51

The author starts with the hypothesis that most psychoanalytical institutions, and especially training committees, echo the “secret committee” founded by Freud in order to preserve the core of psychoanalysis. In view of the increased diversity of contemporary psychoanalysis, this aim no longer makes sense. The definition of what is “true psychoanalysis” and what is a “good analyst” has become more vague than ever. This has important consequences for the evaluation processes within our institutions: we have to evaluate applicants for training, candidates, and aspiring members, training analysts without clear and shared criteria. This lack of criteria contributes to a perception of psychoanalytic institutions as if they were functioning like a sect. The author raises the question of whether a better transparence of the evaluation modalities of applicants for training could increase the attraction of psychoanalytic training such as it is offered by societies belonging to the IPA.