ABSTRACT
The policy of requiring payment for sessions canceled without adequate notice can result in dilemmas that many therapists wish to avoid. In this exploration, sound clinical reasons for enforcing payment under such circumstances, including the acquisition of therapeutic insight and modeled assertive behaviors, are discussed using case examples incorporating an examination of countertransference. One exception to this position, in which flexibility is recommended, is also described. The discussion removes the issue of paymentfrom the concrete domain of money for service by conceptualizing the scheduled appointment as a promise between therapist and client, late cancellations as unconscious challenges to the promise, and enforcement of payment as a means of protecting the promise. Therapists are encouraged to examine feelings that might interfere with their ability to follow through on their own payment policies. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678, E-mail address: getinfo@haworthpressinc.com <Website: https://www.haworthpressinc.com>]
