From the author: This is part of the article “Money. The therapist’s identity: boundaries and limitations” Fully published in the journal of the East European Association of Existential Therapy “EXISTENTIA: psychology and psychotherapy” 2011 (4) p. 216-231Money in therapy. What can you call the money that exists between the therapist and the client? What word or phrase? What's this? My answer: client contribution, therapist fee, consultation cost. To this question, my colleagues whom I asked said: gratitude, tool, reward, payment. I believe this list can be continued. You can highlight the main points, situations that are important to track, keeping in mind this topic. Determining the amount. Changing the amount. Money with change. Missed meetings. Forgotten money. How money is given. How money is taken. I am sure that you can suggest some other important situation that I missed. Determination of the amount. Money first appears in therapy when the therapist tells the client the cost of working with him. There are therapists for whom this cost does not change, remaining clearly fixed. I, like many of my colleagues, am ready for an open discussion of this issue. Now in my therapy the “corridor of amounts” is quite wide. Initially, I tell the client the usual amount, i.e. the amount that most often exists between me and my clients. The usual cost of a consultation for clients living in our city is 700 rubles, for clients from other cities (mainly from Moscow) - 1000 rubles. Undoubtedly, the process of determining the amount of payment should be a joint effort, as a result of which an amount appears that is, if not a guarantor, then at least the driver of relationships in therapy right now and for the near future, for the duration of the contract, i.e. shows the situation with this particular client. What are the characteristics of this amount? My answer to the phrase “cost of consultation” is the following adjectives - appropriate, adequate, therapeutic. What characteristics would you name? Often, when a client asks, I tell them my usual consultation fee over the phone. If I notice some special reaction to money (on the phone this could be a pause for the amount heard) and which, in my opinion, needs attention, I usually return to discussing the amount of the fee with the client during the consultation. I suggest that the client at the beginning of the meeting express her attitude towards the amount she heard. The client directly says that this is a lot for her, shares her financial realities, and asks for a reduction of 100 rubles. I ask how she will spend the money, what exactly these 100 rudders mean to her. He says he will buy something for dinner. The lady is slim. Request for one meeting. As a primary argument, this is sufficient for me. I agree that this meeting will be paid for by the client on terms convenient to her. During the consultation, it becomes more obvious what is behind this strong desire to reduce the amount of payment, and it is not just about food for the evening. The client struggles in her life for little money. When discussing the amount, her usual stereotype emerged. This client came to one meeting, and therefore confrontation or even focusing on this feature of her would be irrelevant and inadequate. In this situation, her condition and our contact were more important to me. For another client who asked for a fee reduction, it was more useful to refuse immediately at the first meeting. Her difficulty in life arose from the fact that she wanted to have everything at once, but without paying anything for it. And she asked for a price reduction at the end of the consultation. To the client. characterized by a desire for reality to change towards only her interests. This is what causes suffering, because... the desire is unrealistic. My answer was: “It’s bad for you. It is not useful for you to reduce the cost of consultation.” Often the cost of consultation becomes higher due to_3/