ueness" (p. 57). It may well be, indeed, that not every psychotherapist is suited to the psychodynamic situation that is constructed along with the construction of a group.
But the risks of anxiety and conflict, whether emanating from therapist or client, do not necessarily make a case against the advisability of forming a group. Further, Corey implies that, even if the nuances of technique of group-counseling leadership cannot be taught in the same way as, say, mathematics, they can undoubtedly be learned. By means of careful attention to and absorption of the principles of various therapy modalities, together with a bit of humility and a sensible grounding in the strategies and procedures suited to the task of effective facilitation of group counseling, the prospective group leader should be well positioned to manage and evaluate the progress of group interactions and facilitate optimal psychological outcomes for the group in general and for individual participants in particular.
To the degree that human beings are social animals, whatever shape the structure of their psychotherapeutic process assumes, they will be obliged to transfer the working-through of their neuroses or other personal problems and issues to their experience of living and functioning productively among their fellow human beings, whether family or friends, whether longtime acquaintances or strangers. The psychotherapist as the object of transference will not always be around to function as the patient/client's platform for displacement of feelings, which means that the client will be on his or her own. But unless the client is determined to live post-therapy life as a hermit--which in most instances would doubtless be an indicator of the need for continued therapy--he or she will need to adapt the breakthroughs of the therapy to the task of displacing feelings and perceptions in psychologically and socially appropriate ways. Indeed, to the degree that this de...