Published June 15, 2019, The NASAP Newlsetter (TNN), Erik Mansager, PhD
It was this same time last year that “Adler in-Depth (and breadth)” first appeared in The NASAP Newsletter. The column has intended (= aimed) to reawaken the spirit of Adler’s whole-theory and therapy among current Adlerian practitioners. At the 2018 NASAP conference in Toronto we re-introduced the idea of Classical Adlerian Depth Psychotherapy (CADP) to NASAP in little ways: a poster presentation, published articles were made available, and CADP books were distributed among several students and offered for the silent auction. Just this month in Tucson, at the 2019 NASAP conference, we were a little more present with three workshops being offered during the main-conference.
The attendance at each was heartening – even when the attendees didn’t agree with all that was presented, they were respectful, candid and interested in the dialogue. I’m happy to say the CADP discourse seems to be well-underway. The following are what I consider some highlights at each of the workshops.
Published April 10, 2019, The NASAP Newsletter (TNN), Erik Mansager, PhD
Ahead to Adler? Ahead to Adler!
Including this issue, for six NASAP Newsletters I’ve shared ideas about Adler as a depth psychologist and the impact of his theory on depth psychotherapy. As I write this installment, I hope that the information presented has been accessible, stimulating and useful.
The point of the column has been to introduce readers to another way of looking at Adler, his theory, and his therapy. This isn’t a new way – but one that has been around since he was providing therapy himself.
Published February 18, 2019, The NASAP Newsletter (TNN), Erik Mansager, PhD
Many thanks to those who sent comments about the last column. I think these observations are representative:
I might quibble with your term “clinical constructs.” I would call the subject of your article “dynamics” or “psychodynamics.” I have said to my students for a long time that IP has a unique and exciting set of psychodynamics, starting, in my mind, with teleological movement.
I really like what you have done here. You provide a model for a case conceptualization. In my practice I try to share a case conceptualization with the client and work together with them as therapy progresses.
I certainly agree that ours is “a unique and exciting set of psychodynamics”! For now, let me use that as a segue to the subject of “depth” in Adlerian psychology.
Published December 26, 2018, The NASAP Newsletter (TNN), Erik Mansager, PhD
Last time this column focused on the general therapeutic aim of Classical Adlerian Depth Psychotherapy (CADP). This time the focus is a bit more specific by looking at the application of the clinical constructs related to Adler’s comprehensive model.
These clinical constructs are not the same as the philosophical constructs of Adler’s theory: existentialism, holism, phenomenology, social embeddedness, subjectivism, teleology. Clearly, Adler steeped himself in a broad philosophical world view. He was not only among the first psychotherapists to think within this context but likely the first to think along these specific philosophical lines. Today, the philosophical constructs constitute the basis of similarity between Individual Psychology and most current therapies. But what still distinguishes Adler’s therapeutic approach from other therapies is his range of specific clinical constructs.
Published October 11, 2018, The NASAP Newsletter (TNN), Erik Mansager, PhD
Maybe in this third installment it’s time to share a little of what classical Adlerian depth psychotherapy aims for in practice. What is the clinical focus of our work, and how might that differ from the way others practice Adlerian counseling or therapy?
How about we start at the finish: the goal. The betterment of humanity was Adler’s big target – and this made the wellbeing of the individual and the welfare of the community equally important. You can’t have one without the other. His grasp of democratic living was not a “representative” model where some are expendable while others represent the welfare of all. No, Adler understood the world could work optimally only when each individual felt safe and secure. Under such conditions, each individual could contribute to the whole – and the secure whole was the assurance that no individual would be left out. The welfare of the community is assured by the individuals’ willingness to make the contribution they are capable of providing.