[meeka]

Hi I want to invite opinions of everyone regarding the supervision in psychotherapy. Where I am situated, they do not really offer supervised therapy. Because of my recent experiences, I have demanded for supervision in order to safe-guard my interests. Would like to find out the ethico-legal dimensions regarding this from any one who has an idea

[sunrise]

Originally Posted by meeka

Hi I want to invite opinions of everyone regarding the supervision in psychotherapy. Where I am situated, they do not really offer supervised therapy. Because of my recent experiences, I have demanded for supervision in order to safe-guard my interests.

In the U.S., I think supervision refers to the period immediately following the therapist receiving their degree. They must work for a year or two under supervision; a senior therapist goes over their cases with them regularly and provides advice and direction. I think different states have different requirements for the length of this supervision period. After being supervised for that length of time, the therapist can then become certified.

Even after this period, most therapists will consult with a colleague (or perhaps their former supervisor) when a challenging case arises that they need advice on. But I don't think it is called "supervision" once they are certified. Probably "professional consultation" is closer.

Meeka, when you say you have demanded supervision, do you mean you have asked your therapist to consult with a colleague on your case to get a second opinion? Or you want the therapist to go back to a training type environment where he/she will meet regularly with a senior therapist for review of your case? (I'm not sure if the term "supervision" means the same in India as in the U.S.)

Often, in the U.S., when a case is outside of the therapist's scope of practice, he/she will refer the client to another therapist who has more specialized training in their area of need. For example, for a client presenting with DID, many therapists would refer out to a therapist with experience treating DID, rather than seek regular professional consultation on the case with a DID specialist.

I have asked my T about "supervision". He said that he has "consultation" with his colleagues (and that it's not called supervision for legal reasons). I know that he meets with the other therapists in the office (there are two others) on a regular basis. He's also called colleagues with certain specialities (like eating disorders) for help when he's not sure how to handle something with me. And he has his own therapist that I think he talks to about things that come up for HIM while giving therapy.

What are your concerns, meeka??

[meeka]

Originally Posted by sunrise

In the U.S., I think supervision refers to the period immediately following the therapist receiving their degree. They must work for a year or two under supervision; a senior therapist goes over their cases with them regularly and provides advice and direction. I think different states have different requirements for the length of this supervision period. After being supervised for that length of time, the therapist can then become certified.

Even after this period, most therapists will consult with a colleague (or perhaps their former supervisor) when a challenging case arises that they need advice on. But I don't think it is called "supervision" once they are certified. Probably "professional consultation" is closer.

Meeka, when you say you have demanded supervision, do you mean you have asked your therapist to consult with a colleague on your case to get a second opinion? Or you want the therapist to go back to a training type environment where he/she will meet regularly with a senior therapist for review of your case? (I'm not sure if the term "supervision" means the same in India as in the U.S.)

Often, in the U.S., when a case is outside of the therapist's scope of practice, he/she will refer the client to another therapist who has more specialized training in their area of need. For example, for a client presenting with DID, many therapists would refer out to a therapist with experience treating DID, rather than seek regular professional consultation on the case with a DID specialist.

Thanks, you cleared some concepts........

[meeka]

What are your concerns, meeka??[/quote]

My concerns are that I do not want a repeat of a phase in my therapy, when he and I were totally not in sync, and I felt that some part of his analysis was hurtful, not applicable to me at all and he stuck to it, probably because he felt that he was on the right track. Several months later, I still felt cheated and then raised the apology issue with him, which is over and done with. He has assured me that he will get a professional consult kind of a thing if in doubt.

[Perna]

I'm not sure I know what therapy is like in your part of the world and if it is like mine was here in the United States. British therapy is different from ours and I imagine therapy in India is even more different? In the United States, our therapists run their own businesses, often are not even in "groups" with other therapists but on their own. So, the idea of "supervision" often does not exist. If we have difficulties with our therapist, such as you describe, the therapist and the client work it out together or, if they can't or remain unhappy, then the client will quit therapy and try with a different therapist or the therapist might suggest someone else who might be a better fit for that person and their problems. It is very individual here in the United States, there's no one "in charge". We are usually very concerned for our privacy too, and don't like "stangers" knowing about us without our meeting them and/or telling them about ourselves. So having someone else hear about our therapy (from our therapist's perspective) might not be something a lot of people would want either.