![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Stemming from a Smith College lecture, this article tells a personal story of professional development—a work in progress. The author employs David Barlow's (Citation2004) distinction between evidence‐based psychological treatments and generic psychotherapy to highlight the perennial controversy about the roles of science and art in the conduct of psychotherapy. The article explicates two facets of the art: sensitivity to ethical considerations and mentalizing capacity. Both arts are amenable to scientific investigation. Employing Barlow's distinction, the author delineates varying blends of science and art in psychotherapy.
Keywords:
Acknowledgements
This article evolved from “Attachment and Mentalizing: Implications for Treating Trauma,” presented at the Brown Lecture Series, Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, on August 9, 2004. The author is grateful to Gerald Schamess for his encouragement to translate these ideas into publishable form; to Laurie Pearlman for her helpful comments on the presentation; and to Kathryn Zerbe for the gift of the book from which the epigraph is taken. The author also thanks Susan Allen, Chris Brown, Peter Fonagy, Edith Funk, Glen Gabbard, Toby Haslam‐Hopwood, Lisa Lewis, Matthew Munich, Richard Munich, Ed Poa, and Roger Verdon for their constructively critical reviews of an earlier draft.