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.
This is a well-researched book, which tackles many important contemporary themes of the modern world. It will help many people interested in psychodynamic psychotherapy to increase their knowledge and/or take informed steps towards clinical training. Although it is entirely about psychodynamic psychotherapy with adults, I could imagine many sections of the book being used for all pre-clinical course teaching. The book is separated into clear well written sections, and each chapter has highly relevant references and useful resources. The list of YouTube videos was, for this reviewer, a revelation. Quality online psychotherapeutic presentations can open up a rich source of learning.
Our hope in writing this book is to bridge this gap for an applied text on psychodynamic psychotherapy and to bring attention to contemporary issues facing psychodynamic psychotherapy practice in the 21st century, such as the role of the technology in our practice and an analytic view of diversity (p. 6).
The competence framework devised by Lemma et al. (2008) is at the heart of most aspects of this book. Readers of this journal will be aware of the Association of Child Psychotherapist’s ‘Competence Framework for Child and Adolescent Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy’ (Association of Child Psychotherapists, 2017). This important ACP document developed the structure of Lemma et al.’s competency framework and made it specific for child psychotherapists. Needless to say there are a great many overlaps.
Despite arguing for ‘adaptive flexibility’ within the ‘analytic attitude’, the authors are also very clear that the core competences derived from work done at University College London (Lemma et al., 2008) are crucial to the development of psychodynamic psychotherapy. ‘Focussing on a competence-based approach represents a way of demystifying the acquiring of psychotherapy skills and allows training courses to be more transparent about the expectations and evaluations of their students’ (p. 5).
Abrahams