What is the purpose of psychotherapy and psychoanalysis if not to reach an understanding of our own inner psychological workings? That goal is both the grandest and most difficult objective in clinical psychology, and not surprisingly most research has previously focused on the much safer study of habits, affects, and motivations. The ability to mentalize, however, to maintain enough self-awareness both of oneself and of others, is something of a holy grail in clinical practice, and only recently have psychologists begun to make true breakthroughs.
Mind to Mind: Infant Research, Neuroscience, and Psychoanalysis is the result of a 2005 conference on mentalization that will be of interest to clinical practitioners, informed-enough patients, cognitive scientists, and philosophers alike. It takes an interdisciplinary approach to a psychotherapeutic topic that is possibly the riskiest and most rewarding of any in the field.
One of the appeals both in the title and the book’s purported goal is the introduction of neuroscience into the psychoanalytic approach. This is obvious a hot new approach in psychoanalysis, one that revitalizes the legitimacy of a declining field. In reality, however, the neuroscience offerings are rather limited, residing mostly in one chapter that essentially provides a functional anatomy of mentalization. The other biological topics take on more of an evolutionary psychology and animal psychology-influenced approach to mentalization. While evolutionary psychological analyses are notoriously spurious, in a subject like mentalization, one which speaks to the very essence of the human mind, such an approach to psychology seems more proper than say, the evolution of canoe-building.
One of the most notable innovations of Mind to Mind is its approach to child-parent psychology. While most such studies understandably focus on the parent’s impact on the child, Mind to Mind offers two refreshing chapters on the child’s impact on parent psychology and the parent’s ability to mentalize both the parent’s own and one’s child in relation to the parent. In James E. Swain et al.’s study of infant psychology, we see that parents of newborns often have difficulty rationally mentalizing their children. Most parents see their babies as “perfect” and have irrational fears of their children being vulnerable to catastrophe. The problems extend into childhood for parents, when many parents have difficulty imagining their child’s right to a personal space and personal life in the period when the child is still dependent on the parent’s support. The problems of adoptive childhood are addressed in multiple chapters, as well as the cases of traumatic and abusive experiences with parents. In nearly every case, an abusive relationship with a parent led to an inability of an individual to properly mentalize their own psychology, let alone express healthy empathy of others.
Article comments