The work of a COPE study group on boundaries is presented, with particular focus on post-termination contact after the training analysis. Through the use of clinical examples evocative and illustrative of the complexity of postanalytic contacts and relationships in the training analysis situation, a number of dilemmas are identified that former analysts and patients face when they meet as colleagues after the training analysis is over. These dilemmas, it is argued, have implications for the conduct and effectiveness of the training analysis and for the institutional cultures and power relations that evolve within institutes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bernfeld, S. (1952). On psychoanalytical training. Psychoanalytic Inquiry31:457—482.
2.
Bollas, C. (1992). Being a Character: Psychoanalysis and Self Experience . New York: Hill & Wang.
3.
Borenstein, D., & Fintzy, R. (1980—1981). Postanalytic encounters . International Journal of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy8:151—164.
4.
Buxbaum, E. (1950). Technique of terminating analysis. International Journal of Psychoanalysis31:184—190.
5.
Cooper, A. (1986). Introduction. In The Termination of the Training Analysis: Process, Expectations, Achievements, ed. A. Cooper.London: International Psychoanalytical Association, pp. 1—7.
6.
Craige, H. (2001). Mourning analysis: The post-termination phase . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association50:507—550.
7.
Dewald, P., & Clark, R., EDS. (2001). Ethics Case Book of the American Psychoanalytic Association. New York: American Psychoanalytic Association.
8.
Dupont, J. (1994). Freud's analysis of Ferenczi as revealed by their correspondence. International Journal of Psychoanalysis75:301—320.
9.
Falzeder, E. (1997). Dreaming of Freud: Ferenczi, Freud, and an analysis without end. Psychoanalytic Inquiry17:416—427.
10.
Fenichel, O. (1980). Theoretical implications of the didactic analysis. Annual ofPsychoanalysis8:21—34.
11.
Firestein, S.K. (1969). Panel report: Problems of termination of the analysis of adults. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association17:222—237.
12.
Freud, A. (1950). The problem of the training analysis. In The Writings of Anna Freud: Vol. II. New York: International Universities Press, 1968, pp. 407—421.
13.
Gabbard, G.O., & Lester, E.P. (1995). Boundaries and Boundary Violations in Psychoanalysis . New York: Basic Books.
14.
——— Peltz, M., & The Cope Study Group On Boundary Violations (2001). Speaking the unspeakable: Institutional reactions to boundary violations by training analysts. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association49:659—673.
15.
Hartlaub, G., Martin, G., & Rhine, M. (1986). Recontact with the analyst following termination: A survey of seventy-one cases. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association34:895—910.
16.
Hoffer, A. (1991). The Freud-Ferenczi controversy: A living legacy . International Review of Psychoanalysis18:465—472.
17.
Kairys, D. (1964). The training analysis: A critical review of the literature and a controversial proposal. Psychoanalytic Quarterly , 33: 485—512.
18.
Kantrowitz, J., Katz, A.L., & Paolitto, F. (1990). Follow-up of psychoanalysis five to ten years after termination: II. Development of the self-analytic function. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association38:637—654.
19.
Kirsner, D. (2000). Unfree Associations. London : Process Press.
20.
Kernberg, O.F. (1986). Institutional problems of psychoanalytic education . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association34:799—834.
21.
Levine, H. (1994). The analyst's participation in the analytic process . International Journal of Psychoanalysis75:665—676.
22.
Lipton, S. (1977). The advantages of Freud's technique as shown in his analysis of the Rat Man. International Journal of Psychoanalysis58:255—274.
23.
Mclaughlin, J.T. (1971). Clinical and theoretical aspects of enactment . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association39:595—614.
24.
Money-Kyrle, R. (1956). Normal counter-transference and some of its deviations . International Journal of Psychoanalysis37:360—366.
25.
Nacht, S. (1954). The difficulties of didactic psycho-analysis in relation to therapeutic psycho-analysis. International Journal of Psychoanalysis35:250—253.
26.
Oremland, J.D., Blacker, K.H., & Norman, H.S. (1975). Incompleteness in “successful” psychoanalyses: A follow-up study. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association23:819—844.
27.
Orgel, S. (2000). Letting go: Some thoughts about termination. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association48:719—738.
28.
Pfeffer, A.Z. (1963). The meaning of the analyst after analysis: A contribution to a theory of therapeutic results. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association11:229—244.
29.
Racker, H. (1968). Transference and Countertransference. New York: International Universities Press .
30.
Rangell, L. (1966). An overview of the ending of an analysis. In Psychoanalysis in the Americas, ed. R. Litman.New York: International Universities Press, pp. 141—165.
31.
——— (1980—1981). Some notes on the postanalytic phase. International Journal of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy8:165—170.
32.
Reich, A. (1950). On the termination of analysis. International Journal of Psychoanalysis31:179—183.
33.
Schachter, J. (2002). Transference: Shibboleth or Albatross?Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
34.
Schafer, R. (1986). The Analytic Attitude. New York: Basic Books.
35.
Schlessinger, N., & Robbins, F. (1974). Assessment and follow-up in psychoanalysis. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association22:542—567.
Wallerstein, R. (1986). The termination of the training analysis; the process, the expectations, the achievement; the institute's view. In The Termination of the Training Analysis: Process, Expectations, Achievements, ed. A. Cooper.London: International Psychoanalytical Association , pp. 35—52.
