4.3 Article

Somatic Retreats: Seeking Refuge in Your Own Body

期刊

PSYCHOANALYTIC PSYCHOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION-AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/pap0000494

关键词

autistic objects; autistic shapes; somatic retreats

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this article, the author examines Frances Tustin's concept of autistic objects and shapes in relation to contemporary trends in psychoanalysis and understanding of autism spectrum disorders. The author proposes the concept of somatic retreat as a term that aligns Tustin's views with psychoanalytic developmental psychology and neurodevelopmental understandings of autism. The article provides examples and a clinical case to support the concept.
In this article, the author attempts to look at the concept of autistic objects and autistic shapes formulated by Frances Tustin from the perspective of contemporary trends in both psychoanalysis and the psychiatric understanding of autism spectrum disorders. The author highlight the theoretical modifications introduced by Tustin and propose a perspective that has the potential to bring Tustin's views into alignment with both psychoanalytically oriented developmental psychology and with neurodevelopmental understandings of autism spectrum disorder. Against this background, the author propose the concept of somatic retreat as a clearly delineated term that reflects Tustin's idea of a person's defensive withdrawal from the outside world to protect themselves from awareness of their own separateness, fragility, and mortality by immersing themselves in the world of sensual self-stimulation. The author present examples of somatic retreat from everyday life, and then describe a clinical example in more detail. The author way of working with the patient was based in part on the recommendation of Lombardi, who, while appreciating the achievements of Tustin, emphasized the need for a more radical focus on the functions of self-stimulation, and not on its symbolic meaning.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据