The analytical transmission that arises from the experience of the personal cure implies a third-party authority for training in psychoanalysis in aptly named institutes. The often overlooked peculiarity of child psychoanalysis is that the child’s treatment has no intrinsic direct transmission function that can satisfy the requirement of personal analysis as an indispensable prerequisite to becoming an analyst. This has implications for training. Issues of transmission and power have structured the development of the psychoanalytic movement. We review the history of the SPP and how the power of the Institute’s didacticians was called into question, with the abandonment of didactic analysis and the integration of the institutes into the SPP, then by considering a trainer’s function instead of a lifetime status. Transferential and counter-transferential dimensions are present in supervision, a privileged place for transmission and training.