Supervision and Consultation
If you are looking for a clinical supervisor (for both LMFT and LPCC), an AMMFT Approved Supervisor, or consultation for you or your agency, it’s important to find a person that is a good match for you both personally and professionally. I see supervision and consultation as an opportunity for both process and content: integrating Self of the Therapist work, coupled with utilizing effective Individual, Couple and Family System interventions.
I administer encouragement in my work with clients and supervisees, helping uncover mistaken beliefs that impede movement, as well as attuning to inner wisdom, resources, and resiliency.
If you have the courage to be imperfect, want to grow both as a therapist and a person, and have a passion for working within the sacred space of relationships, I can help you make this experience personally and professionally rewarding.
Individual Supervision-$65 per hour
Dyad Supervision-$90 per hour
Supervision of Supervision-$100 per hour
Consultation-$150 per hour
- Family Systems: particularly Bowenian, Object-Relations, Strategic, Structural, Narrative, Experiential (Art therapy, Family Sculpting, Mind & Body connection) and Internal Family Systems
- Adlerian Psycho-therapy (Life Style Assessment, Birth Order, Early Recollections, Family Constellation, A Typical Day, Organ Jargon)
- Emotionally Focused Couples and Family Therapy
- Ambiguous Loss
I co-facilitate group supervision with Meghan Williams MA LMFT, from 8am-12pm, typically the first Saturday of each month.
Cost: $25 per hour.
Each month has a didactic topic that we explore. Past topics have included: Compassion Fatigue, Autism, Eating Disorders, Ethical Dilemmas and Mandated Reporting, Ambiguous Loss, Sex and Kink Community, EFT, Discernment Counseling, Family Sculpting, Art Therapy, Music Therapy, EMDR, Internal Family Systems.
Supervision: Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is your philosophy of supervision and may I read your philosophy supervision paper?
A: Yes, please see the link to the left to access my paper.
2. How many years have you been practicing and with what types of population, problems/diagnoses, specialty or theoretical orientation do you use?
A: 16 years post graduate degree experience, 20 years cumulative professional experience. I've worked with children, adults, couples and families in a wide array of settings, i.e., children and families on the Autism Spectrum Disorder, women and children experiencing Domestic Violence, Pregnant and Parenting teenagers and families, Eating Disorders, Mood Disorders, Chemical Dependency, Trauma, Grief and Loss, and Ambiguous Loss. My favorite theoretical orientations are: Attachment and Family Systems (including Bowen, Experiential, Structural, Strategic, Internal Family Systems, Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy).
3. May I talk to a current or former supervisee?
A: Yes you may, please contact me for this information.
4. How will we handle clinical emergency situations?
A: If you review the link under "Supervision Partnership" there is a whole section on how we can handle this arena.
5. What forms of payment do you accept and what is your rate? Do you offer individual and/or dyad/group?
A: Check or cash. $65 per hour for individual/dyad, $25 per group.
6. Are you MN Board approved or AAMFT approved?
7. How often will we meet and where? For how long? Do you offer as needed appointments? If so how quickly do you have openings available?
A: Typically I meet with individuals twice a month for 2 hours (a total of 4 individual hours) and up to 8 hours per month; and/or group supervision once a month for 4 hours. Right now my schedule does not allow for same day appointments, however I am available for phone consults, and am quick to reply to email questions.
8. Do we have mutual clinical interests? What might we learn from each other?
A: I hope so! When we share a common passion or interest it generates a rich learning experience. My intent is for you to tap into your own wisdom and resources to find your unique path into becoming a LMFT or LPCC. I have been honored to learn so much from my supervisees and clients that I have worked with. I learn about myself, our craft, and relationships everyday.
9. What led you to choose this profession?
A: Two things, one of which is my birth order, and the other was the experience of triangulation. My first training ground for the experience of having multiple perspectives and for identifying pattern, was being a middle child. I found myself tracking patterns, and realized I could resonate with many different perspectives. I didn't have a language for identifying patterns at the time, however I knew intuitively the difference between adaptive and maladaptive patterns. And secondly, I learned the power of triangles within the context of my parents' marriage. Early on I learned how to absorb my parents' marital anxiety as a way to detour their distress. I can't say that I was incredibly helpful in shifting this dynamic, however triangles are the most stable geometric shape, and I must have understood on some deep level how much they needed to stabilize their marriage. Little did I know at the time that this experience began shaping my interest in our field. Since then, I've come to believe and experience that relationship is medicine.
10. Do you encourage your supervisees to create a self-care plan?
A: ABSOLUTELY! Conversations around self-care rituals will be on-going and often. What brings you pleasure, joy, restoration? How do you set boundaries between thoughts,feelings and experiences about work, and the thoughts, feelings and experiences within your own families? What are your values around nourishing yourself emotionally, physically, and spiritually? I feel very protective of self-care, burn out is not inevitable. It is not something that will eventually happen with time and difficult clients. We will process what is your stance or posture towards self-care? What is your commitment level around living a value and passion driven life? All of this will be woven into our work together.
11. Will we be creating a supervision contract? A learning plan (goals of supervision)?
A: Yes, please refer to the Supervision Partnership for further information.
12. Do you ask for a release to talk with my other supervisors (if any) or employer?
13. How do you approach concerns related to social and cultural issues in your therapy and supervision practice? (i.e., differences regarding gender, race, culture, sexual identity, religion, age, ability, economic status, etc.)
A: I put a high level of value on our familial, cultural and social contexts. We will explore together, how our similar and different contexts impact your therapeutic work with your clients, and how it impacts our working relationship.
These questions were created in September 2010 by members of the Student and Associate Member Committee. This committee represents the interests of all pre-LMFT individuals in their pursuit of a career in Marriage and Family Therapy by facilitating opportunities for networking, training and mentoring. Visit the MAMFT website at www.minnesotafamilies.org for more information.
Thanks to Steve McManus for providing core content to the above questions.
Philosophy of Supervision
My experience of the multi-faceted supervisory relationship has evolved throughout the years. Historically as a supervisee in many different contexts throughout my life, I’ve held much insecurity within the relationship, noticing that my relationship with power (which is embedded in the supervisory relationship) had been limited to either a “power over” or a “power under” dynamic. What a dilemma for me, and for my supervisor. The “unthought known,” at that time was either to invite the supervisor to enter our dynamic as the expert, the one who would dispense the knowledge and skills that would allow me to become a competent clinician; or invite the supervisor in with fewer competencies than me, not allowing accessibility and blocking the ability to transfer their knowledge. I then co-constructed either an idealized vision of my supervisor, which allowed me an opportunity to feel small and insecure; or the polar opposite, to feel disappointed with my supervisor, which allowed me to gain power and privilege. What a set up! Early on in my development I didn’t know that a “power with,” existed. This idea that power can be shared was foreign to me. Growing up in a traditional home, with a parents that endorsed an authoritarian parenting style, and a mother that mastered enmeshment with her daughters, only confirmed those beliefs about what power looks like in relationships.
Becoming a Supervisor, has been an isomorphic experience. The best way to describe this, is that it has mimicked becoming and having a therapist, and becoming and having a mother. These roles all carry power, privilege, and influence. The rhythms of these three beats can be very different. Sometimes due to the theory of entrainment, they can all slowly and methodically find each other and become one drumming beat. Sometimes due to my shadowed parts, or experiences that haven’t been invited to emerge, the beats can be a cacophony. And yet at other times, they can compliment each other, an almost call and answer to the primal cry of human attachment. Regardless of their tempo, they are all connected and influence and are influenced by one another. I am often aware of these beats when I am working with a client or supervisee I’m struggling with, or in the midst of my tantrumming child, or aware of my own mother hunger.
My Supervision plan working with supervisees could be best described in these stages:
1. Joining and relationship building: carving out time for self to emerge. Who is the supervisee? What are contextual aspects of the supervisee? How do our contextual differences compare and contrast? How do we name and acknowledge them in our relationship in a way that sets up a strong foundation? What will the challenges and victories of that might be? What is their attachment strategy? How does that pull on my own? Knowing that my strategy tends towards avoidance, how do I remain accessible, responsive and engaged with the supervisee? Especially when a supervisee presents very insecure and will bid for an earned security with me that sometimes is difficult for me to give. Will my style and orientation be helpful for the supervisee? How do we negotiate if the dynamic will not best fit the supervisee’s needs?
2. Setting up expectations: creating the scaffolding. Once we’ve ascertained that our work together feels like a match, we can move into expectations. Expectations would cover a spectrum in that they would be both macro and micro, as well as inter and intra-personal. From a macro-perspective we would cover basic scaffolding items like: fees, time, location, liability insurance, etc. From a micro-perspective we would be going over theories/interventions to provide a wide array of information regarding all of the Family System Theories. From an inter-personal perspective, we will explore the nuances of our relationship and how themes of power, hierarchy, attachment, show up not only within us but within his/her relationship with their clients, and with in personal relationships. From an intra-personal perspective, the supervisee will get the opportunity to explore their own parts and learn more about them to allow Self to govern.
3. Working stage: integrating Self and Theories. Further exploration of theories/interventions via live supervision, video-taped, or presenting cases.
4. Evaluation: continue to assess fit and progress. Continue to nurture the relationship, taking careful time and attention to where we are in our process. Did we get stuck in our relationship building phase? Are we stuck in setting expectations? Do we overly focus on theory, and not on Self-of the Therapist? Does this feel more like therapy then supervision? These sort of questions are injected often throughout the process.
5. Termination: how to say goodbye to our work together. Either due to completion of hours, or transitioning to another supervisor, or due to one or both of us concluding that it is best to say goodbye. How do we acknowledge and honor the work that the supervisee did?
My style as a supervisor not only fits the contextual nuances of the supervisee, but also where they are in their training. A 24 year old graduate student may have a different skill set (both from life and educational experiences) then a 45 year old post-graduate trainee. It is important to assess what the supervisees’ needs are and to tailor my supervision to meet those needs. With the latter example, I may become more of a teacher in the initial stages of our relationship, making an inventory of strengths and growth areas, and spending more time on teaching certain theories/interventions. With the former example, my stance may be more of a coach, since the supervisee may have a different skill set and not need much time on the teaching, but encouragement in executing the interventions.
In conclusion, what I have learned is the importance of celebrating growth, especially in my supervisory relationships. It has been gratifying to note my evolution throughout the years. As I’ve learned how to incorporate a “power with,” stance within my relationships, I’ve noticed a deeper integration and a respect for the delicious shades of intra and interpersonal relationships. Finding great joy at times and wonderment at others at how these relationships can stir images, metaphors and experiences in me. Leaning into the “power with,” stance has taken me out of the expert role as a supervisor, allowed me to attach in a secure way, has allowed me to parent in an authoritative way, and continue to practice differentiation from my own family of origin, and work towards mastering it with my daughters.