PAGE 3

The Sociocultural perspective regards mental illness as the result of social, economic, and cultural factors. Evidence for this view comes from research that has demonstrated an increased risk of mental illness among people living in poverty. In addition, the incidence of mental illness rises in times of high unemployment. The shift in the world population from rural areas to cities - with their crowding, noise, pollution, decay, and social isolation - and, has also, been implicated in causing relatively high rates of mental illness. Furthermore, rapid social change, which has particularly affected indigenous peoples throughout the world, brings about high rates of suicide and alcoholism. Refugees and victims of social disasters - warfare, displacement, genocide, violence - have a higher risk of mental illness, especially depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder.The difficulty that the patient’s endeavouring encounter through his engaging frustrations is the product through which is called ‘delusion’: Delusion itself is a false belief which is firmly held by a person even though other people recognize the belief as obviously untrue. For example, a person who truly believes he is Napoleon Bonaparte is delusional. Religious beliefs or popular conceptions, such as the belief that people have been abducted by aliens, are not delusions because they are widely held beliefs. Delusions are a type of psychotic symptom that indicate a person has lost contact with reality.
There are many different types of delusions. A person with a paranoid delusion believes that others - such as the local police, or the best of friends - are trying to harm or plot against him. A person with a delusion of reference believes that events or people refer specifically to him or her when they do not. For example, a woman with schizophrenia may believe that a television news broadcaster is talking personally to her rather than to the entire viewing audience. A grandiose delusion is a belief that one is extremely famous or that one has special powers, such as the ability to magically heal people.
A delusion of control is a belief that others are able to control one’s thoughts, feelings, or actions. For example, a man with this type of delusion may believe that someone has implanted a microchip in his brain that enables other people to control his thoughts. A somatic delusion is a belief that something is wrong with one’s body - for example, that one’s brain is rotting away - even though no medical evidence supports this belief. A person with an erotic delusion believes that someone is in love with him or her despite a lack of evidence for this belief. In a delusion of jealousy, a person believes that his or her spouse or lover is unfaithful despite evidence to the contrary.
Delusional disorder is a relatively uncommon mental illness characterized by delusions. People with this disorder have one or more delusions that persist for at least one month. In addition, they do not suffer from other symptoms of schizophrenia, such as disorganized speech and bizarre behaviour. Usually their delusions are less bizarre than those that occur in schizophrenia and seem merely odd or unsupported by facts. Examples of nonbizarre delusions include beliefs that one is being followed, loved by someone famous, or deceived by one’s spouse. Because delusional disorder is relatively rare, little research has systematically examined its treatment. However, doctors most often use Antipsychotic drugs (also called neuroleptics) to treat this disorder. These drugs help reduce or eliminate delusions, hallucinations, and other psychotic symptoms.
In spite of his narcissistic retreat, every schizophrenic has some underlying notion of the unreality and loneliness of his substitute delusionary world. He longs for human contact and understanding, yet is afraid to admit of himself, or his therapist for fear of further frustration.
That is why the patient may take weeks and months to test the analyst before being willing to accept him, however, once he has accepted him. His dependence on the analyst is greater and he is more sensitive about it than is the psychoneurotic because of the schizophrenic’s deeply rooted insecurity, the narcissistic seemingly self-righteous attitude is but a defence.
Whenever the analyst fails the patient from reasons to be discussed later - one cannot at times avoid failing one’s schizophrenic patients - it will be severe disappointment and a repetition of the chain of frustrations the schizophrenic has previously endured.
The instinctually primitive part of the schizophrenic’s mind that does not discriminate between himself and the environment, it may mean the withdrawal of the impersonal supporting forces of his infancy. Severe anxiety will follow this vital deprivation.
In that of his personal relationship with the analyst it means that the therapist seduced the patient to use him as a bridge over which he might possibly be led from the utter loneliness of his own world to reality and human warmth, only to have him discover that this bridge is not reliable. if so, he will respond helplessly with an outburst of hostility or with renewed withdrawal as may be seen most impressively in catatonic stupor.
The symptoms of mental illness can be very distressing. People who develop schizophrenia may hear voices inside their head that say nasty things about them or command them to act in strange or unpredictable ways. Or they may be paralysed by paranoia—the deep conviction that everyone, including their closest family members, wants to injure or destroy them. People with major depression may feel that nothing brings pleasure and that life is so dreary and unhappy that it is better to be dead. People with panic disorder may experience heart palpitations, rapid breathing, and anxiety so extreme that they may not be able to leave home. People whom experience episodes of mania may engage in reckless sexual behaviour or may spend money indiscriminately, acts that later cause them to feel guilt, shame, and desperation.
Other mental illnesses, while not always debilitating, create certain problems in living. People with personality disorders may experience loneliness and isolation because their personality style interferes with social relations. People with an eating disorder may become so preoccupied with their weight and appearance that they force themselves to vomit or refuse to eat. Individuals who develop post-traumatic stress disorder may become angry easily, experience disturbing memories, and have trouble concentrating.
Experiences of mental illness often interact differently but depends on one’s culture or social group, sometimes greatly so. For example, in most of the non-Western world, people with depression complain principally of physical ailments, such as lack of energy, poor sleep, loss of appetite, and various kinds of physical pain. And factually substantiated in North America these complaints are commonplace. But in the United States and other Western societies, depressed people and mental health professionals who treat them tend to emphasize psychological problems, such as feelings of sadness, worthlessness, and despair. The experience of schizophrenia also differs by culture. In India, one-third of the new cases of schizophrenia involve catatonia, a behavioural condition in which a person maintains a bizarre statue like pose for hours or days. This condition is rare in Europe and North America.
With appropriate treatment, most people can recover from mental illness and return to normal life. Even those with persistent, long-term mental illnesses can usually learn to manage their symptoms and live productive lives.
By a variety of symptoms, including loss of contact with reality, bizarre behaviour, disorganized thinking and speech, decreased emotional expressiveness, and social withdrawal. Usually only some of these symptoms occur in any one person. The term schizophrenia comes from Greek words meaning ‘split mind.’ However, contrary to common belief, schizophrenia does not refer to a person with a split personality or multiple personality. For a description of a mental illness in which a person has multiple personalities. To observers, schizophrenia may seem or appear for being as some sorted kind of madness or a manufacturing insanity.
Perhaps more than any other mental illness, schizophrenia has a debilitating effect on the lives of the people who suffer from it. A person with schizophrenia may have difficulty telling the difference between real and unreal experiences, logical and illogical thoughts, or appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. Schizophrenia seriously impairs a person’s ability to work, go to school, enjoy relationships with others, or take care of oneself. In addition, people with schizophrenia frequently require hospitalization because they pose a danger to themselves. About 10 percent of people with schizophrenia commit suicide, and many others attempt suicide. Once people develop schizophrenia, they usually suffer from the illness for the rest of their lives. Although there is no cure, treatment can help many people with schizophrenia lead productive lives.
A variety of symptoms characterize schizophrenia. The most prominent include symptoms of psychosis—such as delusions and hallucinations - as well as bizarre behaviour, strange movements, and disorganized thinking and speech. Many people with schizophrenia do not recognize that their mental functioning is disturbed.
Research suggests that the genes one inherits strongly influence one’s risk of developing schizophrenia. Studies of families have shown that the more close one is related to someone with schizophrenia, the greater the risk one has of developing the illness. For example, the children of one parent with schizophrenia have about a 13 percent chance of developing the illness, and children of two parents with schizophrenia have about a 46 percent chance of eventually developing schizophrenia. This increased risk occurs even when such children are adopted and raised by mentally healthy parents. In comparison, children in the general population have only about a 1 percent chance of developing schizophrenia.
Some evidence suggests that schizophrenia may result from an imbalance of chemicals in the brain called neurotransmitters. These chemicals enable neurons (brain cells) to communicate with each other. Some scientists suggest that schizophrenia results from excess activity of the neurotransmitter dopamine in certain parts of the brain or from an abnormal sensitivity to dopamine. Support for this hypothesis comes from Antipsychotic drugs, which reduce psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia by blocking brain receptors for dopamine. In addition, amphetamines, which increase dopamine activity, intensify psychotic symptoms in people with schizophrenia. Despite these findings, many experts believe that excess dopamine activity alone cannot account for schizophrenia. Other neurotransmitters, such as serotonin and norepinephrine, may play important roles as well.
Although scientists favour a biological cause of schizophrenia, stress in the environment may affect the onset and course of the illness. Stressful life circumstances - such as maturing in age and character as for living in poverty, the death of a loved one, an important change in jobs or relationships, or chronic tension and hostility at home - can increase the chances of schizophrenia in a person biologically predisposed to the disease. In addition, stressful events can trigger a relapse of symptoms in a person who already has the illness. Individuals who have effective skills for managing stress may be less susceptible to its negative effects. Psychological and social rehabilitation can help patients develop more effective skills for dealing with stress.
Although there is no cure for schizophrenia, effective treatment exists that can improve the long-term course of the illness. With many years of treatment and rehabilitation, significant numbers of people with schizophrenia experience partial or full remission of their symptoms.
Treatment of schizophrenia usually involves a combination of medication, rehabilitation, and treatment of other problems the person may have. Antipsychotic drugs (also called neuroleptics) are the most frequently used medications for treatment of schizophrenia. Psychological and social rehabilitation programs may help people with schizophrenia function in the community and reduce stress related to their symptoms. Treatment of secondary problems, such as substance abuse and infectious diseases, is also an important part of an overall treatment program.
Antipsychotic medications, developed in the mid-1950s, can dramatically improve the quality of life for people with schizophrenia. The drugs reduce or eliminate psychotic symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions. The medications can also help prevent these symptoms from returning. Common Antipsychotic drugs include risperidone (Risperdal), olanzapine (Zyprexa), clozapine (Clozaril), quetiapine (Seroquel), haloperidol (Haldol), thioridazine (Mellaril), chlorpromazine (Thorazine), fluphenazine (Prolixin), and trifluoperazine (Stelazine). People with schizophrenia usually must take medication for the rest of their lives to control psychotic symptoms. Antipsychotic medications appear to be less effective at treating other symptoms of schizophrenia, such as social withdrawal and apathy.
Because many patients with schizophrenia continue to experience difficulties despite taking medication, psychological and social rehabilitation is often necessary. A variety of methods can be effective. Social skills training helps people with schizophrenia learn specific behaviours for functioning in society, such as making friends, purchasing items at a store, or initiating conversations. Behavioural training methods can also help them learn self-care skills such as personal hygiene, money management, and proper nutrition. In addition, cognitive-behavioural therapy, a type of psychotherapy, can help reduce persistent symptoms such as hallucinations, delusions, and social withdrawal.
Some people with schizophrenia are vulnerable to frequent crises because they do not regularly go to mental health centres to receive the treatment they need. These individuals often relapse and face rehospitalization. To ensure that such patients take their medication and receive appropriate psychological and social rehabilitation, assertive community treatment (ACT) programs have been developed that deliver treatment to patients in natural settings, such as in their homes, in restaurants, or on the street.
People with schizophrenia often have other medical problems, so an effective treatment program must attend to these as well. One of the most generally shared in or participated in things conforming to a type without noteworthy excellence or faults just as common a rule, by ordinary, frequent and ordinarily as an idea or expression deficient in originality or freshness, yet, only of its exchanging the commonplace of the common associated problems is vehemently and usually coarsely expressed condemnation or disapproved, as the interpretative category of an unequalled vocabulary is itself a genuine abuse. Successful treatment of substance abuse inpatients with schizophrenia requires careful coordination with their mental health care, so that the same clinicians are treating both disorders at the same time.
Several other psychiatric disorders are closely related to schizophrenia. In schizoaffective disorder, a person shows symptoms of schizophrenia combined with either mania or severe depression. Schizophreniform disorder refers to an illness in which a person experiences schizophrenic symptoms for more than one month but fewer than six months. In schizotypal personality disorder, a person engages in odd thinking, speech, and behaviour, but usually does not lose contact with reality. Sometimes mental health professionals refer to these disorders together as schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.
Severe mental illnesses virtually alters a person’s life dramatically. People with severe mental illnesses experience disturbing symptoms that can cause of such difficulties and holding to a job, or go to school, relate to others, or cope with ordinary life demands. Some individuals require hospitalization because they become unable to care for themselves or because they are at risk of committing suicide.
The symptoms of mental illness can be very distressing. People who develop schizophrenia may hear voices inside their head that say nasty things about them or command them to act in strange or unpredictable ways. Or they may be paralysed by paranoia - the deep conviction that everyone, including their closest family members, wants to injure or destroy them. People with major depression may feel that nothing brings pleasure and that life is so dreary and unhappy that it is better to be dead. People with panic disorder may experience heart palpitations, rapid breathing, and anxiety so extreme that they may not be able to leave home. People whom experience episodes of mania may engage in reckless sexual behaviour or may spend money indiscriminately, acts that later cause them to feel guilt, shame, and desperation.
Other mental illnesses, while not always debilitating, create certain problems in living. People with personality disorders may experience loneliness and isolation or complete alienation, because their personality style interferes with social relations. People with an eating disorder may become so preoccupied with their weight and appearance that they force themselves to vomit or refuse to eat. Individuals who develop post-traumatic stress disorder may become angry easily, experience disturbing memories, and have trouble concentrating.
Even so, the schizophrenic responds to altercations in the analyst’s defections and understanding by corresponding stormy and dramatic changes from love to hatred, from willingness to leave his delusional world to resistance and renewed withdrawal.
Why is it inevitable that the psychoanalyst disappoint his schizophrenic patient time and again?
The schizophrenic withdraws from painful reality and retires to what resembles the early speechless phase of development where consciousness is not yet crystalized. As the expression of his feelings is not hindered by the convention that he has eliminated, as his thinking, feelings, behaviour and speech - when present - obey the working rules of the archaic unconscious. His thinking is magical and does not follow logical rules. It does not admit to every ascribing subsistence in ‘no’, and likewise the no to ‘yes’: There is no recognition of space and time, I, you, and they, are interchangeable expression through which of symbols and often by movement and gestures rather than by words.
As the schizophrenic is suspicious, he will distrust the words of his analyst. He will interpret them and incidental gestures and attitudes of the analyst according to his own delusional experience. The analyst may not even be aware of these involuntary manifestations of his attitudes, yet they mean much to the hypersensitive schizophrenic who uses them as a means of orienting himself to the therapist‘s personality and intentions toward him.
In other words, the schizophrenic patient and the therapist are people living in different worlds and no different levels of personal development with different means of expressing and of orienting themselves. We know little about the language of the unconscious that belongs to the schizophrenic, and our access to it is blocked by the very process of our own adjustment to a world the schizophrenic has relinquished, so, we should not be surprised that errors and misunderstandings occur when we under take to communicate and strive for a rapport with him.
Another source of the schizophrenic’s disappointment arises form which the analyser accepts and does not interfere with the behaviour of the schizophrenic, his attitude may lead the patient to expect that the analyst will assist in carrying out all the patient’s wishes, even though they may not seem to be in his interest to the analyser‘s and the hospital’s in their relationship to society. This attitude of acceptance so different from the patient’s previous experiences readily fosters the anticipation that the analyst will try to carry out the patient’s suggestion and take his part, even against conventional society with which it should occasionally arise. Frequently it will be wise for the analyst to agree with the patient‘s wish to remain unbattled and untidy until he is ready to talk about the reasons for his behaviour or to change spontaneously. At other times, he will unfortunately be unable to take the patient’s part without being able to make the patient understand and accept the reasons for the analyst’s position.
If the analyst is not able to accept the possibility of misunderstanding the reaction of the schizophrenic patient and in turn of being misunderstood by him, it may escape from his security with his patient.
That is to say, that, among other things, the schizophrenic, once he accepts the analyst’s insecurity. being helpless and open to himself - in spite of his pretended grandiose isolation - he will feel utterly defeated by the insecurity of his would-be helper. Such disappointment may furnish reasons for outbursts of hatred and are comparable to the negative transference reactions of psychoneurosis, yet more intense than these, since they are not limited by the restrictions of the actual world - that is, it exists in or based on fact, its only problem is a sure-enough externalization for which things are existing in the act of being external in something that has existence, ss if it were an actualization as received in the obtainable enactment for being externalized, such that its problem of in some actual life that proves obtainable achieved, in that of doing something that has an existence for having absolute actuality.
This establishes that the faculties ascertained to the schizophrenics capabilities of developing strong relationships of love and hatred toward the analyst. After all, one could not be so hostile if it were not for the background of a very close relationship. In addition, the schizophrenic develops transference reactions on the narrower sense which he can differentiate from the actual interpersonal relationship. For which the schizophrenic’s emotional reactions toward the analyst have to be met with extreme care and caution. The love which the sensitive schizophrenic feels as he first emerges, and his cautions acceptance of the analyst’s warmth of interest are really most delicate and tender things. If the analyst deals with the transference reactions of a psychoneurotic is bad enough, though as a reparable rule, but if he fails with a schizophrenic in meeting positive feelings by pointing it out for instance before the patient indicates that he is ready to discuss it, he may easily freeze to death what has just begun to grow and so destroy any further possibility of therapy.
Some analysts may feel that the atmosphere of complete acceptance and of strict avoidance of any arbitrary denials which we recommend as a basic rule for the treatment of schizophrenics may not avoid our wish to guide of reacceptance of reality, nevertheless, Freud says that every science and therapy which accepts his teachings about unconscious, about transference and resistance and about infantile sexuality, may be called psychoanalysis. According in this definition we believe we are practising psychoanalysis with our schizophrenic patients.
Whether we call it, analysis or not, it is clear that successful treatment does not depend on technical rules of any special psychiatric school but rather on the basic attitude of individual therapist toward psychologic persons. If he meets them as strangle creatures of another world whose productions are not comprehensible to ‘normal’ beings, he cannot treat them, if he realizes, however, that the difference between himself and the psychologic is only of degree, and not of kind, he will know better how to meet him. He will not be able to identify himself sufficiently with the patient to understand and accept his emotional reactions without becoming involved in them.
Although process philosophy is as old as the 6th-century Bc Greek philosopher, Heraclitus, renewed interest in it was stimulated in the 19th century by the theory of evolution. Key figures in the development of modern process philosophy were the British philosophers Herbert Spencer, Samuel Alexander, and Alfred North Whitehead, the American philosophers Charles S. Peirce and William James, and the French philosophers Henri Bergson and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Whitehead's Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (1929) is generally considered the most important systematic expression of process philosophy.
Contemporary theology has been strongly influenced by process philosophy. The American theologian Charles Hartshorne, for instance, rather than interpreting God as an unchanging absolute, emphasizes God's sensitive and caring relationship with the world. A personal God enters into relationships in such a way that he is affected by the relationships, and to be affected by relationships is to change. So too is in the process of growth and development. Important contributions to process theology have also been made by such theologians as William Temple, Daniel Day Williams, Schubert Ogden, and John Cobb, Jr.
The differences in the forms of dissociable behaviour are important for many reasons. At present, they are significant to us because of the various ways in which the transference is established in these two types, we know that with a normal child the transference takes place of itself through the kindly efforts of the responsible adult. The teacher in his attitude repeats the situations long familiarly to the child, and thereby evokes a parental relationship. He does not maintain this relationship at the same level, but continually deepens it as long as he is the parental substitute.
When a neurotic child with symptoms of delinquency comes into the institution, the tendencies to transfer his attitude toward his parents to the persons in authority are immediately noticeable. The worker will adopt the same attitude toward the dissociable child as to the normal child, and bring him into positive transference, if he acts toward him in such a way as to prevent a repetition with the worker of the situation with the parents that led to the conflict. In psychoanalysis, on the other hand, it is of greatest importance to let this situation repeat itself. In a sense the worker becomes the father or the mother, but still not wholly so, he represents their claims, but in the right moment he must let the dissociable child know that he has insight into his difficulties and that he will not interpret the behaviour in the same way as do the parents. He will respond to the child’s feeling of a need for punishment, but he will not completely satisfy it.
He will conduct in himself be entirely differently in the case of the child who in open conflict with society. In this instance he must take the child’s part, be in agreement with his behaviour, and in the severest cases even give the child to understand that in his place he would behave just the same way. The guilt feelings found so clearly in the neurotic cases with dissociable behaviour are present in these cases also. These feelings do not arise, however, from the dissociable ego, but have another source.
Why does the educator conduct himself differently in dealing with this second type? These children, too, he must draw into a positive transference to him, but what is applicable and appropriate for a normal or a neurotic child would achieve opposite results. Otherwise the worker would bring upon himself all the hate and aggression that the child bears toward society, thus leading the child into a negative instead of positive transference, and creating a situation in which the child is not amenable to training.
Nevertheless, what was said about psychoanalysis theory is only a bare outline, that much deeper study of the transference is necessary to anyone interested in re-educational work from the psychoanalytic point of view. The practical application of this theory is not easy, since we deal mostly with mixed types, such that the attitude of the counsellor cannot be as uniform as having enough verbal descriptions for evincing of individual forms of dissociated behaviour to enable us to offer detailed instructions about how to deal with them. At present our psychoanalytic knowledge is such that a correct procedure cannot be stated specifically for each and every dissociable individual.
The necessity for bringing the child into a good relationship to his mentor is of prime importance. The worker cannot leave this to chance, he must deliberately achieve it and he must face the fact thus no effective work is possible without it. It is important for him to grasp the psychic situation of the dissociable child in the very first contact he makes with him, because only this can be known in what attitude to adopt. There is a further difficulty in that the dissociable child takes pains to hide his real nature: He misrepresents himself and lies. This is to be taken for granted, it should not surprise or upset us. Dissociable children do not come to us of their own volition but are brought to us, very often with the threat, ‘You will soon find out what is going to happen to you.’ Generally parents resort our help only after every other means, including corporal punishment, have failed. To the child, we are only another form of punishment, an enemy against whom he must be on his guard, not a source of help to him. There is a great difference between this and the psychoanalytic situation, where the patient comes voluntarily for helping. To the dissociable child, we are a menace because we represent society, with which he is in conflict. He must protect himself against this terrible danger and be careful what he says in order not to give himself away. It is hard to make some of these delinquent children talk, remain unresponsive and stubborn. One thing they all have in common: They do not tell the truth. Some lie stupidly, pitiably, others, especially the older ones, show great skill and sophistication. The extremely submissive child, the ‘dandily’, the very jovial, or the exaggeratedly sincere, some especially hard to reach. This behaviour is so much to be expected that we are not surprised or disarmed by it, the inexperienced teacher or adviser is easily irritated, especially when the lies are transparent, but he must not let the child be aware of this. He must deal with the situation immediately without telling the child that he can see that coming through was warrantably attributive value about his attitudinal behaviours.
There is nothing remarkable in the behaviour of the dissociable, but it differs only quantitatively from normal behaviour. We all hide our real selves and use a great deal of psychic energy to mislead our neighbours. We masquerade more or less, according to necessity. Most of us learn in the nursery the necessity of presenting ourselves in accordance with the environmental demands, and thus we consciously or unconsciously build up a shell around ourselves. Anyone who has had experience with young children must have noticed how they immediately begin to dissimulate when a grown-up comes into the room. Most children succeed in behaving in the manner that they think is expected of them. Thus they lessen the danger to themselves and at the same time they are casting the permanent moulds of their mannerisms and their behaviour. How many parents really bother themselves about the inner life of their children? Is this mask necessarily for life? I do not know, but it often seems that the person on whom childhood experiences have forced the dissociable individual masquerades to a greater extent, and more consciously, then the normal. He is only drawing logical deductions from his unfortunate disagreeable authority? Why should he be sincere with those people who represent disagreeable authority? This is an unfair demand.
We must look further into the differences between the situation of social retraining and the analytic situation. The analyst expects to meet in his patient unconscious remittances that prevent him from being honest or make him silent: But the treatment is in vain when the patient lies persistently. Those who work with dissociable children expect to be lied to. To send this child away because he lies are only giving in to him. We must wait and hope to penetrate this mask that covers the really psychic situation. In the institution it does not matter if this is not achieved immediately, it means merely that the establishment of the transference is postponed. In the clinic, however, we must work more quickly. Taking with the patient does not always suffice, and we must introduce other remedial measures. Generally, we see the delinquent child, only, in at least as infrequent to a smattering of times, but we are forced to take some steps after the first few interviews, to formulate some tentative conception of the difficulty and to establish a positive transference as quickly as possible. This means we must get at least a peep behind the mask. If the child is not put in an institution, he remains in the old situation under the same influences that caused the trouble. In such cases we wish to establish the transference as quickly as possible, to intensify the child`s positive feelings for us that are aroused while the child is with us, and to bring them rapidly to such a pitch that they can no longer be easily disturbed by the old influences. To carry on such work successfully presupposes a long experience.
Let us now, infringe upon our theoretical concerns and immediate considerations and see how the analyst and the patient seek to grasp upon a try to solve situational thoughts for which the transference, and, moreover, its mask on which can be understood that feelings and a better understanding the differentiation that intentionality that allies with others and exclusively its need to achieve to some end.
Even so, there are few current problems concerning the problem of transference that Freud did not recognize either implicitly or explicitly in the development of the theoretical and clinical framework. For all essential purposes, moreover, his formulations, in spite of certain shifts in emphasis, remain integral to contemporary psychoanalytic theory and practice. Recent developments mainly concern the impact of an ego-psychological approach, the significance of object relations, both current and infantile, external and internal, the role of aggression in mental life, and the part played by regression and the repetition compulsion in the transference. Nevertheless, analysis of the infantile Oedipal situation in the setting of a genuine transference neurosis is still considered as a primary goal of psychoanalytic procedure.
Originally, transference was ascribed to displacement on the analyst of repressed wishes and fantasies derived from early childhood. The transference neurosis was viewed as a compromise formulation similar to dreams and other neurotic symptoms. Resistance, defined as the clinical manifestation of repression, could be diminished or abolished by interpretation mainly directed toward the content of the repressed. Transference resistance, both positive and negative, was inscribed to the threatened emergence of repressed unconscious material in the analytic situation. Presently, as with the development of a structural approach, the superego had been portrayed as the heir to the genital Oedipal situation, also was the recognition as playing a leading role in the transference situation. The analysis was subsequently viewed not only as the object by displacement of infantile incestuous fantasies, but also as the substitute by projection for the prohibiting parental figures that had been internalized as the definitive superego. The effect of transference interpretation in mitigating undue severity of the superego has, therefore, been emphasized in many discussions of the concept of transference.
Certain expansions in the structural approach related increasingly to the recognition of the role that had earlier objective relations, in the development of the superego. This had affected the current concepts of transference, in that this connection, the significance of the analytic situation as a repetition of the early mother-child relationship has been stressed from different points for viewing to such equally important developments related to Freud’s revised concept of anxiety that can only lead to theoretical developments in the field of ego psychology. However, this brought about their related clinical changes in the work of many analysts. As a result, attention was no longer the main attraction that had focussed on the content of the unconscious. In addition, increasing importance was attributed to the defence processes by means of which the anxiety that would be engendered if repression and other related mechanisms were broken down, was avoided in the analytic situation. Differences in the interpretation of the role of the analyst and the nature of transference developed from emphasis, on the one hand, on the importance of early object relations, and on the other, from primary attention to the role of the ego and its defences. These defences first emerged clearly in discussion of the technique of child analysis, in which Melanie Klein and Anna Freud, the pioneers in the fields of thought as playing the leading roles.
From a theoretical point of view, discussions foreshadowing the problems that face us today as it was presented in 1934 in a well-known paper by Richard Sterba and James Strachey, and further elaborated at the Marienbad Symposium at which Edward Bibring made an important contribution. The importance of identification with, or introjection of the analyst in the transference situation of identification with, or introjection of, the analysts in the transference situation were clearly indicated. The therapeutic results were attributed to the effect of this process In mitigating the need for pathological defences. Strachey, however, considerably influenced by the work of Melanie Klein, regarded transference as essentially a projection onto the analyst of the patient’s own superego. The therapeutic process was attributed to subsequent introjection of a modified superego as a result of ‘mutative’ transference. Sterba and Bibring, on the other hand, intimately involved with development of the ego-psychological approach, reemphasized the central role of the ego, postulating a therapeutic split and identification with the analyst as an essential feature of transference. To some extent, this difference of opinion may be regarded as semantic. If the superego is explicitly defined as the heir of the genital Oedipus conflict, then earlier intra-systematic conflicts within the ego, although they may be related retrospectively to the definite superego, much, nevertheless, are defined as contained within the ego. Later divisions within the ego of the type indicated by Sterba and very much expanded by Edward Bibring in his concept of therapeutic alliance between the analyst and the healthy part of the patient’s ego, must also be excluded from superego significance. In contrast, those whom attribute pregenital intra-systemic conflicts within the ego primarily to the introjection of objects, consider that the resultant state of internal conflict appears like the dynamic idea that something conveys to the mind as having an endless meaning attached to the coherence of the therapeutic situation and seen in the later conflicts between ego and superego. They, therefore, believe that these structures developed simultaneously and suggest that no sharp distinction should be made between pre-oedipal, oedipal, and post-oedipal superego.
The differences of opinion, however, was not entirely verbal, since those whom attribute superego formations to the early months of life tend to attribute significantly too early object relation that differs from the conception of those who stress control and, neutralization of instinctual energy as primary functions of the ego. This theoretical difference necessarily implies some disagreement as how the dynamic situation both in childhood and in adult life, inevitably reflected in the concept of transference and in hypotheses as to the hidden nature of the therapeutic process. From one point of view, the role of the ego is central and crucial at every phase of analysis. A differentiation is made between transference as therapeutic alliance and the transference neurosis, which, on the whole, is considered a manifestation of resistance. Effective analysis depends on a sound and stable therapeutic alliance, a prerequisite for which is the existence, before analysis, of a degree of mature superego functions, the absence of which in certain severely disturbed patients and in young children may preclude traditional psychoanalytic procedure. Whenever indicated, interpretation’s manifestations, which means, in effect, that the transference must be analyzed. The process of analysis, however, is not exclusively ascribed to transference interpretation. Other interpretations of unconscious material, whether related to defence or to early fantasies, will be equally effective provided they are accurately timed and provide a satisfactory therapeutic alliance has been made. Those, in contrast, whom stress the importance of early object relations emphasizes the crucial role of transference as an object relationship, distorted though this may be of a variety of defences against primitively unresolved conflicts. The central role of the ego, both in the early stages of development and in the analytic process, are definitely accepted. The hidden nature of the ego is, however, considered at all times to be determined by its external and internal objects. Therapeutic process whose changes in ego function results, therefore, primarily from a change in object relations though interpretation of the transference situation, finds of less differentiation as made between transference as for being the therapeutic alliance and transference neurosis as a manifestation of resistance. Therapeutically, onward motion depends upon the matter-of-fact designations of the transference interpretation. Other interpretations, although at times, are not, in general, considered an essential feature of the analytic process. From this point of view, the preanalytic maturity of the patient’s ego is not stressed as considered potentially suitable for traditional psychoanalytic procedure.
These differences in theoretical orientation are not only reflected in the approach to children and disturbed patients. They may also be recognized in significant variations of technique in respect to all clinical groups, which inevitably affect the opening phases, understanding of the inevitable regressive features of the transference neurosis, and handling of the germinal phases of analysis. By its emphasis as drawn on or upon the main problems, and, by contrast, rather than similarity, our efforts will be to avoid to detailed discussions of controversial theory regarding the hidden nature of early ego development by a somewhat arbitrary differentiation between those who relate ego analysis to the analysis of defences and those who stress the primary significance of object relations both in the transference, and in the development and definitive structure of the ego. Needless to say, this involves some oversimplification, where I hope that it may, at the same time, clarify certain important issues. To take, on or upon the analysis of patients we are generally agreeing to be suitable for classical analytic procedure, the transference neurosis. Those which emphasis the role of the ego and the analysis of defences, not only maintain Freud’s conviction that analysis should proceed from surface to depth, but also consider that early material in the analytic situation derives, that, in general, from defensive processes rather than from displacement onto the analyst of early instinctual fantasies. Deep transference interpretation in the early instinctual fantasies. Deep transference interpretation in the early phases of analysis will, therefore, rather be meaningless to the patient since its unconscious significance is so inaccessible, or, if the defences are precarious, will lead to premature and possibly intolerable anxiety. Premature interpretation of the equally unconscious automatic defensive processes by means of which instinctual fantasy kept unconscious is also ineffective and undesirable. There are, nonetheless, differences of opinion within this group, as to how far analysis of defence can be separated from analysis of content. Waelder, for example, has stressed the impossibility of such separation. Fenichel, however, considered that at least theoretical separation should be made and indicated that, as far as possible, analysis of defence should precede analysis of unconscious fantasy. It is, nevertheless, generally agreed that the transference neurosis develops, as a rule after ego defences have been sufficiently undermined to mobilize previously hidden instinctual conflict. During both the early stages of analysis, and at frequent points after development of the transference neurosis, defences against the transference will become a main feature of the analytic situation.
In considering, briefly, the terminal phases of analysis, many unresolved problems concerning the goal of the therapy and definition of a completed psychoanalysis must be kept in mind. Distinction must also be made between the technical problems of the terminal phase and evaluation of transference after the analysis has been terminated, there is widespread agreement as to the frequent revival in the terminal phases of primitive transference manifestations apparently resolved during the early phases of primitive transference manifestation, apparently resolved during the early phase of analysis has been terminated. Balint, and those who accept Ferenczi’s concept of primary passive love, suggest that some gratification of primitive passive needs may be essential for successful termination. To Klein, the terminal phases of analysis also represent a repetition of important features of the early mother-child relationship. According to her point of view, this period represents, in essence, a revival of the early weaning situation. Completion depends on a mastery of early depressive struggles culminating in successful introjection of the analysis as a good object. Although, in this connection, emphasis differs considerably, it should be noted that those who stress the importance of identification with the analyst as a basis for therapeutic alliance, also accept the inevitability of some permanent modifications of a similar nature. Those, however, who make a definite differentiation between transference of the transference neurosis as a main prerequisite for successful termination. The identification based on therapeutic alliance must be interpreted and understood, particularly with reference to the reality aspects of the analyst’s personality. In spite, therefore, of significant important differences there are, as already indicated in connection with the earlier papers of Sterba and Strachey, important points of agreement in respect to the goal of psychoanalysis.
The differences as having been to consider, as the end-point of departures, are initially in resemblance to our current problems of transference. So far, however, discussion has been limited to variations within the framework of a traditional technique. We must consider problems related to overt modifications, so as the essential expanding context of use between variations introduced in respect to certain clinical conditions. Often as a preliminary to classical psychoanalysis, and modifications based on changes on basic approach that lead to significant alterations with regard both to the method and to the aim of therapy. It is generally agreed that some neurosis, borderline patients and the psychosis. The nature and meaning of such changes are, however, viewed differently according to the relative emphasis placed on the ego and its defences, on underlying unconscious conflicts, and on the significance and handling of regression in the therapeutic situation.
In ‘Analysis Terminable and Interminable’, Freud suggested that certainly inaccessible to psychoanalytic procedure. Hartmann has suggested that in addition to these primary attributes, other ego characteristics, originally develop for defensive purposes, and the related neutralized instinctual energy at the disposal of the ego, may be relatively or absolutely divorced from unconscious fantasy. This not only explains the relative inefficacy of early transference interpretation, but also hints of possible limitations in the potentialities of analysis attributable to secondary autonomy of the ego that is considered to be relatively irreversible. In certain cases, moreover, it is suggested that analysis of precarious or seriously pathological defences - particularly those concerned of aggressive impulses - may be not only ineffective, but dangerous. The relative failure of ego development in such cases not only precludes the development of a genuine therapeutic alliance, but also raises the risk of a serious regressive, often predominantly hostile transference situation. In certain cases, therefore, preliminary period of psychotherapy is recommended in order to explore the capacities of the patient to tolerate traditional psychoanalysis. In others, as Robert Knight in his paper on borderline states, and as many analysts’ working with psychotic patients have suggested, psychoanalytic procedure is not considered applicable. Instead, a therapeutic approach based on analytic understanding that, in essence, utilizes an essentially implicit positive transference as a means of reinforcing, rather than analysing the precarious defences of the individual, is advocated. In contrast, Herbert Rosenfeld approached even severely disturbed psychotic patients with minimal modifications of psychoanalytic techniques. Only changes that the severity of the patient’s condition enforces are introduced. The dangers of regression in therapy are not emphasized since primitive fantasy is considered to be active under all circumstances. The most primitive period is viewed in terms of early object relations with special stress on prosecutory anxiety related to the death instinct. Interpretation of this primitive fantasy in the transference situation, is best offered the opportunity of strengthening the severity-threatened psychosis mainly to serve traumatic experiences, particularly of deprivation in early infancy. According to this point of view, profound regression offers an opportunity to fulfil, in the transference situation, primitive needs that had not been met at the appropriate level of development. Similar suggestions have been proposed by Margolin and others, in the concept of anaclitic treatment. Serious psychosomatic diseases, that approach the premise that the inevitable regression is shown by certain patients and should be utilized in therapy, as a means for gratifying, in their extremely permissive transference situation. Having distinctive or certain limits in the burdensome instant for demanding to that which has not been met in infancy, as this must, in the connection of being taken to understand that the gratifications recommended in the treatment of severely disturbed patients are determined by their conviction. Of these patients are incapable of developing transference as we understand it, in the connection with neurosis and must therefore be handled by a modified technique.
The popular opinions so far considered, however, much of them, as mine, differ in certain respects, however, all based on the fundamental premise that an essential difference between analysis and other methods of therapy depends on whether or not interpretation of transference is an integral feature of technical procedure. Results based on the effects of suggestions are to be avoided, as far as possible, whenever traditional technique is employed. This goal has, however, tp establish a point by appropriate objective means, that corroborated evidence that proved the need for better a state of being even more difficult to achieve than Freud expected when he first discerned the significance of symptomatic recovery based on positive transference. The importance of suggestion, even in the most strict analytic methods, has been repeatedly stressed by Edward Glover and others. Widespread and increasing emphasis as to the part played by the analyst’s personality in determining the nature of the individual transference also implies recognition of unavoidable suggestive tendencies in the therapeutic process. Many analysts today believe that the classical conception of analytic objectivity and anonymity cannot be maintained. Instead, thorough analysis of reality aspects of the therapist’s personality and point of view is advocated as an essential feature of transference analysis and an indispensable prerequisite for the dynamic changes already discussed in relation to the termination of analysis. It thus remains the ultimate goal of psychoanalyst’s whenever their theoretical orientation, to avoid, as far as is humanly possible, results based on the unrecognized or unanalysed action of suggestion, and to maintain, as a primary goal, the resolution of such results through consistent and careful interpretation.
There are, however, a number of therapists, both within and outside the field of psychoanalysis, who consider that the transference situation should not be handled only or mainly as a setting for interpretation even in the treatment or analysis of neurotic patients. Instead, they advocate utilization of the transference relationship for the manipulation of corrective emotional experience. The theoretical orientation of those utilizing this concept of transference may be closer to, or more distant form, a Freudian point of view according to the degree to which current relationships are seen as determined by past events. At one extreme, current aspects and cultural factors are considered of predominant importance, at the other, mental development is viewed in essentially Freudian terminology and modifications of technique are ascribed to inherent limitations of the analytic method rather than to essentially changed conceptions of the early phases of mental development. Of this group, Alexander is perhaps the best example. It is thirty years since, in his Salzburg paper, he indicated the tendency for patients to regress, even after apparently successful transference analysis of the oedipus situation to narcissistic dependent pregenital levels that prove stubborn and refractory to transference interpretation. In his more recent work, the role of regression in the transference situation has been increasingly stressed. The emergence and persistence of dependent, pregenital commands for something as or is if one’s right or due requirements are challenged in measuring moderations of a wide range of clinical conditions. It is argued, that its indications that the encouragement of a regressive transference situation is undesirable and therapeutically ineffective. The analyst, therefore, should when this threatens adopt a definite role explicitly differing from the behaviour of the parents in early childhood in order to bring about therapeutic results through a corrective emotional experience in the transference situation. This, it is suggested, will obviate the tendency to regression, thus curtailing the length of treatment and improving therapeutic results. Limitations of regressive manifestations by active steps modifying traditional analytic procedure in a variety of ways are also frequently indicated, according to this point of view.
Despite this general understanding on the centrality of transference and resistance in technique, in that, the analysis of transference is not pursued as systematically and comprehensively affirmed, however, it could be and should be. The relative privacy for which psychoanalytic work makes it impossible for one or of that of any-other, to skilfully improve upon the attemptive conceptual representation as comprehended of issues, its assumption to state this view as anything more that impressions, involving on that of what in the analysis of the transference and to states awareness in the number of reasons that an important aspect in the analysis of the transference of the transference, namely in the resistance, by the awareness of the transference is especially, and often adhering to the analytic procedures that interact among cultural inhibitors, but that will be distinguished as such, that its ranging manifold of distancing non-localities as founded of the analyst’s.
Some other connectively directed descriptions for stating this distinction between resistance and the awareness of transference and resistance to the resolution of transference is between implicit and indirect references to the transference and explicitly or directly referential to the transference. The interpretation of resistance to awareness of the transference is intended to make the implicit transference explicit. While the interpretation of resistance to the resolution of transference is intended to make the patient realize that the already explicit transference does indeed include a determinant from the past.
It is also important to distinguish between the general concept of an interpretation of resistance to the resolution of transference and a particular variety of such an interpretation, namely, a genetic transference interpretation - that is, an interpretation of how an attitude in the present is an inappropriate carry-over from the past. While there is a tendency among analysts to deal explicit references to the transference primarily among analyses to deal explicitly the references to the transference as primarily by a genetic transference interpretation, there are other ways of working toward a revolution of the transference. However, this argument does so implicate that not only is not enough emphasis being given to interpretation of the transference in the therapeutic attentions to the existing instant of here and now, that is, to the interpretation of implicit manifestations of the transference, but also that interpretations intended to resolve the transference as manifested in explicit references to the transference should be primarily of having independent reality in actuality within the here and now, rather than genetic transference interpretation.
Our course of study, explains that both interpretations of the transference in the here and now and genetic transference interpretations are valid and constitute a sequence. We presume that a resistance to the transference ultimately rests on the displacement onto the analysts of attitudes from the past.
Because Freud’s case histories focus a great deal more on the yield of analysis than on the details of the process, they are readily but perhaps incorrectly construed as emphasizing work outside the transference much more than work within the transference, and, even within the transference, emphasizing genetic transference interpretations much more than work with the transference in the here and now (Muslin and Gill, 1978). The example of Freud’s case reports may have played a role in what is to be considered as the common maldistribution of emphasis in these two respects - not enough on the transference and, within the transference, not enough on the here and now.
Transference interpretations in the here and now and genetic transference interpretations are, of course, exemplified in Freud’s writings and are in the repertoire of every analyst, but they are not distinguished sharply enough.
Both participants in the analytic situation are motivated to avoid these interactions. Flight away from the transference and to the past can be a relief to both the patient and the analyst.
These two different positions also find expression in the two different ways in which Freud speaks of the transference. In `Dynamics of Transference` he refers to the transference, on the one hand, as `the most powerful resistance to the treatment`(1912) but, on the other hand, as doing us the inestimable service of making the patient’s . . . , immediate impulses and manifests, when all is said and done, it is impossible to destroy anyone in absentia or in effigie (1912).
It can be agreed that his principal emphasis fails on the second position. He wrote once, in summary, ‘Thus our therapeutic work falls into two phases in the first, all the libido is forced from the symptoms into the transference and concentrated there, in the second, the struggle is waged around this new object and the libido is liberated from it`(1912).
The detailed demonstration that he advocated that the transference should be encouraged to expand as much as possible within the analytic situation lies in clarification that resistance is primarily expressed by repetition, and repetition takes place both within and outside the analytic situation, but that the analyst seeks to deal with it primarily within the analytic situation, that repetition can be not only in the motor sphere (acting) but also in the psychical sphere, and that the psychical sphere is not confined to remembering but includes the present, too.
Freud`s emphasis that the purpose of resistance is to prevent remembering can obscure his point that resistance shows itself primarily by repetition, whether inside or outside the analytic situation. `The greater the resistance, to a greater or higher degree of widely ranging differentiating comprehension, as do, the application whose attentions are extensively but will act out (repetition)replace remembering`. Similarly in `The Dynamics of Transference` Freud said that the main reason that the transference is so well suited to serve the resistance is that the unconscious implies does not want to be remembered . . . but endeavour to reproduce themselves . . . (1918), the transference is a resistance primarily insofar as it is a repetition.
The point can be restated in terms of the relation between transference and resistance. The resistance expresses itself in repetition, that is, in transference both inside and outside the analytic situation. To deal with the transference. Therefore, is equivalent to dealing with the resistance. Freud emphasized transference within the analytic situation so strongly that it has come to mean only repetition within the analytic situation, even though, conceptually speaking, repetition outside the analytic situation is transference too, and Freud once used the term that way. `We soon perceive that the transference is itself only a piece of repetition and that the repetition is a transference of the forgotten past not only onto the analyst but also onto all the other aspects of the current situation. We . . . find . . . the compulsion to repeat, which now replaces the impulsion to remember, not only in his personal attitude to his analyst but also in every other activity and relationship which may occupy his life at the time . . . (1914).
It is important to realize that the expansion of the repetition inside the analytic situation, whether or not in a reciprocal relationship to repetition outside the analytic situation, is the avenue to control the repetition: `The main instrument . . . for curbing the patients compulsion to repeat and for turning it into a motive for remembering lies in the handling of the transference. We render the compulsion harmless, and indeed useful, by giving it the right to assert itself in a definite field`(1914).
Kanzer has discussed this issue well in his paper on ‘The Motor Sphere of the Transference’ (1966). He writes of a ‘double-pronged stick-and-carrot’ technique by which the transference is fostered within the analytic situation and discouraged outside the analytic situation. The ‘stick’ is the principle of abstinence as exemplified in the admonition against making important decisions during treatment, and the ‘carrot’ is the opportunity afforded the transference to expand within the treatment, ‘in almost complete freedom’ as in a ‘playground’ (Freud, 1914). As Freud put it, ‘Provided only that the patient shows compliance enough to respect the necessary conditions of the analysis, we regularly succeed in giving all the symptoms of the illness a new transference meaning, and in replacing his ordinary neurosis by a ‘transference neurosis’ of which he can be cured by the therapeutic work’ (1914).
The reason it is desirable for the transference to be expressed within the treatment is that there, it ‘is at every point accessible to our intervention’ (1914). In a later statement he made the same point this way. `We have followed this new edition - the transference-neurosis - of the old disorder from its start, we have observed its origin and growth, and we are especially well able to find our way about in it since, as its object, we are situated at it’s very centre, (1917), it is not that the transference is forced into the treatment, but that it is spontaneously but implicitly present and is encouraged to expand there and become explicit
Freud emphasized acting in the transference so strongly that one can overlook the repetition in the transference, but does not of necessity for its enactment or recognition that gives validity to acts of a subordinate conformation as ratified in support of explicit authoritative permission. Repetition need not go as far as motor behaviour, it can also be expressed in attitudes, feelings, and intentions, and, indeed, the repetition often does take such form rather than motor action. The importance of making this clear is that Freud can be mistakenly read to mean that repetition in the psychical sphere can only mean remembering the past, is when he writes that the analyst as prepared for a perpetual struggle with his patient to keep in the psychical sphere all the impulses that the patient would like to direct into the motor sphere, and he celebrates it as a triumph for the treatment if he can bring it about that something the patient wishes to discharge in action are disposed if through the work of remembering (1914).
It is true that the analyst’s efforts are to convert acting in the motor sphere into awareness in the psychical sphere, but transference may be in the psychical sphere to begin with, even if disguised. The psychical sphere includes awareness in the transference as well as remembering.
One of the objections one hears, from both analysts and patient, to a heavy emphasis on interpretation of associations about the patients real life primarily in terms of the transference is that it means the analyst is disregarding the importance of what goes on in the patients real life. The criticism is not judicial. To emphasize the transference meaning is not to deny or belittle other meanings, but to focus on the one of several meanings of the content that is the most important for the analytic process, for the reasons of positing the addition for one coming to any falsifiable conclusion.
Another way in which interpretations of resistance to the transference can be, or at lease appear to the patient to be, a belittling of the importance of the patients outside life is to make the interpretation as though the outside behaviour is primarily an acting out of the transference. The patient may undertake some actions in the outside world as an expression of and resistance to the transference, that is, acting out. But the interpretation of associations about actions in the outside world as having implications for the transference needs mean only that the choice of outside action to figure in the associations is co-determined by the need to express a transference indirectly. It is because of the resistance to awareness of the transference that the transference to be disguised. When the disguise is unmasked by interpretation, it becomes clear that, despite the inevitable differences between the outside situation and the transference situation, the content is the same for the analysis of the necrosis that coincides (Freud wrote that the mastering of the transference neurosis only coincides with getting rid of the illness that was originally brought to the treatment (1917)).
The analytic situation itself fosters the development of attitudes with primary determinants in the past, i.e., transference. The analyst’s reserve provides the patient with few and equivocal cues. The purpose of the analytic situation fosters the development of strong emotional responses, and the very fact that the patient has a neurosis means, as Freud said, that’ . . . it is a perfectly normal and intelligible thing that the libidinal cathexis [we would now add negative feelings] of someone who is partly unsatisfied, a cathexes that are held ready in anticipation, should be directly as well to the figure of the analyst (1912).
While the analytic setup itself fosters the expansion of the transference within the analytic situation, the interpretation of resistance to the awareness of transference will further this expansion.
There are substantive reasons that resistance places part of both patient and analyst to awareness of the transference. On the patient’s part, this is because of the difficulty in recognizing erotic and hostile impulses toward the very person to whom they have to be disclosed. On the analyst’s part, this is because the patient is likely to attitude the very attitudes to him that are most likely to cause him discomfort. The attitudes the patient believes the analysts have toward him are often the ones the patient is least likely to voice, in a general sense because of a feeling that it is impertinent for him to concern himself with the analyst’s feelings, and in a more specific sense because the aptitudes as held by the analyst are often attitudes the patient feels the analyst will be comfortable about having ascribed to him. It is for this reason that the analyst must be especially alert to the attitudes the patient believes he has, not only to the attitudes the patient does have toward him. If the analyst is able to see himself as a participant in an interaction, as he will become much more attuned to this important area of transference, which might otherwise escape him.
The investigations of attitudes are ascribed to the analyst makes easier the subsequent investigation of the intrinsic factors in the patient that played a role in such ascription. For example, the exposure of the fact that the patient ascribes sexual interests in him to the analyst, and generally to the patient, alternatively the subsequent exploration of the patient’s sexual wish toward the analyst, and genetically the parent.
The resistance to the awareness of these attitudes is responsible for their appearing in various disguises in the patient’s manifested associations and for the analyst’s reluctance to unmask the disguise. The most commonly recognized disguise is by displacement, but identification is an equally important one. In displacement, the patient’s attitudes are narrated for being toward a third party. In identification, the patient attitudes to himself attitudes he believes the analyst has toward him.
To be encouraging to the expansion of the transference within the analytic situation, the disguises in which the transference appears have to be interpreted in the case of displacement the interpretation will be of allusions to the transference in association not manifestly about the transference. This is a kind of interpretation every analyst often makes. In the case of identifications, the analyst interprets the attitudes that the patient ascribes to himself the identification with which an attitude and subsequently attributed to the analyst. Lipton (1977) has recently described this form of disguise allusion in the transference with illuminating illustration.
In his autobiography, Freud wrote, ‘The patient remains under the influence of the analytic situation as hopefully of a latter position or a period of decline, as though he is not directing responsibly for the mental activities onto a particular subject. Justly in assuming that nothing will occur, as not of some reference to the situation (1925). Since associations are obviously often not directed about the analytic situation, the interpretation of Freud’s remark rests on what he meant by the ‘analytic situation’.
It is believed that Freud’s meaning can be clarified by reference to a statement he made in, ‘The Interpretation of Dreams’. He said that when the patient is told to say whatever comes into his mind, his associations become directed by the ‘purposive ideas inherent in the treatment’ and that there are two such inherent regressive themes, one relating to the illness and the other - concerning which, Freud said, the patient has ‘no suspicion’; - relating to other analyst’s (1900), if the patient has ‘’no suspicion’ of the theme relating to the analyst (1900). If the patient has ‘no suspicions’ - relating to the analyst (1900). If the patient has ‘no suspicions’ of the theme relating to the analyst, such that the theme appears only in disguise, the patient‘s associations, it is contended that Freud’s remark not only specifies the themes inherent in the patient‘s identifications, but means that the associations are simultaneously directed by these two purposive ideas, not something by one and sometimes by the other.
One important reason that during an early stage and continuing presence of the transference is not always recognized in that it is considered to be absent in the patient who is talking recognized is that it is considered to be absent in the patient who is talking freely and apparently without resistance. As (Muslin and Gill, 1976) pointed out in a paper on the early interpretation of transference resistance, to the transference is probably present from the beginning, even if the patient is talking apparently freely. The patient may be talking about issues not manifestingly about the transference that are nevertheless, also allusions to the transference, but the analyst has to be alert to the pervasiveness of such allusory discernment about them.
The analyst should progress on the working assumption, that the patient’s associations have transference implications pervasively, that with which this assumption is not to be confused with denial or neglect of the current aspects of the analytic situation. It is theoretically always possible to give precedence to a transference interpretation if one can only discern it through its disguise by resistance. This is not to dispute the desirability of learning as much as one can about the patient, if only to be a position to make correct interpretations of the transference. One therefore, does not interfere with an apparently free flow of associations, especially early, unless the transference threatens the analytic situation to the point where its interpretation is mandatary rather than optional.
With the recognition that evens apparently freely associating patient may also be showing resistance to awareness of the transference, this formulation should not interfere as long a useful information being gathered should relace Freud’s dictum that the transference should not be interpreted until it becomes a resistance (1913).
It can be argued that every transference has some connection to some aspect of the current analytic situation, in the sense that the past can exert an influence only insofar as it exists in the present. Of course, all the determinants of a transference are current in the sense that what I am distinguishing is the current reality of the analytic situation, that is, what actually goes on between patient and analyst in the situation from how the patient is currently constituted as a result of his past.
All analysts would dubiously agree that there are both current and transferential determinants of the analytic situation, and probably no analyst would argue that a transference of the analytic situation, and probably no analyst would argue that a transference idea can be expressed without contamination, as it was, that is, without any connection to anything current in the patient-analyst relationship. Nevertheless, the implications of this fact for technique are often neglected in practice, as my next point is only to argue for the connection.
If the analyst admit as valid and continues under such as a delusional deception that the current cues he provides to the patient can be reduced to the vanishing point, he may be led into a silent withdrawal, which is not too distant from the caricature of an analyst as someone who does refuse to have any personal relationship with the patient. What happens then is that silence has become a technique rather than merely an indication that the analyst is listening. The patient’s responses under such conditions can be mistaken fo uncontaminated transference when they are in fact transference adaptions to the actuality of the silence.
The recognition, from which it takes its point of departure, as it was, has a crucial implications for the technique of interpreting resistance to the awareness of transference, in that, if, the analyst becomes persuaded of the centrality of transference and the importance of encouraging the transference to expand within the analytic situation, he has to find the presenting and plausible interpretation of resistance to the awareness of transference he should make. Is that, his most reliable guide is the cues offered by what is actually going on in the analytic situation? : On the one hand, the events of the situation, such as change in time of session, or an interpretation made by the analyst, and, on the other hand, how the patient is experiencing the situation as reflected in explicit remarks about it, however, fleeting these may be. This is the primary yield for technique of the recognition that any transference must have a link to the actuality of the analytic situation. The cue points to the nature of the transference, just as the day residue for a dream may be a quick pointer of the latent dream thoughts. Attention to the current situation for a transference elaboration will keep the analyst from making mechanical transference interpretation, in which he interprets that there are allusions to the transference in association not manifestly about the transference, but without offering any plausible bias for the interpretation. Attention to the current stimulation offers some degree of protection against the analyst’s inevitability whose tendency to project his own views onto the patient, either because of countertransference or because of a preconceived theoretical bias about the content and hierarchical relationships in psychodynamics.
The analyst may by substantiating his surprise, at what in his behaviour the patient finds important or unimportant, for the patient’s responses will be idiosyncratically determined by the transference, the patient’s responses may seem to be something the patient as well as the analysts consider trivial, because, as in displacement to a trivial aspect of the day residue of a dream, displacement can better serve resistance when it is to something trivial. Because it is connected to conflict-laden material, the stimulus to the transference may be difficult to find. It may be quickly disavowed, so that its presence in awareness is only transitory. With the discovery of the disavowed, the patient may also gain insight into how it repeats as disavowed earlier in his life. In his search for the present stimuli that the patient is responding transferentially, as the analyst must therefore remain alert to both fleeting and apparently trivial manifested reference to himself as well as in the events of the analytic situation.
If the analyst interprets the patient’s attitudes in a spirit of seeing their possible plausibility in the light of what information the patient does have, rather than in the spirit of either affirming or denying the patient’s views, the way is open for their further expression and elucidation.
The analyst will be respecting the effort to be plausible and realistic, rather than manufacturing his transference attitudes out of whole bodied material.
Importantly, is to make a transference interpretation plausible to the patient in terms of as current stimulus that, if the analyst is persuaded that the manifest content has important implications for the transference but he is unable to see a current stimulus for the attitude, he should explicitly say so if he decides to make the transference interpretation anyway. The patient himself may then be able to say what the current stimulus is.
It is sometimes argued that the analyst’s attention to his own behaviour is a precipitant for the transference, will increase the patient’s resistance to recognizing the transference. That, on the contrary, that because of the inevitable interrelationship of the current and transferential determinants, it is only through interpretation that they can be disentangled.
It is also argued that one must wait until the transference has reached optimal intensity before it can be advantageously interpreted. It is true that too hasty and interpretation of the transference can serve as a defensive function for the analyst and deny him the information he needs to make a more appropriate transference interpretation. But it is true that delay in interpreting transference interpretation, but it is also true that delay in interpreting runs the risk of allowing an unmanageable transference to develop. It is also true that deliberate delay can be a manipulation in the service of abreaction rather than analysis, and, like silence, can lead to a response to the actual situation that is mistaken for uncontaminated transference. Obviously important, is assumed in the issues of timing are involved, whereas an important clue to when a transference interpretation is apt and which one to makes lies in whether the interpretation can be made plausibly in terms of the determinant, namely, as something in the current analytic situation. Such as, in the approaching transference in the spirit of seeing how it appears plausibly realistic to the patient, it paves the way toward its further elucidation and expression.
There are two main ways in which resolution of the transference can take place through work with the transference in the here and now. The first lies in the clarification of what are the clues in the current situation that are the patient‘s point of departure force a transference elaboration. The exposure of the current point of departure at once raises the question of whether it is adequate to the conclusion drawn from it. The relating of the transference to a current stimulus is, after all, parts of the patient‘s effort to make, the transference attitude plausibly determined by the present. The reverse and ambiguity of the analyst’s behaviour are what increases the ranges of apparently plausible conclusions the patient may draw. If an examination of the basis for the conclusion makes clear that the actual situation to which the patient responds is subject to other meanings than the one the patient has reached, he will more reality consider his pre-existing bias, that is to say, in that of transference.
Another critic of an earlier version of this paper suggested that, in speaking of the current relationship and the relation between the patient’s conclusion and the information on which they seem plausibly based, such in some absolute conception of what is real in the analytic situation, of which the analyst is the final arbiter. That is not the case, that what the patient must come to see is that the information he has is subject to other possible interpretations implies the very contrary to an absolute conception of reality. In fact, analyst and patient engage in a dialogue in a spirit of attempting to arrive at a consensus about reality, not about some factious absolute reality.
The second way in which resolution of the transference can take place within the work with the transference in the here and now is that in the very interpretation of the transference the patient had a new experience. He is being treated differently from how he expected to be. Analysts seem reluctant to emphasize his new experience, as though it endangers the role of insight and argue for interpersonal influence as the significant factor in change. Strachey’s emphasis on the new experience in the mutative transference interpretation has unfortunately been overshadowed by his views on introjection, which have been mistaken to advocate manipulating the transference. Strachey meant introjection of the more benign superego of the analyst only as a temporary strep on the road toward insight. Not only is the new experience not to be confused with the interpersonal influence of a transference gratification, but the new experience occurs together with insight into both the patient’s biassed expectation and the new experience. As Strachey points out, what is unique about the transference interpretation is that insight and the new experience take place in relation to the very person who was expected to behave differently, and it is this that gives the work in the transference, its immediacy and effectiveness. While Freud did stress the effective immediacy of the transference, he did not make the new experience explicit.
It is important to recognize that transference interpretation is not a matter of experience, in contrast to insight, but a joining of the two together, both are needed to bring about and maintain the desired changes in the patient. It is also important to recognize that no new techniques of intervention are required to provide the new experience. It is an inevitable accompaniment of interpretation of the transference in the here and now. It is often overlooked that, although Strachey said that only transference interpretations are outside the transference.
Rosenfeld (1972) has pointed out that clarification of material outside the transference is often necessary to know what is the appropriate transference interpretation, and that both genetic transference interpretations and extratransference interpretation taking to consider an inclination as marked by or indication of notable worth or simply the consequence based upon the role in working through. Strachey said relatively little about working through, but surely nothing against the necessary provision with which every thing needfully is explicitly recognized as the role for the recovery of the past in the resolving dissection of the purposiveness determined by the transference.
In taking positions, as to emphasize the role of the analysis of the transference in the here and now, both in interpreting resistance to the awareness of transference and in working toward its resolution by relating to the actuality of the situation. In that of opinion or purpose with the evidence that extratransference and genetic transference interpretation and, of course, working through is important too, that the matter is one of emphasis. Also, interpretation of resistance to awareness of the transference should figure in the majority of sessions, and that if this is done by relating the transference to the actual analytic situation, the very same interpretation is a beginning of work to the resolution of the transference. To justify this view more persuasively would require detailed case material.
The concern and considerations that the Kleinian annalists whom, many analysts feel, are in error in giving the analysis of the transference too great if not even as exclusive role in the analytic process. It is true that Kleinians emphasize the analysis of the transference more, in their writing at least, than does the general run of analysts. As, Anna Freud (1968) complained that the concept of transference has become overexpanded seems to be directed against the Kleinians. One of the reasons the Kleinians consider themselves the true followers of Freud in technique are precisely because of the emphasis they put on the analysis of the transference. Hanna Segal (1967), for example, writes, `Too say that all communications are seen as communications about the patents phantasy as well as current external life is equivalent to saying that all communications contain something relevant to the transference situation. In Kleinian technique, the interpretation of the transference is often more central than in the classical technique.
If the point is held to view or way of regarding that Freud and transference had acceedingly connected by simulating observations that we can only offer, that Freud wrote briefly about transference, and did so, to sustain the way in which, is, as a whole, that his actions were justly taken in and around 1917. Another observation that can rarely be made about Freud’s works, and which everyone may not agree with, is that, with one or two exceptions, what he did write on transference did not reach the high level of analytical thought that has come to be regarded as standard for him. Some indication of what his contribution consists of is given by the editors of the Standard Edition, who list them in several places. One of the longer lists, in a footnote on page 431 of Volume 16, includes six references: ‘Studies of Hysteria’ with Breuer (1895), the Dora paper (1905), ‘The Dynamics of Transference’ (1912), ‘Observations on Transference-Love’ (1915), the chapter on transference in the Introductory Lectures (1917), and ‘Analysis Terminable and Interminable’ (1937). Although the editors, in no sense suggest that these six papers include everything Freud wrote on the subject. It does seem evident that, considering the essential importance of transference to analysis, he wrote, ‘The Dynamics of Transference’, ‘Transference-Love’, and the transference chapter in the Introductory Lectures, came across, as, perhaps, his least significant contribution.
Freud’s first direct mention of transference comes upon the pages ascribed within the ’Studies of Hysteria’ (1895), his first significant reference to it, however did not appear until five years later, when, in a letter to Fliess on April 16, 1900, he said (Freud, 1887-1902) he was ‘beginning to see that the apparent endlessness of the treatment is something of an inherent feature and is connected with the transference’. In a footnote to this letter the editors said that, ‘This was the first insight into the role of transference in psychotherapy.’
The impact on analysis of this startling discovery (that is, in the case of Dora) was actually much greater and much more significant than most people seem to appreciate. Although the role of transference as the sine quo non of analysis and is widely accepted, and was stated by Freud from the first, it has almost never been acclaimed for having brought about an entire change in the nature of analysis. The introduction of free association to analysis, a much lesser change, receives and still receives much more recognition.
One of the reasons for the relatively unheralded entry of transference into analysis may have been for circumstances of its discovery. Although Freud’s new ideas were recorded as if they arose as sudden inspiration during the Dora analysis, they may in fact have developed somewhat later. In the paper‘s precatory remarks, for instance, Freud said he had not discussed transference with Dora at all, and in the postscript, he said he had been unaware of her transference feelings. Also, pointing to a later discovery date is the extraordinary delay in the paper’s publication. According to the editor’s note, the paper had been completed and accepted for publication by late January 1901, but this date was then actually set back more than four and a half years until October 1905. The editors said, ‘We have no information as to how it happened that Freud, . . . deferred publication.’ It readily seems that for reasons to have been that only during those four and a half years, as a consequence to his own self-analysis, that he came to a better understanding of the relevantly significant as the applicable reason to posit of the transference. Only then may it have been possible for him to turn again to the Dora case, to apply to it of what he had learned in himself, to write this essay as part of the postscript, and at last to release the paper for publication.
In the same differentiated individuals, as that Freud’s own disciples must have differed upon specified issues, not only from him but from each other. Although some of their differences may have been slight, others, my have contributed significantly to later analytic developments. A question could be raised, for instance, whether differences in handling the transference that at first were the property of one analyst gradually develop into formal clinical methods used by many, and whether these clinical methods, after having been conceptualized, serve as the beginning of variously divergent schools of analysis. Such occurrences, consistent with certain beliefs that analytic ideas do arise in this way, primarily out of transference experiences in the analytic situation, would lead to the question whether the history of the ideological differences in what was actually said and done in response to transference reactions that to any other factor. Whatever the case, many differences and divergencies did occur among the early analysts, and all of that is supposed to have had to do in some major way with differences in the handling of the transference.
Curiously, Freud himself seems to have taken little part in influencing this rapid and divergent period of growth. Usually accused of being too dominating in such matters, Freud seems to have done just the opposite during the development of this most critical aspect of analysis, the process itself, and, for reasons unknown, detached himself from it.
What was needed, one might be inclined to say, was not leadership in the form of domination, but leadership in trying to provide what was lacking, and still lacking, namely an analytical rationale for transference phenomena. The question must be asked, of course, whether in fact this would have been a good thing at that particular time in psychoanalytic history. Perhaps not. The exercise of closure, to which Freud’s structuring might have amounted. But although adding to understanding and stability at ceratin theoretical levels, could at another level, so such closures have often done, have placed many obstacles in the way of further analytical developments. Thus, his leaving the matter of transference wide open, even though it led to confusion and uncertainty, may have been just as well.
Significantly, it indicated that an active struggle was still going on within him, Freud occasionally expressed once again, even though briefly his earlier insights, particularly his ideas that transference is an essential although unexplored part of mental life. An example of this appears in his alternative obtainments such that is gainfully to appear of as quality of being pleasant or agreeable to a feature that makes for pleasantness or ease, among the amenities of the central geniality, otherwise, the prevailing indifference account for the transference in ‘An Autobiographical Study’ (1925). Transference, he says, ‘is a universal phenomenon of the human mind. And in fact dominated the whole of each person’s relations to his human environment. In these few words’ Freud again made the point, and in declarative fashion, that transference is a mental structure of the greatest magnitude, but he never really followed it up.
Rather extensive evidence of his departure from the original concept and his continuing struggle with that concept is seen most clearly, wherein, the ‘Analysis Terminable and Interminable’ is much more than a courageous, brilliant, and pessimistic, appraisal of the difficulties and limitations of analysis, although transference is briefly mentioned in its content, yet a great deal about it comes through, some quite directly, some by easy inference. When looked at in this way, two themes stand out: Freud’s personal frustration with the enigmas of transference and his tacit placing of transference in the centre of success and failure in analysis, both as a therapy and as a developing science. What also comes through, is the perplexing realization of how far Freud had, by now, seemingly moved away from his original concepts. Or had he?
Even so, if it is insufficient for exclusive reliance in relations to the complicated neurosis, for which it would be fallacious to assign to the recall and reconstruction of the past an exclusively explanatory value (in the intellectual sense), important though that functions be, and difficult as its full-blown emotional correlate may be to come by. There is no doubt that, even in complicated neurosis, equivalently complicated transference neurosis, the genuine complex and complicated transference neurosis, the genuinely experienced linking of the past and present can have, at times, a certain uniquely specific dynamic effect of its own, a type of telescoping or merging of common elements in experience, which must be connected with the meaninglessness of time in unconscious life, compared with its stern authority in the life of consciousness and adaptation to everyday reality. Contributing decisively to such experiences as to whatever degree it occurs, is of course, the vivid currency of the transference neurosis, and central in this, the reincarnations of old objects in an actual person, the analyst.
Thus, an allied problem in the general sphere of transference is the fascination and often enigmatic interplay of past and present. If one wishes to view this interplay in terms of a stereotyped formulation, the matter can remain relatively uncomplicated - as a formulation. Unfortunately. , This is too often the case. The phenomenon, however, retains some important obscurities, which cannot thoroughly dispel, but to which I would like to call attention. To concentrate on the dimension of time, it seems in reference to the complication and immediate aspects of technique, nonetheless, essential. For example, we can assume that the transference neurosis re-enacts the essential conflicts of the infantile neurosis in a current setting. If a reasonable degree of awareness of transference is established, the next problem is the genetic reduction of the neurosis to its elements in the past, through analysis of the transference resistance and allied intrapsychic resistances, ultimately genetic interpretations, recollections and reconstructions and working through. Such that the transference is related to its genetic origins, the analyst thereby emerges in his true, i.e., real, identity to the patient, the transference is putatively ‘resolved’. To the extent that one follows the traditional view that all resistances, including the transference itself, is ultimately directed against the restoration of early memories as such, this is a convincing formulation. Is that, only to say, that in his own right as having to a certain tightly logical quality? However, we know that it this is not so readily accomplished, apart from the special intrapsychic considerations described afterward by Freud in ‘Analysis Terminable and Interminable’. Although in a favourable case, much of the cognitive interpretative work can be accomplished, there remains the fact that cognition responsibility, in its bare sense, does not necessarily lead to the subsidence of powerful dynamism, to the withdrawal of ‘cathexes’ from importantly real objects. For, as mentioned, a short while ago, the analyst is a real and living object, apart from the representations with which the transference invests him, and which are interpretable as such, for which there is no, at any time a seldom, a confusing interrelations and commonly of the emergent responses, due to the same old seeking, and this is directed toward a new individual in his own right, both are important, furthermore, there are large and important ones of overlapping. Apart from such considerations, even the explicitly incestuous transference is currently experienced (as, at least in good part) by a full-grown adult (like the original oedipus), instead of a totally and actually helpless child. To be sure, the latter state is reflected in the emergent transference elements of instinctual striving, but it is subject to analysis, and the residual is something significant, if not totally different. It is these residual sexual wish, presumably directed toward the person of the analyst, as such, which must be displaced to others, if, as generally agreed, the revival of infantile fantasies and strivings in the biologically mature adolescent presents a new and special problem, one must assume distinctiveness of experience for the adult, although it is true that in the majority of instances, adequate solution is favoured by the adult state. There is, in any case, a residual relationship between persons who have worked together in a prolonged, arduous and intimate relationship, which, strictly speaking, are reversibly disconnected or divorced of services, in that the transference merely ushers out the retirement for which its rendering retreat of that state of mind or feeling by an inner avoidance of something usually felt as unpleasant or pronounced for it’s adverse but mutual colouration. Blending to some confusion between the two spheres of feeling. The general tendency is that both components are fully gratified to some degree. But, there is the ubiquitous power of the residual primordial transference, yet, argue to cling to an omnipotent partisan to resist the displacement of its ‘sublimated’ anaclitic aspects, even if the various representation of the wishes for bodily intimacy has been thoroughly analysed and successfully displaced. The outcome is largely the transference of the transference, as mentioned earlier, in a different context. For everyday reality can provide no actual answer to such cravings. In this connection, note, Freud’s genial envy of Pfister. If the man of faith finds this gratification in revealing religion, others in a wide range of secular beliefs and ‘leaders’ the modern rational and sceptical intellectual is less fortunate in this respect. Presumably free, he is prone to invest even intellectual disciplines or the proponents with inappropriate expectations and partisan passions, but, least of mention, that within these fields of analytical and theoretical thought, is not to provide exceptions to this tendency.
Though if one is to maintain and beneficially confine its bothering of reservations about the clarity of conceptualization, the explanatory discussion of Kohut and Seitz, is a very useful contribution to the direct complication or which by some understanding the awkwardness of oneself. Both Loewald and Kohut have deliberately associated a special but the different use of one of Freud’s three conceptions of transference, i.e., the transference from the unconscious to the preconscious.
Even to furthering comments on primordial transference, at least potentially, are largely psychological (mental) component, the concept of ‘transference of the transference’ would be applicable to this component. For it does appear that certain aspect of the search for the omnipotent and omniscient caretaking parents are implicitly practical as virtually capable for being turned to use or account for its functional practicability for something of a process or the procedure for being all but the essential purpose to come to or tend toward a common point, for which are the knowledgeable information or ideas, is nothing but causative effectuality. As suggested earlier, there are important qualitative and quantitative distinctions in the mode of persistence and such strivings, however, even to the extent that they are detached from the analyst and carried into some reasonably appropriate expression in everyday life, they retain at least a subtle quality that contravenes reality, one that derives from earliest infancy, and remains - to this extent - a transference. ‘Santa Claus’ lives on, where one might least expect to meet him, whether as a donor of miracle drug or of far more complex panaceas.
Social scientists emphasize that the link between social ills and mental illness is correlational rather than causal. For example, although societies undergoing rapid social change often have high rates of suicide the specific causes have not been identified. Social and cultural factors may create relative risks for a population or class of people, but it is unclear how such factors raise the risk of mental illness for an individual.
There are no blood tests, imaging techniques, or other laboratory procedures that can reliably diagnose a mental illness. Thus, the diagnosis of mental illness is always a judgment or an interpretation by an observer based on the spoken exchange, ideas, behaviours, and experiences of the patient.
For the most part, mental health professionals determine the presence of mental illness in an individual by conducting an interview intended to reveal symptoms of abnormal behaviour. That is, the professional asks the patient questions about their mental state: "Do you hear voices of people who are not with you?" "Have you felt depressed or lost interest in most activities?" "Have you experienced a marked increase or decrease in your appetite?" "Have you been sleeping less than normal?" "Are you easily distracted?" The answers to these questions will suggest other questions. Eventually, the clinician will feel that he or she has enough information to determine whether the patient is suffering from a mental illness and, if so, to make a diagnosis.
The process of diagnosis is not as simple as it might seem. Patients often have difficulty remembering symptoms or feel reluctant to talk about their fantasies, sex life, or use of drugs and alcohol. Many patients suffer in forms that are more than there is one disorder at a time - for example, depression and anxiety, or schizophrenia and depression - and determining which symptoms constitute the primary problem is complex. In addition, symptoms may not be specific to mental illnesses. For example, brain tumours of the central nervous system can produce symptoms that mimic those of the Psychotic disorders.
Another problem in diagnosis is that mental health professionals may interpret symptoms differently based on their personal or cultural biases. One study examined this effect by showing 300 American and British psychiatrists videotaped interviews of eight patients with mental illnesses. Although the psychiatrists’ diagnoses substantially agreed for patients with "textbook" cases of schizophrenia, their diagnoses varied widely for patients who had symptoms of both schizophrenia and other disorders, depending on whether the psychiatrist was American or British. The risk of misdiagnosis is even greater when the mental health professional and the patient come from different cultural groups.
Mental health professionals use a number of methods to treat people with mental illnesses. The two most common treatments by far are drug therapy and psychotherapy. In drug therapy, a person takes regular doses of a prescription medication intended to reduce symptoms of mental illness. Psychotherapy is the treatment of mental illness through verbal and nonverbal communication between the patient and a trained professional. A person can receive psychotherapy individually or in a group setting.
The type of treatment administered depends on the type and severity of the disorder. For example, doctors usually treat schizophrenia primarily with drugs, but specialized forms of psychotherapy may more effectively relieve phobias. For some mental illnesses, such as depression, the most effective treatment seems to be a combination of drug therapy and psychotherapy. Although some people with severe mental illnesses may never fully recover, most people with mental illnesses improve with treatment and can resume normal lives. Despite the availability of effective treatments, only about 40 percent of people with mental illnesses ever seek professional help.
A variety of mental health professionals offer treatment for mental illness. These include psychiatrists, psychologists, psychotherapists, psychiatric social workers, and psychiatric nurses.
Drugs introduced by the mid-1950's had enabled many people who otherwise would have spent years in mental institutions to return to the community and live productive lives. Since then, advances in psychopharmacology have led to the development of drugs of even greater effectiveness. These drugs often relieve symptoms of schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and other disorders. However, they may produce undesirable and sometimes serious side effects. In addition, relapse may occur when they are discontinued, so long-term use may be required. Drugs that control symptoms of mental illness are called psychotherapeutic substance or preparation, in that a substance used by itself or in a mixture in the treatment of or the dependence on drugs, if only to make it bearable. The major categories of psychotherapeutic drugs include Antipsychotic drugs, Antianxiety drugs, antidepressant drugs, and antimanic drugs.
Antipsychotic drugs, also called neuroleptics and major tranquillizers, control symptoms of psychosis, such as hallucinations and delusions, which characterize schizophrenia and related disorders. They can also prevent such symptoms from returning. Antipsychotic drugs may produce side effects ranging from dry mouth and blurred vision to tardive dyskinesia. The occasioning of Panic Disorders, is a mental illness in which a person experiences repeated, unexpected panic attacks and persistent anxiety about the possibility that the panic attacks will recur. A panic attack is a period of intense fear, apprehension, or discomfort. In panic disorder, the attacks usually occur without warning. Symptoms include a racing heart, shortness of breath, trembling, choking or smothering sensations, and fears of "going crazy," losing control, or dying from a heart attack. Panic attacks may last from a few seconds to several hours. Most peak within 10 minutes and render of their potentialities or peak, within 20 or 30 minutes.
About 2 percent of people in the United States suffer from panic disorder during any given year, and the condition affects more than twice as many women as men. People with panic disorder may experience panic attacks frequently, such as daily or weekly, or more sporadically. Additionally, panic attacks may occur as part of other anxiety disorders, such as phobias - in which a specific object or situation triggers the attack - and, more rarely, post-traumatic stress disorder.
People with panic disorder frequently develop agoraphobia, a fear of being in places or situations from which escape might be difficult if a panic attack occurs. People with agoraphobia typically fear situations such as travelling in a bus, train, car, or aeroplane, shopping at malls, going to theatres, crossing over bridges or through tunnels, and being alone in unfamiliar places. Therefore, they avoid these situations and may eventually become reluctant to leave their home. In addition, people with panic disorder appear to have an increased risk of alcoholism and drug dependence. Some studies indicate they also have a higher risk of depression and suicide.
Panic disorder, and both with and without agoraphobia, result from a combination of biological and psychological factors. Some individuals may inherit a vulnerability to accentuation and the availing of anxiety and an increased risk of experiencing panic attacks. In addition, certain physiological cues may trigger a panic attack. For example, if a person experiences a racing heart during a panic attack, he or she may begin to associate this sensation with panic attacks. An accelerated heart beat can be addictive and may impair movement and concentration in some people. Some antidepressant drugs, such as imipramine (Tofranil), also reduce panic symptoms in some people but can produce side effects such as dizziness or dry mouth. Another class of drugs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), appears to reduce panic symptoms with fewer side effects. SSRIs used to treat panic disorder, would remedially need paroxetine (Paxil) and fluvoxamine (Luvox). Medication eliminates panic symptoms in 50 to 60 percent of patients. For many patients, however, panic attacks return when they stop taking the medication.
Research has shown that cognitive-behavioural therapy, a type of psychotherapy, eliminates panic attacks in 80 to 100 percent of patients. In this method, therapists help patients re-create the physical symptoms of a panic attack, teach them coping skills, and help them to alter their beliefs about the danger of these sensations. Patients with agoraphobia face their feared situations under the therapist’s supervision, using coping skills to overcome their strong anxiety. These coping skills may include physical relaxation techniques, such as deep breathing and muscle relaxation, as well as cognitive techniques that help people think rationally about anxiety-provoking situations. About 70 percent of panic disorders patients who also have moderate to severe agoraphobia benefit from this type of treatment.
Antianxiety drugs, also called minor tranquillizers, reduce high levels of anxiety. They may help people with generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and other anxiety disorders. Benzodiazepines, a class of drugs that includes diazepam (Valium), are the most widely prescribed Antianxiety drugs. Benzodiazepines can be addictive and may cause drowsiness and impaired coordination during the day.
Antidepressant drugs help relieve symptoms of depression. Some antidepressant drugs can relieve symptoms of other disorders as well, such as panic disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Antidepressant drugs comprise three major classes: tricyclics, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAO inhibitors), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Side effects of tricyclics may include dizziness upon standing, blurred vision, dry mouth, difficulty urinating, constipation, and drowsiness. People who take MAO inhibitors may experience some of the same side effects, and must follow a special diet that excludes certain foods. SSRIs generally produce fewer side effects, although these may include anxiety, drowsiness, and sexual dysfunction. One type of SSRI, fluoxetine (Prozac), is the most widely prescribed antidepressant drug.
Antimanic drugs help control the mania that occurs as part of bipolar disorder. One of the most effective antimanic drugs is lithium carbonate, a natural mineral salt. Common side effects include nausea, stomach upset, vertigo, and increased thirst and urination. In addition, long-term use of lithium can damage the kidneys.
Psychotherapy can be an effective treatment for many mental illnesses. Unlike drug therapy, psychotherapy produces no physical side effects, although it can cause psychological damage when improperly administered. On the other hand, psychotherapy may take longer than drugs to produce benefits. In addition, sessions may be expensive and time-consuming. In response to this complaint and demands from insurance companies to reduce the costs of mental health treatment, many therapists have started providing therapy of shorter duration.
Psychotherapy encompasses a wide range of techniques and practices. Some forms of psychotherapy, such as Psychodynamic therapy and humanistic therapy, focus on helping people understand the internal motivations for their problematic behaviour. Other forms of therapy, such as behavioural therapy and cognitive therapy, focus one’s actions in general or on a particular occasion, should, in the manner of recognizing the controversial behaviour communicative impact, which to cause to acquire knowledge for which of people skills are essential to set right in that as wrong must be corrected. The majority of therapists today incorporate treatment techniques from a number of theoretical perspectives. For example, cognitive-behavioural therapy combines aspects of cognitive therapy and behavioural therapy.
Psychodynamic therapy is one of the most common forms of psychotherapy. The therapist focuses on a person’s past experiences as a source of internal, unconscious conflicts and tries to help the person resolve those conflicts. Some therapists may use hypnosis to uncover repressed memories. Psychoanalysis, a technique developed by Freud, is one kind of Psychodynamic therapy. In psychoanalysis, the person lies on a couch and says whatever comes to mind, a process called free association. The therapist interprets these thoughts along with the person’s dreams and memories. Classical psychoanalysis, which requires years of intensive treatment, is not as widely practised today as in previous years.
Both humanistic therapy and existential therapy treat mental illnesses by helping people achieve personal growth and attain meaning in life. The best-known humanistic therapy is client-centred therapy, developed by Carl Rogers in the 1950's. In this technique, the therapist provides no advice but restates the observations and insights of the client (the person in treatment) in nonjudgmental terms. In addition, the therapist offers the person unconditional empathy and acceptance. Existential therapists help people confront basic questions about the meaning of their lives and guide them toward discovery of their own uniqueness.
Psychotherapists whom practice behavioural therapies do not focus on a person’s past experiences or inner life, instead, they help the person to change their conduct behavioural, and patterns of abnormal behaviour by applying established principles of conditioning and of learning. Behavioural therapy has proven effective in the treatment of phobias, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and other disorders.
The Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder categorized the mental illness in which a person experiences recurrent, intrusive thoughts (obsessions) and feels compelled to perform certain behaviours (compulsions) again and again. Most people have experienced bizarre or inappropriate thoughts and have engaged in repetitive behaviours at times. However, people with obsessive-compulsive disorder find that their disturbing thoughts and behaviours consume large amounts of time, cause them anxiety and distress, and interfere with their ability to function at work and in social activities. Most people with this disorder recognize that their obsessions and compulsions are irrational but cannot suppress them.
Obsessive-compulsive disorder usually begins in adolescence or early adulthood. It effects from 1.5 to 2 percent of people in the United States, as the disorder affects that are slightly more prominent in women than men.
Obsessions can include a variety of thoughts, images, and impulses. Common obsessions include fears of contamination from germs, doubts about whether doors are locked or appliances are turned off, nonsensical impulses such as shouting in public, sexual thoughts that are disturbing to the individual, and thoughts of accidentally and unknowingly harming someone. People with obsessions may avoid shaking hands with other people because they fear contamination, or they may avoid driving because they fear they will injure someone in a traffic accident.
People usually perform compulsions to relieve the anxiety produced by their obsessions, although not all people with obsessions perform compulsions. The most common compulsions involve cleaning rituals and checking rituals. For example, people with obsessions about germs may wash their hand’s dozens of times each day until their skin becomes raw. People with obsessions about neatness and symmetry may constantly rearrange or straighten objects on their desk. People with checking compulsions must repeatedly check to make sure they locked doors and windows or turned off water faucets. Other compulsions include counting objects, hoarding vast amounts of useless materials, and repeating words or prayers internally.
Obsessive-compulsive disorder can have disabling effects on people’s lives. People with severe cases of this disorder may need hospitalization to help treat the compulsions. In fewer extreme instances, individuals with compulsions often must allow a great deal of extra time to complete seemingly routine tasks, such as preparing to leave the house in the morning. Individuals may avoid going to certain places or engaging in certain activities because they feel embarrassed about their behaviour.
In addition, family members of someone with this disorder may feel angry at the person because the compulsive behaviours intrude on their time together or interfere with the family’s functioning. For instance, some individuals hoard things, such as newspapers or magazines, because they believe they may someday need certain pieces of information. The piles of newspapers may cover the living areas and make other family members feel embarrassed to have guests in the home.
Like many other mental illnesses, obsessive-compulsive disorder appears to result from a combination of biological and psychological influences. Some people may have a biological predisposition to experience anxiety. Research also suggests that abnormal levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin may play a role in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Brain scans of people with obsessive-compulsive disorder have revealed abnormalities in the activity level of the orbital cortex, cingulate cortex, and caudate nucleus, a brain circuit that helps control movements of the limbs.
The disorder may develop when these biological influences combine with a psychological vulnerability to anxiety. Some people may develop a psychological vulnerability to anxiety in childhood. They may come to believe that the world is a potentially dangerous place over which one has little control. People seem to develop obsessive-compulsive disorder specifically when they learn that some thoughts are dangerous or unacceptable and, while attempting to suppress these thoughts, develop anxiety about the recurrence of the thoughts and about the perceived dangerousness and intrusiveness of the thoughts.
Treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder includes psychotherapy, psychoactive drugs, or both. Mental health professionals consider exposure and response prevention, a type of cognitive-behavioural therapy, to be the most effective form of psychotherapy for this disorder. In this technique, the therapist exposes the patient to feared thoughts or situations and prevents the patient from acting on their own compulsion. For example, a therapist might have patients with cleaning compulsions touch something dirty and then prevent them from washing their hands. This technique helps 60 to 70 percent of people with obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Medications to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder are made up of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as fluoxetine (Prozac) and fluvoxamine (Luvox). A tricyclic antidepressant, clomipramine (Anafranil), also helps relieve symptoms of the disorder. About 80 percent of people with the disorder show some improvement with a combined treatment of medication and behavioural therapy. However, many patients relapse when they stop taking the medication.
The goal of cognitive therapy is to identify patterns of irrational thinking that cause a person to behave abnormally. The therapist teaches skills that enable the person to recognize the irrationality of the thoughts. The person eventually learns to perceive people, situations, and himself or herself in a more realistic way and develops improved problem-solving and coping skills. Psychotherapists use cognitive therapy to treat depression, panic disorder, and some personality disorders.
Rehabilitation programs assist people with severe mental illnesses in learning independent living skills and in obtaining community services. Counsellors may teach them personal hygiene skills, home cleaning and maintenance, meal preparation, social skills, and employment skills. In addition, case managers or social workers may help people with mental illnesses obtain employment, medical care, housing, education, and social services. Some intensive rehabilitation programs strive to provide active follow-up and social support to prevent hospitalization.
Therapists often use play therapy to treat young children with depression, anxiety disorders, and problems stemming from child abuse and neglect. The therapist spends time with the child in a playroom filled with dolls, puppets, and drawing materials, which the child may use to act out personal and family conflicts. The therapist helps the child recognize and confront their own feelings.
In group therapy, a number of people gather together to discuss problems under the guidance of a therapist. By sharing their feelings and experiences with others, group members learn their problems are not unique, receive emotional support, and learn ways to cope with their problems. Psychodrama is a type of group therapy in which participants act out emotional conflicts, often on a stage, with the goals of increasing their understanding of their behaviours and resolving conflicts. Group therapy generally costs less per person than individual psychotherapy.
Family intervention programs help families learn to cope with and manage a family member’s chronic mental illness, such as schizophrenia. Family members learn to monitor the illness, help with daily life problems, ensure adherence to medication, and cope with stigma.
Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a treatment for severe depression in which an electrical current is passed through the patient’s brain for one or two seconds to induce a controlled seizure. The treatments are repeated over a period of several weeks. For unknown reasons, ECT often relieves severe depression even when drug therapy and psychotherapy have failed. The treatment has created controversy because its side effects may include confusion and memory loss. Both of these effects, however, are usually temporary.
Seeking a treatment for extreme cases of mental illness, Portuguese neurologist António Egas Moniz invented the lobotomy, a surgical technique that destroys tissue in the frontal lobe of the brain. The procedures, widely performed in the 1940s and 1950s, often leaving the person in a vegetative state or caused drastic changes in personality and behaviour.
Even more controversial than ECT is Psychosurgery, the surgical removal or destruction of sections of the brain in order to reduce severe and chronic psychiatric symptoms. The best-known example of Psychosurgery is the lobotomy, a procedure developed by Portuguese neurologist António Egas Moniz that was widely performed in the 1940's and early 1950's. Psychosurgery is now rarely performed because no research has proven it effective and because it can produce drastic changes in personality and behaviour.
A significant portion of the homeless population in the United States suffers from a chronic mental illness, such as schizophrenia. The shortage of mental health treatment centres in many cities may partly account for the large number of mentally ill people who are homeless or in jail.
Treatment for mental illness takes places in a number of settings. Mental hospitals or psychiatric wards in general hospitals are used to treat patients in acute phases of their illnesses and when the severity of their symptoms requires constant supervision. Most individuals who suffer from severe mental illness, however, do not require such close attention, and they can usually receive treatment in community settings.
Often, patients who have just completed a period of hospitalization go to group homes or halfway houses before returning to independent living. These facilities offer patients the opportunity to take part in group activities and to receive training in social and job skills. In supportive housing, mentally ill individuals can live independently in an environment that offers an array of mental health and social services. Some people with chronic and severe mental illnesses require care in long-term facilities, such as nursing homes, where they can receive close supervision.
Not all ancient scholars agreed with this theory of mental illness. The Greek physician Hippocrates believed that all illnesses, including mental illnesses, had natural origins. For example, he rejected the prevailing notion that epilepsy had its origins in the divine or sacred, viewing it as a disease of the brain. Hippocrates categorically considered mental illnesses as itemized positions, in that to include mania, melancholia (depression), and phrenitis (brain fever), and he advocated humane treatment that included rest, bathing, exercise, and dieting. The Greek philosopher Plato, although adhering to a somewhat supernatural view of mental illness, believed that childhood experiences shaped adult behaviours, anticipating modern Psychodynamic theories by more than 2000 years.
The Middle Ages in Europe, from the fall of the Roman empire in the 5th century ad too about the 15th century, was a period in which religious beliefs, specifically Christianity, dominated concepts of mental illness. Much of the society believed that mentally ill people were possessed by the devil or demons, or accused them of being witches and infecting others with madness. Thus, instead of receiving care from physicians, the mentally ill became objects of religious inquisition and barbaric treatment. On the other hand, some historians of medicine cite evidence that evens in the Middle Ages, many people believed mental illness to have its basis in physical and psychological disturbances, such as imbalances in the four bodily humours (blood, black bile, yellow bile, and phlegm), poor diet, and grief.
The Islamic world of North Africa, Spain, and the Middle East generally held far more humane attitudes toward people with mental illnesses. Following the belief that God loved insane people, communities began establishing asylums beginning in the 8th century ad, first in Baghdad and later in Cairo, Damascus, and Fez. The asylums offered patients special diets, baths, drugs, music, and pleasant surroundings.
The Renaissance, which began in Italy in the 14th century and spread throughout Europe in the 16th and 17th century, brought both deterioration and progress in perceptions of mental illness. On the one hand, witch-hunts and executions escalated throughout Europe, as of relating to the mind, the mental aspects of the problem, is that the mentally ill, and among them were in vengeance a reprisal for they’re merciless persecuted. The infamous Malleus Maleficarum (The Witches Hammer or, Hammer of the Witch) which served as a handbook for inquisitors, claimed that witches could be identified by delusions, hallucinations, or other peculiar behaviours. To make matters worse, many of the most eminent physicians of the time fervently advocated these beliefs.
On the other hand, some scholars vigorously protested these supernatural views and called renewed attention to more rational explanations of behaviour. In the early 16th century, for example, the Swiss physician Paracelsus returned to the views of Hippocrates, asserting that mental illnesses were due to natural causes. Later in the century, German physician Johann Weyer argued that witches were actually mentally disturbed people in need of humane medical treatment.
French physician Philippe Pinel supervises the unshackling of mentally ill patients in 1794 at La Salpêtrière, a large hospital in Paris. Pinel believed in treating mentally ill people with compassion and patience, rather than with cruelty and violence.
During the Age of Enlightenment, in the 18th and early 19th centuries, people with mental illnesses continued to suffer from poor treatment. For the most part, they were left to wander the countryside or committed to institutions. In either case, conditions were generally wretched. One mental hospital, the Hospital of Saint Mary of Bethlehem in London, England, became notorious for its noisy, chaotic conditions and cruel treatment of patients.
Yet as the public’s awareness of such conditions grew, improvements in care and treatment began to appear. In 1789 Vincenzo Chiarugi, superintendent of a mental hospital in Florence, Italy, introduced hospital regulations that provided patients with high standards of hygiene, recreation and work opportunities, and minimal restraint. At nearly the same time, Jean-Baptiste Pussin, superintendent of a ward for "incurable" mental patients at La Bicêtre hospital in Paris, France, forbade staff to beat patients and released patients from chains. Philippe Pinel continued these reforms upon becoming chief physician of La Bicêtre’s ward for the mentally ill in 1793. Pinel began to keep case histories of patients and developed the concept of "moral treatment," which involved treating patients with kindness and sensitivity, and without cruelty or violence. In 1796, a Quaker named William Tuke who had laid the groundwork for the York Retreat in rural England, which became a model of compassionate care. The retreat enabled people with mental illnesses to rest peacefully, talk about their problems, and work. Eventually these humane techniques became widespread in Europe.
In 1908, after his release from an asylum for the mentally ill, Clifford Whittingham Beers wrote, "A Mind That Found Itself," which exposed the poor conditions he had suffered while confined. He went on to establish several organizations dedicated to the promotion of mental health reforms in the United States.
People living in the colonies of North America in the 17th and 18th century generally explained bizarre or deviant behaviour as God’s will or the obstacle working as of the devil. Some people with mental illnesses received care from their families, but most were jailed or confined in almshouses with the poor and infirm. By the mid-18th century, however, American physicians came to view mental illnesses as diseases of the brain, and advocated specialized facilities to treat the mentally ill. The Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia, which opened in 1752, became the first hospital in the American colonies to admit people with mental illnesses, housing them in a separate ward. However, in the hospital’s early years, mentally ill patients were chained to the walls of dark, cold cells.
In the 1780s American physician Benjamin Rush instituted changes at the Pennsylvania Hospital that greatly improved conditions for mentally ill patients. Although he endorsed the continued use of restraints, punishment, and bleeding, he also arranged for heat and better ventilation in the wards, separation of violent patients from other patients, and programs that offered work, exercise, and recreation to patients. Between the years 1817 and 1828, following the examples of Tuke and Pinel, a number of institutions opened that devoted themselves exclusively to the care of mentally ill people. The first private mental hospital in the United States was the Asylum for the Relief of Persons Deprived of the Use of Their Reason (now Friends Hospital), opened by Quakers in 1817 in what is now Philadelphia. Other privately established institutions soon followed, and state-sponsored hospitals - in Kentucky, New York, Virginia, and South Carolina - opened beginning in 1824.
American reformer Dorothea Dix championed the causes of prison inmates, the mentally ill, and the destitute. Horrified by the conditions provided for the mentally ill in Massachusetts. Dix successfully petitioned the state government for improvements in 1843. She was directly responsible for building or enlarging 32 mental hospitals in North America, Europe, and Japan.
Nevertheless, circumstances for most mentally ill people in the United States, especially those who were poor, remained dreadful. In 1841 Dorothea Dix, a Boston schoolteacher, began a campaign to make the public aware of the plight of mentally ill people. By 1880, as a direct result of her efforts, 32 psychiatric hospitals for the poor had opened. Increasingly, society viewed psychiatric institutions as the most appropriate form of care for people with mental illnesses. However, by the late 19th century, conditions in these institutions had deteriorated. Overcrowded and understaffed, psychiatric hospitals had shifted their treatment approach from moral therapy to warehousing and punishment. In 1908 Clifford Whittingham Beers aroused new concern for mentally ill individuals with the publication of A Mind That Found Itself, an account of his experiences as a mental patient. In 1909 Beers founded the National Committee for Mental Hygiene, which worked to prevent mental illness and ensure humane treatment of the mentally ill.
Following World War II (1939-1945), a movement emerged in the United States to reform the system of psychiatric hospitals, in which hundreds of thousands of mentally ill persons lived in isolation for years or decades. Many mental health professionals - seeing that large state institutions caused as much, if not more, harm to patients than mental illnesses themselves - came to believe that only patients with severe symptoms should be hospitalized. In addition, the development in the 1950s of Antipsychotic drugs, which helped to control bizarre and violent behaviour, allowed more patients to be treated in the community. In combination, these factors led to the deinstitutionalisation movement: the release, over the next four decades, of hundreds of thousands of patients from state mental hospitals. In 1950, 513,000 patients resided in these institutions. By 1965 there were 475,000, and 1990 states’ mental hospitals housed only 92,000 patients on any given night. Many patients who were released returned to their families, although many were transferred to questionable conditions in nursing homes or board-and-care homes. Many patients had no place to go and began to live on the streets.
The National Mental Health Act of 1946 created the National Institute of Mental Health as a centre for research and funding of research on mental illness. In 1955 Congress created a commission to investigate the state of mental health care, treatment, and prevention. In 1963, as a result of the commission’s findings, Congress passed the Community Mental Health Centres Act, had authorized the construction of community mental health centres throughout the country. Implementation of these centres was not as extensive as originally planned, and many people with severe mental illnesses failed to receive care of any kind.
One of the most important developments in the field of mental health in the United States has been the establishment of advocacy and support groups. The National Alliance for the Mentally ill (NAMI), one of the most influential of these groups, was founded in 1972. NAMI’s goal is to improve the lives of people with severe mental illnesses and their families by eliminating discrimination in housing and employment and by improving access to essential treatments and programs.
During the 1980's, all levels of government in the United States cut back on funding for social services. For example, the Social Security Administration discontinued benefits for approximately 300,000 people between 1981 and 1983. Of these, an estimated 100,000 were people with mental illnesses. Although the government eventually restored Social Security benefits to many of these people, the interruption of services caused widespread hardship.
The emergence of managed care in the 1990's as a way to contain health care costs had a tremendous impact on mental health care in the United States. Health insurance companies and health maintenance organizations increasingly scrutinized the effectiveness of various psychotherapies and drug treatments and put stricter limits on mental health care. In response to these restrictions, but congress passed the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996. This law required private medical plans that offer mental health coverage to set equal yearly and lifetime payment limits for coverage of both mental and physical illnesses.
In 1997 the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued new guidelines intended to prevent discrimination against people with mental illnesses in the workplace. The rules, based on the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, prohibit employers from asking job applicants if they have a history of mental illness and require employers to provide reasonable accommodations to workers with mental illnesses.
In recent years international agencies, led by the World Health Organization (WHO) of the United Nations (UN) have developed mental health policies that seek to reduce the huge burden of mental illness worldwide. These agencies are working to improve the quality of mental health services in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and elsewhere by educating governments on prevention and treatment of mental illness and on the rights of the mentally ill.
Psychiatry, is the branch of medicine specializing in mental illnesses. Psychiatrists not only diagnose and treat these disorders but also conduct research directed at understanding and preventing them.
A psychiatrist is a doctor of medicine who has had four years of postgraduate training in psychiatry. Many psychiatrists take further training in psychoanalysis, child psychiatry, or other subspecialties. Psychiatrists treat patients in private practice, in general hospitals, or in specialized facilities for the mentally ill (psychiatric hospitals, outpatient clinics, or community mental health centres). Some spend part or all of their time doing research or administering mental health programs. By contrast, psychologists, who often work closely with psychiatrists and treat many of the same kinds of patients, are not trained in medicine; consequently, they neither diagnose physical illness nor administer drugs.
The province of psychiatry is unusually broad for a medical specialty. Mental disorders may affect most aspects of a patient's life, including physical functioning, behaviour, emotions, thought, perception, interpersonal relationships, sexuality, work, and play. These disorders are caused by a poorly understood combination of biological, psychological, and social determinants. Psychiatry's task is to account for the diverse sources and manifestations of mental illness.