The nature of the co-therapy relationship.

Abstract

DOCUMENT RESUME CG 005 061 McGee, Thomas F.; Schuman, Benjamin N. The Nature of the Co-Therapy Relationship. Chicago Board of Health, Ill. Mental Health Div. 24 Jan 70 22p. ; Presented at American Group Psychotherapy Convention, New Orleans, Louisiana, January 22-24, 1970 EDRS Price MF-$0.25 HC-$1.20 Counselor Characteristics, *Counselor Training, *Group Therapy, Supervision The equalitarian co-therapy model which is considered to be the most significant and enduring type of co-therapy relationship is discussed. Co-therapists can interact on at least five occasions outside of the group, and all these interactions have an important effect on the growth and stability of the co-therapy relationship. Co-therapists should not be paired solely on the basis of personal friendship or prior professional acquaintance and factors such as age, sex, race, marital status, personality characteristics, interpersonal style, and the therapeutic situation should be given careful attention. As with many relationships the co-therapy dyad has a period of formation, a period cf continued development, a period of stability, and a period of separation. If the co-therapy dyad develops and operates effectively, the group will develop accordingly. Supervision of the co-therapists should be over a unit of twc people, the whole of which is more important and more profound than its individual parts. Although there are many limitations to the co-therapy approach, it can add much to the promotion of therapy and the development of group therapists. (RSM/Author) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY. THE NATURE OF THE CO-THERAPY RELATIONSHIP * Thomas F. McGee, Ph.D. and Benjamin N. Schuman, M.D. CD CX) .C) Numerous attempts have been made to question the validity and effectiveprN CD ness of co-therapists in group psychotherapy. In spite of these attempts, the C:3 use o2 co-therapists continues to grow, and this approach to group psychotherapy shows consistent vitality. It is-reasonable to assume that psychotherapy groups conducted by co-therapists are a permanent part of the therapeutic landscape. Rather than returning to historical viewpoints and conflicts about the nature of the co-therapy relationship, it seems important that this approach to group psychotherapy be evaluated and discussed from a viewpoint which is contemporary. MacLennan (1965) has argued that if co-therapists have any value, this value lies in their use for training purposes. Others, such as Rabin (1967) and McGee (1968), have argued that the co-therapy relationship provides advantages in addition to those offered for training purposes. Despite controversy about the limitations or assets of co-therapy, there has not been a clear and comprehensive statement as to the nature of the co-therapy relationship. If co-therapists are employed, one should look on the co-therapy relationship as a serious effort to promote group psychotherapy. It follows that an analysis of the varieties, establishment, and development of co-therapy relationships should be made, 0141111.1.0.001.01.71111.../..11.111...10.01. *Prepared for presentation at the 27th Annual Conference of the American Group Psychotherapy Assn.,New Orleans, La., January, 1970. Dr. McGee is Director, Mental Health Division, Chicago Board of Health; and Asst. Professor of Psychology, Dept. of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, University of Illinois. Dr. Schuman is Staff Psychiatrist, Mental Health Division, Chicago Board of Health.