Cierpka M
Psychiatr Prax. 1986 May;13(3):94-103.
With a detailed case report of a patient suffering from kleptomania with neurotic causes, we are trying to obtain more detailed information about such patients' psychodynamics. The case history is preceded by a discussion of the concept of kleptomania. We give a list of the descriptive-empirical papers which prove that one cannot speak of an independent clinical picture, but rather that the kleptomaniac actions may be a symptom of multiple causes. Following the case history, the psychodynamics of this patient is discussed and compared with the existing interpretations, based on depth psychology, of other patients. We confirm the opinion expressed by other authors that kleptomania with neurotic causes is to be classified amongst the impulse neuroses. We criticize the fact that in the presently existing psychodynamic interpretation the sexual symbolism of the theft actions and of the stolen goods themselves has been overvalued. In an ego-psychological consideration, we then draw the attention to these patients' desperate and greedy search for an object which helps them to maintain control over their own destructive aggressiveness and at the same time preserves the object. Subsequently, we suggest distinguishing between two groups of kleptomaniac patients who can be differentiated with regard to their symptoms and psychodynamics. Some kleptomaniacs seem to be "fixed" on special objects when stealing. Others give the impression of being "de-differentiated" by the way they steal. In the latter group the structural ego weakness is the most important feature. These psychodynamic considerations are included in the forensicpsychiatric discussion of kleptomania at the end of this paper. Several criteria are presented, e.g., the symptomatic character of the patients' behaviour, the compulsion to repeat, the progredience of the symptoms, the de-differentiation of personality, which are to contribute to the evaluation of the independence and the automatism of the action with regard to the possibility of a patients' ego control.
通过一份患有神经症性病因盗窃癖患者的详细病例报告,我们试图获取有关此类患者心理动力学的更详细信息。在病例史之前,先对盗窃癖的概念进行了讨论。我们列出了一些描述性实证论文,这些论文证明不能说存在独立的临床表现,而是盗窃癖行为可能是多种原因导致的症状。病例史之后,讨论了该患者的心理动力学,并与基于深度心理学对其他患者的现有解释进行了比较。我们认同其他作者的观点,即神经症性病因的盗窃癖应归类于冲动性神经症。我们批评了当前现有心理动力学解释中,盗窃行为和被盗物品本身的性象征意义被过度重视这一事实。从自我心理学的角度考虑,我们提请注意这些患者不顾一切且贪婪地寻找一个客体,这个客体有助于他们控制自身的破坏性攻击性,同时又能保护该客体。随后,我们建议区分两组盗窃癖患者,这两组患者在症状和心理动力学方面有所不同。一些盗窃癖患者在偷窃时似乎“执着于”特殊物品。另一些患者则因偷窃方式给人一种“去分化”的印象。在后一组中,自我结构的弱点是最重要的特征。本文末尾的盗窃癖法医精神病学讨论中纳入了这些心理动力学考量。提出了几个标准,例如患者行为的症状特征、重复的强迫性、症状的进展、人格的去分化,这些标准有助于评估行为相对于患者自我控制可能性的独立性和自主性。