The APsaA held a panel at the annual American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting on March 1,1974, that stimulated a lively discussion, and was well attended by interdisciplinary groups.
Dr. Herman M. Serota, Chairman of the Committee on Liaison with the A.A.A.S., has arranged these panels annually with the intention of arousing in our scientific colleagues a more open dialogue with analysts on subjects of mutual interest.
Dr. Robert S. Wallerstein, Chairman of the panel, began by trying to define the difference between “ethics” and “professionalism,” showing that as professionalism tends to become more and more technical mastery, an artificial dichotomy arises between ethics and moral values on the one hand, and technique on the other.
The papers that followed covered a wide range of topics with a divergence of both philosophic and scientific viewpoints.
Dr. Rudolf Ekstein's paper, “Psychoanalysis and Education as Allies in the Acquisition of Moral Values and Virtues,” attacked the stereotype of the “analyst as a detached technician.” Rather, he presented the analytic thinking as sources of moral values and ethics.
Dr. Erik Erikson's paper, “Psychoanalysis as a Step in the Evolution of Ethics,” similarly attempted to demonstate that the analytic process, with the goal of insight for the therapist and patient, is an ethic in itself.
“Sex as Sin,” Dr. Robert Stoller's paper, presented some new ideas from his psychoanalytic studies of perversions that questioned classical libido theory and current sexual mores as well.
Dr. Robert Lifton gave a passionate presentation of his advocacy of the cause of the Vietnam War Veterans who were against the war. He demonstrated convincingly that in many situations the therapist, by remaining detached from his own moral values, may become corrupted,
Dr. William Grier also attacked the detached therapist as immoral. He questioned the value of a rich white therapist treating a poor black patient. He felt it was the therapist's moral responsibility to communicate with the disturbed patient, implying that one must not define the patient as disturbed, but ourselves (representing the Establishment) as incapable of understanding.
Dr. Robert Michel's paper, “Professional Ethics and Social Values,” traced the origins of the professional's attempt to detach himself from morals and ethics and remain a technologist. Various paradoxical situations where ethics and technology are separated were illustrated. For example, he asked: “Is a physician supposed to care for a person or find a new cure for ‘disease?’”
The overall thrust of the panel papers and discussion clearly exposed the analyst as partisan rather than neutral with respect to the ethics and moral values that are inseparable from his technique.
Alan Z. Skolnikoff, M.D.