All group therapy textbooks emphasize the importance of the setting for a successful outcome of the group. This setting includes clear boundaries of time and space, stable participation, and good leadership. All are seen as requirements to create a safe enough environment for participants to work on deep issues. In addition, for its normal development and progress, the group is expected to go through a stormy stage with disagreements and conflicts.
My article will highlight groups that do not follow such ‘rules’. Surprisingly, the members are still able to work at deep levels, create intimate relationships, and benefit from the group. How is this possible? Should we change our theories? I link the success of these groups to the secure presence (Neeman-kantor, 2013, researching outdoor groups of wives of Israeli soldiers who suffer from war PTSD) of the leader and the imagined internalized group that the members create. Applying field theory explains how a multi-unconscious-fantasy makes these impossible groups possible.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgazarianM.Y. (1989) ‘The Invisible group: An integrational theory of Group-as-a-whole’, Group Analysis22(4): 355–69.
2.
BarangerW.BarangerM. (1969) Problemas del campo psicoanalítico. [Problems of the psychoanalytic field.] Buenos Aires: Kargieman.
3.
BionW. (1967) ‘Attacks on linking’, in Second Thoughts, pp. 93–109. London: Heinemann.
4.
BionW. (1970) Attention and Interpretation. London: Tavistock.
5.
CarollL. (1897) Through the Looking Glass. Philadelphia: Henry Altemus Company.
6.
DurbanY.LazarR.OferG. (1993) ‘The Cracked Container, the Containing Crack: Chronic Illness-Its Effect on the Therapist and the Therapeutic Process’, International Journal of Psycho-Analysis74: 705–13.
7.
FerroA. (2007/2011) Evitare le emozioni, vivere le emozioni (Avoiding Emotions, Living Emotions). Milan: Raffaello Cortina Editore. London: Routledge.
8.
FoulkesS.H. (1973) ‘The Group as Matrix of the Individual’s Mental Life’, in WolbergL.R.SchwartzE.K. (eds) Group Therapy. NY: Intercontinental Medical Book Corp.
9.
FoulkesS.H.AnthonyE.J. (1984) Group Psychotherapy: The Psychoanalytical Approach. Marsfield Reprints.
10.
GansJ.S.RutanJ.LapeE. (2002) ‘The demonstration group: a tool for observing group process and leadership style’, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy52(2): 233–52.
11.
GansJ.S.RutanJ.WilcoxN. (1995) ‘T-Groups (Training Groups) in Psychiatry Residency Programs: Facts and Possible Implications’, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy45(2): 169–83.
12.
GoldsteinK. (1940) Human Nature in the Light of Psychopathology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
GrossmarkR. (2007) ‘The edge of chaos: Enactment, disruption, and emergence in group psychotherapy’, Psychoanalytic Dialogues17(4): 479–99.
14.
HinshelwoodD.R. (1994) ‘Attacks on the reflective space’, in SchermerV.L.PinesM. (eds) Ring of Fire, pp. 86–106. New York: Routledge.
15.
HopperE. (2003) The Social Unconscious: selected papers. London: Jessica Kingsley publications.
16.
LewinK. (1951) Field Theory in Social Science. New York, NY: Harper.
17.
MarmaroshC.L.MarkinR.D.SpiegelE.B. (2013) Attachment in Group Psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
18.
McKennaK.Y.AGreenA.S.GleasonM.E.J. (2002) ‘Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction?’ Journal of Social Issues58(1): 9–31.
19.
Merleau-PontyM. (1945) Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge, 2002.
20.
Neeman-kantorA-K. (2013) ‘Secure presence’, unpublished Psy.D. Dissertation. Publish due 2016, Professional School of Psychology,Sacramento, CA.
21.
NitsunM. (1991) ‘The Anti-Group: Destructive Forces in the Group and their Therapeutic Potential’, Group Analysis24(7): 7–20.
22.
PowellA. (1991) ‘The embodied matrix: discussion on paper by Romano Fiumara’, Group Analysis24: 419–23.
23.
RaufmanR.WeinbergH. (in press) ‘Working with a Multicultural Group in Times of War—Three Metaphors of Motion and Mobility’, in FriedmanR.DoronY. (eds) Group analysis in the land of milk and honey. London: Karnac.
24.
RutanS.J.StoneN.W.ShayJ.J. (2007) Psychodynamic Group Psychotherapy, 4th Ed.NY: Guilford Press.
25.
SchlapoberskyJ.R. (2016) From the Couch to the Circle. NY: Routledge.
26.
SiegelD.J. (2006) ‘An interpersonal neurobiology approach to psychotherapy: Awareness, mirror neurons, and neural plasticity in the development of well-being’, Psychiatric Annals36(4): 247–58.
27.
SwillerH.I.LangE.A.HalperinD.A. (1993) ‘Process groups for training psychiatric residents’, in AlonsoA.SwillerH.I. (eds) Group therapy in clinical practice, pp. 533–45. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
28.
Tubert-oklanderJ. (2007) ‘The Whole and the Parts: Working in the Analytic Field’, Psychoanalytic Dialogues17(1): 115–32.
29.
WallinD.J. (2007) Attachment in Psychotherapy. NY: The Guilford Press.
30.
WeinbergH. (2001) ‘Group Process and Group Phenomena on the Internet’, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy51(3): 361–79.
31.
WeinbergH. (2014) The Paradox of Internet Groups: Alone in the Presence of Virtual Others. London: Karnac.
32.
YalomI.D. (1995) The Theory and Practice Of Group Psychotherapy, 4th Ed.NY: Basic Books
33.
YalomI.D.LeszszM. (2005) The Theory and Practice Of Group Psychotherapy, 5th Ed.NY: Basic Books
