Through the efforts of Lee Shershow, chair of the Ad Hoc Committee on New Psychoanalytic Centers, the American Psychoanalytic Foundation granted a stipend of $1,500 for a visiting professorship weekend to our newly formed Southwest Psychoanalytic Society. Howard B. Levine of the Psychoanalytic Institute of New England East and the Massachusetts Institute for Psychoanalysis accepted our invitation. By combining his presentations at the society with appearances at the University of Arizona's Department of Psychiatry, we were able to expand his time in Arizona to include Wednesday through Sunday.
Levine's time here was a vital experience not only for the society but for the larger community as well. He presented a paper, “Boundary Violations in Psychotherapy: A Psychoanalytic Perspective” at grand rounds at the Department of Psychiatry. In this paper he offered a conceptual framework for thinking about the problem of boundary violations in psychotherapy and psychoanalysis and the universal forces existing within the therapeutic relationship that move patient and analyst towards the crossing of boundaries, particularly sexual boundaries. He presented a historical perspective and then detailed the need to consider the analyst's susceptibility to boundary violations in the light of contemporary analytic theory. Here neutrality is viewed as impossible, and the analyst or therapist is seen as no longer occupying a place of objectivity. Thus, a therapist's personal analysis does not guarantee freedom from irrational engagement with the patient or immunization against boundary crossings or violations. The potential for them exists within us all.
Levine described types of therapists who violate sexual boundaries; these typologies provide conceptualizations that can be developed for treating the therapist and formulating plans to help the patient. His experience as a member of the COPE group on Boundary Violations in Psychoanalysis lent depth to his presentation, one that was exceptionally well attuned to the audience. Ordinarily about fifteen people attend grand rounds in the psychiatry department; nearly fifty attended this one. This may reflect untapped, latent interest in psychoanalytic topics in the Tucson therapist community. He also served as consultant for the PGY3 residents, who later spoke enthusiastically to faculty and other residents about the hours spent with him.
Next were consultations offered to therapists in the community. Six people scheduled hours with him. One requested ongoing supervision with him. Later in the week Levine gave a workshop on “Creating Analytic Patients” that was designed for candidates in our free-standing Southwest Center for Psychoanalytic Studies and candidates from the Arizona New Training Facility (which has been absorbed into the Southern California Psychoanalytic Institute). Thus the two groups of candidates had an opportunity to work together.
Nancy Skocy, a candidate at the Southwest Center for Psychoanalytic Studies, wrote of Levine's visit and his workshop for candidates:
Many comments that he made have played over and over again in my mind. Statements such as, “Do not take anything on authority [even his] unless it has been clinically tested” and “The cloth of psychoanalysis should be tailored to fit the patient” have stayed with me. Another I liked was, “Historically, in the field of psychoanalysis it was believed that life created analytic patients; presently analysts create analytic patients.”… I would like to personally thank Howard Levine for encouraging us to take another step forward in consolidating our analytic identities. He said, “You are analysts because you think and behave analytically; you just do not know that you are analysts yet.”
There was a full day with the society in which Levine presented two papers. Commenting on the paper “Intersubjectivity and Interaction in the Analytic Relationship: A Mainstream View,” which Levine wrote with Raymond J. Friedman, Tucson psychotherapist Ann Shibuya wrote,
In contrast to the classical technical principle of neutrality in all instances, Dr. Levine suggested a broader, more overriding principle of doing what seems likely to further the analysis and analyzing its consequences for the patient. This principle applies equally to the analyst's attempts to be neutral and to attempts at self-disclosure.
Of Levine's “Comparative Psychoanalysis: A Guide for the Perplexed,” one analyst, Emanual Wolff, said, “This is the best paper I've heard in thirty years on this topic.” Every attendee wanted copies of both papers. George Greenman, an analyst who had recently decided to reopen a practice after moving to Arizona to retire, said, ‘I'm all fired up now to do analysis again!’”
In addition to the scientific presentations, we held two meetings geared to future developments. One meeting included Levine and the presidents of the Southwest Center for Psychoanalytic Studies and the Southwest Psychoanalytic Society, Leonard Corte and Sydney Arkowitz, respectively. We were joined by Mariam Cohen, a board member of the institute and editor of the society's newsletter. In the second, Levine met with the society as a whole. Levine's extended visit here and extensive experience nationally, including his work as a member of the Government Relations and Insurance Committee (CGRI), gave us a rich opportunity to talk with him on many levels.
I cannot emphasize enough the importance of this kind of experience to the development of psychoanalytic communities. The Southwest Psychoanalytic Society, inspired by the American's spirit of inclusiveness and responding to past president Marvin Margolis's encouragement, became a society of the American. We now face the challenge of becoming a vital and cohesive organization. The by-laws of the American allow for non-APsaA analysts and non-analysts to be members of our societies. Yet these clinicians cannot be members of the American. The new category of psychotherapist associate has benefits of affiliation, such as reduced registration fees at the American's national meetings, but does not carry membership status.
In Arizona, we have diverse groups with diverse interests who live in Tucson and Phoenix, cities two hours apart. It is a challenge to recruit new members when recruits do not understand the benefits of belonging to a national organization or to a local society that must charge dues that seem high compared to those of the more familiar small local organizations. Once such members join, their value to those of us who are members of the American becomes a paramount issue. The American's active participation is essential if we are to enhance cohesiveness within the societies themselves. Practical bread-and-butter matters, like the referral list for psychotherapists generated by the Ad Hoc Committee on Psychotherapy Affiliates and the achievements toward health-care legislature by CGRI, do have an impact.
Sydney Arkowitz, Ph.D., is president of the Southwest Psychoanalytic Society.
As president of the society, I make appointments to committees based on the unique talents and interests of members. I also do my best to be imaginative and constant in providing support and an educational view about the issues facing us. However, the attention and interest of the American itself is a binding force for which there is no substitute. The extension of our work to the larger psychiatric and psychological community that we were able to achieve through presentations to the university's department of psychiatry and case consultations offered to therapists brought both the life of the American and the life of psychoanalysis to the attention of the Arizona community as a whole. An experience like the visiting professorship demonstrates the excitement of intellectual stimulation available through national connections, the team efforts that are possible toward shared social and political interests, and the inspiration to be the very best we can be.
The society thanks the American Psychoanalytic Foundation for the funding that led it to embark on this terrific experience. I hope the foundation will continue to fund such events and that the relevant committees within the American will continue to attend to the organizational challenges at hand.