Notes and News

As in all scientific organizations, controversies and schismatic tendencies have occurred from time to time during the history of the New York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute. Such struggles always arise out of a mixture of scientific issues and personal conflicts. By and large, however, they indicate a healthy state of ferment; and in the course of time the scientific issue is settled by the discovery of new facts. Therefore, the outside public need rarely concern itself with the details of such disagreements; and accordingly in the past the New York Psychoanalytic Society has not felt called upon to make any public statements concerning such controversies as have arisen.

The fact that in the spring of 1941, 5 out of 88 members of the New York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute resigned, and that 14 out of 110 students withdrew from the student body, would not of itself call for a departure from this well established policy. On this occasion, however, the group which has withdrawn has organized a society under the name of “The Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis” and a training institute which it calls the “American Institute for Psychoanalysis.” This name suggests that it has a national scope and acceptance, although it may be questioned whether either its right to offer psychoanalytic training or its national scope will be recognized by the general body of psychoanalysts. It is highly regrettable, therefore, that the wording of various letters issued by this group, of its published announcements, and of its public statements, have implied that it was founded as a protest against scientific dogmatism entrenched behind political power within the New York Psychoanalytic Society.

The New York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute can have no objection if any member or student determines to pursue his own studies in a new and independent organization. It can justly ask, however,