You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Masud Khan might be called the third rail of psychoanalysis. Whereas most other instances of boundary violations in the history of our discipline are by now either too remote to be threatening or too obscure to be notorious, the case of Khan is both comparatively recent and, thanks to the furor aroused by the anti-Semitic outbursts in his last book, When Spring Comes (1988), compounded by Wynne Godley's exposé (2001) of his experiences as Khan's patient, a matter of public record. That Khan was conjoined with the widely revered figure of Winnicott as both his analysand and intellectual collaborator further raises the stakes of his Icarus-like catastrophe. Few would dispute the judgment of F. Robert Rodman (2003) that Khan has come to be “regarded as the most disgraceful individual ever associated with the British Society,” or that his worst actions are “reprehensible to such a degree as to prompt questions about Winnicott's own ethical standing” (p. 205).