Myth and Legend in Family Therapy: Maintaining the Distinction Between the Sacred and Secular in Family Process

Family therapy has blurred the distinction between the sacred (myth) and the secular (legend) with resultant ethical implications, and has also created problematic cross-cultural considerations with its use of “myth.” The objectives of this paper are (a) to briefly introduce the evolution of the concept of “myth” in folklore; (b) to identify specific problems resulting from the current utilization of the term “myth” by family therapists; and (c) to demonstrate how appropriate usage of the concepts “myth” and “legend” from folklore theory radically decreases the confusion created in comparison to the present reliance on the term “myth” alone. Kimberly Ann Holle, MS, MSW, LSW, LCDC -III, CADC, graduated from the College of Social Work, The Ohio State University, in June, 2005. Ms. Holle now resides in Columbus, Georgia, USA (kimmers.1212@aol.com).     

Refusing the cure: Sophocles's Philoctetes and the clinical problems of self‐injurious spite,shame and forgiveness1

Sophocles's Philoctetes (409 BCE) is a dramatic masterpiece unfamiliar to most analysts. The play presents a complex portrait of self‐injurious spite of heroic dimensions as it touches on issues of intense shame, feelings of helplessness and the refusal of forgiveness. Sophocles's protagonist, Philoctetes, is a man who, like some of our patients, refuses to be healed. He intends, through his continued sickness and misery, to exact revenge against those who mistreated him. These are recognizable clinical issues, playing roles in every psychoanalytic treatment, issues that may assume a special importance in protracted, stalemated or aborted analyses. There are patients who damage the analyst by damaging the analysis they are in, a malevolent project often undertaken in revenge for wrongs suffered during childhood. This paper links Sophocles's drama to these vitally important clinical considerations through the discussion of a particular case.