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.
In the present paper I explore the notion of the parallel process, a controversial concept in psychoanalytic supervision. I suggest that the parallel process is essentially the operation of the defensive process of projective identification, which in some quarters is similarly viewed with skepticism and/or is mistakenly seen as primarily a malignant defense operating exclusively in severe character pathology (Kernberg, 1975; Mendelsohn, 2009). Further, I present several vignettes of psychoanalytic supervision where a series of parallel processes occurred, and I suggest that these parallel enactments are the result of the projective identifications which stimulated them. I agree with critical writers who say that simply suggesting the presence of a parallel process in the supervision adds no new information to the supervision, but I show how an exploration of the parallel enactments, which includes (1) exploring the patient-therapist dyadic dynamics, (2) a narrowly focused exploration of the dynamics of the therapist/presenter, and (3) and an exploration of the dynamics of the therapist-supervisor dyad, can enrich the treatment, as well as the supervision.
Finally I suggest that while the projective identification that occurs in the supervisory dyad does not always lead to a parallel process, every parallel process is the result of projective identification (s). I further suggest that while every parallel process does not lead to an enactment via projective identification, enactments can only occur via the parallel process instigated by projective identification.
A phenomenon can occur in psychoanalytic supervision where a patient's conflicts, impulses, and defenses are unconsciously communicated