Discussion of John A. Lindon's Article, Supervision by Tape: A New Method of Case Supervision

Dr. Lindon's paper seemed to me especially interesting not only because of the convincing manner in which the usefulness of the proposed supervisory method is expressed, but also because certain specific aspects connected with the therapist's countertransference are thoroughly discussed.

The fact that I have just completed a paper dealing with “Problems of Supervision in Psychoanalytic Education,”1 makes me feel fairly familiar with many of the points Dr. Lindon touched upon. Therefore, it was easy for me to follow the development of such points, and I found his remarks most right and proper as regards the problems of rivalry, jealousy, paternalism, submission, etc., often encountered in the practice of supervision.

Incidentally, I wish to point out that the “exchange of supervision with a peer,” at different levels and also in groups, takes place frequently in our milieu, although it is true that it has not been reported up ot the present moment. The experience, usually face-to-face, has been as positive and fruitful as Dr. Lindon holds it to be.

Now, I do agree in principle concerning the benefits offered by supervision by tape, since I think that the advantages mentioned are certainly valid. Nevertheless, I would like to state here some reservations regarding the use of the tape recorder.

Personally, I am not too sure of the benefits to students through use of the tape recorder in analytic sessions with patients. I am well aware that some candidates prefer to tape-record the session on the grounds that this procedure is absolutely reliable. Some supervisors are also in favor of using the tape recorder; they emphasize the fact that the recording of sessions is most helpful in

avoiding the distortion of the report submitted by the student, and at the same time it allows the therapist to listen to his own interventions. To my mind, this method may sometimes be