Discussion

The future of psychoanalytic training is the topic of Jacob Arlow's and Martin Bergmann's papers, yet they both focused much on history, on the past. This makes sense on several levels: We know more about our history than we do our future; much of the process of analysis itself revolves around the past as it is manifested in the present; and the future of psychoanalytic training is intrinsically bound up with the history of psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic training. Part of the beauty of being in training is being connected to a history where the life of the mind is valued, process is emphasized over results, time is taken to do an in-depth job, and depth is valued.

I was asked to focus specifically on my perspective as a candidate in psychoanalytic training. So my remarks will be centered around how I experience and observe the training at this point in my development as an analyst —in my fifth year of training, in the thick of it, without the benefit of hindsight or years of experience. As I reflect on the present, perhaps I will illuminate something about the future of training. In addition, I will respond to some of the recommendations of both Arlow and Bergmann regarding the future of psychoanalytic training.

Psychoanalytic training is the education and development of a whole person —intellectually, professionally, emotionally, psychically, and physically. Training immerses the candidate in a psychoanalytic milieu, which if it is effective and fulfills its functions (as I see them), transforms the candidate. The candidate experiences this both internally and externally. Psychoanalytic training is a process that, as stated by Arlow, consists of three elements: course work,