On Conditions, Concepts and Theories of Psychoanalytic In-Patient Psychotherapy
Psychoanalytic in-patient psychotherapy is closely connected with some milestones in the course of history of psychiatry1,2 which is linked with famous names like Chestnut-Lodge, Topeka, Maudesley, Cassel, Cery, Tiefenbrunn or Sonnenberg. It has, however, developed in several countries to a very different degree as an independent form of psychotherapy. Within the Anglo-Saxon and the Francophone countries psychoanalytically orientated hospitals as special units have developed in close connection with different branches of psyhiatry3, but within Central Europe and especially in the Federal Republic of Germany there has developed since World War II an institutionally rather independent scope of psychotherapy/psychosomatics within the overlapping field of psychiatry, inner medicine and psychoanalysis the corner-stones of which are independent psychoanalytic hospitals4,5. I want to give a short survey of the theoretical and conceptual elements of this form of psychotherapy which on the base of my experiences in the F.R.G. seem to be the most important to me.
KeywordsIndependent Form Conceptual Element Shelter Area Francophone Country Team Supervision
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.E. Simmel, Die psychoanalytische Behandlung in der Klinik, Int. Z. Psychoanal. 14: 352 (1928).Google Scholar
- 2.W. C. Menninger, Psychoanalytic principles applied to the treatment of hospitalized patients, Bull. Menninger Clin. 1: 35 (1936).Google Scholar
- 4.K. Köhle, Klinisch-psychosomatische Krankenstationen, in: “Lehrbuch der Psychosomatischen Midizin”, Th. v. Uexküll, ed., Urban & Schwarzenberg, München (1979).Google Scholar
- 5.P. Janssen, Behandlungsmodelle der stationären Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Prax. Psychother. Psychosom. 28: 95 (1983).Google Scholar
- 6.H. Wiegmann, “Der Neurotiker in der Klinik”, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen (1968).Google Scholar
- 8.O. Kernberg, Psychoanalytic object-relations theory, group process, and administration, Annu. Psychoanal. 1: 368 (1973).Google Scholar