This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (8)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

MORRIS B. PARLOFF, Ph.D.; NORMAN GOLDSTEIN, M.D.; BORIS IFLUND, Ph.D.

AMA Arch Gen Psychiatry 1960;2(3):300-304.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

When one suggests that there may be an association between the concept of values and the practice of psychotherapy, the sensitive therapist generally reacts as though he were attacked—and generally he is right. The attack may come from one of two diametrically opposite directions: (1) the immorality gambit: he is immoral in that he tolerates, if not openly sanctions, socially disapproved behaviors; (2) the conformity ploy: the therapist is simply trying to make the patient conform to the standards and mores of the middle class. Underlying both allegations is the fear that the therapist will make the patient over in his own image. These attacks do violence to our cherished self-concepts of being enigmatic, nonjudgmental persons, whose own values are never permitted to intrude in the therapy.

Classically, when therapists have felt called upon to dissociate themselves from the question of values, they have fallen back . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Bethesda, Md.

Present addresses: Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. (Dr. Goldstein); Nowlands & Company, Paris, France (Dr. Iflund).

National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Aug. 21, 1959.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?