There is a common misconception shared by most patients and all too many therapists that lies at the root of many of the problems of our therapeutic culture. Fundamental misunderstandings of Psychoanalytic concepts have led to significant regressions in the public sphere and it might be useful to start with the basics.
First, consider a patient who had a very successful psychoanalytic treatment lasting several years:
Mr. C was in his late 30s when he entered treatment, an unhappy, moderately successful lawyer, in an unhappy marriage, guilty over an ongoing affair with a co-worker, and troubled by his distant feelings toward his infant son. In short, Mr. C felt he was failing in life; his life was far from where he had once hoped it would be.
Mr. C was a self-described "lapsed" Catholic, who retained a surplus of guilt from his childhood even as he had lost the comfort that his religion had once supplied. As might be expected, he was deeply conflicted about his behavior and illuminating his conflicts and elucidating the sources of his conflicts became the central themes of his therapy.
Mr. C's initial complaints included a fair number of rationalizations. His wife had put on weight and lost interest in sex during the pregnancy and after the birth of their son. He had been working more billable hours in order to support another member of the family. The co-worker with whom he had begun the affair was attractive, unhappy in her marriage, and the affair "just happened." His problems at work were primarily the result of an inconsiderate, demanding, and insensitive boss who was not as bright as Mr. C and expected Mr. C to cover for his failings. There was a modicum of truth to all of these complaints; the use to which the complaints were put and our subsequent exploration revealed the complaints to be defensive rationalizations which allowed Mr. C to continue doing what he was doing without feeling debilitating guilt. At the same time, his guilt was powerful enough to make him miserable and he was quite concerned that the resultant increase in his alcohol intake was becoming problematic.
During his treatment we quickly came to see how thin his rationalizations were.
While it was true that his wife had put on weight and become less interested in sex during and after her pregnancy, this is an almost universal experience for couples having their first baby. It is an expectable result of a young mother's heightened emotional investment in her infant, an emotional investment that must be leavened by the young father's emotional investment in the well being of his wife and child, and in good marriages leads to a deepened relationship between the young parents. The variable period of decreased sexuality is offset by the enhanced intimacy in the relationship and while sexual relations often do not return to the pre-infant level, the decreased frequency is offset by the deepened intimacy. In Mr. C's case, his loss of interest had much more to do with his psychology than any physical or emotional changes which his wife experienced.
Mr. C had an insecure but persistent attachment to his own mother. She had been a domineering and controlling woman and as a child he had retreated into his studies to minimize contact with her. When Mrs. C became a mother, the primitive feelings of dread and suffocation had been evoked and he had reacted to her by retreating from her now frightening maternalized image. At the same time the co-worker with whom he was involved was a married woman, which further enhanced the Oedipal nature of his conflicts. Mr. C had always found himself in rivalrous relations with men. He was one of four brothers and by far the most successful. His father was an electrician and none of his brothers went to college. His father was overtly denigrating to Mr. C, whose mother valued his educational achievements far more than his father did. Mr. C worried about his masculinity; smart boys were sissies in his house and he had a burning desire to "show them all" what he could achieve. When he became aware of his co-worker's barely veiled interest he grasped the opportunity it offered for him to unconsciously gain revenge upon his distant and uncaring father. In other words, by surreptitiously winning another man's wife, he became the victor in an Oedipal triangle. As might be inferred, Mr. C's problems with his boss arose from much the same conflictual structure. His boss was a father figure and he not only needed to see his boss as less intelligent than himself but needed to defeat him; unfortunately the only way to defeat his boss was for Mr. C to perform at a lower level than his abilities dictated, hence the problems at work.
Mr. C, during the first two years of his analysis, was able to clearly understand his initial rationalizations as defensive explanations. By understanding how he had replicated his childhood struggle with his father in the present day at work he was able to decrease the intensity of the conflicts and his work improved. Because he felt less stressed and less angry his drinking decreased. However, his affair continued.
By the third year of treatment, Mr. C had come to learn a great deal more about his sexual conflicts and his conflicts around intimacy. He understood that his wife was a good woman who was uncomfortable with sex herself, and though loving, was also capable of being quite cold and distant; with some degree of discomfort he realized that his wife fit a template (transference) that had been established in his childhood with his mother. In fact, Mrs. C would never be comfortable having a robust sex life. At the same time, although he knew a great deal about why he was so enamored of his co-worker, the intensity of his sexual feelings for her were undiminished. And, at that point he came to a profound insight. He would never be able to fully resolve his conflict. He would always enjoy sex more than his wife enjoyed their physical intimacy and would never be able to find the instantaneous emotional intimacy he wished for with her, though they shared a great many wonderful things together and he loved her and his son. Further, he could recognize that if he left his wife for his lover he would be inevitably disappointed. She was not a particularly nice woman, was not terribly considerate of him or his feelings, and was using him for her own purposes. She was not the kind of person he could ever be happy with. An additional problem for him was that he very much wanted to see himself as a moral and ethical person, even as he no longer adhered to Catholic doctrine. He did not want to cheat on his wife and believed that his marriage vows meant "till death do us part." The reality was that his wishes to be a moral and ethical person, a good husband and father, and his wishes to have frequent, exciting sex, were irreconcilable. No amount of Psychoanalysis could ever resolve the conflicts between his wishes, his conscience, and the dictates of reality.
Mr. C ultimately decided to end the affair and accept his sexual limitations. He did not believe in divorce, would hate himself for hurting his wife and child were his affair to be discovered or were he to seek a divorce, and further, realized that he loved his wife despite her shortcomings.
Mr. C understood that some conflicts cannot be resolved and that we must often learn to live with our conflicts. In our overly therapeutic society, such understanding is lacking. As suggested initially in this post, far too many therapists do not understand this point. In our over-therapized society, if you are unhappy with your sex life, you are supposed to find someone new and exciting, regardless of the consequences. No one can ever tell you not to seek your gratifications wherever they may lie.
The greater society is as guilty as the most inexperienced therapist in this area. We must end poverty, though it is impossible as long as there exist people incapable or unwilling to work at a level that can generate wealth; we must win the drug war, though it is impossible as long as people desire to get high; we must have peace, though it is impossible when our enemies do not desire the same peace that we do. The list goes on.
In general, and this is quite broad indeed, the Utopian left believes that if only their policies are followed, all our conflicts will magically disappear. The Utopian right believes much the same (though have minimal influence and power.) Sadly, there are a great many conflicts that cannot ever be resolved but can only be managed. Until we come to recognize that, in the deepest sense, we will remain an immature society populated by an immature race.
Recent Comments