Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
DISCUSSION OF "HORNEYAN DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE TREATMENT OF THE YOUNG" Douglas H. Ingram In the following, I will present a clinical case illustrating the ideas dis- cussed by Dr. Paul in his paper. First, I wish to emphasize the underlying position held in common by these two monumental thinkers, Drs. Karen Horney and John Bowlby. Essentially, both writers view mental disorder as an effort at coping with an environment experienced as hostile. These words of Dr. Bowlby will seem entirely compatible to Homey theorists: "Psychopathology is regarded as due to a person's psychological develop- ment having followed a deviant pathway, and not as due to his suffering a fixation at, or a regression to, some early stage of development" (I, p. 41). Like Fairbairn, Homey and Bowlby regard psychopathology as arising in response to adverse influences in the environment. These adverse influ- ences produce, first, anxiety; only secondarily does hostility to the world develop. This differs from the view held by Melanie Klein in which inner hostility is primary and anxiety seen as fear of retribution. How might similarities in the work of Bowlby and Homey emerge in a specific clinical case? Serendipitously, I
The American Journal of Psychoanalysis – Springer Journals
Published: Mar 1, 1984
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.