The fundamental rule: a study of current usage

Members of the editorial boards of the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Psychoanalytic Quarterly, and Psychoanalytic Inquiry, plus selected analysts from Canada, France, and England, were asked how they presented the fundamental rule to their analysands and what considerations led to their choice of initial guidelines. Forty-nine of eight-three analysts responded to the survey. The respondents described diversity in phrasing of the fundamental rule, the time in analysis when the guidelines are given, and the reasons for the practice they follow. The method each chose appears to reflect the differing conceptions analysts have of the analytic process. Two major trends emerged: either our respondents emphasized delineating a work or functional framework or contract, or they emphasized establishing an attitude or spirit of cooperation, mutuality and work sharing. In each group respondents differed as to whether they favored minimal or more lengthy instructions. They also differed as to whether they followed a consistent approach or one tailored to the needs of the individual analysand. A source of tension lay in an inclination either to remain in the tradition set by Freud or to experiment with different phrasings and timings. The authors give their reasons for choosing to give explicit instructions, requesting associational material beyond thoughts and feelings, and describing resistance as inevitable and a potential source of insight.     

Psychological concepts useful in the building of political foundations between nations: Track II diplomacy

There are two phases in the process of negotiating for peace with antagonistic national groups. The leader (or leaders) of one such group will not negotiate with his opposite number until political foundations to support such negotiation are laid down, and obstacles to peace identified and dealt with; at least some measure of success is anticipated by both sides. Accordingly, the first phase requires the building of bridges between those representing opposing nations. The activities in this preliminary phase are sometimes called Track II diplomacy; they differ from those of official or Track I diplomacy. I suggest two kinds of concepts that may be useful in Track II diplomacy, and present them in the hope of initiating further discussion, and exploration of metapsychological underpinnings of each concept. As Mitscherlich (1971) suggested, the psychology of international politics may be better understood if psychoanalysts are willing to engage in interdisciplinary work with others engaged in such endeavors.     

Histories of sexual abuse in adolescent male runaways

In this study, data on sexual victimization in the histories of 89 Canadian male runaways as well as information on physical victimization, family structure, family financial stability, delinquent and criminal activities, and reasons for running away from home were evaluated. The population of male runaways evidenced dramatically higher rates of sexual and physical abuse than did randomly sampled populations. Sexually abused and nonsexually abused male runaways shared characteristics noted in the literature as common to runaways: problem families, high rates of delinquency, depression, tension, low self-image, and history of physical abuse. Sexually abused male runaways differed from nonsexually abused runaways in their reactions to their runaway event, with sexually abused male runaways responding in highly avoidant patterns coupled with extreme withdrawal from all types of interpersonal relationships. These differences are explained as consistent with known sequelae of sexual abuse, and the implications for treatment by runaway shelters and for further research are suggested.