The role of the father in the context of regression in clinical practice

Abstract

By replacing the theory of sexuality with a theory of maturation whose foundations are the need of being and the inborn tendency to maturation, Winnicott not only has brought the importance of the non symbolic, real environment in the maturation of the infant to the level of psychoanalysis, but also, among other innovative contributions, amplified, in a surprisingly way, our vision of the role and functions of the father in this process. With the abandonment of metapsychological theorization, the father figure was displaced from its function in Oedipus Complex related issues and started to occupy a permanent place in the whole maturation process of the infant, the child and the adolescent. At the early stages, from the absolute dependence, the father not only will provide the needs of mother-baby unity, as well as he might become a surrogate mother that will provide in time the integration of the infant, when the woman cannot offer such provision. Furthermore, it will be him that, at the early stages, by incorporating this role to himself and therefore to the external environment, the woman, will help her in the gradual separation from the infant, helping her to fulfill her role on the baby’s omnipotence delusion. Later he can become the mother’s protection element against the aggressiveness of the child, in addition to acting as the intervener that will enable her to create meanings to the anguish of impotence due to triangular relations related issues. It will also be the father, the real man who by not fitting into the child’s projections and by surviving to his/her attacks with firmness and affection will enable him/her to discern between fantasy and reality. However, the father figure will only be recognized as such from the child’s perspective after the fulfillment of the stages and steps that are necessary to ensure the integration of the instinctual impulsiveness and the way to the entrance into the concern. Mainly for this reason, in the process of regression in clinical practice, particularly with patients who show a borderline symptomatology, we can find cases in which there is a clear concentration of memories and conflicts focused on the relationship with the father figure. This fact can lead us into a mistaken interpretation about the origins of the patient’s problems and, mistakenly, drive the analyst’s eyes to a reading of oedipal issues and, as a consequence, to an interpretative practice that will easily result in a pseudo-metapsychological understanding, thus covering up, with real risks to the patient, the primitive origins of the presented picture. This paper will present some clinical vignettes aiming to illustrate the considerations made about the risks of having the clinician’s eyes only focused on issues related to memories and conflicts with the father figure, particularly with borderline patients who show a tendency to split of mind.