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.
Ann Eisenstein and Kathy Rebillot's “Midrash and Mutuality in the Treatment of Trauma: A Joint Account” (2002) is surely a landmark article in psychoanalysis. Their work is also a precious contribution to the psychoanalytic research database. In a paper on the developmental function of the training analysis (Doctors, 1998), I said there was a need for psychoanalytic professionals to provide information on well-functioning analytic dyads (Doctors, 1996). I've called on my colleagues to contribute subjective experiences for scrutiny in the service of advancing the scientific status of psychoanalysis. We have sat by, grumbling, for too long as others derided our work and claimed there was no evidence that it was an effective psychological treatment. Referring to the large proportion of analytic dyads that are composed of a more experienced older analyst and a younger analyst-in-training, I quipped, “We have the data [on analysis]; we are the data!” (Doctors, 1998, p. 27). Without hearing my plea, Ann and Kathy answered the call. I hope this article will lead others to find their own ways to add intersubjective information to our understanding of how analysis cures (Kohut, 1984).
To my knowledge, this is, in fact, the first1 article to be written