How Much Needs to Change in Analysis? How Do We Get There?

The symptom of this shadow zone is precisely the incapacity for an interchange with the ‘non-self’ which is unconsciously feared as dangerous and too disturbing. … In order not to succumb to the danger of petrification we would do well to heed the wise words … that our training never ends, and that, among other wise counsels, Freud left us the idea that from time to time we need to return to the analytic couch and be helped to regain the closeness with our unconscious.

To a packed house late Saturday afternoon at the Winter 2015 APsaA meetings, this ambitious panel was presented with the questions “How much needs to change in analysis? How do we get there?” Stanley Coen, as chair, introduced the panel, after which Peter Goldberg presented a clinical case; panelists Rosemary Balsam, Judith Yanof, and Aisha Abbasi and reporter Beth Steinberg then commented on the case and the issues it raised. As part of his presentation, Goldberg was asked to articulate his thoughts and feelings in response to the patient and his awareness of his reasons for each intervention during the session to allow both panel and audience to experience his way of thinking and working with his patient moment to moment. This format was designed to allow participants to hear an experienced analyst “at work”—that is, for the group to be able to closely follow process material and to stop at