Introduction: Men's violence against women is a major social problem and a public health problem that must be combated in several different ways. In summary, the research about individual psychotherapy with intimate partner violence perpetrators is limited and with specifically psychodynamically trained psychotherapists are still unexplored.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate how psychodynamically trained psychotherapists experience psychotherapy with intimate partner violence perpetrators. How do they work? What is helpful?

Method: A qualitative method. Psychodynamically trained licensed psychotherapists were interviewed. The data was analyzed using thematic analysis.

Result: Three main themes emerged with associated subthemes: 1.Prioritization of the client's own traumatization is a necessity 2. Violence is in focus during psychotherapy 3. The relationship is important in psychotherapy.

Discussion: The result of the study highlights that psychotherapy with psychodynamically trained psychotherapists can also be a treatment for intimate partner violence perpetrators. Both opportunities and difficulties emerged. Psychodynamic interventions are used in psychotherapy together with an eclectic approach. The relationship in psychotherapy is used as an intervention and as a tool to contain the client. The results of the study show that psychotherapy with psychodynamically trained psychotherapists can also be a potential treatment to offer intimate partner violence perpetrators. More research is needed in the area.

Abstract: The "frame" is the basic prerequisite for the therapy process. There is currently a lack of knowledge about how psychotherapists reason about the difficulties that may arise for psychotherapists when the psychodynamic "framework" is affected and to change under the special circumstances that the Covid-19 pandemic has entailed.

Purpose: To examine how psychodynamically trained psychotherapists reason about their work with the psychodynamic "framework" and the external influence during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Method: Qualitative method was used where five psychotherapists were interviewed with a semi-structured interviews. The material was analyzed using the thematic method.

Results: All participants described the psychodynamic framework as extremely important and as a foundation for the therapy. All participants in the study reported an approach in their clinical work, which was based on clear agreements in time, place, payment, confidentiality and reason for meeting to talk about what the patient wanted to work on. All participants give a uniform and clear picture that political directives in connection with Covid-19 affected them.

Discussion: The discussion shows three important parts, how the frame is a requirement for a therapy process, that the frame needs to be adapted to reality and that the frame is both constant and changeable. The results of this study were confirmed in relation to previous research. More qualitative research is needed on the subject.