Comments on: MIP’s Licensure Qualifying Program and the History of Lay Analysis

By: Blair Casdin

Blair Casdin — Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:23:37 +0000

I loved reading this blog, Emi! Candidates who come from other fields bring a wealth of different perspectives and experiences, and we are all the better for it!

This should be required reading for everyone in the field and anyone considering training!

Thank you!

By: Chaim E. Bromberg

Chaim E. Bromberg — Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:12:56 +0000

My thanks to everyone who has read this post, and to those of you who have offered your reactions and responses here. Roberto and Paige shared some excellent questions about how we engage in dialogue with others, how we think about our roles as analysts/emissaries in today\’s world, and how we might challenge our own cultural and institutional rigidities. I\’m encouraged by these questions. I believe they are exactly the issues we should be wrestling with. Please continue to share your reactions, questions and insights!

By: PJ Bleier

PJ Bleier — Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:47:45 +0000

Excellent. Thank you.

By: Paige Sweet

Paige Sweet — Thu, 13 Sep 2018 21:55:58 +0000

Thanks, Emi, for this thoughtful piece. The idea you pose about LQP candidates as emissaries is provocative. I also wonder about connecting the insights from psychoanalysis to other fields (or worlds). And I wonder what conduits might facilitate these conversations (of the LQP emissaries, or others). Are there specific ways (new or old) that psychoanalysts uniquely contribute to broader conversations about culture, identity, art, philosophy… beyond our own professional enclaves? Thanks for opening this to our collective consideration.

By: Roberto Colangeli

Roberto Colangeli — Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:56:04 +0000

Emi, really a great blog, very provocative and challenging not only about the LQP and psychoanalysis in general.

Coming from a scientific background the isolation of psychoanalysis from other disciplines is very clear and unfortunate. My interest in psychoanalysis made me understand the enormous potential that psychoanalysis could have in many different fields.

Open the doors to a more significant number of people (LQP) to train and understand psychoanalyst it is a way to push and challenge a field that, too often, tend to stay close and distant. A field that got too comfortable with traditions and has trouble to challenge the status quo.

Perhaps we should take a step back and ask to ourselves what it means to be a psychoanalyst today, in our culture. Should we revisit the concept of what it means to train a psychoanalyst candidate (no matter if the candidate is an MD, psychologist, social worker or LQP)?

Ultimately, psychoanalysis is the victim of the same fear we see in our consultation rooms, or experience in our training, analysis and many aspects of our life; The fear to change.

By: stevekirschner

stevekirschner — Wed, 12 Sep 2018 20:03:25 +0000

Emi, thank you for this thoughtful piece on the state and place of Psychoanalysis in the contemporary world. I think your take on the importance and impact of LQP candidates is exactly right. For anyone who wants to take a deep historical dive I highly reccomend The Rise and Crisis of Psychoanalysis in the United States by Nathan G. Hale.

Steve Kirschner