Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To see translations of this article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

When there are translations of the current article, you will see a flag/pennant icon next to the title, like this: 2015-11-06_11h14_24 For example:


Click on it and you will see a bibliographic list of papers that are published translations of the current article. Note that when no published translations are available, you can also translate an article on the fly using Google translate.


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

Wallerstein, R.S. (1999). Commentary on "Making the Case for Psychoanalytic Therapies in the Current Psychiatric Environment" by John G. Gunderson and Glen O. Gabbard. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 47(3):728-735.

(1999). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 47(3):728-735

Commentary on "Making the Case for Psychoanalytic Therapies in the Current Psychiatric Environment" by John G. Gunderson and Glen O. Gabbard Related Papers

Robert S. Wallerstein

Gunderson and Gabbard raise an impassioned cri de coeur about the very survival of psychoanalytic psychotherapy as an integral part of the psychiatric armamentarium within the current health care scene. They assert, and I agree fully, that where once (in the halcyon days of the 1950s and 1960s) it took center stage as the principal psychiatric therapeutic, it has in recent decades become progressively “marginalized,” as they put it, within psychiatry. In an invited address in 1990 to the California Psychiatric Association on the future of psychotherapy (Wallerstein 1991), I called our psychotherapeutic enterprise an “endangered species” within psychiatry. In the decade since, the situation has certainly worsened.

In that 1990 address I outlined, even more elaborately than Gunderson and Gabbard do here, the variety of political, socioeconomic, scientific, and professional pressures that have together led us to this progressively unhappy state of affairs. I offered there my own guardedly optimistic statement of the conditions under which we might survive as psychoanalytic therapists, without, however, making the vital growth of our research structure as central to the prognosis for our future well-being as Gunderson and Gabbard very properly have. Nonetheless, I do offer some demurral to their statements on the way in which the pressures under which we work have brought about this decline.

[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.