ABSTRACT
By establishing free association, the fundamental rule also requires certain “refusals”: for example, that of using the couch, ensuring the analysand does not see the analyst, or that of suppressing acting in favour of speech. Although the importance and the theoretical-clinical consequences of such refusals are fairly obvious and unanimously accepted for classical analysis, they have long fuelled a controversy between the various analytic societies around training and the so-called question of didactic analysis. For example, at the end of a long period of reflection arising in 1963 from questioning and theorisation concerning the training of analysts, crystallized by the controversy and the split with J. Lacan, J. Laplanche and J. B. Pontalis proposed in 1970 that the French Psychoanalytical Association should renounce didactic analysis.
