Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To access PEP-Web support…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

If you click on the banner at the top of the website, you will be brought to the page for PEP-Web support.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Masur, C. (1998). The Training Analyst System: Asset or Liability?. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 46(2):539-549.

(1998). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 46(2):539-549

The Training Analyst System: Asset or Liability?

Corinne Masur

Sydney Pulver opened the panel by suggesting that while the current training analyst system may appear to be an asset to the training process, further examination reveals that it may not be. Indeed, Pulver asked for the audience to vote on whether the system should be kept as it is or eliminated. Otto Kernberg, a member of the audience, commented that the question as posed omitted the important possibility of changing the system. The question was then recast, and those present were asked to choose between keeping the current system and either changing or getting rid of it. Six or seven in the audience voted to keep the current system intact, while a large majority, perhaps forty people, voted to get rid of or change it. Several in the audience declared themselves undecided.

Pulver asserted that while being analyzed is undeniably essential to becoming an analyst, that does not mean that a training analysis per se is necessary. He suggested that an analysis by an experienced graduate of a recognized institute might be sufficient to meet the requirement of the tripartite training model. After summarizing the history and current status of the training analyst system, he noted that the issue of how best to accomplish the candidate's analysis is only part of the larger question of how to provide optimal conditions for psychoanalytic education, a topic discussed by Kernberg (1986) and others (Arlow 1982; Balint 1948; Bernfeld 1962; Dewald 1983; Emde 1975; A. Freud 1976; Gedo 1977; Gitelson 1948; Goodman 1977; Hiltner 1971; Hoffer 1945; Morris 1992; Szasz 1958; Wallerstein 1978).

At the Fifth Congress of the International Psychoanalytical Association in 1918, Hermann Nunberg first proposed the idea that all analysts should have a personal analysis.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2019, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.