In the article, certain interpretations made by therapists are being evaluated. Many therapists make several interpretations in order to analyze their patients under the light of the theory which they follow. Although their aim is not firmly criticize their patients, the patients are being faced with accusatory interpretations and give negative reactions to those interpretations. These negative reactions influence the therapy process, also, negatively.
In this article, an alternative theoretical approach is presented, that leads to nonaccusatory interpretation.
Mostly, psychoanalytic theory leads to accusatory interpretations. For example, the therapists assess the problems of their patients with the emphasis on infantile impulses, developmental defects, and defensive reactions. In the article, Kohut’s approach in the analysis of Mr. Z’s case and Kernberg’s approach to his patient are evaluated. Kohut analyzed his patient Mr. Z two times. In the first analysis, he used classical psychoanalytic approach. Kohut suggested that Mr. Z had narcissistic demands, a regressive mother transference, excessive demand of control in psychoanalytic situation, and grandiose expectations. When Mr. Z was criticized with all of these, he became angry and defensive. It is important to decide if this reaction of the patient is normal and natural or not. Kohut and many psychoanalysts suggest that Mr. Z is having the feelings anyone could have.
In Kernberg’s analysis, there was a woman patient with borderline personality organization. He interpreted her like this: “primitive defensive operations in the context of condensation of oedipal and preoedipal material centering on the masochistic search for a warm and giving, but also powerful and sadistic, father who would harm her in intercourse”. The woman was openly told that she was masochistic, defensive, and she wanted to have an intercourse with her father. Although these interpretations are common among psychoanalysts, they are very much accusatory when the patient is faced with them. While analysts think that these kinds of explanations are not welcomed by patients, they also think that the patients should know the truths and face with them. Some examples of such kind of interpretations that psychoanalysts commonly use are like that: ‘you are resistant’, ‘you hate me as you hate your mother’, and ‘you make demands on me as if I were your mother’.
Besides the writer of this article, the negative influence of accusatory interpretations was detected also by Rogers. He states that he also did such kind of accusatory interpretations and a soon later he realized the negative effects of it on the process of therapy and gave up it. He decided to use the client centered therapy.
According to the author, it should be evaluated deeply if the patient is in conflict because of either he display resistance to the therapy unconsciously or he is reacting negatively to the accusatory interpretations. This point is critical. The author presents a new theory developed by Bernard Apfelbaum (1977). The name of the approach is ‘ego analysis’ which is different from the classical traditional psychoanalytic approach. The ego analysis does not attribute the problematic behaviors to the developmental defects or to the infantile impulses. Also this approach does not view clients as resistant or gratified.
Referances:
Wile, D. B. (Fall 1984). Kohut, Kernberg, and accusatory interpretations. Psychological Association. Volume 21, Number 3.
Makaleyi özetleyen:Funda Kaçar
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder