In order to gain ratification from the BCP traditional psychody-namic trainings must organise their curricula in accordance with its training standards. This will explain why the following institutes engage in a uniform rejection of works residing outside of the psychodynamic canon. This includes not teaching a historical / sociological perspective on psychodynamic psychotherapy, or surveying any relevant literature from related disciplines. Below I review the curricula of five traditional psychodynamic institutes—all members of the BCP (British Confederation of Psychotherapists).
It defines its curriculum thus:
The Lincoln Centre aims to provide a course to further the skills, understanding and technique of psychotherapists who already have a qualification equivalent to our basic training and experience in psychoanalytic psychotherapy [which provides a basic introduction to Freudian concepts]. Seminars are conducted by psychoanalysts and Lincoln training psychotherapists. The orientation is that of the British Psycho-Analytical Society, representing the work of the Contemporary Freudian, Independent and Kleinian schools.172
Upon speaking to a member of the institute I was told that the theorists taught were Freud, Abraham, Ferenczi, Klein, and the object relations theorists Winnicott and Fairbain. The topics that I was told were covered are borderline states, depression, psychosis, perversion, thinking and symbol formation, dreams, psychopathology, sexuality, advanced study of clinical concepts, techniques of interpretation, diagnosis, assessment, and analysability. There was no inclusion of any works outside the psychodynamic tradition—that is, from authors who are not themselves psychodynamic practitioners. Also there was no social perspective taught in training.
It defines its curriculum thus:
The qualifying course is committed to providing a sound understanding of unconscious processes through the teaching and critical evaluation of the work of the Freudian, Kleinian, Object Relations and Jungian schools, with a firm grounding in related clinical technique. The curriculum has been devised to familiarise the trainee with the theory and practice of each school of thought, presented coherently throughout the length of the training. The theoretical seminars begin with an in-depth study of Freud, moving on to the work of Jung, Klein and her contemporaries, Bion, and British Object Relations including Winnicott. This is followed in the second year by more contemporary theoretical developments, including American psychoanalysis.173
When asking whether these contemporary theoretical developments included the work of those commenting on the profession from outside the tradition (e.g. anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers, etc.) I was told that‘we are more concerned with teaching good psychoanalysis—and so these concerns are tangential’. It was also made clear to me that no socio-historical perspective was taken on the psychodynamic tradition.
It defines its curriculum thus:
The course covers the theories, clinical concepts and techniques of Freud, Jung, Klein, and the British Independents in their classical and contemporary forms.174
Like the Lincoln, London, BAP, and other trainings, here too in the curriculum there is no inclusion of work that reflects either socially or historically on the psychodynamic tradition.
The Director of the institute informed me that the key works studied are those by Freud, Klein, Winnicott, Kaper, Balint and Bion. These authors are studied in order of their history of contribution. Thus trainees start with Freud and the early Freudians, proceeding through Klein, to the object relations theorists, and then to post-Kleinian work. Again, no work is taught that dwells outside of the psychodynamic bounds.
The British Guide to psychoanalytic psychotherapy trainings defines the curriculum thus:
The theoretical orientation of NIASP is psychoanalytic and the educational curriculum includes the leading theoretical schools within psychoanalysis.
Like the aforementioned curricula, this curriculum is bounded —never transcending the bounds of the psychodynamic. The head of training told me that the main theorists studied were Freud, Klein, Winnicott, Bion, Balint, and the post-Kleinians.
172 The Lincoln Centre, 2005, official website: http://www.lincoln-psycho-therapy.org.uk/background/index.htm. (Accessed December 2005.)
173 The London Centre 2006, offical website: http://www.lcp-psychother-apy.org.uk/qualify.htm. (Accessed November 2005.)
174 Severnside Institute for Psychotherapy, official website: http://www.-sipsychotherapy.org.uk/id8.htm. (Accessed November 2005.)