Couples psychotherapy: A psychodynamic model.

Abstract

Psychoanalytic assumptions and goals need not be viewed or approached from a purely individual analytic perspective. Families and especially marriages offer a unique opportunity for systems-oriented intervention to add therapeutic depth by addressing psychodynamic interactions in vivo. Doing so requires integration in therapy, as well as in theory, of the manner in which individual psychodynamics manifest in primary interpersonal systems. A model is presented which aims at translating and instilling a useful degree of analytic insight in members of marital or family systems. Insight into transferential distortions and behavior is facilitated byintroducing the metaphor of unconscious "hopes" and "expectations" in the interactive contexts of conjoint and. individual sessions. It is suggested that such an expansion of systems-oriented approaches is a crucial step in adding depth and durability to change.Traditionally, most of the emphasis in couples interventions has been on what may be classified as behavioral goals and techniques, especially in regard to developing problem-solving skills in the partners. Although the models of intervention generated by these approaches have been regarded by psychoanalytic practitioners as most often producing solutions lacking in depth and durability, the reasons for this emphasis are not difficult to appreciate. Training in psychoanalytic theory and therapy has its roots and by far its most straightforward applications in work with individuals. For the most part, this has left the field of couples and family work open, almost by default, to those with more behavioral and systems orientations.

Obstacles for the psychoanalyst in the practice of couple therapy.

“…Brody comments that while psychoanalysts have traditionally focused on expanding the knowledge base of individual treatments, the venerated goal of analytic insight is not as easily applied to couple treatments. This is especially true when there is extensive investment in a patient's view of the partner as the source of one's problems (Brody, 1988). This may be one essential explanation for analysts having predominantly applied our methods to the individual rather than to the troubled dyad.…”