Introduction to Special Edition Honoring Gerry Schamess

Abstract

Gerry Schamess was an outstanding figure in the field of clinical social work over the past 50 years. His contribution to the field is recognized in this introduction and in the articles that follow.

Keywords:

• Gerry Schamess
• clinical social work
• mutuality
• psychoanalytic theory

Professor Emeritus Gerry Schamess was many things to many people. As poignantly conveyed by Kathryn Basham and her contributors in the first paper of this special edition, Schamess was an outstanding educator, clinician, supervisor, researcher, mentor, editor, theoretician, writer, and friend. His professional life spanned over five decades, encompassing all these roles. But it was not just his sheer longevity that stood out. It was that he touched the lives of so many through his warmth and wit, his prodigious intellect, his willingness to disclose his vulnerabilities and areas of shame, his deep empathy, and his extensive writing. Although we will try to capture some of what we think was the essence of his life work, particularly in his later years, his contribution to the field of clinical social work is immeasurable. We are deeply honored and privileged to have this opportunity.

Schamess began his social work career in 1958 following his graduation from Columbia University with a Master’s degree in psychiatric social work. Trained in the classical psychoanalytic traditions of the day, throughout the years, Schamess carefully questioned each and every principle as his experience grew. In 2013, Schamess was asked to write a reflective piece on what changed for him over the course of 50 years of practice. What did he hold on to (theoretically speaking) from those early days? Schamess’s (2013) answer to that question can be found in his paper entitled, “On knowing and not knowing: Theoretical transformations during 50 years of practice”. The short answer is: “The central role repetition plays in shaping therapeutic narratives and (2) The healing effects of self-reflection shared with and influenced by a caring other” (p. 218). Evidently, a great deal changed for Schamess over these monumental five decades! Trained at a time that advised strict neutrality, the centrality of the clinician’s authority and objectivity, the formal and restricted role of countertransference, the positivist certainty of interpretations, Schamess gradually found himself increasingly influenced by relational theorists. His shift moved in the direction of a more egalitarian therapeutic relationship and a deeper appreciation for mutuality in this encounter.

This gradual shift in thinking reflected many of Schamess’s admirable traits: humility, openness to new ideas, willingness to test out these new ideas, trusting his own experience, his ability to admit failures and mistakes, and his capacity to tolerate knowing and not knowing. Moreover, he was someone who deeply appreciated theory, in particular, psychoanalytic theory. He respected differences, but never shied from a good theoretical debate. Nonetheless, in characteristic fashion, he added a postscript to the above article. It begins: “I have been surprised to recognize how intensively ambivalent I am about publicly discussing my professional development. Having taught a generation of graduate students about the benefits of ‘not knowing,’ I imagined I could easily describe how my views about practice have evolved. Instead, I discovered that, at times, I could not articulate what I was doing differently, or my theoretical reasons for doing it. My current approach to treatment weaves together a number of discordant traditional and relational techniques. Despite idiosyncratic and eclectic, it is helpful to (most of) my patients and compatible with what I can offer” (p. 231).

Space does not allow for more than an introduction to Schamess’s contribution to clinical social work theory and practice. He wrote about practice with children, group therapy, racism, clinical process, and more. Perhaps a full anthology of his writing will some day be undertaken. For now, we want to highlight a few select papers that we think will give the reader (especially those not familiar with his writing) a sense of the spirit of Schamess’s courageous inquiry. We hope that it will spur further exploration of his life work.

On love

Schamess had the kind of courage in his writing that many readers deeply admire. Whether one agrees with him or not, after reading some of his papers one often must stand back and say, “wow, that was brave!” Let us give a few examples. In 1999, Schamess published a paper entitled, “Therapeutic Love and its Permutations”. In it, he put forth the following argument: “My central thesis is that erotic love, experienced in a wide variety of permutations, is intrinsic to dynamically informed treatment, and that the healing action of psychotherapy is facilitated when therapists recognize their own as well as the patients’ contribution to, what often becomes, even among the most devotedly ‘abstinent’ therapists, a more or less secret dance of mutual desire” (p. 10-11). Schamess is not talking about the acting out of sexual desire that sometimes occurs in the boundary violations of some therapies. He is talking about love in the therapeutic relationship. As is emblematic for Schamess, he is willing to reflect upon and present his own experiences in practice. He writes, “Both in my own practice and in supervising others, I have collected considerable anecdotal data about patient-therapist interactions that are not only intimate and nurturing, but sensual as well; usually at the level of symbolic interaction” (p. 12).

Observing that social workers often refer to “positive relationships”, Schamess notes how our language obscures a range of affective states. Piercing through the fogginess of our everyday speech, Schamess offers detailed case studies to reveal his own subjectivity in providing therapy, conceding that, “a forthright discussion of erotic countertransference requires that I discuss my own reactions and feelings, as best I understand them” (p. 15). How brave is that! Modeling this courageous conversation, he encourages clinicians to recognize these feelings in themselves and to be prepared to talk directly about their loving and sensual (perhaps erotic) feelings in supervision. Schamess concludes: “It encourages us to see our patients as more fully human, and to be more fully human ourselves” (p. 25). We will leave it to the reader to follow-up on this paper – you won’t be disappointed.

On providing therapy

Nearing the end of his formal academic career, Schamess seemed even further willing to share his feelings and reflections on a lifelong calling of providing psychotherapy for over 45 years. In the essay, “Megalomania: A Mingled Tale”, Schamess (2008) is contemplating retirement after 45 years of practice. The decision to continue practicing or retire outright was not so straightforward. What he shares with us is the idea that providing therapy can be mutually beneficial for both parties. So, why give up something that benefits himself? Wait, did he just say that therapy can (sometimes) benefit the clinician? Isn’t it supposed to be unidirectional? Indeed, that is the claim he is unapologetically making here. Schamess writes, “… in treatment that mirrors the intrapsychic and interpersonal issues that also inhabit the therapist’s internal world… common themes in the lived experience of patients and therapist interact in ways that can, potentially, benefit both parties” (p. 459). Schamess is fully aware of the hazards in publicly acknowledging that he has personally benefited from some therapies (and is careful to say that this gain should never come at the client’s expense). Nonetheless, he is sure that he is not alone. Arguing that therapists are not as altruistic as we like to think of ourselves, he explores the theme of what we get out of this practice. Again, as is typical of Schamess’s writing, he provides a lengthy case study to illustrate his points. Characteristic of his approach is the willingness to share his own life experiences in a way that brings life to the humanity of the therapeutic enterprise. In his own words:

“My personal history: I too am an only child. My father died when I was 12, and my only living grandfather died a year later. When I was 14 my mother suffered a disabling stroke that left her paralyzed and, for the most part, without speech. My extended family was the very model of what Minuchin described as “disengaged,” so I became responsible for caring for myself and my mother—or for my mother and myself; the relevant issue being whose needs came first? Throughout my adolescence, it was apparent that our emotional needs did not exactly coincide, which, come to think of it, is not at all unusual during adolescence. Actually, I did a pretty good job of caring for my mother, and, even though I didn’t realize it at the time, she also managed to take care of me in spite of her disability. She determinedly maintained our attachment and although her vocabulary was limited to 50 or so words, she consistently communicated her strong convictions about what I should do with my life, and how I should and should not behave” (p. 463).

The point of this disclosure was to demonstrate the ways in which his life caused Schamess to ponder (along with the reader) what he gets personally out of being a clinician, particularly as a consequence of the reported therapy. In the end he recognizes how much emotional development he gained because of providing therapy, and accordingly, what he might lose in ceasing to engage in this work. We read it as a nudge and a wink for us to ponder our own life stories likewise.

On mutuality

In 2012, Schamess published two papers that featured the word ‘mutual’ in the title: “Mutual transformations in psychotherapy” and “Mutual influence in psychodynamic supervision”. It seemed that the idea of mutuality would become a cornerstone in his thinking about clinical social work practice. Nothing was done to people; everything is done with others. In his way of thinking, psychotherapy and supervision are clearly bidirectional fields.

In “Mutual transformations in psychotherapy”, Schamess returns to the theme of exploring the emotional benefits that therapists might gain from their practice, something that is rarely discussed in clinical literature. As is the style for Schamess, a lengthy case study of a long-term therapy is presented. This paper is remarkable in at least two ways: 1. His willingness to present what he refers to as an enactment – falling asleep in the middle of a session. Schamess writes, “As the silence continued, I waited patiently, or so I thought. When I awoke, R. was looking at me with an expression I can only describe as wry amusement. Realizing how deeply asleep I had been, I quickly apologized. The clock said I had slept for 5 min. Flooded with anxiety, I silently began to analyze my emotional state and the origins of my behaviour” (p. 15). Schamess analyzes this moment as related to mutual issues of abandonment anxiety and the degree to which both his client and he employ similar defenses. 2. Schamess encourages his client to read the paper he has written about him, along with an invitation to provide a commentary. The client’s response to having his therapist fall asleep, in addition to other comments about the ongoing treatment is published at the end of the paper. How rare that the client gets the last word! Also extraordinary is Schamess’s courage to present an embarrassing moment in treatment, turning it into therapeutic grist for the mill.

We hope that the few papers we have highlighted give you a sense of the courage, humility, wisdom, and vast intellect of Gerry Schamess. They are worth reading and re-reading. His complete body of writing demonstrates the transformations of his thinking over five decades of practice. But he not only transformed himself – he transformed the lives of his students, mentees, supervisees and clients.

Introduction to articles

Leading off the selection of articles is Kathryn Basham’s “Tribute to Gerald (Gerry) Schamess”. Basham, a former student and long-time colleague, provides a brief outline of Schamess’s work and academic career, along with her own poignant memories of Schamess. She is joined in this tribute by Edith Fraser, Jim Drisko, Dawn Faucher, Jeana Hayes-Carrier, Chris Vaughan, and Laurie Herzog. Each of the contributors offers us a glimpse into the man who meant so much to so many. It is a touching tribute to Schamess who was not only an outstanding scholar, but a remarkable individual.

Next, Joel Kanter offers an outstanding review of the life and work of another stalwart contributor to psychoanalytic social work – Selma Fraiberg. Having previously written about Claire Winnicott, Kanter now explores the life journey of Fraiberg. In so doing, Kanter suggests that there are many similarities between Fraiberg and Schamess: both treated children, both advocated the use of groups, and both were remarkable listeners and observers who could see past psychoanalytic jargon. While many readers may be familiar with Fraiberg’s hugely successful book, The Magic Years, Kanter provides a deeper and richer examination of her life work. This paper will stand as a significant contribution to the psychoanalytic social work literature.

As we noted above in reviewing a selection of Schamess’s writing, he did not shy away from provocative topics and contentious theoretical positions. It is in keeping therefore, that the next paper, by a long-standing colleague of Schamess, Jim Drisko, ventures into the divisive territory of childhood narcissism. Drisko is fully aware that “applying the concept of personality disorders to children is controversial”. Nonetheless, he carefully reviews the theoretical literature on childhood and adult narcissistic personality disorder, noting the similarities. Then, in keeping with the practice of Schamess, Drisko presents a lengthy case study, modeling knowing and not knowing along the way. Drisko concludes by suggesting that therapists consider how some children might be characterized by this adult personality disorder, and accordingly, how treatment may be guided by this view.

The paper “Swimming with Winnicott: An Ode to the spirit of creativity inquiry, and learning,” by Loan Vo, beautifully reflects the spirit of Schamess’s legacy: it is personal, authentic, humble, curious, and creative. Lo brings alive the writings of Winnicott (who Schamess very much appreciated) through the metaphor of learning how to swim as an adult. With the guidance and trust of her instructor, together they create a potential space for growth and mastery. Written with a great appreciation for metaphor and analogy, Vo conveys her humanity and life story in a way that brings insight into oneself and other.

Schamess had a love of groups and group therapy, publishing some significant contributions over the years. Seth Aronson draws heavily on Schamess’s writing to explore the developmental aspects of an adult process group in the paper “Build-a-group: Structural considerations with regard to roles, phases and leader intervention”. Aronson contributes to a sparse literature on this kind of process group by focusing on roles, defenses, developmental needs of the group, and leader intervention. This contribution to the literature gives group leaders much to ponder as they seek to understand the developmental phases of their process groups.

In our final paper, Linda Gross offers us a glimpse into the world of milieu therapy. She writes, “In the basement of a social service agency in Chicago, an adult therapeutic milieu provides healing through community, relationships and identity. While the Intensive Day Program (IDP) serves individuals who do not all share a clinical diagnosis, they all share a cultural, religious identity—a common ethnography”. This program, which the author notes has become increasingly rare, serves multiple functions for its clientele. We know it is just the kind of work that Schamess fully endorsed: community based, individualized, caring, supportive, long-term, and with an eye toward social justice.

In the end, we trust that this collection of articles will hold something for everyone, and in some way, serve to foster the continued imagination and spirit of enquiry inspired by Professor Schamess.