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 article, I respond to commentaries by Morgan (2016) and Schacht (2016) regarding my presentation of the cases of Beth and Amy (Samlin, 2016).  Addressing the dialectic raised between Morgan’s (2016) support for and Schacht’s (2016) skepticism towards the integration of Time-Limited Dynamic Psychotherapy (TLDP) and the Aversion/Attachment Model of Client Suffering (A/AMCS, I organize my response into three broad sections.  First, I provide context as to the type of Buddhist tradition from which the A/AMCS draws.  In this section, I also address the current debate in Mindfulness-Based Interventions literature regarding the use of explicit vs. implicit Buddhism in treatment.  Second, I address issues related to the technical and conceptual integration of the A/AMCS into TLDP.  Finally, I re-examine the outcomes of Beth’s and Amy’s cases from the pragmatic standpoint and offer additional thoughts regarding the differing outcomes of the two cases.

On the Skillful Integration of Buddhist Psychology and Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherapy