IJSP Number 6, 2024

112 they once interacted with parents and siblings.” In our experience, this is also true in groups even if they aren’t psychotherapy groups. Many group leaders (certainly those leading psychotherapy groups) agree that awareness of underlying process issues and a willingness to address them is very important. How this plays out in multipurpose groups like those described here will vary with the experience and inclinations of the leader as well as the willingness on the part of members and the interpreter to engage with the group process. In the support group for interpreters discussed here, we tried to establish a balance to meet the needs of the greatest number of people. We prioritized topics of discussion with the interpretative function being first, followed by clinical supervision issues, and then personal issues. We also stayed open to addressing the group process as it emerged and addressed this on several occasions. 4.5. ADDRESS LANGUAGE USE ISSUES Ukrainian and Russian have been the most widespread languages in Ukraine coexisting almost seamlessly over decades of Ukrainian independence. Nevertheless, after the full-scale Russian invasion, Ukrainians demonstrated the tendency to choose the Ukrainian language within their language self-identification more frequently and 83% of them supported Ukrainian to be the only state language [14]. Another public opinion poll demonstrated that 84% of respondents “continue to adhere to the view that there are no problems with the use of the Russian language in Ukraine and that Russian-speaking citizens are not oppressed and persecuted [15].” As the project to provide support groups to Ukrainian mental health professionals was launched shortly after Russia’s full-scale military invasion, the language usage within those groups became one of the most frequent conflictual issues. Since there were no guidelines given by those who initiated this project about the use of Ukrainian or Russian most groups were bilingual, which caused some tension between participants and sometimes between participants and interpreters. Such issues proved very difficult for supervisors to handle because most of them do not know either Russian or Ukrainian. They were not able to identify which language each participant was using and what the core of the conflict was in many instances, especially if the interpreter was involved in the conflict. We recommend that language usage within each group, for both group members and interpreters be decided on early in the formation of the group. Perhaps in some groups both Ukrainian and Russian languages can be used, and the interpreter can translate both for the benefit of the group leader. In some cases, when the interpreter is not fluent in Russian, it is obvious that group members will need to speak Ukrainian. Regardless of what a group decides on, an early discussion of feelings about using Ukrainian and/or Russian may be helpful for the group to find an acceptable way of working.