This statement brings together my responses to two related questions raised during the election discussion: what I would say to an early-career clinician considering APsA, and how I understand leadership responsibility in moments of rupture and repair. I share it here because these questions go to the heart of my leadership vision and the future I hope to help shape for our association.
To an early-career colleague, I would say: I believe APsA can function as a safe, vital, and professionally sustaining learning environment that supports their clinical work and their development. I would also name the reality that parts of our association struggle with organizational ill-health, where moments of difference can slide into repetitive, polarizing, and at times hurtful dynamics. I wish to use my collaborative leadership to address these situations as I believe strongly that we can reclaim a genuinely enlivening community.
My leadership priorities grow directly from these concerns.
First, strong education and training.
I will grow our practices by supporting trainees and early-career clinicians as they navigate today's realities—telehealth, AI, insurance pressures, and evolving career paths—while remaining firmly grounded in rigorous psychoanalytic therapy and analytic training.
Second, leadership and professional stewardship.
I understand the President's role as stewarding the internal life of the organization. From a psychoanalytic perspective, organizations need containment, a trustworthy frame for engagement, and leadership that can hold difference without collapsing into polarization. This is why I supported the changes to the listservs that have reduced their toxicity. It's also why I supported staying in the IPA so that we could continue the dialogue about tele-training.
Bridging early-career and senior colleagues matters deeply to me. Younger clinicians bring innovation and vitality; senior colleagues bring depth, continuity, and perspective. APsA is strongest when these voices are in dialogue.
Third, scholarship and research grounded in clinical reality.
APsA should engage emerging developments thoughtfully and collaboratively, drawing on initiatives such as the President's Council on AI, the Department of Psychoanalytic Education, and the Commission on the Economics of Psychoanalysis-especially where economic pressures shape the viability of analytic careers.
An essential question in this discussion concerns rupture and repair. In my own leadership experience, I have seen how quickly groups polarize—and how much leadership matters in restoring analytic listening and making repair possible. When a shared analytic frame is re-established, even difficult differences can be explored with respect and care. I am committed to finding ways for these conversations to occur in settings that allow for reflection and repair, beyond the limitations of listserv exchanges.
I offer my leadership in a spirit of collaboration and deep care for our field. I believe APsA can once again feel like a place of intellectual excitement, professional support, and safe, meaningful connection—a community worth belonging to and building together.
