| Abstract: |
Discusses some of the latent meanings that deviations in the classical tenet of the analyst's relative anonymity can have for the patient. Technical justifications for this precept, as well as the existing literature on the subject, are reviewed, and the relevance of this ground rule in the context of psychoanalytic psychotherapy is explored. Potential sources of threat to the maintenance of appropriate anonymity are also discussed. Two clinical examples in which the ground rule of anonymity was modified are presented. It is concluded that the data support the conclusion that the far-reaching consequences of the manner in which the therapist establishes and sustains the ground rules of the therapeutic relationship have been underappreciated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) |
