You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Dear Editors,
I read Dr Fink's paper (2007) with great interest. I found his title very pertinent for it places supervision in that intermediate space implied by the old aphorism quoted by Pedder, ‘s upervision is more than education and less than psychotherapy’ (Pedder, 1986). I detected some common ground between Dr Fink and myself in his suggestion for a ‘s upervision of the supervision’. I myself reached a similar conclusion a few years ago (Vaslamatzis, 1990, 1993) on the occasion of a supervisee's dream in which appeared the supervisor, when I thought that issues of transference and countertransference in the supervising dyad are an integral part of the supervisory process and should not be overlooked. I also remarked at the time that “complementing the process with a supervisor's supervision could definitely have been of help” (1993, p. 244).
The discussion about these matters dates far back. As several authors suggest in the literature, if supervision is process-centred, then it includes the supervisory process as well. Dr Fink's paper contributes rich clinical material to this debate. In describing the relationship with Dr W, his supervisee, he hints at his own countertransference responses, such as the feeling of a considerably successful supervision, feelings of boredom as well as the fact that they went on to do some work together after the end of supervision. But the most intriguing part of this paper lies in the motive for making him take up patient K whom he knew as the patient of the supervisory relationship but failed to recognize in the face of the patient he saw. Dr Fink attributes the whole matter to the distortion of images caused by the patient and fails to investigate his own countertransference issues, thus going against the very title of his paper.
In Countertransference: Theory, technique, teaching (Alexandris and Vaslamatzis, 1993) Theodore Jacobs analyses two of his supervision cases and discusses his identifications with his supervisees. Hi