Object relations theory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 08:08, 11 May 2025

Latest revision as of 10:26, 11 July 2025

(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 26:

==History==

The initial line of thought emerged in 1917 with [[Sándor Ferenczi]]. Subsequently, early in the 1930s, [[Harry Stack Sullivan]], established what is known as interpersonal theory.<ref>Ogden, T. (2005). ''This Art of Psychoanalysis: Dreaming undreamt dreams and interrupted cries''. NY: Routledge. (p. 27).</ref> British psychologists [[Melanie Klein]], [[Donald Winnicott]], and [[Harry Guntrip]], Scott Stuart, and others{{Who|date=June 2023}} extended object relations theory during the 1940s and 1950s. In 1952, [[Ronald Fairbairn]] formulated his theory of object relations.<ref name=":2">Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1952). ''Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality''. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981.</ref>

The term has been used in many different contexts, which led to different connotations and denotations.<ref name=":0" /> While Fairbairn popularized the term "object relations," Klein's work tends to be most commonly identified with the terms "object relations theory" and "British object relations," at least in contemporary North America, though the influence of the [[British Independent Group (psychoanalysis)|British Independent Group]]—which argued that the primary motivation of the child is object seeking rather than drive gratification<ref>Glen O. Gabbard, ''Long-Term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy'' (Washington, DC 2010) p. 12</ref>—is becoming increasingly recognized.

Line 183:

=== Fairbairn's structural theory ===

Fairbairn realized that the child's absolute dependence on the good will of their mother made them intolerant of accepting or even acknowledging that they are being abused, because that would weaken their necessary attachment to his parent. The child creates a delusion that they live in a warm cocoon of love, and any information that interferes with this delusion is forcibly expelled from their consciousness, as they cannot face the terror of rejection or abandonment at three, four or five years of age. The defense that children use to maintain their sense of security is dissociation, and they force all memories of parental failures (neglect, indifference or emotional abandonments) into their unconscious. Over time the neglected child develops an ever expanding memory bank of event after event of being neglected. These dissociated interpersonal events are always in pairs, a self in relationship to an object. For example, a child who is neglected dissociates a memory of themselves as a frightened confused self who has been neglected by a remote and indifferent parent. If these events are repeated again and again, the child's unconscious groups the memories into a view of the self and a view of the parent, both which are too toxic and upsetting to be allowallowed into consciousness. The paired dissociations of self and object that accrued from rejections were called the antilibidinal ego (the child's frightened self) and the rejecting object (the indifferent or absent parent). Thus, in addition to the conscious central ego, which relates to the nurturing and supportive parts of the parent (called the ideal object), the child has a second view of self and object in his unconscious: the antilibidinal ego and the rejecting object.

No child can live in a world devoid of hope for the future. Fairbairn had a part time position in an orphanage, where he saw neglected and abused children. He noticed that they created fantasies about the "goodness" of their parents and eagerly looked forward to being reunited with them. He realized that these children had dissociated and repressed the many physical and emotional outrages that they had been subjected to in the family. Once in the orphanage, these same children lived in a fantasy world of hope and expectation, which prevented them from psychological collapse. The fantasy self that the child develops was called the libidinal self (or libidinal ego) and it related to the very best parts of the parents, who may have shown interest or tenderness toward their child at one time or another, which the needy child then enhances with fantasy. The fantasy enhanced view of the parent was called the exciting object by Fairbairn, which was based on the excitement of the child as he spun his fantasy of a reunion with his loving parents. This pair of self and objects is also contained in the child's unconscious, but he may call them into awareness when he is desperate for comfort and support (Fairbairn, 1952, 102–119).<ref name=":2" />

Line 219:

* [[Egocentrism]]

* [[Family therapy]]

* [[Jointness (psychodynamics)]]

* [[Psychoanalysis]]

* [[Relational psychoanalysis]]

Line 249 ⟶ 248:

==External links==

*[http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/objectrelations.html Object Relations Theory, Psychology Department, Sonoma State University] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161101120035/http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/objectrelations.html |date=2016-11-01 }}

*[http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=176021 Melanie Klein Obituary]