Research on human attachment has improved the practice of psychotherapy in part because attachment theory gives therapists permission to be “real” people with their clients. One of my favorite books on the subject is David Wallin’s Attachment in Psychotherapy, which describes how to practice attachment-focused psychotherapy. (He’s working on a new book that looks at how therapists’ own attachment patterns effect psychotherapy.) As mentioned in an earlier post, rather than acting like “blank screens,” and relying on emotionally detached, analytical interpretations to support clients’ attempts to heal childhood wounding, attachment-focused therapists instead facilitate healthy attachment-related experiences, which invariably means engaging in real and meaningful ways.
Of course, attachment theorists aren’t the only ones who see the relationship between therapist and client as central to the practice of psychotherapy. Psychodynamic psychotherapists have made the relationship the cornerstone of their approach, although many maintain an analytical stance towards clients.
The Jungian analyst Robert Stein was an early dissenter to the emotionally detached, analytic approach to relationship. His book The Betrayal of the Soul in Psychotherapy explores the importance of making soul-felt connections with clients, which he argued requires a real, human connection. According to Stein, a soul-to-soul connection is the most healing aspect of psychotherapy (or analysis), which an analytical stance likely impedes.
The following quote is not from Stein, but rather from Jungian analyst John Ryan Haule who wrote the Foreward to Stein’s book. Haule describes the impact of the failure to witness soul. It’s a long quote, but I think an important one, especially as psychotherapy is increasingly discussed as both a failed paradigm of care and potential panacea for all that ails us.
“Mainstream psychotherapy is complicit in our cultural blindness. Its rituals were established nearly a century ago according to Freud’s ideal of scientific detachment, the very same mentality that Western culture has been pursuing since the Renaissance. It pictures the encounter of therapist and patient on the model of two separate rational egos meeting to discuss dispassionately and to ‘analyze’ the unconscious forces that interfere with the patient’s attempt to live a rational life. The analyst is urged to be cool and emotionally uninvolved. In its most emphatic form, the ritual envisages an analyst who acts as a ‘blank screen’ for the projections of the patient. The patient is to learn as little as possible about the personality of the analyst. Rather the patient’s ‘projections’ recreate the neurotic structure of his life in the form of a ‘transference neurosis’ which can be dispassionately deconstructed.”
“There is no place in such a scheme for the naked and disturbing encounter of soul with soul. In fact, therapy amounts to a ‘strange distortion of the human connection,’ where one party strives for objective distance while the other is urged ‘to become completely involved and entangled emotionally.’ Psychotherapy as usual is an inhumanly structured encounter that blatantly repeats the injurious frustrations of the child whose parent refuses to engage with his soul. While the therapist is seen as a scientist/technician who coolly observes and measures, the patient becomes merely an object to be inspected, probed, and readjusted.”
“In mainstream psychotherapy—as in our culture as a whole—the soulful human element is seen as a dangerous and destructive force that has to be held at bay. When Eros enters the space between therapist and patient, stirring up the terrible forces of soul meeting soul, we become convinced that something has gone wrong. We feel the overpowering draw to engage and the equally strong anxiety, shame, and confusion that Eros always generates. But we do not see it as an awe-inspiring mystery. It never dawns on us that this might be the first appearance of a healing and transformative energy. Rather we fall into a panic, terrified at the prospect of ‘sexually acting out’.”
Caginess often surrounds talk of love, soul, and psychotherapy. Where in our training do we learn how to deal with the first breaths of a long-dormant soul, let alone work with the formidable passion and energy that such deeply felt stirrings can release? Perhaps therapists should be a bit cagey, since therapy and sex should never mix. The impact can be so damaging as to lead to suicide.
Yet when therapists’ own wounds have led them to search the depths of their own souls, they often intuitively understand the path the client must take to fill a self that feels hollow, thus revitalizing the client’s self-love. This intuitive understanding may be the first meeting of the soul of the therapist with the soul of the client, even without therapists ever speaking a word of their own wounding. Such deep knowing can spark feelings of kinship and heartfelt compassion in the therapist, igniting a sense of commitment and containment that no doubt the client senses. This is part of the necessary crucible for healing. And if self-love is the goal of therapy, then it’s hard to imagine transformation and healing occurring without the therapist’s love and soul somehow in the mix.
References:
Stein, Robert. 1998/1973. The Betrayal of Soul in Psychotherapy. Spring Journal Books: Woodstock, CONN.
Wallin, David J. 2007. Attachment in Psychotherapy. New York: The Guilford Press.
© 2014 Laura K Kerr, PhD. All rights reserved (applies to writing and photography).
The post When Soul Informs Psychotherapy was written by Laura K Kerr, PhD. Visit her website at Laura K Kerr, PhD.
Written By Laura K Kerr, Ph.D
When Soul Informs Psychotherapy was originally published @ Laura K Kerr, PhD and has been syndicated with permission.
Our authors want to hear from you! Click to leave a comment
Related Posts
What a wonderful piece. As therapists, we have to bond with the client in quite a deep way in order for them to grow. And how can anyone with a damaged experience or view of love ever develop it, unless they are shown what true love really is? An unconditional valuing and care given by the therapist not only allows clients to open up, but also provides them with a healthy model of love to follow and understand. I find that my clients get the most out of me when I am loving, and allow them to “see me” as a human with a human experience as well.
What you wrote perfectly mirrors what I feel ought to be the ground for all therapy — if not all relationships! Your clients are lucky to have you supporting their growth.
That quote is many decades out of date. Just to go PubMed and see how many studies there are on psychoanalysis vs. cognitive therapy (which normally includes a big emphasis on empathy and rapport), family therapy, group, couples, desensitization… I’m really surprised to see that characterization of psychotherapy today.
And “failed paradigm”? Research continues to build and to refine this field which is constantly developing on numerous fronts. How can you dismiss the countless people that benefit with increasingly better-informed approaches?
I wish you’d spell out what you think the “paradigm” of psychotherapy is, and then explore the research and other literature (not pop psych) to see what is really going on.
Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it’s just wrong to make a bogey man out of a valuable field in such a vague, unaccountable way.
Robert,
Your commitment to cognitive therapy is great. It’s an important modality, and yes, there’s lots you can find out about it on PubMed and other places. And yet the idea that what is the latest trend makes the best approach in psychotherapy is just too positivistic for me to swallow. The history of psychotherapy also shows that quite a few things that seemed good at one time, and had evidence to back them up, later turned out not to be so good.
One of the things I enjoy most about combining depth psychology with the latest research in the neurobiology of trauma and attachment is that it widens my perspective beyond the most recent research to include classics line Stein’s work, which I believe still have much to contribute to the field. Furthermore, the points Haule makes about two rational minds encountering one another — some might say that commonly occurs in cognitive therapy despite any emphasis on empathy and rapport. Haule is also taking about the deep emotional involvement that comes with working with someone over time, which personally I haven’t seen as part of any descriptions of cognitive therapy. Yet what Haule talks about seems to be perennial to the practice of psychotherapy, and thus not as easily upended by the latest research trends.
You are absolutely right; the field has progressed significantly since analysis ruled, especially with regards to the importance of the relationship for psychotherapy. I think it can progress even more, particularly with regards to the impact of therapists’ own woundings on psychotherapy.
With regard to “failed paradigm of care” – I also mention in the same sentence that psychotherapy is also often seen as a “potential panacea.” I am not dismissing anyone — including myself and the work I have done as a therapist using cutting-edge research on the neurobiology of trauma and attachment. I too have witnessed great strides in the kinds of therapy that are now available. And yet, so many of the problems that can emerge in relationship are the same today as they were 30 years ago.
No bogey man here, just deeper reflections. And by the way, Stein’s not pop psychology; he was a Jungian analyst. Similarly, Wallin is one of the most respect psychologists and experts on attachment in the field. Not sure where you’re seeing pop psychology….
Laura,
thank you for the lovely, well thought out article.
Just as fundamentalism, with it’s clear boundaries of right and wrong, serves to thresh out those who are capable of moving on to something greater, cognitive and behavioral approaches do the same for those seeking personal growth leading to life enhancement.
The path of balance is a razor’s edge not many are willing or capable of walking.
My work has always been at its best when I have been warm, real and approachable.
thanks again and I look forward to hearing more from you hear.
Connie,
Such a beautiful comment. Thank you for sharing your wisdom.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply! While we’re on the subject, one of the less-discussed topics is the ability to enhance spiritual experiences with EMDR. By targeting ego attachments, for example, people can get to very meditative states and then some. This may happen without making this modification, which is an indication of how easy it is. Of course, all the caveats pertaining to EMDR or any approach that can induce deep relaxation and enhanced awareness apply. http://www.MySpace.com/ryourell has some of my audio along these lines.
What you describe sounds very intriguing. This idea of “spiritual experiences” occurring in relation to targeting ego attachments with EMDR makes sense from the perspective of the sociology of religion. Supposedly, the underlying “spiritual” experience shared by all religions is a transcendental, “unitive” state. Letting go of ego attachments would seem to be a necessary precursor for entering such a state. Fascinating to think such an experience could also be related to the bilateral organization of the brain.
Great stuff! Thanks for sharing the link.