Complexity and Risk in Relational Therapy: Discussion of Joye Weisel-Barth’s “Courting the ‘Real’ and Stumbling in ‘Reality’”

Abstract

In this courageous and conceptually rich article, Joye Weisel-Barth shares her experience with her patient, Lara, in which a spontaneous, well-intended decision at a moment of heightened emotional connection led, unpredictably, to later events which caused the treatment to collapse. Weisel-Barth’s article invites reflection regarding both the complexity and risks involved in the analytic therapist’s greater participatory freedom—a core element in contemporary relational thinking, broadly defined. I consider what happened between Weisel-Barth and Lara from four points-of-view. The first has to do with the mutuality-asymmetry dialectic first named by Lew Aron (1991), developed more fully by Wally Burke (1992), and later canoninzed by Irwin Hoffman (1998). The second concerns what Madeleine and Willy Baranger (1961–1962) first recognized as the necessary ambiguity of the analytic situation. Related to that is the necessary complexity of the analyst’s subjectivity-as-analyst. And the fourth set of considerations, informed by Rachel Peltz’s (2012) article, “Ways of Hearing: Getting Inside Psychoanalysis,” concerns what it means to “go in close” in an analytic relationship, with particular reference to contemporary relational and Bionian approaches.

TRANSLATIONS OF ABSTRACT

Dans cet article courageux et conceptuellement riche, Joye Weisel-Barth nous fait part d’une expérience avec sa patiente, Lara, au cours de laquelle une décision spontanée et bien-intentionnée, survenue à un moment de connexion émotionnelle intense, a malencontreusement mené à l’échec du traitement. Ce récit nous convie à une réflexion sur les enjeux de la complexité, en particulier sur les risques associés à la plus grande liberté de participation du thérapeute analytique—cet élément central de la pensée relationnelle contemporaine. Je propose de revoir selon quatre perspectives différentes ce qui s’est passé entre Weisel-Barth et sa patiente Lara. La première prend en compte la dialectique mutualité-asymétrie définie par Lew Aron (1991), développée par Wally Burke (1992) et finalement admise comme canon psychanalytique par Irwin Hoffman (1998). La deuxième s’appuie sur ce que Madeleine et Willy Baranger (1961–1962) ont reconnu comme la nécessaire complexité de la situation analytique. Reliée à celle-ci, il y a la nécessaire complexité de la subjectivité-en-tant-qu’analyste de l’analyste. Les dernières considérations, inspirées de l’article de Rachel Peltz (2012), Ways of Hearing: Getting Inside Psychoanalysis, traitent de ce que signifie « devenir proches » dans la relation analytique, en se référant à Bion et aux approches relationnelles contemporaines.

In questo articolo coraggioso e concettualmente ricco, Joye Weisel-Barth espone la sua esperienza con la paziente Lara in cui una decisione animata da buone intenzioni in un momento di accesa connessione emotiva provocò in modi imprevedibili eventi successivi che portarono al collasso del trattamento. L’articolo di Weisel-Barth invita a riflettere sui rischi e la complessità connessi ad una maggiore libertà di partecipazione analitica del terapeuta – un elemento chiave nel pensiero relazionale contemporaneo, nella sua più ampia definizione. Io prendo in considerazione ciò che accadde tra Weisel-Barth e Lara da quattro punti di vista. Il primo ha a che fare con la mutualità-asimmetria dialettica enunciata per la prima volta da Aron (1991) e sviluppata ulteriormente da Wally Burke (1992), e più tardi canonizzata da Hoffman (1998). Il secondo riguarda ciò che Madeleine e Willy Baranger (1961–1962) riconobbero per primi come la necessaria ambiguità della situazione analitica. In relazione ad essa è la necessaria complessità della soggettività dell’analista. E il quarto insieme di considerazioni è fornito dall’articolo di Rachel Peltz’s (2012). L’articolo Ways of Hearing: Getting Inside Psychoanalysis (Modalità di ascolto entrare nella psiconalisi), riguarda ciò che si intende per “avvicinarsi” in una relazione analitica con particolare riferimento agli approcci relazionali contemporanei e a quelli Bioniani.

Keywords:

• ambiguity
• asymmetry
• closeness
• complexity
• mutuality
• participatory freedom
• risk

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Steven Stern

Steven Stern, Psy.D., is a Faculty Member of the Massachusetts Institute for Psychoanalysis and a Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine and Maine Medical Center. His book-in-preparation, Needed Relationships and Psychoanalytic Healing, is under contract with Routledge.