One favorite criticism of social wor k academics – and others who are hostile to
psychoanalytic tho ught – is that psychoana lysis is an elite form of treatment, an
inappropriate and largely irrel evant body of knowledge for social wor k. These critics
contend that psycho analysis was expr essly designed for neurotic patients, the majority
of whom were women posses sing vast fina ncial resou rces, able to commit litera lly to
years of therapy conducted at a frequenc y of 45 sessions weekly. For many, anything
psychoanalytic or psy chotherapeutic is suspect, becaus e it has the effect of derailing the
profession from its historical mission, that of aidi ng the poor and serv ing the
underprivileged