Structural Change and its Assessment

Abstract

The concepts of structure and structural change and their use in psychoanalytic discourse are explored. It is argued that, when these concepts are not used merely as rhetorical devices, the concept of structure essentially refers to stable, unobservable mental organisations and that these may only manifest themselves as consistency across time in their behavioural derivatives. The concept of structural change may refer to three different forms of change in structures so defined. It is argued that psychoanalytic treatment is neither necessary nor strictly sufficient to bring about such changes. Particular attention is paid to the concept of symptom in the context of structures and structural change. When assessment is concerned, it is concluded that structures and structural change do not reside in certain functions or instruments as such but may only be assessed through repeated observations of structure indicators. able-in other kinds of mental treatments. Werman [4] and Blum [5] bluntly suggest that the concept represents a mere idealization among psychoanalysts, “an article of faith in the superiority of analysis”, as Abend [6] put it. And Weinshel argues [3], “We should at least consider that our long-held claim that ‘structural change’ is the sacrosanct province of psychoanalysis may be a somewhat solipsistic one”. The purpose of this paper is to follow Weinshel’s suggestion and analyze the structural change concept with the following kinds of questions in