Clinicians’ Reverie as Private Enactments

Original Paper

Abstract

This paper introduces a concept the authors refer to as private enactments. While the majority of the relational literature has focused on the more dramatic enactments in treatment, private enactments emerge as the therapist becomes aware through reveries and personal associations that she is facing a parallel struggle with the patient, one shaped by the unfolding relational unconscious cocreated in treatment. These moments are private in the sense that the therapist experiences them internally after a period of sustained, often confusing private reflection during moments of clinical impasse. The authors elucidate this process with two cases with traumatized patients that highlight how the eventual resolution of private enactments offered new perspective on the clinical stalemate, novel understanding that evolved into constructive interventions after both authors became aware of shared, dissociated conflicts involving threads of trauma and loss, leading further to mutual reparation. Far from being dramatic moments acted out between therapist and patient, or far from simply involving unresolved emotional conflicts in the therapist, the cases of help illustrate how these subtle, often unnoticed musings operating sub rosa can highlight a shared, cocreated struggle that if identified can provide new insight and relief from impasse, so that we change as our patients change by metabolizing our private associations.

Keywords

Private enactments Cocreation Therapeutic space Trauma and loss, therapeutic impasse Mutual reparation 

References

  1. Aron, L. (1996). A meeting of the minds: Mutual influence in psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bass, A. (2014). Three pleas for a measure of uncertainty, reverie, and private contemplation in the chaotic, interactive, nonlinear dynamic field of interpersonal/intersubjective relational psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 24, 663–675. doi:10.1080/10481885.2014.970967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bollas, C. (1987). The shadow of the object: Psychoanalysis of the unthought known. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bromberg, P. M. (1998). Standing in the spaces: Essays on clinical process, trauma, & dissociation. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  5. Buechler, S. (2008). Making a difference in patients’ lives: Emotional experience in the therapeutic setting. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, S. (2014). The things we carry: Finding/creating the object and the analyst’s self-reflective participation. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 24, 621–636. doi:10.1080/10481885.2014.970963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corbett, K. (2014). The analyst’s private space: Spontaneity, ritual, psychotherapeutic action, and self-care. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 24, 637–647. doi:10.1080/10481885.2014.970964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davies, J. M. (2004). Whose bad objects are we anyway? Repetition and our elusive love affair with evil. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 14, 711–732. doi:10.1080/10481881409348802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davies, J. M., & Frawley, M. G. (1994). Treating the adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse: A psychoanalytic perspective. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  10. Faimberg, H. (2005). The telescoping of generations: Listening to the narcissistic links between generations. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Freud, S. (1958). Remembering, repeating and working through. In J. Strachey (Ed. &amp, Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 12, pp. 145–163). London, UK: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.Google Scholar
  12. Ganzer, C. (2013). Variations from the frame. Clinical Social Work Journal, 41, 57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerson, S. (2004). The relational unconscious: A core element of intersubjectivity, thirdness, and clinical process. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 73, 63–98. doi:10.1002/j.2167-4086.2004.tb00153.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Harris, A. (2009). “You Must Remember This”. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 19, 2–21. doi:10.1080/10481880802634537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harris, A. (2014). Introduction. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 24, 615–620. doi:10.1080/10481885.2014.970962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoffman, I. Z. (1983). The patient as interpreter of the analyst’s experience. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 25, 169–211. doi:10.1080/00107530.1983.10746615.Google Scholar
  17. Hoffman, I. Z. (1998). Ritual and spontaneity in psychoanalytic process: A dialectical-constructivist view. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Loewald, H. W. (1980). Papers on psychoanalysis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Mitchell, S. A. (1988). Relational concepts in psychoanalysis: An integration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Mitchell, S. A. (1995). Hope and dread in psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Mitchell, S. A. (2003). Relationality: From attachment to intersubjectivity. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ogden, T. H. (1994). The analytic third: Working with intersubjective clinical facts. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 75, 3–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Ogden, T.H. (1997). Reverie and metaphor: Some thoughts on how I work as a psychoanalyst. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 78, 719–732.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Ogden, T. H. (2004). The analytic third: Implications for psychoanalytic theory and technique. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 73, 167–195. doi:10.1002/j.2167-4086.2004.tb00156.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Seligman, S. (2014). Paying attention and feeling puzzled: The analytic mindset as an agent of therapeutic change. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 24, 248–662. doi:10.1080/10481885.2014.970966.Google Scholar
  26. Stern, D. B. (1997). Unformulated experience: From dissociation to imagination in psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  27. Stern, D. B. (2010). Partners in thought: Working with unformulated experience, dissociation, and enactment. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Midwestern UniversityDowners GroveUSA
  2. 2.University of Chicago, School of Social Service AdministrationChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations