Training analysis

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The training analysis is a psycho-analysis in which a future analyst is itself the analysandum (Analyzed). It is an integral part of psychoanalytic training. A training analysis differs in some respects from a rule analysis, but should nevertheless be profound enough to enable future psychoanalysts in training to gain access to their own unconscious impulses, motivations and conflicts through self-awareness so that they can later their analysands and patients can understand freely and freely.

Goals of the training analysis

The main goals of the training analysis are

  • the discovery and resolution of unconscious conflicts so that they do not act as obstacles or disruptive factors in future analytical work with one's own patients;
  • the didactic communication of the core aspects of psychoanalytic technique and practice through self-experience.

Development of the term in the work of Sigmund Freud

As the discoverer and developer of psychoanalytic treatment techniques , Freud himself was of course not subjected to a training analysis; but he was convinced relatively early of the need to explore his own unconscious through " self-analysis " in order to be able to become a psychoanalyst. He personally undertook this self-analysis as part of an intensive correspondence with his colleague and friend Wilhelm Fließ . During this self-analysis, Freud used the same methods he had just discovered: free association , dream interpretation , analysis of one's own failures . The discovery of the Oedipus complex is the most important result of his self-analysis for further development and, in Freud's view, establishes the status of psychoanalysis as a science.

At the second psychoanalytic congress, held in Nuremberg in 1910, Freud advocated “self-analysis” as the only way for the psychoanalyst to recognize and master the countertransference .

“Self-analysis” is not a clear term here; it remains unclear whether this analysis is necessarily to be carried out by someone else. Two years later, Freud tended more clearly to believe that every analyst should be psychoanalysed by an expert. In this regard, he expressly praised the contribution by CG Jung :

“I count among the many merits of the Zurich analytical school that it tightened the condition and laid it down in the requirement that anyone who wants to carry out analyzes on others should first submit to an analysis by an expert. Those who are serious about the task should choose this path that promises more than one advantage; the sacrifice of having revealed oneself to a stranger without being forced to be sick is amply rewarded. You will not only realize your intention to get to know the hidden things of yourself in a much shorter time and with less affective effort, but you will also gain impressions and convictions on your own body, which you strive for in vain by studying books and listening to lectures. "

From these considerations, the institution of training analysis developed within the framework of psychoanalytic training. This differs in a precise way from a conventional, therapeutic "rule analysis". Since the training analyst is usually a "healthy" person, his motivation is also different: He does not come to the analytical treatment primarily to eliminate psychological symptoms; hence the analysis cannot (at least not primarily) have a therapeutic goal.

The general requirement of a didactic analysis for all candidates for an analytical training as well as the attempt to describe their goals, framework and scope will only follow ten years later, at the congress of the International Psychoanalytic Association, which took place in Berlin in 1922.

Freud himself always viewed the practice of training analysis as necessary and advantageous, without, however, being convinced of the depth and scope of such an analysis. The self-analysis with which the apprentice begins his preparation can only be limited. In 1937 he said:

“For practical reasons, this [the self-analysis] can only be brief and incomplete. Its main purpose is to enable the teacher to judge whether the candidate is eligible for further training. Your achievement is fulfilled when it gives the apprentice the sure conviction of the existence of the unconscious, gives him the otherwise implausible self-perceptions when the repressed appears and shows him the technique that has proven itself in the analytical activity alone on a first test. "

But Freud adds at the same point that neither the self-analysis and even less the training is done. The motivation to continue working with one's own unconscious should also arise automatically as a spontaneous necessity and interest. It is precisely this - and not the formality of the training analysis - that makes the person analyzed suitable as an analyst.

The relationship between analyst and analysand in the context of a training analysis

In training analysis, the relationship between analyst and analysand shows some peculiarities compared to conventional analysis. The double function that both the training analyst or therapist and the candidate or analysand fulfill, as well as the associated double roles that they play in the psychoanalytic dialogue, has repeatedly been addressed in the psychoanalytic literature, because it is not a simple analytical one Situation. In fact, the training analyst has an analytical and, in some cases, therapeutic goal on the one hand, and a didactic pedagogical goal on the other. The analysand also pursues therapeutic or self-exploration goals on the one hand, and professional learning goals on the other.

The relationship between a training analyst and an analyzed candidate offers a suitable scenario for the emergence of transference and countertransference phenomena based on processes of identification and idealization . These can, according to the theory, be productive and beneficial to the progress of analytical work, but they can also be negative and even an obstacle, depending on the training analyst's ability to correctly interpret and analyze this particular type of transference.

Training analysis at the different psychoanalytic schools

Training analysis is a core part of training in all theoretical orientations and in almost all psychoanalytic institutes worldwide; However, there are significant differences in implementation and duration (e.g. some institutes set the number of analysis hours beforehand, others leave the end of the analysis open) as well as in scope, scope or depth.

While in the more traditional psychoanalytic schools the practice of training analysis generally follows rigid rules, the school of structural psychoanalysis according to J. Lacan , while maintaining Freud's view of the advantages of self-analysis, advocates the abolition of what it considers to be unfavorable differentiation between rule analysis and training analysis. In particular, the roles of a master who analyzes and imparts knowledge, an apprentice who passively waits for it, and an institution who is ultimately supposed to decide who can call themselves an analyst have been heavily criticized by Lacan. His famous sentence: “The analyst only authorizes himself through himself” comes from the context of his disputes with the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) , which ended with his exclusion in 1963. The institution of the so-called “passe”, which Lacan introduced for his newly founded school instead of the IPA admission procedure, is not exempt from subjectivity and arbitrariness and therefore did not remain undisputed: the analysand who is subjected to a conventional analysis can decide for yourself when to introduce yourself to a group of “passeurs” and report on your psychoanalytic career. The group of “passeurs” does not decide, however, but reports to a jury to which the candidate does not have direct access.

Before Jacques Lacan, Sándor Ferenczi had vehemently advocated the dissolution of the boundaries between rule and training analysis. Ferenczi was concerned that the training analysis could turn into a purely bureaucratic step over time. The analysis of the candidates must be more thorough than usual. Freud only partially agreed with this idea.

Training analysis in the current time and institutional regulations

The training of a psychoanalyst requires an extensive training analysis, the time expenditure of which goes far beyond the analogue self-experience in the training of other psychotherapists. According to the German Psychotherapists Act and the Training and Examination Regulations for Psychological Psychotherapists, only 120 hours of self-experience are required, but the prerequisites for membership required by analytical associations are far higher. For example, in accordance with the guidelines of the DPV ( German Psychoanalytical Association ) for later membership, training institutes set a scope of approx. 22 weeks per semester with four hours of training analysis per week.

Training analysis is an important one, but only part of the training of a psychoanalyst. Theoretical training, practical work (in Germany, 1200 hours in a psychiatric clinic and 600 hours in a psychotherapeutic facility are a prerequisite according to the Psychotherapists Act) and practical training after the intermediate examination (conducting psychoanalytic patient treatment under supervision) are also important components of this training.

The Austrian Psychotherapy Act provides for at least 200 hours of self-awareness; the analytical associations, however, ask for much more.

Discussion and criticism

Trigant Burrow and his analysand Clarence Shields were critical of the authoritarian structure of training analysis - one person lies and says everything about himself, one sits and reports nothing about himself - and tried to make up for this deficiency by reversing roles. Since this did not lead to satisfactory results either, they developed - together with the Swiss psychiatrist Hans Syz , other colleagues, former patients and family members - the concept of group analysis .

Heinz Kohut saw in the practice of training analysis a root of the analyst's sarcastic attitude; in the continuation and adoption of the (originally parental) sadism of the training analyst by his candidate, “ the power of the need to transform passive experience into active one is shown ”. This transformation is accompanied by justification by a morality of maturity, in the name of which the therapist's attacks are made for the benefit of the client.

Because of his professional authority or the position of power transferred by an institute that a training analyst holds, the client in training therapy may shy away from changing the training analyst. Jeffrey Masson was trained by his training analyst, Dr. V., threatened when he expressed his intention to consult another analyst:

"Do that. But of course you understand that your word is against mine. And what do you think, Masson, whom you will believe if I tell you that you are completely nuts and should be expelled from the institute on the spot? "

Masson's authentic account of his training analysis with Dr. “Irvin Schiffer” can be found in chapters two and four of his book Final Analysis: The Making and Unmaking of a Psychoanalyst . The danger of the training analyst being in too great a position of power is now greatly reduced by the fact that most training institutes (all of the DPG and DPV ) use the so-called "non-reporting" system, which means that the training analyst is informed about all decisions and consultations that affecting his analysand is excluded. Information about the respective analysis itself may no longer be passed on either. Threats like those in Masson's account would be ineffective today.

reception

  • Siegfried Bernfeld : About the psychoanalytic training (1952) (From the archive of psychoanalysis). In: Psyche. 38th Jhrg., 1984, pp. 437-459.
  • Hubert Speidel (Ed.): From the workshop of the psychoanalysts. Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden 2003, ISBN 3-531-14095-7 , p. 14ff.
  • Johannes Cremerius : The training analyst makes every single one of these mistakes. In: Ulrich Streeck, Hans V. Werthmann (Ed.): Training analysis and psychoanalytic training. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1992, pp. 52-69.

Analyzes describe their training analysis

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Sigmund Freud: The future chances of psychoanalytic therapy (1910). Writings on treatment technology, study edition, supplementary volume, Fischer, Frankfurt am Main, special edition 2000, ISBN 3-596-50360-4 , pp. 126–127.
  2. ^ Sigmund Freud: Advice for the doctor in psychoanalytic treatment (1912). Writings on treatment technology, study edition, supplementary volume, Fischer, Frankfurt am Main, special edition 2000, ISBN 3-596-50360-4 , pp. 176–177.
  3. ↑ Sigmund Freud: The finite and the infinite analysis (1937). Writings on treatment technology, study edition, supplementary volume, Fischer, Frankfurt am Main, special edition 2000, ISBN 3-596-50360-4 , p. 388.
  4. ↑ Helmut Thomä: On questions of training analysis. In: Psyche, magazine for psychoanalysis, Klett-Cotta Stuttgart, 2/1992
  5. ^ Elisabeth Roudinesco and Michel Plon: Jung, Carl Gustav in: Dictionnaire de la Psychanalyse , 1997. From the French by Christoph Eissing-Christophersen a. a. Dictionary of Psychoanalysis . Springer Vienna, 2004, ISBN 3-211-83748-5 , pp. 769-772.
  6. ↑ See on this: Jean Laplanche and J. B Pontalis : Das Vokabular der Psychoanalyse . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1972, Art. Training Analysis , ISBN 3-518-27607-7 , p 282ff.
  7. ↑ Psychth-aprv
  8. ↑ Information about training as a psychoanalyst with simultaneous acquisition of the qualification "Psychological Psychotherapist (PTG)". (PDF) Frankfurter Psychoanalytisches Institut eV, accessed on August 26, 2014 .
  9. ^ Ibid
  10. ↑ Heinz Kohut: Reflections on narcissism and narcissistic anger. In: Psyche , 28 (1973), pp. 513–553, here: 536, note 6. Quoted from Eli Zaretzky: Freuds Jahrhundert. The history of psychoanalysis , Munich (dtv) 2009, note 22 to chap. Twelve, p. 600.
  11. ↑ Janet Malcolm : Father, dear father ... From the Sigmund Freud Archives. Ullstein non-fiction book, translator Eva Brückner-Pfaffenberger, Dt. First edition 1986, ISBN 3-548-34319-8 , p. 39.
  12. ^ Final Analysis: The Making and Unmaking of a Psychoanalyst. 1990, ISBN 0-201-52368-X , Chapter Two: The Worm of Analysis. Pp. 19-44; Chapter Four: The Worm Turns. Pp. 59-86. (2003, ISBN 0-345-45278-X )