The integrative attitude–a personal journey

The origins of clinical psychotherapy date from the beginning of last century and the development of broadly four foundational schools–psychoanalytic, cognitive-behavioural, humanistic and transpersonal psychologies. The imperative to integrate these schools, however, is relatively recent and in the last 25 years a professional integration movement has developed, exemplified by the formation of SEPI and the UKAPI, and ‘integrative psychotherapist’ is now the most popular nomenclature used in the profession. This article gives a brief history of the integration movement, reviews some issues raised by developments so far, and discusses the personal dilemma that integration evokes in the would-be integrative practitioner. Using my own journey I espouse an integrative attitude that is based on the nature of integration as an evolving personal process rather than an ideal, fixed, profession-wide position. I describe three interweaving modalities of integration I call constructive, complicit and contiguous integration, which form a developmental framework that aims to encourage the individual activity of questioning, inventing, researching and interrogating the discipline within its philosophical, professional and social context. In concluding, this article exhorts the profession to see integration as a personal journey, as a way of being that is constantly becoming and unfolding in relation with the therapist's training, experience and interaction with peers and clients. The result is indefinable and unnameable, and perhaps represents the soul of integrative psychotherapy.     

Universities are not a good place for psychotherapy and counselling training

This paper outlines eight aspects of institutional practice in university teaching that are at odds with the ethos of therapy: the linearity of university training has consequences for conceptual and cultural issues that may be antithetical to genuine therapeutic practice; certain notions about what reality is and what counts as truth may be reinforced by university trainings; academic knowledge in universities is standardized so as to sabotage therapeutic work; the university privileges a cognitive account; the university trains therapists in ways that are antithetical to the ethos of therapy; universities keep alive hierarchies that sit uneasily with the project of therapy; university training encourages the therapist to develop an identity that is anathema to many traditions in therapy; and compartmentalization of ethics in university-based trainings would run against the ethics of therapy.     

Mindfulness reconsidered

Mindfulness has recently become a popular addition to the range of methods available to counsellors and psychotherapists, especially in the field of stress reduction but is the method being over-sold? This article reviews the origins of mindfulness, attempts a balanced review of what mindfulness is and is not good for, looks at the question of whether the meaning of the term has mutated or suffered dilution as its popularity has grown and considers what that popularity and possible mutation tell us about the current state of thinking in the psychotherapy field. In the process, it puts the usefulness and nature of mindfulness in a new perspective, challenging a number of commonly held contemporary views on the subject.     

Uses and abuses of theory: a group analytic perspective

Group therapy occupies a curious and ambiguous status in the overall mental health field: groups are recognized and marginalized, sought after and avoided, respected and dismissed as second best to individual therapy. Groups are now practised widely in many services, probably because of the pressure of referrals and increased concern about funding, but even then have a secondary status. The under-recognition of both the value and complexity of groups seems to parallel the problems of theory which are part of the group psychotherapeutic culture. Rather than attempt a comprehensive theory of groups in this article, I intend to present some of the problems about theory and its link to practice, focusing particularly on the ambivalence about groups that I see as a continuing concern. I do so from a position which values theory, seeing in theory the container of understanding which guides psychotherapeutic practice. I do not identify with a critical position which rejects theory. This position recognizes fully the risks and dangers of over-theorizing, the potential to distort human contact through a rigid adherence to theory; however, I write in the spirit of appreciating theory thoughtfully applied as without theory, our work might be impoverished and even impeded.     

Psychotherapy in a neoliberal world

The neoliberal regime has significant consequences for the psychotherapies. In particular, the idea that individuals is deserving of support from society and government when they need it – for example in managing the inevitable stresses of the life cycle – is being displaced by an ideology of total individual responsibility. Psychotherapies framed around relational conceptions of the self find themselves particularly out of key with this dominant way of thinking. Governmental approaches to developmental needs become more instrumental, measurement-oriented and ‘disciplinary’ in this situation. Market incentives and disciplinary sanctions are introduced to ensure that institutions and their personnel conform to governmental directives. There is pressure on psychotherapists to adapt to this instrumentalised environment to survive. However, ‘expressive individualisation’ was also stimulated by the cultural liberation of the 1960s, and survives alongside the ‘possessive individualism’ of neoliberalism. This alternative culture has not been entirely suppressed, and therapies continue to be sought which offer the possibility of self-understanding and growth, although the pressure is for such therapies to become luxury goods. What is at risk under neoliberalism is the idea that society should support the self-development and self-understanding of all its citizens, as an aspect of a modern kind of democratic citizenship.