English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this discussion I use the interaction between Dr. Davis (referred to as Scott) and his analysis and, Sue, to examine an implicit ideal that we all might hold, that is favoring the need to re-present experience in words as a way of helping patients. Often a worded response (as opposed to an embodied registration, a facial expression or verbal pause or accent, for example), can feel to those we work with as robbing them of the power of their efforts in treatment that we are witnessing and trying to recognize. The worded response can feel like a usurpation of agency serving the narcissistic needs of the analyst over those of the patient. Bollas has called this an “extractive introjection.” I explore moments in the clinical interaction where this might have occurred at the same time that Scott adroitly uses his and his patient’s embodied emotional registrations effectively.

Discussion of “Words and music: Creating transformative opportunities through implicit and explicit dialogue”