i read somethin last night :-)

it was talking about... dammit... i forget... see... when i asked my therapist what model he worked within (i didn't know how to phrase that any better) he said Self Psychology. He said it fit in well with DBT. He said that it needed to be supplimented, however. He said something about 'relational psychology' or 'family systems theory' or 'systems theory' or something along those lines. He did emphasise the Self Psychology though and I found that through google alright. The other terms are harder... I've forgotten which terms he said and which terms have popped up through google in a related way. Anyhow, the other stuff is harder. (Not much stuff on it that I can find).

Sigh.

Anyhow, I managed to find something on systems theory (or similar) last night. It had a VERY different view of analysis from the 'orthodox view' (Freudian).

See... The orthodox view is that the therapist doesn't say stuff all except to offer interpretations. The therapist is thought to be authorative with respect to the 'real' meaning of the behaviour / thoughts / feelings. The therapist is thought to (attempt to) attain complete objectivity and neutrality.

The orthodox view is questioned in a number of respects...

But the relational view... Was talking a whole heap more about how instead of interpretations being the mechanism of theraputic change the relationship is the mechanism of theraputic change. The notion is that both bring stuff to the encounter and a lot of stuff that the analysand does is of course in response to real features of the analyst.

There was something about modes of interacting in therapy...

In the beginning... the mode becomes the analysand being in the past and so yeah transfering stuff onto the analyst in virtue of past experiences. Its meant to be a fairly primitive form of object relationship because the analyst is viewed as little more than a stereotype that the analysand has formed on the basis of past experiences.

Then there is a shift...

I can't remember... I can't remember...

But eventually the idea is that there can be an experience near mode of interacting in the present. Where both the analyst and the analysand are able to respond to each other on the basis of what each brings to the present moment of interaction. This is meant to be theraputic for BOTH THE ANALYST AND THE ANALYSAND (though there is of course a power differential because the analyst has a view to helping the analysand get to there and not vice versa).

On this model... There is more therapist disclosure. In a way... My longing for NOT KNOWING about my therapist... Is pathological because what I'm doing is resisting seeing him as a person. It is so much easier for me to cast him in past roles / stereotypes if I don't see how he is different.

So the notion is that what you learn is... How to interact positively with people in the present moment. I think the middle step involves coming to understand (and process and work through) the resistences that we have for being able to interact positively with people in the present moment.

:-)