Archive for December, 2007

Happy New Year

Monday, December 31st, 2007

jane_blueglasses2.jpgAs we prepare to ring in the New Year, I offer some toasts:

* To Arnie Richards: Here’s to the Internationalpsychoanalysis.net blog — may it flourish and continue to feed our world with interesting articles and information on psychoanalysis.

* To all readers of the blog with hopes that more of you participate!

* To Elise Snyder: Congratulations on your inroads to China –may psychoanalytic thinking bridge our cultures.

* To Jurgen Reeder: Kudos for alerting us to the Hate and Love in Psychoanalytic Institutes: The Dilemma of the Profession in a scholarly manner, one from which we all can learn.

* To the IPA Planning Committee: congratulations on the Berlin conference.

* To Barbara Stimmel: Thank you for the fine work you and your committee did on representing North America in Berlin.

* To Claudio Laks Eizirik: Cheers for the leadership you have provided at the IPA.

* To Paul Mosher: Thank you for providing us all with a sense of history.

* To Glen Gabbard: Gratitude for making the APsaA meetings so rich.

* To the organizing committee of The Future of Psychoanalytic Education (Sam Herschkowitz, Kenneth Eisold, Lewis Aron, Jennifer Harper, Joann Turo, James Fosshage, Doonam Kim, Arlene Kramer Richards, and my co-chair Arnie Richards) thank you for producing the first and most successful ecumenical conference on this topic.

* To Charles Brenner, Martin Bergmann, and Peter Neubauer for their continued vitality and for being wonderful role models.

* To Elizabeth Gero-Heymann for celebrating her 104th birthday.

* To Doris Silverman: kudos for the IPA newsletter.

* To all the presidents and board members of our many societies and institutes: thank you for your commitment and energy and time. Your leadership will take us into a successful future.

* To Dick Fox of APsaA for giving psychotherapy its rightful place in the sun.

* To the psychoanalytic journal editors: appreciation for keeping us informed and intellectually stimulated.

* To Norman Doidge: Thanks for telling us that the brain is indeed plastic and that we can add years to its functioning.

* To all the writers of psychoanalytic books and articles that teach us valuable lessons.

* To all the spouses: appreciation for your collective patience, tolerance, and support for your analytically involved mates.

* And most important: Deep gratitude to all the clinicians who do not necessarily make the news but who do the most important work.

Apologies to everyone I have not mentioned but who deserve cheers and best wishes for a successful and healthy New Year.

Peace!

China American Psychoanalytic Alliance

Sunday, December 30th, 2007

Our website http://www.capachina.org/CAPA/Home.html is now up and running.

Please visit us to learn more about what is happening in China.

Symposium 2008: Responding to the Erotic Transference

Thursday, December 27th, 2007

Symposium 2008: Responding to the Erotic Transference

March 8th and 9th, 2008

Mount Sinai Medical Center

100th Street and Madison Avenue

Click Here to Read: The Complete Symposium 2008 Brochure.

Personal Reflections on Object Loss by Marion M. Oliner

Thursday, December 27th, 2007

Click Here to Read:  Personal Reflections on Object Loss by Marion M. Oliner 

This article has been previously published: Oliner, Marion M. (2007, Fall). Personal Reflections on Object Loss. The Round Robin (Newsletter of Psychoanalytic Practitioners, Section 1, APA Division 39) 22 (3) and appears here with the requisite rights and permissions.

“On Civilization and Its Discontents, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis”: Martin Bergmann Interviewed by Jane Kupersmidt

Thursday, December 27th, 2007

Click Here to Read: “On Civilization and Its Discontents, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis”: An Interview with Martin Bergmann. 

This article has been previously published: Kupersmidt, Jane (Fall 2007). “On Civilization and Its Discontents, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis”: An interview with Martin Bergmann. The Round Robin (Newsletter of Psychoanalytic Practitioners, Section 1, APA Division 39) 22 (3) and appears here with the requisite rights and permissions.

Information for Recommendation Letters

Tuesday, December 25th, 2007

Information for Recommendation Letters

一般需要提供三位推荐人。其中应该有一到二位是申请人的任课老师、导师、系主任或院系领导。已经工作的申请人最好请你的上司写一篇推荐信。若能找到相关专业领域的学术权威或有国际知名度的教授(比如在国际性刊物上发表学术论文的人)担任推荐人,则会对申请有一定的帮助;但不必强求,如果推荐人不了解你,则即使写了推荐信也不能让对方学校的评审委员信服。推荐人必须和申请人有一定的接触,他/她可以从学术成绩、科研能力和潜力、性格、特长、语言能力等各个方面推荐申请人。每个推荐人只应该评论与申请人接触到的方面并稍作拓展,不太可能面面俱到。

注:

1. 若推荐人是海外老师或领导,请与其充分沟通,确保其可以按时自行写作并提交推荐信,确认无误的,表格中详细描述部分可省。

2. 提供素材时要从老师的角度出发考虑问题,而且要提供实际的事例。比如:你上课喜欢问问题,那这种方式是否促进了班级学习的积极性,辅助老师更好地教学,增强了学习效率?有没有印象特别深刻的事例,体现了你某方面的突出能力?你在课下是如何和老师联系的,探讨了哪些问题,让老师感受到了你怎样的学习态度,学习进展以及学习成果?成绩是班上最好的,除了学术成绩以外,你还有什么特别的优势或者素质呢?作为班上成绩最好的学生,你为老师,为同学,为班集体做了什么贡献,比如以你自己的方式影响了同学,提高了他们的学习积极性?或者对课程本身的理解,是通过哪些特殊的事情体现出来的?

 

 

 

Part 1:第一推荐人
姓   名(Name)   性   别(Gender)  
职   称(Title)   学   历(Educational Qualification)  
所在单位(Organization)   在此单位工作时间年限(Duration)  
职   务(Position)   工作邮箱(Work Email)  
电   话(Telephone)   手机(Cell Phone)  
通信地址(Postal Address)   邮政编码(Zip Code)  
是否需要后期老师撰写推荐信(Requirement)   推荐信提交方式(Method) 自行提交 or 转发邮件给后期老师?
推荐人是否有国外留学或访问的经历(The brief information of the referee)如推荐人有相关介绍,请提供链接(Link of referee)
  
推荐人对申请者详细描述
  1. 与申请者关系描述
推荐人与申请者关系Relationship to the applicant  
相识时间(具体时间年数)Duration of knowing each other  从  至  ,截至申请时认识了  年   月
如果是教过你课程的老师,课程的中英文名称,上课时间区间(年,月),你的那门课程考试结果如何(如分数,排名等等),课堂表现如何?(比如你和老师共同讨论的某些话题,你在group project中term papers中的表现等)

(Suppose he/she taught the applicant a course, please list the Chinese and English names of the course, the time, exam result and how did the applicant behave himself/herself in class.)

 
2. 以时间为序描写推荐人与被推荐人关系发展,并说明你们的熟悉程度。(How did you know each other? Do you know the applicant well?)

注:回答问题时可以先从第一次如何认识;进一步了解是通过某件事或某次活动等给推荐人留下深刻印象;进一步接触等等,如偶尔见面或密切接触,或教过一年课。

 
3. 该推荐人是否指导你进行过什么研究或工作?详细介绍研究/工作的项目以及所取得的成绩。(Please introduce in details the research/work project and the achievement if the referee instructed the applicant about the project.)
 
4. 请先选择两个以上给推荐人留下深刻印象的特点用事例描述,请从推荐人的角度来说(以下内容切忌空泛)
Scholastic Aptitude(学术倾向): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Native intellectual ability(天赋) Imagination(想象力) Creativity(创造力) Capacity for analytical thinking(分析思考能力) Intellectual curiosity or Spirit of inquiry(好奇心) Ability to work independently(独立学习工作能力) Memory(记忆力) Accuracy(精确) Methodology(研究方法) Capability for abstract reasoning(抽象推理能力) Potential as a researcher(研究潜力) Potential as a teacher(教学的潜力) Ability to express ideas orally and in writing(口语或文字的表达能力) Capacity, desire and determination for good quality graduate work(是否有获得学业成功的能力、企图与决心) Probable success as a graduate student(研究生成功的可能性)
  

 

 

 

 

 

Academic performance(学业表现): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Breadth of general knowledge(常识是否丰富) Knowledge of literature in his/her field(本科知识) Grade or achievement(成绩表现或成绩) Industry; diligence(勤勉) Participation in discussion(参与讨论是否热烈) Academic maturity(学业上成熟度)
 
Languages(语言能力): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Ability to speak, listen, read and write the English language(英语文的听、说、读写能力)

Ability to read significant literature in other languages than English(英语或母语之外的语言能力)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Character(品行): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Honesty; integrity(诚实) Sincerity(诚恳) Sense of responsibility(责任感) Cooperation(合作) Enthusiasm(热诚) Conscientiousness(自觉性) Ethical and moral standards(伦理与道德标准) Reliability; dependability(可靠性) Concern for others(关怀他人) Patience(耐性) Perseverance(恒心) Seriousness of purpose(求学认真) Work habits initiative(工作习惯) Record of disciplinary action or misconduct(曾受惩罚或品行不良记录)
 
Leadership(领导力):请用事例描述
 
 
  1. 客观评价被推荐人的有待提高之处 (Briefly describe the applicant’s weakness)
 

 

Part 2:第二推荐人
姓   名(Name)   性   别(Gender)  
职   称(Title)   学   历(Educational Qualification)  
所在单位(Organization)   在此单位工作时间年限(Duration)  
职   务(Position)   工作邮箱(Work Email)  
电   话(Telephone)   手机(Cell Phone)  
通信地址(Postal Address)   邮政编码(Zip Code)  
是否需要后期老师撰写推荐信(Requirement)   推荐信提交方式(Method) 自行提交 or 转发邮件给后期老师?
推荐人是否有国外留学或访问的经历(The brief information of the referee)如推荐人有相关介绍,请提供链接(Link of referee)
 
推荐人对申请者详细描述
  1. 与申请者关系描述
推荐人与申请者关系Relationship to the applicant  
相识时间(具体时间年数)Duration of knowing each other  从  至  ,截至申请时认识了  年  月
如果是教过你课程的老师,课程的中英文名称,上课时间区间(年,月),你的那门课程考试结果如何(如分数,排名等等),课堂表现如何?(比如你和老师共同讨论的某些话题,你在group project中term papers中的表现等)

(Suppose he/she taught the applicant a course, please list the Chinese and English names of the course, the time, exam result and how did the applicant behave himself/herself in class.)

 
2. 以时间为序描写推荐人与被推荐人关系发展,并说明你们的熟悉程度。(How did you know each other? Do you know the applicant well?)

注:回答问题时可以先从第一次如何认识;进一步了解是通过某件事或某次活动等给推荐人留下深刻印象;进一步接触等等,如偶尔见面或密切接触,或教过一年课。

 
3. 该推荐人是否指导你进行过什么研究或工作?详细介绍研究/工作的项目以及所取得的成绩。(Please introduce in details the research/work project and the achievement if the referee instructed the applicant about the project.)
 
4. 请先选择两个以上给推荐人留下深刻印象的特点用事例描述,请从推荐人的角度来说(以下内容切忌空泛)
Scholastic Aptitude(学术倾向):针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Native intellectual ability(天赋) Imagination(想象力) Creativity(创造力) Capacity for analytical thinking(分析思考能力) Intellectual curiosity or Spirit of inquiry(好奇心) Ability to work independently(独立学习工作能力) Memory(记忆力) Accuracy(精确) Methodology(研究方法) Capability for abstract reasoning(抽象推理能力) Potential as a researcher(研究潜力) Potential as a teacher(教学的潜力) Ability to express ideas orally and in writing(口语或文字的表达能力) Capacity, desire and determination for good quality graduate work(是否有获得学业成功的能力、企图与决心) Probable success as a graduate student(研究生成功的可能性)
  

 

 

 

 

 

Academic performance(学业表现): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Breadth of general knowledge(常识是否丰富) Knowledge of literature in his/her field(本科知识) Grade or achievement(成绩表现或成绩) Industry; diligence(勤勉) Participation in discussion(参与讨论是否热烈) Academic maturity(学业上成熟度)
 
Languages(语言能力): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Ability to speak, listen, read and write the English language(英语文的听、说、读写能力)

Ability to read significant literature in other languages than English(英语或母语之外的语言能力)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Character(品行): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Honesty; integrity(诚实) Sincerity(诚恳) Sense of responsibility(责任感) Cooperation(合作) Enthusiasm(热诚) Conscientiousness(自觉性) Ethical and moral standards(伦理与道德标准) Reliability; dependability(可靠性) Concern for others(关怀他人) Patience(耐性) Perseverance(恒心) Seriousness of purpose(求学认真) Work habits initiative(工作习惯) Record of disciplinary action or misconduct(曾受惩罚或品行不良记录)
 
Leadership(领导力): 请用事例描述
 
 
  1. 客观评价被推荐人的有待提高之处 (Briefly describe the applicant’s weakness)
 

 

Part 3:第三推荐人
姓   名(Name)   性   别(Gender)  
职   称(Title)   学   历(Educational Qualification)  
所在单位(Organization)   在此单位工作时间年限(Duration)  
职   务(Position)   工作邮箱(Work Email)  
电   话(Telephone)   手机(Cell Phone)  
通信地址(Postal Address)   邮政编码(Zip Code)  
是否需要后期老师撰写推荐信(Requirement)   推荐信提交方式(Method) 自行提交 or 转发邮件给后期老师?
推荐人是否有国外留学或访问的经历(The brief information of the referee)如推荐人有相关介绍,请提供链接(Link of referee)
 
推荐人对申请者详细描述
  1. 与申请者关系描述
推荐人与申请者关系Relationship to the applicant  
相识时间(具体时间年数)Duration of knowing each other  从  至  ,截至申请时认识了  年   月
如果是教过你课程的老师,课程的中英文名称,上课时间区间(年,月),你的那门课程考试结果如何(如分数,排名等等),课堂表现如何?(比如你和老师共同讨论的某些话题,你在group project中term papers中的表现等)

(Suppose he/she taught the applicant a course, please list the Chinese and English names of the course, the time, exam result and how did the applicant behave himself/herself in class.)

 
2. 以时间为序描写推荐人与被推荐人关系发展,并说明你们的熟悉程度。(How did you know each other? Do you know the applicant well?)

注:回答问题时可以先从第一次如何认识;进一步了解是通过某件事或某次活动等给推荐人留下深刻印象;进一步接触等等,如偶尔见面或密切接触,或教过一年课。

 
3. 该推荐人是否指导你进行过什么研究或工作?详细介绍研究/工作的项目以及所取得的成绩。(Please introduce in details the research/work project and the achievement if the referee instructed the applicant about the project.)
 
4. 请先选择两个以上给推荐人留下深刻印象的特点用事例描述,请从推荐人的角度来说(以下内容切忌空泛)
Scholastic Aptitude (学术倾向): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Native intellectual ability(天赋) Imagination(想象力) Creativity(创造力) Capacity for analytical thinking(分析思考能力) Intellectual curiosity or Spirit of inquiry(好奇心) Ability to work independently(独立学习工作能力) Memory(记忆力) Accuracy(精确) Methodology(研究方法) Capability for abstract reasoning(抽象推理能力) Potential as a researcher(研究潜力) Potential as a teacher(教学的潜力) Ability to express ideas orally and in writing(口语或文字的表达能力) Capacity, desire and determination for good quality graduate work(是否有获得学业成功的能力、企图与决心) Probable success as a graduate student(研究生成功的可能性)
  

 

 

 

 

 

Academic performance(学业表现): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Breadth of general knowledge(常识是否丰富) Knowledge of literature in his/her field(本科知识) Grade or achievement(成绩表现或成绩) Industry; diligence(勤勉) Participation in discussion(参与讨论是否热烈) Academic maturity(学业上成熟度)
 
Languages(语言能力): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Ability to speak, listen, read and write the English language(英语文的听、说、读写能力)

Ability to read significant literature in other languages than English(英语或母语之外的语言能力)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Character(品行): 针对以下提示的某一方面用事例描述Honesty; integrity(诚实) Sincerity(诚恳) Sense of responsibility(责任感) Cooperation(合作) Enthusiasm(热诚) Conscientiousness(自觉性) Ethical and moral standards(伦理与道德标准) Reliability; dependability(可靠性) Concern for others(关怀他人) Patience(耐性) Perseverance(恒心) Seriousness of purpose(求学认真) Work habits initiative(工作习惯) Record of disciplinary action or misconduct(曾受惩罚或品行不良记录)
 
Leadership(领导力):请用事例描述
 
 
  1. 客观评价被推荐人的有待提高之处 (Briefly describe the applicant’s weakness)
 

 

Symposium 2016: Sexuality and Its Discontents

Tuesday, December 25th, 2007

Registration is now open for Symposium 2016:  Sexuality and Discontents
March 26th, 2016
Goldwurm Auditorium, Mount Sinai Medical School, 98th Street and Madison Avenue

Click Here to Read:  Symposium 2016 Brochure.

NOTE: 7.0 contact hours NYS approved CEUs will be offered through our co-sponsor, National Institute for Psychoanalytic Education and Research in Clinical Social Work (NIPER) Inc. educational arm of the American Association for Psychoanalysis in Clinical Social Work (AAPCSW). NIPER is recognized by the New York State Education Department’s State Board for Social Work as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed social workers. This will be of value to social workers for their licence renewal and may also be of value to psychologists for future requirements. Please check with your local agencies. hYou can pay the fee of $20 for the credits onsite or on the button below. Choose the regular or student rate with SW CEUs. Paying for CEUs now will make it easier for all of us onsite.

Also Note: If you would like to volunteer and work at the conference during registration, you can attend for free, but you must contact Psypsa@aol.com at least a week before the conference.

Click Here For: Full the full CE units information.


Select: Regular or Student
Degree and Phone
Affiliation



= PROGRAM =
08:15–08:50 REGISTRATION & Breakfast Buffet
08:50-09:00 Welcome & Introduction – Arthur Lynch, PhD

09:10–09:45 KEYNOTE Jack Drescher, MD Transgender
09:50–11:20 PANEL I —Transgender
09:50–09:55 Chair/ discussant – Judith Logue, PhD
09:55–10:20 Jack Pula, MD
10:20–10:45 Michael J. Feldman. MD
10:45–11:05 Discussant – Judith Logue, PhD

= MORNING BREAK 11:05–11:20 =

11:20–12:45 KEYNOTE BOUNDARY VIOLATIONS
11:20-11:55 Glen Gabbard, MD

PANEL II — Boundary Violations
11:55–12:00 Chair – Ruth Imber, PhD
12:00–12:25 Joyce Slochower, PhD
12:25–12:50 Seth Aronson, PsyD
12:50–1:15 Discussant – Ruth Imber, Ph.D

1:15–01:30 Morning Q & A
= LUNCH 1:30–2:30 =
2:30–3:05 Keynote Presentation – Otto Kernberg, MD
SEXUALITY

3:05–4:15 PANEL III — Sexuality
3:05–3:10 Chair – Kerry Kelly Novick,
3:10–3:35 Adrienne Harris, PhD
3:35–4:00 Arlene Kramer Richards, EdD
4:00–4:25 Discussant – Kerry Kelly Novick

4:25-5:15 Symposium Commentary – Harold Blum, M.D.
5:15–6:00 Q and A

= CLOSING 6:00 =

Stephen L. Richards and Jennifer Bishop Jenkins: A Tale of Two States

Sunday, December 23rd, 2007

A Tale of Two States

By Stephen L. Richards and Jennifer Bishop Jenkins
 This is a tale of two states. Let’s call them State A and State B.

 Both State A and State B have the death penalty.

 In State A, the anti-death penalty movement is strong, well-financed, and well-publicized.

 In State B, the anti-death penalty movement is initially weaker, poorer, and not so well-publicized.

In State A, an innocent man, fitted for his burial shroud, comes within hours of execution.

In State B, no innocent man ever comes close to execution.

(more…)

The Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference: Constructing Our Psychoanalytic Ethos: How & What We Teach

Saturday, December 22nd, 2007

The Panel “Constructing Our Psychoanalytic Ethos: How & What We Teach” was held at the Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference at the Lycee Francais in New York City on December 1st, 2007.

Click Here to Read: Sandra Buechler’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Heather Pyle’s Contribution 

Click Here to Read: Vicky Semel’s Contribution

The Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference: What Do We Educate For? The Role of Psychoanalysis in the Age of Psychotherapy

Saturday, December 22nd, 2007

Panel on “What Do We Educate For? The Role of Psychoanalysis in the Age of Psychotherapy” from the Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference at the Lycee Francais in New York City on December 1st, 2007. 

Click Here to Read: James Fosshage’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Joann Turo’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Joseph Schachter’s Contribution

Discussion Group #2: “Psychodynamics of Spirituality”

Saturday, December 22nd, 2007

jerrygariulo.jpg 

Pre-registration is encouraged for our ongoing discussion group on the
Psychodynamics of Spirituality, Discussion Group # 2 on Wednesday
January 16, 2008 at 9 a.m.* This year, Donald Marcus, MD will co-chair
with me in welcoming and discussing with our gifted presenter and member
of The American Psychoanalytic Association, Dr. Gerald J. Gargiulo.

Gerald J. Gargiulo, Ph.D. is a much sought after, delightful and engaging
speaker who has lectured throughout Canada, England, and the US. Dr.
Gargiulo has published over ninety articles in his thirty-six years of
practice, His creative thinking and deeply-rooted understanding of
spirituality, philosophy and psychoanalysis promises to bring forth a
new level of understanding, relating spirituality to psychoanalytic
practice.

(more…)

A History of The Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference

Friday, December 21st, 2007

Lynn Moritz said in her address at the Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference the following:

“I would even go so far as to muse that this conference was born partly from a covert agenda to punish the American–not to bring us together really, but rather to stabilize and strengthen the fact of our separateness. Some may even hope to do harm to the American, to weaken its influence.”

This ecumenical conference was my idea, and I would like to assure all of you that punishment and exclusion were not part of my agenda. Quite the opposite. So I would like to set the record straight with a brief history.

Our field has been fractious from the beginning. Those in Freud’s inner circle who dared to disagree were cast out; they formed their own factions and the battles began. While some feel energized by adversity and debate, I prefer to seek the security of unity. My wish is for all of the groups to join together, to derive strength in their combined numbers. We need not agree on everything, but we must respect one another’s positions.

For years I have experienced the competition of institutes and umbrella groups, oft times ignoring each other’s existence. For instance, there has been little, if any, cooperation between the 5 IPA institutes in New York (3 primarily medical and 2 primarily non medical). Each hold their own meetings and when there have been attempts to do something together (like the Freud 150th anniversary celebration at the Neue Galerie), we had difficulty acting in concert. Lynne is correct that the APsaA is a group that can and often does unite the IPA societies, but the burden should not rest on APsaA alone. (more…)

The Future of Psychoanalytic Education Conference: Roundtable Discussion

Thursday, December 20th, 2007

roundtable-panel495.jpg

Click Here To Read: Proposals, Bios, and Abstracts of the Participants

Click Here to Read: Judith Logue’s Introduction

Click Here to Read: Lynne Moritz’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: David Ramirez’s Contribution

Click Here to Read:  Carola Mann’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: David Downing’s Contribution

 Click Here to Read: Sherry Katz-Bearnot’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Drew Clemen’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Judy Ann Kaplan’s Contribution

Rick Perlman:  Please note.  NO PERMISSION for posting of this talk on this website has been allowed by the author.  Go to CIPUSA to read it there.

Click Here to Read: Estelle Shane’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Douglas Maxwell’s Contribution

Click Here to Read: Nancy McWilliams’s Contribution  

The Art of Lucian Freud

Thursday, December 20th, 2007

lucian-freud-artwork.jpg

Click Here to Read: Roberta Smith’s New York Times Article from December 14th on Lucian Freud.

Jerome Winer on Frank Lloyd Wright

Thursday, December 20th, 2007

franklloydwright.jpg

Click Here to Read: Jerome Winer’s article on “Frank Lloyd Wright: Power, Powerlessness, and Charisma” reprinted from the Annual of Psychoanalysis, 33:179-190 with the author’s permission.

“It’s a Wonderful Life”: A Cure for the Holiday Blues

Wednesday, December 19th, 2007

wonlife_jimmy_billy_mom.jpg

I had never heard of It’s a Wonderful Life until one winter night in the early eighties. I was feeling out of sorts. I don’t remember the particular details but I know that I was feeling down, unfulfilled, frustrated, disappointed, perhaps lonely, unconfident, worried and otherwise unhappy. Those who have never felt that way need not read on.

(more…)

Charles Fisher Interview by Arnold Richards Part V: “The Middle Decades–1940 to 1969: Practice, Teaching, and Research”

Wednesday, December 19th, 2007

lilfisher.JPG

Click Here to Read: Part V of Arnold Richards’s interview with Charles Fisher: “The Middle Decades–1940 to 1969: Practice, Teaching, and Research.”

Discussion Group 71: Privacy and Electronic Records

Wednesday, December 19th, 2007

DISCUSSION GROUP 71 will meet at our usual time slot 4:45-7:15 PM on Thursday,
January 18, at the APsaA Meetings at the Waldorf Astori in New York City.  All attendees at the Winter Meeting are cordially invited to attend up to the space limits of our assigned room.

As momentum continues to build for the wide-spread conversion of medical records to electronic form, increasingly complicated and confusing issues arise as to if and how we can translate our traditional methods of maintaining the privacy of patient information into what may well become mandatory arrangements in the coming new world of health care.  If we hope to maintain the status of psychoanalysis as part of the health care system, we must face these challenges head on.

Continuing with our overall theme of exploring and discussing broad issues of psychoanalytic confidentiality in an interdisciplinary context, the Jaffee-Redmond The Discussion Group’s January meeting will again focus on the transition to the new world of electronic record-keeping and the challenges to privacy that we will be facing as a result.

We are most fortunate in having as our Guest Discussant for this meeting ROBERT PLOVNICK, M.S., M.D., Director, Dept. of Quality Improvement and Psychiatric Services, American Psychiatric Association.  Rob is both a psychiatrist and an “informatics” expert and is especially sensitive to the special privacy needs of psychiatric patients.  He has represented the APA in a wide variety of national forums where the actual structures of the electronic medical records systems of the future are NOW being negotiated. 

(more…)

Discussion Group 11: Conversations with Doctors: From Balint Groups to Narrative Medicine

Wednesday, December 19th, 2007

balint31.jpg

DG #11. Conversations with Doctors:  From Balint Groups to Narrative Medicine
Wednesday, January 16 at the APsaA Meetings at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City at 2:00-4:30 PM

Co-chair and Facilitator:  Fred L. Griffin, M.D.  (Birmingham)
Co-chair and Presenter:  Randall H. Paulsen, M.D. (Boston)
Presenter:  Nina Calabresi, M.D. (Boston)

     Narrative medicine is an emergent field in which clinicians creatively write about their subjective experiences with patients and reflect upon what they learn about themselves and about clinical process.  The act of writing generates a reflective space, and seeing oneself with a patient on the written page may create a very powerful self-analytic process that increases the capacities for self-awareness and self-reflection.  Time-honored Balint Group work results in similar achievements by way of case presentations that are discussed by groups of physicians. 

(more…)

IPA Berlin Conference: Gertraud Schlesinger-Kipp

Wednesday, December 19th, 2007

Click Here to Read: Gertraud Schlesinger-Kipps’ Welcome and Introduction to the IPA Berlin Conference in July 2007.