The IPA congress held recently in Nice was a rousing success. The quality of the program was openly acknowledged in the scientific meetings, during coffee breaks in the hallways, and over French cuisine. Exchange and discussion, in particular, aroused great interest.
The theme, “Psychoanalysis: Method and Applications,” was so broad (some have said too vague) that one might have feared repetition and overly generalized views. Nothing of the sort. The place of psychoanalysis today, not only in its method but also in its application, is the center of debate. How do we integrate new forms of psychotherapy adapted to current care needs? How do we face up to economic conditions and new social pressures? What are the consequences for the training of psychoanalysts? Although these questions are being raised throughout the world, psychoanalysts do not respond in the same way from one country to another, from one society to another. How can one profit from this diversity, and how can one reconcile common principles and flexibility of response?
Gathering almost 2,000 participants from an association numbering just over 10,000 members is not a dishonorable result. Yet in financial terms, the congress only just broke even, and this in spite of very strict cost control. We must face up to the fact that the general cost of this type of congress is too high, too onerous for the participant. Our congress organization needs in-depth review. Members' interest needs to be stimulated by more active participation through discussion groups on specific themes, which could be studied in advance in international workshops that could be conducted over the Internet.
The IPA congress is also the time of a change of administration. It provides the opportunity to reflect upon the place that the international association can and should hold in this changing world. In contrast with the organizations from which it is composed, the IPA is not defined by a limited geographical context. It should ensure the provision of all services that cannot be carried out at a local or regional level. It should also ensure, in the name of all its members, an aperture to the world, to our cultural and scientific environment, and to the development of psychoanalysis in regions of the world where it is not yet practiced.
More than ever, the IPA must be capable of justifying actions undertaken and monies allocated, in accordance with members' interests. At a time when the economic status of psychoanalysts is experiencing significant regression, even in countries where there has been great development, we must provide clear objectives and strategies.
However, the status of the profession is never assured. Its legitimacy comes from its recognized usefulness. Our contemporary society is experiencing transformation in this area. We must consider the presence of psychoanalysis within this society and within an expanding world.
The extension of psychoanalytic applications has led to a certain dilution of psychoanalytic method and theory. Further, analysis is the object of criticism that tends to disqualify it or at least deny it capacity for progress. The dilution of practices calls the psychoanalyst's professional identity into question. Scientific debate questions the vitality of psychoanalysis.
The main function of the IPA is to implement strategies that have been designed to meet these challenges. We need to define action priorities and concrete measures to be taken throughout the coming years. Such definitions should accord with developments in our practices and research while responding to outside pressures and the needs and obstacles emanating from the social and professional environments.
What publications can and should be provided by the IPA, independently of the work of component organizations and editors of numerous journals who work alongside them?
We must develop a policy promoting our presence within universities and treatment centers to connect to those who, outside the IPA, claim to draw inspiration from psychoanalysis, from psychoanalytic psychotherapy, and more broadly from psychiatry and clinical psychology.
For the next international congress, in Toronto in 2003, we hope to organize new working methods, making the congress a place for the reporting and communication of ongoing research, with workshops actively involving participants.
With regard to education, where a certain diversity in practice is developing (as in empirical and clinical research), we must seek to understand what concerns an international entity. The stakes are the same for all component organizations. What can one specifically expect from an international association? The arousal and nourishment of local initiatives, of course, but also the co-ordination of action that must be undertaken in common by all component organizations to maintain our psychoanalytical identity.
The International Psychoanalytical Association's role is to animate action that has been decided in common, thus avoiding the dissolution of our identity.
Daniel J. Widlöcher, M.D., is president of the International Psychoanalytical Association. He is a training and supervising analyst for the French Psychoanalytical Association. He is also Emeritus Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Paris VI and Honorary Chief of the Department of Psychiatry of the Hôpital de la Salpêtrière.