The Phenomenology of Separation Difficulties in Group Psychotherapy

  • Duska Blazevic
  • K. Muradif


Comparatively little is being written about separation problems in group psychotherapy in relation to the importance of the problem and in comparison with the great attention paid to this question in the literature on individual psychotherapy. This difference is partly due to certain stereotypes (Foulkes1) which newer research is helping to destroy. According to these stereotypes, regression phenomena are the domain of individual psychotherapy and of dyadic relations, while the group by its very nature offers protection against a high degree of regression. However, it has been found that this is not necessarily the case. It can be said that Slav-son2,3 (1940, 1964), Wolf4 and Schwarz5 (1962) were among the first to discuss the problem of a dependent child in group psychotherapy. Slavson described his own technique of play group therapy, which enabled the dependent child to express his need for his mother through the medium of play materials and the group. The problem of dependence was indirectly approached by Wolf6 (1949) and Wolf and Schwartz (1962) with the technique known as “Going Around”. In this technique, each member of a group in turn takes on the chain of free associations started by his predecessor.


Group Psychotherapy Dependent Child Separation Problem Individual Psychotherapy Early Separation 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Foulkes, S.H., Therapeutic Group Analysis: Allen and Unwin, London, 1964.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Slavson, S.R., Group Therapy, Mental Hygiene, 24, 36, 49, 1964.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Slavson, S.R., Text Book in Analytic Group Psychotherapy: International Universities Press, New York, 1964.Google Scholar
  4. 4a.
    Wolf, A., The Psychoanalysis of Groups: American Journal of Psychotherapy 1949, 4, 16–50,Google Scholar
  5. 4b.
    Wolf, A., The Psychoanalysis of Groups: American Journal of Psychotherapy 1950, 1, 525–558.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Schwartz, E. & Wolf, A., Psychoanalysis in Groups: the Mystique of Group Dynamics. In Topical Problems of Psychotherapy. Vol. II Sources of Conflict in Contemporary Group Psychotherapy. Basel: S. Karger, 1960, 119–154.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    Bion, W.R., Experiences in Groups: Basic Books, New York, 1961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 7.
    Rosenbaum, M., Group Psychotherapy and Psychodrama: In Handbook of Clinical Psychology, McGraw-Hill Book Company — N.Y., 1965.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Kernberg, O., Object Relations Theory and Clinical Psychoanalysis, Jason Aronson, New York, 1978.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    Pines, M., The Large Group, Ed. L. Kreeger, Overview, Constable Comp., London, 1975.Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    Mahler, S.M., Pines, F., Bergman, A., The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant, Hutchinson, New York, 1975.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Winnicott, D.W., The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment, The Hogarth Press and Institute of Psychoanalysis, London 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Duska Blazevic
    • 1
  • K. Muradif
    • 1
  1. 1.Centar za mentalno zdravljeZagrebYugoslavia

Personalised recommendations