top of page

Who Are You and Who Am I? Inviting Identities in Clinical Supervision

Sarah M. Thompson, PhD

Starting a new supervisory relationship is anxiety-provoking for supervisee and supervisor. Consider broaching identities to set the stage.


I have vivid memories of the anxiety I felt around starting a new supervisory relationship as a trainee. One of the idiosyncrasies of clinical training is that so much of what you learn, what you can do, and ultimately who you become as a clinician is tied to the randomness of supervision assignments. Luck out with an attentive, thoughtful supervisor who is talented at clinical work? You're on your way to developing strong skills. Get stuck with a hapless, disengaged, or narcissistic supervisor? Strap in and hope for the best.


Throughout my own training, this realization led to what I can only describe as passionate engagement around who I was assigned as a supervisor. I was unabashed in seeking out the people who I perceived to be the most effective clinicians and supervisors, and I was willing to advocate to work with them. While I don't know that this level of anxiety and intensity was entirely needed, my experiences have shaped the way I enter supervision with my own trainees.


Much like therapy, supervision is an odd relationship. A trainee walks into their future supervisor's office, often knowing very little about them, and anticipates sharing the infinite vulnerabilities of learning a complex new skill in front of their eyes. Weaknesses, insecurities, and (hopefully) triumphs will all be divulged to someone who is practically a stranger. A similar experience awaits anyone who enters therapy, although at least in that context the client's confidentiality is assured. Supervisees can't even assume that their disclosures will be kept private.


So, what can you do as a supervisor to engage effectively in this situation? There are many things, but one of the most critical is how you approach the supervisory relationship. Much has been written in the supervision literature on the importance of building a warm, supportive, and trusting supervisory relationship. And a critical pathway to this type of relationship is getting to know your supervisee.


This is hard. There is a power imbalance in supervision that cannot be ignored. And your inability as a supervisor to guarantee the trainee's confidentiality, combined with the need in most settings to conduct a formal evaluation of their performance, means that inviting fully authentic, vulnerable disclosures from supervisees is a real challenge.


Consider broaching. Broaching refers to explicitly naming relevant identities and demonstrating that discussions of identity are welcome in supervision. Similar to broaching issues of identity, culture, and diversity in therapy, broaching in supervision allows you to establish norms around the topics to be discussed and helps you enter the supervisory relationship knowing something about your supervisee and allowing them to know a bit about you.


For me, this process begins by asking my supervisees to complete a self-reflection worksheet prior to initiating our relationship. The worksheet I've created contains a series of questions that I ask them to reflect on before our first meeting, including questions about who they are, their past clinical training experiences, their current training goals, and how I can be helpful to them in supervision. Then, in our first meeting, I ask the trainee to tell me whatever they would like regarding their identities and background. Usually, this is phrased as something like, "Is there anything about your identities and background - personal, professional, cultural, or related to training - that you think it would be helpful or important for me to know in our work together?"


I've received all kinds of responses to this question. Some trainees give me a primer around their various identities, such as their gender, age, race and/or ethnicity, sexual orientation, and religious background. Some talk about where they grew up, how they entered a mental field, or what they hope to do in their career. Some share their cultural or socioeconomic backgrounds. Some discuss their professional passions. Some shrug and say there isn't anything they want to tell me.


One of the reasons I love this question is that it invites disclosure but does so in a way that gives the supervisee freedom around what and how much to share. Some trainees want to be known by their supervisor and others do not. Some see their identities and cultural backgrounds as inherent to their work, while others are not sure how it is relevant (which also tells me something important as a supervisor around where they are in their professional development).


It's also important to recognize this question as the start of a conversation, rather than its entirety. Some trainees (very understandably) are wary of disclosing 'too much' to a supervisor, especially in a first meeting (remember the power imbalance and evaluative, non-private nature of supervision highlighted above?). That's totally fine. Supervisees do not have to tell their supervisor everything about themselves in the first meeting. Instead, this discussion is setting a tone for our future meetings: it's okay to talk about our identities and how they impact our work. And not just okay - in fact, this is a critical conversation.


I try to follow up on any disclosures by my supervisees by reflecting what they've shared, validating, asking a question or two about their experiences, and thanking them for sharing. My goal here is to communicate that I've heard them and that I appreciate their willingness to consider the impact of these variables on their work as therapists and on our supervision. I also share a bit about myself. What I share varies, but I try to give them a sense of who I am, including (at a minimum) my gender and racial/ethnic identity, given the visibility and relevance of these variables to our work. Sometimes I'll talk a bit about where and how I grew up or how I think about my identity as a psychologist and a supervisor. If there are notable differences or similarities between us, I try to highlight those and reflect a bit on how these factors might influence our work. For example, "I notice that we both had the experience of growing up Christian and no longer identify as religious, and I imagine that will shape both of our perspectives when working together in supervision and deciding how to work best with your clients. Are there any things you think we should be looking out for or paying attention to in our work together given that shared identity?"


Differences are especially important to highlight, and I view this as a chance to invite the supervisee to let me know if/when I've demonstrated limited understanding of their experiences or identities, including if I ever microaggress against or hurt them in some way.

For example, "One thing that seems important to name is that I suspect you and I have different experiences, especially around our race and gender identities. You identify as a South Asian, cisgender man, and I identify as a white, cisgender woman, which means that there will probably be times when we see things differently or approach your work with your clients or our work together in supervision from different perspectives. I just want to say that my hope is that talking about our various perspectives and experiences will only make our work richer, so I want to invite you to bring up these identities and our shared and unique experiences whenever they feel important, and I will work to do the same. I also recognize that there could be times when I might not understand where you are coming from due to our differences, and this could lead me to unintentionally engage in microaggressions or to make a prejudicial or hurtful comment. Obviously, I hope that won't happen, and I'm going to try hard to make sure it doesn't, but if it ever does or if there are ever other difficulties in our relationship, I really hope that you will be willing to let me know. It's my job as your supervisor to look out for problems in our relationship and address them, but if I'm missing something, I genuinely would want you to share that with me so that we can talk about it and try to work through the issue, even if it feels uncomfortable. How does that sit with you?"


I view this sort of comment as an invitation for ongoing conversations about identity and diversity, including when the supervisee and I share most of our identities. Hopefully, having such a conversation encourages supervisees to share situations which I've messed up in some way and shows that I'm genuine in wanting to work through these issues together rather than just pretending they didn't happen. I also see this as a way of modeling how supervisees can approach their own work with clients. Occasional misunderstandings are inevitable in close work between two people, and our goal as supervisors should be to model ways of addressing those difficulties - including moments that are genuinely hurtful, offensive, or discriminatory - with honesty.


Finally, I give the supervisee a chance to ask me any questions, either about myself and what I've shared around my identities and background or about our relationship and work together. Some ask several questions, some have none. But regardless of the number or extent of their questions, the point is to model that it's important to consider the impact of our personhood on our work as therapists and that who we are is integral to supervision in the same way that it is integral to clinical work.


This sort of conversation isn't easy. I almost always feel anxious beforehand and while in the midst of it, mostly because it feels taboo in American culture (particularly white culture) to talk openly about issues of identity, prejudice, and hurt. Even more taboo is acknowledging your mistakes in this domain, particularly when you hold one or more privileged identities. As a white woman, I often feel particularly anxious when suggesting to BIPOC supervisees that there is the possibility I could microaggress against them. My mind tells me that even bringing up this possibility makes it seem like I am okay with that outcome.


And yet, I've found that there is something freeing for both parties in acknowledging the possibility of mistakes, rather than pretending they will never happen. A pluralistic society will inherently involve some degree of misunderstanding in interpersonal interactions because everyone has different experiences. A society rooted in white supremacy will likely foster some degree of oppression, racism, and unexamined privilege in interactions between people holding different identities because that is the water in which all of us swim; even those with the best of intentions will sometimes make mistakes. This is why it can feel easier as a supervisor to stay silent - it's hard to acknowledge that you are not perfect and may contribute to something harmful occurring. And yet, clinical work and supervision offer the opportunity for us to go beyond typical societal norms.


We already talk openly in therapy and supervision about otherwise taboo topics, so why not add the uncomfortable, but important, topic of identities to the agenda as well?

To me, a conversation about identities creates a context for ongoing work together in supervision. Hopefully, it establishes values and norms that the supervisee and I can draw on in the future, including if things between us or with the supervisee's clients become challenging. It's certainly not a perfect intervention, and I've had moments as a supervisor when I wished I knew more or less about a supervisee's identities or background. Both shared and differing identities can be challenging in the supervisory relationship, and supervision must also integrate identity and diversity considerations regarding the client(s) with whom your supervisee is working, adding another layer of complexity. This conversation is also not an end in itself - it should be an invitation to ongoing discussion rather than a task that is checked off a list at the first meeting and never revisited again. My hope is that having such a conversation early in the supervisory relationship allows trainees to begin our work together with a greater understanding of where we are both coming from, a sense that identities and culture are a welcome and essential aspect of clinical supervision, and perhaps even a bit less fear about the idiosyncrasies of supervision assignments.

Komentáře


© 2025 Snapdragon Psychology

bottom of page