The late arrival of group psychiatry and group psychotherapy has a plausible explanation when we consider the development of modern psychiatry out of somatic medicine. In a particular group a subject may be used as an instrument to diagnose and as a therapeutic agent to treat the other subjects. The doctor as the final source of mental therapeusis has failed. Sociometric methods have demonstrated that therapeutic values are scattered throughout the membership of the group. One patient can treat the other. The role of the healer has changed from the owner and actor of therapy to its assigner and trustee. But as long as the agent of psychotherapy was a particular, special individual, a doctor or a priest, the consequence was that he was also the medium of therapy as well as the catalyzer of healing power.
Your search for all content returned 2 results
The psychodramatic realizations of suicidal or homicidal fantasies may give courage and prepare a patient to carry out the suicide in life itself. Such a patient may be already warmed up to the near action point when the treatment begins. The psychodramatist has to have, besides telic sensitivity, knowledge of the codes of alcoholics and drug addicts, as well as of prisoners in prison, in order to approach them effectively. Psychodrama and group psychotherapy are two independent developments. Contrary to unsophisticated opinion, psychodrama is the broader classification. Individual, “a deux", psychodrama is possible; it is an accepted and valuable form of psychotherapy, but obviously “individual” group psychotherapy is a contradiction. Individual psychodrama may be combined with psychodramatic group treatment in such cases where certain types of problems are not suitable for group revelation or when the patient feels the level of acceptance is not compatible.Source: