Abstract：
Questions concerning analysts\' publication of material from the analyses of their patients have troubled the field of psychoanalysis since its inception. Disguise inevitably distorts the clinical material and is often insufficient to protect the patient from recognition. Asking the patient\'s consent for publication intrudes upon and alters the analytic process. While analysts have largely reached a consensus about the need for anonymity in published material, there is still considerable debate about the necessity for obtaining patients\' consent when using their material for publication. In this paper, I will trace the evolving meanings of disguise, and particularly of consent, in the analytic literature. I will place a particular emphasis upon the differing theoretical belief systems that underlie the analyst\'s decision to ask consent from her patient or not to do so, and I will argue that, although decisions on asking consent remain a complex matter, such coherent belief systems should play an important part in analysts\' decisions regarding consent. I will illustrate my thought processes and some clinical situations with brief examples, and I will conclude with some practical recommendations, with the hope that these will stimulate further discussion in the analytic community.
摘要：
自精神分析成立以来，有关分析师从患者分析中发表材料的问题一直困扰着精神分析领域。伪装不可避免地会扭曲临床材料，并且通常不足以保护患者免受识别。请求患者同意发表会侵犯并改变分析过程。尽管分析师在发表的材料中对匿名的必要性基本上达成了共识，在使用患者的材料发表时，是否有必要获得患者的同意仍存在相当大的争论。在本文中,我将追踪伪装的演变意义，特别是同意，在分析文献中。我将特别强调不同的理论信仰体系，这些理论信仰体系是分析师决定请求患者同意或不同意的基础，我会争辩说，尽管请求同意的决定仍然是一个复杂的问题，这种连贯的信念系统应该在分析师关于同意的决定中发挥重要作用。我将用简短的例子说明我的思维过程和一些临床情况，最后我会提出一些切实可行的建议，希望这些将激发分析界的进一步讨论。
