First Posted on August 5, 2010 by alisonball
As a psychotherapist who is not a psychologist, I get rather fed up with the implications these days that our sort of psychotherapy is of no value because it lacks an evidence base on a par with Cognitive Behavioural Therapies. It is as if, just because many “scientifically” based studies have been conducted for that cognitive work, then somehow it means that such “evidence” makes that therapy the “gold standard” of treatment- for just about everything! I even recall a leading professional in that field many years ago claiming that they could “cure schizophrenia in ten sessions.”
And it can be said that over many years the psychoanalytic and psychodynamic world have eschewed a lot of that so-called scientifically based research that would “prove” the validity and reliability of their work. In that way perhaps psychoanalysts and those of us who do work long term and from a psychodynamic base, have been our own worst enemies. We have seen our work more as an art than a science. Certainly it means that we do not easily fit into the modern leaning for government to only embrace the short term, so called ”evidence based” therapies.
But of course there are all sorts of studies available (*For example as below) that do show the worth of psychodynamically based therapies and I am certain there are thousands of people who have experienced the work who can attest to the transformation it has brought to their lives. However many such accounts would be considered “anecdotal” in that quasi scientific world of “evidence based” medicine. And all of us who do do this medium to long term therapy that sees as paramount, a consistent and reliable relationship as the foundation of the work, also know that our work is being validated by much of the neuro-scientific findings that show, not only the effects on the brain of problematic attachment figures and later emotional development but also what is needed to effect real and lasting change.
Definitely for some people and some sorts of changes, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy is enough and all that is needed but, the people who turn up in the practices of my analytic colleagues and the members of our Association (Australian Association of Somatic Psychotherapists) have usually already experienced the cognitive work AND know within themselves, that they require a lot more. And this is where our sort of psychotherapy comes into its own.
I have never believed that Cognitive Behavioural Therapy- which, I might say, has been vigorously promoted over many years now by its proponents, is any real threat to our members. And especially I do not see those sort of therapies gaining Medicare Benefits in Australia is any long term threat to our members. Rather, I see it that such access to psychological services will mean that many more people will try to get the help they need for their problems in life. This will create a whole new potential clientele for those of us who can actually do what is needed to help those who have suffered long term relational trauma and/ or abuse. Though it might be only a trickle of people who can bear to make the commitment needed, there will always be a flow on to our members.
* Shedler J. 2009,(In press. Copyright)): The Efficacy of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy.American Psychologist, American Psychological Association.www.apa.org/journals. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. Revised: 10-9-2009. University of Colorado Denver.
