Book
Influence and Autonomy in Psychoanalysis
Stephen A. Mitchell's 1997 book, published in the Relational Perspectives series, examines psychoanalysis after its shift from a one-person model of the mind to a two-person, interactive and relational view of the analytic situation. Once the analyst is understood as a participant in the interaction, the analyst's influence on the patient can no longer be avoided. The book asks how analysts can still protect the patient's autonomy and integrity, given how far they personally shape the process. Mitchell builds a critical, comparative framework for the many concepts recently proposed to describe what passes between analyst and analysand. He draws on the interpersonal and Kleinian traditions, on object relations theory and on contemporary Freudian thought. Taking the problem of influence as his guiding thread, he reconsiders the therapeutic action of psychoanalysis, the ideals of anonymity and neutrality, the analyst's intentions, the nature of analytic knowledge and authority, and the clinical questions that gender and sexual orientation raise in a postmodern climate. He ends with a personal synthesis.
Main ideas
- Psychoanalysis has moved from a one-person model of the mind to a two-person, interactive, relational understanding of the analytic situation.
- Once the analyst is seen as a participant, influence on the patient cannot be avoided; the question is how to protect the patient's autonomy within it.
- The book offers a critical, comparative framework for the concepts that interpersonal, Kleinian, object-relations and contemporary Freudian analysts have proposed to describe analyst–patient interaction.
- Mitchell reconsiders the therapeutic action of psychoanalysis in the light of interaction.
- The publisher's description presents the classical ideals of analytic anonymity and neutrality as anachronistic, and Mitchell examines them critically.
- The book examines the analyst's intentions and the nature and limits of analytic knowledge and authority.
- It addresses the clinical dilemmas that gender and sexual orientation pose for the analyst in a postmodern climate.