Want to save an article in your browser’s Bookmarks for quick access? Press Ctrl + D and a dialogue box will open asking how you want to save it.
For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.
De Paula Ramos, S. (2004). Reply to Dr Dodes. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 85(6):1508-1509.
(2004). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 85(6):1508-1509
Reply to Dr Dodes
Sérgio De Paula Ramos
Dr Dodes disagrees, strongly at times, with things neither written nor even thought by me (de Paula Ramos, 2004). According to him, my article has two main problems: generalization and the intention to attribute to ‘the father's pathology’ a general psychodynamic theory for chemically dependent patients.
To answer his questions I must begin by recalling the concept that supports the entire study, namely that of vulnerability. I state that
current studies on the etiology of chemical dependency, convinced of the syndrome's multi-determination, upon analyzing the many possible etiological factors, prefer to concern themselves with vulnerabilities. Just as biogenetic, social, ethnic, anthropological, and other vulnerabilities exist, so does the psychological, I believe. Though not present in every case, and perhaps not even in every type of chemical dependency, psychological vulnerability should be considered. Here we find patients who, for the most part, did not have a good enough father to identify with, and therefore reveal a frail ego (p. 474).
… To reiterate, I am of the opinion that the described psychological factors exist and; even not being specific, they create a vulnerability, previously alluded to, for the future installation of a process that creates dependence (p. 475).
[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]