AAA’ 09 KUT CLS3024505: Psychoanalytic study of the child. WR: BF721 .P8 (ISSN 0079-7308 / Yale University Press [etc] /) Requested: 2017-03-20 13:54 Not needed after: Pickup at: GW George Washington - Gelman WDD: Web Delivery Citation: Issue: v.36() 1981; Article: The ! Laufer, Moses; Pages: 181-191 psychoanalyst and the adolescents sexual development. * WRLC Shared Collections Facility BF721 .P8 - 32105400333844 - - Charged(1997-08-09) “WRLC Shared Collections Facility BF721 .P8 - 3210540033392 - - Charged(2016-09-12) * WRLC Shared Collections Facility BF721 .P8_ - 2105400334149 - - Charged(1997-08-09)180 M. Eglé Laufer ogy, that is, the patient's inability to maintain any sublimatory activity. In line with the view just presented, this could be seen as a rejection of any activity that does not have the unconsciously searched-for intensity of pleasurable bodily experience. To it seems that in the re seeing the result of a particularly investment of the body image and a correspond ing sense of loss at puberty; while in the patient with a" tic personality disorder” we see the result of a failure or lack of a satisfactory libidinal investment of the body image, with a sub- sequent defensive attempt to compensate for this lack by the premature use of the superego as a substitute source of satisfac- tion and an intense wish to take over the role of the depriving intense object. BIBLIOGRAPHY 964), The Self and the Object Groor, J. (1962), Ego ide The Psychoanalyst and the Adolescent’s Sexual Development MOSES LAUFER, Ph.D. IN RECENT YFARS THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT DEAL OF QUESTIONING OF the assumption that certain forms of sexual activity or behavior should be considered as being signs of abnormality. This doubt about such categorization is based partly on the changes in at- titudes and laws which have taken place and are taking place in various Western countries, but more critical for purposes of this paper is the fact that such doubt also rests on the questioning by professional colleagues of the criteria or the explanations which haye been applied to certain activity or behavior and which have resulted in the classification Another impetus for this doubting and questioning has come from the growing awareness by both professional and lay people that the categorization of certain activity and behavior as either normal (and therefore acceptable) o nd therefore le) has enabled part of th ‘own motives. “Abnormal has been used for centuries 1 debasement or denigratior has begun to be some freedom in ng this. in our work with the adolesce! cal to separate our own views about normality and al ity,” espec asa descr ing My own view is Din n182 Moses Laufer mality” within the context of assessment and treatment. When the psychoanalyst is assessing or treating, he is constantly having to make judgments about a person’s psychological development, and itis not sufficient in the assessment and the treatment of the adolescent to be “neutral.” Neutrality, when applied to the adolescent patient's present and future psychosexual life, is untenable and is, I be- liewe, contrary to the purpose of therapeutic intervention during this period of life. This view is based on my assumption that certain forms of sexual activity or behavior in adolescence always repre- sent, at the least, a breakdown in the developmental process of adolescence; professional “neutrality” is therefore equivalent to an acceptance of that developmental breakdown and its conse quences in later life Tue Issues rhe issues which I will examine in this paper can be defined as follows: (1) whether certain forms of sexual activity and behavior during adolescence invariably represent a disruption psychological development; (2) whether such disruption, if it exists, enables us, in assessinent and treatment, to view such activity and behavior as “abnormal”; (8) whether the psycho- analyst, in assessment and treatment, should or should not make a judgment about such activity and behavior. My own experience in assessment and treatment of adoles- cents, and the knowledge we have about the meaning that cer- tain forms of sexual activity have to the adolescent, enable me to answer in the affirmative to the issues defined above. More em phatically, T believe that the psychoanalyst must have a view about this, and also must convey this view to the adolescent at the beginning of or early in his contact with the adolescent patient oF prospective patient. To do otherwise is contrary to the responsi- bility which the psychoanalyst accepts when he agrees to under take to try to help the adolescent. The forms of sexual activity which need to be considered ab- normal in terms of psychological development, and about which the psychoanalyst needs to make clear his view to the adolescent patient, are those which exclude heterosexual intercourse as the primary sexual activity between two people. Although I will de- The Adolescent's Sexual Development 183 fine this in greater detail later in the paper, the sexual activity and behavior which I have in mind are homosexuality, fetishism transvestitism, and perversions. Developmental breakdown in adolescence can manifest itself in a whole range of ways, and at times this may not be too obv ous. But [am implying that certains forms of sexual activity always signify that a developmental breakdown has taken place. The way in which I define my function in my work with the adolescent, and the judgments 1 make about the normality or abnormality about certain forms of sexual activity or behavior, are linked directly to the view I have about the developmental function of adolescence and about the meaning of developmen- tal breakdown during adolescence ‘THe DEVELOPMENTAL FUNCTION OF ADOLESCENCE AND THE MEANING OF DEVELOPMENTAL BREAKDOWN: THEIR RELATION TO rie Issues Unitil recently (1978, 1981) I defined the function of adolescence as the establishment of a “final sexual organization,” that is, an organization which, from the point of view of the body repre- sentation, must now include the physically mature genitals. It is during adolescence that the person becomes the guardian of his sexually mature body. He establishes a sexual identity by the end of adolescence, a consolidated picture of himself as a sexual being, which is irreversible—irreversible, that is, without therapeutic intervention, Consequently, adolescent pathology can be defined as a breakdown in the process of integrating the physically mature body image as part of the representation of ‘oneself. Whatever may be the contributory ingredients to this breakdown (preoedipal, oedipal, or preadolescent), the essential component of adolescent pathology can be understood as being a break- down in the developmental process whose primary or perhaps specific function is that of establishing the person's sexual identity. The primary interference in the developmental process is in the adolescent's distorted view and relationship to his body, something which is expressed via the hatred or shame of, the fury with, the sexual body.184 Moses Laufer But I would now extend my earlier definition of the develop- mental function of adolescence and of the meaning of develop- I breakdown. I would now include as a central task of ‘cence what I would define as the restoration of the oedipal parents, that is, the ability by the end of adolescence to begin to forgive the internalized parents for not having protected the original childhood state of narcissistic perfection, that is, a time when the child could maintain the fantasy of having acquired the oedipal parent. Viewed in terms of the oedipal relationship to one’s adolescence, it means that by the end of adolescence there should be the ability unconsciously to test the oedipal disap- pointments and the jealousy and envy of both parents in ways which remove the blaming of the oedipal parents for the earlier failures. Expressed in terms of genitality, it means that by the end of adolescence there is the internal freedom to acknowledge unconsciously that the original oedipal wish and demand con- tained an unfulfillable fantasy of the perpetuation of perfection and of ultimately acquiring the oedipal parent. Instead, during adolescence and especiallly by the end of adolescence, the person can, in normal development, be free to use oedipal identifica- tions to enable him or her to include the functioning genitals, into the body image. The adolescent can now replace and kill the parent of the same sex, without actually having to do so. It means that the oedipal guilt no longer has the same authority and power because the aggression contained in the original oedi- pal hatred has not destroyed the parent in reality, nor has the adolescent needed to use his or her own body as the vehicle for the destruction of the oedipal parent. Inother words, the adoles- cent is ultimately able to feel that genitality is his right given to him by the oedipal parents, and this right removes any need oF wish to destroy that genitality. This is what is meant by “owner ship of the body.” a process which is normally completed by the end of adolescence But there are certain forms of sexual activity and behavior which, I believe, represent at the least an obvious breakdown in the developmental process of adolescence, and which carry un consciously a statement about the person’s relationship to his own sexual body and to his internalized parents. These adoles~ cents have not been able to use the period of adolescence as @ The Adolescent’s Sexual Development 185, time when they can begin to make amends in their relationship with the oedipal parents; that is, they have not been able, through their genitality, to identify with the parents’ sexuality. Instead, these adolescents are compelled to go on using their own bodies as a means of having to try to destroy the oedipal parent. They use their bodies to live out the fantasy of the de- struction of the oedipal mother—the one who remains blamed for having robbed the child, and now the adolescent, of the perfect union and of the original narcissistic perfection. In adolescence, these people must destroy their own genitality, and must continue to portray the destruction of their physically ma- ture genitals. It is in this way that they continue to live out the fantasy of offering the mother that body which they believe the mother always wanted them to have, that is, a body without adult genitals. The unconscious hatred and blaming of the oedipal parent is, in this way, never doubted and is therefore per- petuated. For these adolescents, the end of adolescence and the move into adulthood unconsciously also signify the giving in, ina hopeless way, to the mother who they believe has destroyed their genitality or has robbed them of it. It seems that this is so for those adolescents who, by the end of adolescence, no longer have the choice but to accept certain kinds of sexual activity and rela- tionships as their main expression of their sexuality, as is the case in homosexuality, fetishism, transvestitism, and perversions, The additional danger for these adolescents is that the “giv- ing in,” also means that the fantasies produced during ad- olescence—instead of being used actively in the attempt to alter the central masturbation fantasy, which was originally es- tablished as part of the resolution of the oedipus complex (Laufer, 1976)—become integrated into. the adolescent's Pathological sexual organization (Freud, 1906) and strengthen the quality and the extent of the developmental breakdown. The unconscious hatred and blaming of the oedipal parent and the giving in to the mother may be the outcome in the lives of many adolescents, whether or not their sexual activity and relation ships include people of the opposite sex. For those who have the internal ability to establish heterosexual relationships, and who can rely on physical genitality as the main means of sexual Sratification, however, there may still be the possibility of doubt-186 Moses Laufer ing their previous internal solutions and there may still be some possibility of reversing the breakdown. The choices of sexual object during adolescence, and espe- cially by the end of adolescence, represents the manner in which genital sexuality has or has not been integrated into the final sexual organization. In other words, one’s relations to the oedi- pal objects, to one’s own sexual body, and to the external world also represent one’s relation to reality. Although reality testing begins to function well before the oedipal period, it may also be that it is only with the need ultimately to give up the original oedipal wishes that reality testing is finally established, This oed- ipal solution in relation to reality should again be questioned in adolescence and be re-resolved by the end of adolescence. Those adolescents who have rejected or denied their genitality, and who unconsciously have to continue to use their sexual bodies and the sexual object to confirm their self-hatred and the hatred of the oedipal parent, however, do not in any way question their original relation to reality during adolescence. Instead, their self-hatred and their need to destroy their genitality strengthen the distortions and ultimately force them to give in forever. In other words, unless they are able during adolescence to question their original solutions, and to be helped to add meaning to theit oedipal hatred and the rejection of the identification with the oedipal parent of the same sex, then these adolescents will have Jost their chance ever to doubt the direction of their lives. The rejection during adolescence of one’s body being either masculine or feminine means that the person has irreversibly rejected the oedipal identifications with the parent of the same sex. It means that the person's relationship to his or her own body, if the object choice isa homosexual one or one in which the genitals are not the primary vehicle for sexual gratification and for the love of the sexual object, also contains the hopelessness with which they have lived since childhood. In such relation ships, the function of procreation is denied or seems irrelevant But the possibility of choice of procreation during adolescence is central fo one’s efforts to establish one’s sexual identity. The ability to choose to be a father or a mother is a necessary part of one’s relationship to oneself asa male or a female, and is funda~ mental in ultimately establishing one’s relation to one’s past The Adotescent’s Sexual Development 187 Those relationships which, through their sexual activity, exclude the possibility of procreation strengthen the distortion of the sexual body image and must at the same time strengthen the hatred of oneself and of the oedipal object. Such relationships break a link with the past. In terms of one’s present life, they may also strengthen the feeling that one’s past has nothing to do with oneself, that one is simply the product of parents who hated one and who withheld the right to genital sexuality (Lampl-de Groot, 1962) ‘Tie PsyCHOANALYST AND THE ADOLESCENT'S SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT When the psychoanalyst undertakes to ty to help the adoles. cent, he implicitly accepts that the adolescent will be offered the chance to examine those areas of his present and past life which have brought about the existing problems, and which are now part of the adolescent's internal life. He also undertakes to help the adolescent to get more in touch with those factors or experi- ‘nces in his life which have determined the choice he has made or wishes to make about his present and future life. ‘The adolescent may be in agreement with the analyst’s under- taking, or he may feel that he has the right to make any choice he likes without there being any need for the analyst to question that choice. But this view cannot be accepted by the analyst from the start, because there is an important difference between the berson’s conscious intent or choice and the unconscious factors which determine “choice.” The great difficulty that the adoles- cent has in acknowledging and accepting the presence of factors in his life other than the conscious ones, together with the ex- treme power of pathology, may force the vulnerable or poten- Wally ill adolescent to reject any definition or understanding of his behavior other than that which is conscious. He may also have todeny the authority of the past, and he may feel that any choice other than the one he has made consciously isa submission to the Past, that is, a submission to the oedipal parent who he feels was responsible initially for his present mental state. The analyst may make the error of confusing his moral and ethical views about people's “rights” and his responsibility when188 Moses Laufer choosing to work with people whose future psychological lives are still in the process of being determined and finalized. If we accept that certain forms of sexual activity or behavior during adolescence are, at the least, a sign of developmental breakdown, then our primary responsibility is to help this adolescent, that is, tory to keep open the psychological options which may still exist for this adolescent. If we apply our views about people's “rights” to our function in assessment and treatment of the adolescent, we take the risk of confirming for the adolescent his unconscious belief that there is no hope, that he is worthless, and that the oedipal parents have given up any wish for the adolescent to be a sexual being and the owner of his sexual body. The adolescent who seeks help may wish for this kind of confirmation, but at the same time he may also wish for the analyst to doubt the choices made until now and to offer the adolescent the possibility of a different solution. Asthe result of treatment, the adolescent may feel that he can now choose actively to live his social and psychological life in one way or another: he may, in fact, choose to continue to live a life which is, for example, homosexual in terms of his object choices. Or he may understand that the only relationships which he can value, and perhaps which he can have in the first place, exclude genital sexuality. This may be an out- come of treatment, but it is based on his readiness to question and to doubt his earlier solutions. Developmental breakdown in adolescence, as expressed by the choice of “sexual abnormality,” means that the adolescent has given up hope of ever restoring the relationship to the oedi- pal parent, But by choosing “sexual abnormality” and by giving Up this hope of restoring the relationship to the oedipal parent, he, atthe same time, defies his conscience and thereby breaks the relationship to his own past; that is, he gives up feeling that his past and his present life are in any way his responsibility. But if the adolescent has agreed to undertake treatment, he has chosen to give the psychoanalyst the right to question his earlier s0- lutions. In this sense, the psychoanalyst’s “neutrality” is unten ble, inasmuch as itis contrary to the undertaking of the analyst, and itis also contrary to the unconscious expectation and hope of the adolescent. Neutrality is, in this context, equivalent to con~ firming the adolescent's hopelessness. It may also be experi The Adolescent’s Sexual Development 189) enced by the adolescent as yet another confirmation that “sexual abnormality” is the only right he has. But the ability not to be neutral, especially in the face of much social opposition, means that the psychoanalyst would need to be aware of the meaning of his own adolescence in relation to his present life. It may mean the giving up of many of the idealizations of the past that we live with. It may also force us to consider the extent of our own envy of the adolescent's sexuality, and it may be necessary to risk losing some of the narcissistic gains which so many ill adolescents want to or have to offer, especially if their pathological solutions are not questioned, or perhaps more seriously, if their pathological solutions are felt by them to be idealized or overvalued. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS. There are a number of clinical implications which follow from what I have said. It is not my intention to discuss here the day- to-day clinical work with the adolescent in detail. Instead, I will discuss only those areas which are related specifically to the “is- sues" which I defined at the beginning of the paper, thatis, to the Psychoanalyst’s attitude to the adolescent who seeks help and whose developmental breakdown has manifested itself by “sex- ual abnormality. When I see stich an adolescent for assessment or for the possi- bility of treatment, I explain to him (either at the beginning or carly on in treatment) what my view is about “sexual abnormal- ity.” T explain in detail to hit (and if necessary I see the adoles- centa number of times for this) why I consider his present choice of sexuality as being a sign of the presence of serious trouble in himself, and that I will try to help him understand what its mean- ing is for him, and how it may have come about. The adolescent knows, at the same time, that itis not my wish or my intention to try remorselessly to take away his choice, but that treatment does mean questioning the choice, understanding its meaning, and possibly changing. If, after this, the adolescent insists that his sexual life and Object choices must at no time be discussed or questioned, but that we must concentrate only on one or another area of hisgo Moses Laufer problems, I choose not to accept to treat him. Lam aware of the view held by some colleagues that treatment might ultimately lead to this examination and understanding, and that there is no heed at the start or early on in treatment to take such a definite view. My past experience has shown that many adolescents who come for treatment expect either to be fooled or forced to sub- mit, and who then may continue in treatment because of the transference relationship which has been established but with- out any lasting therapeutic work going on. ‘Those adoles- cents whose sexual lives include “sexual abnormality” very often secretly feel that they have been fooled or cheated, and are con- vinced that the oedipal object, represented now by the psychoanalyst, wants them to remain as they are. Although this view can be understood during treatment, it is important from the start to separate oneself from this expectation, and to enable the adolescent to choose to accept treatment or not But when I say that the adolescent can choose treatment or not, itis not simply that I allow the adolescent to decide totally on his own. I discuss with the adolescent my views about his present life, and 1 tell him why there is reason to be worried and why he should consider having treatment. I also make it clear from the start that I do judge, and that this judgment has to do with his present and future life. Adolescents may find it extremely dif- ficult to separate my judgment about normality or abnormality from the judgment of right or wrong, good or bad. Within the transference, however, the meaning of right or wrong, good or bad becomes a central factor and is something which has existed in the adolescent's life for years past, especially from puberty onward. But to imply that I do not judge is equivalent to avoiding the issue of normality or abnormality, breakdown or not. B yond this, however, the adolescent is certainly aware of the fact that a judgment is being made, and for this not to be acknowl: edged from the start of treatment represents for the adolescent both a collusion and an opting out by the analyst From the start of treatment, I acknowledge the extent of the adolescent's suffering, even though the adolescent may insist that his life is proceeding well. Often, the adolescent will feel that to admit to any suffering is to risk losing the only things or people who offer any pleasure or who make him feel worth= The Adolescent's Sexual Development Agi while. This anxiety has to be acknowledged from the start, but at the same time it is also critical to acknowledge the extent of the adolescent's aloneness and inner emptiness. The adolescent is aware, from the start, that I view his present life and his choices as signs of the presence of severe trouble within himself, and he knows that for me to be neutral cannot be true. BIBLIOGRAPHY Fae, 5. (1M), Thrce essays on the theo of sexta. Si, 7125-248 (1g) ay tens the prt plate y sexe he set the neuen 8 P21 aT ee 91, Female sexual. Sy 2229-28, Coin Gut 1962) goes nd supeseyo In: The Deelopmet of the Mand London: Hogarth Press 1965 pp 317-388 Laurent (070), Thecenratmasen bao fantasy he sedstolscence: Pc Stuy 3127-988 (igre), The naar of aaleeen poly andthe pechoamalyi procsh Pdoal Sud Chil 39907. ‘last, dolescent reakdnnalshe ransferencenewsos FJ Pacha 6251-38 Lnivatne th 97, 2751-775 anal, Aso, 27-751 775. c waning of the oedipus complex. J. Amer. Psycho-