While the need for studying psychoanalytic theory and process is indisputable, the idea of promoting such a need through research, other than the naturalistic search that goes on during the treatment itself, has always met with considerable resistance. One of the more compelling arguments against such an undertaking at a time of recession like ours was that money for any kind of research would be very difficult to materialize. In the conviction, however, that research is essential for the survival of psychonanalysis as a science, the Association undertook the establishment of a Foundation that would actively solicit and receive money for psychoanalytic research.
Originating simultaneously with the Committee on Research and Special Training and the Committee on Scientific Activities, the idea of a Fund for Psychoanalytic Research was proposed to the Board of Professional Standards and the Executive Council about a year ago. After further discussion at the Executive Committee, which, from the outset, had followed closely the development of this proposal, it was agreed to make the project a joint purview of Board and Council. Subsequently an ad hoc committee under the chairmanship of Dr. George Klumpner was formed to determine the feasibility of the project. On the rationale that soliciting outside funds would be easier if the Association could provide “seed money” on its own, the recommendation was made to establish a Research Fund by means of a voluntary contribution from the members.
At the present time, the Fund is a reality, having been supported enthusiastically by the membership. Of the 1500 members who paid their dues in recent months, 1150 or 77% made a voluntary contribution of $25, thus providing an initial sum of $28,750 to be utilized for psychoanalytic research. At the recent Baltimore meetings, the governing structure of the Board of Directors of the Fund was established. It is composed of ten members, two each designated from the Executive Committee, the Committee on Scientific Activities, COPE, The Committee on Research and Special Training and the Board of the Journal of the American. One of the two members from the Executive Committee is, ex-officio, the Treasurer of the Association.
Even though the main question has been how to organize an agency that would be able to secure enough funds to support ongoing or new research, issues related to the nature and purpose of psychoanalytic research are inherently related to the use of the fund. It would be a truism to say that those who are in a position to contribute money, whether governmental agencies or private foundations, are interested in something innovative. In as traditional a field as psychoanalysis, however, innovation is not easy to come by. Indeed, in many quarters it is frowned upon. But without violating any of its tenets, it might still be possible to open the door to the application of psychoanalysis to some new patient groups with the idea of achieving two goals: first, to determine if psychoanalysis has anything to offer patient groups not usually considered for such treatment; and second, to discover if psychoanalytic work would cast any new light on some of the problems now plaguing our society.
One possibility, suggested by Dr. Sydney Smith of the Topeka Institute is to accept patients from the welfare population into psychoanalysis. What can be learned about their motivation, their fantasies, their dreams, even their day-to-day struggles? No one bothers to find out these things or what influence they might have in keeping such people on the welfare rolls, set as they may be in a welfare mentality. Most studies have been concerned with the environmental and sociological “causes” of poverty, unemployment, dereliction, etc., but there is scant literature, and none of it clinical, about what goes on inside these people.
Another population sector worth studying is the criminal group. In this instance there has been more clinical study, but most of it stems from diagnostic work and not from treatment in depth. Again, much might be learned about such genetic factors that lead to criminal behavior or something new might be discovered about the vicissitudes of the aggressive impulse. Again most studies on crime and violence have been based on sociological considerations in groups and not on intensive individual treatment of the offender.
The aged may be still another target group, made up of people who have been ruled out as possible candidates for help since the beginning of psychoanalysis. The point would have to be made that the application of psychoanalysis in such studies should not be looked upon as panacea nor as indicating that psychoanalytic treatment is what all these people need. The suggestion is, rather, to use psychoanalysis as a research tool in tapping the depths of some of our social ills in a way not before utilized.
By the way, if our Institutes took the initiative in writing up such projects and received funding, they might go a long way in solving the problem of finding control cases, at least for advanced candidates. For, obviously, these would be difficult cases, and certain parameters might have to be introduced. But the experience could be beneficial in any number of ways.
—Peter Hartocollis