000			01327cam a2200157 4500500
005			20250121111412.0
041			_afre
042			_adc
100	1	0	_aSueur, Jean-Pierre _eauthor
245	0	0	_aPsychotherapy, Neo-Behaviorism, and the Law
260			_c2007.
500			_a89
520			_aThis article rehearses the legislative process that culminated in parliamentary passage of a law that is, quite symptomatically, a contradiction in terms, beginning with the Accoyer amendment (named after its author) aimed at providing a legal definition of the prerequisites for attribution of the title of psychotherapist. This initial contradiction led to others in the various draft bills of an implementing decree that were subsequently published. The whole debate was in fact heavily influenced by diverse initiatives and publications that raised doubts about psychoanalysis and promoted cognitive/behaviorist therapies. However desirable it may be to define the preconditions for practicing the profession of psychotherapist, the procedure in place may well render problematic, inoperative or ineffective the terms of that definition.
786	0		_nRaisons politiques | o 25 | 1 | 2007-03-15 | p. 47-55 | 1291-1941
856	4	1	_uhttps://shs.cairn.info/journal-raisons-politiques-2007-1-page-47?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080
999			_c539700 _d539700