Skip to main content
Log in

Envy and Generosity Between Co-Therapists

  • Published:
Group

Abstract

This paper explores the dynamics of envy and generosity between co-therapists. Generally speaking, co-therapists can be drawn into the same social comparisons (overt and covert), competitiveness, and envy as their group members. The list of valued resources can include the group's affection, appreciation, and recognition, or, more generally, one's status, popularity, creativity, sensitivity, understanding, or parental functioning. The group in turn, will sometimes tend to divide the therapists into the “good one” and the “bad one” in order to serve its own developmental needs. This process can increase the tension between the therapists, and feed their envy. I present an argument for processing those feelings and assert that awareness of co-therapist envy can promote the expression of generosity and enhance the capacity of group members for similar experiences. Clinical material will be presented to demonstrate how this works.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Anderson, B. N., Pine, I., & Mee-Lee, D. (1972). Resident training in co-therapy groups. International Journal of Psychoanalytic Therapy, 22, 192–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, J. (1999). Recognition and destruction: An outline of intersubjectivity. In Mitchell, S. A., & Aron, L. (Eds.), Relational psychoanalysis. The emergence of a tradition (pp. 181–211). NJ: The Analytic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, A. (2000). Envy and generosity in the countertansference of group therapists. Paper presented in IAGP congress in Jerusalem.

  • Berman, A. (1999). Self-envy and the concealment of inner resources. Israeli Journal of Psychiatry, 36(3), 203–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, A., Berger, M., & Gutmann, D. (2000). The division into us and them as a universal social structure. Mind and Human Interaction, 11(1) 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binns, M. (1984). The challenge of co-therapy. British Journal of Guidance Counseling, 12(2), 122–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bion, W.R. (1993). Second thoughts. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A.P., Dugo, J.M., Eng, A.M., & Lewis, C.M. (1986). The search for phases in group development: Designing process analysis measures of group interactions. In Greenberg, W. M., et al. (Eds.), The psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook. NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F.B., & Lohr, N.E. (1971). Special problems with the use of co-therapists in group psychotherapy. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 21(2) 143–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fivaz-Depeuresinge, E., & Corboz-Warnery, A. (1999). The primary triangle: A developmental systems view of mothers, fathers, and infants. NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foulkes, S.H. (1975). Group analytic psychotherapy. London: Karnac.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilfron, M. (1969). Co-therapy: The relationship between therapists. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 19, 366–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernberg, O.F. (1980). Love, the couple, and the group: A psychoanalytic frame. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 49, 78–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M. (1957). Envy and gratitude: The writings of Melanie Klein, Vol. 3. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, R.H. & Bernard, H.S. (1994). Utilizing co-therapy in group treatment of borderline and nar-cissistic patients. In Schermer, V.L. & Pines M. (Eds.), Ring of fire: Primitive affects and object relations in group psychotherapy (pp. 198–240). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLennan, B.W. (1965). Co-therapy. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 15, 154–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGee, T. F., & Schuman, B.N. (1970). The nature of the co-therapy relationship. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 20(1) 25–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell S.A. (1988). Relational concepts in psychoanalysis: An integration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roller, B & Nelson, V. (1993). Co-therapy. In: Kaplan, H. I & Sadock, B. (Eds.), Comprehensive group psychotherapy (pp. 304–314). Baltimore, MD: William & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutan, J.S., & Stone, N.W. (1993). Psychodynamic group psychotherapy (Second Edition). NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, D.N (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant. NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winnicott, W.D. (1975). Through pediatrics to psychoanalysis. NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winnicott, W.D. (1983). Playing and reality. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winnicott D. W (1965). The maturational processes and the facilitating environment: Studies in the theory of emotional development. CT: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yalom, I.D. (1985). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miriam Berger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berger, M. Envy and Generosity Between Co-Therapists. Group 26, 107–121 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015430913790

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015430913790

Navigation