The Psychoanalyst in the Community

Joseph J. MICHAELS, M.D.

Prior to the war, the oft repeated criticism of psychoanalysts was that they remained aloof in their “ivory towers.” After the war, due to the realization that psychoanalysis has much to contribute towards the scientific development of psychiatry, many demands were made upon psychoanalysts. There have been suggestions by prominent psychiatrists that there should be a more intimate relationship between psychoanalysis and psychiatry. On the other hand, some psychoanalysts felt that psychoanalysis may become absorbed into the field of psychiatry, which may interfere to some extent with the unique development and living tradition of psychoanalysis.

Against this background it was thought that it might be worthwhile to determine to what extent psychoanalysts devote their activities to psychiatric fields other than the private practice of psychoanalysis and the teaching and training at psychoanalytic institutes. In order to study this problem, one psychoanalytic society of forty-three members was selected in the belief that a small example may nevertheless reveal certain trends and provide sufficient data to reflect to some extent the general situation in other psychoanalytic societies and institutes. It was decided to analyze the activities of the members of the Boston Psychoanalytic Society and Institute, Inc.

A questionnaire was prepared covering the following topics: university appointments, hospital appointments, agency or institutional affiliations, and federal appointments. In June, 1948, this questionnaire was sent to the 43 members of the Society and Institute. Although an attempt was made to determine the amount of time entailed in positions outside the office practice of the analysts, such as amount of hours, part time, full time, etc., the data were insufficient on this particular point.

Thirty-nine of the forty active members, and two of the three honorary members, filled out and returned the questionnaire, giving a total of f