The optimal structure for psychoanalytic education today: a feasible proposal?
Our psychoanalytic training system, close to a century old, has been subjected to increasing criticism, starting shortly after its creation, for failing to properly fulfill its avowed purposes. The most intense critiques have centered around the authoritarian power lodged in a self-selected training analyst elite, the inadequate development of a psychoanalytic research tradition, and the isolation of our educational structure from cognate disciplines concerned with human mental life, owing to its private and part-time nature, apart from the university with its spectrum of biological and human sciences. Efforts to reform this system, including the establishment of psychoanalytic institutes within medical school departments of psychiatry, and the further call for their autonomous placement within the university at large, with full-time students and faculty, have been only partially successful and have not become widespread. The values of the newly emerging multifaceted psychoanalytic center as the best currently achievable fundamental reform are presented.
Wallerstein
Robert S
RS
Department of Psychiatry, University of California at San Francisco, School of Medicine, USA.
D003479:Curriculum; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D011572:Psychoanalysis / Q000193:education* / Q000266:history / Q000458:organization & administration; D012106:Research / Q000266:history / Q000458:organization & administration; D012577:Schools, Medical / Q000266:history / Q000458:organization & administration*; D013663:Teaching / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000639:trends; D014495:Universities / Q000458:organization & administration