A Model for Integrating Actual Neurotic or Unrepresented States and Symbolized Aspects of Intrapsychic Conflict

Abstract

In psychoanalytic theory, the importance of actual neuroses-considered to be devoid of psychic content-diminished as Freud and subsequent analysts focused on unconscious intrapsychic conflict. This paper explores the relationship between actual neurotic and unrepresented states, which are believed to be best addressed through attention to countertransference, intersubjectivity, and enactments rather than interpretation of intrapsychic conflict. Models suggesting how actual neurotic states and symbolized intrapsychic conflict may interact with each other and environmental stressors are described. Symbolizing actual neurotic states and establishing meaningful linkages between somatic/affective experiences and intrapsychic conflict are viewed as necessary for effective treatment of many disorders.

Conceptual and Technical Aspects of Psychoanalytic Enactment: A Systematic Review

“…Numerous authors stress that enactments are an intersubjective process (Gabbard, ; Allen, ; Frank, ; Anchin, ; Gerson, ; LaFarge, ; Varga, ; Ginot, ; Sullivan, ; Ivey, ; Bonovitz, ; Yerushalmi, ; Steiner, ; Gilhooley, ; Strauss, ; Boston Change Process Study Group, ; Sapisochin, ; Cassorla, ; Bohleber et al ., ; Busch, ).…”

“…Such enactments are regressive in character because they result from affective communication which indicates that a capacity for abstraction and symbolization has not been adequately developed or that it manifests as an ideopictographic format (Sapisochin, 2013). They consequently 'hold' the analyst or therapist in the analytic situation, although this psychic immaturity must be perceived and worked through (Chused, 1991;Katz, 1998;Friedman & Natterson, 1999;Cassorla, 2001Cassorla, , 2017Wurmser, 2003;Ginot, 2007;Yerushalmi, 2010;Bohleber et al, 2013;Kogan, 2014;Wright, 2016;Busch, 2017).…”

“…Numerous authors stress that enactments are an intersubjective process (Gabbard, 1994;Allen, 2002;Frank, 2002;Anchin, 2002;Gerson, 2004;LaFarge, 2004;Varga, 2005;Ginot, 2007;Sullivan, 2007;Ivey, 2008;Bonovitz, 2009;Yerushalmi, 2010;Steiner, 2011;Gilhooley, 2011;Strauss, 2012;Boston Change Process Study Group, 2013;Sapisochin, 2013;Cassorla, 2001Cassorla, , 2008Cassorla, , 2012Cassorla, , 2013Cassorla, , 2017Bohleber et al, 2013;Busch, 2017). Sapisochin (2013) argues that an enactment is not considered an end in itself.…”

“…The basic characteristic of enactment is the interaction between the participants, the 'being led', or 'being induced' to act, thus generating a joint action. Briefly stated, enactment goes beyond acting-out (Smith, 1990;White, 1992;Almond, 1995;Bateman, 1998;Friedman & Natterson, 1999;Cassorla, 2001Cassorla, , 2008Cassorla, , 2012Cassorla, , 2017Sapisochin, 2013;Bohleber et al, 2013;Wright, 2016;Busch, 2017).…”

On Becoming able to Play: Individual Child Psychoanalytic Psychodrama and the Development of Symbolization

“…These unrepresented experiences determine a split in the ego in Klein's sense and, in order for the individual to survive psychically, these experiences are relegated to bodily states and actions that retain their communicative potential, though in nonverbal modes. Along these lines, we can imagine different levels and forms of unrepresented mental states, ranging from frankly unrepresented ones to weakly represented ones that are inscribed in the mind as bodily experiences (Busch ; Busch and Sandberg ).…”