Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To turn on (or off) thumbnails in the list of videos….

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To visualize a snapshot of a Video in PEP Web, simply turn on the Preview feature located above the results list of the Videos Section.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Gabbard, G.O. (1997). Letter: Glen O. Gabbard Replies. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 45:571-572.

(1997). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 45:571-572

Letter: Glen O. Gabbard Replies

Glen O. Gabbard

I welcome the opportunity to respond to the concerns of Emanuel Berman, one of our leading Ferenczi scholars. He describes mutual analysis as “a thoughtful and systematic attempt to develop a more effective analytic technique.” He goes on to state, “There is a crucial difference, however, between critically evaluating experimental treatment methods and stigmatizing them in toto as boundary violations.” He compares Ferenczi's innovations with McLaughlin's report of allowing a patient to grasp his hand in one session and with Renik's self-disclosures.

I disagree with Dr. Berman's point in two respects.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2019, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.