Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Eckhard Frick sj
Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München
Klinik für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie
Forschungsstelle Spiritual Care
www.spiritualcare.de
1 | Vilnius 12.5.2018 Hochschule für
Philosophie
Dear Colleages, laba diena: First of all I would like to thank you for this
invitation to Lithuania: to Marianne Müller who brought up the idea, to
Gražina Gudaite who generously accepted a research cooperation in the
field of Spiritual Care Competency, and especially to Vanda Sodaitienė
who contacted health professionals in several fields: physicians and
nurses of the Republican Vilnius Psychiatric Hospital, the Vilnius
University Hospital, psychodynamic psychotherapists and a small but
precious group of Jungians. Last not least to my Jesuit brother Lukas
Ambraziejus who translated the SCCQ into Lithuanian and to Dalia
Kulvieciuviene who did the backward translation. To all of them and to
those who completed the questionaire a very warm Ačiū!
I am honoured to share with you some of our results and reflections about
Spiritual Care Competency.
1
1. What is Spiritual Care Competency?
2. How can we assess it?
3. SCCQ: Validation and intercultural
project
4. SCCQ: The Lithuanian sample
5. Discussion: A Jungian perspective on
spiritual care competency
2
1. What is Spiritual Care Competency?
2. How can we assess it?
3. SCCQ: Validation and intercultural
project
4. SCCQ: The Lithuanian sample
5. Discussion: A Jungian perspective on
spiritual care competency
We looked for all available studies about spiritual care competency, most
of them in English and most of them in a cultural context influenced by
Christian traditions. Interestingly, we also found some studies which have
a Muslim context. We collected the already studied items, translated them
into German and submitted them to expert who also helped us in the face-
validation of what was our original tool.
3
1. What is Spiritual Care Competency?
2. How can we assess it?
3. SCCQ: Validation and intercultural
project
4. SCCQ: The Lithuanian sample
5. Discussion: A Jungian perspective on
spiritual care competency
4
5 | Vilnius 12.5.2018 Hochschule für
Philosophie
The current original instrument has been shortened during the validation
process. Studies with English, French, Spanish, Norwegian, Arab, Hebrew
and Italian versions are in preparation. You are welcome to cooperate in
this fascinating intercultural project.
5
6 | Vilnius 12.5.2018 Hochschule für
Philosophie
6
7 | Vilnius 12.5.2018 Hochschule für
Philosophie
7
0.31
0.52 0.30
s1 s2 s7 s8 s28
s19 s20
perceiving 0.77
negotiating
s30
0.77
0.61
0.51 0.33
s42
s12 0.55
0.86
0.40 Self 0.74
0.35 experience 0.80
s43
s13
& opening
0.48
Team 0.56
0.50
s48
s14 0.86 Spirit 0.57 0.38
0.60
s49
0.60
s15 0.26 0.55
0.56 0.83
0.24
0.64
s17
0.91 0.30
0.39 0.43
0.47
s3
0.52 0.88
0.28
Let’s have a look on the structural equation modelling (SEM) following our
inquiry among 717 health professionals in Germany and Austria,
confirming our explorative factor analysis (EFA). We obtained a seven
factor structure for SCCQ comprising 26 Items: (1) Perceptual
Competences; (2) Team-Spirit Competences; (3) Documentation
Competences; (4) Self-awareness and proactive Opening Competences;
(5) Knowledge about other Religions Competences; (6) Interviewing /
negotiating Competences; (7) Proactive Empowerment Competences.
Interviewing Competences scored highest and Documentation
Competences lowest There were no relevant significant gender
associated but some age associated differences, e.g., in self experience
and deepening of personal spirituality. Double arrows in the structural
equation modelling are correlations, single arrows show the factor
loadings.
8
1
I am confident I can perceive the spiritual
needs of patients.
2
I am confident I can perceive the spiritual
needs of patients´ relatives.
7
I am able to perceive existential / spiritual 19
I am able to conduct an
needs even if patients have little relation to open discussion on
religion. existential issues.
8
I can also talk with non-religious patients 20
I am able to conduct an
about their existential / spiritual needs. open discussion on religious
28
I am able to tolerate the pain / suffering of issues.
patients and their relatives
30
My own spirituality shapes my dealings
12 In our team, we speak regularly about with others / sick people.
the spiritual needs of the patients. 42
I regularly approach patients to talk
13 In our institution (practice, clinic, etc.) with them about their spiritual needs.
there is a great openness to the topic of 43
I open verbally, but also non-verbally,
spirituality. a ‘space’ in which the patient may
14 In the team, we exchange regularly
bring spiritual concerns - but is not
about spirituality in patient support.
forced to do so.
15 In the team, we regularly exchange
about our own spirituality.
48
I regularly take care of deepening my
17 In the team, we have rituals (for own spirituality (for example, through
example farewell and interruption rituals) contemplation, meditation, worship,
to deal with problematic situations. etc.).
49
I regularly attend professional
development sessions on spiritual
topics.
24
I enable my patients to participate 3 I am familiar with
in religious activities / celebrations. 38
I am well aware of the
instruments (i.e., topic list)
25
In the case of therapeutic decisions, religious characteristics
for creating a short spiritual
I pay attention to religious / of patients from other
history.
spiritual attitudes and convictions of religious communities. 4 I am familiar with
the individual patient. 39
I take care that the
instruments / questionnaires
26
I encourage my patients to reflect religious characteristics
for structurally assessing
their spiritual beliefs and attitudes. of patients from other
spiritual needs.
35
I pay attention to the appropriate religious communities 5 I know how to document the
framework for spiritual are adequately
spiritual history of my
conversations. considered.
patients in a comprehensible
way.
What items are united in a given factor? I shall read the first question of
each factor as an anchor-item, in order to give you an idea of our factors:
Perceiving: I am confident I can perceive the spiritual needs of patients
…
9
Correlations between SCCQ-Scores (N=714) and external variables
Knowledge about
Documentation
Empowerment
Team-Spirit
negotiating
perceiving
religions
1.99 1.02 0.67 1.31 1.71 2.28 1.81
M ± SD (Range: 0-3)
±0.61 ±0.66 ±0.76 ±0.78 ±0.72 ±0.73 ±0.75
Spiritual Care Competencies
perceiving (n=714) 1.000
Team-Spirit (n=711) .428** 1.000
Documentation (n=713) .381** .394** 1.000
Self experience & opening (n=713) .518** .409** .364** 1.000
Knowledge about religions (n=703) .310** .229** .224** .255** 1.000
negotiating (n=710) .581** .325** .229** .458** .246** 1.000
Empowerment (n=709) .541** .508** .341** .592** .357** .469** 1.000
Spiritual Care barriers (n=706) -.417** -.381** -.266** -.538** -.179** -.415** -.424**
s56 Own weaknesses & wounds hinder from spiritual
competency (n=595) -.089 -.099 .076 -.072 -.046 -.157** -.076
Spirituality Indicators
Actively believing vs. not believing (n=702) -.030 -.035 .010 .070 -.059 -.051 -.037
Prayer / meditation practice (n=690) .006 -.004 -.017 .127** -.035 -.014 -.010
s31 my S/R has no relevance at all for my profession -.240** -.147** -.112** -.448** -.085** -.195** -.262**
Age (n=688) .201** .121** .116** .419** .027 .169** .255**
Weekly work time (n=684) -.025 -.040 .021 -.096 .065 .051 -.004
Professional satisfaction (n=702) -.001 .039 -.002 -.043 -.013 -.023 -.048
Self efficacy expectation (n=700) .171** -.001 .047 -.054 .146** .196** .072
I already told you that there are some internal correlations. Let us choose
the column “self experience and opening”. We find positive correlations
with negotiating / interviewing, with empowerment and with age.
Conversely, lack of time and other frequently mentioned “barriers” are
negatively correlated with this factor. We also tested a very “Jungian” item
mentioned by Cicely Saunders: the influence of my own wounds. We
tested it negatively, as a barrier, and found no influence. We will correct it
and maintain it in a positive way: own weaknesses & and wounds are a
help for spiritual care competency.
10
1. What is Spiritual Care Competency?
2. How can we assess it?
3. SCCQ: Validation and intercultural
project
4. SCCQ: The Lithuanian sample
5. Discussion: A Jungian perspective on
spiritual care competency
Now let‘s have a look on our Lithuanian sample which is small but which
nevertheless confirms the factorial structure found in the German
speaking sample.
11
The Lithuanian sample (N=181)
Women 173
Married/with partner 123
Confession
Catholic 147
Protestant 4
Jewish 3
Others 6
Without religion 20
Profession
Physicians 32
Nurses 103
Other professions 46
Age m=42.2 11.05
12
Lithuania: SCCQ-Factors & professions
(m, ANOVA)
Perceiving TeamSpirit Doc‘tation Self exp & Knowledge negotiating Empower Barriers
opening ment
Physicians
(n=32)
2.0625 .6922 .5417 1.15 1.2344 1.2969 1.3672 1.4167
Nurses
(n=103)
1.8583 1.3024 1.3464 1.3874 1.6250 1.2327 1.4337 1.6567
others
(n=46)
2.2076 .9329 .6884 1.3705 1.5109 1.6630 1.6033 1.1196
In the following slides, you see the medium item scores for each factor.
The range is from 0 to 3. Let’s have a look on the first two columns:
“others” (among them psychologists) score better in perceiving than
physicians and nurses. Nurses are the best in “team spirit”.
13
Lithuania: SCCQ-Factors & institutions
(m, ANOVA)
Perceiving TeamSpirit Doc‘tation Self exp & Knowledge negotiating Empower Barriers
opening ment
Jungians
(n=24)
2.4896 1.1806 .9306 1.8104 1.8125 1.9167 2.0 .8696
Psychiatric
Hospital
1.8562 1.3051 1.3409 1.3944 1.5698 1.2241 1.4625 1.6628
(n=89)
University
Hospital
1.9545 1.0364 .9848 1.2636 1.6364 1.25 1.3182 1.6136
(n=22)
Total
(N=182)
1.9854 1.054 1.0387 1.3371 1.5279 1.3639 1.4679 1.4747
Let’s see how Jungians are scoring: They are champions in perceiving,
self-experience and opening, knowledge about religions, and
empowerment. And they have less complaints about hinderances than
others have. We are talking about perceived spiritual care competencies,
not about an objective assessment of capacities.
14
S57 „I think that my professional group has a
special spiritual competence”
p=.001 (χ2)
15
S58 „I think that my professional group has a
special spiritual competence”, namely:
N167: Spiritual needs and
spiritual life is part of the
N56: I work with oncology
patient's personality, hence it
patients, in collaboration N159: Psychologists
is important for psychologists
with oncologists I help are trained and are
and psychotherapists to be
patients keep the faith and able to create space
emotionally and spiritually
hope, hence spiritual to talk about spiritual
sensitive, empathic, to have
topics and the meaning of topics, help patients
tolerance for patient’s
life are main themes, even find answers
spiritual needs. They also
if not explicitly discussed.
need to know about the
meaning of spiritual and
N25: In my religious life practices, they
workplace Minnesota need to fully acknowledge
N166: Because we understand their own spiritual (religious)
and 12 steps
that spiritual matters have a life's values and attitudes.
programs are used,
huge impact on people's
these programs
mental health and can help
discuss the higher
them see meaning during the N179: recognized
power.
difficult times. and dictated by the
transcendent
N54: The topics of spirituality N50: In their work psychotherapists function.
often come up in psychotherapy. face human suffering, desperation,
These questions are directly quest for meaning and other questions
related to the individuation that are inevitably related to spiritual
process of a human being. matters. Holistic view does not allow
to separate spiritual topics from the
other topics.
16
S58 „I think that my professional group has a
special spiritual competence”, namely:
17
S59 „I think that my professional group is not
responsible for spiritual care”
p=.008 (χ2)
The cross check is still clearer: Jungians reject the uttering that the are
NOT responsible for spiritual care.
18
S60 „I think that my professional group is not
responsible for spiritual care” because: N163: Patients don't stay long
in our unit. I think that our
N4: We don't have enough
group is not responsible for
time and a dedicated space N43: These are spiritual help, however could
(if we'd have time). different areas, in a way provide more support
psychologists are not to people to whom
responsible for spirituality/religiosity is an
providing spiritual important part of their life and
N53: Almost no attention for support. one of the sources of support.
spiritual competency in the
training program for
psychologists. Not enough
attention for spirituality in the
training program for N96: I think that we don't have
psychotherapists, no connection enough competence in religious
with practical work. During and spiritual topics.
supervisions psychotherapists in
training are not encouraged to
reflect on their religious N44: I think that
experiences. emotional
N16: Because it is the conversation could
competency of serve as a kind of
clergymen. psychotherapy.
The psychiatrist
N98: A lot of work for could offer to go
one nurse... Medical to church to talk
tasks come first. with a priest.
What are arguments for not being responsible, once more in the whole
Lithuanian sample?
- The time barrier even if the importance of spirituality is acknowledged
- The referral to chaplains
- The lack of training
19
S60 „I think that my professional group is not
responsible for spiritual care” because:
What are arguments for not being responsible, once more in the whole
Lithuanian sample?
- The time barrier even if the importance of spirituality is acknowledged
- The referral to chaplains
- The lack of training
20
1. What is Spiritual Care Competency?
2. How can we assess it?
3. SCCQ: Validation and intercultural
project
4. SCCQ: The Lithuanian sample
5. Discussion: A Jungian perspective on
spiritual care competency
I would like to conclude with some remarks which may introduce our
discussion.
21
Jung, Alsatian pastoral conference of May 1932 (CW
11, par. 509)
Very often quoted is Jung’s allocution about the “religious outlook” which
may be lost in our biography and which may be regained in analysis.
22
Kast Psychother For 16 (2008)
I fully agree with Verena Kast that Jung uses “religion” in the broad sense
we found in William James, too and which we call nowadays “spiritual
experience”. “Religion” has two etymologies. The first one, coined by
Cicero has its root in “relegere”: to read again, to observe traditions,
rituals, pious behaviours. This meaning is rejected by many
cotemporaries. They may prefer another etymology: “religare”, to be
attached, to be linked to a human or dive person.
23
„The process of individuation – Exercitia spiritualia
of St Ignatius of Loyola“ (Jung 1939/40)
24
25 | Vilnius 12.5.2018 Hochschule für
Philosophie
25
Fostering Spiritual Care Competency among
Analysts – A Jungian Perspective
Joint IAAP/Vilnius University/LAAP Conference
Eckhard Frick sj
Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München
Klinik für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie
Forschungsstelle Spiritual Care
www.spiritualcare.de
26 | Vilnius 12.5.2018 Hochschule für
Philosophie
Dear Colleages, laba diena: First of all I would like to thank you for this
invitation to Lithuania: to Marianne Müller who brought up the idea, to
Gražina Gudaite who generously accepted a research cooperation in the
field of Spiritual Care Competency, and especially to Vanda Sodaitienė
who contacted health professionals in several fields: physicians and
nurses of the Republican Vilnius Psychiatric Hospital, psychodynamic
psychotherapist and a small but precious group of Jungians. Last not least
to my Jesuit brother Lukas Ambraziejus who translated the SCCQ into
Lithuanian and to Dalia Kulvieciuviene who did the backward translation.
To all of them and to those who completed the questionaire a very warm
Ačiū!
I am honoured to share with you some of our results and reflections about
Spiritual Care Competency.
26