Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To print an article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To print an article, click on the small Printer Icon located at the top right corner of the page, or by pressing Ctrl + P. Remember, PEP-Web content is copyright.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Rendon, M. (1974). The Family and Defense Mechanisms. Am. J. Psychoanal., 34(4):347-350.

(1974). American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 34(4):347-350

The Family and Defense Mechanisms

Mario Rendon, M.D.

Many principles and practices in psychiatry have moved from the abstract to the concrete, from the obscure to the obvious. Freud moved in a centrifugal fashion from the unconscious and dreams of the individual to the analysis of social institutions and social phenomena such as culture, religion, and war. Post-Freudians directed their attention to the ego, and the neo-Freudians to the social. Harry Stack Sullivan focused on the concept of interpersonal factors, akin in certain respects to the Kleinian school in England; Horney and other “culturalists” studied the influences of society in the determination of mental illness. Family therapy has been a necessary and almost unavoidable outcome of this process.

Psychiatry has not remained detached from politics, and thus we hear about self-, family, and group therapy and other psychiatric phraseologies in political terms. Politics has to do with government and control and with the use of power. In this sense it applies to all levels of existence, from the intrapsychic to the international. Freud's so-called defense mechanisms may be considered in political terms as strategies or operations that aim at maintaining the self's homeostasis (or order) by using power (Freud's libido, Horney's growth forces) through channeling, converting, suppressing, repressing, denying, and so on. Used optimally, freely, and under one's control, these operations would lead to health and growth. But when used arbitrarily, blindly, indiscriminately, and compulsively, they lead to illness.

Why do individuals use their power in such arbitrary and blind (unconscious) ways? It is at this point that we enter into the arena of the family, and of a broader society as well. The answer is obvious to those who recognize that the individual has to maintain the homeostasis of larger groups, and not just his own personal homeostasis. In other words, today we must think not only in terms of an Oedipus complex, but also in terms of the Jocasta complex, the Agamemnon complex, the Electra complex, and so on.

[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.]

Copyright © 2020, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.