This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (5)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Problems and Perspectives

Judd Marmor, MD

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1979;36(4):486-489.

Abstract
• The increasing prolongation of the didactic analysis and supervisory hours that has occurred in most psychoanalytic institutes over the past several decades has not only failed to guarantee a better trained and more scientific group of psychoanalysts, but, because of the unhealthy and authoritarian hegemony of training analysts over their candidates, may be having a contrary effect of fostering rigidity and dogmatism. If psychoanalysis is to remain vital, it must be open to growth and change like any other branch of science and its practitioners must be flexible and open to new vistas of knowledge from whatever source. A suggestion is offered that would enable psychoanalytic candidates, in most instances, to complete their training within a four-year period.

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Psychiatry, University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication June 10, 1978.

Read before the annual meeting of the American Society of Physician Analysts, Atlanta, May 7, 1978.

Reprint requests to University of Southern California School of Medicine, 2025 Zonal Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90033 (Dr Marmor).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?