Effective management of resistance in ISTDP, an interview with Jonathan Entis
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 жов 2024
- In April 2023, Jonathan Entis is coming to Malmö Center for ISTDP to present on the topic of resistance work in Intensive Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherapy, ISTDP.
In this interview, Jonathan sits down with danish clinical psychologist Mikkel Reher-Langberg to touch on some of the current conversation on Habib Davanloo, ISTDP, the Malmö event and more.
Love the focus on defense work. Davnaloo urged us to acquaint the patient with his defenses and how they can operate to create resistance. By acquainting the patient with his D and R, and encouraging him then to turn on them, feelings naturally arise. This is in contrast to just pressing on or "fishing for feelings" - something he warned us against. As Jonathan so aptly notes, this is essential work in creating character change.
Great interview!
Not sure I prefer cases from the 70s, though those are great. For me, the 1990 book is the Bible. When I studied with Davanloo he was clear we should not create iatrogenic anger. Later he didn't seem to care and tried to make something happen in the T instead of just following the UTA. Different approaches and different clinicians are drawn to different phases of his work. Delighted this is all being discussed openly.
As Freud said, any method that priorities transference and resistance is considered psychoanalytic. Same for ISTDP. There are many ways to identify and intensify the patient's conflicts in order to breakthrough into the unconscious, where the healing force is mobilized.
This was actually a zoom interview, but someting went wrong with the render of the recording - thus we will unfortunately have to make due with the still image of Jonathan.
Great interview🎉
In Military they also work with resistance
So Davanloo changed his style substantially over the decades. It's good to recognize these different "Davanloo periods", but does anyone have a clue why he changed? Well clearly he thought it was better to change, but what were his considerations, why did he think so, and what might we learn from these changes and the conflicts he himself seemed to be facing with his own technique? (I'm only at 17:00 but this came up and didn't want to forget to mention/ask)
The changes we talk about during the 80's and 90's may be a reflection of his teaching, rather than his actual technique. If you want, you can check out my comment to the talk I did on this here on UA-cam.