The human (and animal) phenomena of attachment and bonding is at work in the events Carrie describes, I would think.
We forget, at times, how very primitive we are in our social and interpersonal lives.
Conrad Lorenz’ (a swiss researcher) on imprinting among waterfowl had an interesting revelation about both imprinting and this attachment phenomena.
Looking at later research on attachment by Bowlby, who used Lorenz’ work in his own research on attachment theory,
http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/pendry.html , in my own work, I found that intensity of emotion, not just what emotion, but how dynamically intense events were, had a powerful effect on attachments.
It explains, in some ways, why those of us that have violent personal interactions, say in domestic abuse, find themselves so emotionally distraught when we try to separate from our violent partner.
Intensity. Often shared. Sometimes experienced more by one than the other in a two party, or more, relationship.
And whether it is negative or positive matters little, though negative events often have far more intensity to them.
The instructor may well have felt intense, as Carrie describes it, about her and the horse involved. Her investment is a normal human response, but socially out of bounds.
We don’t want people to get that attached to us. Well, in the aftermath we don’t. Sometimes while it is happening we accept it, and may welcome it, and may even participate fully in it.
Master - acolyte relationships are often that way, with the master, supposedly, the one that controls and mitigates the attachment effect so that it does not interfere unduly in the accepted structure of the relationship - an association for learning purposes.
Therapist-client relationships are often, very often in fact, fraught with such problems to manage.
Of course if one is not aware of this issue they may not be able to deal with keeping things ‘business like’ and of course will not take kindly to the acolyte ending the relationship by disagreement with the master.
Be kind. Your former instructor, Carrie, has some things to learn about being a teacher.
And some things to learn about acceptable grieving.
On the other hand, she actually owes you nothing, in the strictest sense.
Which is sad.
I figure, personally, I owe and will never be able to repay, every student of mine, and I’ve had thousands in both professions I followed. And I hope I’ve never done them harm, or hurt, as your instructor seems to have unwittingly done to you. The same is true of every child I worked with in an adolescent therapeutic setting. I owe then, not they me.
I have had instructors do similar to me. And that is hurtful. But then they simply lack the discipline of character necessary to be a good teacher. Their loss. They had the power, and they misused it.
Think of what your instructor might have gained (though it might have triggered her feelings of loss again) had she contacted you and gotten you to the event you describe as wanting to attend.
I hope I have NOT answered any questions for you, but instead have inspired more questions on this sensitive subject.
There's more to AND than just the horse.
Donald Redux