(Author Name)
(Course Name/Number)
The Tavistock Model was originally developed at the Tavistock Clinic in London around the onset of the First World War It started as a classroom experiment for students studying infants, but soon became an accepted practice throughout the social science field as a means of observing infants, children, and adults. The model itself has deep roots in Sigmund Freud’s Psychoanalytical Theory and was developed as a collaboration between child psychoanalyst Esther Bick and Dr. John Bowlby. Because the concentration started as a means of observing the stages of emotional and mental development in children, this practice of observation has become a valuable asset for social service professionals. The Tavistock Model is an approach to psychoanalytical therapy that not only transcends the psychological and social sciences, but has even made breakthroughs in the healthcare profession as a means to treat patients with unexplained medical symptoms. As an approach to psychoanalytical observation that utilizes group relations to understand the developmental milestones of individuals, the Tavistock Conference is arguably the most well understood component of successful psychoanalytical therapy used within the Tavistock Model. It is because of this emphasis on group relations that therapists are able to successfully work through problems with children and adult patients who possess underlying problems associated with development through earlier stages in life, as defined by Freud’s psychoanalysis theory.
Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis stemmed from the research that consumed nearly half of his life through countless case studies during his therapy sessions. His therapy sessions were conducted using primarily female subjects, notably his most famous being Bertha Pappenheim, and were largely directed at exploring the unconscious mind as it influences the perspective of each individual. Freud’s studies proved to be groundbreaking because they contributed greatly to the history of psychology in what he labelled the different parts of the psyche, the unconscious mind, and specific defense mechanisms that humans utilize. However, as the father of psychoanalytical theory, he is more commonly known for his identification of the psychosexual stages, which are highly debated to this day amongst psychology professionals and the world at large. Nevertheless, Freud’s contributions to the field of psychology were influential in the development of the Tavistock model and the implementation of the Tavistock Conference in the modern social service setting.
Freud believed that dreams were a gateway to the human unconscious and often revealed the repression of thoughts and feelings that were detrimental to the psyche. This repression often occurs without the individual’s knowledge, because it is the brain’s way of defending itself, although in dream state, the unconscious is allowed to fully express itself because there is no threat. Freud believed that the dream state was critical in understanding the underlying nature of an individual’s ID and Super Ego, parts of the unconscious and preconscious that are largely responsible for the thoughts and actions of individuals throughout their everyday routines. The problem with the dream state and the theory surrounding the unconscious and pre-conscious is application, because therapy normally occurs when a person is fully awake. The Tavistock Conference is a way for social service professionals to fully understand the psychoanalytical observations that can take place during therapy, while the individual is conscious, but also understand how psychotherapy can be implemented successfully without comprising the quality of treatment. Because every individual has a unique psyche and their own set of defense mechanisms, social service professionals are also at risk for unveiling repressed memories during psychotherapy sessions and undermining the transference and countertransference process that needs to take place within that setting.
Analyzing the individual’s behavior and thoughts from a psychoanalytical perspective is difficult without the presence of transference. Transference can best be described as undesirable desires or actions that manifest themselves in the individual, and can be attributed to relationships or desires carried over from childhood or earlier life experiences. These behaviors and actions often exist without the conscious understanding of the individual seeking treatment and effective countertransference takes place when the therapist works with the individual to change and correct these habits. A complete understanding of Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis is necessary in order to identify the defense mechanism used by the individual’s psyche, as well as the memory or desire that threatens the wellbeing of the psyche. The defense mechanisms used by the human brain are recognized as regression, repression, denial, projection, displacement, and sublimation. In the successful implementation of countertransference, the process requires much more than a cognitive behavioral approach, because it happens at a much deeper level. The psychotherapist will build a relationship of trust with the individual, prompting the reveal of their unconscious in an effort to repair what was once left broken during childhood or at some other stage of their life. The process of countertransference is when the therapist actually transfers emotions to the individual, allowing that individual to redirect their emotions or desires toward something less detrimental than their original desire or relationship.
The Freudian perspective places a large emphasis on sexuality and desires not fulfilled during infancy. Although this is one highly debated focus of the Freudian perspective, it doesn’t change the fact that Freudian analytical practice focuses a large part of its effort on psychosexual development. Because transference plays a key role in structure and outcome of psychotherapy within the Tavistock Model, understanding the psychosexual stages of development is critical to the successful implementation of countertransference, whether in the individual or group setting. The Freudian theory suggests that each action performed is unconsciously related to a sexual desire either attained or unattained during infancy through early childhood, whether phallic, oral, anal, latent, or genital, and subsequently influences the development of the Ego. Because this theory supports that infants are born with a sexual drive expressed in different ways, the Tavistock Model has its roots deep in infant observation; infant observation being the driving research behind all proceeding psychoanalytical techniques implemented within this sect of psychology.
According to Freud’s theory, ignored sexual desires from early infancy through the stages of development can cause the brain to implement defense mechanisms, such as the ones listed above. When the brain does not develop specific defense mechanisms to avert the desires of the individual, those desires can emerge into the conscious of the individual and present themselves as neurosis, psychosis, or identity issues. Furthermore, the Freudian theory suggests that improperly developed defense mechanisms at specific stages of development can manifest into what are known as the Electra complex and the Oedipus complex. The Electra complex takes place during the phallic stage of young girls, in which they wish they were a boy, but ultimately accept the fact that they are female out of sympathy for their mother and follow in her footsteps. The Oedipus complex is during the same stage for young boys, in which they secretly desire their mother but accept that they cannot overpower their father and eventually settle on imitating their father. This stage is normally resolved in young boys and girls, but the failed resolution of these complexes contribute to repressed desires and feelings, and often neurosis or psychosis.
However, these desires can also arise during psychotherapy sessions. This is what is referred to as transference neurosis, a process that can be beneficial in directing the course of countertransference, but also a dangerous zone for the patient and the therapist. Transference neurosis occurs when an individual’s repressed memory is triggered during a psychotherapy session and it can either cause the individual to go into a state of neurosis or it can be addressed between the psychotherapist and the client. Of course, the goal of psychotherapy is to redirect the course of underlying desires and feelings in an effort to prevent or counter negative mental health symptoms, however psychotherapy can be seen as a special relationship between the therapist and client in which the therapist is at risk for triggering repressed feelings and desires as well. Just as transference neurosis can be detrimental to the client, it can also affect the therapist, which is why the Tavistock Conference has proven to be an essential asset to psychotherapists, allowing them to better understand their role and how transference can influence countertransference, and vice versa.
Research is constantly being updated to improve the efficiency of psychoanalysis within the Tavistock Model, and how transference and countertransference change according to the immediate environment. In the case of the Tavistock Conference, the focus is placed heavily on the empathy, sympathy, and other emotional cues of the psychotherapist, and how they affect the overall treatment. The implementation of the Tavistock Model in a psychoanalytical setting has placed a major focus on group relations in the recent past and how the interaction among individuals changes due to the presence of others. A study conducted by Gregory Rizzolo, of the Chicago Institute for Psychoanalysis, found that the mere presence of other individuals in a group setting not only prompted the transference and counter transference process, but also promoted a self-transformation process among the group members . Although the balance is delicate, the significance of these findings suggest that a group psychotherapy session may be more effective for some individuals in overcoming mismanaged feelings, traumas, and desires.
On the other hand, infant observation has prompted the curiosity of researchers in bridging the gap between the Super Ego, the ID, and the Ego in early infant development. Although the Tavistock Model is deeply rooted in Freudian theory, Carl Jung’s theory of transcendent function, as it relates to infant development, has been studied as a possible missing link. Infant observation within the Tavistock Model allows psychoanalysts the opportunity to explore the interaction between infants and adults, but also between adults during the observation process. After a case study performed by Virginia Humphrey and Beth Barmack within the Tavistock Model, the Infant Observation Group found that observation of transcendence within a group setting was not only beneficial in its efforts to further research the transcendent function, but it also played a role in transcendence itself. In other words, the mere existence of a group setting provides a transcendent connection that did not exist beforehand, and ultimately prompts transference and countertransference.
Although the Tavistock Model is deeply rooted in Freud’s Psychoanalytical Theory, it raises some major research questions regarding the efficiency of the model as a whole. Because psychoanalysis focuses mainly on the unconscious, pre-conscious, and conscious states and the underlying desires and feelings of individuals from childhood, it seems to disregard the responsibility of the individual during their current decision making process. In other words, it attributes the actions of each individual to a form of underdevelopment or unattained milestone earlier in life without taking into account that individuals may simply make bad decisions or think differently for one reason or another. So, how can an individual receive objective treatment if the psychoanalyst is searching for a broken link that may not exist? Of course there is always the counter argument that psychotherapy wouldn’t be necessary if the individual didn’t seek refuge from some unresolved problem, however it doesn’t take into account that those problems may be related to another life event, rather than the unresolved events of the distant past.
Furthermore, the research is grounded in case studies, which makes quantitative data sets almost obsolete. So, how can psychologists definitively pinpoint the existence of the Ego, Super Ego, and ID beyond the confines of theory? In reality, the Freudian theory of psychoanalysis borders on philosophical rather than psychological in nature, and raises questions as to the validity of the psychosexual stages and the infantile sexual drive. Because psychotherapy and psychoanalysis are mainly Freudian practices, the Tavistock Model is somewhat subjective, seemingly influenced easier by newer developments within the realm of Freudian thinking and less within the realm of objective social scientific discovery. This doesn’t completely negate the validity of psychotherapy in practice, but it does offer a different perspective to the effectiveness of psychotherapy.
The Tavistock Model, itself, is a valuable application to the field of psychoanalysis, and mainly for the emphasis on the Tavistock Conference. However, the Tavistock Model is only one model of psychotherapeutic practice and the social service professional should encompass a multitude of theories and models into their everyday application, finding the most effective resolve for each individual. Some individuals may benefit more from the transference and countertransference process that takes place within the one-on-one setting, while others may benefit from the group setting. It is ultimately at the discretion of the therapist to decide which treatment will benefit each individual, but also the choice of the individual as to which process they feel will be most effective for their particular situation.
References
Canham, H. (2000, November). Exporting the Tavistock model to social services: clinical consultative and teaching aspects. Journal of Social Work Practice, 14(2), 125-133.
Ehrenberg, O. (1987). Review of Forms of feeling: The heart of psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 24(2), 277.
Humphrey, V., & Barmack, B. (2010, June). Transcendence, transmission and transformation: the transcendent function in infant observation. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 55(3), 321-338.
McLeod, S. (2013). Sigmund Freud. Retrieved from Simply Psychology: http://www.simplypsychology.org/Sigmund-Freud.html
Rizzolo, G. S. (2012, July). Rethinking Tavistock: Enactment, the analytic third, and the implications for group relations. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 29(3), 346-367.
Taivstock and Portman. (2016). History. Retrieved from The Tavistock and Portman: https://tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/
Withers, B. (2011, May). Review of the Tavistock conference on medically unexplained symptoms. Journal of Holistic Healthcare, 8(1), 3.
Zepf, S. (2010, January). The psychoanalytic process and Freud’s concepts of transference and transference neurosis. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 27(1), 55-73.
