IJSP Number 3, 2021

94 Table 2.1 The relational matrix of the supervision model CLIENT SUPERVISEE SUPERVIZOR SELF Focus on the client and his current issues, support Focus on the supervisee, on his experiences, support Focus on the supervisor, on his experiences, support THE OTHER (relational field) Focus on client’s relations (his/ her support network) Focus on the client- supervisor relationship Focus on the supervisory relationship (parallel process, transfer) SITUATION (extended relational field) The context of the extended relational field and the client’s culture Focus on the supervisee and the client’s field (contract, ethical and professional codes, cultural codes) Focus on the field of supervision in general (contract, ethical and professional codes, cultural codes) The supervision process involves an easy transition, without obstacles and avoidances, from one quadrant to another (from one aspect to another of supervision) usually, supervisors with preferences for a certain quadrant depending on their personal style, type of training / training, field of work. Content-related frames depend on context-related ones, sometimes they are generated by them, and so although they may seem “additional”, it is very important to explore them from the first supervision sessions. Another interesting aspect to be approached in supervision is that of the therapist’s “blind spot”, when he can apply “techniques”, forgetting the client’s uniqueness, “When they become central to the therapeutic approach, when they become” received / inherited wisdom “or when I take them ready, I constrain the therapist’s repertoire, and decrease the possibility of a healthy alignment between the therapist and the client. Examples of such “dead points” may be [16]: • The claim of being “neutral” in relation to the client; • Considering countertransfer as the only landmark in the client’s approach (the “exalted” idea of projective identification); • The use of body-centred therapy (somato-psychotherapy) with people with a history of trauma; • The need / reification of insights to generate change; • Excessive focus on childhood experiences and returning to each session, to the detriment of other “here and now” explorations; • The “holistic” approach of “evidence based” techniques for certain “personality disorders” or “diagnosed mental disorders”.