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.
To the Editors: I want first to convey my appreciation to the editors for the opportunity of expressing thoughts stimulated by reading this journal. The idea of a Continuing Forum is delightful because its freedom and informality spare one the necessity of rigidly formalizing his concepts. A light approach to our formulations may be a hopeful beginning to better worked out principles and spare us the tediousness that often accompanies scientific clarification.
However, a discussant's freedom here to express himself in an impressionistic fashion (there may be considerable value to an impressionistic discussion) does not mean that what he is discussing is necessarily an artistic, although clinical, creation with little scientific meaning. Mrs. Sandford's article, “A Patient and Her Cats,” is a case in point. Most of the discussants agreed that it was a charming paper and that the author displayed a sensitivity toward the patient that could be found only in a skillful therapist, which she obviously is. Her theoretical formulations, on the other hand, were to a large measure considered unjustified or irrelevant, and one discussant (Dr. Rosow) believed that therapeutic success was solely dependent upon the relationship aspects of the treatment rather than upon the integrative effects of her interpretations.
I choose to discuss this situation because it is commonly encountered in clinical psychoanalytic presentations. I agree also that warmth and empathy were important factors in the relatively successful outcome of her treatment. But I seriously doubt that Mrs. Sandford went to the trouble and labor of writing a paper simply to display her intuitive skills.
Some of the discussants extended her clinical formulations and this is always helpful. Others requested more data in order to feel convinced of the plausibility of her formulations.
Still it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine when one has presented enough data “to justify the conclusions” and whether the data a