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.
During the past two decades the tremendous expansion of psychotherapeutic services has led to many variations of the basic, frequently termed “orthodox,” schema of psychoanalytic therapy. Most frequently changes in technique have centered upon varying concepts of the role to be taken by the psychotherapist in the treatment relationship.
Perhaps the most significant technical variation has come from the Neofreudian or “culturalist” school, who have departed from the model of analytic neutrality. In more recent years our country has seen the growth of Existentialist therapy, which emphasizes the ongoing encounter between patient and therapist, and also the emotional experiences of the therapist himself as he is with the patient.
Despite these variations of therapeutic technique it has often been noted that gifted therapists tend to resemble one another in the kinds of relationships they form with patients, regardless of the school they profess. It would almost seem that patients get well despite their analyst's theoretical beliefs rather than because of them.
It may very well be that there are certain basic attitudes or expectations of therapists that are so embedded in our cultural matrix that they are not recognized as significant. These built-in parameters may constitute a kind of invisible countertransference that is helpful to certain patients but possibly harmful to others.