Intimate and non‐intimate relations in therapy

Abstract

It is a commonplace that psychotherapeutic practice has moved steadily away from the consideration of the patient's inner life 'on its own' as though the patient were an island, towards a greater concentration upon the bearing that this inner life has upon his outward relationships with his fellows ; primarily upon his relationship with the therapist, reductively described as the transference. Likewise psychoanalytic theory, at least in Britain, has moved away from a predominantly intrapersonal emphasis in the direction of a more interpersonal approach. In both theory and practice, we have moved somewhat from a oneperson towards a two-person (or more) psychology. The present time seems appropriate for exploring the possibilities of taking a further step and considering the relationship in itself; to some extent independently of the personalities of the individuals so related. THE LITERATUREIt is evident that this step has in fact already been taken by several workers. Guntrip (1961), for instance, has produced a systematic classification of relationships as such, in terms of the qualities of dependence involved; infantile symbiosis with the mother, mature interdependence, and eleven intermediate grades.Bateson et al. (1956) and the interactional school of psychologists (Berne, 1961) have enriched our understanding of the vagaries of communication, mostly pathological, occurring between people, especially in families. (Indeed the current interest in family and marital processes has focused attention upon qualities of relationships.) Recently Laing et al. (1966) have produced a highly original work on interpersonal psychology. By and