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.
In this paper, the author is trying to clarify, through different psychoanalytical theories (A. Freud, P. Heimann, H. Deutsch, M. Little, C. York, H. Rosenfeld etc.) and also through his own clinical practice with addictive patients how the analytic treatment of these patients does not succeed if one insists on a rigid adherence to the classical method. This means that many parameters have to be introduced in the analysis and that the analyst must play a more active role, i.e. those aspects of psychoanalytical technique that can (arguably) be modified to meet the needs of particular classes of patients. The so called parameters are really not very different from the technique which Anna Freud called “developmental help”. The author underlines the countertransferential difficulties encountered in the treatment of the addict, that are not very different from many that we find in the treatment of adolescents. In both cases the analyst is bombarded from every corner with an intensity both in quality and quantity, which, unless well prepared for in advance, one is very much in danger of succumbing to. The relevance of the empathy and the therapist's personal values, opinions and attitudes to the addict and the alcoholic need to be acknowledged. This is one of the occasions when the benefits from a personal psychoanalytic or psychotherapeutic experience are clearly seen.