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.
We hope that this feature will eventually be one of the most vital and important contributions that the Bulletin can make to the membership. At this point we are still far from clear as to what would be the best procedure in developing this section. To publish the proceedings of all the societies—scientific and business—would obviously be impossible because of limitations of space. We have therefore temporarily decided to select from the material which was so kindly sent to us, that which we feel would be of widest interest to the membership and of broadest content. Abstracts of papers on technique and allied subjects strike us as being a good starting point. This is by no means a fixed policy and we would be delighted to hear from our readers on this subject.
Dr. Robert S. Bookhammer writes us of an interesting meeting held before the Philadelphia Psychoanalytic Society on February 14, 1948. At this meeting Dr. Ives Hendrick of Boston spoke on the Evaluation of the Results of Psychoanalytic Therapy. He offered a tentative definition of psychoanalysis as follows: Any treatment by an active member of the American Psychoanalytic Association who considers the technique employed to be psychoanalysis within the meaning of that term to him. The treatment should have been in progress for at least 6 months and should consist of a minimum of 200 sessions. As far as classification