My experiments in psychiatry 1
The Hall of mirrors
The experiment consists of a room separated in the middle with
a wall with a two-way mirror (the
"mirror" of the name) on the
same principle as the interrogation
rooms that can be seen in movies or on TV. (N.B.:
Even if the name is “mirrors”, in the plural, there was one
mirror)
On one side of the room there was my appointed mental
health counsellor and me. Also a chair for each of us
and a small coffee table with a
phone on it near the chair of the
counsellor. Our chairs were oriented
to be face to face, four to six feet from each other,
and about four feet from the wall along the aforesaid mirror.
We wore, each of us, a
clip-on microphone which was connected
to a sound console on the coffee table near the phone.
On the other side, behind the two-way mirror, were four, six or eight
different persons, depending on their availability,
all specialized in
mental health care (psychologist, therapist,
social worker, educator, etc.) whose no
faces I had seen. I knew afterward that they were sitting on two rows, facing
the mirror. The back
row was raised two feet high by a platform
so that the people sitting in
that row could have a good view of the meeting on the other side of the mirror. In front of the first row there was a small table with a cordless phone. On top of the two-way mirror, there
were two speakers connected to the sound console in the other room.
The duration of the session was fifty minutes: thirty-five to forty minutes in the Hall of mirrors and then
ten to fifteen minutes in the
counsellor's office for a post-mortem analysis.
The principle was the following one:
The session with my counsellor began. When the phone rang, the
counsellor answered and listened
to the recommendations given by one
of his colleagues behind the two-way mirror. He
then hung up and put into immediate practice one or
several recommendations that were suggested.
And so it was throughout the meeting.
(The idea was to use the experiences of many specialists in mental health care onto the same patient during a therapy session.)
Then, ten to fifteen minutes within the end of
the session, the sequence in the Hall of Mirrors ended.
And so, I and my counsellor headed to his office where
I gave my impressions of the meeting and decide whether another meeting was necessary or not.
A maximum of ten meetings for this exercise were suggested. I was the only decision maker in the number of meetings that I wanted to do.
Positives:
1) I was facing a whole slew of mental health
care experts, the best of the
best therapists who, through
their combined effort, could
speed up the resolution of the problems
I was experiencing.
2) It also allowed me to test a different therapeutic approach, to give me additional tools on the resolution of my mental health problems.
Negatives:
1) Every time the phone rang, the
counsellor-patient link was automatically broken. After
several "phone calls" the distance
between the counsellor and me was digging further.
2) The counsellor, by answering the phone,
lost more and more
credibility in my eyes; if
therapists behind the two-way mirror
often called up, it gave me the impression that the counsellor lacked experience. Or was passing by many
important things he forgot to
tell me. Or appears not to be
able to lead the discussion smoothly.
He looked like, in my view, a puppet.
3) If the number of interventions of the therapists was anemic, the
principle of the Hall of Mirrors itself
was becoming obsolete.
4) Each therapist behind the one-way mirror gave me the
feeling to impose its own view
of the problem and its solutions, regardless of
others, which could make interventions
confused at times.
5) Because of the two-way mirror,
soundproofing was deficient; I could
occasionally hear a therapist, behind the mirror, cough. (A mirror isn’t
a wall.)
6) The feeling of being watched and scrutinized by a group, whose faces I hadn’t
seen nor known, developed in me a
discomfort.
7) Mental health
care solutions can’t be “speeded up”; it takes time, much time sometimes....
Conclusion:
The idea “on paper” was excellent! That's why I wanted to
do this experiment. But in reality, this exercise slowed the resolution of my problems
with the numerous interventions which led to some confusion.
Also, the bond of intimacy necessary between counsellor and patient could not be settled properly.
Nevertheless, I am very glad I tried it; now, I know…