Many challenges and issues confront psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic education today: practice concerns, external credentialing, the development of new training opportunities, new categories of non-waivered candidates. Changes are an inevitable and necessary consequence of new learning, and the chair of the Board works to ensure a thoughtful, reasonable, and complete discussion as the Board facilitates change while finding the necessary balance to protect standards. The chair functions to represent these standards and to ensure their maintenance as the Association moves in innovative and uncharted directions. The chair and the Board also work collaboratively with the president and the Executive Council: internally, in studying the structure of our organization, and externally, in efforts to secure a place for us in the mental health environment as the Clinton administration's effort to reorganize the health care system goes forward.
Very early in my career I developed a deep commitment to psychoanalytic education. I have been fortunate to have been a member of the Committee on Institutes since 1985 and its chair since 1990. I have directly participated in, or been involved in the study of, site visits to each of our twenty-eight institutes. During a visit, both the host institute and the site visitors benefit from the interaction. Each member of COI not only learns about the institutes that are visited but also gains insights about analytic education that enhance the ability to effect changes at home. Respectful and mutually enriching relationships with colleagues around the country are developed. This “model” of a collegial, interactive experience can be readily applied to the functioning of all committees of the Board as well as to its overall functioning. Conversely, the process of education and facilitation is aided by the most inclusive representation of institutes on the committees of the Board.
Every site visit has provided an opportunity for an in-depth understanding of all aspects of the institute's functioning: educational, administrative, organizational, and historical. All institutes manifest patterns of organization that evolve, show strains, decline, and recover. Each is the product of its history as well as its efforts to build upon and reach beyond that history. These organizational concerns are as important as our educational ideals, as they have an impact on educational processes and ambience.
These experiences have led to a clear appreciation that each of our institutes has its own informing structures that must be understood and respected. On first joining the committee, one's view tends to be limited to the experiences of one's own institute and to whatever view of others is prevalent. Closer acquaintance with the visited institutes enlightens the committee member about the pluralism of educational approaches and theoretical understandings consistent with achieving the educational standards of The American.
As chair of COI, my efforts to arrive at waiver recommendations have made clear the importance of finding a workable balance between the needs of candidates, the standards of the Board, the advancement of the profession, and the fundamental needs of our institutes. The chair of the Board both represents the standards of the
Board and reflects a model of understanding based on sensitivity to the individuality of each institute as it approaches its educational tasks and its issues. Standards are vital to the preservation of excellence in our profession, but it is necessary to be aware of the many issues that encumber their optimal application. It is important to act to facilitate solutions to the problems and needs for change that face our institutes, rather than add encumbrances.
I have led or participated in national workshops focused on the issues that have concerned us: certification, the education of women candidates, the development of psychoanalytic practice, the integration and interaction of child and adult programs, integration with psychiatric training programs, and psychotherapy training.
The structural change effected by delinking certification and membership has opened up possibilities for developing certification into a valuable postgraduate educational experience. A Faculty Development Study I coauthored brought out clearly the importance of postgraduate education, development and inclusion both at the institute and at The American for the emerging analytic identity and self-esteem of our graduates. Through workshops on certification, and as consultant to the Task Force on Certification, I have worked to extend this vision of postgraduate development. Means of furthering candidates' involvement with The American need to be considered. I also suggest that we initiate some form of student affiliation with The American, for both psychiatric residents and doctoral candidates in psychology and other qualified programs, so that they can benefit from an identification with The American early in their careers.
At my own institute I have participated in the work of all major committees. My experience as clinic chair was an introduction to the issues of case finding and practice development. Currently I am leading an institute study group on ways of promoting an analytic practice. As chair of the Education Committee from 1985 to 1991 and currently of the Executive Committee, my experience in candidate progression has made clear to me the importance of both individualized approaches and informed inclusion of candidates in their education. As director of my institute since 1991, I have directly encountered the many educational, administrative, and ethical issues that confront each institute as well as the Board. During the past twenty years I have personally experienced and led the ongoing self-scrutiny and reevaluation of educational programs and organizational structures that is part of the continuing vitality of all our institutes.
Since 1979 I have been the primary liaison person in further promoting our institute's successful integration with the Department of Psychiatry at NYU, where I am currently Clinical Professor of Psychiatry. This has been an experience of mutual enrichment in which the institute has become a respected and fully participating component of the department, and has been able to contribute substantially to the education of residents in psychodynamic psychiatry and psychotherapy, and, most important, to expose them to the humanistic values of psychoanalysis. As director I have also worked with our psychologist graduates and candidates in inaugurating a Psychology Outreach Program.
Implicit in the responsibilities and functions of the Board is our responsibility to patients, candidates, graduates, and The American itself, to sustain excellence in our profession. These responsibilities include candidate education, collegial review and consultation on all aspects of institute functioning, setting minimal requirements for training analyst appointments, setting a standard of postgraduate competency in the practice of psychanalysis, collaboration with institutes in the development of new training facilities, the establishment of criteria of eligibility for the training of new categories of clinical and research applicants, and the ongoing study of our educational process.
I have come to understand that all our educational efforts are subject to processes of growth and development. I believe that there is much still to be learned about an optimal educational approach. Psychoanalysts are always in the process of “becoming,” and our profession is always in the process of advancing. The centrality of the Board in achieving these advances continues as a vital element of the American Psychoanalytic Association.
I am optimistic about psychoanalysis and its future.