Are Psychiatric Residents Still Interested in Psychoanalysis? A Brief Report

What role does the real relationship play in psychoanalytic supervision? While the real relationship's role has long been and continues to be considered with regard to psychoanalysis, it has received virtually no attention in the supervision literature. In this paper, using Horney's construct of the real self as conceptual anchor, I attempt to: (1) situate the real relationship squarely within the borders of the psychoanalytic supervision relationship; (2) examine the relevance of real relationship phenomena for the supervision experience; (3) provide some simple, ordinary yet meaningful examples of case dialogue that illustrate moments of real relationship in supervision; and (4) introduce the concept of real relationship rupture and consider its potential ramifications for and impact upon the supervisor-supervisee relationship. Just as ruptures can occur in the supervisory alliance, I propose that ruptures can also transpire in the supervisory real relationship, have the potential to reverberate throughout the entirety of the supervision experience, and depending upon how they are handled, can prove either constructive and relationally energizing and enlivening or enervating and eviscerating to supervision process and outcome.

Section: Reflections On the Problem And Possibility Of Real Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moments of Real Relationship in Psychoanalytic Supervision

Watkins

2012

“…Analysts trained in psychiatry or other mental health professions within the last 30 years were most likely strongly infl uenced by the bio-psychiatric approach ( Damsa, et al , 2010 ;Carlat, 2010 ;Breggin, 1991 ). This is especially true if the clinician was trained in the United States and parts of Europe that have been unduly infl uenced by the pharmaceutical industry.…”

Section: We Are Psychiatrists and That Is What We Were Trained To Domentioning

confidence: 99%

Medicating Patients in Psychoanalytic Therapy: Implications for Introjection, Transference, and Countertransference

Riccio¹

2011

If a patient comes for psychotherapy or psychoanalysis, why medicate him with psychotropic drugs? The answers to this question are explored and addressed from several points of view. The central hypothesis of this paper suggests that most of the reasons for medicating patients have to do with therapist's unresolved countertransference issues. Furthermore, medicating a patient may have deleterious effects on his introjected sense of self, and impacts the transference relationship in a significant way. The issues surrounding medication as adjunctive therapy are elucidated and clarified in terms of rationale, efficacy, and the impact on the psychotherapeutic relationship. Psychoanalytic solutions are offered and discussed.

“…In this comment on Damsa et al (2010), I briefl y address that question and suggest that -if we are to truly generate passionate interest in psychoanalysis among psychiatric residents and other mental health professionals in training -perhaps we need to begin by researching the largely unresearched process of psychoanalytic education and supervision. Damsa et al (2010), in lamenting the seeming decline of psychiatric residents ' interest in learning about psychoanalysis, (1) offer ten " common sense feedbacks " on how such interest might be improved, (2) call upon psychoanalytic educators to be open and critically self-refl ective in working to better stimulate that interest, and (3) urge the adoption of a proactive stance in the modifi cation of the status quo ; their " feedbacks " and suggestions, in my view, offered sound guidance that could be quite useful pedagogically. Yet, if we ponder their work and other recent papers in which the matter of psychoanalytic training has been considered (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…DOI: 10.1057DOI: 10. /ajp.2011 Damsa et al (2010), in lamenting the seeming decline of psychiatric residents ' interest in learning about psychoanalysis, (1) offer ten " common sense feedbacks " on how such interest might be improved, (2) call upon psychoanalytic educators to be open and critically self-refl ective in working to better stimulate that interest, and (3) urge the adoption of a proactive stance in the modifi cation of the status quo ; their " feedbacks " and suggestions, in my view, offered sound guidance that could be quite useful pedagogically. Yet, if we ponder their work and other recent papers in which the matter of psychoanalytic training has been considered (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If we truly want to best stimulate, maintain, and fructify interest in psychoanalysis, perhaps a good place to begin would be the empirical study of the psychoanalytic educational endeavor itself and the educators who actualize that endeavor. For instance, much of the educator behaviors that Damsa et al (2010) identify as problematic (e.g. rigidity, arrogance, closed-mindedness) are antipathetic to learning and seemingly serve no good facilitative purpose in any training context.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is Psychoanalytic Education Effective? Comment on Damsa et al. (2010)

Watkins

2011

While a growing body of empirical data attests increasingly to the efficacy of psychoanalytic treatment, what data do we have that attests to the effectiveness of psychoanalytic education? In this comment on Damsa et al. (2010), I briefly address that question and suggest that-if we are to truly generate passionate interest in psychoanalysis among psychiatric residents and other mental health professionals in training-perhaps we need to begin by researching the largely unresearched process of psychoanalytic education and supervision.