ABSTRACT
The author responds to criticisms in defense of his recent controversial article on a critique of relational psychoanalysis. Critics charge that Mills fails to live up to scholarly standards, uses rhetorical devices to unjustly discredit certain relational authors, takes clinical material out of context, and has committed unethical and libelous acts. Mills attempts to show that these criticisms largely lack solid rationale, distort or ignore crucial textual evidence, rely on ad hominem arguments and emotional polemics, and fail to convince the author of their genuine merit.
