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.
There is an ongoing tension in the psychodynamic field between interpreting the meaning of a patient's verbal productions or actions and addressing the defenses utilized by the patient. Some authors maintain that implicit interactions between analyst and patient may be more important than the verbal interventions by the analyst. This article stresses the importance of observing and appropriately addressing how patients manage painful affects in the sessions. Focusing the patients’ attention on their at-the-moment defenses as they occur in the session is an experience-near intervention and minimizes interventions that address issues far from the patient's consciousness and that require a high level of conjecture by the therapist. This technique can be utilized at any point in treatment, regardless of its duration and intensity. Several vignettes are provided that suggest that addressing defenses against painful affect is a pantheoretical construct and may be a common factor in psychodynamic treatment. A successful randomized control trial utilizing this technique with children (regulation-focused psychotherapy) is described. There have been limited empirical studies of the impact of therapists addressing defenses in sessions, but the work of J. Christopher Perry and colleagues, particularly the development of the Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scales, offers an opportunity to further study the impact of defense interpretations and other interventions.