Online Dictionary of Mental Health
Top Ten Bestsellers (continuously updated): abuse, adhd, adoption, aging, aids, alcoholism, alternative medicine, anxiety disorders, autism, bipolar disorder, child development, child care, conversion disorders, counseling psychology, cults, death and dying, depression, dissociative disorders, domestic violence, dreams, eating disorders, forensic psychology, gay, lesbian & bisexual, grief, learning disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, parenting, personality disorders, professional counseling and psychotherapy, psychiatry, psychopathy, PTSD, rape, schizophrenia, sexual disorders, self-esteem, self-help, stress, suicide, violence.

[ HOME | A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z ]

 | What's new | Search | Guestbook | Feedback | Add Your URL |

Burying Freud

[ Burying Freud Homepage | Freud's Seduction Theory Homepage ]

I welcome Jeremy Holmes' description of the "new" psychoanalysis. He writes of a discipline which is trying to integrate classical psychoanalysis with contemporary psychological science. All well and good. But this new theory does not seem to be part of psychoanalytic clinical practice, at least not here in New York City. I attend conferences given by the local major institutes on a regular basis. The topics presented and the discussions give me the impression that nothing has changed since 1955. The very same topics, the very same language, and the very same people! (I see almost no young people at these meetings). Thus, I doubt that Holmes is correct in presenting this "new" psychoanalysis as being representative of what most psychoanalysts believe. It seems to me that he is describing a small minority view of psychoanalysis, an enlightened view to be sure, but one which, as yet, is without significant influence.

The change in psychoanalysis which is most visible is not Holmes' new model but rather a profound vulgarization of psychoanalysis. The egregious use of recovered memory (of repressed sexual abuse) therapy by psychoanalysts has become prominent. This discredited work is only used by a minority of N.Y. psychoanalysts, but they get a lot of publicity, and no one in the psychoanalytic world is challenging them. Sadly, the clinical practice of psychoanalysis seems to be going in a quite different direction than that of Holmes' psychoanalytic theorists. The practice in too many cases is moving away from psychological science and improved therapy techniques and toward new age mumbo-jumbo, political cant, and the destructive therapy of false memory creation.

Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D
Brooklyn, New York

 


human-nature.com
Ian Pitchford and Robert M. Young - Last updated: 28 May, 2005 02:29 PM

US -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.com logo

UK -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.co.uk logo

 | Human Nature | The Human Nature Daily Review | Psychiatry Research Online |

Burying Freud

[ Burying Freud Homepage | Freud's Seduction Theory Homepage ]

I welcome Jeremy Holmes' description of the "new" psychoanalysis. He writes of a discipline which is trying to integrate classical psychoanalysis with contemporary psychological science. All well and good. But this new theory does not seem to be part of psychoanalytic clinical practice, at least not here in New York City. I attend conferences given by the local major institutes on a regular basis. The topics presented and the discussions give me the impression that nothing has changed since 1955. The very same topics, the very same language, and the very same people! (I see almost no young people at these meetings). Thus, I doubt that Holmes is correct in presenting this "new" psychoanalysis as being representative of what most psychoanalysts believe. It seems to me that he is describing a small minority view of psychoanalysis, an enlightened view to be sure, but one which, as yet, is without significant influence.

The change in psychoanalysis which is most visible is not Holmes' new model but rather a profound vulgarization of psychoanalysis. The egregious use of recovered memory (of repressed sexual abuse) therapy by psychoanalysts has become prominent. This discredited work is only used by a minority of N.Y. psychoanalysts, but they get a lot of publicity, and no one in the psychoanalytic world is challenging them. Sadly, the clinical practice of psychoanalysis seems to be going in a quite different direction than that of Holmes' psychoanalytic theorists. The practice in too many cases is moving away from psychological science and improved therapy techniques and toward new age mumbo-jumbo, political cant, and the destructive therapy of false memory creation.

Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D
Brooklyn, New York

 


human-nature.com
Ian Pitchford and Robert M. Young - Last updated: 28 May, 2005 02:29 PM

US -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.com logo

UK -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.co.uk logo

 | Human Nature | The Human Nature Daily Review | Psychiatry Research Online |