Therapy Moms and Psychoanalysis (for autistic children)
Are you a “therapy mom”?
What, perhaps you ask, is a “therapy mom”?
Martha R. Herbert, M.D., Ph.D., of the Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, uses the phrase to describe mothers of autistic children in an article on WebMD (CBS News) about why psychoanalysis should be part of the treatment for autistic children. I rather doubt that my own son, who can talk a little but not well enough to explain his emotions or fears or to tell me what he did at school today, would be a good candidate for this sort of treatment. New York city psychoanalyst Susan P. Sherkow, MD, says that psychoanalysis can help parents understand the “‘meaning of what these children are trying to convey’”:
Psychoanalysts see autistic children four times a week, typically with a parent in the room. They also counsel parents once a week separately to keep them abreast of progress. In a nutshell, the analyst serves as a sensitive translator who attempts to decode what the child is thinking, feeling and doing.
“A major piece is to make sense of what the child is trying to communicate, translate it to the mother, and give her the confidence that she can do it, too,” explains Sherkow, …… who works with autistic children and their families.
“The therapist focuses on the behavior, mood, or emotion of the child and then translates it to the child and waits for a sign that the child feels understood, such as a furtive glance. And from there, the therapist enters the child’s world,” she explains. Sometimes this translation is putting the child’s actions into words, such as saying “you are picking up a cup.”
Herbert (who has spoken and written about environmental causes of autism) suggests that
“Moms are running themselves into the ground and yet they are not really present, so they become part of the process and not part of [sic] solution.”
Parents of children with autism need to relate to the child in whatever state they are in - and this is where psychoanalysis may be helpful, she says.
Psychoanalysts can be sensitive to the inner world of the child. “It’s a skill you can’t package, but it’s wonderful,” Herbert says.
A “therapy mom,” from what Herbert indicates here, would be a mother who is doing so much for her autistic child that she is over-fatigued, “running [herself] into the ground and yet…..not really present,” due to her excessive efforts to help her child (efforts which many of us—including potential “therapy dads”—-do find ourselves doing). While we could all, I supposed, use a bit more sleep, and while I certainly see my husband and myself as playing a key role in the “process” of Charlie’s education, I find Herbert’s suggestion that such parents are “not part of [sic] solution” and that we are somehow not “sensitive to the inner world of the child” extremely puzzling. I’m not always right about what my son is trying to tell me when he wants me to wear a certain shirt, but—due to regular, daily, constant experience and interactions—-what parent does not attempt “to decode what the child is thinking, feeling and doing”?
As for this notion of the “therapy mom”: The term seems to suggest that mothers who are so much involved in helping their child that they are “running themselves into the ground and yet…..not really present” are themselves in need of therapy; that such mothers are themselves in need of some kind of help if they are to start to become part of the “solution.”
And I find it troubling that a professional in the autism field might hold such a view.
Tags: asd, asperger, autism, autism spectrum disorder, children, Environment, Family, mother, pdd-nos, psychoanalysis, Psychology, therapyRelated Stories
POSTED IN: Family, Parenting, Psychology, Treatment
41 opinions for Therapy Moms and Psychoanalysis (for autistic children)
Special Needs Mama
Jan 26, 2008 at 11:49 am
Whoa, just whoa…. Remind me not to call on Herbert and Sherkow when I need help.
Kate
Jan 26, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Wonderful. We finally move away from “Refridgerator Mom’s” to what? “Microwave Mom’s?” Yeesh.
Linda
Jan 26, 2008 at 12:37 pm
From the “De-Motivators”, “if you can’t be part of the solution there is money to be made prolonging the problem”. Definition for consultant.
Autismville
Jan 26, 2008 at 1:55 pm
I agree. I found this article really distressing. Psychoanalysis didn’t work before and I don’t think it will work now… Just how exactly is the psychologist supposed to “know” what Jack is thinking? No training, other than parenting and loving him, can provide that sort of skill.
Not good …
Caroline L.
Jan 26, 2008 at 2:03 pm
For about a year when my child first began to have difficulties, losing speech, rebelling, etc., I was so busy running him from therapy to therapy, preparing for a due process hearing, and getting frustrated that my child was only getting worse instead of improving with all the therapies, that I did not smile very much. My child looked in wonder at my mouth one day when I did smile, and said in surprise, ‘Teeth!’
When I am ’sensitive to the inner world of my child’, my child does a LOT better. Having kind, informed, patient teachers and no time out room helps a lot too!
I can honestly say i was not part of the solution in that six month period when my child fell apart. I listened to the therapists who refused to meet with me, even though we were paying them top dollar privately.
We spent a year with a beloved and trusted therapist rescuing him from that experience, and I learned to listen to my child’ s ‘behavior’.
Niksmom
Jan 26, 2008 at 2:17 pm
YUCK! The sad, sad thing is that there will be soooo many parents who will buy into this grossly offensive —and patently wrong —notion that they will miss out on the opportunities to simply BE a parent to their child.
I can see, though, how a certain, shall we say “zealous” faction of parents might fall into this siutation. They become so overly focused on cures and remediation and “passing” that they lose sight of their relationship with a child and NOT the neurology.
Regan
Jan 26, 2008 at 2:18 pm
So, it wasn’t just me.
When I read the article, my mind cast back to the therapeutic psychoanalytic nurseries of the 60’s, because that is what it sounded like…with the trained psychoanalyst having *special insights* into the child beyond the reach of the overinvolved/underinvolved mom and dad.
Regan
Jan 26, 2008 at 2:34 pm
If the point is to slow down, really observe, and interact on a quality basis, so that the focus in on the child and not deficits…I can see that, but I would really like to know what Dr. Herbert’s theoretical premises are for this program, beyond sitting and watching and saying, “You have a cup” or whatever.
Is it Floortime or Bettelheim?
FWIW–do they have any published comparative case study or clinical research data on this either from effect on the child or the parents? I might want to know that before investing whatever it is per hour 4-5X/week on what is another therapy.
Club 166
Jan 26, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Oh, baby! So someone who we see once a week is supposed to have more insight into what my child’s inner motivations are than I do? HA HA HA HA HA!
I agree that those that get caught up in “fixing” their kids are the ones that need therapy. The kids, as always, need love, presence, patience, and understanding. Not psychoanalysis.
Joe
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm
I recall Temple Grandin writing about sessions with a psychoanalyst in Emergence—-the main thing she did was eat M&M’s as he had a huge bowlful and things she does not remember.
Emily
Jan 26, 2008 at 4:12 pm
We briefly tried this route when TH was exhibiting some suicidal ideation–disconnected utterances that added up to that, anyway–and it was a complete bust. I don’t *like* psychotherapy, and I distrust its framework completely. At any rate, TH could no more express himself clearly to a psychotherapist than he could live alone on Mars, so it would be worthless. And I’m not exaggerating when I say that NO ONE understands that child better than I do, and I’m probably the person HE understand best. We are very closely connected, a connection developed over six years and one that a psychotherapist would never be able to make with him.
And am I misinterpreting this? It seems as though she’s simultaneously accusing moms of spending too much time with therapy while encouraging yet another form of therapy.
Artemisia
Jan 26, 2008 at 5:15 pm
I’m amazed at all the articulate and measured responses above - you all are far calmer people than I am.
My first inarticulate response to this article involved weapons of mass destruction.
My second response is - how dare WebMD cite “researcher’s opinions” on a subject to cover up the fact that there is no research to cite?
As for the professionals, what a bunch of snake oil salesmen. The demotivators have their number.
Daisy
Jan 26, 2008 at 5:49 pm
My child is verbal and benefits from therapy, and so do we. We’re lucky that way. I feel frustrated that someone would label and criticize us when we run ourselves ragged to help our child — and our family. The balance is precarious, I agree, but I can’t demean the efforts we make. How dare a “professional” demean us for working to make our children’s future better!
Laura Collins
Jan 26, 2008 at 7:24 pm
It’s bunk. And it is old, stale, dangerous bunk.
What overstressed parents need is help. Support. Services. Empathy.
Analyze the support system, not the parents. Leave the “really being present” for the family and clinicians who are working together.
Cliff
Jan 26, 2008 at 8:46 pm
I’d have found a trip to a psychoanalyst amusing, because he/she just would have no idea. And, oddly enough, Mom’s been the most perceptive person in my entire life, and I’m pretty sure a psychoanalyst wouldn’t even pick up on the more basic details.
I guess, though, to be totally honest, I’ve seen some circumstances where, though a psychoanalyst would hardly come close to knowing anything, the parents were a little… oblivious. Mind you, it’s not the people here (based on statements here, I can get enough of that sense), but I’ve seen it occasionally. If a psychoanalyst entered the picture, though, I’m certain these people would be so utterly confused by various contradictions it’d be pretty sad.
Cliff
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 26, 2008 at 9:44 pm
One of the perils of parenting—being the last to know……
Shari
Jan 26, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Talk about people “not getting it!”
Nothing would make me happier than to discover people who could and would “own” procedures, leading to many more successes for Nicholas.
I wish that I didn’t have to be so involved. Yet, the truth of the matter is that I honestly do have expertise that many others with Nicholas don’t. I wish that they did. I really would love if they would ask me, “Could you please show me how you do that and how you think these things through for Nick.” RARELY does this happen. But, when it does, I can EASILY back away and let the magic unfold.
I’m always blown away at the lack of commonsense out there, when it comes to working with our children who have autism. On one hand, experts tell us that “early intervention” or “early intervening” makes a difference for children, with and without disabilities. The clock is ticking. Yet, it is rare to get that helper (professional or not) that can address the specific need, at a specific time, for Nicholas.
In the end. Who is ending up holding the ball and picking up the piece for Nicholas? ME!
I’m tired of regretting not stepping in sooner and worrying too much about “hurting someone’s feelings” or making someone feel like I “don’t trust” them. I so wish that everyone would get over it.
Teams mean teams. Moms and dads are the starters in the line up. Others come in to the game, off from the bench. But, those folks come and go. The people who care most about the team “win” or “loss” are the parents.
Sure. I am exhausted. If that makes me need “therapy,” OH WELL. I’d rather spend that money and time on helping my son be the best he can be while I’m alive. That is what makes me most happy. That is what makes me calm and capable of reclaiming lost parts of my brain again. That is what helps me sleep uninterrupted. That is what makes my mental state most healthy.
It is so easy to see, that for Nicholas, the areas that he does best in school are the ones where I’m involved, or someone involved who cared enough to ask me how to help him. I love those people. They are the ones who make it possible for me to reclaim me again. They are the ones who help Nicholas shine, without me nearby.
Hopefully, someday, we will have more people out there like that. Nick and I need that, more than anything else.
Shari
Jan 26, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Talk about people “not getting it!”
Nothing would make me happier than to discover people who could and would “own” procedures, leading to many more successes for Nicholas.
OK…I feel better now. Just had my rant of the day! LOL
I wish that I didn’t have to be so involved. Yet, the truth of the matter is that I honestly do have expertise that many others with Nicholas don’t. I wish that they did. I really would love if they would ask me, “Could you please show me how you do that and how you think these things through for Nick.” RARELY does this happen. But, when it does, I can EASILY back away and let the magic unfold.
I’m always blown away at the lack of commonsense out there, when it comes to working with our children who have autism. On one hand, experts tell us that “early intervention” or “early intervening” makes a difference for children, with and without disabilities. The clock is ticking. Yet, it is rare to get that helper (professional or not) that can address the specific need, at a specific time, for Nicholas.
In the end. Who is ending up holding the ball and picking up the piece for Nicholas? ME!
I’m tired of regretting not stepping in sooner and worrying too much about “hurting someone’s feelings” or making someone feel like I “don’t trust” them. I so wish that everyone would get over it.
Teams mean teams. Moms and dads are the starters in the line up. Others come in to the game, off from the bench. But, those folks come and go. The people who care most about the team “win” or “loss” are the parents.
Sure. I am exhausted. If that makes me need “therapy,” OH WELL. I’d rather spend that money and time on helping my son be the best he can be while I’m alive. That is what makes me most happy. That is what makes me calm and capable of reclaiming lost parts of my brain again. That is what helps me sleep uninterrupted. That is what makes my mental state most healthy.
It is so easy to see, that for Nicholas, the areas that he does best in school are the ones where I’m involved, or someone involved who cared enough to ask me how to help him. I love those people. They are the ones who make it possible for me to reclaim me again. They are the ones who help Nicholas shine, without me nearby.
Hopefully, someday, we will have more people out there like that. Nick and I need that, more than anything else.
Caroline L.
Jan 26, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Shari,
thank you for that comment. I too stay quiet, over and over again, because most professionals public and private want to ‘run their programs’ ‘drills, trials’ etc. without really observing and listening to the child in front of them…and ‘Mom’ is delusional.
Liz D.
Jan 26, 2008 at 10:37 pm
As Kristina knows, all my kids are neurotypical, and yet my response to this article was……
GRRRRRRR!!!!
Psychoanalysts see autistic children four times a week, typically with a parent in the room. They also counsel parents once a week separately to keep them abreast of progress. In a nutshell, the analyst serves as a sensitive translator who attempts to decode what the child is thinking, feeling and doing.
The psychoanalyst does not see the child in the classroom. The psychoanalyst does not see the child in challenging settings (such as taking the children to the grocery store, or other high-stimulation retail venues). The psychoanalyst does not see the child experiencing transitions. The psychoanalyst does not see the child at mealtimes. The psychoanalyst does not see the child experiencing eliminatory sensations or toileting.
Lacking those direct experiences of the child’s response to those settings, the psychoanalyst is qualified how to be a sensitive translator who attempts to decode what the child is thinking, feeling and doing.?
For my money, this is psychoanalysis as quackery.
IMAO, psychoanalysis is intellectually bankrupt.
Joel B.
Jan 26, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Absolutely absurd and disgraceful. The psychoanalysts, who have so few patients, are trying to get a piece of the action. It’s all about $$$. Lots of it.
Misha
Jan 26, 2008 at 11:20 pm
So then all the doctors and other therapists (speech, OT, etc.) who work with J and have told me over and over I know my son better than anyone and know what’s best for him are all wrong? Won’t they all be surprised. *rolls eyes*
This article is so much bunk.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:00 am
I did some searching on PubMed and came up with:
Parks, CE.
J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 2007 Summer;55(3):923-35.
“Psychoanalytic approaches to work with children with severe developmental and biological disorders. Panel report.”
Salomonsson B.
Swedish Psychoanalytical Association, Stockholm, Sweden. bjorn.salomonsson@chello.se
Int J Psychoanal. 2004 Feb;85(Pt 1):117-35. “Some psychoanalytic viewpoints on neuropsychiatric disorders in children.”
The author addresses issues interfacing neuropsychiatry and psychoanalysis. He recommends psychoanalysis for children with Attention Deficit, Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Dysfunction in Attention and activity control, Motility control and Perception (DAMP). He attributes its low status in neuropsychiatric treatment recommendations partly to the fact that psychoanalysts do not always declare their specific field of investigation. The scientific community then assumes that psychoanalysis aims to comment on issues outside its field of investigation, e.g. on neurobiological aetiology. The community therefore fails to discern the psychoanalyst’s specific task, to help the child express and work through his conscious and unconscious experiences. Clarity on the analyst’s part will improve relations with the scientific community and facilitate a relevant comparison of treatment methods. Another reason for neuropsychiatry’s negative attitude towards analysis is its unwillingness to accept that unconscious conflict influences behaviour. With theoretical and clinical arguments, the author argues that unconscious factors must be taken in to understand and to treat the child. Countertransference, often cumbersome with neuropsychiatric children, becomes easier to handle if the analyst is clear about his field of investigation. If he sees through simplistic formulations on aetiology, countertransference gets even more manageable. Psychoanalysis can result in considerable intellectual and emotional development, as illustrated by work with a latency boy with DAMP, autism and slight mental retardation. In his psychoanalytic theoretical framework of the case, the author unites ego-psychological formulations with a Bionian conceptualisation of the thought disturbance.
Regan
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:02 am
Now here’s a question.
Yes, yes, it was Google U–(the regular search engine and Google scholar) and Pubmed, but I was curious about either Dr. Sherkow’s or Dr. Herbert’s qualifications to be making these claims about the need recommendation of, psychotherapy.
It could be me, but I did not find anything worth talking about. Dr. Sherkow, in particular, does not seem to have anything in her own CV to do with a professional knowledge of autism, beyond an account at a conference about someone else’s work with “envy and narcissism” in A, as in one, case study, of an autistic girl. That does not speak well to particular qualities of having special insights in autism that the article claims as necessary.
Dr. Herbert does have a connection, but not in regards to that which she is recommending.
So what is it exactly that makes either of them competent to speak to the need or effectiveness of this except their desire to say so? And again, is this based on any kind of empirical outcome data or is it just something they came up with to try out? I can’t seem to find any research.
Regan
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:12 am
Kristina,
Thanks for the citation, which I will look at in the full version, just to be fair.
If nothing else, figuring out what
“unites ego-psychological formulations with a Bionian conceptualisation of the thought disturbance.” translates to in plain English will be interesting. I still want to see what the actual outcome is and how that was determined.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:15 am
Do you have the links?
Completely not-academic research but this is a post from last year by Autism Diva referencing Herbert.
Emily
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:31 am
“unites ego-psychological formulations with a Bionian conceptualisation of the thought disturbance”….= HURL for me. That wall of jargon must be difficult to see through.
Regan
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:57 am
Okay, I was able something in reference to a presentation that just happened at the Jan 18, 2008 Winter Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, which may have been the warmup for the WebMD article,–a discussion led by Drs. Sherkow and Herbert. I have not been able to locate other on the presentation itself yet (which is what I would really like to take a look at). So I stand corrected that Dr. Sherkow has not worked with an autistic child, although the majority of citations that I found had to do with sexual abuse in girls.
“Psychoanalytic Approaches to Working with Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder: A Dialogue between Psychoanalysis and Neurobiology.”
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/93574.php
This letter to the NYT
in reply to
“Detecting Autism Early, When There’s Hope”
Jan 3, 2005
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9504E4DE1239F930A35752C0A9639C8B63&sec=&spon=
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 2:19 am
You mean this:
Working with Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder:
A Dialogue between Psychoanalysis and Neurobiology
A little more information:
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 2:23 am
And here is a summary of a 2004 session, with my emphases in italics:
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 2:41 am
One more by Sherkow, “Further Reflections on the “Watched” Play State and the Role of “Watched Play” in Analytic Work” (2004). Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 59:55-73:
I’m noting the notion of the “watching mother” and Sherkow’s references to the analyst as “translating” the child for the mother.
AnneC
Jan 27, 2008 at 4:09 am
I was evaluated by some folks with a rather psychoanalytic mindset when I was four, and some of the stuff they came up with was utterly ridiculous. They gave me an inkblot test and noted that at a certain point, I just started making up “nonsense words” — my dad pretty accurately surmised that this meant I’d “had enough”, but the evaluators still decided to read all kinds of weird stuff into whatever it was I said. And I mean really weird stuff, including insinuations of penis envy. (Did they say that about all females during a certain period of years? I’d wager probably).
Regan
Jan 27, 2008 at 5:23 am
Kristina,
Do you have access to these articles or just the summaries? Our university library does not subscribe. To be square, without reading the full text, it is just gobbledeegook to me, as to the goal of the “watched play” as reciprocal play and the “watched play” as observation to develop mentalization.
———————————–
Review of The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child:Volume 59
http://www.apsa.org/Portals/1/docs/JAPA/541/Ascherman-Bk–pp.337-343.pdf
The volume’s section of clinical contributions opens with Susan P. Sherkow’s development of her concept of “watched” play: She distinguishes the “watched” play of her 2001 paper, a reciprocal play, from “watched play” in which “the young child wants mother to ‘participate’
in his play by quietly observing him” (p. 56). The“watched play state” is related to development, including the capacity for “mentalization” (Fonagy and Target 1998). Sherkow notes, “the child’s growing
ability to mentalize, corresponding to ego development, is a function of an internalization of the mother’s mentalization itself. In the same way, the child’s internalization of ‘watched mother’ in play is an internalization of the patient, focused, watching mother’s cognitive processes, including the ego functions of affect regulation and compensatorystabilization. The internalization of ‘watched play’ and the internalization of mentalization coincide . . . ” (p. 61). While Sherkow’s ideas have obvious relevance to intriguing to consider how her ideas may apply to other clinical work.
FONAGY, P., & TARGET, M. (1998). Mentalization and the changing aims of child psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Dialogues 8:87–114
SHERKOW, S. (2001). Reflections on the play state, play interruptions, and the capacity to play alone. Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis 10:531–542.
This Week’s Top Posts
Jan 27, 2008 at 12:35 pm
[…] Therapy Moms and Psychoanalysis (for autistic children)Martha R. Herbert, M.D., Ph.D., of the Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, uses the phrase to describe mothers of autistic children in an article on WebMD (CBS News) about why psychoanalysis should be part of the treatment for autistic children. And New York city psychoanalyst Susan P. Sherkow, MD, says that psychoanalysis can help parents understand the “‘meaning of what these children are trying to convey.” […]
Owl
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:08 pm
I’m glad somebody is willing to take a cognitive view to treatment instead of just drugs or conditioning… but I do take psychoanalysis with some grains of salt. I liked how one of the psychoanalists is quoted saying that they could make themselves more useful by staying out of discussing the cause of autism and sticking with how understanding the mind can help… but then again they base their understanding on the remnant of Freud’s ideas. I’m just remembering a Freud reading I did where he was trying to diagnose schizophrenia I think it was as having something to do with masturbation… He completely failed to say anything relevant on the subject. Modern attempts to pin down withdrawing from social interactions as a result of narcissism etc I think will be similarly doomed. Autistic perspective: I wonder why all these people talk so much… psychoanalyctic perspective: the child is attempting to withdraw from properly developing an oedipus complex by self stimulating the latent sexuality by flapping his hands.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Regan, I’ve just looked at the summaries so far—will see if I can access more. Shades of play therapy here—–
Regan
Jan 27, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Thanks Kristina,
While I doubt that I am going to delve too deeply into this, sometimes when there is a lot of explanation of internal motives, ideation, etc., I like to find out just plainly what is going on on the outside–as in what they are actually doing.
As owl pointed out, the translation is somewhat dependent on what the observer’s point of reference is.
Cheers.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 27, 2008 at 3:54 pm
I’m not inclined to delve too much into this topic either—but it is more “alive” that many of us might think or wish, and I’d rather be informed. At the 2005 conference in Cleveland on autism and the humanities that led to the book on autism and representation from a disabilities studies perspective—one of the keynote speakers was a psychoanalyst from Austria (I think). He spoke a good hour (that’s what it seemed like) about the equivalent of Bionian conceptualisations—–his presentation did not at all fit in with the focus of the conference.
larry
Feb 23, 2008 at 12:40 am
I can’t figure out why you find various ideas for research “troubling.” If there is “no known cause and no known cure” for autism, why leave any stone unturned. I thought we were supposed to be concerned primarily about children around here; not their mothers.
Anyway, of all psychoanalysis, the object relationists are are probably best suited for curing autism.
As for your point that psychoanalysis can’t learn too much about the meaning of symptoms; that was Bettelheim’s complaint. However, modern psychoanalysts have been working on that problem just as classical psychoanalysis. If you start out with a deterministic view of things–that EVERYTHING has a meaning–all you have to do is decypher observed behavior. It’s like decoding dead languages. It has been done before.
larry
Feb 23, 2008 at 1:01 am
In reponse to Owl:
Where did you get the idea that Freud’s works are nothing more than remnants in modern psychiatry? Interpretation of Dreams is still required reading for all medical school psychiatry residents. Ninty percent of all modern psychotherapy is still Freud. Recently Aaron Beck admitted this in public, after winning his fancy Lasker Prize in medicine. What’s more, Freud’s book on aphasia is still required reading for neurology residents all over the world.
I think the big problem with Freud is that nobody knows a thing about his theories. The reasons for this are obvious enough. Up until about ten years ago it was illegal in the U.S. for anyone but physicians to practice psychoanalysis. Therefore only physicians were qualified to teach it. Your typical psychology professor is a dunce compared to the old-time psychoanalysts, and such a professor is not qualified to teach Freud to his students. He can present cheap jealous scorn though. That’s why all students go around smirking and giggling at the very mention of the word Freud. Just Read Freud for yourself. All his 23 volumes of callected work are available in paperback.
Anyway, Freud had something to say about autism and schizophrenia. For your information, it was Freud who first saw autism as essentially different from schizophrenia. In schizophrenia, libido is withdrawn from external reality. In autism it is not withdrawn. Instead it is focused on only one aspect of external reality; one’s own body. For this, Freud coined the term “auto-erotism.” Eugen Bleuler first agreed with Freud, but then decided he no longer could accept Freud’s libido theory. Instead he decided that auto-erotism was simply a symptom of schizophrenia and therefore changed the name to “autism.”
This truly aggravated Freud, but there was nothing he could do about it. Bleuler outranked him as the world’s leading psychiatrist at that time.
So, the big question is this: Was Freud right? Is autism distinct from psychosis? Or was Bleuler right. Is autism simply a symptom of psychosis.
larry
Feb 25, 2008 at 3:20 am
“And I find it troubling that a professional in the autism field might hold such a view.”
———–
And you accuse ME of being peurile!
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: