Countertransference From a Depth Psychological Perspective

In this chapter, the author conducted an elaborate analysis of countertransference from a depth psychological perspective. In doing so, the author examined the psychological understandings of some of the most influential minds in psychoanalysis. As a way of providing an in-depth analysis, the author presented five distinct views on countertransference. It is important to note that each countertransference view also represents an evolution of sorts, and a change in the psychoanalytic understanding and approach to countertransference. The classical view is presented through the works of Sigmund Freud, Melanie Klein, and Annie Reich. Their views on countertransference formed the main premise that countertransference was of no therapeutic value and a barrier to treatment. In contrast, the totalistic view, a view pioneered by Donald Winnicott, Paula Heimann and Margaret Little, argued that countertransference was in fact a useful therapeutic tool that assisted the analyst in understanding their patient’s unconscious material. The next view, the complementary view, focused on the works of Heinrich Racker. Similar to the totalistic view, Racker and the complementary view emphasized the importance of countertransference while also highlighting the differences between the two views, in particular, the interactions between the patient and analyst. The fourth view explored, the relativistic view, argues that the transference/countertransference dynamic between the therapeutic dyad is immensely dependent on the interactions between the patient and analyst. Through the use of Lewis Aron’s work, the author was able to detail the interactions that take place between the therapeutic dyad. The final perspective examined, the integrative view, combines certain aspects of the previous four views and merges them into one. The author also focused on the importance of the analyst knowing themselves as a way of preventing their own unresolved conflicts from interfering in treatment, and instead using such wounds as a way of gaining a deeper understanding of the patient’s woundedness, creating a unique push and pull dynamic that provides a view into the patient’s psyche and ultimately facilitating healing.