On becoming a psychoanalyst

One has the opportunity and responsibility to become an analyst in one's own terms in the course of the years of practice that follow the completion of formal analytic training. The authors discuss their understanding of some of the maturational experiences that have contributed to their becoming analysts in their own terms. They believe that the most important element in the process of their maturation as analysts has been the development of the capacity to make use of what is unique and idiosyncratic to each of them; each, when at his best, conducts himself as an analyst in a way that reflects his own analytic style; his own way of being with, and talking with, his patients; his own form of the practice of psychoanalysis. The types of maturational experiences that the authors examine include situations in which they have learned to listen to themselves speak with their patients and, in so doing, begin to develop a voice of their own; experiences of growth that have occurred in the context of presenting clinical material to a consultant; making self-analytic use of their experience with their patients; creating/discovering themselves as analysts in the experience of analytic writing (with particular attention paid to the maturational experience involved in writing the current paper); and responding to a need to keep changing, to be original in their thinking and behavior as analysts.     

The psychoanalyst: On becoming more human than otherwise

Classical psychoanalytic technique, which called for the role of the analyst to be a scientific observer, removed from interaction with the patient, imposed such restrictions on the analyst that often his or her simple human responsiveness to the patient was curtailed. Harry Stack Sullivan revolutionized the field by introducing the concept of “participant observation,” and others of his time made similar observations. Gradually, over the years, analysts have become more real, more human, and more interactive with their patients. Contrary to classical opinion, this departure from the original technique does not interfere with analytic work, and, in fact, enhances it, if the analyst monitors and analyzes the reactions of patients to this more human engagement. Examples are provided to support this conclusion. Murray Krim is a supervising analyst at the William Alanson White Institute, Adjunct Associate Clinical Professor of Psychology in the Postdoctoral Program at Adelphi University, and supervisor at the Institute for Contemporary Psychotherapy.     

Being a psychoanalyst: An everyday audacity1

This paper is the work of fi ve psychoanalysts who came together as a group in order to refl ect on their work as analysts. How are we analysts to identify the unconscious resistances that may sometimes hold us back from offering psychoanalysis to some patients? Do these resistances sometimes hamper the inner freedom that we require in order to maintain a psychoanalytic focus once that process is under way? How do we manage from time to time to overcome these resistances or, better, make use of them in order to develop our understanding of the unconscious dynamics that create the link between analyst and patient? The authors discuss these issues with particular reference to clinical situations taken from classic psychoanalytic treatment cases during which the analyst had to fi nd within him‐ or herself the audacity to be a psychoanalyst. Each clinical situation is different: preliminary interviews, in the course of the actual treatment, issues that emerge in the training of candidates. One of the signifi cant features of this group lies in the fact that the participants are at different stages in their development as psychoanalysts (student, associate member, full member, training analyst). This means that their experiences complement one another and encourage a discussion of issues such as how psychoanalysis can be passed on, and the relationship between supervisor and supervisee.     

Childhood trauma from a patient and a psychoanalyst perspective: linking chronic depression to relational multiple trauma

The relationship between multiple childhood trauma, as well as adversity, and chronic depression has been reported repeatedly. However, there is a lack of clinical differentiations of these findings. We complemented patient self-ratings, using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), with psychoanalysts’ perspectives in order to provide finer grained clinical differentiations of the trauma behind chronic depression. These differentiations connect the trauma scales with early relational experiences. We developed a bespoke instrument derived from psychoanalytic trauma concepts. A subsample of 52 cases of chronically depressed patients alongside their 24 psychoanalysts was taken from the LAC depression study, in order to complement patient and psychoanalyst ratings. Our results confirm the connection between multiple childhood trauma and chronic depression. Besides relational trauma, the psychoanalysts’ perspective found separation trauma and transgenerational transmission of trauma to be significant. These traumatic relationships seem to precede and accompany adverse life events and/or traumatic experiences. They may even prevent adequate coping and/or processing of such experiences. Patient interview material from study intake and five-year follow-up further provides an insight into the changes the trauma narratives undergo throughout time. These changes emerged due to a joint reconstruction of the meaning of traumatic experiences throughout the course of the psychoanalytic process.     

What the psychoanalyst learns from his own interpretations

The processes by which the psychoanalyst acquires knowledge of his or her patient exceed the traditional sequence of careful listening and reflection on the meaning of associations. This paper focuses on the value of the analyst's utterances as a source of information about what he or she thinks and is in the process of considering. Movement of the thought process from one subject to another, and the accompanying visual phenomena (among analysts who tend to envision memories and associations), supply valuable data. The author presents several clinical vignettes to illustrate how the analyst discovers ideas and words in the process of giving interpretations.