<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">Dearest Jacques and Folks,<div><br></div><div>In your last emails, there is always a looming question of risk. I will respond to your</div><div>question on the risk of working analytically in the US. I then have a question of my</div><div>own about the risk of working analytically in France that I hope you will respond to.<br><div><br></div><div>But first, in response to the following:</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite">If you confirm this approach is possible in the USA without the major danger of<br>being sued by IPA or any other Health dept, for me it is good to hear this. And<br>Therefore the use of the concept of lacanalyst is useless. If you confirm<br>that someone with no specific diploma can put a plaque on his door mentioning<br>"Psychoanalysis" in California and can receive public and won't have<br>legal problems that's fine and great for me.<br><br>This is not what I heard when I talked to Aviva, Kris or John. That's the reason<br>why I tried to invent a counter measure.</blockquote><br></div><div>I can confirm that in the US, anywhere but New York (and maybe Mass.), there is no law</div><div>restricting the use of the title psychoanalyst and you need no license to practice. The proof of the pudding is </div><div>you will find at PLACE people working as analysts who have no diploma, no license, and not sued (if that is your</div><div>worry), for the last 20 years. Some of them, besides myself, were even present at the time before last</div><div>meeting on Zoom. The problem of working legally with the prevailing laws in CA was resolved a long time ago, at</div><div>least for those working at PLACE. This is not the problem today.</div><div><br></div><div>I am not saying some people will not have problems actually establishing an analytic practice – this impossibility</div><div>is intrinsic whether you are in France or the US – in fact, some people have so many problems that all that</div><div>they can think of doing is to get a psychology degree, or some kind of therapy degree, or a psychiatry degree,</div><div>then try to improvise something around that. Unfortunately, if this professional basis is used as the standard for</div><div>an entry to the US public, then such entries are themselves phobic, and it is no surprise that people would</div><div>be scared. But I do not think they should be scared of being sued, I think the problem is much worse: they </div><div>should be scared of the<i> s’autotorize </i>which I described in my last missive. I think R. Bauknight is just one</div><div>warning among others of what not to do in this manner when trying to enter into a psychoanalytic discourse:</div><div>no doubt, she had a psychoanalytic transfer and threw great parties, but was there any analysis? In the end,</div><div>there are people who work at PLACE who do have psychology degrees and the rest, but it just takes a little</div><div>more time to work and show what is at stake to get beyond the crazy and fears.</div><div><br></div><div>In the end, Jacques, for me and others, since the questions that are being asked about the Laws in the US have</div><div>been resolved, I would ask today not how to game the US system, but how to establish fundamentally that</div><div>one is, or has, ever worked as an analyst in the first place? If it is only the s’autotortize that is appealed to here, then, again, there</div><div>is more than a risk of being sued, there is the risk of crazy (knowing full well that analysis is part of its own clinic). </div><div><br></div><div>So, if you will permit my question to you Jacques. We know that Lacan started a ’Section Clinique’ in France</div><div>whose intention was to make room for the entry of psychoanalysis into psychiatry in France. But in fact, we know just the</div><div>opposite happened: psychiatry entered into psychoanalysis and never left (even though Lacan disbanded the school and the clinic).</div><div><br></div><div>Today, we find, and I have been told by many that the problem of practicing Lacanian analysis in France is that the two Apostles, </div><div>Melman and Miller, have maintained a professionalization and psychiatrization of analysis that holds its participants captive in a Lacanian Ghetto, </div><div>with little or no work of consequence. That is why I left and it is why Vappereau also left. </div><div><br></div><div>So this is my question to you: do you agree that the psychiatrization of Lacanian analysis in France has</div><div>made it impossible to work at analysis in France? </div><div><br></div><div>I would be relieved if you could answer this question.</div><div><br></div><div>Best to you and friends,</div><div><br></div><div>ScullyRobert</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><br><blockquote type="cite">On Nov 26, 2025, at 3:32 AM, Jacques B. Siboni via The-lacanalyst <the-lacanalyst@lutecium.org> wrote:<br><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">Dear friend<br><br>To give a kind of temporary conclusion, I'll just advance my personal vision.<br>When I work as psychoanalyst I would not accept that any health department ask<br>me to produce a diploma or license to prove I have the right to practice analysis.<br><br>Of course as long as a patient puts forward this license demand to me, I consider he is<br>legitimate to do so, but on the way I direct the cure he is in the process of<br>preliminary sessions and not actual analysis.<br><br>If you confirm this approach is possible in the USA without the major danger of<br>being sued by IPA or any other Health dept, for me it is good to hear this. And<br>Therefore the use of the concept of lacanalyst is useless. If you confirm<br>that someone with no specific diploma can put a plaque on his door mentioning<br>"Psychoanalysis" in California and can receive public and won't have<br>legal problems that's fine and great for me.<br><br>This is not what I heard when I talked to Aviva, Kris or John. That's the reason<br>why I tried to invent a counter measure.<br><br>All the best my friend<br><br>Jacques<br><br><br>-- <br>The-lacanalyst mailing list<br>The-lacanalyst@lutecium.org<br>https://lutecium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/the-lacanalyst<br></blockquote><br></div></div></body></html>