• “…impressed by how the essential points were covered in such a thorough, well- considered and balanced manner…” • “…an important and essential contribution to ongoing education on a complex and sometimes avoided topic…” There were also some critical comments and questions concerning the report as a whole, but there were fewer of these. • One respondent wrote: “ Does the report in its defensive completeness risk throwing out the baby of discovery and exploration with the bathwater of rigorous self- regulation? ” • Another wrote of the need for “ a balance between rigidity and excess of flexibility ”. Some specific suggestions were made about what should be done with the report. • One respondent wrote that the report, or some sections of it, “ could have some official recognition and [be] published together with the Ethics Code on the website, so that members could access it easily and consult it, as they now consult the Ethics Code .” • Another wrote that the suggestions in the report were clear but that they could be stated in a more compact form. More than one comment stressed the need to widen discussion of the report to include non-IPA practitioners. • One wrote: “ While this document is an IPA document supporting specific recommendations for official IPA policy, it need not systematically exclude reference to non-IPA analysts and organizations, or public education ”. • Another wrote: “… we cannot really expect the needed ongoing dialogue to be achieved if we frame the issues in terms only of IPA analysts and fail to engage with other analysts and also other professionals, including academics and social scientists and, perhaps most importantly, the general public. I would hope that this point can be reflected in section 9.3, perhaps under the heading At the Institutional Level …: “Regularly organize public dialogues on the meaning of confidentiality among different psychoanalytic groups and with the general public …” (See 9.2). 10.3 Intrinsic limitations of psychoanalytic confidentiality Some respondents commented that there may be limits on the possibility of maintaining confidentiality in an analysis even under optimal conditions. One wrote: “… one could argue that the very method of free association assumes a proper functioning of breaches of confidence within the analysand’s internal structures. It is always astonishing how despite a presenter's best efforts at disguising a case that some vital aspect of the analysand's identity will pop through ”. Another pointed out that if trust is an essential element in the analytic situation, feelings of mis trust are equally important, especially where infantile aspects of the transference are concerned, and that trust and mistrust can be understood as being in a
41
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online