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.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one cannot stay silent.
—Davoine & Guadilliere, History beyond Trauma
In 1998, the International Psychoanalytic Association enjoined all member institutes to establish and maintain ethics committees. Similarly, the American Psychoanalytic Association in 2001 required its member institutes to establish a mechanism to address accusations of professional misbehavior. If an analysand or another analyst brings a complaint to the psychoanalytic institute in which the analyst is a member, an ethics committee of the institute is now mandated to construct procedures and guidelines to help shape the institute's response.
Since all licensed mental health practitioners are subject to ethics codes of their respective professions, what is the significance of mandating that psychoanalysts govern ourselves? Since medieval times professional associations have assumed such responsibilities for their members. All licensed mental health professionals have ethical codes that specifically pertain to their professional roles. Analysts are subject to those rules and standardized requirements of their licensing boards. Will analytic institutes replicate the established boards, or are we going to consider psychoanalytic ethics as something with another aim and other parameters? Mandated the responsibility to acquire a new analytic function of governing one another, analysts must learn to apply