![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 3 to 27 of 30. Go back in thread:
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 14, 2006, at 21:24:36
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » Pfinstegg, posted by annierose on September 14, 2006, at 20:41:13
Hi Annie! I do think going frequently, while horrible on the budget, does offer the opportunity for a deeper relationship. Maybe that, of itself, has profound healing properties- perhaps beyond what we are aware of as it's occuring. It certainly feels wonderful! So I guess I'd come down on your T's side. I'm assuming it's right to begin going down when you are feeling ready to consider termination. I wasn't sure of your reason- I don't think it was that!
Right now, I'm sitting up all the time. Lying down allowed for a lot of regression, so that I could really feel and know more about my early selves. But now we both feel that seeing him is very important- especially for the youngest parts. I'm comfortable now, but. like you I used to be terrified and think of ANYPLACE to hide where I couldn't be seen- behind or under the couch, behind the curtains, etc., so I do know exactly how it feels to not want to be seen at all. I don't know if you are the same, but I found out that it was particular young selves which couldn't bear being looked at.
Posted by Daisym on September 14, 2006, at 23:44:26
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » annierose, posted by Pfinstegg on September 14, 2006, at 21:24:36
A HUGE and warm HELLO! I've missed you!
I'm so glad you are doing so well and still feel so connected to your therapist. I was thinking about one of your posts last night, in which you were sort of sadly resigned to the fact that the intense closeness had worn off a bit. I'm happy that it was simply changed in a way and it has now changed back.
I passed the three year mark (I had to really think about that, it HAS been 3 years!) in May and I'm about to change how often I go. I've been going 4x a week pretty steady for awhile but we've decided to try 3x a week and take the 4th session and split it between T and Th sessions. So I'll go an hour and half on those days. Part of this is logistical, too much driving on Wed and part is a frustration of not having enough time for all the parts and pieces. I've become afraid to go really deep because it is so hard to get myself together to leave. And then I'm so angry that he let me fall apart and then makes me leave. So we are going to try this as a two week experiment.
I've learned so much from my Fellowship program. Last weekend we worked at integrating analytic theory and technique with developmental theory and play techniques. It was fascinating and painful for me in places. I think I shared somewhere here - I was brilliant in places because of my own experiences, not because I totally understood the material. :) And I am more and more convinced that doing therapy the way we are doing it is truly a gift. Most people do not get to experience such a deep and healing connection. In November we will be working with Dan Siegel and his research about changing the brain. And next March I'll be in Boston for a class with Daniel Stern about what effects change in psychotherapy. So it is grueling but hugely rewarding, both professionally and personally.
I'm so glad you checked in.
Posted by zazenducky on September 15, 2006, at 8:25:22
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » Pfinstegg, posted by Daisym on September 14, 2006, at 23:44:26
I missed you even though I don't think I ever posted to you. It was nice to see your name again.
Posted by Dinah on September 15, 2006, at 9:17:18
In reply to Just saying hello!, posted by Pfinstegg on September 14, 2006, at 20:16:02
I'm so happy you're doing well!
I've missed you, but the best reason to miss someone is because they're doing well. :)
Posted by antigua on September 15, 2006, at 14:12:47
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » Pfinstegg, posted by Dinah on September 15, 2006, at 9:17:18
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 15, 2006, at 17:58:47
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » Pfinstegg, posted by Daisym on September 14, 2006, at 23:44:26
Hi Daisy! A huge and warm hello to you, too- and thanks for your sweet note. I've been reading, though not posting, so I did know about your scheduling challenges- and your fellowship.
I know people who have double sessions (90 minutes) and they feel that it works very well because all the parts get to have time, every time. And I do know one person who does it because she has to drive quite a distance, and fewer but longer sessions are more efficient for her. They like this arrangement; I hope you will, too. And the day you don't see your T, you have group, don't you? And also a phone session on Friday if you want one?
What you are doing with your fellowship really sounds fascinating. You have all the "hot" speakers! I am involved with a program run by a branch of the American Psychoanalytic Association which takes three years, and involves four three-day weekends. We seem to be having the same speakers as you! I do agree- having the traumas ourselves really gives us so much insight. The writing and reading which we have to do seem so natural and easy. I'd love to hear more about your program.
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 15, 2006, at 18:10:49
In reply to Re: Just saying hello!, posted by zazenducky on September 15, 2006, at 8:25:22
Thank you all so much for your lovely welcome! It means so much. I've been reading, and following what was happening with everyone, but went through such a tough time myself that I just didn't feel able to post. I think I just didn't want people to know how awful it was. But so many important, deep things came out, and we are now working them through- it just had to happen that way, I guess! Or, more accurately, it DID happen that way long ago, and I had to face it.
Anyway, thank you, guys.
Posted by gardenergirl on September 15, 2006, at 19:24:13
In reply to zazenducky, Dinah and antigua...., posted by Pfinstegg on September 15, 2006, at 18:10:49
Glad you've worked your way back with your T. I'll take that into my session Monday as inspiration.
Very nice to see your name here.
take care,
gg
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 15, 2006, at 19:39:43
In reply to zazenducky, Dinah and antigua...., posted by Pfinstegg on September 15, 2006, at 18:10:49
Thanks, gg! You probably know really well from professional experience that people with my type of experience ( mother hospitalized for post-partum depression) have huge difficulties learning how to be fully connected- an adult part can, but there is a younger part which just can't. I really give enormous credit to my wonderful analyst that he never gave up on me, and was willing to go through the incredibly painful re-experiencing of those early times-just staying with me the whole time. It was hard on him. But we're in such a better place now. I think perhaps we've both earned the right to be a bit inspiring!
Posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2006, at 21:36:16
In reply to making it back.., posted by Pfinstegg on September 15, 2006, at 19:39:43
Hey, nice to see you back :-)
I'm getting interested in the relation between psychoanalysis / psychodynamic theory and neurology.
More in particular on how the mental structures posited by the theory (id, ego, superego) and defences (represesion etc) are realized in the neurology.
Sounds like there are people working on this?
Any names / articles etc would be greatfully received thanks!
Posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2006, at 21:42:45
In reply to Re: making it back.. » Pfinstegg, posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2006, at 21:36:16
PS. Someone or other said that there are two ways we can view psychoanalysis:
1) As an art.
2) As a science.
He went on to critique psychoanalysis for claiming to have scientific status. He went on to praise it for its art.I guess that is the way I've viewed it for a while now... You can view it as a science but then there are significant problems with it... Or you can view it as an art and consider it is going very well indeed.
I choose to view it as an art.
But I've just read something where the guy was trying to argue that all the usual suspects (biological, psychoanalytic, behavioural and learning, cognitive, humanistic and existential, sociological) can be made consistent with the medical paradigm and the medical paradigm can be enlarged in order to embrace them.
Anyway... Point it that it got me thinking about the relationship between psychodynamic structures of mind (the id, ego, superego) and the mental defences (repression, regression etc) and how these might be implemented in the neurology.
There are people studying the relationship between psychoanalytic structures and neurology, aren't there?
Any references to articles or names of people would be gratefully received.
The more in line they are with neuropsychology the better for me (so I can understand what they are getting at). But whatever really. There is a lot of bad stuff out there... I'd like to see some of the good stuff.
Thanks.
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 21, 2006, at 21:04:31
In reply to Re: making it back.., posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2006, at 21:42:45
People have been talking for a long time about whether psychoanalysis is an art or a science, haven't they? Now, the majority of younger analysts have backgrounds in psychology or social work, rather than medicine, which puts it a little further away from science. At the same time, people are starting to do PET and fMRI imaging to see what is happening, both in illness and during therapy, which gives it a real scientific foundation for the first time.
As a consumer, analysis feels like a moment-to-moment creation, informed by the analyst's knowledge, personality and unconscious feelings as they connect with the same things in the patient. It is never the same with any two analyst-patient dyads, nor is it the same within the dyad- it is always changing, and, hopefully, progressing. So, I'd be inclined to call it more of an art.
I don't think people emphasize ego, super-ego and id the way they once did. They do rely heavily on an "observing ego", able to look within and put things in perspective. I think super-ego refers to a severe conscience, which is not emphasized now too much. Rather than "id", people talk about "implicit memory" and "implicit relational knowing". These are thought to be right hemisphere functions roughly equivalent to one's unconscious. Even in analysis, they may never become conscious, but the emotions connected to them play a very important part in the relationship to the analyst, and in the growth which takes place within the person.
A new concept, which we all talk about a lot here, concerns attachment between the patient and analyst. This is considered to be vital in creating a new, healthier kind of "relational knowing" to supercede the original damaging parental relationships, which always remain partly unconscious .Attachment centers lie very deep in the brain-way below conscious knowing. Freud sometimes emphasized this a bit, but sometimes didn't. The person who originally recognized its importance was Sandor Ferenczi.
I am not the best person to ask about what to read, but I think Daisy will know much more, as she is taking a fellowship in just this area- trauma and psychological repair. Alan Schore is very interesting on the neurological basis of attachment and successful psychotherapy; Donnel Stern is another contemporary
author with similiar interests. I think we will see a huge explosion of increasingly sensitive brain imaging which will shed a lot of light on what trauma and attachment failure do to the brain, and how psychotherapy can repair those deficits. We're going to be able to see the repair! So exciting! We just need enough really well-trained therapists so that everyone who needs it can get really good therapy. That will make such a difference in personal happiness and family health.
Posted by Daisym on September 22, 2006, at 0:45:06
In reply to psychoanalysis, posted by Pfinstegg on September 21, 2006, at 21:04:31
One of the authors I'm really interested in right now is Bion - he talks about the concept of reverie and how the unconscious of the therapist can tune in to the inner life of the patient and help make repairs. But he is hard to read and very obtuse -- but fascinating.
I highly recommend "The Present Moment" by Daniel Stern, "The Neuroscience of Psychotherapy" by Louis Cozolino and "Ordinary People and Extra-Ordinary Protections" by Judith Mitrani. These aren't easy reads but they are pretty approachable. Mitrani is a post-Kleinian analyst who weaves clinical stories with theory and explains it all pretty well. But she is definitely an American analyst!
Two of my favorite writers/theorists remain Winnicott and Thomas Ogden. Almost anything they've written is good background information.
I hope this helps.
Posted by littleone on September 23, 2006, at 18:16:15
In reply to Just saying hello!, posted by Pfinstegg on September 14, 2006, at 20:16:02
A big hello right back to you Pfinstegg!
It was just lovely to see your name here again. You sound so positive. I'm so glad things are going well for you.
I could be a bit off here, but from what I can tell, you took a break from babble because you were wanting babble to meet certain needs for you and it wasn't doing that. This left you feeling very upset and you left babble so you could work through these need issues with your T. Is that sort of right?
This comes up a lot for me and I get very confused over the whole idea of needs.
On the one hand I believe that these needs are coming up because of all my "stuff" and they aren't reasonable needs. And that it is unreasonable to expect babble to fill these needs. And that I should go to my T and have him fill these needs.
But on the other hand I read about how you should get your needs met by different sources (no one person, including your T, can meet all your needs), it is a good thing to tell people when you have a need and give them the opportunity to meet it. That it is normal and okay to have needs and have them filled by other people. In fact, that is the very reason why we have relationships.
Very conflicting and confusing.
I was just wondering if you had similar thoughts and how you have resolved them.
I know it would be important to talk to your T about what your needs were and how you wanted them filled. But I guess I start getting confused around how you actually do get them filled. I tend to think you should identify the needs then try to find ways to fill them yourself, but then why bother having relationships?
Just wondering what your thoughts were.
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 23, 2006, at 22:39:14
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » Pfinstegg, posted by littleone on September 23, 2006, at 18:16:15
Hello, littleone! You are exactly right. All of my unmet needs, from early times, especially, became so intense in my therapy, and they spilled right over to Babble, and other places. While I had been originally comfortable and interested with whatever level of give and take occurred here, I got terribly sensitive about whether my posts were answered, whether people understood me, whether they cared, etc. Because of where I was, emotionally, I was just going to be hurt by everything, even though no-one here ever actually said a hurtful word. They said a lot of great, supportive things, but it was never going to be enough for me- the way I was.
In analysis, we did a huge amount of work on this. My analyst was constantly encouraging me to bring up the feelings of my younger parts, and to explore and respect their needs. As to getting the needs met, we seemed to do it two ways. He is a very warm, attentive listener, and often just the listening make me feel like those very young needs were being met- often for the first time. He also says very helpful things in very genuine, tender tones, like, "let me contain all of your different parts" or "I'm here for you emotionally, not just in the room with you"- and lots of similiar phrases which seem to speak to the younger parts, and console them. I think some of these needs have really gotten met by him, and aren't as painful as they were.
There's another part, too. He is encouraging me to learn more and more about the feelings of my younger parts, and to befriend and console them, myself. This can be hard work, as they are sometimes angry and jealous of one another, and of me. I need to find out why they are feeling that way first, and respect it- then I can usuually offer some comfort. As my analyst says, "they are only with me an hour a day, but they're with you all the time!" So it's a two-pronged effort. Without the comfort my analyst has given me, I don't think I would be able to self-comfort nearly as well as I'm doing. I think I would just try to push the pain down, the way I used to. And we all know that doesn't work well at all!
Now that these needs don't feel so overwhelming and threatening, I'm finding it much easier to ask for things from other people- family members and friends. Before, I just used to give, but didn't feel that I should be given to. I guess I thought doing that would open up a floodgate! The floodgate finally got opened, and the flow of water is getting down to a reasonable level.
Very nice to hear from you.
Posted by Jost on September 23, 2006, at 23:41:38
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis, posted by Daisym on September 22, 2006, at 0:45:06
If you like Bion, have you read any books/ articles by Michael Eigen?
Thanks for the references, I'll definitely check them out.
Jost
Posted by Jost on September 23, 2006, at 23:49:28
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis, posted by Daisym on September 22, 2006, at 0:45:06
The reference for the Daniel Stern book is as follows, for anyone who's interested:
"The Present Moment in Psychotherapy and Everyday Life"
Jost
Posted by littleone on September 24, 2006, at 21:15:33
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » littleone, posted by Pfinstegg on September 23, 2006, at 22:39:14
Firstly, I’m so glad you were able to work through this and come back to babble. You’ve done so much hard work with your analyst. I love hearing about your journey.
You said you were originally comfortable with babble, but then later became overly sensitive to it. Was this triggered by what you were working on in your analysis? It always amazes me that I’m mad at my boss because I’m actually mad at my T inside. Or I’m upset with babble because I’m actually upset with my T. How my mind works at diverting the feelings to a “safer” target.
>> “let me contain all of your different parts”
I often hear the word “contain” in relation to therapy, but never really understand what it means. Is your analyst saying he’ll emotionally hold all of your different parts, or is he saying he’ll keep the space (ie his office) safe for all your parts to express their needs, or something else altogether?
>> He is encouraging me to learn more and more about the feelings of my younger parts, and to befriend and console them myself.
You’re right, this is very hard work. I’m not very good at this (yet). At the moment I try to learn about them by listening inside (which I still find very difficult) and journaling. Occasionally I’ll draw. Do you have other techniques you use? I suspect your intensive analysis has helped you a lot at listening inside.
I understand what you were saying about your ability to comfort your parts, but it did kind of surprise me. I thought that from having kids of your own, you would have learnt this with them. Are you saying that your analyst taught you better ways to comfort?
I tend to comfort my parts by making it okay for them to do child-like things (eg reading kids books or colouring) and I have a comfort book that soothes them. Often putting new things in my comfort book is also very soothing for them. I’m not sure, but it sounds like you might be providing comfort by making your parts feel listened to and understood and accepted. I’m interested in how exactly you comfort your parts.
Your talk about needs was very interesting. So you’re saying that when it’s an unmet childhood need, then it is overwhelming and not healthy for babble/friends/etc to meet it. This type of need should be worked through and resolved with your T. But that all people have other healthy needs and it *is* reasonable to ask for these needs to be met by friends. Is that kind of what you’re saying?
I guess I kind of get confused by whether a need falls into the unmet childhood needs bucket, or the healthy needs bucket. Eg I know one need would be the need to feel accepted, but it seems like that could fall into both areas. I guess you could say that if it is too intense, then it’s probably the unhealthy type. But say it was a healthy level of need, if it kept getting refused, then wouldn’t it become very upsetting? Sorry, the whole needs thing confuses me so much.
Was it scary when you first tried to ask for things from family/friends? I bet it would have been nice to (mentally) hold your analyst’s hand as you tried that. What sort of needs do you ask family/friends to meet? Do you mean like if you’re upset about something, you talk it over with them?
I think it’s a big step forward to be able to believe that you should be given to (and to actually accept things given to you). I feel like doing a little happy dance for you.
Posted by Pfinstegg on September 24, 2006, at 23:45:52
In reply to Re: Just saying hello! » Pfinstegg, posted by littleone on September 24, 2006, at 21:15:33
Well, he doesn't really say what he means by "containing", but I always feel- he says it in such a quiet, tender voice- that he means that he will emotionally hold, and thus comfort-the parts of me which are hurting, terrified or distrustful. He says it when those parts are closer to the surface, so that I am more aware of them, It always has a very consoling effect- that the parts which feel lost and alone finally feel that there is someone there for them. Of course, we have to do this considerably more than once!
As far as comforting and befriending my younger parts myself, I do it mostly by keeping them in mind, and trying to be curious about what they are feeling and experiencing. I've learned to ask questions- and sometimes get amazing answers. I also write in a journal almost every day. I do have two sons- one grown and one still at home, and I know I have been a good mother to them- lots of love, hugs and snuggling, playing with them, listening to them and respecting their ideas. I think the world of them both. One is now grown, has a doctorate in physics and a lovely new wife- and still makes a real place in his life for us- in fact, from time to time, he still needs our emotional support. The younger one still needs us full time! I wanted to do the exact opposite of what was done to me- as I know we all do.
Taking good care of them didn't translate at all into taking good care of my own younger selves, until I began analysis. I was trying to keep them out of my consciousness altogether; I was terribly afraid of becoming completely overwhelmed. In fact, I did become quite overwhelmed as all the early feelings became more conscious. I don't know if this is the case for most people, but, for me, it was true that I got worse before I began getting better. I think it takes so much strength and steadfastness on the part of therapists to see someone through this process. And when you think you're only one of the nine or ten people they see every day! Then, too, it takes every bit of energy and strength on our parts.
Sometimes I wonder, "am I going to have to spend so much time connecting and empathizing with my younger parts my whole life? I'm hoping they will become more integrated into me, and that I won't have to, but I don't know.
I love the creative things you do for your younger parts- the special book and the drawings. Those are wonderful ideas.-very worth trying.
Posted by Daisym on September 24, 2006, at 23:59:33
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis » Daisym, posted by Jost on September 23, 2006, at 23:41:38
Hey Jost, thanks for correcting that link for me. I didn't realize it was wrong.
I haven't read Eigen but one of my professors suggested reading Ferrero, who interprets Bion in a more useable way. So I'm reading him first.
Thanks for the suggestion - I'll look into it.
So many things to read...so little time. I need a vacation!
Posted by Jost on September 25, 2006, at 0:13:54
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis » Jost, posted by Daisym on September 24, 2006, at 23:59:33
Hmm. I'll look into Ferrero. Eigen is a little off the deep end. In a good way, I think, but also not a terribly applicable to anything way.
It's more a sensibility, a type of engagement, that's very spiritual in some way and intense-- but not a teaching type of book, or anything one could copy.
It's more to say-- you can even go this far, and do and think these things with patients, who really need it, and it works-- or sometimes doesn't for a while, then does, then doesn't-- but it's a profound exploration that gives a lot of meaning.
So it makes room for a lot of unconventional things, that one otherwise would not feel free to attempt-- as a T.
Jost
Posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2006, at 1:18:16
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis » Daisym, posted by Jost on September 25, 2006, at 0:13:54
Thanks for the links and suggestions.
I'll follow up on the names. I'll see if I can get "The neuroscience of psychotherapy" in from the library because there is a chapter in there on the relation between neurology and psychotherapy.
I had heard that there is less emphasis on the psychic structures these days.
I had heard that some people think of them as metaphoric and not as attempted descriptions of functional neurological units. To take them as metaphoric seems to be to take the theory that posits those entities to be an art rather than a science, however.
I guess what I'm really looking for are short(ish) articles available online that might introduce one to the topic of the neurobiology of psychoanalysis. Just trying to grasp what the project is supposed to be for those who think that psychoanalysis is a science.
Basically... To see how that project fits in with biomedical research and research in cognitive psychology etc.
I'll google the names, though, and see what I can find.
Thanks.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2006, at 1:23:56
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis, posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2006, at 1:18:16
PS I know there is some work being done on attachment and the like from within social psychology. Especially personality research etc. I've got this:
"Current Controversies and Issues in Personality" and I think they talk about some research that has been done on attachment etc. I haven't flicked through it in a while, but I should reread the relevant parts.
Is there something along the lines of an introductory textbook (or even better an article available online) that introduces psychoanalysis generally and outlines the different varieties in a reasonable amount of detail? In particular I would be interested in trying to figure:
1) Whether different varieties are competing theories (and what the relevant data would be to support one theory and be anomalous for another)
2) What kind of scientific research is generated from the different theoriesThanks.
Posted by Jost on September 25, 2006, at 14:36:02
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis, posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2006, at 1:18:16
That topic-- the neurobiology of Psa-- has been big in the US for a few years.
Last year or maybe two, one of the Psa Institutes had a conference on it. If I can get the cites from my T tomorrow, I'll let you know.
I also might be able to find them myself, but as he mentioned it to me, that might be better.
Probably an issue of one of the Psa Journals published the papers-- or if it's a hot topic, there probably are some anyway.
Do you read any of those (Psa Journals, I mean)?
Jost
Posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2006, at 17:44:41
In reply to Re: psychoanalysis » alexandra_k, posted by Jost on September 25, 2006, at 14:36:02
Psa?
I've seen a couple psychoanalytic journals but I'm having trouble accessing them. My institution doesn't subscribe and while I could attempt to get articles by interloan I won't know if they are at all what I'm looking for until I've read them.
Journal access can be a bit funny here with some journals. Sometimes it is a matter of figuring how to get in to the darned things. Sometimes you get told you don't have access but if you try and get in from another link turns out that you do.
I'm pretty sure that we don't subscribe to the psychoanalytic journals though...
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.