Countertransference

---

 
Clinical technique has been changing considerably since the influence of Ferenczi left Hungary in the 1930s, and since the decline of Viennese ego-psychology in the US from the late 1970s.  The traditions that have emerged within psychoanalysis, including the use of countertransference and the analyst’s subjectivity mostly argue from one point of view, but here I have assumed that it is more important to try to debate the differences (and similarities) between points of view as well; and to do so with clinical material where possible.
 
2012  Being objective about the subjective. 
International Forum of Psychoanalysis  21: 136-145.
This was originally a talk at an international conference, convened to discuss the re-introduction of subjective experience back into the centre of psychoanalysis.  It compared relational psychoanalysis with a contemporary object relations approach.
 
2013 Freud’s countertransference
In Oelsner, R. (ed.)  Transference and Countertransference.  London: Routledge.
This paper is grounded in the principle that if countertransference is a real tool of the interaction between two people, then it will be apparent in clinical material from before the crucial reconsideration of countertransference around 1950.  Examples from four of Freud’s major case histories are used in order to show that the interaction with Freud illustrates the dynamics of the case revealed by traditional psychoanalytic means.
 
2016  Countertransference and Alive Moments: Help or Hindrance
London: Process Press
This book is an attempt to follow the ways in which the countertransference has come into use as an important tool in clinical work, either in the relational mode or in object relations psychoanalysis.  Whilst attempting set out clearly and fairly the distinctions between different approaches to countertransference, it does stand squarely on the tradition that moved from Paula Heimann to Wilfred Bion and Betty Joseph.