It is 41 years since the Transactional Analysis Journal last dedicated a theme issue to the concept of cure. In 1980 John McNeel was the guest editor of an issue that embraced a broad and comprehensive collection of views on the subject of cure versus progress. John opened his editorial with two questions for the TA practitioner: "What brings about change?" and "What constitutes cure?" He closed it with the observation that although we may never fully have answers to these questions, we should constantly challenge ourselves "to continually seek the answers" (McNeel, 1980, pp. 94-95). It is with some pride in our community that we can say, 41 years later, that this conversation has continued to deepen as the TA community has embraced the shifting landscape of philosophy, theory, and practice over the past 4 decades.Change has always been one of the cornerstones of TA practice. People can change, said Berne, and this optimistic and forward-looking sensibility remains at the heart of our work with individuals, groups, systems, and organizations. Berne's emphasis on change and cure was part of his rebellious challenge to the psychoanalysis of his day, which he framed as only facilitating understanding whereas TA was devoted to change. At the same time, his use of the word "cure" inevitably reflected his grounding as a physician and psychiatrist and perhaps even his training as a psychoanalyst. But the question of what brings about change remains something of a contested issue and one that we continue to grapple with in depth in our community as the influence of relational, constructivist, and postmodern thought has begun to shape psychological theory and practice. Some might regret that Berne chose to use the word "cure," invoking as it does a medical model with presuppositions of illness and disease and implying a fixed state of health rather than a dynamic process of ongoing healing, change, and/or growth.Over the years, the notion that people can change has sometimes been interpreted rather more forcefully as they should change or even must change. This has sometimes led to a practice that might sacrifice other important humanistic principles, such as the right to self-definition or the sharing of power and responsibility. Tudor (2016) reminded us of one of Berne's typically pithy metaphors when talking about the function of the permission transaction in bringing about change. Berne (1972) compared the permission to a fishing license, which he noted sardonically simply gives one permission to fish, not compel one to fish! In our eagerness to focus on cure, have we, at times, been guilty of compelling people to fish? Perhaps … or perhaps our focus on cure has ensured that our work with our clients remains alive, purposeful, and with clear direction.We expect that our readers, like our authors, will represent a diverse collection of views on this topic. Nonetheless, the concepts of change, growth, and cure-however we choose to interpret the latter-remain fundamental to our joint endeavor in transactional analysis, a...
