Psychoanalytic training in the Eitingon model and its controversies: A way forward.

Psychoanalytic training has been an object of controversy for many years. Arguments have been intense about the details, sometimes called "requirements", and particularly over whether or not training institutes should have routine external validation. We describe these arguments and present preliminary conclusions about the core challenges psychoanalytic trainings face using a unique set of detailed observations collected during structured "conversations" inside nine European institutes. We conclude that whether a psychoanalytic training is "working" is not a matter of compliance with requirements. Rather, it is an issue of how candidates, training analysts, supervisors and committee members, confront within and between each other the consequences of the unconscious dynamics that psychoanalytic training must inevitably create. Institutional psychoanalytic capacity is to take itself as the object. Consequentially, we propose that training committees that seek to claim that their psychoanalytic training is genuinely and safely producing psychoanalysts would be ones that institute routine procedures to show to themselves, transparently, how they attend to the dynamics just mentioned and how they take a neutral inquisitive stance towards them. Fear of oversight, we suggest, is a symptom of deeper anxieties. They can be faced by creating an appropriate setting. Properly conducted visits from outsiders are welcomed.

Freud's 'transference': Clinical technique in the 'Rat Man' case and theoretical conceptualization compared.

A considerable gap exists between clinical psychoanalytic concepts and psychoanalytic practice. It can be traced back to the early beginnings of psychoanalysis and to Freud's own handling of concepts that he had developed himself. Focusing on the concept of 'transference' that Freud in several steps coined so precisely from his experiences with hysteric patients and especially from his understanding of the 'Dora' case, it can be shown that he - seen from today - could not fully apply the meaning of his own concept in the later treatment of the so-called 'Rat Man'. Freud's 'Original record of the case' is used to scrutinize his way of understanding and handling the transference with this patient. To a substantial extent transference as well as counter-transference was rather enacted than understood in this case, partly due to Freud's own personal and scientific interests and to his ambitions to use this case as a demonstration of his therapeutic approach. In order to show this, it is unavoidable to correct several blurry or even misleading passages of Strachey's translation. Findings from numerous workshops using 'comparative clinical methods' indicate that up till now we analysts - like Freud - have great difficulties in applying Freud's incredible insight that "a whole series of former psychic experiences comes alive not as the past but as the present relationship to the person of the physician" (Freud, 1905c [1901], p. 279/280, my translation).