This article discusses some of the issues raised by Richard Erskine’s (2013) article “Relational Group Process: Developments in a Transactional Analysis Model of Group Psychotherapy.” The author’s perspective stems from her clinical experience in the Romanian social and cultural context and emphasizes the role of moments of discomfort and unconscious communication when working with groups.
BerneE. (1961). Transactional analysis in psychotherapy: A systematic individual and social psychiatry. New York, NY: Grove Press.
2.
CornellW. F. (2007). The inevitability of uncertainty, the necessity of doubt, and the development of trust. Transactional Analysis Journal, 37, 8–16.
3.
ErskineR. G. (2013). Relational group process: Developments in a transactional analysis model of group psychotherapy. Transactional Analysis Journal, 43, 262–275.
4.
LandaicheN. M., III. (2005). Engaged research: Encountering a transactional analysis training group through Bion’s concept of containing. Transactional Analysis Journal, 35, 147–156.
5.
PetriglieriG.WoodJ. D. (2003). The invisible revealed: Collusion as an entry to the group unconscious. Transactional Analysis Journal, 33, 332–343.
6.
PolandW. (2006). The analyst’s fears. American Imago, 63(2), 201–217.
7.
RowlingJ. K. (1997). Harry Potter and the philosopher’s stone. London, England: Bloomsbury.
8.
SillsC. (2003). Role lock: When the whole group plays a game. Transactional Analysis Journal, 33, 282–287.
