Discussion

TO STUDY WHAT HINDERS the growth of candidates we need to consider separately the intrapsychic problems of candidates and the external situation of institute training. It is essential not to use the external problems of the institute so as to avoid confronting candidate's intrapsychic conflicts. It is equally essential not to use

candidate's intrapsychic problems so as to avoid facing what is wrong with the psychoanalytic institute training situation.

Dr. Lefer suggests that, hopefully, the candidate brings to psychoanalytic training a "willingness to learn" and that the task of supervision is to promote self-inquiry.

But that is what so much of the problem is about—that most candidates initially have problems with their willingness to learn. Psychoanalytic candidates become students in their thirties, having already been students most of their lives, at a time when they are already qualified professionals, often responsibly involved in the teaching of psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic training requires considerable time, money, effort, and energy. Many start analytic training after military service, where there are extensive clinical responsibilities and one is looked to as expert in the practice of psychiatry. Many have been administrators in hospitals, clinics, and mental health centers, as well as teachers in medical schools. Analytic training is initiated at a time when one has finally been able to earn money; when professional status and power are, to one's delight, increasing. One comes to analytic training with unrealistic expectations of analysis and of the process of becoming an analyst. Unlike professional colleagues in other fields, the candidate's major task is a painful one confronting those aspects of himself he has needed most to keep hidden. The first lesson for the analytic candidate to learn is how much he does not want to learn, and how much he will have to struggle against this tendency for the rest of his life. He will also have to learn