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.
Experience with termination of psychoanalysis and long-term psychotherapy does not prepare the analyst for the consequences of relocation. Many analysts have moved, but there are relatively few papers on the subject (Aarons, 1975; Dewald, 1965, 1966; Glick, 1987, Martinez, 1989; Mulholland & Sanguilano, 1969; Rosenbaum, 1977; Schwartz, 1974; Weiss, 1972). Our explanation is that moving is so painful that most analysts “put it out of their minds.” From our pooled personal and clinical experiences of imposed termination due to the analyst's relocation we hope to deepen understanding and appreciation of this complicated predicament, and we propose practical recommendations with their theoretical rationales.
Analysis begins with the implicit acknowledgement of terminability and with the tacit assumption that both parties will see it through to the end. How are these assumptions realized? The ideal of a mutually-agreed-upon decision, date-setting, and the working through of a successful termination experience is not achieved as often as once was assumed. Some patients fix a termination date upon entering analysis for reasons that can include career moves and finances. Some analytic candidates who plan to relocate upon completion of training impose deadlines at the outset. A significant number of patients who initially intend to see their analysis through will terminate unilaterally rather than by mutual agreement (Novick, 1982; Weber et al., 1985a, 1985b). In contrast, few analysts impose termination unilaterally for any reason.