7. My Career in the IPA and the Filing of the Lawsuit

The lawsuit was filed on March 1, 1985, by the four psychologists acting on behalf of a declared class of several thousand, and under the official auspices of a newly created entity, the Group for the Advancement of Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis in Psychology (GAPPP), which had been established for that purpose in 1984 under the umbrella of Division 39. It had a war chest of several hundred thousand dollars. The suit claimed that the American unfairly monopolized the quality psychoanalytic training market across the nation and thereby barred psychologists from proper access to this training and practice, which deprived them of this lucrative and prestigious means of earning a livelihood. As stated previously, the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) was named as a codefendant for allowing its American component to engage in these practices, contrary to the practice of the IPA's other component organizations around the world.

At the time that the lawsuit was filed, I was a Vice-President and member of the Executive Council of the IPA and a nominee for the presidency; the election was to take place at the 34th IPA Congress to be held in Hamburg at the end of July, five months later. Because it was expected at the time that I would probably run unopposed, which in fact turned out to be the case, I could look forward to the lawsuit being a major, or rather, the major concern of my coming presidency, which is indeed what happened. The signing of the settlement agreement did not take place until October 1988, more than three-and-a-half years after the initial filing, and after more than three years into my four-year presidency (1985-1989).

To explain how I came to be in this critical position in organized international psychoanalysis at this critical time, when it would become my task to lead the IPA effort to resolve the contending positions vis-à-vis all the issues, scientific, educational, and professional issues surrounding