If I ever start a blog, you can bet this blogger’ll
Fill its many pages with mongrel doggerel.
At least for the poetry section. I also intend to blog a White Guys Guide to Diversity, opinions on psychology and psychotherapy and an occasional advice column (Ask Dr. Reality: feel free to write with a question!).
I’m a clinical and forensic psychologist, teaching since 2003 and practicing since the late seventies. I have an almost unwholesome amount of experience in the child welfare system, and wide-ranging experience in other areas of psychotherapy and assessment. I’ve written six professional books, but now I want to write without clearing it with anyone else as to subject (or merit). I’m also (technically) an attorney.
Michael Karson, Ph.D. 
I’m curious about your thoughts related to the culture of psychology. Certain contexts seem to glorify the supervisory hierarchy. At times it seems that the hierarchy appears more oriented toward enhancing supervisor confidence and security, rather than engaging in behaviors which serve in the best interest of the supervisee. At what point does critical supervision targeting individual weaknesses turn into bad supervision? (i.e., creates resentful, defensive supervisees). Psychologists also often seem to have difficulty balancing efforts to challenge their supervisees with the intention to create growth, while also being a protective source that is on their side. Basically, psychologists often seem to be more concerned about putting on a front than being good at what they are supposed to do.
These seem like important dynamics in any supevisory relationship, but how they play out in any particular supervision depends a great deal on the details. It’s hard to tell when a supervisor is focusing on a sore spot to enhance growth rather than to stomp out dissent or to express anger at mistakes or to enhance his or her front. One thing I feel pretty confident about is that the supervisee’s emotional reaction is not a good gauge, because some get angry at confrontational curiosity and some are happy and obedient when faced with a supervisor who avoids conflict. Supervisors and therapists should always be cognizant of the privilege they hold to pull rank and define reality, but that doesn’t mean they should back down every time a comment is rejected. One strategy for me is to consult with peers about every supervisory conflict (peers who have a track record of not just taking my side). It’s more complicated in therapy because the consultation itself is a breach of privacy (one might still consult, but only after weighing the potential costs and benefits), but in supervision, at least with supervision of trainees as opposed to private, post-graduate supervision, the relationship is defined as not-private.
Hi Mr. Karson, I read Psych Today almost religiously every day and all I have to say is that I just finished reading your latest article and found you funny. Thanks!