Abstract
Supervisees and consultees may take their groups and the feelings associated with them to another group for clinical advice. Crucial to the practice of consultation is the perplexing question of how material is carried from one group to another. This paper presents a model, with illustrative vignettes, of a consultative sequence that relies on the conveyance of subjective as well as objective data. As the presenter tells about his or her therapy group, the members of the consultant or supervisory group experience reactions that mirror, parallel, or identify with dynamic processes that originated in the first place. In response to the creative interaction between presenter, presented, and receivers, the consultation group can arrive at formulations that provide the consultee with new understandings and action plans. This protocol can be used for single-session consultations or adapted for ongoing group supervision.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agazarian, Y. (1982). Role as a bridge construct in understanding the relationship between the individual and the group. In M. Pines (Ed.),The individual and the group: Boundaries and interrelations. New York: Plenum Press.
Armstrong, D. (1994). Thoughts bound and thoughts free: Reflections on mental process in groups.Group Analysis, 27, 131–148.
Billow, R. M., & Mendelsohn, R. (1987). The peer supervision group for psychoanalytic therapists.Group, 11, 35–46.
Brown, D., & Zinkin, L. (1994).The psyche and the social world: Developments in group-analytic theory. London: Routledge.
Cohen, B. D. (1986). Group supervision of group psychotherapy: Some thoughts on the Ormont workshop.Newsletter of the New Jersey Group Psychotherapy Society, 2, 7–9.
Cohen, B. D., & Epstein, Y. (1981). Empathic communication in process groups.Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 18, 493–500.
Cohn, B. R. (1994). The process group in institutional settings: Special techniques for an endangered species.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 44, 333–347.
Counselman, E. F., & Weber, R. L. (1994). Leadership of mental health consultation groups: A model for group therapists.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 44, 349–360.
Ettin, M. F. (1992).Foundations and applications of group psychotherapy: A sphere of influence. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ettin, M. F. (1994). Symbolic representation and the components of a group-as-a-whole model.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 44, 209–231.
Gallagher, R. E. (1994). Stages of group psychotherapy supervision: A model for supervising beginning trainees in dynamic group therapy.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 44, 169–183.
Ganzarain, R. (1992). Effects of projective identification on therapists and groupmates.Group Analysis, 25, 15–18.
Hopper, E. (1984). Group analysis: The problem of context.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 34, 173–199.
Hopper, E. (in press). The social unconscious in clinical work: Reflections on “the complete interpretation” and on squaring the therapeutic triangle.Group Analysis.
Horwitz, L. (1983). Projective identification in dyads and groups.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 33, 259–279.
Kutter, P. (1993). Direct and indirect (“reversed”) mirror phenomena in group supervision.Group Analysis, 26, 177–181.
Marohn, R. C. (1969). The similarity of therapy and supervisor themes.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 19, 176–184.
Ogden, T. H. (1979). On projective identification.International Journal of Psycho-analysis, 60, 357–373.
Ormont, L. (1970). The use of objective countertransference to resolve group resistances.Group Process, 3, 95–110.
Ormont, L. (1985). Demonstration of group supervision. Preconference Workshop of New Jersey Group Psychotherapy Society.
Salvendy, J. T. (1993). Control and power in supervision.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 43, 363–376.
Schlachet, P. J. (1992). The dream in group therapy: A reappraisal of unconscious processes in groups.Group, 16, 195–209.
Schuman, E. P., & Fulop, G. (1989). Experiential group supervision.Group Analysis, 22, 387–396.
Searles, H. F. (1979).Countertransference and related subjects. New York: International Universities Press.
Shapiro, E. R., & Carr, A. W. (1991).Lost in familiar places: Creating new connections between the individual and society. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Skolnick, M. R. (1992). The role of the therapist from a social systems perspective. In R. Klein, H. Bernard, & D. Singer (Eds.),Handbook of contemporary group psychotherapy: Contributions from object relations, self psychology, and social systems theories. Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
Spence, D. (1982).Narrative truth and historical truth: Meaning and interpretation in psychoanalysis. New York: W. W. Norton.
Sullivan, H. S. (1953).The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: W. W. Norton.
Whitaker, D., & Lieberman, M. (1964).Psychotherapy through the group process. Chicago: Aldine.
Winnicott, D. W. (1947). Hate in the countertransference. InThrough paediatrics to psycho-analysis. New York: Basic Books, 1975.
Zaslav, M. R. (1988). A model of group therapist development.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 38, 511–519.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ettin, M.F. From one to another: Group consultation for group psychotherapy. Group 19, 3–18 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01458187
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01458187