Международная Психоаналитическая Ассоциация: История и Развитие

The International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) is an association including 12,000 psychoanalysts as members and works with 70 constituent organizations. It was founded in 1910 by Sigmund Freud, from an idea proposed by Sándor Ferenczi.

In 1902 Sigmund Freud started to meet every week with colleagues to discuss his work, thus establishing the Psychological Wednesday Society. By 1908 there were 14 regular members and some guests including Max Eitingon, Carl Jung, Karl Abraham, and Ernest Jones, all future Presidents of the IPA. The Society became the Vienna Psychoanalytical Society. In 1907 Jones suggested to Jung that an international meeting should be arranged. Freud welcomed the proposal. The meeting took place in Salzburg on April 27, 1908. Jung named it the "First Congress for Freudian Psychology". It is later reckoned to be the first International Psychoanalytical Congress. Even so, the IPA had not yet been founded. The IPA was established at the next Congress held at Nuremberg in March 1910. Its first President was Carl Jung, and its first Secretary was Otto Rank. Sigmund Freud considered an international organization to be essential to advance his ideas. In 1914 Freud published a paper entitled The History of the Psychoanalytic Movement. The IPA is the international accrediting and regulatory body for member organisations. The IPA's aims include creating new psychoanalytic groups, conducting research, developing training policies and establishing links with other bodies. It organizes a biennial Congress.

American Psychoanalytic Association ("APsaA") is a body which has in membership societies which cover around 75% of psychoanalysts in the United States of America (the remainder are members of "independent" societies which are in direct relationship with the IPA).

The first 23 Congresses of IPA did not have a specific theme. Number Year City President Theme 1 1908 Salzburg 2 1910 Nuremberg C. G. Jung 3 1911 Weimar C. G. Jung 4 1913 Munich C. G. Jung 5 1918 Budapest Karl Abraham 6 1920 The Hague Sándor Ferenczi 7 1922 Berlin Ernest Jones 8 1924 Salzburg Ernest Jones 9 1925 Bad Homburg K Abraham / M Eitingon 10 1927 Innsbruck Max Eitingon 11 1929 Oxford Max Eitingon 12 1932 Wiesbaden Max Eitingon 13 1934 Lucerne Ernest Jones 14 1936 Marienbad Ernest Jones 15 1938 Paris Ernest Jones 16 1949 Zürich Ernest Jones 17 1951 Amsterdam Leo H. Bartemeier 18 1953 London Heinz Hartmann 19 1955 Geneva Heinz Hartmann 20 1957 Paris Heinz Hartmann 21 1959 Copenhagen William H. Gillespie 22 1961 Edinburgh William H. Gillespie 23 1963 Stockholm Maxwell Gitelson 24 1965 Amsterdam Gillespie/Greenacre Psychoanalytic Treatment of the Obsessional Neurosis 25 1967 Copenhagen P. J. van der Leeuw On Acting Out and its Role in the Psychoanalytic Process 26 1969 Rome P. J. van der Leeuw New Developments in Psychoanalysis 27 1971 Vienna Leo Rangell The Psychoanalytical Concept of Aggression 28 1973 Paris Leo Rangell Transference and Hysteria Today 29 1975 London Serge Lebovici Changes in Psychoanalytic Practice and Experience 30 1977 Jerusalem Serge Lebovici Affects and the Psychoanalytic Situation 31 1979 New York City Edward D. Joseph Clinical Issues in Psychoanalysis 32 1981 Helsinki Edward D. Joseph Early Psychic Development as Reflected in the Psychoanalytic Process 33 1983 Madrid Adam Limentani The Psychoanalyst at Work 34 1985 Hamburg Adam Limentani Identification and its Vicissitudes 35 1987 Montreal Robert S. Wallerstein Analysis Terminable and Interminable – 50 Years Later 36 1989 Rome Robert S. Wallerstein Common Ground in Psychoanalysis 37 1991 Buenos Aires Joseph J. Sandler Psychic Change 38 1993 Amsterdam Joseph J. Sandler The Psychoanalyst's Mind – From Listening to Interpretation 39 1995 San Francisco R. Horacio Etchegoyen Psychic Reality – Its Impact on the Analyst and Patient Today 40 1997 Barcelona R. Horacio EtchegoyenPsychoanalysis and Sexuality 41 1999 Santiago Otto F. Kernberg Affect in Theory and Practice 42 2001 Nice Otto F. Kernberg Psychoanalysis – Method and Application 43 2004 New Orleans Daniel Widlöcher Working at the Frontiers 44 2005 Rio de Janeiro Daniel Widlöcher Trauma: New Developments in Psychoanalysis 45 2007 Berlin Cláudio Laks Eizirik Remembering, Repeating and Working Through in Psychoanalysis & Culture Today 46 2009 Chicago Cláudio Laks Eizirik Psychoanalytic Practice Convergences and Divergences 47 2011 Mexico City Charles Hanly Exploring Core Concepts: Sexuality, Dreams and the Unconscious 48 2013 Prague Charles Hanly Facing the Pain: Clinical Experience and the Development of Psychoanalytic Knowledge 49 2015 Boston Stefano Bolognini Changing World: the shape and use of psychoanalytic tools today 50 2017 Buenos Aires Stefano Bolognini Intimacy 51 2019 London Virginia Ungar The Feminine 52 2021 Vancouver Virginia Ungar The infantile: its multiple dimensions 53 2023 Cartagena Harriet Wolfe Mind in the Line of Fire

In 1975, Erich Fromm questioned this organization and found that the psychoanalytic association was "organized according to standards rather dictatorial". In 1999, Elisabeth Roudinesco noted that the IPA's attempts to professionalize psychoanalysis had become "a machine to manufacture significance". She also said that in France, "Lacanian colleagues looked upon the IPA as bureaucrats who had betrayed psychoanalysis in favour of an adaptive psychology in the service of triumphant capitalism". She wrote of the "IPA['s] Legitimist Freudianism, as mistakenly called "orthodox" ". On the other hand, most criticisms laid against the IPA tend to come from a 1950s Lacanian point of view, unaware of recent developments, and of the variety of schools and training models within the association in recent decades. One of the three training models in the IPA (the French Model), is mostly due to Lacan's ideas and their perspectives regarding the training.