Tactics and empathy: Defences against projective identification

In this paper the author argues that interpretations made when the analyst has not done the emotional work of recognising and bearing what kind of object she has become in the patient's psychic reality will be experienced as empty tactics – even lies – rather than interpretations of integrity. However, interpreting from a position of bearing the truth of the patient's perception will be technically difficult and indicate turmoil as the analyst struggles to take in the patient's view of her. If the analyst avoids integrating her own picture of herself with the patient's picture (despite giving voice to the patient's picture) the split inside the analyst will be felt and intensify the patient's need to split. Vignettes demonstrate how the analyst, believing she is trying to understand, may become a projective‐identification‐refusing object and the issue of the analyst's disclosure of her countertransference is examined. Ultimately, the author argues, a capacity to receive and bear projective identification requires empathy with both patient and analyst‐as‐patient's object, engaged in a process about which both are ambivalent.     

The analyst's countertransference to the psychoanalytic process1

There is countertransference, not just to individual patients, but to the process of psychoanalysis itself. The analytic process is a contentious topic. Disagreements about its nature can arise from taking it as a unitary concept that should have a single defi nition whereas, in fact, there are several strands to its meaning. The need for the analyst's free associative listening, as a counterpart to the patient's free associations, implies resistance to the analytic process in the analyst as well as the patient. The author gives examples of the self‐analysis that this necessitates. The most important happenings in both the analyst's and the patient's internal worlds lie at the boundary between conscious and unconscious, and the nature of an analyst's interventions depends on how fully what happens at that boundary is articulated in the analyst's consciousness. The therapeutic quality of an analyst's engagement with a patient depends on the freeing and enlivening quality, for the analyst, of the analyst's engagement with his or her countertransference to the analytic process.     

Working in the countertransference

Ferenczi (1988) described the procedure of mutual analysis, in which the patient and analyst switch roles for part of the time in the analysis. This procedure allowed patients in stalled analyses to make progress and enabled the analyst to overcome certain countertransference blocks but was ultimately rejected for certain drawbacks. Working in the countertransference is a modification of mutual analysis that retains some of its benefits and eliminates some of its drawbacks. In such work, the psychoanalyst's personality and psychodynamics become the center stage of the manifest content of the session; the analyst avoids interpretations of the transference and, instead, elicits the patient's detailed understanding of the analyst's psychodynamics. The analyst does not, however, generally volunteer his free associations or facts about his own life. This process allows deep work with patients with a predominance of projective identification. Working in the countertransference may be preferred in cases of severe psychopathology to other procedures for its lessening of the frequency, severity, and persistence of transference psychoses. The procedure is also a useful supplement to transference analysis with neurotic patients, for whom it can break through blocks caused by anxiety‐laden issues or countertransference impediments.     

The Dignity of Creating: The Patient's Contribution to the “Reachable Enough” Analyst

Through the defining power of words, the phrase “difficult-to-reach” patient reflects the extent to which the analyst inverts the patient's will to change and makes the analyst the subjective agent of treatment progress. If making a constructive contribution to another person's life engenders a sense of creative agency, the traditional dichotomies of analyst/helper who gives and an empty patient who receives may not be useful. I trace the evolution of a 23-year-long psychotherapy from a parent–child dynamic through to more uncertain relational terrain in order to illustrate how the analyst's own evolution may have clashed with the patient's ambivalence toward change and endings. I raise questions of how the dignity of making a creative contribution to the “reachable enough” analyst's life may enable the patient to work through gratitude, attain a sense of belonging, and terminate with good conscience.     

Incognito or not? the patient's subjective experience of the analyst's private life

This paper examines the meaning for the patient of the analyst's personal life and personality which are ostensibly banished from the consulting room. The therapist has a not‐always‐so‐secret “secret life”; that the patient is supposed to “not know”; about. Yet, more or less unconscious perceptions, impressions, and fantasies about extratherapeutic aspects of the analyst are omnipresent and significantly color the psychoanalytic enterprise.

Moreover the analyst as a person generally plays a critical and underacknowledged role in the patient's experience of the endeavor. Constructing multiple overlapping images of the analyst and of the analytic relationship, the patient discovers himself or herself in the matrix of these relationships with various images of the analytic other. The analysand is motivated to make sense of the analyst as wholly as possible, the better to place into context the analyst's interventions. The patient's resulting view of the analyst's subjective experience acts as a lens that filters and subtly alters the meaning of the analyst's communications.

I illustrate these points by relating my work with a patient whose dreams uncannily picked up on a (consciously) unknown aspect of my private life—my having a handicapped son. The treatment thereafter centered on the patient's identification with my child (as someone “disabled") and on the meaning of her having dreamt something so personal about her therapist.     

State of the Hope: The New Bad Object in the Therapeutic Action of Psychoanalysis

Until recently, most psychoanalytic conceptualizations of the analyst as a new object have tended to equate newness with good experience and safety. Recent papers in the relational literature have explored not only the therapeutic value, but also the inevitability of the patient's experience of the analyst as bad, as well as the analyst's participation in this experience. This author examines the multifarious nature of hope, goodness, and badness in the clinical situation. The patient gets to know not only elements of his or her own self that are held by the analyst, but also ways in which the patient holds elements related to the particulars of the analyst's person in the analytic situation. Shifts in American psychoanalysis regarding conceptualizations of the analyst as a new object are examined. Limitations of a bifurcated approach to goodness and badness in clinical conceptualizations are also explored.     

Language and Intersubjectivity: Multiplicity in a Bilingual Treatment

This paper explores the psychodynamics of analytic work conducted between a French patient and an American analyst who are both bilingual in French and English. The depth of the patient's early traumatic relational history is initially bound and cloistered in French, her mother tongue. The author argues that through the symbolization of a series of initially dissociated enactments a transitional space is created in the treatment, facilitating the integration of the patient's (and analyst's) early French-speaking selves. Language is considered as a container for both dissociative and associative forms of multiplicity, as it serves to mediate an external and internal intersubjective expansion both between and within patient and analyst.     

The compulsion to confess and the compulsion to judge in the analytic situation

In this paper the author shows that human beings have two quasi‐instinctual primitive tendencies – namely, the compulsion to confess and the compulsion to judge (to condemn or to absolve). These compulsions are originally unconscious and become conscious during the course of the analytic process. The compulsion to judge is a natural consequence of the compulsion to confess. These two tendencies are intensified by the analytic situation. The patient has a compulsion to confess to the analyst and to himself, and likewise the analyst has a compulsion to confess to himself and to the patient. The patient therefore has a compulsion to judge himself as good or bad and to judge the analyst as good or bad while, on the other hand, the analyst has a compulsion to judge himself as good or bad and to judge the patient as good or bad. The task of analysis is to make both patient and analyst conscious of their compulsions to confess and to judge (to condemn or to absolve). The compulsion to judge in the analyst, particularly if unconscious, may give rise to mistakes in diagnosis, technique, treatment, and the assessment of analysability. The requirement of analytic neutrality in the analyst constantly conflicts with his compulsion to judge. If we are profoundly involved in our patient's dramatic conflict, we are bound to pass a judgement (condemnation or absolution); however, when we judge, we are not neutral and therefore become incapable of intellectual consciousness of the patient's conflict. Conversely, if we do not judge, we are neutral, but are then relatively uninvolved in the patient's conflict and are hence virtually unable to achieve emotional consciousness. The author attempts to show that neutrality cannot and must not be a preconstituted attitude in the analyst, but can and must be a point of arrival following a profound, intensely felt existential experience based on an attitude of non‐condemnation and non‐absolution.     

Projective identification,containment and sojourn in the psyche: Clinical notes on a specific type of transference-countertransference interaction

Abstract

This paper suggests that the interplay between transference and countertransference is considered to be a valuable channel of communication. The author puts an emphasis on the containing function of the analyst. The patient strives for an experience of an object (analyst) that tolerates and copes with the patient's projections. There are some moments when analysts feel themselves to be invaded, controlled or abused by their patient's products. As Bion has postulated, this situation takes the form of a sojourn in the analyst's psyche. Clinical vignettes are given to provide support for the ways in which the analyst contains and elaborates the projections of the patients in his or her own mind and the therapeutic role that these processes have.     

Self‐disclosure,trauma and the pressures on the analyst

This paper argues that self‐disclosure is intimately related to traumatic experience and the pressures on the analyst not to re‐traumatize the patient or repeat traumatic dynamics. The paper gives a number of examples of such pressures and outlines the difficulties the analyst may experience in adopting an analytic attitude – attempting to stay as closely as possible with what the patient brings. It suggests that self‐disclosure may be used to try to disconfirm the patient's negative sense of themselves or the analyst, or to try to induce a positive sense of self or of the analyst which, whilst well‐meaning, may be missing the point and may be prolonging the patient's distress. Examples are given of staying with the co‐construction of the traumatic early relational dynamics and thus working through the traumatic complex; this attitude is compared and contrasted with some relational psychoanalytic attitudes.     

Full and empty spaces in the analytic process2

In this paper the author discusses two categories of patients which differ in terms of the impact they have in the countertransference. On the one hand, there are patients who create an empty space in the analyst's mind. The response they provoke is a kind of depressive feeling that remains after they leave. The patient may bring dreams and associations, but they do not reverberate in the analyst's mind. The experience is of dryness, a dearth of memory, which may‐at times‐leave the analyst with a sense of exclusion from the patient's internal world. At the other extreme, there are patients who fill the consulting room. They do that with their words, dreams and associations but also with their emotions and their actions. The experience is that the analyst is over‐included in the patient's world. They have dreams that directly refer to the analyst and the analyst feels consistently involved in the patient's analysis. The pathway through which the analyst can understand both these types of patients is via the countertransference or, to put it another way, the analyst's passion. In ‘Analysis terminable and interminable’ Freud suggested that the bedrock of any analysis is the repudiation of femininity. The author believes this statement may be viewed as lying at the crossroads of the discussion about the limits of the theoretical and clinical psychoanalytic formulations which she refers to. In the examples presented the author relates the repudiation of femininity in its connections to the gaps implicit in psychoanalytic understanding.     

Residues in the analyst of the patient's symbiotic connection at a somatic level: unrepresented states in the patient and analyst

This paper discusses the residues of a somatic countertransference that revealed its meaning several years after apparently successful analytic work had ended. Psychoanalytic and Jungian analytic ideas on primitive communication, dissociation and enactment are explored in the working through of a shared respiratory symptom between patient and analyst. Growth in the analyst was necessary so that the patient's communication at a somatic level could be understood. Bleger's concept that both the patient's and analyst's body are part of the setting was central in the working through.     

At Death's Door: Therapists and Patients as Agents

This paper explores the interrelationship between patients' exercise of will to make advances in an analysis and their readiness to forgive their analysts for their human limitations. There is a thin line between idealization of the analyst, probably a necessary component of the process, and resentment of the analyst for his or her privileged position in the world and in the analytic situation itself. The patient's “progress” emerges as a kind of reparative gift, one that implicitly overcomes the patient's tendency to withhold such change out a sense of chronic, malignant envy. Particularly poignant in terms of its potential to elicit the patient's reparative concern is the situation in which the analyst is struggling with his or her mortality because of aging or life-threatening illness. In this essay two clinical vignettes are presented to illustrate some of the issues that this situation poses. One begins with an elderly patient appearing at the door of the analyst's (the author's) home the day of his return from the hospital after coronary bypass surgery. The other begins with an analyst who is terminally ill appearing at the door of a patient who is threatening suicide. The two stories are compared in terms of their implications for human agency, the exercise of will, and the coconstruction of meaning in the face of mortality in the analytic process.     

What’s So Great About Authenticity Anyway? The Therapeutic Function of an Analyst’s Lie

How can we understand moments when the analyst lies to her patient? When it’s not the patient’s lying at issue but the analyst’s? When we suddenly find ourselves being deliberately disingenuous in the analytic hour? When our commitment to authenticity conflicts with the patient's need to create and sustain certain fantasies about us? Psychoanalytic literature typically focuses on the dynamics of the patient’s lie but rarely is the analyst's authenticity questioned. Are there times when the analyst might choose to lie in order to preserve herself, as well as, the relational bond? The complexity of this “choice” is explored and the erosion of an analyst’s authenticity unpacked during the final days of a difficult treatment.     

THE PATIENT'S OBJECTS IN THE ANALYST'S MIND

In every analysis, the analyst develops an internal relationship with the patient's objects—that is, the people in the patient's life and mind. Sometimes these figures can inhabit the analyst's mind as a source of data, but at other times, the analyst may feel preoccupied with or even invaded by them. The author presents two clinical cases: one in which the seeming absence of a good object in the patient's mind made the analyst hesitate to proceed with an analysis, and another in which the patient's preoccupation with a “bad” object was shared and mirrored by the analyst's own inner preoccupation with the object. The use and experience of these two objects by the analyst are discussed with particular attention to the countertransference.     

Impervious and intrusive: The impenetrable object in transference and countertransference

The author describes an internal object that he calls the ‘impenetrable object’ which has two characteristics: being impervious to the projections from the patient and being intrusive, i.e. projecting into the patient. It arises out of an early relationship with a mother who may be generally disturbed or traumatized so that she is unable to take in or tolerate the child's projections and may use the child as a receptacle for her own projections. He links the concept of an impenetrable object with other concepts such as Williams's ‘reversal of the container–contained relationship’ and Green's ‘dead mother’. If such an object dominates the patient's internal world, it can lead to severe difficulties in the analytic process. Interpretations may be experienced as violent projections from the analyst which the patient has to ward off and the analyst may enact an impervious or intrusive object in various ways. The author describes a case in which such dynamics played a significant role. He argues that intensive work in the countertransference is required to detect subtle enactments and allow a shift in the analyst, which in turn can enable change in the patient. He gives clinical material that demonstrates such work by the analyst and illustrates the shift from an impenetrable object to a more permeable one in the patient's internal world.     

Discussion of Craige's “Terminating Without Fatality”

Craige's concept of termination and the related concept of post-termination contact are based on Freud's early, one-person model of analytic therapy as a medical treatment for the cure of a disease. Post-termination contact was considered appropriate only if the patient needed additional therapy. Subsequent development to a two-person model of treatment, which recognizes the critical importance of the patient–analyst relationship, requires modification both of concepts of termination and of post-termination contact. I propose that whether there should be such contact, and what it's nature should be, should be mutually decided by patient and analyst in the termination phase, based on their risk/benefit evaluation of such meetings. The intimate, loving patient–analyst relationship, which has enhanced the patient's development, should be able to continue in some form after the end of treatment unless substantial, unresolved problems of either patient or analyst proscribe such meetings.     

Collusive induction in perverse relating: Perverse enactments and bastions as a camouflage for death anxiety

The author argues that one of the main functions of perverse relatedness is to induce the analyst into becoming the patient's unconscious accomplice in a “perverse pact” against the analytic work aimed at disavowing intolerable aspects of reality. The intense power of collusive induction in perverse relating leads the analyst to participate in transference‐countertransference enactments and to the crystallization of a silent and chronic unconscious collusion between the patient and analyst in the analytic field, stagnating the process (bastion; Baranger and Baranger). The author claims that analysis of perverse pathology should not be limited to interpretation of the patient's intrapsychic functioning but should also focus on the information obtained by the analyst through his participation in collusive enactments; the analyst should also take a “second look” at the analytic “field” to detect underlying bastions. The author reviews the main psychoanalytic contributions that have clarified the phenomenon of collusive induction in perverse relating and as an illustration, describes the analysis of a man with a perverse character; in this patient, one of the main functions of his perverse relatedness was to induce the analyst to become an accomplice in his disavowal of his terror of death. The author highlights the influence of death anxiety in the bastions that develop in the treatment of perverse patients.