The psychoanalyst: On becoming more human than otherwise
- 22 Downloads
Classical psychoanalytic technique, which called for the role of the analyst to be a scientific observer, removed from interaction with the patient, imposed such restrictions on the analyst that often his or her simple human responsiveness to the patient was curtailed. Harry Stack Sullivan revolutionized the field by introducing the concept of “participant observation,” and others of his time made similar observations. Gradually, over the years, analysts have become more real, more human, and more interactive with their patients. Contrary to classical opinion, this departure from the original technique does not interfere with analytic work, and, in fact, enhances it, if the analyst monitors and analyzes the reactions of patients to this more human engagement. Examples are provided to support this conclusion.
KeywordsParticipant Observation Analytic Work Classical Opinion Original Technique Human Responsiveness
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Hoffman, I.Z. (1993) Expressive Participation and Psychoanalytic Discipline.Contemporary Psychoanalysis 28: 1–15.Google Scholar
- Horney, K. (1950)Neurosis and Human Growth. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
- Kohut, H. (1984)How Does Analysis Cure? Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
- Menaker, E. (1991) The Sacred Cow of the Transference.How People Change. R. Curtis & G. Stricker, ed. Plenum.Google Scholar
- Sullivan, H.S. (1953).The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
- Thompson, C. (1964)Interpersonal Psychoanalysis: The Selected Papers of Clara M. Thompson. Maurice R. Green, ed. New York: Basic Books, Chapters 7 & 9.Google Scholar
- Wolberg, L. R. (1965) The Technic of Short Term Therapy.Short Term Psychotherapy. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar