247 East 82nd St.,
New York, NY
All graduate analysts and candidates in psychoanalytic training are invited to participate in the Clinical Working Parties, "Comparative Clinical Methods", "Specificity of Psychoanalytic Treatment Today", "Initiating Psychoanalysis", “Clinical Forum”, and IPA Training analysts in the “Mind of the Supervisor: End of Training Evaluation”. (Please find descriptions of Working Parties below.)
Working party groups explore the psychoanalytic process using detailed session notes with new methods for approaching the clinical material, with experienced Presenters, and lead by trained Moderators, and Co-moderators from North America and Europe. Participants have said they return to their practices with a better idea of how we work and think as analysts.
The Working parties have a unique set of features and goals:
Most groups will consist of 12 analysts, including one or two moderators, and one presenter of clinical material. Participants will be assigned to a group in the Working Party they choose, and will be contacted by the moderators with information, times, place and materials for the group.
The fee will be $196.
$146 for Initiating Psychoanalysis
$130 for candidate only Specificity
Deadline February 24th, 2014.
Steering Committee: Maxine Anderson (Co-chair), Abbot Bronstein, Margaret Ann Fitzpatrick Hanly, William Glover, Nancy Kulish, Marianne Robinson, Marie Rudden,, Ronnie Shaw, David Stevens, Bob White (Treasurer), Nancy Wolf (Chair).
The North American IPA Working Parties are standing clinical research groups, developed in coordination with the Working Parties of the other IPA Regional Organizations, EPF and FEPAL, funded by the IPA.
Comparative Clinical Methods:
Saturday, March 8th:
9:30 am – 6:00 pm;
Sunday, March 9th: 9:00 am – 1:30 pm
End of Training Evaluation: Saturday, March 8th: 9:00 am – 6:00 pm;
Sunday, March 9th: 9:00 am – 1:30 pm
Initiating Psychoanalysis: Saturday, March 8th: 10:00 am – 4:00 pm
Specificity of Psychoanalytic Treatment Today: Saturday, March 8th: 9:00 am – 6:00 pm; Sunday, March 9th: 9:00 am – 1:30 pm
Reception and Paper
Special Presentation by Marie Rudden and Abbot Bronstein on
Transference and the Relationship in North American Psychoanalysis
using data from the CCM cases.
Saturday March 8, Wine and Cheese 6:30 - 7 PM, Paper 7-8 PM.
At the New York Psychoanalytic Institute and Society
Register now for this Special Clinical Conference! Spaces are limited.
You can register and pay on-line
1. Register and pay on-line
2. You can register by mail
Send the following information:
Member or Candidate:
Working Party Preference:
With check or money order US payable to the Contemporary Freudian Society to:
Pay by credit card (fax or email)
— Visa — MasterCard — Discover — American Express
Name on card:
Credit Card Number:
3 or 4 digit Security Code:
Fax to: 752-446-4867
or email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The Working Party on Comparative Clinical Methods (CCM) has been designed to allow analysts, to talk across theoretical, linguistic and cultural boundaries. The Comparative Clinical Method starts with a prime assumption. The presenter in each group is a psychoanalyst who is presenting an analysis. The members of the groups have a work task: to understand how the presenting analyst works. The group attempts to discover both the explicit and implicit analytic theory and method of the presenting analyst. The presenter brings a brief background to the case and analytic sessions that represent their way of working with this patient. Over the two days of meetings the group begins discussion focusing directly on the presenter's way of working, first by considering the function and purpose of each "intervention" in depth (Step1). During Step 2, members of the group "construct" from their discussion of the clinical hours, a picture of the presenter's work. The group works on the analyst's "explanatory model": "how does this analyst explain the patient's difficulties”; "what are the analyst's ideas about how change takes place"; "how does the analyst think about the transference"; and "the dynamic unconscious as it comes into the session"; and "how does the analyst's way and manner of interventions further the analysis". In the process of discussion, each participant along with the presenter become clearer about how they and other analysts work in their consulting rooms. Participants must be psychoanalysts. There is also space for two advanced candidates.
For further information contact:
Abbot A.Bronstein- Chair CCM, email@example.com
Marie Rudden –Co-Chair CCM, firstname.lastname@example.org
The Working Party on The Mind of the Supervisor: End of Training Evaluation (WPETE): In small groups, training analysts focus on understanding the mind of the supervisor as he or she evaluates a psychoanalytic candidate’s progress toward becoming a psychoanalyst. A presenting analyst/supervisor provides clinical examples from his supervisory work with one or two candidates, if possible, from the supervisions of one candidate whom he or she perceives is ready to graduate, and one who is not yet ready. As the supervisory session and the supervisor’s thinking come alive in the group, the participants consider how the presenter thought about the candidate’s readiness to function as a graduate psychoanalyst. The presenter’s criteria for his or her ideas about what good psychoanalytic work is, which may be implicit or “taken for granted”, emerges in the group process. The task of the group members is to construct the presenter’s model of evaluation of the candidate’s progress and to test this construction with the presenter. The group asks such questions as, What is the presenter’s view on the dynamics and psychopathology of the supervised case (conflicts, developmental deficits, trauma etc.)? What is the presenter’s theory of psychic change, which guides his assessment of the candidate? (For example, what sorts of experiences does he think the candidate must help to facilitate in the patient?) How does the presenter/supervisor think about the candidate’s work with the transference and countertransference etc.? How does the presenter think an analyst should listen to the patient’s unconscious? Does the presenter have a theory of technique which guides how he or she thinks the candidate should intervene and interpret? The group will also have the opportunity to consider how an Institute’s training program and culture (explicit and implicit) might influence the supervisor’s work, and will discuss and compare subtle differences in training models to see how they might influence the supervisor’s way of working with candidates. The group process as it examines the supervisor’s mind is one of discovery.
For further information contact:
Chairs: Nancy Kulish, email@example.com
Marianne Robinson, firstname.lastname@example.org
The Working Party on Initiating Psychoanalysis holds Small group clinical workshops to understand how analysts create a specifically psychoanalytic opportunity in preliminary interviews. The EPF Working Party on Initiating Psychoanalysis (WPIP) was set up in 2004 to develop expertise about how to begin psychoanalytic treatment and, in particular, how to convey to an unprepared patient the specific opportunity offered by the experience of psychoanalysis.
The WPIP has launched a study to look at how this is done by experienced colleagues, using small group clinical workshops to explore preliminary interviews psychoanalytically and develop experience-near theories of their dynamics. This involves a case presentation followed first by a free-associating group discussion and then by a more focused and structured examination of the material. Participants find that they learn from the experience at the same time that they contribute to the collective project. This procedure has now been extended to include the study of preliminary interviews that did not lead to psychoanalysis, leading for example to psychotherapy or to no treatment at all. The workshops are not informed of the outcome beforehand and begin by working blind to the results of the interviews, to sharpen their exploration of the material and to see whether or not they can detect differences in the dynamics of preliminary consultations that lead to analysis and those that do not. Registered participants will be sent more detailed preparatory information about methods and procedures before the workshops.
For further information contact Nancy Wolf, chair, email@example.com
The Working Party on the Specificity of Psychoanalytic Treatment Today is a research method founded by Evelyne Sechaud, who developed the work of the clinical groups by widening the ideas of Johan Norman, Bjorn Salomonsson and Jean-Luc Donnet. The method is based on an analogical relation between the analytic sessions and their narration. The Working Party has found that owing to the associative thinking of analysts working together, the clinical research group functions as a magnifying echo of the transference-countertransference relation between patient and analyst. The small clinical groups are made up of 12 to 15 analysts from different analytic cultures working for a day and a half on the same clinical material. The presenter relates no more than necessary of the session content (speech, affects, and actions) without giving any indication concerning biography, the history of the analysis or the setting. He/she then remains silent without responding to the questions raised among the group. The fundamental rule of the group is to associate freely to the clinical material. The group thus 'constructs' the patient, each participant using his explicit and implicit theoretical references. Through the group work the gap between theory and practice (J.-L. Donnet) thus becomes reality and makes its exploration possible. The presenter then enters the discussion and lends his thoughts and feelings to the group work. This step enables the group to assess après-coup the constructions worked through during the preceding step.
Ronnie Shaw and David Stevens, Co-chair. For Further information contact: Ronnie Shaw, Co-chair, firstname.lastname@example.org
“Transference and the Relationship in North American Psychoanalysis”
by Marie Rudden and Abbot Bronstein
Wine and Cheese followed
by a Paper presenting some Findings from the meetings and research by the North American Comparative Clinical Methods Working Party
Saturday Evening March 8, 2014
The Auditorium of NY PSYCHOANALYTIC SOCIETY AND INSTITUTE, 247 E. 82 St, NY
Wine and Cheese at 6:30
The Presentation begins at 7 PM and finishes at 8 PM
Dr Rudden will introduce the work of the Comparative Clinical Methods Working Party, briefly describing their ongoing research projects, which explore some central clinical ideas such as how analysts consider unconscious phantasy, understand and work with enactments and with the transference, and attend to the" here and now".
Dr. Rudden will then present the paper co-authored by herself and Dr. Abbot Bronstein. In the paper, the authors review the literature about the complex intertwining between transference and the relationship in psychoanalytic practice. This interconnection is discussed in three cases that have been presented in Comparative Clinical Methods groups by North American psychoanalysts. The authors consider both the apparent transferences and the nature of the analyst-analysand relationships that characterize each of the three treatment dyads, suggesting the importance of each element in the treatment process.
Dr. Marie Rudden is an Assistant Clinical Professor in Psychiatry at Weill Cornell School of Medicine, a Training and Supervising Analyst at the Berkshire Psychoanalytic Institute and a member of the affiliated faculty of the Austen Riggs Center. She is co- chair of The North American Comparative Clinical Methods Working Party, on the Editorial Board of IJP and has written and published in the areas of panic disorder, depression, regressive group processes, fantasies about hidden self states and on reflective functioning and symptom- specific reflective functioning.
Dr. Abbot Bronstein is co- chair of the North American Comparative Clinical Methods Working Party. He developed the Working Party Groups in North America. He is a member of the San Francisco Center for Psychoanalysis, editor of the Analyst at Work section of the IJP, and a Training and Supervising Analyst of the International Psychoanalytic Association.
Return to top