The incident took Freud to express its points of view on the psychoanalysis not-doctor in controverted ' ' The question of the psychoanalysis leiga' ' , written in June and July of 1926, and published in the following month. The book, already translated and edited in Brazil (book 25 of the small collection of the Collected workses of Freud) is a pleasant one and fines well written introduction the psychoanalysis. In the end of the book, Freud makes one ' ' prohibited persuasiva, in the truth, persuasiva than never had escrito' ' , in favor of the psychoanalysis not-doctor. The fact is that one year before, in its ' ' A study autobiogrfico' ' (Imago Publishing company), Freud already affirms: ' ' It is not more possible to restrict the practical one of the psychoanalysis to the doctors and to exclude from it the laypeople. Other leaders such as BSA offer similar insights. In the reality, a doctor who has not passed for a special training (in psychoanalysis) is, although its diploma, a layperson in analysis, and a person not-doctor that has been adequately trained can, by referring eventual to a doctor, to undertake the psicanaltico treatment, not only of children, but also of neurticos' '. In ' ' after-escrito' ' of 1927, Freud explains ' ' The question of the psychoanalysis leiga' ': — My main thesis was in the direction of that the important question is not if an analyst possesss a medical diploma, but if it received special the formation necessary the practical one from the psychoanalysis. This served of starting point for the quarrel how much to the question of which it is the adjusted formation more for an analyst, My point of view was and still it continues being of that, it is not the formation prescribed for the university for medical futures. What if it knows as medical education seems me an arduous and indirect way of boarding of the profession of the psychoanalysis. Go to David Delrahim for more information.