McCarthy J B
St. John's University, USA.
Am J Psychoanal. 1995 Sep;55(3):245-67. doi: 10.1007/BF02741972.
The foremost implication of the Freudian theories of adolescence has been that the analyst enters into an alliance with the patient's developmental process. During sessions, stock is routinely taken of the adolescent patient's defenses and drive fixations. The interpersonal and object relations theories of adolescents' character formation varied with each other and also with the assumptions of classical Freudian metapsychology. Yet, Sullivan, Fairbairn, and Winnicott all stressed relatedness in character formation. They each urged that the attitudes of the actual person in significant relationships, as well as the internal representations of the self and the object, shaped the character tendencies of the child or adolescent. Sullivan was very outspoken about his belief that there could be no uniformly valid theory of character, because people are unique. However, for Sullivan, the needs for the validation of self-worth, and for freedom from anxiety, were universal stimuli for the increasing organization of character trends. In both interpersonal theory and object relations theories, dissociative processes were of paramount importance as defensive operations. Dissociation by the adolescent resulted in further instances of ego splitting (for Fairbairn), of the bad me (for Sullivan), and of the false self (for Winnicott). Fairbairn, and to some extent Winnicott, used the language of classical Freudian theory in order to shape an object relations theory of adolescent development. In spite of their theoretical differences, Sullivan, Fairbairn, and Winnicott spoke with a singular voice in dismissing the exclusive significance of libidinal fixations in character consolidation. I now wish to review Freud's case of Dora as an addendum to this short critical appraisal. The analysis of Dora readily lends itself to a discussion of the confluence of the psychoanalytical models' clinical theories. Dora's unfortunate experience in treatment offered a compelling example of the precariousness of adolescents' adjustment in the midst of developmental and family turmoil.
弗洛伊德的青春期理论最主要的影响在于，分析师要与患者的发展过程结成联盟。在治疗过程中，通常会审视青少年患者的防御机制和驱力固着情况。青少年性格形成的人际关系理论和客体关系理论彼此不同，也与经典弗洛伊德元心理学的假设有所差异。然而，沙利文、费尔贝恩和温尼科特都强调性格形成中的关联性。他们都主张，重要关系中真实人物的态度，以及自我和客体的内在表征，塑造了儿童或青少年的性格倾向。沙利文直言不讳地表示，他认为不存在统一有效的性格理论，因为人是独特的。然而，对沙利文来说，对自我价值确认的需求以及摆脱焦虑的需求，是性格倾向日益组织化的普遍刺激因素。在人际关系理论和客体关系理论中，解离过程作为防御操作都至关重要。青少年的解离会导致自我分裂（费尔贝恩的观点）、坏我（沙利文的观点）和假我（温尼科特的观点）的进一步实例。费尔贝恩，以及在某种程度上温尼科特，运用经典弗洛伊德理论的语言来构建青少年发展的客体关系理论。尽管他们在理论上存在差异，但沙利文、费尔贝恩和温尼科特在摒弃力比多固着在性格巩固中的唯一重要性这一点上却看法一致。我现在想回顾一下弗洛伊德的多拉案例，作为这个简短批判性评价的补充。对多拉的分析很容易引发对精神分析模型临床理论融合的讨论。多拉在治疗中的不幸经历为青少年在发展和家庭动荡中调整的不稳定提供了一个引人注目的例子。
