Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

jungatheart

New Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Does anyone have any experience with the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis? I'm looking specifically at their Master of Arts in Psychoanalytic Counseling program which leads to licensure as a mental health counselor. I'm new to this forum and have appreciated reading your posts. I appreciate your help and shared wisdom.

Members don't see this ad.
 
You have to apply and go to three interviews which is the tradition in psychoanalytic institutes. If I were you, I would definitely go visit the school. It is very small and focused on psychoanalysis specifically. It is unique in that the program is academic as well as emotional because they want to train you well in this area so that you are prepared as a clinician. I wish I could tell you more, but I'm not there yet. I recently went for a visit and went to a conference, and I personally loved it! But, again, it is a exactly what I am looking for, and it is a very specific area of study. The administration is very friendly and would be a great help in terms of asking questions and getting acquainted with the school and setting up interviews. It's known for being a little disorganized but that's because they are often in the process of adding / changing programs. It's not for everyone but it may very well be for you! Good luck.
 
vessie, thanks for the input and for sharing your experience. I certainly don't think it would hurt for me to pay them a visit especially considering I'm so close. I have several concerns that may not be covered on a tour. One is how having a degree from there would look if I wanted to get a doctorate in the future (not from the BGSP). I'm also concerned that they're not APA accredited, which given their orientation they may not feel is necessary. Perhaps some of our more experienced members can speak to their reputation.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Yes, I understand your concerns, and I have shared them. I would also like to go on to get my PhD from another university after studying at BGSP. It's the emotional experience that I'm seeking at the BGSP that I don't think is offered with such intensity elsewhere. I'm sure you will find out more as you continue to ask around. Good luck to you.
 
Hi Jungatheart, I completed an MA with BGSP and found myself pushing my way to the finish line. The school was in general very disorganized. I remember I had the same experience as Vessie when I interviewed. Following my three interviews, I felt this was the right program for me. Today I understand that during those interviews they basically "reflected" back my questions. For example, I asked if they studied a variety of psychoanalytic theories to which the interviewing psychoanalyst responded, "Is that important to you?" In short, she never really responded to my questions but I left feeling like I was in the right place. It seems that my comfort stemmed more from an interview/session setting, rather than from an organized and serious interview experience. The rest of my experience was similar to the interviews; very little theory and a ton of emotional and feelings talk in classes. Some faculty were actually quite brash with students who weren't good at displaying their feelings, a way in which many professors assessed a trainees good mental health and readiness to analyze others (along with mandatory psychoanalytic sessions with someone from the school).
It is a problem that they are not accredited because trying later to transfer credits to an APA accredited doctorate program is virtually impossible. Getting an LMHC is also a struggle. Among the surrounding psychoanalytic community they are considered a small and insular school with questionable ethics. I would advise you to take a look at what other people have to say on studentreviews.com. However, I must admit that the "feelings" format and the general atmosphere of the school seemed to work for some students. Unfortunately, it was not a good format for what I wanted. I agree that psychoanalysis is a unique type of training that differs from mainstream psychology. However, I also believe that a good training program balances out helping students acquire professional identity by inserting them into a philosophy (whatever that may be), without neglecting to teach the student how to communicate with the professional community at large (diversified training). BGSP does too much of the former and very little of the latter.
 
I know, they are "massively unethical". I'm currently in a PsyD. program and when I compare the differing atmospheres I'm even more perplexed at how such a program can manage to continue...
 
Masters programs are not accredited by the APA. Only doctorate level programs are.
 
Cbress, just out of curiosity, did you write one of the student reviews? i have read them.
 
Masters programs are not accredited by the APA. Only doctorate level programs are.

Yup.

As for transferring credits into a doctoral program, I don't think any program will accept masters credits in 'mental health counseling' into 'clinical psychology'. I know people who have had an MS in Clinical Psych or Experimental or something similar have some credits transfer, but MHC seems too different. I'd think the same issue would happen trying to transfer social work credits into psych, etc.
 
hi guys

i am also interested in the boston grad school of psychoanalysis so your previous messages about it being unethical i am concerned about.

would anyone be able to ellaborate more about what in particular they found unethical about the program? it would be much appreciated! thanks,
 
"along with mandatory psychoanalytic sessions with someone from the school..."

Do you not think recieving psychotherapy from ther same individuals who are responsible for your academic evaluations/grading poses a dual role and severe conflict of interest that biases both activities? This is a blatant violation of the APA ethics code. I would also argue that teaching psychoanalytic theory as the "only way" to do therapy is an ethical slippery slope as well.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
I've heard of some programs having therapy be a part of their experience, but not directly linked to academic and/or clinical training...particularly with school faculty. I think it is good for the person to have that experience, but not with people where a duel relationship could happen.

I think institute training like this can be valuable as an adjunct, but not as the sole training. There is still a place for psychoanalytic work, but I think to be ethical a person should receive training in other empirically supported orientations.....in the event that a psychoanalytic approach isn't as well supported.
 
I wrote in this thread as veesie in 2008, and just in case anyone else is wanting information on Boston Grad School of Psychoanalysis, I thought I'd throw in a perspective, having studied there for 7 years. My advice: stay away from this school. It is massively unethical as an academic institution. They are not honest about how much time and money it takes to be there, and once they've got you, they milk you for all they can. They manipulate requirements to keep students longer and the students don't refute this because they have to sit in front of the "committee" and pass their orals for the dissertation in order to finish. People remain quiet and when they're done, they either join the faculty and bully students, as other faculty do, or they get the hell out of there. You do learn about psychoanalysis, of course. I did learn something in my 7 years, but my god, the amount of money and time spent is not commensurate with the experience and learning -- not even close. I am still a doctoral student and when I explain my desire to graduate in a timely manner, their response is "what's the rush". The school has serious trouble helping their students to individuate and move on. I sit in classes now where we don't discuss readings and instead listen to professors haphazardly talk about their clients. The learning is minimal at best. Professors are arrogant and irresponsible. I have heard professors disclose things about other students to me, in appropriately, and I ask myself, "Is this who you want as your role model?" Well, it's too late for me to turn back but if you are considering this school, for god sakes, do your homework first. Heed the warning signs. I wish I had. Going to this school is most definitely the worst mistake I have ever made. It's not a healthy environment and not a healthy community. There are other places to get a psychoanalytic education.

Wait a minute. Hold the phone. Psychoanalysts="arrogant;" ignore data in favor of individual anecdotes; work slow; focused on money.

Who'd a thunk it....
 
Wait a minute. Hold the phone. Psychoanalysts="arrogant;" ignore data in favor of individual anecdotes; work slow; focused on money.

Who'd a thunk it....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Talk about arrogance. I don't think we should generalize one experience to psychoanalysis as a whole, since psychoanalyst are quire a diverse bunch. Psychologist from other orientations can be quite arrogant too.
My primary orientation is psychodynamic and I appreciate what psychoanalysis brought to the field historically, but I also appreciate the negatives it has brought us. I really think that keeping that outdated theory and treatment perspective alive is not a good thing. It gets in the way of going forward in my opinion.
 
Talk about arrogance. I don't think we should generalize one experience to psychoanalysis as a whole, since psychoanalyst are quire a diverse bunch. Psychologist from other orientations can be quite arrogant too.

I agree in principle, but you have to admit there is some humor in this place basically being a living caricature of what seems like every existing stereotype of analysts...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Talk about arrogance. I don't think we should generalize one experience to psychoanalysis as a whole, since psychoanalyst are quire a diverse bunch. Psychologist from other orientations can be quite arrogant too.

Don't be so sensitive. See Ollie's post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree in principle, but you have to admit there is some humor in this place basically being a living caricature of what seems like every existing stereotype of analysts...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I simply advocate for an accurate critique of psychoanalysis that is free from stereotypes. I do not feel the stereotypes are helpful, especially, for the less informed crowd. Some individuals not familiar with current psychodynamic thinking might come to believe the stereotypes, in consequence, developing an inaccurate view of psychodynamic/psychoanalytic thinking, theory, and practice. I am of the believe that clinical psychology can benefit from clinicians with different perspectives.

Levy, K. N., & Anderson, T. (2013). Is clinical psychology doctoral training becoming less intellectually diverse? And if so, what can be done? Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 20(2), 211-220.

However, if there were not some truth in those stereotypes, analysis would still be a dominant treatment modality. But there is. So it's not.
 
Last edited:
I simply advocate for an accurate critique of psychoanalysis that is free from stereotypes. I do not feel the stereotypes are helpful, especially, for the less informed crowd. Some individuals not familiar with current psychodynamic thinking might come to believe the stereotypes, in consequence, developing an inaccurate view of psychodynamic/psychoanalytic thinking, theory, and practice. I am of the believe that clinical psychology can benefit from clinicians with different perspectives.

Levy, K. N., & Anderson, T. (2013). Is clinical psychology doctoral training becoming less intellectually diverse? And if so, what can be done? Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 20(2), 211-220.

Modern psychodynamic theory and practice=/=psychoanalysis, though.
 
Modern psychodynamic theory and practice=/=psychoanalysis, though.

Well, that is a debatable topic (http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Safran-J.-Interview-with-Lewis-Aron.pdf) which speaks more to the importance of avoiding stereotypes and providing correct information. Even if both were different, the stereotype still applies, both are connected, assumed to be the same, and talked about in the same context. Also, there is something to be said about changes in contemporary psychoanalysis, and how stereotypes lead undergraduates astray when trying to understand how contemporary psychoanalysis is practiced. I feel it is important for students who peruse the forums to be aware of other perspectives rather than rely on the usual stereotypes.
 
Last edited:
Well, that is a very complicated topic (http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Safran-J.-Interview-with-Lewis-Aron.pdf) which speaks more to the importance of avoiding stereotypes and providing correct information. Even if both were different, the stereotype still applies, both are connected, assumed to be the same, and talked about in the same context. Also, there is something to be said about the changes in contemporary psychoanalysis, and how stereotypes lead undergraduates astray when trying to understand how contemporary psychoanalysis is practiced. I feel it is important for students who peruse this forums to be aware of other perspectives rather than rely on the usual stereotypes.
The Boston school sure isnt doing you any favors, apparently.
 
Well, that is a debatable topic (http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Safran-J.-Interview-with-Lewis-Aron.pdf) which speaks more to the importance of avoiding stereotypes and providing correct information. Even if both were different, the stereotype still applies, both are connected, assumed to be the same, and talked about in the same context. Also, there is something to be said about changes in contemporary psychoanalysis, and how stereotypes lead undergraduates astray when trying to understand how contemporary psychoanalysis is practiced. I feel it is important for students who peruse the forums to be aware of other perspectives rather than rely on the usual stereotypes.
I really think contemporary psychoanalysis is an oxymoron. Our culture is permeated with the version of Freudian psychoanalysis so to use the approach of "just say no" to stereotypes and caricatures is a poor strategy. More than half of the images on the first page of a google images search for psychotherapy are of someone on a couch. This is hit number one.

psychotherapy-1006.jpg
 
I really think contemporary psychoanalysis is an oxymoron. Our culture is permeated with the version of Freudian psychoanalysis so to use the approach of "just say no" to stereotypes and caricatures is a poor strategy. More than half of the images on the first page of a google images search for psychotherapy are of someone on a couch. This is hit number one.

psychotherapy-1006.jpg

post-39234-this-really-goes-beyond-my-tra-t03n.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
I really think contemporary psychoanalysis is an oxymoron. Our culture is permeated with the version of Freudian psychoanalysis so to use the approach of "just say no" to stereotypes and caricatures is a poor strategy. More than half of the images on the first page of a google images search for psychotherapy are of someone on a couch. This is hit number one.

psychotherapy-1006.jpg
...
 
Last edited:
I disagree given that the misinformation often leads to mocking and miscomprehension of psychoanalytic theory and practice. I opine this is detrimental to the field and perspective students for various reason (see article above). I am curious about what the most practical approach would be in your opinion. One that does not involve furthering the pervasive misunderstands and derision of the psychoanalytic/psychodynamic approach.

The practical approach is to adopt the few universally accepted aspects of analytic/dynamic theory and.... move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I disagree given that the misinformation often leads to mocking and miscomprehension of psychoanalytic theory and practice. I opine this is detrimental to the field and perspective students for various reason (see article above). I am curious about what the most practical approach would be in your opinion. One that does not involve furthering the pervasive misunderstands and derision of the psychoanalytic/psychodynamic approach.
What Erg said. Also, stop conflating current psychodynamic theory with psychoanalysis. It is not the same thing at all.

I think we should probably move away from the term psychodynamic, too, but it might be a while before we can begin really integrating and reconciling the various schools of thought. Although I do it every day in my practice since I can't get my patients to stay in the right category.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
My analyst has a chaise/couch. Ironically she is always ending sessions on time. Whereas the car salesman I went to today tried to keep me forever.

It's like when someone is trying to sell you something, they want increased contact. But when they have already sold you something they just want you to go away.

Now I know how my dates feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
However, if there were not some truth in those stereotypes, analysis would still be a dominant treatment modality. But there is. So it's not.
What a frightening poor attempt at reasoning. Do you apply this logic to other groups with negative stereotypes?
 
Through my years, I have slowly become aware of the significant characterological wounds many members here have, particularly those who are licensed Psychologists.

I do not exclude myself either, however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We really need a couple sticky threads to keep most things from getting threadjacked. You guys can have your own "Erg/LAPsyGuy Tort/Retort" thread, and maybe another "Fact check OND" thread. It'd keep the rest of these things much cleaner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
We really need a couple sticky threads to keep most things from getting threadjacked. You guys can have your own "Erg/LAPsyGuy Tort/Retort" thread, and maybe another "Fact check OND" thread. It'd keep the rest of these things much cleaner.
We need tort reform!
 
We really need a couple sticky threads to keep most things from getting threadjacked. You guys can have your own "Erg/LAPsyGuy Tort/Retort" thread, and maybe another "Fact check OND" thread. It'd keep the rest of these things much cleaner.
lol Is there really such a thing as an initial tort or is it always just retort? Do we need to recapitulate or does the first capitulation suffice? I know that we can hash and rehash the same argument. I swear it feels like Friday and it's only Tuesday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
lol Is there really such a thing as an initial tort or is it always just retort? Do we need to recapitulate or does the first capitulation suffice? I know that we can hash and rehash the same argument. I swear it feels like Friday and it's only Tuesday.
Well, only in the sense of legal matters. It was more just a word joke to supplement a bigger theme :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
lol Is there really such a thing as an initial tort or is it always just retort? Do we need to recapitulate or does the first capitulation suffice? I know that we can hash and rehash the same argument. I swear it feels like Friday and it's only Tuesday.

"Can you ever just be whelmed?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top