The New York State Education Department published preliminary regulations for the licensure of psychoanalysts in New York State in August 2004. The regulations were scheduled to be implemented in January of 2005. (See article, page 21.) The law will not apply to psychoanalysts in exempt professions (psychiatry, clinical psychology, and clinical social work). However, it may affect some members trained with waivers and other members who wish to practice in New York State and be licensed under the law. This law will set a regulatory precedent for defining psychoanalysis for other states. What follows are sections from a letter to the regents of the New York State Education Department on behalf of the Association by Eric Nuetzel, BOPS chair, Jon Meyer, APsaA president, and K. Lynne Moritz, APsaA president-elect, expressing the Association's concerns.
This letter is in response to the proposed regulations to implement Article 163 of the Education Law establishing training and post training requirements for the licensure of psychoanalysts in the State of New York which were published this past August. The law establishes psychoanalysis as a Mental Health Profession in the State of New York. This development is especially important for those who train in psychoanalysis without having obtained a degree in another mental health discipline. We support your efforts to license such individuals. The care of people with mental health problems is a serious responsibility, and your attempt to regulate the provision of that care in the State of New York is laudable.
The vast majority of the American Psychoanalytic Association members are in exempt professions: psychiatrists, psychologists with doctoral degrees, and clinical social workers who have all obtained additional training in psychoanalysis. However, some of our members are academics with a research interest in psychoanalysis and others have unusual educational backgrounds, such as non-psychiatric physicians. When we accept such individuals for training in one of our institutes, we provide pre-matriculation training to establish equivalency with a mental health background. This pre-matriculation training involves didactic coursework, direct experience conducting psychotherapy, and clinical exposure to the vast array of clinical psychopathological conditions.
Our major concern regarding the regulations of Article 163 of the Education Law is that there is no provision requiring that individuals with a master's degree or above outside a mental health discipline receive pre-matriculation mental health training prior to the start of formal psychoanalytic training. The education in psychoanalysis outlined in Article 163 of the Education Law is highly specialized and insufficient for a broad background in mental health. The scope of practice in Article 163 of the State Education Law appropriately requires medical/psychiatric consultation for those patients with “serious mental illness.” It is essential for licensees to have familiarity with the clinical presentations of such conditions to insure they have the diagnostic ability necessary to determine if there is an indication for consultation. Students of psychoanalysis should have experience conducting psychotherapy under supervision, didactic courses in basic psychopathology and psycho-diagnostics, as well as direct clinical exposure to people suffering from serious mental illnesses prior to entering formal psychoanalytic training to insure the safety of the public.
In regard to the New York law, we believe it is essential that frequency of sessions per week be specified for personal analyses and for cases treated under supervision. Psychoanalysis requires the careful exploration of transference and countertransference dynamics, and these phenomena are more likely to emerge when analyst and patient are meeting regularly and frequently for multiple sessions each week. If students do not gain an appreciation for these phenomena during their training experiences, their education will be inadequate for the practice of psychoanalysis. The present regulations are insufficient for the general training of psychoanalysts. To rectify this, Sections 52.35, (c) (2) & (3) should have the frequency of psychoanalytic sessions per week specified in the regulations. We also believe that the qualifications or the requirements for eligibility to serve as a personal psychoanalyst and as a supervisor of psychoanalytic cases should be specified in Section 52.35, (c) (2) & (3). Our attached document, “Principals and Standards for Education in Psychoanalysis,” will provide you with our model for such requirements.
We applaud your efforts to develop standards for training in psychoanalysis for the purpose of licensing psychoanalysts who are not members of exempt professions. This is clearly in the public interest. Indeed, protecting the public is also our primary concern. We look forward to knowing more about the regulations in regard to accrediting agencies that will be recognized by the State of New York. We plan to apply for such status, and both hope and trust that the American Psychoanalytic Association will be recognized as an accrediting agency for psychoanalytic education and training in the State of New York.