The Educational Boundary. - The University of Texas at Austin

An attack against the training analystA candidate nearing the end of her training sat for an oral examination. On the examining committeewas a young analyst who had long ago been in an unsuccessful treatment with thecandidate's training analyst. He was quite angry with this senior member of the faculty, harboring agrudge, and believing that the analyst was not capable of performing a truly successful analysis. What hewas not aware of consciously at the time of the oral examination was that he believed that this analyst wasso incompetent that he could not work well enough to successfully analyze any candidate, and wasincapable of equipping that potential analyst to function effectively. Unconsciously trying to prove thispoint, in the course of the oral examination he relentlessly attacked the candidate. The candidatefortunately was thoughtful, highly competent, and quite confident, and passed the examination. But ratherthan it being a positive experience, which in the candidate's mind was associated with pride in herprofessional and personal growth, it was remembered as an unacceptable attack. It caused the student toslow down her institute progress, and for several months became the focus of her analysis.An effort to support the training analystA training analyst was involved in an effort to reform an aspect of admission policy at his institute,and had encountered resistance on the part of the old guard. A candidate analysand of that analyst was notparticularly gifted at using the verbal and pictorial imagery of his analysands as he worked, and was insupervision with one of the old guard analysts, who was interested in the clinical use of dreams. In fact,that analyst worked in a very traditional way, was not particularly interested in more contemporary aspectsof two-person technique, and often advised colleagues to view much of what was said in analytic hours asthough the analysand were producing dream material. In that supervision, the candidate was offered theopportunity to focus on his shortcomings, which had been his reason for choosing that supervisor. In thatinstitute each candidate had an advisor, and this candidate's advisor was a close friend of his analyst.When candidate and advisor met every few months, the advisor learned that the candidate was finding thework with the old guard supervisor quite difficult, but rewarding. Eventually, the advisor began toquestion the candidate's choice of that supervisor, suggesting that, rather than experience frustration, heshould capitalize on his strengths as an analyst, which were in the area of interpersonal managementof conflict, and change to a supervisor who was more interested in that focus of clinical work. Afterhearing this for a year the candidate left the old guard supervisor. Clearly, the reason for this had nothingmanifestly to do with the political struggles within the institute, and could be understood as goodeducational advice by the advisor. That the candidate lost an opportunity to develop a skill that did notcome easily to him could be rationalized: ‘There are so many skills useful in analysis, and no analystcould possess all of them … so why not build on one's strengths?’ But, unconsciously,- 207 -it was the wish of the advisor to embarrass the first supervisor, in order to give the candidate's analyst aboost in his battle with the old guard. And for the candidate, this was a real loss, because he never learnedto build up certain skills which could have provided a useful form of access to unconscious process.In fact, what seemed like a constructive educational intervention by an advisor had not only supportedthe candidate's unconscious resistance to learning new ways to access unconscious processes in hisanalysands, but also encouraged difficulties for him in his personal analysis. He went on to misappropriatethat lesson to construct a parallel resistance in his personal analysis, where he stopped remembering,reporting, and analyzing his dreams. Eventually, focusing only on here and now transference feelings, thecandidate created a serious analytic impasse for himself and his analyst, the person whom the advisor wasunconsciously trying to support.An effort to support the administration of the instituteA candidate with a PhD in Business Administration, with enough course work in psychology toentitle her to membership in the American PsychologicalAssociation, had worked for a number of years ina university setting. She had written a book on the problems encountered in the administration oforganizations. Eventually, she decided that she needed to know more about the psychology of individuals,so she entered analysis, and eventually applied for analytic training. Shortly after her admission, she wonher institute's annual candidate prize for a paper on problems in administration. She presented this paper toher new colleagues at the analytic society, to much acclaim, and she was asked to be a consultant by theadministration of the institute, as they were working to revise the bylaws governing the organization. Thiscandidate was encouraged to participate in this process of revision, and devoted many hours to the project.