Psychoanalysis and the academic world1

The moderator explained that the purpose of the panel was to describe examples of programs in Latin America, Europe and the USA involving the relationship of psychoanalysis and university communities, and to stimulate thought and discussion about these important relationships.

Beth Seelig described the Fellowship Program of the American Psychoanalytic Association (APsaA). She also made reference to the Columbia and Emory psychoanalytic institutes, which are unusual in that the institutes are located within the psychiatry departments of major universities. The Fellowship of APsaA was originally developed for psychiatrists in training (later changed to ‘early career’) and was initially focused on attracting potential candidates and, to a lesser extent, developing goodwill among future leaders in psychiatry who would not become psychoanalysts. The program then expanded to include other mental-health clinicians (e.g. psychologists and social workers) and then non-clinical academics in other fields. Unlike some programs at local institutes (and in other countries, which were later described by other panelists) the Fellowship does not attempt to give a formal clinical credential or training to the Fellows. The core of the experience is an ongoing relationship with a local psychoanalyst who acts as a mentor, supplemented by participation in the meetings of APsaA. For the Fellows who do not become psychoanalysts, including members of social sciences and humanities departments, the fellowship exposes them to the relevance of psychoanalytic principles to their particular field at an early career stage. When successful, this leads to incorporation of psychoanalytic perspectives in other fields and a more collegial atmosphere with academics in a variety of disciplines. Follow-up reveals that the majority of fellows (and even a good number of applicants who did not become fellows, but did receive mentors) were influenced in a positive way towards psychoanalysis. Problems with the