Hungarian GA History
The situation of group analysis in Hungary
Introduction
In Hungary, the group analytic scene has changed significantly in the recent period. Although the roots of our group analysis are already about seventy years old, in the times after the change of regime (1990), the group analytical association remained a small organization with somewhat more than ten. One of the reasons for this was that it operated as a training institute (IGA Budapest, in Hungarian CSAKIT), the task of the association was to organize the training. A Hungarian kind of training formed: block training, but despite the numerous classes that went to the end of the training, only few have passed the final exams, and the number of trained group analytical therapists, and especially training psychotherapists, has hardly increased over the years. It remained a small association, while the group analytical approach plays a more decisive role in the Hungarian scene of psychotherapy and psychology. In 2003 the association transformed from a training institute into an association of group analysts, and the training institute, the School, was born within the association, but the substantial change only began later. In the last 6-7 years, the seventeen-member association has swelled to over a hundred, and the number of group analysts and trainers has also increased.
The training has transformed, and related to this the organizational structure of the association has also changed. The working group asked to think through this transformation had just completed its two-year work in the October of 2021 and discussed that a report on this process should be written for the international group analytical community when the invitation to write in the December thematic issue of GA Context arrived. This coincidence was so inspiring that despite the short deadline, we decided to accept the possibility.
History
In Hungary, the tradition of group analysis dates back to the fifties and sixties. Mihály Bálint, already living in London at the time, who started the groups later named after him in Hungary in the late 1920s, drew the attention of György Hidas to the work of Foulkes and Bion in the 1950s and encouraged him to start clinical groups. György Hidas had a great impact on the psychoanalytic professional life. On his initiative, several people led groups, first in psychotherapeutic departments and then, from 1963, on an ambulant way for training purposes. From the 1970s onwards, group analytical psychotherapy played a significant role, although it could not be called so because the political system at the time was against analysis, and was therefore named free interaction group. The development of the Hungarian psychotherapy scene took place during the Psychotherapy Weekends in the seventies, where it was possible to try and learn various new methods. In these weekends and in the clinical field, group analytical small groups and the large groups played an important role.
In an institutional form, the training started in 1981 within the boundaries of the Group Psychotherapy subsection of the psychotherapeutic section formed within the Hungarian Psychiatric Association, which ran for 8 years together with the analytically oriented psychodrama. Gábor Szőnyi and Teodóra Tomcsányi began the theoretical training. When the legal opportunity after the change of regime arrived, CSAKIT was formed as an independent group analytical association, which became an association of trainers, essentially operating as a training institute.
The extensive grouplife and group movement took place in another association – MaCsopE (Hungarian Association for Group Psychotherapy). Another root of Hungarian group analytical training is a direct connection with London. After the regime change a so-called Fifty-Six Hungarian (dissident of the crushed Hungarian uprising of 1956 against the soviet regime) Ormay Tom, group analyst from London, and Marika Denton, a group analyst from London of Hungarian descent, started training groups in Budapest, this training also became part of CSAKIT.
We have been a member of EGATIN since its formation in 1988. For many years Ormay Tom was a member of the board of GAS and of the editorial board of GA. Another aspect of international relations is that in the 1990s GAS held a congress of every three years in Budapest, at the time Gábor Szőnyi was a member of the board of GAS. Following this mostly Gábor Szőnyi was the international contact. In 1998 an EATGA transcultural workshop was held in smaller Hungarian city, Kőszeg. In 2006 there was an EATGA symposium in Budapest, where Vamik Volkan also presented a speech. In 2007 the EGATIN Study Days took place in Budapest, organized by Piroska Komlósi. After that, althoughHungarian group analysts took part in some international events, it remained rather sporadic, it was in the last few years we have began to have a greater emphasis on international contacts again. Following Piroska Komlósi, Zoltán Terenyi, currently Lili Valkó represents us in EGATIN.
Based on a foreign example, the training was developed in block form, on the recommendation of Piroska Komlósi, and it basically remained this way to present times. This has made the training available in our capital based country to Hungarian professionals living outside of Budapest or even outside the country. Of course, the first-time trainers did not take part in the therapy part of the block training. They did not have any self experience about block training process, for a long time there were only two of them, László Bokor and Éva Hosszú. There are opinions that this may also have played a role in the fact that the development of the association was stalled for so long, their proposals for change collided with the highly conservative association at the time. Today’s active trainers have all been trained in block training.
In the 25 years following the change of regime, countless classes have completed the block group analytical training in the headquarters shared with the Psychoanalytic Association. However, few completed the final exam at the end of the training, the number of trainers in the association barely increased, and the number of applicants for the training also gradually decreased. Workshops were organized to understand this crisis, as the situation did not change radically even when the association transformed from a training institute to an association of group analysts in 2003 during the presidency and to the initiative of Zsuzsa Lovas.
A slow enlargement began during the presidency of Tamás Bagotai. At that time, several people started to take the final exam of group analysis thanks to the efforts of some trainers, and new trainers were also appointed. László Bokor launched a case group to facilitate the examination, the members of which almost all successfully went to the final exam later. This group not only facilitated case writing, but also facilitated a transformation of point of view and the strengthening of group analyst identity.
In the meantime, from 2007 MaCsopE relaunched the Psychotherapy Weekend (PsziHé), which, like it’s predecessor is an annual three day small and large group event to this day. The team leaders and organizers from different methods make up the staff, whose work is an important element of the event. The organizing approach of the whole event is group analytical, the group analytical small groups became dominant and more and more popular, and the group analytical large group was interiorized by the whole psychotherapeutic community. The processes taking place in society and the difficulties of democratic functioning have driven the group analysts organizing PsziHé in collaboration with other psychotherapy oriented professionals to create an event based on the same principles as PsziHé, the Civil Group Weekend, where democratic functioning, the learning of conscious citizenship can take place. This event has been operating and developing also as a professional workshop and with an independent image ever since.
All but one of the previously thriving psychotherapy wards have been dismantled, and some new ones have emerged later, with group analysis playing an important role in these places.
Thus, the group analytical approach has an important role, it was time for the Association and the training to have a similar important role in the Hungarian psychotherapeutic and non-psychotherapeutic scene. A few years ago, due to the change of demand, the social environment, legal regulations and the international environment, we started to transform the training, and we also undertook a corresponding organizational transformation during the presidency of Zoltán Terenyi. The community organizing energies of Zoltán Terenyi and his colleagues gave zest to the life of the association.
Until then, the training was organized by the study officer part of the board in the association. The study committee became a three member committee, separated from the board, and later the responsibilities of the study committee were changed when the School institution was established to organize the training, so the Association itself was not the training institute anymore, but an independent training institute within the association formed.
For two years, a working group worked on the transformation of the training and the related organizational structures of the Association. The members of the working group represented the trainers of the association, the board, the study committee and the School: Klára Horváth, Tímea Sáray, Gábor Szőnyi, Márta Takácsy, Zoltán Terenyi.
2021 novemberben indult az első, már az új tanulmányi rendszerben képződő évfolyam.
During the period of transformation, the training gained strength again, the number of trainees suddenly swelled from 5-6 to 50-60. These professionals learn a group analytical approach to better understand their groups, of which 10-20 people can become a group analytical psychotherapist based on their basic qualifications. The block system also had to be restructured during this transitional period. The number of large groups per block has increased to two, and the cooperation of the team has been significantly strengthened, operative and reflective staff meetings are taking place, the system of the School has started and is constantly improving its operation. In November of 2021, the first class already in the new study system began.
The new institutional system
Thus, in the renewed training system, the board of the Association, the study committee and the School have been given new roles. The task of the School is to organize and operate the training. At the same time, the School is an intellectual workshop where training experiences are directly gathered, reflected, incorporated directly, or can initiate major changes through the Association (board, study committee, general assembly). The key participants in this intellectual workshop are the trainees, as the structure of the training includes elements that facilitate this, such as the growing role of the large group, the active seminar mode, and the workshops organized by the associate members.
The School organizes the training from the planning, advertising, start-up phase to the completion of the training process. The exam is organized by the study committee.
The task of the School is to continuously adapt the training in accordance with the current professional and social challenges, the constantly changing regulatory and legal environment, and the international professional trends.
The task of the School is to develop its training strategy based on the recommendations of the study committee: quality assurance, consistency with domestic and international scientific trends, research planning and organization.
The School also cooperates with the board in shaping other aspects of the training strategy: group analysis in terms of professional policy, social embeddedness, accreditations, external relations, events.
A new system of training
Under the new study system, we have developed a credit system in which the different needs of students coming in for different training purposes can be better addressed. We have developed a system of continuous self-reflection and development, where there is room for a wide range of group professionals, who are helped by the group analytical approach to better understand the processes taking place in their groups, as well as those training to become a group analyst.
The training also works as a professional workshop, its special seminars can be attended by members of the association who are not in training, in which case they also participate in a large group of the training. With this, we also strengthen the processes of the society of the group analytical community, provide a reflective space for it, and also allow for a kind of cultural training in the current, difficult social environment, I will write about in detail in the next chapter.
Meanwhile, the emergence of the epidemic posed a continuous task for the training, and the teamwork was significantly strengthened by its management, so the training remained strong during this period as well.
The environment of the training, social effects, difficulties, the system of psychotherapeutic institutions in Hungary
In the history of Hungary, the democratic system has little tradition, in the last centuries we have been ruled by other countries, empires (Turks, Habsburgs, German occupiers, Soviet occupation), which significantly determines our current difficulties. Our other major trauma is the country that was fragmented during the Treaty of Trianon (1920), millions of Hungarians found themselves to be in minority outside the border of their home country. After World War II, a communist dictatorship was formed, and later a one-party system that eased but was highly centralized, where psychoanalysis fell into a strictly forbidden category, but psychotherapy and group life first fell into the forbidden but later tolerated category. After the change of regime in 1990, it seemed that the processing and discussion of these traumas and our history could begin. At the same time, outlining our own responsibilities and maturing our identity, if we can become an independent, democratic nation belonging to European culture. The transformation was very peaceful and consensual, with a European-level constitution and legal system created by the parties of the change of the regime. This has made possible the democratic development of the institutional system of psychotherapy through the Psychotherapy Council, which is constantly shaping professional standards and common values. From 1992, psychotherapy became a second specification for doctors and a few years later for clinical psychologists. Psychotherapy training consists of a general clinical part and a method-specific training. The psychotherapy associations that provide training are brought together in the umbrella organization of the Psychotherapy Council. In the Psychotherapy Council those associations of psychotherapeutic methods belong that have the legal status of a civil association, and that met common minimum conditions included. They developed through consensual decisions professional principles that were generally accepted by the professional community and decision-makers. CSAKIT has been a member of the Psychotherapy Council since the beginning.
The 1990s fueled professional work with enthusiasm, but it also brought with it a lot of uncertainty. Centuries-old social traditions, which did not strengthen the conscious, reflective citizen effort, but was characterized by strong authoritative functioning and the adaption to this – for or against, fell into a crisis of values. It was difficult to find new grips, so a kind of reorganization in the value system and in the culture of politics began. This situation led to the choice of a seemingly strong political leader by the majority, who has quickly and consciously began to dismantle fresh democratic structures. Paradoxically, it gives the sense of security to many in the image of the irreplaceable strong leader by increasing insecurity, general anxiety. He constantly gives an enemy image to those from whom he expects his votes, and constantly puts pressure on those he does not consider to be his own followers.
To add to these increasingly centralized institutional structures are being built in all areas, where in many cases the methods of authoritarian exercise of power over the professional and cultural aspects are the organizing forces. The legislative system is changing at an untraceable pace, causing complete unpredictability. Legal regulations are being accepted that are in conflict with the scientific knowledge of our time, the cultural approach of its wider layers, e.g. the “homophobic” law discussed in the
In this environment, group analysis (and psychotherapy in general) plays a particularly important role with its communal, transparent, democratic values, but is in a difficult position. The deep splitting in society is difficult to deal with, as words have become politicized and common values are difficult to grasp. The growing popularity of grouplife also lies in the fact that these lines of power and phenomena can be interpreted and reinterpreted in the space of the group. This is a slow, maturing process as opposed to how the current environment works.
This kind of culture of exercising power is increasingly penetrates the Hungarian system of psychotherapy. Despite attempts to repress the democratically functioning Psychotherapy Council, decision-makers ignore it from time to time, for the psychotherapy profession it is an important organization. University institutions are becoming more and more vulnerable that have lost their autonomy (seemingly independent of the state, but in fact in the form of foundation structures that strengthen state governance), undermining the psychological and psychotherapeutic field with power and permanent legal regulation.
The unpopularity of association life and taking on social roles makes it very difficult to operate. There are several reasons for this. For one, constant overwork, people work in multiple jobs, there is no limit to working hours. Overtime forced by employers or voluntarily undertaken is overburdening. The other is the weakening civil guts, which comes from the social processes described above.
At present, there are threatening news about further plans to place the formation of methods with a legal act in the competence of universities instead of method-specific associations. Again, this topic could be a challenge for the Association, along with the other associations, that is also threatening and gives new tasks.
Future plans
Our group analytical association of seventeen members (including several inactive trainers) has grown to have over 100 members in the last 5-6 years. We have also started to divide responsibilities, and it might be true that slowly, but we are moving ahead. It is a new role to have an international correspondent of the association (Lili Valkó at present), we consider it important to develop our international embeddedness. Our association has begun to represent itself more and more often in the recent period in the international spaces, the multiplication of online events provides a better opportunity for this. Improving communication with the membership is also very important, and the wider promotion of group analysis also offers better opportunities in the new structure. The development of training, the organization of working groups around various specific group analytical topics, and research are also among our plans.
In addition to the above social processes, the initial structure of being founded as a training institute provides some explanation for the block in the development and inward attention of the association and training. Turning inwards, moving away from the international trend, is probably part of the ivory tower’s image: for a long time CSAKIT was quite conservative, kept its borders, did not place enough emphasis on socialization, remained elite, parallel to the closedness of a group analytic small group, where the outside world has little insight into how the one person group leader works.
In an association, having such a high entry threshold impedes the natural maturation of the process of group analytical identity and the process of incorporating social norms. For a long time the association was not able to move from a small group size to a middle group size, where the social aspects are also present. In a training like this, trainees find it much harder to feel like it is their place and that they have a place there. If there is no narrower or wider group around the training of the association, the life of the association, which reflects its operation, the development of the association will also be stalled. More broadly, deeper integration into the social environment is also lacking. It was important for us to understand this to be able to change. An important sign of change is that not only has training become more popular, but more and more people are joining the groups of group analysts.
In addition, group analysis trainers were members of other training associations and tended to work there with a greater emphasis. Breaking this deadlock took years, it needed the strong representation of some trainers and for group analysts with block group experience to gain decisive roles.
Openness appears in many ways in today’s operation and training, people openly lead groups, they can be seen.
The transformation of the association brought important changes. This change is a long process, we hope that the renewed association will help them continue.
author: Klára Horváth, head of training at CSAKIT School,
assisted by: Gábor Szőnyi, Márta Takácsy (Treasurer of the Association and Secretary for School Training) and Zoltán Terenyi (President of the Association)
translator: Lili Valkó