Psychotherapeutic competence: a concept made up of many components.

Journal title RICERCA PSICOANALITICA
Author/s Laura Fruggeri
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/1
Language Italian Pages 13 P. 9-21 File size 639 KB
DOI 10.3280/RPR2014-001002
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Therapeutic competence is presented as a concept made up of many components, a sort of prismatic image whose many interconnected faces are: technical and relational skills, sensitivity to context, self-reflection and social awareness. It is necessary to keep in mind that if technical skill (the one highlighting recursivity between the therapist’s theoretical framework, attribution of meaning and actions) is defined within a theoretical- practical model, the other aspects of therapeutic competence are present in different models and are more and more crucial today. So today’s psychotherapists are pressed to "reform" their knowledge and skills as they are aware that they operate in a personal, relational, institutional, social and cultural context within which the meanings of therapy emerge from the intertwining of processes taking place at different levels in the here and now of patient/ therapist interactions. We are invited to reflect on the concept of therapy by overcoming the current fragmentation and non integration of different types of knowledge.

Keywords: Technical skills, relational skills, contextualization, self-reflection, social awareness

  1. Ansermet F. (2009). Famiglie e genitorialità. http://biblioteca.asmn.re.it/Mediagallery.jsp?-idGalleria=16&idFilmato=90.
  2. Bartels D. M. (2004). Brave new families: Modern health technologies and family creation. In: Coleman M., Ganong L. (Eds.). Handbook of contemporary families. London, New Delhi: Thousand Oaks, pp. 493-505.
  3. Bateson G. (1972). Trad. it.: Verso un’ecologia della mente. Milano: Adelphi, 1976.
  4. Bateson G. (1975). Trad. it.: Alcune componenti della socializzazione per la trance. In: Bateson G. Una sacra unità. Milano: Adelphi, 1997, pp. 141-158.
  5. Bateson G., Bateson M.C. (1987). Trad. it.: Dove gli angeli esitano. Milano: Adelphi, 1989.
  6. Bepko C., Johnson T. (2000). Gay and lesbian couples in therapy: Perspectives for the contemporary family therapist. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 26: 409-419. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-0606.2000.tb00312.x
  7. Byrne A. e McCarthy I. (1988). Moving statutes: Re-questioning ambivalence through ambiguous discourse. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 9: 173-182. DOI: 10.1080/030339-10.1988.10557712
  8. Cecchin G., Lane G., Ray W.A. (1997). Verità e pregiudizi. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  9. Falicov C.J. (1995). Training to thinkculturally: A multidimensional comparative perspective. Family Process. 34: 373-388. DOI: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1995.00373.x
  10. Ferrari F. (2011). Crescere in famiglie omogenitoriali: risultati scientifici e altri piani del dibattito. Terapia Familiare, 95. DOI: 10.3280/TF2011-095005.
  11. Fruggeri L. (1991). I contesti della psicoterapia. In: Malagoli M., Togliatti A., Telfener U., a cura di, Dall’individuo al sistema. Torino: Boringhieri, pp. 72-84.
  12. Fruggeri L., Matteini M. (1992). Le strane vacanze di Carlo, ovvero i pregiudizi del terapista. Rivista di Psicoterapia Relazionale, 32-33-34: 47-60.
  13. Fruggeri L., Marzari M., Matteini M., Castellucci A. (1995). Servizi pubblici e terapia sistemica: Teorie e tecniche nell’incontro con le famiglie. In: Gurman A., Kniskern D. (eds.). Manuale di terapia della famiglia. Torino: Boringhieri, pp. 496-519.
  14. Walters M. (1990). A feminist perspective in family therapy. In: Perelberg R. J., Miller A. C., eds. Gender and power in families. London: Routledge, pp. 13-33.
  15. Tomm K. (1987). Interventive interviewing: Part I. Strategizing as a fourth guideline for the therapist. Family Process, 26: 3-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1987.00003.x
  16. Roy-Chowdhury S. (2006). How is the therapeuticrelationshiptalkedintobeing? Journal of Family Therapy: 153-174. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6427.2006.00344.x
  17. Pakman M. (1997). La micro-politica delle classi sociali nella vita familiare. Connessioni, 2: 24-33.
  18. Mejia C., Ansermet F., Germond M. (2008). Origine e filiazione. Studio clinico sull’imma-ginario inconscio dei genitori circa la fecondazione autologa in vitro e il trasferimento embrionale (FIVET) attraverso crioconservazione dello zigote. Rivista Sperimentale di Freniatria, CXXXII, 2: 11-42.
  19. McGoldrick M., Anderson C., Walsh F. (1989). Women in families. New York: Norton.
  20. McCarthy I., ed.(1995). Irish family studies. Selected papers. Dublin: Family Studies Center.
  21. Manghi S. (2012). Complessità sociale. Dizionario di Servizio sociale. Roma: Carocci Editore.
  22. Lannamann J.W. (1991). Interpersonal communication research aside ological practice, Communication Theory, 1, 3: 179-203. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1991.tb00014.x
  23. Jones E. (1994). Gender and povertà as contexts for depression. Human Systems, 5: 169-183.
  24. James K., McIntyre D. (1983). The reproduction of families. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9: 119-129.
  25. Hare Mustin R. (1978). A feminist approach to family therapy. Family Process, 17: 181-194. DOI: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1978.00181.x
  26. Goldner V. (1985). Feminism and family therapy. Family Process, 24: 31-47. DOI: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1985.00031.x
  27. Fruggeri L. (2012). Different levels of psychotherapeutic competence. Journal of Family Therapy, 34: 91-105. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6427.2011.00564.x
  28. Fruggeri L. (2008). Le famiglie nella terapia familiare sistemica. Rivista sperimentale di freniatria. CXXXII, 2: 133-149.
  29. Fruggeri L. (2005). Diverse normalità. Roma: Carocci Editore.
  30. Fruggeri L. (2002). Different levels of analysis in the supervisory process. In: Campbell D. and Mason B. (eds). Perspectives on supervision. London: Karnac Books, pp. 3-20.
  31. Fruggeri L. (1998). Famiglie. Dinamiche interpersonali e processi sociali. Roma: Carocci Editore.

Laura Fruggeri, La competenza psicoterapeutica: un costrutto multi-componenziale in "RICERCA PSICOANALITICA" 1/2014, pp 9-21, DOI: 10.3280/RPR2014-001002