Burland J A
Philadelphia Psychoanalytic Institute, Pennsylvania.
Psychiatr Clin North Am. 1994 Dec;17(4):731-42.
Clinical data suggest that Kernberg's description of splitting as a defense mechanism is useful in conceptualizing the psychological consequences of abuse in childhood in certain patients. The splitting in these patients is similar to his description of splitting in borderline patients in that it compartmentalizes and sequesters certain overwhelming and painful ego states accompanying negative introjects of the betraying primary object and the betrayed self. These sequestered introjects, furthermore, act as automatons, generating behaviors that arbitrarily re-enact their content even though the patient remains consciously unaware of their historical meaning. Another consequence of the sequestration of these traumatic introjects is that their affects retain their initial power and primitive quality, unmodulated by the usual homogenizing process that is a part of the synthesis of part-object introjects into whole-object introjects; the sequestration, therefore, often painful in itself, must nevertheless be rigidly maintained lest traumatic anxiety in the face of overwhelming affects be re-experienced. Shengold calls the sequence of events that results in this brittle but stubborn painful constriction of the personality "soul murder." He borrowed the phrase from Freud who used it to refer to what Schreber had suffered at the hands of his sadistic father. That phrase--"soul murder"--may sound melodramatic, but it powerfully conveys what these patients communicate of their experience of themselves. As with Kernberg's patients, the defensive splitting serves to protect the positive introjects. These patients fear their negative introjects, even more than they feel uncomfortable about the split. They fear their desperate rage will destroy their love objects, and leave them feeling abandoned and hating themselves. As one of my patients put it: "I fear that my destructive anger will leave me all alone in a sea of rubble of my own making." In the transference, he feared destroying me and our positive bond. In these cases it would seem that the turning to splitting occurred at a later age than it does with Kernberg's borderline patients. His proposition is that the developmentally normal "splitting," related to the undifferentiation of the infantile ego, persists as a defensive splitting, perhaps as a consequence of a consistently derailed mother-child dialogue; whereas in my patients it would seem that the normal developmental splitting had waned as ego differentiation proceeded, but that in the face of overwhelming traumata at perhaps 3 or 4 years of age, the primitive defense was invoked regressively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
临床数据表明,克恩伯格对分裂作为一种防御机制的描述,有助于理解某些患者童年期受虐的心理后果。这些患者的分裂与他对边缘型患者分裂的描述相似,因为它将伴随背叛的主要客体和被背叛的自我的负面内射物而产生的某些压倒性的、痛苦的自我状态进行了划分和隔离。此外,这些被隔离的内射物像自动装置一样运作,产生一些行为,随意重演其内容,即使患者在意识层面上仍未意识到它们的历史意义。这些创伤性内射物被隔离的另一个后果是,它们的情感保留了其最初的力量和原始特质,未被通常将部分客体内射物整合为整体客体内射物过程中的那种均质化过程所调节;因此,这种隔离本身往往很痛苦,但仍必须严格维持,以免再次体验到面对压倒性情感时的创伤性焦虑。申戈尔德将导致这种人格脆弱却顽固的痛苦收缩的一系列事件称为“灵魂谋杀”。他从弗洛伊德那里借用了这个短语,弗洛伊德用它来指施雷伯在其虐待狂父亲手中所遭受的痛苦。“灵魂谋杀”这个短语听起来可能有些夸张,但它有力地传达了这些患者所表达的自我体验。与克恩伯格的患者一样,防御性分裂起到保护积极内射物的作用。这些患者害怕他们的负面内射物,甚至超过他们对分裂感到的不适。他们担心自己绝望的愤怒会毁掉他们的爱的对象,让他们感到被抛弃并厌恶自己。正如我的一位患者所说:“我担心我毁灭性的愤怒会让我独自置身于自己制造的一片废墟之中。”在移情中,他害怕毁掉我以及我们积极的关系。在这些案例中,转向分裂似乎比克恩伯格的边缘型患者发生的年龄要晚。他的观点是,与婴儿自我未分化相关的、发展上正常的“分裂”,作为一种防御性分裂持续存在,这可能是母婴对话持续脱轨的结果;而在我的患者中,正常的发展性分裂似乎随着自我分化的进行而减弱,但在面对大约三四岁时压倒性的创伤时,这种原始防御被退行性地调用。(摘要截选至400字)