The Board on Professional Standards has begun a major initiative to support the health and vigor of our institutes.
Over the last several years, the co-chairs of the Committee on Institutes (COI) noticed that from time to time even some well-established institutes began to falter and experience difficulty functioning. The contributions to these difficulties varied; they might be the result of financial concerns, interpersonal acrimony and conflict, an inability to recruit candidates, faculty or training analysts, or an inability to sustain candidate training because of challenges with case finding. Sometimes these challenges have been short lived and followed by quick resolution of the difficulties. On other occasions, the challenges have been more prolonged. The most pressing issue facing our profession is how we will sustain ourselves and continue training psychoanalysts for the 21st century. If the practice of psychoanalysis is not sustained, important applications of psychoanalysis will, within a generation, lose their grounding in analytic theory and technique. We want to be clear, by referring to the practice of psychoanalysis we are not referring to any one theoretical perspective.
In response to this need, the COI began to collaborate with the Committee on New Training Facilities (CNTF) to provide intensive consultation to institutes temporarily experiencing such difficulties. Like new training facilities, these institutes face the challenge of establishing stable and viable organizations. The CNTF is uniquely positioned to offer help in such circumstances with its experience focusing on viability and its ability to offer ongoing consultation. In addition, in recent years the North American component of the IPA's Outreach Committee under the leadership of our former APsaA president, Marvin Margolis, also began to provide consultation to some of our institutes who invited its involvement. Both resources have led to tremendous turnaround at a number of sites.
The aging of our profession and the changes in psychoanalytic career trajectories are significant contributors to this situation. The analysts who have been teaching and leading our institutes are aging. While this is a reality we all know, the continuity of institute life has a timeless sense because so many older analysts are still active. This is not just an American phenomenon. The IPA has also recognized aging as a key challenge to the future of psychoanalysis worldwide. Complicating the problem we face with aging is the fact that analytic career patterns have changed. In contrast with an older pattern of exclusive focus on psychoanalysis, many contemporary analysts have multiple professional identities and commitments. This affects the level of involvement of the analysts that we do have available.
Other complex forces impacting our profession include major economic and health care funding changes and vast cultural shifts emphasizing quick interventions and evidenced- based practice; evidence that is difficult for analysts to easily produce given our emphasis on privacy and a treatment culture that does not conform well to standardized protocols. Our presence in professional mental health training programs has diminished, with some notable exceptions that have proven successful. Other cultural and generational shifts contribute to expectations of more contained work commitments balanced with time for family and avocations and less emphasis on longitudinal commitments to those we treat. Significant student debt also dissuades some intimidated by the cost of analytic training and insecurity about future earnings. For some younger professionals looking for depth and longitudinal experiences with those we care for, a career in psychoanalysis remains an attractive alternative.
In order to deal with these changes and challenges to our institutes and professions, we have established the following resources for institutes:
Reenabling consultation from CNTF and promotion of liaison with former components of the IPA Committee on Outreach
Financial consultation
Leadership consultation for presidents of institutes and centers
Consultation on practice development
Reorganization of the Executive Council Chairs and Directors of Institutes Meeting to address challenges and demonstrated solutions
Collaboration with the Society Presidents Meeting
Website and social media consultation to enhance local outreach efforts
Regional training/long distance learning consultation modeled on successful regional child analytic programs
Exploration of scholarship opportunities for candidates and development of scholarships
Continued collaboration with ACPE, Inc. efforts to gain Department of Education recognition of analytic training programs
Institutes struggle for different reasons and likewise solve their problems in different ways. We have created this list of resources so that institutes can use the ones appropriate for their local situation. In recent years, several of our institutes have moved from a sense of endangerment to renewed optimism about their future reflected in significantly improved recruitment of quality candidates and improvement in the local practice environment. Some have used COI/CNTF consultation to turn the corner. Some have used the IPA Committee on Outreach resources. Others have relied on their own resourcefulness to turn the corner We have the opportunity to learn from all of them, and the responsibility to share what works with colleagues. The Board on Professional Standards is committed to ensuring that institutes facing these challenges receive the resources they need for a better future. Only with attention to these issues will a healthy foundation for psychoanalysis in the U.S. be renewed.
Lee I. Ascherman, M.D., is chair of the Board on Professional Standards and Elizabeth Brett, Ph.D., is secretary.