Go the distance II: How long is too long? Further thoughts on termination.

Abstract

Termination in psychoanalysis, or mutual ending (as one of our panelists prefers to term it), is not a simple technical issue for which criteria, rules, and procedures exist and which have simply to be applied. Rather, as our panelists will demonstrate, it is a concept which, in its complexity, relates to all aspects of the analytic process. Further, each termination has to be understood as an idiosyncratic phenomenon from which can be derived insights that perhaps can be applied to other terminations. Notwithstanding, each termination of an analysis must be considered a unique process, deserving of understanding in its own right.Such is also the case with the length of an analysis. Each analyst and analysand, individually and mutually, has to balance and come to terms with the myriad factors that relate to ending or continuing the analytic work.From the papers presented today and the discussion of them, we can observe skilled and experienced psychoanalysts address and evaluate many of the considerations that are a part of the mutual ending (and/or the continuing) of the analytic work. We will also have the opportunity to observe the manner in which analysands participate in the continuing and ending process.Our first speaker is Dr.

Termination revisited.

“…A recent issue of this journal was dedicated to the topic of termination (Bergmann, 1997; Chazan, 1997; Ellman, 1997; Garcia-Lawson & Lane, 1997; Golland, 1997; Hyman, 1997; Kaplan, 1997; Kerner, 1997; Novick, 1997; Poland, 1997). The reader of these articles comes away with an appreciation of the importance of termination as an experience in its own right to be analyzed.…”