How do we treat our clients in the relational framework? 2．

  As for the pluralism in psychoanalysis, Dr. Glen Gabbard asserts that “contemporary psychoanalysis is marked by a pluralism unknown in any prior era and this extends to theories of therapeutic action” (p.823) .

Gabbard, G.O. Westen, D. (2003). Rethinking therapeutic action. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 84(4):823-841.

Also he states: “Insight is now toppled off its prior pedestal (Sandler and Dreher, 1996) but its status among the spectrum of interpretive and non-interpretive mechanism is unknown”.

 Slide 4. The opposing axis of “insight oriented vs. supportive approach”, or “interpretation vs relationship” is no longer meaningful as they might always work synergistically. As Wallerstein said, the study at Menninger Clinic in 1950~70s (Psychotherapy Research Project) indicated that supportive and insight oriented therapeutic elements are always mingled together in real clinical situations.

Slide 5. Does it mean that any intervention among the spectrum, from interpretation-observation- confrontation- clarification- invitation for description- show of empathic validation- psychoeducation- advice and appreciation/praise are all possibly (and potentially equally) therapeutic? Perhaps.   

Slide 6. Thus, it is getting harder and harder for us to define what is psychoanalytic, as even elements that Freud obviously considered as non-analytic, such as suggestion and advice-giving can be re-considered as potentially valuable. Where is the role of Oedipus Complex and infantile sexuality? However, some say that the most valuable legacy that Freud left with us is the importance of unconscious process.