In The Beginning.

Object Relations Theory.

 

Object relations theory began during the 1940’s, mainly through the efforts of British psychologists Ronald Fairbairn and D.W. Winnicott, but also including the rather more extreme positions of Melanie Klein and Anna Freud.[i]  Object relations theory evolved from Freudian theories of child development and family relationships, and concepts regarding the use of objects to satisfy drives.  Fairbairn and Winnicott were particularly interested in the development of the ego or self through relationships with other ‘objects’ - the object in this context being the mother, and the ‘object relationship’ being the transformational mother/child relationship. Object relations theory takes a particular interest in the effect that this early relationship has on the later formation of internalised objects, and the way in which faulty infant object relationships lead to neurosis later in life.  Object relations psychoanalysts are interested in the inner images of self and others and how these are manifest in interpersonal situations, and are consequently less concerned about interpreting internal imagery (dreams) than investigating the externalised interpersonal effects.

 

Melanie Klein developed Sigmund Freud’s concepts to include two rather negative routes to maturation, through the development of either a depressive position or paranoid-schizoid position, related respectively to either Eros or Thanatos.  The element which ultimately dominated the child’s personality is thought to be entirely dependant on parenting style.  Klein considered aggression to be an important issue in child development, and postulated that small children are too young to understand that love and hate can be felt for the same object, leading them to relate to ‘part objects’; for example to the mother’s breast as separate to the mother, because the mother frustrates the child whereas the breast does not.  Melanie Klein’s theories were strongly opposed by those of Anna Freud, (daughter of Sigmund), which equally blamed the mother for a child’s pathology, but with less emphasis on child aggression.[ii]  Both groups were attempting to establish their theories as Sigmund Freud’s successors. history.  D.W. Winnicott belonged to a ‘middle group’, with Scottish theorist Ronald Fairbairn.  Winnicott took a moderate and positive position with his idea that the appropriate method of infant care is the ‘good enough’ mother or environment.  Rather than there being a ‘perfect’ mothering method, healthy normal children develop quite adequately from ‘good enough’ care from an inevitably imperfect mother. A balance is achieved between neglect and over-possessive fussing, sufficient to provide for an infant’s needs, but allowing for personal development through minimal control.  His emphasis was on the child/ carer relationship and his theory of ‘transitional objects’ explained the emotional attachment to familiar objects by small children as attempts to stave off anxiety during periods of stress and separation from the mother.[iii]