theoretical frameworks other than the one they espouse. There is no tradition of “comparative psychoanalytic studies”, where alternative frameworks are considered side-by-side in a specific context. In fact, it is generally, if informally held that those who have not been trained in a specific tradition might be on shaky ground when using constructs rooted in that tradition. It is hard to imagine how this could lead to anything but fragmentation. Instead, each framework, once established, tends to take on the challenge of incorporating all new data, gradually making them unwieldy and contrasts between theories of little practical relevance. There are two facets to this problem. The first is that the principle of parsimony (Occum’s razor) is hard to apply as explanations are rarely placed side-by-side. For example, the concept of splitting has been widely used since Freud’s introduction of the notion (Breuer & Freud, 1895; Freud, 1923) and Fairbairn’s (1952) popularisation of the idea. As a behavioural phenomenon, splitting is readily observed in most severe psychopathology, particularly borderline personality disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 1994; Perry, 1992; Westen, 1997). Accounts of the concept, however, vary, from ones tracing its origins to infantile mental states and the need to protect the good object from internal attack to others where any separation of mental state from consciousness is considered under this heading (Rousillon, 1998). The conceptual framework within which splitting is considered profoundly influences the range of phenomena which it is used to explain. Yet since Hartmann’s (1964) description of the “genetic fallacy” we understand that the origin of an ego defence has no implication for its current function and use. The most parsimonious account of the phenomenon of splitting might be that it is a normally and naturally occurring cognitive response to extreme levels of conflict and stress (Linehan & Heard, 1993). The extensive use of splitting as a defence may have less to do with a past history of unresolved ambivalence or inaccessible traumata and more to do with the current stress which borderline individuals experience. The second aspect is the identification of the best-fitting account amongst rival accounts. For example, hostility and destructiveness in borderline patients has been attributed at various times to constitutional aggression, experiences of unempathic caregiving, self-protective defensive manoeuvres etc. It is not clear if these competing accounts should be applied to the same individual at different times, to different individuals, or if just one of these accounts is correct and applies to all individuals in the category. The challenge for the future must be more fully to explore alternative accounts, identify the appropriate sub-population to which they are best suited or discontinue their use having replaced them with a better-fitting alternative. Such an endeavour requires systematic scrutiny. .+?#%@()+L&">#&(":-)(,)?@,)"+&?"+?%#+)+L&("?)@B&)+!B>%+?%(& Psychoanalytic theories vary in the extent to which they show concern about the impact of the environment. However, generally speaking, they suffer from a lack of sophistication in considering the impact of the external world. In some respects this is understandable as the focus of psychoanalysis is explicitly upon the intrapsychic. It is this lack of sophistication which leaves psychoanalysis vulnerable to accusations of mother-blaming and the unrealistic over-emphasis on external influences during the first years of life. It is now generally accepted that influences between the child and the environment are reciprocal. Constitutional and parental risk factors interact in the generation of risk (Rutter, 1993). Such interactional models suggest that risk and trauma are processes rather than events and problems arise when a constitutional vulnerability is combined with a sub-optimal environment thus generating a maladaptive response which in turn might undermine further the adequacy of environmental provision and so on. A scientific psychoanalytic attitude would suggest the elaboration of current psychoanalytic developmental models in the direction of increased specificity concerning transactional aspects of the process of traumagenesis.
4'20&&;443&&32D.2E&&F&&19.3;&&2;.1.40&&GHIJ&&F& VD
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator