[Skip to Navigation]
July 1960

Three Problems in Contemporary Psychoanalytic Training

Author Affiliations

Syracuse, N.Y.
From the Department of Psychiatry, State University of New York, Upstate Medical Center.
Roy R. Grinker, Chief Editor

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1960;3(1):82-94. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1960.01710010084011

Introduction  In a recent essay I examined the historical evolution and present sociopsychological status of psychoanalytic training.15 My purpose was to scrutinize the social structure in which students of psychoanalysis are trained, and which for many analysts constitutes their dominant social milieu as well. I believe that this type of scrutiny is essential if the integrity of psychoanalysis both as a science and as a professional discipline is to be maintained. The present paper is offered as a continuation of that study. I shall now examine three major problem areas vital to psychoanalytic training. These are (1) the relationship of psychoanalysis to medicine and to nonmedical psychotherapy; (2) the psychoanalytic pledge; (3) the training analysis. I shall consider each of these separately.

Psychoanalysis and Medicine  The thesis that psychoanalysis is a branch of medicine is the official policy of the American Psychoanalytic Association. This definition of psychoanalysis

Add or change institution