Chapter 10. Special Topics

Introduction

It is inevitable that the subject of this chapter must differ from that of Vol. 1 (i. e., the relationship between theory and practice). The numerous examples we have given provide sufficient clarification of this relationship. Moreover, it is impossible for a clinical textbook to satisfy the requirements that the theory of science today poses to Freudr's inseparable bond hypothesis about research and therapy.

In this chapter we will instead familiarize our readers with specific problems that are of great practical significance. The issue of consultation, covered in Sect. 10.1, is just one example. The subject of religiosity also deserves our special attention, both for therapeutic and interdisciplinary reasons (Sect. 10.3). Furthermore, as shown by the example of a “good hour,” the participation of scientists from other fields in the study of the psychoanalytic dialogue leads us back to the hypothesis of an inseparable bond (Sect. 10.2).

Consultation

We distinguish, as did Szecsödy (1981), between consultation, which is a meeting in which colleagues meet as equals and one advises the other, as has always been the case when difficult diagnostic and therapeutic problems are confronted, and supervision, which is a learning situation within the framework of training. The process of supervison includes both overseeing and evaluating; participation is obligatory, in contrast to a consultation, which is voluntary. Three persons are involved in a consultation, namely the patient, the therapist, and the consultant. In supervision there is also a fourth element, namely an institution, i. e., the training institute whose standards are set and watched over by national and international bodies.

Because of his distance to the dyadic interaction between patient and therapist, the perspective of an outside analyst differs and in some regards is wider than that of the analyst providing the treatment. Since he is not entangled in the transference and counter