Family matters The descendants of Freud and Jung

A brief history of what it has meant to be a Jungian analyst and/or analytical psychologist in the United States and England is portrayed. At first the differences between psychoanalysis and analytical psychology were very great, and there was great animosity between the two schools. The conflict was much stronger in the United States than in England where Jungians developed a much better rapport with psychoanalysis. Recent theoretical developments within psychoanalysis, such as the development of self theory and intersubjectivity, as well as speaking about religious issues in a new way, have brought psychoanalysis closer to analytical psychology. On the other hand, analytical psychology has been enriched by an increased awareness of the importance of developmental issues and transference and countertransference. The implications for both psychoanalysis and analytical psychology are explored.     

Analytical psychology and its relation to psychoanalysis. A personal view

Jungian analysis is a process based on analytical psychology; it shows local variations giving emphasis to different aspects of Jung's work within the various societies which make up the IAAP. I describe the orientation of the Society of Analytical Psychology (SAP). I have emphasized the different origins of psychoanalysis and analytical psychology and described how, because we encounter the same clinical phenomena, our differences centre on technique and interpretation in the context of our theoretical differences (see Astor 1998, p. 697 & 2001). In the main the link to psychoanalysis has come from the connection forged by Fordham, who recognized that Jung and Klein shared a similar perception of the significance of unconscious phantasy. For Klein unconscious phantasy was the primary unconscious content, and this is different, as Spillius has recently pointed out, from Freud for whom, 'the prime mover, so to speak, is the unconscious wish.     

Psychodynamic Conceptualization and Treatment of Suicidal Patients

This paper discusses psychodynamic perspectives to the conceptualization and treatment of suicidal patients. A review of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic conceptualizations is provided, along with representative case examples of these phenomena. Empirical studies are also reviewed, noting how recent research provides some meaningful insight into the object relations of suicidal patients. Finally, treatment issues are discussed, including comments about transference, dreams, and countertransference. It is concluded that a psychodynamic model is of value when treating patients with suicidal ideation and impulses.     

Turning towards a bio-psycho-social way of thinking

This paper considers the impact being made on child and adolescent mental health services by the ‘neuroscience revolution’. It outlines some of the important developments that form part of that revolution and considers some of the challenges they present to the thinking of psychoanalytic child psychotherapists within the British Object Relations tradition. After considering a case example and Guntrip's formulation of some core principles of that tradition, it argues that its psycho-social thinking now needs to be stretched so as to become bio-psychosocial.     

Transference and relationship: Technical Implications in the psychoanalytic process with a borderline patient

This paper reviews how the bond between the therapeutic relationship and transference is created, illustrates its technical management, and provides a basic methodology for the exploration of both transference and the therapeutic relationship. For this purpose, the current therapeutic relationship, the concept of affective dominance, the object relation triggered by transference, the past and present unconscious, and the relationship pattern (CCRT) applied to dreams will all be considered. The approach in this paper is based on an object relation conceptualization. Highlights of the theory underlying the technique will be illustrated in a succinct discussion of the clinical treatment of a borderline patient in psychoanalysis.     

On Teaching Psychoanalysis in Antianalytic Times: A Polemic

The author argues that in the current attitudinal climate, characterized by significant denigration of psychoanalysis coming from biologically oriented psychiatrists, academic psychologists, pharmaceutical firms, insurance companies, managed care organizations, anxious taxpayers, and revisionist critics of Freud, psychoanalysts need to adapt their training and supervisory practices to take into account the preconceptions of many of those seeking training as psychotherapists. Specifically, we need to appreciate the nature of the transferences toward analysts and analysis that exist in the wider mental health community and in the general public. These include assumptions that analysts are cold, arrogant, rigid, and worshipful toward Freud (who is himself seen as cold, arrogant, rigid, and narcissistic), and the prevalent misconception that psychoanalysis has been empirically discredited. Analysts need to find creative and honest ways, some of which are suggested by the author, to challenge the distortions in these stereotypes and to respond nondefensively and generatively to the grains of truth they contain. The essay concludes with some reminders of the legitimate strengths of the psychoanalytic tradition that suggest that its future is not as bleak as its disparagers have assumed.     

The role and importance of interpretation in the talking cure

Starting with an exploration of how the concept of interpretation in analytical treatment has evolved, the author goes on to discuss the role and importance of interpretation in the changes that psychoanalysis brings about. Although interpretation is looked upon as the key element in psychoanalytic activity, the fact that it is subsumed within the transference raises questions as to its influence in the analytical domain. After discussing the foundations of interpretation with respect to the theory of psychoanalytic treatment and examining Strachey’s views on this, the author defines the conditions and constraints surrounding interpretation and preparatory interventions in order to outline the essential nature of the interpretative process as seen against the wider background of the analyst’s activity as manifested through speech. This leads to a discussion of the relative influence of insight and suggestion in bringing about therapeutic change. The author draws the conclusion that interpretation works as a metaphor in lifting repression.     

Psychoanalytic Models of the Mind for Couple and Family Therapy

This paper describes an object relations theory of mind that highlights the interactive origin of psychic function and the beginnings of mental structure in the infant's relationships within the family group. Based on this model, psychoanalytic family and couple therapy employs the interactions between family and therapist to detect and work with developmental failures in holding and containment, skewed family projective identification, and attacks on linking, which characterize pathological and traumatized families. The coming together of transference generated by the family as a group and the therapist's countertransference are the fulcrum on which such therapy turns. An extended vignette of a session is used to illustrate the application of object relations theory to the therapeutic process of family therapy.     

Archetype and object: primary deintegration and primary love in analytical play therapy with young children

Jungian and post-Jungian theory of the development of the child's psyche is reviewed. A discrimination between primary and secondary deintegration is suggested. Post-Freudian theory regarding primary object relations is integrated with the Jungian model. The two approaches can contribute synergistically to inform and advance play therapy with young children. Patients from widely diverse cultural backgrounds use their relationship with the therapist as a helpful person (object), and engage in archetypal material from the collective unconscious, to help them work on and through their unresolved emotional issues.     

Destructive and reparative transference in multiple levels of group psychotherapy

Group members are challenged to form psychologically meaningful relationships with therapists, other members, and the group as a whole. The way in which individuals perceive this challenge is based on their past experiences. Early relationships establish a perceptual frame in which fears of being hurt and concern about hurting others coexist. Balance between these two ways of generating meaning enables individuals to form relatively healthy relationships. Imbalance in this perceptual frame results in distorted perceptions and maladaptive patterns emerging as transference manifestations. Working through involves repeatedly addressing distortions as members relate to therapists, others and the group as a whole.