Harald Schultz-Hencke’s neopsychoanalysis and its influence on the development of psychotherapy within Slovenian psychiatry

Abstract

The analysis of Harald Schultz-Hencke’s neopsychoanalysis and the influence on the emergence of psychotherapy within Slovenian psychiatry reveals a complex interplay of theoretical innovation and institutional adaptation. Schultz-Hencke sought to build upon classical psychoanalysis by shifting the focus from Freud’s metapsychology to a phenomenological examination of personality inhibition and current conflicts. His successors made significant contributions to the integration and public funding of psychotherapy within the healthcare system; however, the development of neopsychoanalysis remained marked by Schultz-Hencke’s controversial role at the Göring Institute during World War II.

The integration of neopsychoanalytic theory into Slovenian psychiatry in the 1960s is closely linked to the work of clinical psychologist Leopold Bregant. After completing his training in Berlin and Göttingen, he obtained the status of psychotherapist and, by transferring new knowledge, helped reduce the ideologically motivated resistance to psychoanalysis. Psychiatrists Lev Milčinski, Bazilija Pregelj, and Miloš Kobal provided him with crucial support in developing systematic psychotherapy training for physicians and clinical psychologists; in clinical practice, they recognized the value of interdisciplinary teamwork and the dispensary method in treating mental disorders. This group of experts laid the foundations for the birth of Slovenian psychotherapy within the field of psychiatry in 1968.

This gradual development led to the formulation of the so-called ‘Schultz--Bregant theory’, which combined neopsychoanalytic principles with clinical experience in Slovenian psychiatry. After 1986, when the period of Bregant’s direct influence came to an end, successors, such as Peter Praper and Franc Peternel, expanded upon his legacy by incorporating object relations theory, developmental, self, and ego psychology, as well as group analysis. This theoretical shift enabled a more differentiated approach to patients and the expansion of training standards from psychotherapy as a method to psychotherapy as a medical specialty or even an independent profession.

In its concluding section, the article examines the dominance of the biomedical/disease model in psychiatry, which is reinforced by the social conditions of neoliberalism. The mental health industrial complex affects not only users of health services but also all healthcare workers. The most alarming consequence is the erosion of ethical values, as instead of ensuring quality and equitable access to psychotherapy services, they are becoming increasingly superficial and inaccessible for those who cannot afford to pay out of pocket - money is taking the place of compassion. Particular significance is attributed to the adoption of the Psychotherapy Act in November 2025, which defines psychotherapy as an independent profession and an autonomous scientific discipline. Historical reflection here serves not merely to archive the past, but functions as an essential tool for understanding current systemic deviations and is intended to help overcome exclusionary policies both within and outside the healthcare system.