If you're a psychologist and you have a supervisor....

[Guavatron]

How does it work? Which of your patients would you choose to discuss with your supervisor? Would you discuss all of them or focus just on a few and, if just a few, how do you choose which ones?

It depends how long the supervision is. Also how experienced you are and what the expertise of the supervisor is. Usually you would have 20-30 mins on each client you wanted to bring. It isn’t line management supervision it’s clinical supervision so you are asking about
treatment options
models and formulations
alternative approaches
ways of getting to the core beliefs or behavioural experiments to change behaviours

I would usually take 1-3 clients to supervision. I would take the ones I’m stuck on. I supervise a lot of psychologists and some bring me 1-3 clients and some we spend all hour of one. But we might have discussed the next 2-4 sessions for that one client.

are you a trainee?

No I'm not a trainee. Just curious because my psychologist (20+ years of experience I'd say) told me (I think for full disclosure) that she discussed me with her supervisor (on a no names basis).

I would see that as a positive. They must want to help you and are seeking advice on the best way to do this. The supervisor will be more experienced & everything talked about in supervision is confidential.
I guess from your tone you are not happy about it though? I wonder could you speak you your psychologist and say it’s been on your mind & could they tell you why they “took you” to supervision?

Like poster says above usually it's two or 3 patients per supervision, and broadly you would pick the people you need help with the most. The service I work for has a policy that everyone should be discussed at least once during their treatment, but that could just be 5 mins if all is going well and there's not a huge amount to necessarily reflect on/explore.

I’ve been told by two longtime counsellors that they’d discussed specific issues in supervisions.

@Superstar22 oops, didn't mean to come across as unhappy about it. I'm completely indifferent as to whether she discusses me with her supervisor or not. My question was driven by curiosity about how supervision works, that was all. I suppose my curiosity was piqued because when I told my best friend that my therapist had mentioned a couple of times that she'd discussed me with her supervisor, my friend said (in a teasing sort of voice) "ahhh, well, that's what they do with the tricky ones" (or something along those lines). And it suddenly occurred to me that maybe there was some truth in that... couldn't tell if it was my friend really just teasing me or if there might be some truth in it.

They usually discuss a case they need some input on eg one that they feel is affecting their own emotions, or can grow from, as in it's for them not you,

Ah I see! I think it’s unfair to think of yourself as tricky. It’s more likely as the poster above said, they find it tricky because of their own experiences or they want an alternative approach to something or they want to check they’ve tried all the obvious things with you. It could also be they’re asking to be pointed in the direction of new evidence or journal papers or perhaps your issue relates to someone else’s issue in a way they’ve not come across before. I sometimes ask about scales; we completed X questionnaire or used X model but it’s a borderline change or borderline “diagnosis”… do they know of other scales/ models, therapies etc that might work?

hope that’s helpful

Yes, that's helpful. Thanks!

Highly recommend the "three associating" podcast for examples of how clinical supervision works.

I'll add it's not always "hard" clients, it can be ones where it feels too "easy"/I enjoy our sessions/feel pulled to become their friend.

But I also don't tell clients I take them to supervision (except that it might happen, in our initial meetings) 🤷‍♀️