The essay also posits a hypothetical case study in suggesting a means by which the contrasting therapeutic models could be integrated to achieve functional results.
Sigmund Freud wasn’t the first to investigate the philosophical ramifications of the unconscious, but his early 20th century psychological examinations and development of psychoanalysis make him the progenitor of the psychodynamic counseling theory (Kovel 1987). While psychoanalysis has been extended into a broad range of analytic fields, most notably literature, its implications for counseling theory have largely been linked to his assertion that unconscious childhood or past-life experiences are oftentimes repressed by the individual, causing them to deleteriously affect later life functioning (Geldard 1998). Most individuals are familiar with Freud’s characterization of the personality as differentiated into three categories of ego, super-ego, and id. When considering the relevancy for this personality theory for psychodynamic counseling it’s important to note that Freud believed that the conscious elements represented by the ego in certain situations experienced cognitive overload resulting in repression as a protective mechanism.
Psychodynamic counseling theory functions by determining the patient’s underlining malaise as rooted in the complex interaction of conscious and unconscious forces governing the individual’s actions. Once the forces governing the patient’s behavior have been identified, the therapy then functions to develop a functional response to the issue. As one might infer, while the process can be implemented through quick and direct methods, psychodynamic therapy usually occurs through the long-term and methodical investigation of the patient. While psychodynamic therapy has been practiced for nearly a century and has engendered a number of therapeutic techniques, two of the most predominant techniques are