A Candidate's Perspective on Certification

Is certification beneficial to psychoanalysis? It is clear, from the discussions of the Affiliate Council delegates both at meetings and by e-mail, that they are as diverse in their opinions as are members of the vocal membership in general.

Those candidates who support the need for certification, of which I am one, believe it is necessary if psychoanalysis is to be respected outside our own training institutions. They are concerned that institutes are not always able to evaluate a candidate's work objectively. They hope certification can become a mechanism for establishing an analytic identity.

Most candidates are uncertain about the need for certification. They have not had the time, opportunity, or encouragement to inform themselves about the issue, and they feel unprepared to make a decision. There is a widespread conviction that the purpose of certification, and what it is designed to measure, are not evident and need to be more clearly defined. Is certification measuring competency, or is it measuring quality or excellence? Nearly all candidates believe that the guidelines provided by the Committee on Certification are not adequate. They do not understand what information the committee members need in order to make a determination. I believe all candidates want to learn, and many could come to value the national evaluation process if they had a better sense of the answers to several questions.

Those candidates who question the need for certification believe that certification replicates graduation requirements. They believe that supervisors and teachers in their institutes are best suited to make decisions on competency. Some question whether the case writeup is the best method of evaluation and are concerned about issues of validity and reliability.

The Importance of Writing

In my view, one great inadequacy in the certification system is that candidates are not properly prepared to write about cases in their institute education. The value of organizing and writing about clinical work cannot be overstated. Yet only a few institutes have a writing course in their curriculum. Many candidates could learn to write well and even enjoy the task if they could take part in a well-designed writing course, taught by a dedicated, stimulating teacher. The assignments would be the periodic summaries that are already required.

Some fear that certification is being used to discriminate against those who do not conform to the theory of ego psychology. Every candidate with whom I have communicated believes that such a form of “gatekeeping” is destructive. But many believe that if the focus in certification were on helping experienced, well-trained graduate analysts conceptualize and communicate how they work, the gatekeeping function of certification would be in the background, as it should be.

Many candidates believe that if the practice of certification is to be continued, there should be some informed thinking about what purpose it serves, and if that purpose is being served by the methods now employed. We need to seek answers to questions about the value of certification in the same way we seek answers to our questions about our work with our patients.