I have found a "The Collected Works of Winnicott" on Amazon. But, it is very expensive and seems like there is no alternative because the only seller is on Amazon.

Is it possible to find it online? How can I reach these collected works?

Hello at r/psychoanalysis!

I am not a psychoanalyst, but I am a practicing IFS therapist working within the United States. I am a frequent lurker in this sub but this is my first post here.

I am slowly reading Philip Bromberg’s Standing In The Spaces. His view of human psychology is almost identical to mine, but his methodology in treating trauma and dissociation differs. His approaches have helped me make a few changes to my clinical approach.

I also ordered Sexuality Beyond Consent by Avgi Saketopoulou earlier today, because I read many therapists or psychoanalysts found it helpful to conceptualize their patients’ relationship with trauma.

I am fairly familiar with narrative therapy approaches to trauma, as well as many of the modern approaches (like EMDR.)

I am wondering if you could recommend to me other psychodynamic or psychoanalytic texts that were helpful for you or your patients in working on or through traumatic experiences?

Thanks in advance for any help with this!

I understand where these posts come from. There's many interesting Psychoanalytic theories written by various Psychoanalysts (and non paychoanalysts) about a huge variety of issues, topics, and experiences. Ranging from mental health to sexuality to politics to history to economics. It's all been covered at some point or another.

What I'd like to bring to this conversation as a practicing Psychoanalytic practitioner is that these theories are always developed as a perspective developed by a theorist (whether they're an analyst or not), and are produced by their unique experience and engagement with what they're talking about. If you ask three different analysts about the same thing, you'll likely get at least five different answers.

This is because the heart of the work lies in working with the details of what is being worked with. That will always be unique based on the position of the observer and what is being brought to the table.

So when people ask about kink, fanaticism, narcissism, promiscuity, dreams, politics, childhood experiences, trauma etc. My first question will always be "Well, what about this are we looking at?"

This is not to say that questions like "what does Psychoanalysis say about x" should not be asked. It's actually the opposite. It's always more productive to bring as much context as possible about your inquiry. What aspects of this topic would you like to know about? What are you interested in exploring? This gives commenters an opportunity to also engage more deeply with the multiplicity of the topic at hand.

Please only answer if you’ve attended a program or are very familiar. What’s your experience of the difference of respect or quality of training for LCSWs/LPCs vs PhDs in psychoanalytic training programs (wherever)?

Just curious, when I look on psychology today, there really doesn’t seem to be a difference and I see more MA psychoanalytically trained than PhDs. I wonder if the PhD burns people out of school? I want to practice and I have the experience to apply to PhD programs, but I feel like I’d only see it through if it’s worth it and would practice well.

What is the Psychoanalysis view on Promiscuity?

Any resources would be great.

Thanks.

For psychoanalysts and psychoanalytic therapists, how do you describe your work on a resume? Do you use the bullet points to highlight your theoretical orientation and approach, personality structures or dynamics you work with, different diagnoses or other specialized demographics?

I was just wondering about the beginning of the session being talked about quite often, but have any of read in any case studies or personal experience on interesting ways of closing the session.

I believe the main points would be - using the couch in the later, and increasing the frequency. But what other aspects would differ in the two?

I’ve heard plenty criticisms of meeting more than once a week from the mainstream pov. How does psychoanalysis defend it, or explain the need for meeting twice, thrice, four times or even five times a week sessions. Additionally, how would a psychoanalyst or a psychoanalytic psychotherapist explain this need to a patient without making them feel untreatable in the once a week setup (as the mainstream would have them believe)

Hello writing an essay on this topic and looking for some feminist/psychoanalytic literature that could help me analyse fascism. The idea is that fascist ideology is predominantly misogynist and anti-feminist.
Has anyone got any ideas of what may be useful to read and reference?

I can't find a bonafide copy of the book Inward by Yung Pueblo online. One free download that I have made is only 73 pages long. The original is apparently 230+ pages. Comments?..anyone can share a copy? Thanks in advance!

the title, basically. Seems there's a difference between therapy and analysis and that the latter is a more drawn out process.

not about their sexual meaning only. can a person be happy to hurt or be hurt? in any way, physical or mental pain can bring satisfaction to someone? if a person isn't born with them, what would cause to develop the habits of this mentality?

and, do you believe self sabotaging can be a form of masochism? or is it associated with other mental disorders more? (e.g depression ptsd bpd...)

Hello. I’m in the UK and as part of my job (therapeutic care work with traumatised children in a residential home) we are given free education. This is with Middlesex university and I’m currently doing my diploma (bachelors second year). Then I’ll be able to register with UKCP as a practitioner. After that I’ll have a choice whether I want to do masters to become a psychotherapist but this will take about 4 years. A few of my workmates chose not to go down the educational route, saying it’s not worth it as outside of the place of our organisation, the qualification will not mean much and UKCP is not a good body. However others say the opposite. I spoke to senior staff too, who said that the worries are not true and that the qualification is legit, giving an opportunity for us to have a career outside of our organisation. Working with the children counts towards experience as well, so I won’t need to do volunteer work after finishing my qualifications. What do you think? I don’t want to waste 6 years of my life studying if this is not going to help me have a good career. But it’s free education which is an amazing opportunity. Let me know if you have any other question, in case I wasn’t clear with some of the info. Thank you

I figured that psychoanalysts might enjoy/be able to respond to this question because of their emphasis on dreams:

I was watching an episode of Arcane, and in an episode, one of the characters finds himself in an alternate universe/history where his life is different. I was thinking that this could be compared to a dream? Irrational events happen all the time in dreams after all. However, the character in the show doesn’t have any memories of this alternate world, only those of the “real” world. It made me wonder: is the only way to distinguish between “what’s real” (or maybe the symbolic part of our psychic structure) and dreams is the fact that memories exist in the real world but dreams are something of a different kind; we can know what’s real and not a dream by the memory of our lives. After all, if we identify more with our “real” experiences and less of our dreams, is that because only “real” experiences have a connection through time in memories while dreams are just one offs that just simply arise when we go to sleep. After all, if dreams had a consistent memory, enduring experiences in an organized succession, would we even be able to tell what are “dreams” and what is “real” from one another?

Hey ! A legend once said " According to a study run by the greek analyst Peter Sifneos, once a week has the same impact than 3"

Would y'all be open to this theory? Because for most people, it represents 800$ less to pay per month which is crazy.

Hey! I’m an MSW student and I’ll be doing an independent study in the spring exploring the connection between psychoanalysis and social work. I’m in the process of creating a syllabus structured around the following objectives:

-Engage historically peripheralized voices in psychoanalytic theory and practice, including feminist and contemporary decolonial perspectives.

-Explore psychoanalysis’ historically complex relationship to broader social context, examining the ways in which psychoanalytic theory has challenged and/or sustained oppressive power structures.

-Apply psychoanalytic understanding to examine contemporary perspectives on race and sex/gender.

I’d be grateful for any recommendations you all have!

(I'd like to paraphrase my current understanding, however much a work-in-progress it is, to see if anyone can help me learn. Can you lmk where in my understanding you find any points of correction or threads in my existing thought to build upon for further or deeper study? So this isn't meant to be fully didactic to anyone reading.)

So.... as i take it, "prohibition" per the Law starts as a growing child's learned sense of 'You can't always get what you want? As the kid learns that other people want things too and may require cooperation if they're to ever help you reach what you want, that them fulfilling your wants (and needs) requires some sacrifice on their part and cooperation on yours?

That whole interplay, reiterated over and over in different scenarios, requires ppl to shape this 'You can't always get what you want' around the patterns of prohibition we encounter and negotiate with. But the 'Law' is initially the instilling of the felt-sense that one must curb their desire (or perhaps entire libido?) in order to structure their interactions, and this is mediated through language in the Symbolic.

And when this prohibition 'clicks', at least in neurotic structure, one's splitness—from the injunction of language and of the Law—impels one to realize that libido can't remain in a primary-narcissistic operation because failure to prohibit has consequences inferred from the Law?

And this realization or limits anchors the chain of signifiers, if going into Lacan, so that the web of language has something to mark what's intrinsically a negative signification (a "No" in symbolization with its attendant 'lack' in subjecthood)...?

And any disavowal creates consequences played-out in both transference and even in imaginary, like how it'd affect mutuality, cooperation, where/how you conduct your fantasies, how one approaches alterity with different ppl, etc.. Like, refusing the "No" of any given situation will likely elicit responses from ppl in that situation, so the kid learns how to navigate when/how to refuse and how much to concede, and these craftings' and reshapings' cumulative artefact is one's sense of the "Big", general Other.

Am i missing anything in terms of the relationship between prohibition and Big Other? (not to say anything of little-other alterity, bc i only touched on that to be thorough)

Afaik, polymorphous perversion stage is seen as autoerotic and sexually plural. Later on, one's sinthome includes sexuation effects that not only implicate desire in general, but also bodily metaphors of gender and thus also attraction/orientation.

Where would the (emergent?) phenomenon of aromanticism—no romantic attraction, yet maintaining sexual desire—fit in this picture?

I've seen every other LGBTQ+ gender/sexual/romantic orientation described in literature (like Gherovici for the T, elsewhere seen psychic bisexuality or whatever it's called for the B, etc) but this one's too new or at least new in being publicly recognized.

Almost-absolute beginner here. I've seen psychoanalysts from several schools refer to the difference between the generations and the sexes in relation to autism, psychosis, and perversion.

What exactly is meant by this?

I have an inkling that it has to do with the relation to castration and recognising the limitations of age and of having a sexed body but would appreciate if someone with more experience than me to explained it to me.

Hi all! I've been learning more and more about Freudian psychoanalysis and I eventually came to know that Jung and Freud have different understandings of what libido is.

Now, what I know is that Jung, while still recognising the importance of sex in neuroses and the like, was critical of how "sexual" Freud's psychoanalysis was; However, Freud's understanding of what constitutes the sexual is much broader to what it is commonly meant, so I have a hard time understanding what the practical differences between Jung's and Freud ideas in this particular subject are.

Could someone explain, and/or tell me some books and articles (either by Jung and Freud themselves, or by some biographers) that explain this better?

Thanks in advance

Curious about the discourse on doing dream interpretation with teens. If they are emotionally mature enough to do the work, is it ok to do?

Hi I wondered what people's thoughts were on this theory. It really feels overly simplistic alongside of deeper psychoanalytic works. I wondered whether this community felt it held any merit?

Thanks

Hi everyone! Does anybody have suggestions of good books on Freud’s theories? None in particular, I’ll appreciate any suggestions, I am struggling to find a middle ground between strenuous readings such as “the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud”, and very superficial readings more often than not analysis of Freud’s theories instead of an unbiased exposure of said theories. Documentaries would also be appreciated.

Thank you and have a lovely Friday!

I'm curious if anyone here has insights or resources on preliminary interviews conducted before analysis begins. I've found shockingly little detailed information on them anywhere apart from a few books stressing how important they are.

I'm wondering what exactly a preliminary interview involves and why they're considered so crucial? How are they usually carried out in practice?

I'm also wondering what specifically the analyst looks for to decide if the analysand could benefit from the treatment or if it might be contraindicated. What might lead an analyst to contraindicating treatment?

I'm especially interested in resources that have demonstrative and practical examples of the process, whether fictionalised or real. I'd also be very interested to hear from analysts about how they carry theirs out.

I'd appreciate information on the Freudian and Lacanian orientations, but I'm open to learning about other perspectives as well. Thanks in advance for your help!

Space intentionally left blank

Has anyone read this book? Does anyone have thoughts on it?

This is such a great mystery for me; is there a psychoanalytic explanation for it? I can give you two examples related to this. 1. I once brought some sweets to my doctor as a thank-you gesture, and she was so embarrassed that she couldn’t even take them from me for a while. 2. Someone I knew from a distance became involved in a political issue and paid the price by losing him job and career. I told him, “Thank you for what you did.” He was utterly taken aback, extremely embarrassed, and seemed almost in shock, standing before me completely hunched over.

This is such a great mystery for me; is there a psychoanalytic explanation for it? I can give you two examples related to this. 1. I once brought some sweets to my doctor as a thank-you gesture, and he was so embarrassed that he couldn’t even take them from me for a while. 2. Someone I knew from a distance became involved in a political issue and paid the price by losing their job and career. I told them, “Thank you for what you did; I’m glad you exist.” They were utterly taken aback, extremely embarrassed, and seemed almost in shock, standing before me completely hunched over.

I'm relatively knowledgable about Freud's Analysis of a Phobia in a Five-year-old Boy (1909), and I've been trying to grasp Lacan's interpretation of it. I've also come to understand that, according to Lacan, there is no "all-encompassing cure" - no neurosis is like the other. Still, I wonder, how would an analyst naturally respond if the analysand claimed to be severely phobic?

I've researched this extensively, but I'm yet to find a satisfying answer.

EDIT: Grammar.