{"title":"关于监督中的辩证对话","authors":"Hanoch Yerushalmi PhD","doi":"10.1111/bjp.12900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Whereas the therapeutic action centres on emotional participation and containment of the patient's intolerable experiences, the supervisory action centres on interpreting the reconstructed therapeutic reality. Since the emergent interpretation is subjective and contextual, it requires processing in a dialogue between the supervisor and the supervisee. However, their existential need to define and assert themselves as professionals often urges them to highlight the differences between their perceptions and beliefs and keenly convince each other. Uncontained, this dialectical tension might disrupt the supervisory process and the participants' well-being. Despite the existential urges, when the supervisor and the supervisee recognize and validate each other as independent and autonomous professionals, they can restrain their competitiveness, maintain a productive dialectical dialogue, achieve creative and integrated understandings of the therapeutic process and consolidate their professional identities. Moreover, despite the hierarchical supervisory relationship, acknowledging their vulnerability helps supervisors recognize and validate their supervisees and facilitate the dialectical supervisory dialogue.</p>","PeriodicalId":54130,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Psychotherapy","volume":"40 3","pages":"341-354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjp.12900","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Dialectical Dialogue in Supervision\",\"authors\":\"Hanoch Yerushalmi PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjp.12900\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Whereas the therapeutic action centres on emotional participation and containment of the patient's intolerable experiences, the supervisory action centres on interpreting the reconstructed therapeutic reality. Since the emergent interpretation is subjective and contextual, it requires processing in a dialogue between the supervisor and the supervisee. However, their existential need to define and assert themselves as professionals often urges them to highlight the differences between their perceptions and beliefs and keenly convince each other. Uncontained, this dialectical tension might disrupt the supervisory process and the participants' well-being. Despite the existential urges, when the supervisor and the supervisee recognize and validate each other as independent and autonomous professionals, they can restrain their competitiveness, maintain a productive dialectical dialogue, achieve creative and integrated understandings of the therapeutic process and consolidate their professional identities. Moreover, despite the hierarchical supervisory relationship, acknowledging their vulnerability helps supervisors recognize and validate their supervisees and facilitate the dialectical supervisory dialogue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54130,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\"40 3\",\"pages\":\"341-354\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjp.12900\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjp.12900\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjp.12900","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Whereas the therapeutic action centres on emotional participation and containment of the patient's intolerable experiences, the supervisory action centres on interpreting the reconstructed therapeutic reality. Since the emergent interpretation is subjective and contextual, it requires processing in a dialogue between the supervisor and the supervisee. However, their existential need to define and assert themselves as professionals often urges them to highlight the differences between their perceptions and beliefs and keenly convince each other. Uncontained, this dialectical tension might disrupt the supervisory process and the participants' well-being. Despite the existential urges, when the supervisor and the supervisee recognize and validate each other as independent and autonomous professionals, they can restrain their competitiveness, maintain a productive dialectical dialogue, achieve creative and integrated understandings of the therapeutic process and consolidate their professional identities. Moreover, despite the hierarchical supervisory relationship, acknowledging their vulnerability helps supervisors recognize and validate their supervisees and facilitate the dialectical supervisory dialogue.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Psychotherapy is a journal for psychoanalytic and Jungian-analytic thinkers, with a focus on both innovatory and everyday work on the unconscious in individual, group and institutional practice. As an analytic journal, it has long occupied a unique place in the field of psychotherapy journals with an Editorial Board drawn from a wide range of psychoanalytic, psychoanalytic psychotherapy, psychodynamic, and analytical psychology training organizations. As such, its psychoanalytic frame of reference is wide-ranging and includes all schools of analytic practice. Conscious that many clinicians do not work only in the consulting room, the Journal encourages dialogue between private practice and institutionally based practice. Recognizing that structures and dynamics in each environment differ, the Journal provides a forum for an exploration of their differing potentials and constraints. Mindful of significant change in the wider contemporary context for psychotherapy, and within a changing regulatory framework, the Journal seeks to represent current debate about this context.