In the truth, who reads unsupicious ' ' Complete correspondence Freud-Jung' ' (translated and launched by the Imago Publishing company) it can evidence that the new adepts and practitioners of the psychoanalysis were accepted Independently of its previous formation in medicine. This was completely absent of the concerns in such a way of Freud how much of Jung, at that time (1907-1913). We read this yes, elogiosas references to them you endow staffs, sensitivity, to the capacity for psychoanalysis of the new adepts, but nor a word on the condition to be or not doctors. In 1913, it has the first explicit reference of Freud to the problem. In the Introduction to the book of the psychoanalyst not-doctor, and reverendo, Oskar Pfister, ' ' The method of psicanaltico' ' , Freud affirms: ' ' It practises of the psychoanalysis much less requires it medical training of what psychological instruction and a perspective human being aberta' ' , The problem did not come back to the surface, as much how much if it knows, in next the 12 years, until the divergence it enters the justinian codes of New York and of Vienna. A marcante fact finished for unchaining the question, in terms of an energetic and forceful Interference of Freud. Who account is Ernest Jones, in ' ' Life and workmanship of S.
Freud' ': ' ' In the spring of 1926, a patient of Theodor Reik moved an action to it under the allegation of harmful treatment and invoked the Australian law against the charlatanism. Fortunately, for Reik, one revealed that the patient one was an unbalanced person, whose testimonial evidence was not worthy reliable. This circumstance, and the personal interference of Freud next to one high dignatrio, had decided the case in favor of Reik.' ' Theodor Reik was psychoanalytic not-doctor of Vienna, described for Eissler as one ' ' scholar brilhante' ' ' ' writer of psicanalticos texts of great mrito' '.