Talk:Integrative psychotherapy

Untitled
This article need some work to turn it into Wikipedia style. It uses first person and has rather a conversational style. I am listing it on pages needing attention as I dont know enough about it to change it myself. Lumos3 19:40, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Clinical psychology deleted because it is not a school or method of therapy, a clinical psychologist could use any of the listed therapies, just as a psychiatrist. Georgius 23:51, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Rewrite
This article needs a lot of work, and I think might need to start over from scratch. Before I start this, I wanted to see if anyone would strongly resist this idea. Psykhosis 00:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Broadening of scope
I've expanded the lead from a rather terse and narrow academic definition "Integrative psychotherapy IS the fusion of different schools of psychotherapy" to encompass the widespread alternative use of the term Integrative psychotherapy out in the field by the likes of the International Integrative Psychotherapy Association and involving "integration of the personality".

Have also distinguished in the lead the broad difference between the integrative and the eclectic. Some practitioners would call themselves integrative psychotherapists to indicate that they integrated various theories and methodologies into their work eclectically on a case by case or even moment by moment basis. Esowteric (talk) 11:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Integrative psychotherapy category
Have created Category:Integrative psychotherapy. Cheers, Esowteric (talk) 15:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Request Edit
OTRS Ticket 2013122510009326 (from author with release permisssion - hence COI) - Dr. Walter J. Urban wrote the first book on INTEGRATIVE THERAPY entitled INTEGRATIVE THERAPY: FOUNDATIONS OF HOLITIC AND SELF HEALING which was published in 1978 published by the Guild of Tutors Press of International College, Library of Congress Catalog Number 77-93141, ISBN 89615-00406. The book focuses on the integration of psychotherapies, its theories, techniques and aspect of the psychodynamics of energy. Could it be included in the article? Also of interest either as an WP:EL or for article content may be the author's sites at http://www.worldhearrevolution.com and http://www.lifestylepsychotherapy.com   Ron h jones  (Talk) 19:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oddly Google book search doesn't like the (correct, confirmed by Amazon) ISBN. The de:Gerda Boyesen article (German Wikipedia) suggests a book from 1977 (without ISBN, later editions offered by Amazon.de), but presumably the EU scene at this time isn't very interesting for readers here. You could add a history section starting with Wilhelm Reich, and if you need the book in a reference it should be okay. –Be..anyone (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * @User:Ronhjones I don't understand. Where did this text come from? Is it sourced? Why did they release the copyrights? Best regards. CorporateM (Talk) 17:45, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * @User:Ronhjones, It seems you want to add an article but what text from the article? Just that the good Dr wrote an article? Geraldshields11 (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * @User:Geraldshields11 I'm only relaying a message from Dr. Walter J. Urban, from the OTRS system, who stated he wrote the first book on the subject and could it be included, he did not want to do it himself as it was an obvious COI - I know nothing of the subject.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 23:05, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Have done the edit. Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 03:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Praise and addition to Comparison with Eclecticism section
First off, the revisions from users over the years are excellent! Well done to all those! I would like to add some verbiage regarding recent growths in development of integration/eclecticism. Since integration and eclecticism is not a unified movement, many authors do not distinguish between integration and eclecticism. I don't want to take out the verbiage that draws a distinction between the two, but would rather add to it by stating that for many the two are one and the same. I think it will clear up confusion to many new students and others unfamiliar with the field. Urstadt (talk) 07:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Well done for your diplomacy. I would not have been so. Integrative PSYCHOLOGY has a very clear meaning. Integrative psychotherapy, as is correctly identified here, should be related to that field. The alternative adoption of the term Integrative Psychotherapy to describe a hybridized form was a blatant attempt to benefit by association. Many practitioners trained in-depth within a single school take exception to this distortion of methods and their underlying philosophies. We have eclecticism - the generation by an individual therapist of their own hybrid approach often with limited training in a single school - and we (now) have pluralistic - an approach that recognises that there are many similarities between the schools (because they have similar ontogenies) and which draws on these as a single approach. IF, and it is a big IF, there is evidence to support any specific school, then it is to be expected that a client/patient/analysand might benefit up to a point by working with a pluralistic counsellor, but would wish to move on to a purer form of practitioner subsequently. This is not merely a matter of semantics (and a grumbling old-timer)... Eclectic practice (and integrative practice when it is used to mean the same thing) can never be validated because no two eclectic practitioners have the same approach. Pluralistic can - up to a point - as can individual schools. If a psychotherapeutic approach cannot be validated then it is merely snake-oil. Ursus-deningeri2 (talk) 18:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)