Welcome to the Therapists Connect podcast. Dr. Peter Blundell, interviews therapists about their work and experiences within the therapists' community.
Peter Blundell :Hello and welcome to this episode of therapists connect to the podcast. My name is Dr. Peter Blundell. And today I'm going to be interviewing Professor Marvin Goldfried. Professor Goldfried is distinguished professor at Stony Brook University. He has a very distinguished career and he's also the co founder of the Society for the Exploration of Psychotherapy (SEPI). He's the founding editor of in session psychotherapy in practice. Professor Gottfried also is the recipient of the 2018 APA, American Psychological foundation Lifetime Achievement Award for the application of psychology. And I'm very glad to welcome him here today for this episode of therapists connect podcast. So thank you very much for doing this. I really appreciate it. So could you tell me a little bit about why you you did become a therapist in the first place then
Professor Goldfried :Well, my identity is that of a therapist, but it's also that of a researcher, mentor and a teacher. So it's multifaceted. And interestingly enough, my original reason for majoring in psychology and going on for the advanced degree is that I thought, gee, this could be very useful. If I went into advertising because I enjoyed kind of figuring out what advertisers on TV were trying to pitch and how they were doing and what they were appealing to. I figured I could think I could do that. So I went to graduate school for that and then kind of got sidetracked with my degree and my research and my therapy, so I've gotten sidetracked for about 60 years and now I'm tweeting I want to market a certain set of ideas. So it's been a little bit delayed, but I finally reached my goal.
Peter Blundell :You finally returned to the marketing that you're interested in. And you have had a very long distinguished career when you set up the graduate programme, the clinical psychology programme, didn't you at Stony Brook University in the 60s. So what what was it like starting that
Professor Goldfried :It was like a professional being in a candy store. Of professional goodies. We we were in our late 20s and 30s. And the state of New York wanted to set up a system of higher education. Pretty much mirroring what was in California. They wanted Stony Brook to be the Berkeley campus of the East. comprable one. Ah, and so they hired a bunch of young guys who were very, very idealistic and, and essentially said, Why don't you set up something that's a good clinical programme. And we worked very hard. It was a very heady type thing. Because while we what we lack in experience we made up for in enthusiasm and ideals. And back in the 60s, it was very easy to take these ideas and put them into practice. So we set up a programme where part of the faculty teaching involved clinical supervision and clinical interview because we wanted to really bring to life the scientist practitioner model. We've maintained that for over 15 years. Yeah, this very day.
Peter Blundell :Absolutely. It's still going strong now and I think that's absolutely fantastic. And that kind of thing. is a little bit actually to to kind of the next point, you're the co founder of the Society for the exploration of psychotherapy integration. Could you just tell us a little bit about that?
Professor Goldfried :Yes. The history of this, which is interesting, but I'll be very, very brief. When I was in graduate school, there wasn't anything called behaviour therapy. This was in in the 50s. So I read a lot of psycho analytics was basically traditional, do psycho analytic and, and then when I came to Stony Brook and started teaching behaviour therapy, we were visited by the American Psychological Association, and said, You can't just teach behaviour therapy, you must teach other forms of therapy as well. Otherwise, we will not accredit your programme. So I went back to my readings and notes from graduate school. Looking at it with some experience and a different vantage point and realise, gee, you know, there are some similarities here. The language is very, very different, but there are some similarities. And it's a shame that we all are trying to do the same thing, develop intervention procedures that will help people. And yet we're not benefiting from the other person's perspective. And that's what got me into setting up co founding society for the exploration of psycotherapy integration with Paul Wachtell and then a bunch of other people. And the idea was to lower the barriers across different theoretical orientations and get people to talk to each other. Also, the secondary goal, which was to close the gap between research and practice, and that's that's the history of, of SEPI which continues to exist to this day. It's very, very international. And I don't know what the current membership is maybe five or 600. But we do have local chapters throughout the world. And these are groups that meet locally and then once a year, we have conferences. We have website. We have a newsletter, we have a journal. So there is this ongoing communication and analysts are. Yeah.
Peter Blundell :Fantastic. And so somebody was interested in kind of joining or whatever, they'd be able to kind of log on to the website and go and have a look at some of those some of those local groups
Professor Goldfried :Yes SEPIweb.org
Peter Blundell :The other thing that I was reading about which you set up as well was the was AFFIRM which you set up in in 2000. And could you tell the listeners a little bit about that? What brought you to set that up and what impact that's had?
Professor Goldfried :Well, the origin goes back could see, my, my son who's happily married with a lovely guy that we love is now he's got a birthday coming up next week. So let's say I have to do some calculation. He's in his late 40s. Basically, when he was about seven, we kind of suspected that he was gay. Because there had been research on longitudinal research on gay men, and the kinds of activities that they did when they were kids. And it looked pretty certain so we figured we would wait and try to make the atmosphere at home as gay affirmative as as possible. And then he went in, and we made sure that we went away to college, he went to a gay affirmative School, which I think helped him to finally come out to us after the long waiting period, And a turning point for me was my wife and I were watching the gay pride parade in New York City. And we saw this organisation P flag parents, friends and families of lesbians and gays. And we we said let's walk Let's march with them and give them our support was very very naive of us because they didn't need our support as we marched through the parade the onlookers cheered and and you know, they were banner saying, you will always have a home at P Flag we love our LGBT family and all of that and and the energy and the desires. A lot of unfulfilled desire on the part of the onlookers gave me a sense that I should probably do something about that. Yeah. I didn't quite know. And it took a while before I figured out. I mean, I started doing things like handing out the badges at gay events. Which, after about two hours, I had the sense I was being underemployed. Anybody could I could do this so I decided I really need to do something professional. And so I wrote an article in the American psychologist saying that the field of psychology has ghettoised LGBT research, and that it's very, very relevant to just knowing about people and how people change in general, and that, that not taking into account sexual orientation in research is bad science. Cause conclusions are being drawn about gender when it may not gender spousal abuse. Some people have said it's a feminist issue. Well, when two women or two men abused each other, it's no longer a feminist issue. So the conclusion came from an inadequate approach. So I developed this website and this organisation, I post things periodically. I have a feeling it's now obsolete because there's just so much more acceptance and, and the notion, the notion was the premise for this was that it was research to indicate that if you knew somebody who's a sexual minority, you had more favourable attitudes for that. So which meant that the sexual minority had to come out. However, that's short, sighted, short sighted because you can get more people to know who was a sexual minority. My Already, if the family also came out as well, and was open about that, as a matter of fact, there are more of us than there are them. Because we have two parents with siblings, aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins. So the goal of AFFIRM was not only to provide information about your family members, but also to encourage them to come out in support of their sexual minorities. Yeah.
Peter Blundell :And I think that's just absolutely fantastic reading about it. And I think in in the times when obviously it is more accepting now, but there is still things like gay conversion therapy, which is out there and kind of people are kind of pushing forward. So I think the message that it provides is still very, very important in this day and age.
Professor Goldfried :Yeah, definitely. Yeah. It'll be a long time to get there if we ever really get there. Yeah. There being 100% acceptance Very much that could ever occur.
Peter Blundell :Yeah, we can we can only hope can't we.
Professor Goldfried :Yes. Or act. Well, hope but also act.
Peter Blundell :You've had a very long career. So I was just wondering, and what do you think have been the highlights of that career so far?
Professor Goldfried :I used to think it was research and writing and, And I enjoyed that. And I think, to a great extent that's been impactful. But I'm starting to revise my thinking as I've been teaching and mentoring Stony Brook students. And it's, it's mentoring students, it's letting them really fully understand what therapy is all about and what good therapy is all about and how it really has to be connected to basic research, as well as as applied research. So, and we've had our study, I've been at Stony Brook for 50 years. And we've had hundreds and hundreds of people graduating. And they're fantastic. They've been in positions of authority of research, leadership, academic eminence and I'm in my mid 80s. I'm still teaching and supervising I can't, can't retire. It's so great working with them.
Peter Blundell :And it sounds like you are still really passionate about it even after all this time and that you enjoy doing it.
Professor Goldfried :Yes, I do.
Peter Blundell :which is fantastic.
Professor Goldfried :But my passion for advertising is, is returning but I don't think it will replace my passion for teaching and
Peter Blundell :This could be the next 50 years. If you were speaking to somebody now, maybe maybe you speak to some of the students actually in this way, if someone's thinking about becoming a therapist or going into this type of profession, is there any advice that you would give somebody kind of coming into it at this point?
Professor Goldfried :Yes, Yes, I would. I would say that it's going to be hard to change the mindset of people who have been in the field for a while. And we're kind of used to talking about, well, it's this school of thought and that school of thought, this is the way we think, we think in terms of people Freudian, Adlerian, Rogerian, you know, if you go to a physician, your primary care physician, you don't say, what's your theoretical orientation? It makes no sense. So I would say to these young people, what kind of profession do you want to be affiliated with Do you want one were we were still fighting with each other One where we have good interventions that we can agree on, and that have a good empirical basis. And you should fight for that.
Peter Blundell :It's really interesting you talking about that kind of distinction between the newest therapists who are coming through and the people who have been in the in the profession for a very long time. And I do think there is a difference actually, in terms of how people perceive the profession and how they approach it. Definitely. I think I probably know what the answer to this question is, what do you think is the biggest challenge that the profession currently faces?
Professor Goldfried :I think it's it's learning to indicate what we agree upon. And I think the mindset of many people in the profession is, is that it's hard to do this. And basically, what I've experienced is either they don't want to do it. Or they'll say, Yes, we can agree on this, but and we know as clinicians, yes, but the but erases everything. And I think that people have identities and their identity goes with a given school of thought. And that's very, very important. And I think it's threatening to many people to take away that identity. So younger people have not yet formed their identity. And I think, you know, they enter the field saying, I want to really do the best kind of work. Well, the best kind of work. And I say, based on the research that I and other people have done based on clinical practice, based on supervision, and not the single school, apparently, it must deal with other things. For example, CBT therapist is dealing with a young woman who is very, very unassertive, very unsure of herself and the interaction with a therapist, therapist will ask a question and the patient will say, Well, I guess it's this and she can make a commitment and CBT focuses more on what you need to do between sessions. What is going on within the session is crucial. You can do therapeutic work by pointing out, here's the problem happening right now. You're afraid to say, what's on your mind, or if the patient preferences are coming by saying, you're gonna think I'm crazy, but it's like, well why will, I think you're crazy. If your nose itches, and it's a subjective feeling. You don't say I think my nose itches. It's my nose itches. If I want something, I want something and you don't have to apologise. So you can do this intervention right in a session. That's not CBT. It's like wasting a potential for intervention.
Peter Blundell :And it's that I think what you're describing there is just kind of more holistic approach where actually we're using all of our skills in that moment to to kind of really support the client or the patient and get to know exactly what's going on for them.
Professor Goldfried :Exactly. The therapist should intervene on the basis of her or his theoretical orientation, but on what the patient needs,
Peter Blundell :which is very client centred and based on exactly the client's rather than, as you say, the the background or the philosophy that you're coming from.
Professor Goldfried :Yes, given that, there may be people listening to this, who are kind of going into research and counselling and psychotherapy, and particularly in the UK. Now, it's a very, very big thing and a lot, a lot more practitioners are encouraged to kind of do that. Is there any kind of areas of research that you think require greater attention? And we've done we've already given A couple of areas. I think, let me make a comment on the areas that have been given too much attention, and assumed by many people to be the only source of evidence, namely, clinical trials for DSM disorders. It's a very, very specific and in a sense contrived use of a heterogeneous intervention, not tailored to the particular person, but is tailored to a DSM disorder, which is in itself heterogeneous and has nothing to say very much about aetiology. Though I think a lot of that research has been oversold. And what's been short shrifted it is process research as it relates to outcome. So the question of the process or searcher is what did what did the therapist do to make an impact in this session? And to what extent to these impacts in a session contribute to overall change? That's the therapy but it's the research question. The therapists question is what can I do to make an impact in this particular session? And how will this impact contribute to the effectiveness of my intervention? So the research question by the process researcher is the question that clinicians need to know about. And I think, you know, we need more of that. We also need to know, more basic research. And I think this was the thing that that very excited about behaviour therapy, in that it presented a whole new approach to developing therapy. The psychoanalytic approach, and I'm not faulting it for this was based on clinical observation, trial and error. because there wasn't a basic research on human functioning. We have basic research on how people behave. How people think How people feel clinicians need to know this. Physicians need to know more than what the Merck manual. It's a maybe several inch manual that the drug company puts out and a summary of what can be done. A lot of people are learning to do therapy by manuals I would not go to a primary care physician whose only knowledge of medicine came from the manual. I would want this person to know about biology, chenistry, and anatomy and know about how the body works as well as know what interventions will work, though I do think that that basic research is very, very important, and it is underused.
Peter Blundell :And that almost goes back to the point you were making before, which is this idea of a holistic understanding of the person. Yeah, one of the main things that kind of has come out this idea of Therapists Connect, which is kind of why I'm speaking to you now is this idea of, of therapists not feeling very connected to the wider therapeutic community. And so just wondered how you saw it from your perspective. And whether there's anything that you thought we could be doing to actually connect therapists together and make more of a community for therapists.
Professor Goldfried :It's kind of obvious that if we're going to connect with therapists of other orientations. A lot of that connection is going to involve verbal interaction. If we don't speak the same language, there's absolutely no way we're going to get that interaction. So we have a concept, we have a concept that I think is key to a lot of therapy. It's not the only concept. But it's key to the change process. And that involves helping the patient to step back and with the therapist help to kind of observe their behaviour, their thinking, their feel, their feeling, and this observation and then having them do that as a way as a stepping stone to change to become aware of why they're behaving the way they are. Now people have spoken about the change process in skill learning, as having four phases, and these phases I think also have to do with therapeutic change. The first phase is a person who's not functioning well doesn't know what to do. It's not effective. Is not confident and doesn't know why. So that is a phase of unconscious incompetence therapy. They need to know why their life is not working based on past history based on constitutional inheritance based on all kinds of other other things. So now, they move to the next phase of conscious incompetence, where they know what is wrong and perhaps where it's come from in the phase after that is to start making changes to consciously make changes to be more effective, which is conscious competence. And the more the more you do this over time, and if you're really fortunate, it depends on on how long the problem is existed. And then the other limitations, the goal is to eventually have the person function in a competent way automatic automatically as unconscious competence. So going from unconscious incompetence, to conscious incompetence to conscious competence and unconscious incompetence, I think exists in all forms of therapy. The phase of going from unconscious incompetence to conscious incompetence means they have to step back with the therapist and do some self examination. Freud said, The observing ego forms an alliance with the analyst to observe the neurotic aspects of a person's function. Contemporary analysts call it reflective functional. Cognitive therapists call it de centering. Researchers call it metacognition, we can call it dynamic, we can talk about it as case formulation, we're all talking about pretty much the same thing. But if we don't know the terms that the other person is using, there's no communication. So we need a common language. The common language is also important not only for communication, but for retrieval of information from the literature. So there is research on on decentering, there is research on insight. there is research on reflective functioning. And if you use these search terms, you'll come up with things. But if you don't use the search terms, you won't come up with it. And it may be important information, some language is, is very important. In addition to that you can observe somebody doing therapy and can say, Oh, that's good therapy. I'm planning to do this. I don't know when it will be. I think it's too long for a tweet. Though I think I might link the tweet to something will lengthy like a video. You have the therapist patient interaction, the patient says, you know, I'm always concerned about whether my ideas are legitimate or not. And I'm always concerned that other people are going to disagree with me the name of being legitimate and this this keeps keeps me stressed. Makes me feel crappy about myself. I can always get what I want the therapists as well ok, so maybe it's important For you to learn how to shift your focus away from thinking about what other people want or concerns about what other people want, and focus on more what you want, and then take the risk sometimes in well thought out situations to express and feel good about yourself, and maybe you'll even get what you want. So what's the orientation? It could be any, and then asking therapists, you agree this is, you say this in your clinical work. You say that clinical work, we don't talk about, or we do talk about it, but we talk about it with different langauge.
Peter Blundell :And one thing I wanted to ask is do you worry that if if we ended up using a common language, and do you think there's a risk that we could lose some of the depths that we have with some of these approaches, which kind of and the variety that we have to think there's a potential that we could lose something there if we all become kind of very similar in terms of how we how we approach it.
Professor Goldfried :No if the language is common in that example, I gave the interaction between therapist and patient. Yeah, how this was gonna happen. I didn't say anything about the therapeutic procedure. And that's where we have our differences. And our differences may be theoretically, it's like, well, what you need to do is a search yourself to your wife, or somebody would say, Well, I have a person, as your therapist, try it out on me. So the different orientations may have different therapeutic techniques or procedures, and that's fine. And they may work better with some people than other people, as opposed to rely only on CBT. So I can only do talk about what's happening. Please say, No, I'm into personal so I can only talk about what's happening within the session. Well, you know, maybe the needs of the patient, and what works better for that person to be the method that's used. So we agree on the process of change, the principle of change. Then how it gets implemented is empirical question. I have no problem with using a technique from another orientation. If it's indicated, it should the client. that dictates what the therapist does rather than or the theorist, you know, once the pandemic is over, they're going to be lots of psychological issues. And people are going to be turning to therapy for social issues, therapists will say, Well, according to my approach, and then somebody said, Well, according to my approach, or I mean as Adlerian and I thought Adler had all the answers, you know, he said it all and someone will say no, but Jung was this and no, but no, but no, but no, but this, its embarassing, we need more of an allegiance to our clients and rather than our orientation.
Peter Blundell :And do you feel that is happening. Do you feel like there is there that that is starting to happen?
Professor Goldfried :Not quite, but it requires somebody who knows something about the field who has experience and is adept at marketing. So this is my challenge. In my my later years, my my post, career or maybe it's ancillary, you know, it's dissemination of information, hopefully, of what I have to say will make make some impact on people. And the the issue is not will therapists ever agree, but rather when will it's not if but when I firmly believe that if it's I don't know, if it's happening, it's hard. It's hard to know if it's happening,
Peter Blundell :and I think that might go back to the original point about this idea of connection because actually, sometimes we're quite disconnected. as as as a profession and sometimes trying to pick up on is there a movement is there a change is the collective union of voices is something times quite hard to establish, isn't it? Because we can be in our own kind of bubbles? And, and so it's, it's hard to understand that.
Professor Goldfried :Yes. And maybe we don't know what the aftermath will be. Most probably, it'll just be easy to talk to somebody in another country very easily as we are doing. I mean, it was required an email and I clicked on a link and
Peter Blundell :there it was.
Professor Goldfried :So the vehicle for doing this is here, and will it will stay and hopefully we'll use it all at least I will, as much as I can to try to use it for the purpose of marketing here, that the infant science, over 100 years old, needs to grow up.
Peter Blundell :And I think you've done a really good job of kind of explaining that point of view and anything in terms of marketing. I mean, we put this out on a podcast so people can listen to and really get an understanding of it. But I think also to acknowledge that you are on Twitter as well so people can follow you in and and see more of these viewpoints on there as well.
Professor Goldfried :So it's goldfriedmarvin is my Twitter name and blog to my 2019, American psychologist article. So I think we're at a turning point where everyone is looking to the field of psychotherapy. And if we can't speak with one voice now, when, when will he be able to do it after all these years? That's fantastic, Peter.
Peter Blundell :Brilliant. Well, that was all my questions. I just want to say thank you very much because I really appreciate your time. I know you're a busy man, but I found that very interesting. So thank you.
Professor Goldfried :Okay, and thank you for your interest.
Opening :Thank you for listening to the therapist connect podcast. Go to www.therapists-connect.com from more discussions and debates. Transcribed by https://otter.ai