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.
Once upon a time as depth psychologists we only had Jung's problem of the very devil (theory) and Freud's problem of the witch (metapsychology) to worry about; now we have research evidence. To this we can add related problems of diagnostic categories, outcome measurement, and questions of cost-effectiveness. For the Jungian analysts in private practice these things may seem far away—an irrelevance to what they aim to do and how they practice their craft—though this depends increasingly on jurisdiction and the reach of institutional purchasers, such as insurance companies and governments. For the Jungian analyst in public practice, working for a health service or a funded therapy provider, these things are likely to be uncomfortably close and may well be highly intrusive; perhaps to the extent that something called ‘Jungian analysis’ is not what they provide. In the UK, at least, Jungians in public practice have frequently exercised their depth psychological skills through the fortunately vague-enough medium of ‘psychodynamic/psychoanalytic psychotherapy’, most likely short-term (less than 40 sessions) and perhaps according to some kind of manual (eg. Lemma et al., 2011).