Integrative Therapy

Abstract
Psychotherapy’s historical development has come a long way from its initial single approach to today’s multifaceted integrative methods. Commonality among psychological schools of thought was briefly hinted at in the 1930s and 1940s but true growth and assimilation would have to wait nearly twenty years until the first integrative counseling approach was defined and publicized in 1950. Changing climates among all areas of society, throughout the second half of the 20th century fostered a “re-approachment” attitude to psychotherapy and counseling. Since this time, integrative therapies have become the norm across the world and most current therapists when posed with the question regarding their chosen therapeutic orientation will no
longer declare themselves “purist” and rather identify as “integrative”. Today, it is estimated that there are approximately 400 different types of integrative therapies in use across the continents.

Integrative Psychology: A Brief Historical Exploration

Integrative therapy or counseling blends various elements and approaches from therapeutic theories for a combined approach to psychotherapy.
Therapists, who are drawn to an integrated approach, tend to hold the view that no one single approach will work for all clients or for all situations. Viewing the client as a unified whole, rather than a sum of parts, builds the foundation of integrative counseling and allows for a choice of techniques in order to tailor effective therapies to a client’s individual needs and personal circumstances. There is no one particular integrative approach that holds esteem over another and the term, itself, is meant to describe any combination of approaches a therapist may choose to use in order to effectively assist their
client.
Historical Overview
Historically, psychotherapy emphasized a single approach, but the movement towards the synthesis of psychotherapy approaches has been evolving for the past 70 years. “On the whole, however, psychotherapy integration has been traditionally hampered by rivalry and competition among the various schools. Such rivalry can be traced to as far back as Freud and the differences that arose between him and his disciples over what was the appropriate framework for conceptualizing clients’ problems” (Jones-Smith, 2012, p.586). As competing therapists developed and asserted their approach as best, clashes and conflicts arose throughout the therapeutic systems and across leading therapeutic minds. “From Freud’s Wednesday evening meetings on psychoanalysis, a number of theories were created, including Adler’s individual psychology” (Jones-Smith, 2012, p.586). However, vying recognition and achievement in theoretical pursuits overshadowed actual patient practicality during this time for the sake of developing the one best approach .
Earliest Mention
Integrative therapy was briefly addressed in 1932, when Dr. Thomas Morton French suggested similarities between Freud’s psychoanalytic concept of repression and Pavlov’s behavioral concept of extinction. Not surprisingly, this semblance, mentioned in presentation to the American Psychology Association, was received with mixed, mostly harsh, reviews. Finally, four years later, in 1936, Dr. Saul Rosenzweig would offer backing to French’s observations by publishing an article that argued “the effectiveness of various therapeutic approaches probably had more to do with their common elements than with theoretical explanations on which they were based” (Norcross, 2005, p.25). Another four years would pass before the American Orthopsychiatry Association would convene to discuss commonality among approaches and agreements between therapies to unify therapists to the familiar goal of client care and growth and move away from competitive blindness.
Developing Years Throughout the decade of the 1940s, psychology’s path coincided and diverged as it advanced in all directions. Concepts, theories, and approaches where formed, tested, and used but the underlying fact that no one theory worked for all at any given time remained constant and all too clear. Alas, in 1950, Dollard and Miller published Personality and Psychotherapy bridging learning theory with psychoanalysis - creating the first integrative counseling approach. Norcross (2005) states that “Dollard and Miller merely translated one language system into another”, allowing an alliance between the key interventions of psychoanalysis with the concepts of behavioral therapy to merge and root. This first integrative theory stood the test of time and Personality and Psychotherapy can still be found both in print and use today Modern Times In 1963, “Carl Rogers published an article dealing with the current status of psychotherapy.
He noted that the field ‘was in a mess’, that theoretical orientations within which therapists had typically functioned were starting to break down” (Norcross, 2005, p. 27). Others began to publically call upon the limitations of individual schools and with the shifting societal and political tides in the second half of the 20th century, as well as a substantial growth in research and publications, an emerging attitude to explore and question pushed through the paradigm. This created a secure environment in which to “re-approach” psychology and therapy, blurring the dividing lines between schools of thought and progressing integration in pursuit of client health. Cooper and McLeod (2007) defines this psychological phenomenological shift the starting line of a movement from “schoolism” to “specialism” that allowed for the collaboration of therapies we seek today. Integrative counseling, itself, has since become a specified practice known as pluralistic therapy that suggests the integration of methods and concepts, as well as, emphasizing collaboration and negotiation across the client-therapist
relationship.
Conclusion
. “Collaborative pluralism can be regarded as an adaptation and elaboration of central themes found in other strategies for therapy integration” (Cooper &McLeod, 2011, p.9). Integrative counseling’s history and growth among professionals is a sure sign that no one therapeutic approach can satisfy the needs of every client, every time. Theoretical approaches should be tailored and a collaboration of therapies used in pursuit of client well-being and evolution. Integrative and pluralistic counseling practices are in use across the world and estimates show that approximately 400 collaborated therapies are in use today.