[The-Lacanalyst] Regulations in the USA

Tate tate at netwood.net
Sun Sep 28 23:30:02 UTC 2025 

Hello all, 

Well, I sent out a previous email and it seems it did not go through ot went to the wrong mailbox. Let me know if this goes through.
I will copy-paste what I had already sent:


<< Bonjour Jacques and others,

In this initial probe, I am sending out a brief post just to check whether the email invitation works. 

It was a pleasure to meet again in Paris for the homage to Jean-Michel. 

The question of what is required to work under the title of psychoanalyst should be gone through carefully, not mistaking, for example,
policy with statutory law, or psychoanalysis with psychoanalytic therapy.

This much said,  I am not so sure email is the right forum. 

Let me know if this goes through, how, and when you would care to address this.

Truly,

Scully-Robert Groome>>






> On Sep 28, 2025, at 4:03 PM, Jacques Siboni via The-lacanalyst <the-lacanalyst at lutecium.org> wrote:
> 
> So we definitely need to hear Robert's position. I know he is flying back to Berlin now.
> Robert tell us my friend!
> Jacques 
> 
> 
> On September 28, 2025 10:15:38 PM UTC, John Gasperoni <gaspo at lmi.net> wrote:
> Kristopher,
> 
> This has been my understanding for as well. 
> 
> john 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Sep 28, 2025, at 1:49 PM, Kristopher Lichtanski, PhD, LMHCA via The-lacanalyst <the-lacanalyst at lutecium.org> wrote:
> 
>> Greetings everyone,
>> 
>> It is wonderful to be back in the fold(s)! I am looking forward to this update while recommending caution due to the following existing information. BTW - not starting a debate nor taking any sides on this matter whatsoever, but I want all to be updated with the most current developments in CA regarding the term and practice of "psychoanalysis." -Kristopher
>> 
>> **********************
>> In California, the Board of Psychology (BOP) protects against unlicensed psychoanalysis by defining it as a form of psychology, which requires state licensure. While a "research psychoanalyst" designation has existed, recent legislation transferred the regulation of this limited license to the BOP to better protect the public. [1, 2, 3, 4] 
>> 
>> Psychoanalysis as a form of psychology
>>     • California's Business and Professions Code includes "psychoanalysis" under its definition of the "practice of psychology".
>>     • Under state law, anyone who represents themselves to the public as a psychoanalyst and receives a fee for services must be a licensed psychologist or meet other specified statutory criteria. [1, 5]
>> The "Research Psychoanalyst" exception
>>     • A limited practice: For years, a special "research psychoanalyst" license was regulated by the California Medical Board. It allowed certain graduates of approved psychoanalytic institutes to practice on a limited basis, as an "adjunct to teaching, training, or research".
>>     • Restrictions: These individuals could not spend more than one-third of their professional time on fee-based services and had to primarily be engaged in teaching, training, or research. [2, 6, 7, 8]
>> The 2025 regulatory transfer
>>     • New oversight: Effective January 1, 2025, control of the Research Psychoanalyst Program was transferred from the Medical Board of California to the California Board of Psychology.
>>     • Consumer protection: The BOP's 2024–2028 strategic plan outlines the addition of research psychoanalysts to its regulated population. This move is intended to place all mental health practitioners under the oversight of a board specifically focused on psychological services, ensuring better public protection. [3, 4, 9]
>> Legal challenges to the licensing scheme 
>> The BOP has successfully defended its licensing authority against legal challenges from psychoanalysts.
>>     • In the case National Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis v. California Board of Psychology (2000), a federal court rejected arguments that the licensing laws violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
>>     • The court found that the state's regulation of mental health professions is a valid exercise of its power to protect the public health and safety. [6, 10, 11, 12]
>> [1] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/228/1043/478769/
>> [2] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/228/1043/478769/
>> [3] https://www.mbc.ca.gov/Licensing/research-psychoanalyst/
>> [4] https://www.psychology.ca.gov/laws_regs/sb_815.shtml
>> [5] https://content.next.westlaw.com/practical-law/document/I644487bc798e11d98c82a53fc8ac8757/National-Ass-n-for-Advancement-of-Psychoanalysis-v-California-Bd-of-Psychology?viewType=FullText&transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)
>> [6] https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/pro_lic/naap_v_ca.htm
>> [7] https://www.reddit.com/r/psychoanalysis/comments/1gpocdo/how_to_practice_psychoanalysis_in_california/
>> [8] https://www.reddit.com/r/psychoanalysis/comments/1gpocdo/how_to_practice_psychoanalysis_in_california/
>> [9] https://www.psychology.ca.gov/forms_pubs/strat_plan_24_28.pdf
>> [10] https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/pro_lic/NAAP_v_CA_brief.htm
>> [11] https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/pro_lic/naap_v_ca.htm
>> [12] https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/ChilesvSalazar_AmiciStatesBrief.pdf
>> 
>> *********************************************
>> 
>> On Sun, Sep 28, 2025 at 1:42 AM Jacques B. Siboni via The-lacanalyst <the-lacanalyst at lutecium.org> wrote:
>> Dear colleagues
>> 
>> Yesterday at a day to give a tribute to Jean-Michel Vappereau
>> I had the pleasure to reconnect to Scully-Robert Groom, a colleague
>> living partly in Berlin and Los Angeles. He gave me great
>> legal information regarding the legal statute of psychoanalysis in the USA.
>> I discovered that except for New York State and Massachusetts, the
>> statute is similar to France's!! Anyone in the 48 other states can
>> decide they work as psychoanalysts as a private practice. They can put
>> a placard saying so in front of their office.
>> 
>> I have registered him on the lacanalyst mailing list. Robert can you be
>> kind enough to explain the situation which is so seriously misunderstood
>> by psychoanalysts in the US.
>> 
>> Tell us
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Jacques
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> The-lacanalyst mailing list
>> The-lacanalyst at lutecium.org
>> https://lutecium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/the-lacanalyst
>> 
>> -- 
>> The-lacanalyst mailing list
>> The-lacanalyst at lutecium.org
>> https://lutecium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/the-lacanalyst
> -- 
> The-lacanalyst mailing list
> The-lacanalyst at lutecium.org
> https://lutecium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/the-lacanalyst

More information about the The-lacanalyst mailing list