Training in psychoanalysis: A comparison of models

Abstract

The paper presents three training models officially accepted by the Psychoanalitical Association (IPA) from a historical perspective, which are the Eitingon model- the most popular among the societies of psychoanalysis in the world - as well as the French and Uruguay ones. The critical nature of the models, which is considered as a major cause of the current crisis in the psychoanalytic system by several authors, is authoritarianism characterizing the rigid imposition of the training method to psychoanalysis. In particular, the paper highlights the problem of prescribing training analysis to candidates for psychoanalysis. This prescription seems to contradict the very nature of psychoanalytic experience, forcing the candidate - as the training analyst - within a constrained and false mandatory practice. We provide an alternative training model where students are monitored and analyze - in a small group - the emotional dynamics evoked by the training experience as well as by the clinical internship work. It is a real institutional analysis to verify the psychoanalytic competence of students along different training stages; students are allowed to decide to further integrate their training with personal psychoanalysis.