Child versus adult psychoanalysis: Two processes or one?

Abstract

Child analysis continues to be seen as a different technique from adult analysis because children are still involved in a developmental process and because the primary objects continue to play active roles in their lives. This paper argues that this is a false dichotomy. An extended vignette of the analysis of a latency-aged girl is used to demonstrate that the psychoanalytic process that develops in child analysis is structurally the same as that in adult analysis. Both revolve around the analysis of resistance and transference and use both to promote knowledge of the patient's mind at work. And both techniques formulate interventions based on the analyst's appraisal of the patient's mental organization. It is hoped that stressing the essential commonality of both techniques will promote the development of an overarching theory of psychoanalytic technique.

Further considerations of theory, technique, and affect in child psychoanalysis: Two prelatency cases

“…Child analysis has tended to be conceptualized classically in terms of clinical theory and technique: establishing a relationship, an atmosphere of safety, and a developmental space within which to play; interpreting defense and resistance, anxiety and conflict, and unconscious fantasy; working with parents; and using one's countertransference and analyzing the transference (Yanof, ; Hoffman, ; Sugarman, ; Tyson, ).…”

“…As noted previously, child analysis has classically emphasized interpretation of resistance, defense, unconscious fantasy, transference, and other elements (Hoffman, 2007;Sugarman, 2009). Yet, when I initially attempted this with Sammy and David, there seemed to be little progress: there was little further discussion, elaboration of the anxieties or the affects, enhanced tension regulation, and so on.…”

Losing a Father All Over Again: the Termination of an Analysis of an Adolescent Boy Suffering From Father Loss

“…"A central aim of child analysis is restoration to the path of progressive development and this may well imply an increase in resistance so that the goals of fostering progression and of continuing analysis may be incompatible" (Fabricius and Green 1994, p. 114). Others suggest that the impact of the developmental process on elements of the psychoanalytic process with children and adolescents is often overstated (Sugarman 2009a); still others argue that developmental considerations are just as relevant to adult terminations (Novick 1990). Regardless, it is not uncommon for analysts to play the dual role of being both transference and developmental objects with children and adolescents.…”

Il bambino e le sue relazioni. Attaccamento e individualità tra teoria e osservazione [The Child and His Relationships: Attachment and Individuality Between Theory and Observation] 1

“…One thinks of the radical critique that a number of authors have made of the operational models of infant research, whose data they see as unimportant for the purposes of developing the theory and practice of psychoanalysis. Even more recently, Sugarman (2009) has tackled the controversy surrounding the differences in the psychoanalytic process in adult and child therapy. But, in my opinion, Riva Crugnola’s gamble succeeds – we finish reading her book without any doubt about the usefulness of developing a single frame through which to study the relational development of the infant – a frame made up of theories which, although different, are becoming ever more convergent.…”