The mind model of child psychoanalysis in clinical work with children

Author(s):  
Roberto Bertolini
2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-84
Author(s):  
John O'Connor

The art of psychotherapy has been defined as the capacity of the psychotherapist’s mind to receive the psyche of the patient, particularly its unconscious contents. This deceptively simple definition implies the enormously complex art of receiving the most disturbed, dissociated, maddening, often young and primitive, frightening, and fragmented aspects of the patient’s multiple ages and selves, in the hope perhaps that we might make available to our own mind, to the patient’s mind, and within the therapeutic relationship, whatever it is that we discover together, perhaps with the possibility that this may allow that these dissociated, fragmented, lost, and potentially transformative aspects of self might become more accessible to both therapist and patient. The complexity of this process is further intensified when cultural difference is an important aspect of therapeutic engagement. This paper will explore this rich and complex art. It will include exploration of psychoanalytic, relational, and transpersonal psychotherapeutic perspectives as they inform the potentials and mysteries of this deeply receptive process. The paper will consider the potential this receiving of the other might have for the growth of both the therapist and patient within the life span of clinical engagement and will include consideration of implications for cross cultural clinical work. Clinical vignettes illustrating and informing the ideas explored in this paper will be woven throughout the paper. Whakarāpopotonga Kua tautuhia te toi whakaora hinengaro ko te kaha o te hinengaro o te kaiwhakaora hinengaro ki te pupuri i te hinengaro o te tūroro, mātuatua nei ko ngā matū maurimoe. E tohu ana te tautuhinga ngāwari nei i te kaha uaua o te mahi pupuri i ngā maramara tirohanga, ngā tau, ngā whaiaro tini o ngā tūroro arā noa atu te wairangi, te noho wehe, te kārangirangi, he taiohi, he māori, whakawehiwehi, i runga i te wawata tērā pea ka tuwhera ki ō tātau ake hinengaro, ko tō te tūroro ki waenga hoki i te whakapiringa haumanu. E kene pea mā te mea ka kitea, e tuku ēnei tirohanga pūreirei, kongakonga, ngaro, ā, ngā tirohanga hurihanga whaiaro e whakamāmā ake ki te kaiwhakaora me te tūroro. Ka kaha ake te auatanga o tēnei hātepe i te mea ko te rerekētanga o te ahurea te wāhanga nui o te mahi haumanu. Ka wheraina e tēnei tuhinga te tirohanga toitaurea mōmona nei. Ka whakaurua te wherawherahanga o te wetewetenga hinengaro, te tātanga, me ngā tirohanga whakaoranga hinengaro wairua i te mea ko ēnei ngā kaiwhakamōhio i ngā pirikoko o tēnei hātepe toropupū tino hōhonu. Ka whakaarohia e te pepa nei te ēkene pea o te whakaurunga mai o tētahi kē atu mō te whakatipuranga o te kaihaumanu me te tūroro i roto i te wā huitahi ai. Ka whakaarohia ake anō hoki ngā hīkaro mō te mahi haumanu ahurea whakawhiti. Ka rarangahia ngā kōrero haumanu e whakaahua e whakaatu ana i ngā whakaaro tūhuraina i roto i tēnei tuhinga.


1987 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyne Albrecht Schwaber

Author(s):  
Malby Oliver

Melanie Klein (b. 1882–d. 1960) proposed a revolutionary way of thinking about children and child psychoanalysis that led to discoveries related to the understanding of the functioning, structure, and growth of the mind, as well as an original method for the psychoanalytic treatment of children. The creation of her play technique redefined child psychoanalysis, transformed adult psychoanalysis, and opened new areas including the psychoanalysis of psychosis, autism and borderline conditions, group analysis, and interdisciplinary studies on issues that affect the child’s world. Klein started working with children at a time when child analysis occupied a marginal position in psychoanalysis; children were considered unanalyzable, or in danger if analyzed. Klein’s freedom of thought led her to test psychoanalytic theory and method in her clinical encounters with children, resulting in her concept of the child as a unique object of psychoanalytic treatment and investigation. Her radically original approach to child analysis facilitated the study and treatment of the earliest and deepest functioning of the psyche. The infant was conceived of as born with its objects and with an ego from birth, equipping the infant with the capacity to relate, to love, and to hate the other, to differentiate between me and not-me, inside and outside, and to phantasize. Klein’s theory of the paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions is a theory on changes in the link between the ego and its objects and ensuing anxieties. The task in development is to master this related anxiety and transform it into language and thought, this occurring in the context of the relationship with the mother/other/analyst. Klein took children extremely seriously. Her child clinical material offers vivid descriptions of the child’s mind and the contact she made with challenging young patients. Klein had an obvious passion for clinical work and curiosity about the child’s unconscious discourse, her intuition, and capacity for observation. Available for the child, playing out the roles attributed to her, adhering to phantasy, receiving positive and negative transferences, intuitively registering anxiety and interpreting it: Klein gives meaning to the child’s experience. The main focus of this article is on the relevance of Kleinian discourse for the study of the child and the thinking on the needs of and dangers affecting children in the 21st century.


2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. 829-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy LaFarge

In our “post-pluralistic era” (Cooper 2015), analysts, perhaps particularly in North America, are exposed to a multiplicity of formal theories in their training and their reading; their clinical work often reflects ideas drawn from more than one of them. An aspect of this development is the analyst’s mental process as she draws on heterogeneous models when with the patient and when processing the events of the session afterward. A number of questions arise here: How does a new piece of clinical understanding, representing an alternative theoretical perspective—one that is not usually at the center of that analyst’s thinking—enter the mind of the working analyst? How can the analyst assess whether this is a useful piece of understanding? How can the new piece become assimilated in the analyst’s broader thinking? That is, how can the analyst’s practice influence her theory? (Canestri 2006).


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter DeScioli

AbstractThe target article by Boyer & Petersen (B&P) contributes a vital message: that people have folk economic theories that shape their thoughts and behavior in the marketplace. This message is all the more important because, in the history of economic thought, Homo economicus was increasingly stripped of mental capacities. Intuitive theories can help restore the mind of Homo economicus.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeannette Littlemore
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document