Countertransference and the Theory of Technique: Discussion

Historical, clinical, and conceplual remarks are presented regarding countertransference and the theory of ps).choanabfic technique, pre-liminary lo and in the context of discussing the contributions lo the panel, ‘%outilertransfererice in The07 and Practice ” (Tyson, 1984; Loewald, 1984; Jacobs, 1984; Dewald, unpublished). I n addition, special etnpliasis is given to problems of countertransfer-ence in trainiiig arid supervision which may be ProtoQpes for later dijjficullies in anabtic work. OUNTERTRANSFEREKCE I lAS BEEN RELEGATED TO lesser and C later studies when compared to other aspects of the theory of technique. Freud formally introduced the concept in 1910 after he had already formulated transference. Beginning with Freud, there was reticence and reluctance for analysts to divulge and discuss their countertransference difficulties. Psychoanal-ysis involves special occupational hazards that go beyond de-mands on the analyst’s special knowledge, skill, and experience to his entire personality. The analyst’s exposure of his technique might be too self-revealing, too involved with issues of discretion and confession, voyeurism, exhibitionism, and criticism, so that it has often been difficult to obtain clinical material illustrative of countertransference reactions. Analysts have usually pre-ferred to depict countertransference in the supervision of stu-dents, in reanalysis, and in discussions of reported cases. Beginning with Freud, we know of the universality and ubiquity of countertransference conflicts and their potential or actual interference with analytic neutrality, empathy, and inter-pretation. Freud was probably aware of countertransference Expanded version of presentation at the panel. “Countertransference i