A Theory of Everything # 12 'The art therapy sessions 1'

THEORY OF EVERYTHING

'The art therapy sessions # 1'

Facts beyond theory: There was a later attempt by CAMHS General Manager, Wanda Reynolds, to suggest that Sally Mungall engaged in ‘Parent Work’ from the onset and that the work gradually turned into something deeper over time. This was not true. I was invited, in writing, by Sally Mungall herself, to attend ‘art therapy’. The first of Sally Mungall’s ‘clinical notes’ states ‘Events 03P Psychodynamic/analytical Therapy. It is absolutely clear that I was not being offered ‘Parent Work’.

There was a meeting between Sally Mungall and my daughter’s psychotherapist, Mark Birbeck where it was decided that I was to be offered ‘Parent Work’.

30^th June, 2021 Events 04 Planning/Review/Consultation

Clinicians   Sally Mungall, Mark Birbeck

‘case discussion following the complex case discussion decision for Megan’s Father to be offered infrequent parent work with SM to support Megans use of therapy and recovery.

Agreed Mark therapist to discuss this with megan before contact made with Dad by SM.’ ---30^th Jun 2021 15:17 Sally Mungall

Between the 30^th Jun 2021and the 18^th Aug 2021 when she addressed an invitation to me in writing, Sally Mungall made the professional decision to apply her specialism, art therapy. She made that decision in the absence of a higher authority as there was no Team Leader available to her at the time. A Team Leader might have reminded Sally Mungall that psychotherapy was not to be offered by CAMHS to anyone other than the child or adolescent originally accepted into their service.

I, on the other hand, was expecting to explore ‘intergenerational trauma’ on my side of the family and to consider any potential psychological impact on my daughter. I did query the written invitation to attend ‘art therapy’, believing it was intended for Meg but the appointment was confirmed.

Theory

So. Why did Sally Mungall decide to overrule CAMHS own policy?

I believe that part of the explanation lay in Sally Mungall’s personality. She was a creative person and probably scored high on ‘openness to experience’, one of the Big Five personality traits.

Openness to experience 'is a general appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, imagination, curiosity, and variety of experience. People who are open to experience are intellectually curious, open to emotion, sensitive to beauty, and willing to try new things. They tend to be, when compared to closed people, more creative and more aware of their feelings. They are also more likely to hold unconventional beliefs. Open people can be perceived as unpredictable or lacking focus, and more likely to engage in risky behaviour or drug-taking. Moreover, individuals with high openness are said to pursue self-actualisation specifically by seeking out intense, euphoric experiences.' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

 It is my considered supposition that Sally Mungall was partly motivated by boredom with her current professional position and a frustrated ambition. I will return to this part of my theory later. I believe the greater motivation to dismiss CAMHS own policy against offering psychotherapy to parents, guardians or carers was based on an a personal crisis unfolding simultaneously outside of the CAMHS setting.

I am fairly sure that Sally Mungall was wearing a wedding ring when I first met her on the 2^nd September, 2021. I am an artist by profession and have developed a high degree of visual acuity and trained myself to notice fine detail but I cannot be absolutely sure as my focus, at the time, was purely professional. I do know, for a fact, that Sally Mungall never wore a wedding ring during any other session of ‘art therapy’.

Evidence would accumulate over the following months suggesting marital problems for Sally Mungall. I believe that she was betrayed and was hurting.

And then there was the ‘Strong countertransference of feeling violated by the intrusiveness within the room,’ Sally Mungall’s own words written in her ‘clinical notes’ for the 2^nd September, 2021.

SALLY MUNGALL’S ‘CLINICAL NOTES’ extracts from CIS ID 1******

2^nd September, 2021   Events 03P Psychodynamic/analytical Therapy

‘case discussion following SM’s parent work appointment.  Strong countertransference of feeling violated by the intrusiveness within the room. Marks words come out with force, his idea of life feeling like a battle in the lord of the rings type of journey. WHere is the JOY? How to fill up his own batteries and seek life for himself before he dies is important, ---02 Sep 14:43, Sally Mungall’

Broken down, those words are

‘strong’, ‘countertransference’, ‘violated’, which definitionally become

‘great physical or moral, emotional, or intellectually powerful’,

‘therapist's redirection of feelings towards a patient or becoming emotionally entangled with them or the therapist’s resulting feelings, thoughts, and reactions, which relate to their own experiences and triggers

 ‘to break or act against or to go, especially forcefully, into a place or situation which should be treated with respect and in which you are not wanted or not expected to be

Those definitions, transposed and specific to Sally Mungall, become

‘A powerful redirection of feelings towards me, the patient, relating to Sally Mungall’s own life experiences.’

There was something about me physically or psychologically that reminded Sally Mungall of a person or persons associated with an incident or period of time from her own past. Sally Mungall had suffered a significant violation some time ago and I triggered a visceral memory.

‘Unexamined countertransference can lead to missed opportunities to help a patient or—even worse—replicate the harmful dynamics that led them to therapy in the first place.’ - https://www.apa.org/monitor/2025/09/managing-countertransference

To be absolutely clear to the reader, I was NOT ‘violating’ Sally Mungall in the room during that first meeting. Sally Mungall carried an unprocessed or improperly processed memory of violation from her own past into therapy.

A combination of

1) personality trait,

2) professional boredom,

3) personal relational grievance and

4) unprocessed historic trauma

were set against me from the outset.

During that first appointment, Sally Mungall tried to persuade me to use the art materials in room but I refused. I explained to her that I was a trained artist and that any work I was likely to produce in therapy would be contrived and ‘professionalised’ but she was particularly persistent and finally cajoled me. I gave my consent but it was NEVER informed. I had no idea what to expect from ‘art therapy’ or the precarious paths to be aware of. I certainly had no inkling of ‘transference’ or ‘countertransference’ and NEVER suspected the therapist sitting opposite carried such devastating potential for abuse and dishonesty.