ABSTRACT
After the supervision with John Bowlby at the seminar, I strove to handle the patient’s rage, triggered by the missed sessions, in a different way. I managed to leave behind the argumentative and demanding atmosphere by shifting our attention to the patient’s perception of the therapist as a real person, and to my perception of him as a real person. This was effective in enabling us to continue therapy for another four months and come to an agreed conclusion of treatment. In terms of therapeutic outcome, the patient was able to experience some trust in the therapist and some affection for him, which was certainly a healing experience for him. There are, however, two main reservations: (1) the termination date was decided because of an external event, the patient’s move with his family to another town; (2) according to the therapist’s perception, the patient did not completely renounce his essentially distrustful attitude, at least not until the end of treatment. Since we do not have any aftertermination data, we do not know if the partial character change that was achieved went any further, came to a halt or, in the worst hypothesis, was undone. With hindsight, I believe that, if the handling of the patient’s character defences had been effective enough to make him renounce his attitude of distancing and distrust, this would have 76paved the way to a full emotional experiencing. This, in turn, might have been worked through in the relationship with the therapist, further promoting the adaptive change and making it permanent.
