Abstract
In this response to commentaries by Bernstein and Frankel, I suggest that there has been a shift in the psychoanalytic Zeitgeist with regard to ethical transgressions. At the time my case transpired, analysts' authenticity was prohibited, and “misdemeanors” were met with overzealous judgment. Contemporary theory and practice has come to appreciate the analyst's subjectivity, and the mutual press of the “impossible profession.” But in doing so, it has begun to occupy another polarized position. Instead of imposing moralistic judgment, we are tending to overcontextualize the analyst's acts and displace the analyst's agency onto the patient. Another position is suggested here.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
