About Psychoanalyst’s training

Historical Context of Psychoanalyst Training:

Since psychoanalysis began to expand beyond Wednesday Societies, even in the early years of the 20th century, the discussion about the training of a psychoanalyst began to take shape between Freud and his disciples. It’s an old, complex and still relevant discussion today.

Initially, the first practitioners of psychoanalysis formed themselves through the reading of Freud’s texts, exchanging ideas, and were recognised as analysts by Freud based on practice and their theoretical contributions.

Freud’s self analysis, that is, the investigation of his unconscious conflict and his theoretical construction, served as the basis for establishing what the requirements for the training of future analysts would be.

Foundation of IPA

With the foundation of the IPA ( International Psychoanalysis Association) in 1910, several training groups were established in Europe and the United States, contributing to an attempt to reach a consensus regarding the requirements implied in the training of analysts.

The goal of the International Psychoanalytical Association ( IPA) was to establish rigorous standards for the training and practice of psychoanalysis. This included standardising analyst training, ensuring high quality certification, preserving and promoting psychoanalytic theory, developing the global psychoanalytic community and maintaining the integrity of professional practice.

In 1918, at the Budapest Congress, Hermann Numberg, a Vienna analyst, advocated the idea that every analyst should be analysed.

Already in 1912, in the text “Recommendations to Physicians  Practising  Psycho Analysis, Freud answered the question of how one could become an analyst by affirming that it was through the analysis of one’s  own dreams and defended  personal analysis because it  provides impressions and convictions that may not be obtained only through book study or lecture attendance.

Until nowadays, IPA’s efforts continue to be highly relevant, sustaining the quality, credibility and evolution of psychoanalytic practice worldwide and remaining one of the most recognized and esteemed pathways for training in psychoanalysis with members and affiliated societies on every continent.

Freud’s Training Model for Analysts:

Freud always advocated for a tripod in the training of analyst, consisting of three elements:

1. Study of theoretical concepts of psychoanalysis and also knowledge  of other fields such as biology, psychology, mythology , history of civilisation, sociology , art and philosophy of religion.
2. Clinical supervision: the analyst  should report their clinical cases to a more experienced analyst  to elucidate impasses  in the sessions  and provide testimony of his practice.

     3. Personal analysis : Freud was aware that the training of an analyst, unlike other fields of knowledge, does not pass exclusively through theoretical knowledge, but rather through knowledge of one ‘s own unconscious, a knowledge to be constructed in the experience of analysis.  The analyst needs to have lived though the effects of a transference neurosis.

 

“The patient never forgets what he has experienced under Transference“.

(Sigmund Freud, 1912. Articles on Technique).

 

“No psychoanalyst advances beyond the extent permitted by their own internal complexes and resistances; and as consequence, we require that they must begin their activity with a self analysis and carry it out, continuously, ever more deeply, while they are conducting their observations on their patients. Anyone who fails to produce results in such a self analysis must give up, immediately, any idea of becoming capable of treating patients through analysis“.

( Sigmund Freud, 1910. Future Perspectives of Psychoanalytic Therapy)

Theodor Reik, a victim of a lawsuit for practising psychoanalysis without medical qualification, led Freud to write his important text “The Question of Lay Analysis” in 1926, where he exposes the particularities and needs in the training of an analyst.

Freud states that it is not wether an analyst holds a medical degree or not, but whether they have received the necessary specialised training for the practice of psychoanalysis.

However, the plurality of Freud’s followers did not agree with him, and the opposition was especially controversial in America. And so, in some places, medical training continued to be a required prerequisite, while in other it did not.

Jacques Lacans’s Contribution

Since Freud, few psychoanalysts have delved into as deeply into this topic as the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. Before him, Michael Balint in 1948 had elaborated a severe criticism of the training proposed by the IPA.

In 1964 , with Lacan’s Excommunication”from the IPA and the foundation of the Freudian School of Paris, a new proposal emerges in terms of analyst training. For Lacan, over time, the training of the analyst proposed by the IPA approached a model that he considered too academic, attempting to regulate a curriculum that ensured and “guaranteed” training by the institution.  In this way, candidates interested in becoming analysts sought a didactic analysis  with an institution ‘s titular analyst, who could later authorise the candidate to assume the position of analyst.

Lacan questions his protocol, proposing a certain flexibility in the requirements in the IPA, questioning the number of pre established sessions, the frequency of stipulated supervisions, and the fixed time of 50 minutes for sessions. For him, the analyst should be guided by the patient’s speech during the analysis, which is accordance with his conception that the unconscious is structured like language.

In the proposition of October 9, 1967,  Lacan states that “The analyst must authorise himself”.

The becoming analyst could not be a decision coming from the Other. The proposal of authorising oneself takes into account that the Other is barred and incomplete, and therefore it is not about holding someone else accountable for authorisation other than himself.

But at the same time, the transition from analysand to analyst is not a conscious choice of the ego. It’s as an effect of an analysis work carried out, hence Lacan saying that every end of analysis produces an analyst.

In Seminar XXI ( “Les non dupes errent”), Lacan adds the phrase “the analyst must authorise himself” and by “some others”, indicating that the analyst is recognised by their peers.

Lacan introduced two significant components to psychoanalytic training : the cartel and the pass

• The cartel: which would be a small group of 3 to 5 participants and “One more, which comes together around a theme in which none of the participantes ocuppies the place of mastery. The so called “one more” has the function of cause of work, and after a defined time, each member is invited to produce a writing about the theoretical  course. The role  within  the cartel rotates, preventing an individual from identifying  or being identified with any specific function  within the group.
• Pass:  It is a procedure in which the analysand, after completing their analysis , testifies  before a commission  of experience analysts about their experience and subjective elaboration during the treatment.  It is not an evaluation of the analysand, but rather a moment  of validation of their analytical journey.  This practice introduces an ethical dimension into psychoanalysis, encouraging the analysand to take responsability for their own process of subjectivity change.

Pass ended up becoming a very controversial device and not all Psychoanalysis School adopt it.

Regarding supervision, Lacan eliminated the obligatory requirement and granted individuals  the autonomy to decide when to seek supervision, as it  is not about following  a rigid protocol but about being authentically engaged with the issues and impasses.

Training and Certification for Lacan:

Lacan preserves the three pilar of training, but emphasises that it does not offer guarantees of the place of the analyst.

In each session, the analyst needs to handle the transference and the conditions for an analysis to take place. Training implies a singularity of trajectory .

The authorisation by oneself does not exempt the analyst from their responsibilities; quite the contrary, the analyst has the ethical duty to be truly involved in the three pilar of the training, this being a permanent training.

In the UK, psychoanalysis are not required to be registered  by law. However, they may choose to join voluntary professional organisations such as the British Psychoanalytic Council (BCP) or the UK Council for Psychotherapy  (UKCP) which set standards for training and practice in the field .  Membership in these professional organisations  lend credibility and ensure ethical practice.

Different Pathways in Psychoanalytical Training:

Both the Lacanian and IPA training pathways offers significant benefits. Lacan’s innovative approach, which emphasises the importance of the symbolic order and decentralised recognition, challenges traditional hierarchies and enriches psychoanalytic theory.

The structured training of the IPA proposes a demanding certification program designed to provide a solid foundation for professional  practice.

This diversity nurtures the  psychoanalytic field  accommodating various theoretical studies and clinical approaches, which enhances the fields’s depth and promotes continuous growth.

References:

Freud, S. (1912). Recommendations to physicians practising psycho analysis (SE 12)

Freud, S. (1926) The question of Lay Analysis (SE 20)

Freud, S  (1937) Analysis terminable and interminable (SE 23)

Freud, S. (1919 [1918]) On the Teaching of Psychoanalysis in Universities (SE 17)

Jorge, M.A.C ( Org). 2006. Lacan and the training of the psychoanalysis. Contracapa, RJ.

Lacan, J . Proposition of October 9, 1967. About the analyst of the School. In Other writings. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.

Lacan, J.  Situation of psychoanalysis and  training of the analyst in 1956. In: Writings. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar

Lacan, J (1964). Act of Foundation of the Ecole Freudienne de Paris. In Writings . Rio de Janeiro: Zahar

Quinet, A. (1991). The psychoanalyst act and the end of analysis. In the 4+1 conditions of analysis. Rio de Janeiro : Zahar