Abstract
This article starts with a response to the second article by Taha et al., published here, which further defines the Egyptian Minia model of group psychotherapy. The debate continues as to whether group analysis has as part of the model an inactive conductor and whether this is linked to the social unconscious of the modern West and whether that indeed is a fatherless society. There is a discussion on which different components of therapy are more effective. Methods of group analytic psychotherapy are clarified and the therapist’s role linked to the goal of the therapy. The group analytic therapist keeps in mind, both the personal transference and social unconscious levels and develops the group by facilitating communication at both these levels. Examples from individual and group analytic psychotherapy illustrate work at the level of the social unconscious.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
