Correction. Re-reading Christopher's message, and Aubyn's original posting, it seems I misunderstood one point they were making. I have always understood (evidently mistakenly) that the term "clinical psychology" overlapped with "academic psychiatry" to the extent that they each included psychotherapists under their banners. Thus I erroneously assumed that the quotations from Shorter and Hale about the past influence of Freudian notions on academic psychiatry covered clinical psychology to the extent that some forms of psychotherapy came under that banner. Evidently this is the mistake of an outsider to these fields, so I apologise if my previous response to Aubyn and Christopher has muddied the waters (in my mind, at least!). Leaving aside my error, however, I cannot but note that Riki Koenig reported out of his own experience that in the not-so-distant past (Riki does not reveal how far back) "most psychotherapists and *all clinical psych doctoral programs in the New York area were Freudian, neo-Freudian or psychodynamic*" [my emphasis], so the issue may be not quite so clear-cut as Christopher indicates. But, I repeat, all this is a side-issue to Aubyn's original query and my extended response to it.
Allen --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
