IJSP Number 5, 2023

10 When engaging the supervisee in a spontaneous discussion or when listening to recordings of the supervisee’s psychotherapy sessions I am also observing how the supervisee shapes their dialogues with their clients. I want to assess if they are engaging their clients in a confirmatory or exploratory conversation. I pay attention to the possibility that the supervisee may be making theory first and foremost by selecting evidence that confirms a particular theory. Such confirmatory interventions may occur with inexperienced psychotherapists who want to apply the theories that they are learning to every client. For example, when I was initially learning Transactional Analysis, I defined clients’ behaviours in terms of ego states and therefore missed many of the subtleties of what they were unconsciously communicating. As I acquired phenomenological and relational perspectives my therapeutic dialogue became more exploratory — we talked more about the client’s subjective experiences; theory was less important than the clients’ awareness of their physiology and affect or what was happening within our therapeutic relationship. In my practice of psychotherapy supervision, I want to foster the supervisee’s capacity to invite their clients into an exploratory dialogue. I emphasize the importance of the supervisee’s sustained inquiry into the uniqueness of each client’s phenomenological and developmental experiences. Often, I model the skills of acknowledgement and validation and how they are central in an involved inquiry by giving hypothetical examples of how I might use phenomenological, historical, and relational inquiry with a client. In many situations I model an exploratory dialogue by inquiring with the supervisee about their own internal process. Although using audio or visual recordings may be time consuming, they are a good way for the supervisee to enhance their capacity for both understanding and empathy. Another way to enhance the supervisee’s capacity for empathy and to stimulate an understanding of their client’s level of developmental functioning is to have them role play the client with the supervisor or another trainee and then talk about their experience of being “in the client’s shoes”. I periodically use a two-chair method to have the supervisee shuttle between being in the client’s chair and the therapist’s chair. When the supervisee is in the client’s chair, speaking as though they were the client, I encourage them to talk about how they perceive their psychotherapist, what is missing in their psychotherapy, or what they don’t like about what the therapist has done. The use of the two-chair methods often leads us to a new supervisory discussion and an increased sensitivity to the relational needs of their client. Whether the supervision in done individually or in a group each of these supervisory formats are followed with a discussion of the interventions used, possible alternative interventions, the client’s emotional and behavioural reactions to the methods used, and the theoretical concepts that apply. I may ask the supervisee a number of stimulating questions, such as: In your perception, what unconscious story is your client presenting? How do you understand your client in terms of the theory you are using? Where is the client open and where are they closed to contact: affectively, cognitively, behaviourally, physiologically, or relationally?