<div dir="auto">Dear Scully Robert,<div dir="auto">D'accord, merci.</div><div dir="auto">Aviva</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Sep 29, 2025, 3:00 AM Jacques B. Siboni via The-lacanalyst <<a href="mailto:the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Grep Robert's answer<br>
<br>
Jacques<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------<br>
Subject: Re: test 123<br>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2025 02:57:13 -0700<br>
From: Tate <<a href="mailto:tate@netwood.net" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">tate@netwood.net</a>><br>
To: Jacques B. Siboni <<a href="mailto:jacsib@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">jacsib@lutecium.org</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Rehello Jacques,<br>
<br>
Because of the mail problem, I am sending my response to you so you can <br>
forward it to them.<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
There are three different levels to respond to the question of what is <br>
involved in using the title 'psychoanalyst' in the US, specifically in <br>
California.<br>
<br>
1 - The title of psychoanalyst is only part of stature law in NY (and <br>
may be Mass, I am not sure of this though). What is part of statute law <br>
in California<br>
is the use of the title psychologist. I would invite you to compare the <br>
wording of NY for psychoanalyst with that of CA (§ 2903) to recognize <br>
the difference.<br>
<br>
2 – However, if you use psychoanalysis to treat people and provide a <br>
service, i.e., as psychotherapeutic psychoanalysis, then you fall under <br>
the statute law<br>
for psychologists and are liable for sanctions. If you do not, but still <br>
use the title psychoanalyst, you do not fall under the interpretation of <br>
(§ 2903).<br>
<br>
3– Lastly, beyond the law of any state, however, the real problem, at <br>
least for many analysands in the US, is how not to confuse practicing <br>
analysis with doing<br>
psychotherapeutic analysis. Every US analyst I have met to date does not <br>
practice psychoanalysis, in the sense of Lacan, but only <br>
psychotherapeutic psychoanalysis.<br>
Not only do they not practice psychoanalysis, they do not even <br>
understand what the difference is to begin so, by default, usually fall <br>
under the label of psychologists<br>
improvising a kind of psychoanalytic therapy.<br>
As you can tell, for me and others, what is primary is (3), if this is <br>
not resolved, then the problems of (1) and (2) remain moot. To clarify <br>
what is at stake, it really<br>
takes more than some email exchanges.<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
Scully Robert<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> On Sep 29, 2025, at 2:22 AM, Jacques B. Siboni <<a href="mailto:jacsib@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">jacsib@lutecium.org</a>> <br>
> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Actually your mail has been sent, we have the problem that so far <br>
> mailman does not send a copy<br>
> to the sender!! I have to solve this, but it you look in the archives <br>
> you'll see your<br>
> mail went through:<br>
> <a href="https://lutecium.org/pipermail/the-lacanalyst/2025-September/date.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lutecium.org/pipermail/the-lacanalyst/2025-September/date.html</a><br>
><br>
> But can you some day take the time to answer to Kristopher and John<br>
><br>
> Talk soon<br>
><br>
> Jacques<br>
><br>
> On 9/29/25 9:07 AM, Tate wrote:<br>
>> Here is the address I sent the mail to: <a href="mailto:the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org</a> <br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org</a>><br>
>><br>
>> I pushed reply to a previous email, and the above was the address <br>
>> that it sent it to. I then received the reply:<br>
>> ]<br>
>> =====<br>
>> Your message entitled<br>
>><br>
>> ANALYSIS IN THE US<br>
>><br>
>> was successfully received by the The-lacanalyst mailing list.<br>
>> ====<br>
>><br>
>> But in fact, it looks like it is sending my original email only back <br>
>> to me, to my oriiginal address and leaving everyone else out:<br>
>><br>
>> In any case, let me know,<br>
>><br>
>> SR<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> On Sep 28, 2025, at 11:31 PM, Jacques B. Siboni <br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:jacsib@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">jacsib@lutecium.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> I don't understand. Are you making sure you send the mail to <br>
>>> <a href="mailto:topologos@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">topologos@lutecium.org</a>?<br>
>>> If so please send me a copy of the refused message. Anyway this is <br>
>>> weird and not standard.<br>
>>><br>
>>> I forward your mail to the group<br>
>>><br>
>>> Jacques<br>
>>><br>
>>> On 9/29/25 12:44 AM, Tate wrote:<br>
>>>> Hello Jacques,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I have pushed reply now twice to the emails from the Lutecium list <br>
>>>> in my INBOX, and they do not seem to be getting through.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Instead, it seems they are coming back to my address and CCing me <br>
>>>> also. Do I need to push something besides reply?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> In any case, here are my previous two messages:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Let me know,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Scully-Robert<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> "Hello all,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Well, I sent out a previous email and it seems it did not go <br>
>>>> through ot went to the wrong mailbox. Let me know if this goes through.<br>
>>>> I will copy-paste what I had already sent:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> << Bonjour Jacques and others,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> In this initial probe, I am sending out a brief post just to check <br>
>>>> whether the email invitation works.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> It was a pleasure to meet again in Paris for the homage to Jean-Michel.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The question of what is required to work under the title of <br>
>>>> psychoanalyst should be gone through carefully, not mistaking, for <br>
>>>> example,<br>
>>>> policy with statutory law, or psychoanalysis with psychoanalytic <br>
>>>> therapy.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> This much said, I am not so sure email is the right forum.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Let me know if this goes through, how, and when you would care to <br>
>>>> address this.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Truly,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Scully-Robert Groome>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
The-lacanalyst mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:The-lacanalyst@lutecium.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">The-lacanalyst@lutecium.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lutecium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/the-lacanalyst" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lutecium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/the-lacanalyst</a><br>
</blockquote></div>