You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Reflecting upon his impetus for exploring the area of reassurance in contemporary psychoanalysis, Douglas H. Ingram identified Alexander Reid Martin's 1949 paper “Reassurance in Therapy” as being a seminal work when it was written over 20 years ago.
Ingram began by summarizing and explaining the main points of “Reassurance in Therapy.” The definition of reassurance, according to Martin, was “to free from fear, anxiety, and terror.” However, due to its elusive and subjective elements, anxiety was felt to be unresponsive to ordinary reassurance. In an effort to protect themselves, patients unconsciously objectify their anxiety in an attempt at providing internal reassurance, according to Martin. These “objectifications” then are seen as symptoms that analysts are often tempted to remove, thus disregarding the unconscious processes behind the symptoms. Martin then identifies three ways in which reassurance can be categorized: (1) false reassurance, which disregards the determinants of inner conflict and consequent anxiety; (2) superficial or defense reassurance, which recognizes the unconscious values of the complaint but seeks mainly to restore defenses; (3) basic reassurance, which derives primarily from the philosophy of the analyst, as expressed in Martin's formula of the four H's—Holism, unity of the self; Humanism, feeling and emotion; Homer (or poetry), metaphor and allegory; and Humor.
Ingram organized his critique of Martin's view of reassurance by providing a contextualistic perspective on analytic practice. He emphasized the danger of “false reassurance” and expressed the importance of appreciating the patient's complaints and recognizing their powerful value. He extended Martin's idea of humanism by addressing the conversational, interpersonal nature of the analytic relationship, but noted that a holistic perspective can deny the “fluidity of subjectivity” by emphasizing the “ideal” and eliminating the “eccentricities.” Ingram emphasized the importance