Vorbemerkung:  An der Diskussion nahmen teil: Alexandra Adler, M. D.; Frederik Allen, M. D.; Eleanor Bertine, M. D.; Joseph O. Chassell, B.D., Ph.D.; Helen Durkin, Ph.D.; Carl. R. Rogers, Ph.D.; Saul Rosenzweig, Ph.D.;  Robert Waelder, Ph.D.; Goodwin Wastson, Ph.D. Man erkennt an der Zusammenfassung des Diskussionsleiters unschwer die Einflüsse der Humanistischen PsychotherapeutInnen. Dieses Gespräch zwischen den Schulen ist nun, im Jahre 2000, 55 Jahre alt. Und wo stehen wir jetzt?

   Our discussion has illustrated one reason why people get the impression that there is little agreement among various exponents of psychotherapy. We found it difficult to keep attention centered on our wide area of agreement, and seemed irresistibly drawn to the one point of controversy. On that issue of  non-intervention'' we seem to have reached the conclusion that psychoanalysis did give much of the initial impetus toward a relationship in which the therapist tries not to let his own values influence the patient, and that the past twenty years have seen all other psychotherapies move toward much the same ideal.
   We found reason to agree with Dr. Chassell's observation that if we were to apply to our colleagues the distinction, so important with patients, between what they tell us and what they do, we might find that agreement is greater in practice than in theory. Despite the various names under which we work and our various backgrounds of training we all seem agreed upon many essentials of psychotherapeutic practice.
   First, we have found no apparent disagreement on objectives. We all hope to increase the client's capacity to deal with reality, to work, to love, and find meaning in life. For all of us the relationship of therapist and client has been a central factor. We have stressed the need to provide a security which fosters spontaneity. We have seen the treatment relationship as social adjustment under artificially simple conditions, but as a step in socialization. We have recognized that as the therapist meets the oft-used patterns of the patient in an unexpected, fresh and revealing way, the patient is stimulated to new growth. We have urged that the therapist must so understand his own needs as to prevent their unconscious domination of the relationship. Our relationship with the client is an identification controlled
in the client's best interests.
   We have all stressed, as a third area of agreement, the importance of keeping responsibility for choice on the client. Growth occurs especially as he becomes able to achieve  integration of will'' making his own decisions and carrying out the implications of new insights earnestly, responsibly, and with increasing independence. As Dr. Allen put it,  It is what (clients) do about themselves that is therapy.''
   A fourth concept which has seemingly been accepted by us is that good psychotherapy enlarges the client's understanding of himself. We encourage but do not guide expression. We direct attention to dreams, to art, to phantasy, to verbal sequences and to behavior. We try to help the individual accept responsibility for more of his feelings than he previously could. We recognize that interpretation of his past may be useful if it illumines for the client his tendencies in the present. The psychoanalyst says,  Where was id, there shall ego be.'' The analytical psychologist accepts this and adds, at least for some persons,  Keep working at that synthetic, creative, partly spontaneous process of growth whereby each realizes his unique indivisible individuality.'' Every psychotherapy assumes that in the client there are important impulses and connections, some half-conscious, some repudiated, some unconscious, which need to be assimilated in a more complete and truer self-awareness.
   We have agreed, negatively, not to try to treat symptoms in superficial isolation from the structure of the personality. We do not believe that mere catharsis of feelings is therapeutic. We distrust advice and exhortation. We have agreed further, I think, that our techniques cannot be uniform and rigid, but vary with the age, problems and potentialities of the individual client and with the unique personality of the therapist.
   Finally, we all have recognized that what the therapist can contribute depends in large measure upon his own character. He should be mature, objective, constant, with insight into his own problems and freedom to live with integrity.  A therapist has nothing to offer but himself.'' " (p. 708 f)