Supervision of Sandplay Therapy

Harriet S. Friedman, Rie Rogers Mitchell, Harriet S. Friedman, Rie Rogers Mitchell

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9781134128624
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psicología
• Subtopic: Capacidad creativa en psicología

Supervision of Sandplay Therapy, the first book on this subject, is an internationally-basedvolume that describes the state of the art in supervision of sandplay therapy. Recognizing that practitioners are eager to incorporate sandplay therapy into their practice, Harriet Friedman and Rie Rogers Mitchell respond to the need for new information, and successfully translate the theories of sandplay therapy into supervision practice.

The book provides a meaningful connection and balance between theoretical principles, practical application, and ongoing therapeutic encounter involved in sandplay. Divided into six sections, contributors cover:

• original supervision models
• contemporary supervision models
• special challenges in supervision
• international sandplay supervision
• supervision of special groups
• connections with other arts therapies.

Supervision of Sandplay Therapy expands the vision of what is possible in supervision and will be vital reading for those studying supervision and sandplay therapy, as well as for those wanting to provide a depth-oriented approach during supervision.

Part I
Creating original supervision models

Chapter 1
Group sandplay supervision: synergy at play

Lauren Cunningham and Kay Bradway

This chapter emerges from participating in and leading sandplay supervision groups for more than 20 years. Our experience has been with groups of four or five members that have stayed together for 3-10 years. Normally participation in a group includes a yearly commitment of monthly meetings, each two hours to two and a half hours long, from September to June. New members are introduced into a group infrequently and then only at the beginning of a year. This chapter reviews practicalities in leading a supervision group, including the group culture, the group development, limitations and challenges, and confidentiality issues of conducting sandplay supervision groups. The first four sections are from Lauren’s pen; Kay contributed the last section on confidentiality issues.

Practicalities

Forming a group that bonds and meshes is part luck and part skill. I always meet individually with potential members to assess whether there is a fit with me as well as with the group. Dual relationships among the members have to be considered and the members have to be prepared for a new person joining. I try not to change the group’s membership during a yearly cycle, only adding a new member, if need be, in the fall.

Over the years varying presentation formats have been tried. Generally members want to present as often as possible, but the groups have found that too many presentations in one meeting flood the members with clinical and symbolic material, which makes it more difficult to deepen the group process. My recent groups have settled on having a main presenter who uses the majority of time, with a secondary presenter introducing a vignette or issue for about a half hour at the end. The following month the secondary presenter then becomes the main presenter. Although participants may present two different cases or themes, they also have the opportunity to extend and elaborate the previous month’s discussion. It’s interesting to notice the synchronicity of interweaving themes in the two presentations in a given month.

Participants generally have an opportunity to present four to six times during the year. Projections of slides or digital images are preferred; sometimes Polaroid photos are shown or the tray is reconstructed with figures that the presenters bring from their collections. Most participants present ongoing cases that are challenging. Some prefer to bring in trays relating to themes around a particular image, such as the mermaid, or a specific clinical issue, such as latency-age boys with absent fathers. I encourage presenters to bring questions about the case that will focus the group discussion. Research about a symbol that will be used in papers for application to STA/ISST membership sometimes makes its debut in the group. Optimally participants support each other in reading, writing and deepening their sandplay training.

The presenter is asked to set up the projector and screen for slides or digital images (with some coaching as needed), so that they can become familiar with the equipment. As an intuitive-feeling type, I remember how stressed I became when I had to set up my screen and projector before making sandplay presentations. The sensation function needs to be worked on as part of our individuation process! It’s interesting how some members of the group want to “help” the others by setting up the equipment for them rather than watching an awkward struggle with the levers, buttons, and plugs. This can become a model of tolerating uncertainty as another masters a task.

Group culture

A relaxed, accepting atmosphere is nurtured so that the members are willing to become more candid and open about difficulties in their work. Kay claims that one feels more vulnerable divulging what one does as a therapist than in giving sensitive material about oneself. It can help establish group rapport by having participants check in with each other before presenting case material. I encourage people to speak freely about their associations or feeling reactions before circling in closer to the possible meanings in the clinical and symbolic material. Play, intuition, and curiosity are encouraged. The supervisor becomes a model for developing the symbolic attitude. Students new to sandplay sometimes attempt to reduce their anxiety by hurrying to “this means this” in a concrete and reductive way.

Usually the group is able to move deeper together when there is stability in the membership and regularity in attendance over the year. Members feel safer and more open to sharing their feelings around confusing or uncomfortable moments with their clients. The group culture often promotes this process when seasoned members relate their “mistakes” in a session with a client. This example helps less experienced members become more candid about their work.

Experiencing trays as a group promotes a back-and-forth movement between abaissement de niveau and a development of consciousness, or deintegration and integration. Archetypal and clinical impressions depend on the orientation of individual therapists. The group ethos fosters a movement toward integration of perspectives while respecting and honoring the mystery of “not knowing.”

As a case is held by the group, various aspects of the client’s, the therapist’s and the group’s psyches (including personal, family, cultural, relational/cotransferential, and archetypal elements) tumble forth. Group supervision involves both an immersion in and reflection of this mix. The collaboration and sharing of impressions and knowledge can have a synergistic effect on participants’ capacity to think symbolically and to hold the tension of the opposites. There can also be a tension between “moving through” a case in order to see the flow of process and settling into deeply experiencing and being with the images of a particular tray. There can be a play between the symbolic content of specific images or themes that run through a series of trays, on the one hand, and the clinical material that focuses more on the cotransference and analytic process, on the other. The presenter may feel anxious for a variety of reasons and offer more material than the group can digest. The supervisor needs to stay attuned to the group’s anxiety level and capacity to tolerate the chaos and distress that may be manifesting in the sandplay images as well as in the presenter to help the group slow down, reflect more and re-integrate. The group learns to comment on parallel processes happening in the case and occurring in the present moment of the group.

Participants learn how to give and receive feedback with each other in a way that can be metabolized and built on. Many will become sandplay supervisors themselves. The supervision models supportive commentary that enlarges the container rather than constricting it – more of a “yes and” attitude than a “yes but.” Before I became a supervisor, I was a supervisee in one of Kay’s groups. Our teachers influence us. Kay set an accepting, receptive atmosphere. We learn how to learn and teach from our best teachers.

Inevitably students are at different levels and have different presenting styles and typologies. For the most part I support the presenters in finding and developing their own style rather than imposing a strict format. The leader needs to stay aware of group process and make sure that runaway competition or exclusion isn’t happening, especially with newer or less experienced members.

Group development

Students start with varying skills and at different levels. It is important that group members have both enough in common as well as sufficient differences to enhance the mix. In a working group the more seasoned sandplay therapists become mentors for the less seasoned therapists. Expressive arts, art therapy, bodywork, EMDR, and teaching backgrounds may be part of the therapists’ repertoire of working with their patients. Cross-learning happens by listening and discussion; we become familiar with each other’s collections, clients, and ways of working with sandplay. Some therapists use a multimodal expressive arts approach; others use sandplay more exclusively, which they integrate with an analytic, verbal approach.

Strong connections are made among members as well as with the leader. Members appreciate having a group roster with their contact information. As the group and individuals mature, more fluidity develops in the leadership. A member might present something that he or she has thought about and studied, using the group as an opportunity to practice teaching in a small seminar setting. Members often hand out copies of relevant articles.

I offer group members something equivalent to a teacher’s “office hours” a half hour before the group meeting for individuals to discuss specific training questions or where they are in terms of their development as a sandplay therapist. Students are often in different stages, and this pre-meeting period is an opportunity to open conversations that would not necessarily be addressed in the group but that can affect group process.

Over time the symbolic function of the group is enhanced as members are steeped in the unconscious material of a variety of sandplay trays over many hours. As the group matures, members become more comfortable with the tension of not knowing and sitting in uncertainty. There is less need to jump to conclusions. Fewer words may be spoken, but more is said. There is a felt experience in the room that we are circumambulating the mystery of the living psyche.

Limitations and challenge

Group supervision is rich but cannot replace individual supervision. The number of times each group participant can present in a year is limited. In individual consultation there is more opportunity to meet more frequently and to follow a single case closely over a longer period of time. The intimacy co-created in the group psyche is quite different from the one in individual consultation. In group supervision, complex family dynamics may come into play and there are certainly more psyches in the mix than in individual supervision. There is always the psychic mix of the consultant, of individual group members, of the whole group, of the patient, and of the sandplay itself. As an introvert, I have found that when a complex gets activated between a member and myself, it is easier to work through it in a one-to-one supervisory relationship than in the group. In such an occurrence, it may be helpful to have an individual meeting. From time to time, the group as a whole may need to discuss its own process to revitalize and tweak the format or emphasis. This is part of the group’s maturation.

Confidentiality issues

In supervision groups we must not forget that the hallmark of Kalffian sandplay is the “free and protected space.” The “protected” includes protection from exposure to the eyes of people other than the therapist. This means that therapists have to be very careful in sharing case material under any conditions. We weigh the benefit of the group’s suggestions and understanding of the material as being helpful in the therapy against the breaking of strict confidentiality. This is the reason that we limit the number of persons in a supervision group. In the years that I led supervision groups, I limited the number in my group to four. The STA guidelines recommend up to six. We watch the comfort level in a group and new members are seldom added. The group is a cohesive unit that can represent an extended container or temenos.

The protection of identity is of prime concern. Of course the true name is never used. When I recognized I would be seeing a sandplayer for more than one or two sessions, I found it helpful to immediately assign a code name that I used for all my notes, photos, and labeling of relevant folders. There were often times when I forgot the true names of sandplayers because I was so used to thinking of them in the code names.

The question of amount and nature of identifying data to include is important. In some instances age and gender are sufficient. We have experimented with giving only age and gender and found that the presentation did not seem to be damaged. In fact, it allowed the viewers – the other members of the supervision group – to see the images in the tray at a less personal level. The images immediately became more archetypal in nature.

Such data as marital status, constellation of family, occupation or profession, and reason for referral may be important. The therapist, of course, has to make the decision as to what data are necessary in order for the therapist to feel satisfied about the presentation.

The effect on the ongoing therapy of sharing sandtrays with even this small number of persons is a question. Does it adversely affect the co-transference? Actually, neither Lauren nor I can recall an instance in which the presenter told us that the relationship was adversely affected. Presenters often report at the group meeting, following the meeting at which they presented a case, that at the next session with the sandplayer, the sandplayer had seemingly improved.

Of course, ongoing or “live” cases are presented in the supervision groups and this is the reason for such care with regard to confidentiality. The “rules” for presenting a case to a larger group or for publication are well known, or should be. No “live” cases are presented outside a supervision group. The case has to have been closed for several years. For any presentation to a group outside a teaching group or for publication, therapists must obtain written permission from the sandplayer. STA has a form for obtaining such permission. It is considered good practice to let the sandplayers read and pass on any article about themselves before it is published.

Conclusion

We are grateful for the learning we have received from our students, who have brought their varied experiences to bear and have contributed to our development as group sandplay supervisors and consultants. In a sandplay supervision group we are continually reminded of the vastness of the psyche and the need for honoring the “free and protected space” just as we do for a single psyche.

Chapter 2
Memories of Kay Bradway’s supervision group

Gretchen Hegeman

For most sandplayers the time arrives when a strong urge emerges to teach sandplay. We want to share with others what sandplay is all about. We are smitten. Something as powerful and fascinating as sandplay calls upon us to do this. But how do we become good teachers? How do we learn to communicate the complexities of sandplay – the theoretical, the numinous and the practical? How do we teach creating a “free and protected” space?

Sometimes the prompting comes from outside. We’re asked to speak publicly about sandplay at a conference or to an agency. There might be an article to write for a professional journal. These possibilities require us to use our thinking and sensate functions to pull our ideas together coherently. Sandplayers’ personality types notoriously tend toward intuition and feeling, so this can be a struggle. How do we learn to be good teachers? How do we find our way?

I’d like to share a personal experience with you that reflects how I found my way. Over many years, I was a member of one of Kay Bradway’s supervision groups. The group met once a month for two hours at Kay’s home in Sausalito, California. Kay and Kay’s home were welcoming. I traveled from Seattle to San Francisco for the group meetings, and my traveling was always acknowledged. Kay’s front door was usually ajar when we arrived, conveying the feeling that we were expected. The view from Kay’s living room, looking onto San Francisco Bay and across to Tiburon, reminded me of the beauty and power of the natural world. It helped us all relax and enter into our work together.

We were a group of four plus Kay. Her two-hour format was simple. For the first hour we sat together at Kay’s dining table and talked while having tea and something sweet. Sometimes one of us would bring something, and sometimes Kay surprised us with a fresh baked treat. I particularly remember mini-muffins that were just an inch in diameter. Kay often had a new book for us to look at or an article that she thought was helpful. Sometimes we learned of an interesting conference or talk on sandplay. Other times there was news from a sandplay colleague. On rare occasions an international sandplay visitor joined us.

We took turns “reporting in,” sharing something about our work, updating the group on a case recently presented, or raising a ...