[molimolimolly]

I am a trainee psychotherapist. Recently I found myself quite attached to and connected with my supervisor. The feeling is quite weird. I do not know why I can open myself quite easily in front of her which is good in the sense of professional development in discussing clients' materials. However, the closed feelings made me wonder if I like her too much that should not have happened in a trainee-supervisor relationship.

I think she has done a great job in containing me and this made me feel like she is my mother and I am safe enough to expose my true self to her. The close feeling is a bit scary somehow.

I wonder if anyone has similar experience? On another level, I guess it has to do with a spiritual connection too because sometimes I can feel how she feel easily.

Anyway, any thoughts are appreciated. Thank you very much!

[Skeezyks]

Hello molimolimolly: I noticed this is your first post here on PC. So... welcome to PsychCentral.

Since you're a psychotherapy trainee, I would presume you know much more about this sort of thing than I would. Based on what you wrote, it sounds to me as though, perhaps, you are experiencing some transference? I've never done much in the way of therapy myself. So this is not a topic I have personal experience with myself. I only know what I read, as the saying goes.

Here are links to 7 articles, from PsychCentral's archives, on the subject of the psychotherapeutic relationship, transference, and on becoming a psychotherapist:

Psychotherapy – A Relationship You Can Understand | Psychotherapy Matters

Transference in Therapy

Transference is Not Transferable | Therapy Unplugged

Got Countertransference? A Journal Exercise to Better Understand | Psych Central Professional

Psychologists Spill: When I Knew I'd Become a Psychotherapist

https://psychcentral.com/lib/therapi...g-a-clinician/

https://pro.psychcentral.com/private...vate-practice/

I hope you find PC to be of benefit.

[stopdog]

People have these sorts of feelings for other people all the time. Students do it with teachers. People do it with mentors, etc.

[Echos Myron redux]

You and your supervisor are in the best position to work out whether your feelings limit the efficacy of your supervisory relationship. It is also worth discussing with your tutors. The fact that this is occurring in your supervisory relationship makes me wonder whether you have had your own personal therapy? These sorts of attachment/transference feelings are best explored there imo.

For context I am a UK based therapist so I am likely to have gone through similar training to you.

[molimolimolly]

Originally Posted by Echos Myron redux

You and your supervisor are in the best position to work out whether your feelings limit the efficacy of your supervisory relationship. It is also worth discussing with your tutors. The fact that this is occurring in your supervisory relationship makes me wonder whether you have had your own personal therapy? These sorts of attachment/transference feelings are best explored there imo.

For context I am a UK based therapist so I am likely to have gone through similar training to you.

Yes I am studying in the UK. I have personal therapy but I have not thought about exploring about that. Somehow I feel a bit embarrassed to have this feelings towards my supervisor and I found myself trying to suppress it. I guess I want to sort it out on my own before taking it to personal therapy or even bring it to my supervision.

[Ididitmyway]

I am a US based psychotherapist.

I never had similar feeling for any of my supervisors. I wonder if it has anything to do with the differences in training. In the US the professional nature of the supervisor-trainee relationship is strongly emphasized, surprisingly more so than the therapist-client relationship.

Here, it's very unlikely that a supervisor would create an atmosphere that would encourage trainees a.k.a interns to share much (if anything at all) of their personal issues on order to improve their performance as a therapist. Here, a supervisor would simply suggest to an intern to work on the specific issue with the intern's therapist, if the supervisor believes that there is a specific issue that prevents the intern from doing their best.

It is generally considered inappropriate here for a supervisor to dig into a trainees personal stuff and to do the work of their therapist. This is not what supervision is about. It is about discussing clients cases, not trainees' personal issues. A supervisor can point out that some personal issue seems to be an obstacle for a trainee in their work, but then they suggest them to address it with their therapist and they stop at that

There was a time here back in the 60s and 70s when the professional boundaries between supervisors and trainees were completely blurred. This led to a lot of abuse of power.

The professional community put a stop to this, eventually, and wisely so. There is a whole section in the professional code dedicated to supervisor-supervisee relationship. A therapist who blurrs boundaries with a trainee can get into the same kind of trouble as when they do it with a client. And, since we, mostly, have group supervision here, it's highly unlikely for a supervisor to create an environment where those boundaries are blurred. It never happened during my training years. All my supervisors always kept a professional distance and always gently but firmly discouraged any personal sharing. We strictly discussed clients only.

I can't judge what's happening in your supervision. What you've described is very general and not enough for me to form an opinion. I think, the best thing to do is to take it to your own therapy. If you don't have a therapist you should get one ASAP. You can't do this work without doing your own work and without knowing what it's like to be in the client's shoes. I'd suggest to talk this over with a therapist before addressing this with your supervisor.

[Echos Myron redux]

In the UK the model of supervision may differ slightly from that in the U.S.

Here, personal issues can be explored in a boundaried way relevant to supervisory work - e.g. you might look at how the ways your issues overlap with your client's and how that might impact on the work.

Additionally, in the UK, most of the main models of supervision involve paying attention to what happens in the supervisory relationship and how this might bear parallels to what is happening in the corresponding therapeutic relationship as a means of understanding the transference dynamic. (If you are interested in this, look up parallel process in supervision).

That said, it is only relevant as it relates to the client work and not at all a place to work through your own issues. Remember, supervision is in service of the client, and your feelings and responses are relevant to explore as far as that exploration will help you be a better therapist to your clients. If the transference is actively getting in the way of the work of supervision, then it is an ethical imperative to either resolve that in personal therapy or get a new supervisor (or both).

[Echos Myron redux]

Originally Posted by molimolimolly

Yes I am studying in the UK. I have personal therapy but I have not thought about exploring about that. Somehow I feel a bit embarrassed to have this feelings towards my supervisor and I found myself trying to suppress it. I guess I want to sort it out on my own before taking it to personal therapy or even bring it to my supervision.

I think trying to "sort it out on your own" is unlikely to be enough when it comes to transference of this kind. In order to be the best therapist you can be, you really have a duty to process and explore the nature of your transference. If a similar response arises in you with a client one day and you haven't worked through this stuff in therapy you have the potential to do harm to your clients.

I appreciate it is embarassing and difficult but it's important. Presumably you have PD too? Perhaps you might explore it here?

I say this with kindness and from two positions- firstly, I am a client who has been harmed by a therapist who didn't look at his own processes (or his ineffective supervision) ethically or fully. Secondly, I am a therapist who has a great deal of attachment and transference issues towards my therapists and who has had a number of difficulties with various supervisors. I have had to change supervisors a number of times to find someone with whom I can work to the benificence of my clients. I urge you to consider that whatever decisions you make about how you explore your feelings must, first and foremost, be in the interests of your clients.

[Ididitmyway]

Originally Posted by Echos Myron redux

In the UK the model of supervision may differ slightly from that in the U.S.

Here, personal issues can be explored in a boundaried way relevant to supervisory work - e.g. you might look at how the ways your issues overlap with your client's and how that might impact on the work.

Additionally, in the UK, most of the main models of supervision involve paying attention to what happens in the supervisory relationship and how this might bear parallels to what is happening in the corresponding therapeutic relationship as a means of understanding the transference dynamic. (If you are interested in this, look up parallel process in supervision).

That said, it is only relevant as it relates to the client work and not at all a place to work through your own issues. Remember, supervision is in service of the client, and your feelings and responses are relevant to explore as far as that exploration will help you be a better therapist to your clients. If the transference is actively getting in the way of the work of supervision, then it is an ethical imperative to either resolve that in personal therapy or get a new supervisor (or both).

Then, I understand why trainees in UK might develop personal feelings for supervisors.

With all due respect, I like our US approach better.

Of course, your personal issues are relevant to your work. I did say that supervisors here point out to your personal issues that they notice in you that might prevent you from doing good work. That entails looking at the personal dynamic between you and the client. That, however, is very different from analyzing those issues and trying to resolve them in supervision. That's personal therapy work, not supervisory work.

In order for me to explore my issues effectively, it has to be done in a relatively safe environment, where the person who is doing this work with me is "on my side" so to speak, meaning that they have my own, not my client's well-being a priority. And it is the therapist, who is in the position to do that, not the supervisor.

By the way, I see no conflict between the client's and the therapist's best interests. What is in my best interest's would also be in the best interests of the client. If I feel limited to help the client for whatever reason, for example, it'd be in both mine and theirs best interests if I refer them out. The same with getting personally involved with clients. Everyone is trying to paint it as a selfish behavior on the therapist's part, but, to me, the behavior is truly "selfish" if it's done in the best interests of the one who does it. If unethical therapists were truly "selfish", they'd never crossed the line they are not supposed to cross because that would not be in their best interests, as well as the best interests of the clients. So to me, this rule of not letting one's issues interfere with one's work has nothing to do with sacrificing anything of yourself.

All that is to say that the only way for someone to effectively work with their issues IMO is only when they do it with utmost self-compassion a.k.a "selfishly", which means that the only reason why they are doing it is for the sake of their own, not their clients' or anyone else's well-being (and those are, "paradoxically" go hand in hand). Supervision is not a place where such "selfish" exploration is possible.

It's always funny to me to see how therapists often judge each other harshly for not "working on" their "issues", as if this mutual blame would really motivate anyone to "work harder", and how they call for self-sacrifices for the clients' sake supposedly. I've learned that the harsher people are on themselves and others for not doing their emotional work, the less work gets done. But this element of judgment and the implicit (or not so implicit) urge to get the "work" done as fast as possible for clients' sake is always present in supervision. That's why supervision is not a good place to do one's personal work, because it's not safe enough for that kind of work to be effective.

I am not a therapist but have supervised people in academia for >15 years and had quite a few significant mentors and teachers myself when I was young. Some of my most memorable life experiences! From all I know, developing these kinds of feelings is very natural and common in mentor-mentee relationships - I experienced it many times on both ends. I would be surprised to hear if anyone considered them as issues or something to fix... For example, one of my greatest passions in life is learning and having some great mentors were some of the highlights of my life. Likewise, I could be quite annoyed and frustrated if I had to be stuck with incompetent mentors or those that were not a good fit for me. I have seen all these happen in most of my interactions with students as well, including when some come to me to complain and seek help about their bad supervisors or just to tell me how much a good mentor meant to them earlier and even changed their lives.

As far as therapist supervision, I am not a clinician but work in the mental health field and with many clinicians. I attended a few group supervisory classes for Ts out of curiosity (in the US). What I saw was that group members (established Ts or in training) were very much encouraged to explore their feelings of all kinds - in relation to their clients, other members of the group, and the supervisory T as well. When it was something about the supervisory T, the discussion did not usually get into great depth in class but the group leader often encouraged members to set up a private consultation if they felt the need. I know that a few people did that but I never asked them for more detail.

Going back to the one-on-one, I actually think it can be a very good and useful experience to discuss the feelings of the student with the supervisor and I did that myself with both my supervisors and supervisees (again emphasizing I am not a T!) quite a few times. It can help to gain insight into what type of mentoring one likes/dislikes, why, and to keep that lesson in mind when choosing subsequent mentors. The feelings can feel parental but I don't think it always has much to do with our specific parents but it has a lot to do with the scenario of teacher-student. Originally, our first life experiences of learning usually happen in relationships with parents/caregivers and the student-teacher situation is also a learning experience with some hierarchy in it. Personally, I learned tons from exploring my feelings towards my teachers and mentors in my youth and can apply the lessons quite well to developing myself as a mentor, tailoring it to different students' needs. The lessons also help me evaluate better what kinds of students to take on as supervisees. In my experiences, these things can be discussed quite effectively without breaking professional boundaries or ethics, as part of the learning experience. I think it can also be done with an outsider - another professor or therapist. I imagine there may be certain styles/guidelines specific to cultures/countries but I think there is a lot of individual variation as well that specific people apply in their own practice. I guess one can always ask the supervisor whether they would be open to such a more personal conversation?

Again, if I can suggest one thing: don't let anyone make you believe that developing strong feelings toward mentors is a problem that needs to be resolved and lost! They can be used as lessons and tools though.