Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To see translations of Freud SE or GW…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

When you hover your mouse over a paragraph of the Standard Edition (SE) long enough, the corresponding text from Gesammelte Werke slides from the bottom of the PEP-Web window, and vice versa.

If the slide up window bothers you, you can turn it off by checking the box “Turn off Translations” in the slide-up. But if you’ve turned it off, how do you turn it back on? The option to turn off the translations only is effective for the current session (it uses a stored cookie in your browser). So the easiest way to turn it back on again is to close your browser (all open windows), and reopen it.

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

Lesley, J. Varvin, S. (2016). ‘Janet vs Freud’ on Traumatization: A Critique of the Theory of Structural Dissociation from an Object Relations Perspective. Brit. J. Psychother., 32(4):436-455.

(2016). British Journal of Psychotherapy, 32(4):436-455

Clinical and Theoretical Practice

‘Janet vs Freud’ on Traumatization: A Critique of the Theory of Structural Dissociation from an Object Relations Perspective

Joan Lesley and Sverre Varvin, M.D., DPhil

It is still ‘Janet vs Freud’. We present ‘The theory of structural dissociation’ and the three-phase treatment programme that provides the basis for treatment of traumatized patients in many services in Europe, exploring its shortcomings. With roots in Janet's work it displays a behaviouristic, systemic view of the human being that allows for an understanding of traumatic experience as preventing natural development of the personality towards an integrated unit, or disrupting integration, causing splits along fault lines between major personality systems. Traumatization, structural dissociation, produces patients with multiple inner parts, each with a subjective first person perspective of experience not (necessarily) shared with other parts. With our roots in Freud, from an object relations perspective, we illustrate, through clinical example with two traumatized female patients, how (1) the transference and countertransference provides a unique, alternative understanding of the traumatized patient determining the direction of the therapeutic process, thus making a phase-orientated therapy moot; (2) the patient's functioning prior to traumatization influences the actual traumatic experience, reactions to it and the treatment process; and (3) a patient's attachment needs and way of handling these, brings the traumatic experience into the treatment room from the first contact, providing a core process in the transference and countertransference throughout the therapy.

[This is a summary excerpt from the full text of the journal article. The full text of the document is available to journal subscribers on the publisher's website here.]

Copyright © 2019, 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.