Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:14:24 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Matthew Simpson" <054340@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Clinical Data
              25 Aug 1992 07:31:59 -0400 from
              <jdaniels%unlcdc2.bitnet@UTCS.UTORONTO.CA>

Regarding little games and traps...
(Maybe this is no fun from where you stand and this little game
may be microscopic in importance, and maybe I'm going nowhere with
this, but...)

FIRST A SLIGHT DIGRESSION REGARDING INTAKE INTERVIEWS.
Okay, so the first thing you do is an intake?  This means that
the first therapy session was not really a therapy session.  It
was the "taking in" of the client into care.  The therapy will
actually be in later session, right?  Question: why not skip the
intake and go straight to the therapy?  If we collect data in all
of the therapy sessions, why do we need an intake to especially
collect data?

Sticking to the question, "what data do we attend to in the therapy
session," an intake interview is not a therapy session, so we
can't count that as data collected while doing psychotherapy.
Maybe.  There is still the argument of semantics right?  We call
the first session an "intake" session.  However, we actually do
some therapy in that session.  Why call it an intake, then?
Answer: because the real therapy comes in later sessions.

AND NOW BACK TO THE ISSUE OF DATA...

To be fair, you answer these questions here...

> Within the session I look for the
>client's behavior, reported thoughts, and affect associated with
>the topic.  Does the client get fidgety and report anxiety merely
>in talking about an up-coming test?  Or has the client moved to
>the point of being relaxed, doesn't speak with a dry tongue and
>reports feeling comfortable when talking about tomorrow's exam?

You look at the physical behavior of the person in the therapy session.
You also attend words from the client which give you ideas about what
the thoughts of the client are.  The client's words can also give you
ideas about what the client is feeling.

(now I'll put my head on the chopping block)
So you have the client's behavior in the room, the clients thoughts,
and the client's feelings.  I do this alot in biofeedback.  But I add
another step.  I judge certain things as good or bad and then I
invite the person to change their bad behavior, thoughts, and feelings
into what I think are good thoughts, behaviors, and feelings.  So, in
order to do this, I must collect data on my own judgments.  The data
would look something like (fidgeting - bad; anxiety - bad; self-
blaming thoughts - bad; relaxed behavior - good; comfort - good;
self-empowering thoughts - good).  I must also attend to another
set of data, my own feelings.  If I say something and the client
responds in a way that makes me feel good, then success!  The person
therefore understands me.

Does this make sense?  Question: is it necessary to judge the client
as a means of doing good psychotherapy?  Does this provoke anything
in you?  Does this assume to much?  How does it feel for me to
insinuate that the therapist takes on some sort of omniscient role
in the clients life;  A role that judges and attempts to correct
all thoughts, behaviors and feelings?

O======================================================================O
 | _  l  _  * Matthew Simpson          * BITNET:                      |
 |  \_l_/   * School of Psychology     * 054340@uottawa.bitnet        |
 |    l     * 145 Jean Jacques Lussier * INTERNET:                    |
 |    l     * Ottawa, Ontario K1N 8P5  * 054340@acadvm1.uottawa.ca    |
O======================================================================O
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU