Richard Lasky, in chapter 10, an especially valuable chapter for the practicing psychiatrist, points out there is a difference of opinion as to whether, as Freudians insist, the relationship with the analyst determines only the shape of the transference or whether, as the relational view suggests, "each individual’s personality contributes not only to the shape the transference eventually takes but also creates the contents of the transference itself" (p. 201). This is a hotly debated topic in current psychoanalysis. Lasky adds, "For Freudians…behavior in analysis…as it may exist in any patient—behavior that is repeatedly acted out in many different settings with many different people, behavior that repetitively enacts a particular, an often complex fantasy constellation—is an important part of the patient’s psychology that is not thought to be dependent on the actual behavior of the analyst" (p. 203). For Freudians, transference has to do with the expression of deep fantasy constellations in the patient’s mind, and analysts do not "initiate either the need or the stereotypic manner in which they eventually become used" (p. 203). For Freudians, intrapsychic processes determine how the patient experiences the psychotherapeutic situation and the vicissitudes of the transference. Freudians also are committed to try to get as reasonably close to the conditions of objectivity, neutrality, and abstinence as is possible, while at the same time knowing this can never be achieved to perfection. As Lasky puts it, the issue is whether the characteristics and behavior of the analyst are to be treated as a foreground issue or background issue: