The Best of the Two Worlds

Dividing the entire cultural universe into two large categories of Collectivists and Individualists seems like a wild idea. As someone who has grown up, went to school and worked in both societies, I can understand why the distinction could not only be a useful idea, but also an important survival tool for people of dual cultural identities such as myself.

In a collectivist society, the community is placed ahead of the individual. It sounds simple, nice and convenient it sounds, the idea comes with a number of disadvantages. For instance, in a collectivist community, any marriage decision must be made by a number of family members including second relatives. That is where the ideas of arranged marriages and individuals sacrificing their loves for the sake of the whole community come from. While that appears as a disadvantage to the individual, the idea prevents a large number of societal problems that exist in an individualis community such as teenage pregnancy.

In an individualist society on the other hand, the needs of an individual always come ahead of the community and even the family. As selfish and self-centred the idea sounds, it has many advantages over considering the community’s benefits over self’s. for instance, it advocates for focusing on one’s true needs which in turn could put the individual on their path towards self actualization. In an individualist society, one learns to take responsibility for their own decisions and actions instead of blaming others for their mistakes. For the same reasons, the individual is more likely to face life problems alone with less community support than their counterparts in collectivist societies.

The interesting idea arises when migrations happen between the two cultures. Movement is more likely to happen from collectivism into individualism either in idealistic transformation or physical movement than the other way around. Either form of movement will result in very well defined concepts:

Acquiring individualist thoughts in a collectivist society will result in “Radical Feminism”, while practicing collectivism in individualist societies will result in “Patriarchy”. One should not cherry pick as they go along in either societies as that will result in “Stereotyping”. For example, arranging marriages in an individualist society will imply the idea of oppression against women in collectivist practices. The important idea is to “act as Romans when in Rome”. Practicing against societal and cultural norms will not only result in isolation but is likely to put the individual in conflict with the law.

Let’s not forget about the existence of sub-cultures in either societies. Each community could come up with their own ways of practices in a larges society. Each family, community, group and even city could have collectivist or individualist ways of functioning in a larges society which itself could be individualist or collectivist. Familiarizing oneself with both ways of relating to the larger community will insure the benefits of the best of the two worlds.

Shahrzad Shahriari
BSc.Psych, MSW., RSW.
647-405-7706
shahrzad.therapy@gmail.com
www.shahrzadtherapy.com

What is Counter Transference?

In my profession, I work very closely with people. I listen to their pains. Clients come to me to feel better, to seek relief, to leave happier. Psychotherapy is a very delicate work. It makes the therapist get very close to people’s feelings, sometimes too close as they could touch their clients’ feelings with their fingertips. Being in such position, it is very important for therapists to be aware of their own feelings. Monitoring their responses to what they experience in a therapy session is one of the most important aspects of being a therapist. Counter Transference therefore, is when a therapist has a personal reaction to what they hear from a client. Detecting this reaction, identifying it and defining it, is part of the therapist’s work.

Now, what to do with this reaction is a matter of debate among scholars. Whether it needs to be shared with the client and be discussed or be kept to the therapist depends on how the phenomenon is being defined. Some schools of thoughts believe that Counter Transference is a therapist’s issue and they need to resolve it or analyze it with their own supervisor/therapists. According to this school, it should never be shared with the client. Others believe that Counter Transference belongs to therapy. While already rooted in the therapist’s past experiences, it has been elicited by the client. According to this school, the client has every right to know how their therapist is reacting to what they say. And as with any other controversial issue, others take a middle stand position. They believe that it all depends on the context. According to this school, the therapist has to know the client well enough to decide whether sharing a Counter Transference feeling might be helpful or harmful to the client. It is all about the client. That’s what the therapist is getting paid to do: To think of the client first.

Going back to my school days, I trained with a physician psychotherapist. According to his medical model, under no conditions you would ever share a Counter Transference reaction with your client. As part of my training, I also worked with a social worker psychotherapist who would share small bits of his own feelings with the clients from time to time. Having observed both of my supervisors for many hours, I could never come into a solid conclusion on what is the right approach to take when dealing with Counter Transference.

Having started working with clients as a professional, what I learned through my personal experiences is that there are no doubts that Counter Transference is a very powerful phenomenon. It could stir up a lot of feelings in the therapist. Overall, it is a positive outcome of the therapy for the therapist as it could teach them a lot about themselves. As it goes for the client, it could show them that their therapist is also a human being who comes with all different normal feelings just like them. Now, to what extend that should be shared with the client, I believe depends on the clients’ level of intelligence and understanding of the therapy. Working with a lot of young abused women, I find them in need of hearing from an older wise, yet sensitive and sympathetic female. I find telling these women something like: “I wish I had a little sister like you” would make them more receptive to my suggestions on how to end an abusive relationship. It has worked for me every single time. In a different context, telling an intelligent successful client who has a troubled relationship with his younger sister something like: “I envy your sister for having a brother like you” elicits a reaction like “ Maybe one day my sister sees me like that too”. To me, sharing my Counter Transference reaction with the client has shown him that despite not being appreciated, he is a good brother.

Counter Transference is powerful and useful and could help therapy process more useful for the client. It is a natural normal human reaction which is one of the most beautiful by-products of the client/therapist relationship.

Shahrzad Shahriari
BSc.Psych, MSW., RSW.
647-405-7706
shahrzad.therapy@gmail.com
www.shahrzadtherapy.com