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 author believes that the disembodied nature of Teletherapy, whether visual or auditory, is not conducive to the deep regressive experience of psychoanalysis per se. However, it is amenable to psychoanalytic psychotherapy and can be effective for analyzing unconscious motivations and defenses. In addition, it lends itself to a flexible frame that reveals more about the patient and analyst than in traditional psychoanalysis. This can provide important therapeutic grist for the analytic mill or might lead to unreliable boundaries. Some patients suffering from severe childhood neglect are not able to relate meaningfully to a cyber analyst, while certain narcissistic patients feel validated by the world's Coronavirus disease (COVID) consensus that human contact is dangerous, resulting in the necessity for contact-avoiding Teletherapy. Teletherapy is easier to access for patients and analysts than having to drive to an appointment. For some patients, it is a dream come true, waking up with your iPhone analyst at your bedside. Because Teletherapy is so user-friendly, many patients will never want to return to their analyst's office. But the technical glitches of iPhones, computers, and the unexpected interruptions by housemates, pets, etc. make Teletherapy less reliable and private. And most patients and analysts miss the vital need for an embodied therapeutic experience. The author emphasizes the importance of continuing to practice Teletherapy until the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) indicates it is safe to see patients in person. It appears that Teletherapy has radically transformed the practice of psychoanalysis and will continue to do so into the 21st century.