Back to Table of Contents
1975/2001, p. 97); and the parent’s/analyst’s capacity to remain at an optimal distance, facilitating symbolization and representation, “necessary for the formation of thought” (Green 1975, p. 14). Clinically, this translates into close ‘listening’ to all forms of unconscious exchanges and transmissions of emotions via words and behaviors between the patient and the analyst, as in ‘ shared-transmitted affect ’ (Parat 1995) and ‘ countertransference position’ of de-centered clinical listening (Faimberg 1993).
III. MUTUAL INTERNATIONAL INFLUENCES AND CONTEMPORARY USAGE OF THE CONCEPT
III. A. Contemporary Freudian and Object Relations Theory Within contemporary Ego Psychology and Conflict Theory of North America, Lasky (2002), following Arlow (1997) and Abend (1986) in focusing on subtleties of the inner states and processes of the analyst at work, distinguishes between empathy, analytic instrument, and countertransference proper. Blum (1991) focused on the complexities of affective communication within the two-way transference-countertransference field of the analytic process, and particular problems in the analysis of patients who have specific difficulty with recognition, experience, communication, and regulation of affect, within the intrapsychic conflict paradigm (Ellman, Grand, Silvan & Ellman 1998). Kernberg (1983), writing on the character analysis of mild borderline personality patients, distinguishes between chronic and acute countertransference. Acknowledging Heimann’s (1960) influence, he writes: “… chronic stalemate may be crucial to diagnosing both chronic countertransference distortions (which are more pervasive though less obtrusive than acute countertransference developments) and subtle but powerful transference acting out that might otherwise not have been diagnosed. In this regard, the analysis of the analyst’s total emotional reaction is a “second line” of approach when the first line of approach to direct transference exploration proves insufficient…” (pp. 265, 266; emphasis added). Overall, Kernberg’s (1965, 1975) views on the countertransference have gradually evolved, towards its vital importance, especially in working with borderline patients. While in 1965 he cautioned against the danger of broadening the concept ‘countertransference’ to include all emotional responses in the analyst (thus risking that the concept lose all specific meaning), in 1975 he acknowledged and emphasized the constructive analytic work of interpreting countertransference. Especially in the work with borderline patients the analyst has to deal with and manage his or her own (at times) strong inner reactions to the patient’s projections of highly primitive object relations . In his recent Transference Focused Psychotherapy (TFP), he outlines the paradigm of overtly focusing on the borderline patient’s transference responses, yet closely internally monitoring the analyst’s countertransference. In this model, the analyst interprets from the position of the ‘third’ , interpretatively commenting on the interaction of both participants in the dialogue (Kernberg 2015).
106
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online