Advertisement

Restoring the Impaired Self as an Essential Corrective Experience in Group Analysis

  • Lisbeth E. Hearst

Abstract

In setting up and maintaining the group-analytic situation — the medium in which the therapeutic processes evolve — the selection of the patients who make up such a group is, of course, of the utmost importance. The highest therapeutic potential rests in a group with “the optimal span between polar (personality) types” ··· “a mixed bag of diagnoses and disturbances”. (Foulkes and Anthony 1957). In selecting such a mixed bag, the group-analyst will find himself extra cautious and attentive where, in the diagnostic interview, he comes upon the ego-weak; the patient with a borderline personality organisation (Kernberg 1968); the patient who displays the defensive organisation of an excessively immature self; and he who hides his mutilated self from himself and his world by living with another’s self. The need and greed which emerges from the very start of the therapeutic contact, together with an emptiness in the relationship and extreme communication difficulty — these and the many other so capably and thoroughly investigated and documented phenomena of the narcissistically severely injured (Kohut, Kernberg i.a) militate against inclusion in a group-analytic therapy group of the classical type.

Keywords

Therapeutic Contact Optimal Span High Therapeutic Potential Genuine Feeling Borderline Personality Organisation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Battegay, R., The Concept of Narcissistic Group Self Group Analysis 1976 IX/3Google Scholar
  2. Bion, W., Attacks on Linking — A Theory of Thinking 1962. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 1962.Google Scholar
  3. Foulkes, S.H., Group Analytic Psychotherapy (1975) London Interface Book.Google Scholar
  4. Foulkes, S.H. and E.J. Anthony, Group Psychotherapy (1957) Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  5. Kernberg, Otto, The Treatment of Patients with Borderline Personality Organisation. International Journal of Psychoanalysis (1968) 49, 600.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kohut, H., The Analysis of Self (1971) Monograph Series — The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child No. 4. Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
  7. Leal, Rita, Group Analysis 1/2 June 1968.Google Scholar
  8. Little, Margaret, Counter Transference. British Journal of Medical Psychology (1960), 33, 29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Miller, Alice. Das Drama des Begabten Kindes etc. 1979 Surkamp Verlag Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  10. Ogden, T., Projective Identification (1979) International Journal for Psychoanalysis IV.Google Scholar
  11. Pines, M., Basic Principles: Changes and Trends. 1972. Paper given at the Second European Symposium on Group Analysis and printed in GAIPAC August 1972 V/2.Google Scholar
  12. Schindler, W., The Borderline Syndrome. Group Analysis Aug. 1978.Google Scholar
  13. Schindler, W., The Role of the Mother in Group Psychotherapy. International Journal for Group Analytic Psychotherapy (1957/66)Google Scholar
  14. Winnicott, D.W. Countertransference. British Journal of Psychology (1960) 33.17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lisbeth E. Hearst
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanmore, Middx.UK

Personalised recommendations