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.
The 120th Bulletin presented a 'Communication from the President about the Neoanalytic Movement'. An extensive comment on this was published as a letter from Dr Jules Masserman in the 122nd Bulletin. Subsequently a letter on the same matter was received from the Academy of Psychoanalysis. Inasmuch as this comment added nothing of substance to the previously published letter and, furthermore, since its contents had already appeared as an editorial in the A.M.A. Archives of General Psychiatry, a decision was made not to print it.
Now, however, it appears from correspondence with the representatives of the Academy that they believe that 'the Bulletin's stated ground of refusal to print the Academy's answer ["the letter has already been published in a reputable journal"—see the 123rd Bulletin] is without foundation. The Academy's letter has not been published anywhere. While an editorial response to Gitelson's attack did appear … it has not circulated among the readers and subscribers of your journal, who constitute a considerably different audience …'
Since it has not been the intention of the Bulletin to suppress the views of the Academy—witness the earlier publication of the Masserman letter—we are printing the second letter below. It requires no general comment but it is necessary to correct one serious misinterpretation. The last paragraph of Dr Gitelson's communication ended with the following statement:
Our failure to be uncompromising in the application of our psycho-analytic insight into our authoritarian role as teachers and educators may have something to do with the fact that at least some of our colleagues and students find solace for narcissistic injury in alliance as dissident coteries. There is reason for interminable self-analysis for each of us