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 distinction is made between the classical concept of countertransference and the so-called totalistic one. The former is defined as the unconscious reaction of the therapist to the patient's transference, the latter as the emotional reaction of the analyst to the patient in the treatment situation. It is stressed that various emotional reactions of the analyst, conscious and unconscious, conflict-ridden or based more on reality, can be employed constructively in the therapeutic situation. Mention is made of Sullivan's totalistic approach as part of his stress on the interpersonal reaction between patient and therapist.
Countertransference can be employed as an important diagnostic tool to assess the degree of regression in the patient. The more severe countertransference problems occur with those patients who are pregenitally rooted and stir up counteridentification problems in the analyst. Concern on the part of the analyst may have different unconscious meanings. It can be helpful in limiting regression in the analyst, in exploring his limitations in the therapeutic