Reality and Danger in Psychoanalytic Treatment

Abstract

In recent papers there has been considerable interest in the disclosure of the analyst's erotic countertransference. In our view this discussion touches a more fundamental issue: must something "real" take place between analyst and patient in order for real change to occur? And if what takes place is "real," will it not be dangerous and potentially destructive? Tracing the history of psychoanalytic understandings of what is "real" in the patient's life and what is "real" in the transference, we explore these questions in a clinical vignette and discuss the implications of this issue for our understanding of the process of psychoanalytic treatment.

Becoming an Individual: Technically Subversive Thoughts on the Role of the Analyst's Influence

“…Slavin, Rahmani, & Pollock, 1998) with a willing, malleable, emotionally responsive, and, of necessity, strong analyst. While worth re-emphasizing, it is a known perspective.…”

Psychoanalytic Training: The Absence of Thirdness: A Review ofImpossible Training: A Relational View of Psychoanalytic Educationby Emanuel Berman

“…Slavin, 1994), we have had to wrestle with the consequent question of how we can observe, think, feel, and speak as analysts and not simply as coequal participants in a "real" and potentially undisciplined process (J. Slavin, Rahmani, and Pollock, 1998).…”

Ending With Options

“…An example of this phenomenon is the beneficial effect of the analysand's becoming aware of the analyst's sensitivity to not repeating the analysand's dreaded past, although nevertheless experiencing the analyst's limitations in this regard. It is not just the actualization of the analyst's efforts that play a role in therapeutic action, but also the analyst's positive intentions and hard work on behalf of the patient, as sensed by the patient (Slavin et al, 1998).…”