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.
The literature on practicing throughout a life-threatening illness is reviewed and important differences about attitudes toward self-disclosure are understood by noting a division between two perspectives on transference: “one-body” and “two-body” views. The analyst's use of self-disclosure is informed by the prominence given the interpretation of transference as against that given the patient's needs in the collaborative relatedness supporting the therapeutic alliance. Themes and illustrative clinical vignettes are presented from the author's own experience practicing during such an illness. Three phases of working during illness are delineated, each somewhat different regarding the analyst's state, and hence patients' needs and reactions. Recommendations are made regarding conditions that make it possible to work effectively during a life-threatening illness. The analyst needs help from his or her own analyst to make the clinically and sometimes ethically appropriate decisions about practice; while this is important in instances in which the analyst recovers, it is essential should the analyst become terminal and face more certain death.