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.
In this communication I have touched upon the technical issues which are described in the literature. I have stressed our growing sophistication concerning the difficulties of termination, concerning the structural as well as technical modifications which have been discussed and which have replaced the early optimism. Rather than contributing to the technology of termination I have attempted to focus on its philosophy. In order to do this, I have used the analogy of the ending of a play, the function of its epilogue, in order to lead us to a model, a prototype of the total process of change, so that the working-through function of the process of termination could be seen against that background. I have synthesized the primary model of thinking with the secondary model of thinking in order to indicate certain features of the process of working through, which if successful moves from the compulsion to repeat to spontaneous repetition in the service of adaptation, rather than in the service of the neurotic conflict. The adaptive function of the afterplay, the epilogue, has been discussed in terms of remembering the task completed; recollection then was seen in the service of reconstruction, of mastery, of preparation for future tasks. The epilogue was shown to become a prologue. I have touched on the special difficulties of this termination procedure in work with children and in training analysis, and I have put emphasis on the fact that both situations create special technical problems including countertransference problems because of the difficulty to separate the therapeutic process from the total educational or training task. Termination of analysis is seen as an important aspect of working through, as a process rather than as an arbitrary or ideal ending point.