Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 30 Dec 2000 22:16:38 EST |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Dr Eisman continues in his angry attacks on "types" of which he disapproves,
be they "social work psychoanalysts" or "lit-crit types" (his terms). He
seems to forget that he is writing about people, not "types", and that these
people, the vast majority of whom he does not know and who have never harmed
him, don't deserve his evacuating upon them.
In a message dated 12°30°2000 3:22:33 PM, [log in to unmask] writes:
<< Come to NYC and look around. Or ask some NYC psychoanalysts. It is very
obvious
that what I describe exists. I NEVER MEANT TO IMPLY THAT I WAS DESCRIBING ALL
SOCIAL WORKER PSYCHOANALYSTS.
Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D. >>
Dr Eisman is denying today what he posted just yesterday:
<<One motivation for New York City social workers to go to one of our Mickey
Mouse
"insitutes" is that it offers them a chance to change their title from social
worker to psychoanalyst. They practice "psychoanalysis" out of their husbands'
offices in the evening, charging much less than the going rate, as they have
no
overhead and their spousal support limits their monetary needs. This type has
little interest in psychoanalysis as a body of knowledge, nor do they care
about
controversies or criticisms. They also have little to no experience working
with
severe mental illnesses, which should be a part of every therapist's training.
There are non-social workers about whom the above is equally true.
I single out social workers because I remember a time when this field-as did
psychology-attracted a brighter and more scholastic person. I'll bet that you
do
too.>>
Does Dr Eisman also object to intermarriage between physicians and social
workers?
What do the physician husbands of these women who are Clinical Social Workers
and also psychoanalysts have to say on the matter?
Who is this Doctor Eisman, and why is he ranting like this? He has a right
to, but how are we to respond to such communications? Perhaps it is a mistake
to respond at all; he only seems to grow more frenzied in his denunciations.
John Buksbazen
Southern California Psychoanalytic Institute
|
|
|