Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Freud Little Hans

    Uploaded by

    Deeptesh Sen
    45 views22 pages
    hans

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    hans

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    45 views22 pages

    Freud Little Hans

    Uploaded by

    Deeptesh Sen
    hans

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 22
    fy Analysis of a phobia in a five-year-old i boy Sigmuad reba (1909) 7 tican Freud Lilnary, Vol. 8, Cave Histories 1 (1977 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT Freud's work represents many things (often just referred to as ‘psychoanalysis"). 1 is a theory of personality, personality development (hence, a theory of child developmen, including moral), a theory of motivation and dreams, as well as being an approach the Weaunent of (certain kinds of) mental disorder, It is useful to refer to all the theoretical aspects of his work as ‘psychoanalytic theory’, and to the related method of psychotherapy as ‘psychoanalysis. The five-year-old boy with whom this case study is concerned is called Hans: hence “The case of Little Hans’. This is an important study because of the claims Freud made for it, namely, that it confirms the Oedipal theory already set out in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905). The case study gave the abstract theory a personality (Ward, 2001). Italso demons with, say, the learning theory explanation: see Chapters 16, fates Freud's explanation of the origin of phobias (in contrast dl 30) Little Hans is also the only child patient which Freud reported on, and this assumes particular significance in the light of a standard criticism of Freud's theorizing, namely, that he built up a whole theory of child development around his (almost) exclusive treatment of adult patients, AIM AND NATURE OF THE STUDY The study reports the findings of the pyychoanalvtic weatment of a five-year-old boy. In fact, the actual account of the analysis comprises the middle section of the reportas a whole, the others being Introduction, in which a great deal of background information is prosided. and Discussion, The stmmmary that follows incorporates elements of all three sections, The kind of study being reported is a casesbudy. sometimes referred to, misleadingly. «rave history, The latter is veally just the collection of background information asa necessary prefiminary to the primary ain of the studs, which is to understand andlor eat the Subject” of the study. Most casestudies take place in a eliviral contest: thes LZ. sigmukd Frew Ty ee are reports of attemprs by doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists and others in the caring professions to help those needing professional assistance, due to brain a ie aby confused with the clinical interviewas used by, for exa mage /injury, mental disorder, a gen ormality, or some other problem. (This is not to be nple, Piaget.) As important as may be for the patient concemed, the case-study is usually intended to throw light on the problem under investigation (in this case, phobias asa form of neurotic disorder) or, in the case of brain-damaged patients, ce Pychological functioning (e.g. how memory works). The actual collection of dats on take place ina number of different ways, such as psychological testing, observation, and even experimentation, Nn aspects of normal In Freud’s case (as in most ease-studies), there is no real distinetion to be made between the casestudy as a form of helping and as a piece of scientific resesech fa Point made by Freud himself in defence of the criticism that the method is unse ‘entific: see Evaluation section below). {This, in fact, appears in three parts: Introduction, Case History and Analysis, ond Discussion, The summary that follows is based on the Discussion, But also includes Material from the Introduction, and Case History and Analysis.] PART 1 ‘My Impression is that the picture of a child’s sexual life presented in this observa: tion of Little Hons agrees very well with the account | gove of it (bosing my views Pon Psychoanalytic examinations of adults) in my Three essays [on the Theory of Sexuality, 19054). But before going into the details of this agreement, 1 must des with two obiections which will be raised against my making use of the present analysis for this purpose, The first objection is to the effect that Hans wos not a rormol child, but (0s events - the illness itself, in fact ~ showed) had a predispost. tion to neurosis, and was a young ‘degenerate’; it would be illegitimate, therefore, {o apply to other normal children conclusions which might perhaps be true of him 1 Shall postpone consideration of this objection. According to the second, and more UncomPromising, objection, en analysis of a child conducted by his father, who ‘went fo work instilled by my theoretical views and infected with my prejudices, Imust be entirely devoid of any obiective worth. A chitd, it will be said, is necessor. ily highly suagestibie, and in regard to no one, perhaps, more than to his ona father: he will allow anything to be forced upon him, out of aratitude to his father for taking so much notice of him. | do not shore the view, wich is ot present fashionable, that assertions made by children are invariably arbitrary and untrustworthy. The arbitrary has no existence Key Stublies in Ra}chology _ fra _) THE STUDY in mental life, The untrustworthiness of the assertions of grown-up people is due to the predominance of their preiudice. For the rest, even children do not lie without a reason. If we reject Little Han’s statement root and branch, we should certainly be doing him a grave injustice. On the contrary, we can quite clearly distinguish from fone another the occasions on which he was falsifying the facts or keeping them bock under the compelling force of a resistance, the occasions on which, being undecided himself, he agreed with his father (so that what he said must not be taken as evidence), and the occasions on which, freed from every pressure, he burst into @ flood of information about what was really going on inside him ond bout things which, until then, no one but himself had known. Statements made by adults offer no greater certainty. It is a regrettable fact that no account of a psy: choanalysis can reproduce the impressions received by the analyst as he conducts it, and that a final sense of conviction can never be obtained from reading about it, but only from directly experiencing it. But this disability attaches in an equal degree to analyses of adults. Little Hans is described by his parents as a cheerful, straightforward child, and so he should have been, considering the education given him by his parents, which consisted essentially in the omission of our usual educational sins. It wos with the outbreak of illness and during the analysis that discrepancies began to make their ‘appearance between what he said and what he thought; this wos portly because unconscious material, which he was unable to master all at once, wos forcing itself upon him, and partly because the content of his thoughts provoked reservations on is Parents. It is my unbiased opinion that these dif- ficulties, too, turned out no greater than in many analyses of adults, account of his relation to It is true that, during the analysis, Hans had to be told many things that he could not say himself, that he had to be presented with thoughts which he had so for shown no signs of possessing, and that his attention had to be turned in the direction from which his father was expecting something to come. This detracts from the evi dential value of the analysis, but the procedure is the same in every case. For 0 psychoanalysis is not an impartial scientific investigation, but a therapeutic measure. Its essence Is not to prove anything, but merely to alter something. Ino psychoanalysis, the physician always gives his patient the conscious anticipatory ideas by the help of which he is put in a position to recognize and to grasp the unconscious material. It is true that a child, on account of the small development of his intellectual systems, reauires especially energetic assistance. And yet, even during the analysis, the small patient gives evidence of enough independence to ‘acquit him upon the charge of ‘suggestion’ The first trait in Little Hons which con be regarded as part of his sexual life was quite peculiarly lively interest in his ‘widdler’: an organ deriving its name from that one of its two functions which, scorcely the less important of the two, is not to be eluded in the nursery. This interest aroused in him the spirit of enquiry, and he — aL Sigrwvhe. Fret ee Lok thus discovered that the presence or absence of a widdler made it possible to differ- entiote between cnimate and inanimate objects. He assumed that all animate obiects were like himself, ond possessed this important bodily organ; he observed thot it was present in the larger animals, suspected that this was so too in both his parents, and was not detered by the evidence of his own eyes from authenticating the fact in his new-born sister: yows up, tl got igaer all ight Cone might also say thot it would have been foo shattering a blow to his ‘We/tan- ‘schavung’ if he had had to make up his mind to forgo the presence of this organ in 9 being similor to him; it would have been as though it were being torn away from himself, It was probably on this account that a threat of his mother’s which was concerned precisely with the loss of his widdler, wos hastily dismissed from his thoughts, and only succeeded in making its effects apparent at a later period. When he wos 3%, his mether found him wih his hand en is penis. She threotened him in these words‘ you do tha, | shall vend fo Dr A. to cutoff your widdler. And then what l you wide wih? Hans: ‘Wik my bottom ‘The reason for his mother’s intervention had been that he used to like giving himself feelings of pleasure by touching his member: the little boy had begun to practise the commonest - and most normal - form of auto-erotic sexual activity ‘The pleasure which a person takes in his own sexual organ may become ossociated with scopophilia (or sexual pleasure in looking) in its active and passive forms, in o manner which has been very aptly described by Alfred Adler (1908) as ‘confluence of instincts’. So Little Hans began to try to get a sight of other people’s widdlersi his sexual curiosity developed, and at the same time he liked to exhibit his own widdler. One of his dreams, dating from the beginning of his period of repression, expressed a wish that one of his little gir! friends should assist him in widdling, that is: thot she should shore the spectacle. The dream shows, therefore, that up unt! then, this wish had subsisted unrepressed, and later in formation confirmed the fac thot he had been in the habit of gratifying it. The active side of his sexua scopophilia soon became associated in him with a definite theme. He repeated! expressed both to his father and his mother his regret that he had never yet seet their widdlers, and it was probably the need for making a comparison whic impelled him to do this. The ego is always the standard by which one measures th: ‘external world; one learns to understand it by means of a constant comparison wit! oneself. Hans had observed that large animals had widdlers that were correspond inaly larger than his; he consequently suspected that the same was true of hi parents, and was anxious to make sure of this. His mother, he thought, mus THE STUDY THE STUDY certainly have a widdler ‘like a horse’. He was then prepared with the comforting reflection that his widdler would grow with him. It was as though the child’s wish to be bigger had been concentrated on his genitals. Thus, in Little Hans’ sexual constitution, the genital zone was from the outset the one among his erotogenic zones which afforded him the most intense pleasure. The only other similar pleasure of which he gave evidence was excretory pleasure, the pleasure attached to the orifices through which micturition and evacuation of the bowels are affected. In his final fantasy of bliss, with which his illness was over- come, he imagined he had children, whom he took to the WC, whom he made to widdle, whose behinds he wiped; for whom, in short, he did ‘everything one con do with children’. It therefore seems impossible to avoid the assumption that, during the period when he himself had been looked after as an infant, these same pertor: mances had been the source of pleasurable sensations for him. At this juncture, it is as well to emphasize at once the fact that, during his phobio, there was an unmistakable repression of these two, well-developed components of his sexual activity. He was ashamed of micturiting before other people, accused himself of putting his finger to his widdler, made efforts to give up masturbating, ‘and showed disgust at ‘lumf* and ‘widdle’, and everything that reminded him of them. In his fantasy of looking after his children, he undid this latter repression, In his attitude towards his fother and mother, Hans really was a little Oedipus who wanted to have his father ‘out of the way’, to get rid of him, so that he might be alone with his beautiful mother and sleep with her. This wish had originated during his summer holidays, when the alternating presence and absence of his father had drawn Hans’ attention fo the condition upon which depended the intimacy with his mother which he longed for. At that time the form taken by the wish had been merely that his father should ‘go away’, and at a later stage It became possible for his fear of being bitten by a white horse to attach itself directly into this form of the wish. But subsequently (probably not until they had moved back to Vienna, where his father’s absences were no longer to be reckoned on), the wish had token the form that his father should be permanently away, that he should be ‘dead’. The fear which sprang from this death-wish against his father, and which may thus be soid to have had a normal motive, formed the chief obstacle to the anolysis. ‘The most important influence upon the course of Hans’ psychosexual development was the birth of a baby sister when he was 3% years old. That event accentuated his relations to his parents, and gave him some insoluble problems to think about; ond later, as he watched the way in which the infant was looked after, the memory traces of his own earliest experiences of pleasure were revived in him EE — & SigmubdFreud a LA i that m ofcid Velden, 30 | coun’ alin. i's only in the big oy in ery dropping you inthe ve ld er qo of hey co thal Han Feud Sl In the analysis he gave undisguised expression to his death-wish against his sister. His inner conscience did not consider this wish so wicked as the analagous one against his father, but it is clear that in his unconscious he treated both persons in the same way, because they both took his mummy away from him, and interfered the rs eg yh he ke nad cher ves, led wh tlead or iq about he 1 sdler’. Evceth h ne come est 1 jealous ch-he new anal, ond wrbenecaet a6 7 he sa lovly 7 ree decloes scerohay: 8 sh yer Basing the Ft ; fr Bs fover he ies heard saying: ‘Bat dor : Affection for his sister might come later, but his first attitude was hostility. From that time forward, fear that yet another boby might orrive found @ place among his conscious thoughts. In the neurosis, his hostility, already suppressed, was represen- ted by a special fear, a fear of the bath. | ogked bia alii ond ha > a 2 = oO x - | with his being alone with her. Rs in cyger > a > er o w x - I PARE RE One day, while Hans was in the street, he was seized with an attack of anxiety. He could not yet say what it was he was ofraid of, but at the very beginning of this ‘anxiety state, he betrayed to his father his motive for being ill; the gain from ilness. He wanted to stay with his mother and to coax with her; his recollection ‘that he hod also been separated from her at the time of the baby’s birth may also, «s his father suggests, have contributed to his longing. It-soon became evident that his anxiety was no longer reconvertible into longing; he was ofraid even when his mother went with him. In the meantime, indications appeared of what it was to which his libido (now changed into anxiety) had become attached. He gave expres- jon fo the quite specific fear that a white horse would bite him. In the early days of his illness, when the anxiety was at its highest pitch, he expressed a fear that ‘the horse’ll come into the room’, and it was this that helped me so much towards understanding his condition. ‘The first thing we learn is that the outbreak of the anxiety state was by no means so sudden os appeared at first sight. A few days ea anxiety dream to the effect that his mother had gone away, and that now he had no mother to coax with. the child had woken from an But the beginnings of this psychological situation go back further still. During the preceding summer Hans had had similar moods of mingled longing and apprehen sion, in which he had said similar things, and at that time they had secured him the ‘advantage of being taken by his mother into her bed. We may assume that since then Hans had been in a state of intensified sexual excitement, the object of which was hi mother. The intensity of this excitement wos shown by his two attempts at seducing hhis mother (the second of which occurred just before the outbreak of his anxiety). Hans, 4% This morning Hons wos given his esl daily bath s mother, ond oherwards died ond powdered, As his me wos powdering found his pen and ta s2id: "Why don't you put your finger here? Because thot would be priggi Who's tho? Pr Because i'sn Hans laughing Bul #2 greot fun fond he found on inci | channel of discharge fri by thal woy obtoining gratification. We have already described the child's behaviour at the beginning of his anxiety, os well as the first content which he assigned to it, namely, that a horse would bite him, 1 was at this point that the first piece of therapy was interposed. His parents represented to him that his anxiety was the result of masturbation, and encouraged Sigmuhd Fs THE STUDY os Lo 36a, him to breok himself of the hobit. | took care that, when they spoke to him, great cirose wos told upon his affection for his mother, for that was what he was trying to replace by his fear of horses. This fist intervention brought a slight improvement, but the ground was soon lost again during « period of physical illness. Hans" con- dition remoined unchanged. Soon afterwards, he traced back his fear of being bitten by e horse to an impression he had received at Gmunden. A father had addressed ve child on her departure with these words of warning: ‘Don’t put your finger t0 the ‘unite horse or i'l bile you'. The words “don’t put your finger fo', which Hans used ‘i reporting this warning, resembled the form of words in which the worning ‘igeinat masturbation had been formed. If seemed at first, therefore, as though Hone’ parents were right in supposing thot what he was frightened of wos his own masturbatory indulgence. But the whole nexus remained loose, and it seemed to be merely by chonce that horses had become his busbear | had expressed a suspicion that Hans’ repressed wish might now be that he wanted ot all costs to see his mother’s widdler. As his behaviour to a new maid fitted in with this hypothesis, his father gave him his first piece of enlightenment, namely, that women have no widdlers. He reacted to this first effort at helping him by pro- ducing a fantasy that he had seen his mother showing her widdler. This fantasy, ‘and a remark made by him in conversation to the effect that his widdler was ‘fixed in, of course’, allow us our first glimpse into the patient’s unconscious mental processes. The fact was that the threat of castration made to him by his mother some 15 months earlier was now having a deferred effect upon him. For his fantasy thot his mother was doing the same as he had done was intended to serve as a piece of self-iustification; it was a protective or defensive fantasy. Hoving partly mastered his castration complex, he was now able to communicate his wishes in regard to his mother. He did so, in what was still a distorted form, by means of the fantasy of the two giraffes. Hone: Inthe night here was 2 bg gia inthe room ond crumpled one, ond he big one valid oul becouse Hook the crumpled one away fom i. Then it stoppe caling ou, and ten | sot down on top of he crumpled one. Hpszaledl; Wha? A cumpled Hons You. {He quell eiched a piece of poper, crumpled i! yp and soict twos crumpled hike that f ‘And you sat down on top ofthe crumpled gitae? How? [He agoin showed me by sting down on the ground t Why did you come into our oom? Hons | dom knw myst k Were you akaid? He No, af course nat rs No, tid the gilt Key Stubiies in Ps}chology A970 I — His father recognized the fantasy as 0 reproduction of the bedroom scene which used fo take place in the morning between the boy and his parents; and he avickly stripped the underlying wish of the disguise which it still wore. The boy's father and mother were the two giroffes. The giraffe fantosy strengthened a conviction which had already begun to form in my mind when Hans expressed his fear that ‘the horse’l! come into the room’, and | ‘thought the right moment had now arrived for informing him that he wos afraid of his father because he himself nourished iealous and hostile wishes against him. In telling him this, | had partly interpreted his fear of horses for hi be his father - whom he had good internal reasons for fearing. Certain details of which Hans had shown he was afraid, the black on horses’ mouths and the things in front of their eyes (the moustaches and eyeglasses which ore the privilege of o grown-up man), seemed to me to have been directly transposed from his father onto the horses. ~ the horse must THE STUDY ———__—___—___-f@ By enlightening Hans on this subiect, | had cleared away his most powertul resis tance against allowing his unconscious thoughts to be made conscious, for his father was himself acting as his physician. The worst of the attack was now over, there was @ plentiful flow of material; the little patient summoned up courage to descril the details of his phobia, and soon began to take an active share in the conduc! of the analysis. It was only then thot we learnt what the obiects and impressions were of whic" Hans was ofraid. He was not only afraid of horses biting him ~ he was soon silent upon that paint ~ but also of carts, of furniture vans, and of buses (their cc auality being, as presently became clear, that they were all heavily load: horses that started moving, of horses that looked big and heavy, and of hors drove quickly. The meaning of these specifications was explained by Hans hin he was afraid of horses falling down, and conseauently incorporated in his folling down. everything that seemed likely to facilitate thei ~ ibe {It was at this stage of the analysis that he recalled the event, insignificant in itself, which immediately preceded the outbreak of the illness, and may no doubt be regarded as the precipitating cause of its outbreak. He went for a walk with his mother, and saw @ bus horse fall down and kick about with its feet. This made a great impression on him. He was terrified, ond thought the horse wos dead; and fram that time on he thought that all horses would fall down. His father pointed out to him that when he saw the horse fall down he must have thought of him, his father, and have wished that he might fall down in the same way and be dead. Hans did not dispute this interpretation, ond a little while later he played a ame consist ing of biting his father, and so showed that he accepted the theory of his having identified his father with the horse he was afraid of. From that time forward, his behaviour to his father was unconstrained and fearless, and in fact c trifle over: bearing. Nevertheless, his fear of horses persisted; nor wos it yet clear through what chain of association the horse’s falling down had stirred up his unconscious wishes. Quite unexpectedly, and certainly without any prompting from his father, Hans now began to be occupied with the ‘lumf* complex and to show disgust at things that reminded him of evacuating his bowels. We learn that, formerly, Hans hod been in the habit of insisting upon accompanying his mother to the WC, and that he had revived this custom with his friend Berta, at «a time when she was filling his mother’s place, until the fact became known and he was forbidden to do so. In the end, his father went into the lumf symbolism, and recognized that there was an analogy between a heavily loaded cart and a body loaded with faeces, between the way a cart drives out through a gateway ond the way in which faeces leave the body, and so on. THE STUDY i Without any wotring, a were, Hans produced @ new fantasy. Lateran, he began: ‘Caddy, thought something: | wos inthe rd unscrewed i. Then he h, and then the plumber come ok 0 big bever and Henceforward, the material brought up in the analysis far outstripped our powers of understanding it. It was not until later that it was possible to guess that this was @ remoulding of a fantasy of procreation, distorted by anxiety. The big bath of water, In which Hans imagined himself, was his mother’s womb, the ‘borer’ which his father had, from the first, recognized as a penis, owed its mention to its connection with ‘being born’. The interpretation that we are obliged to give to the fantasy will of course, sound very curious: ‘With your big penis you “bored” me (i.e, “gave birth to me”) and put me in my mother’s womb’. For the moment, however, the fantasy eluded interpretation, and merely served Hans as a starting point from which to continue giving information. Hons showed fear of being given a bath in the big bath, and this fear was once more 1 composite one. One part of it escaped us as yet, but the other part could at once ey ey Stublies in Psychology | S372 _ 4 7 | F_% eetdote in connection with his boby sister hoving ner bath. Hons contsne ty | having wished that his mother might drop the child while she wos being givin nor bath, so that she should die, His own anxiety while he was having his both was @ fear of retribution for this evil wish, and of being punished by the same thing hop pening to him. Hans now left the subiect of lumf, and passed on directly to Hat of his baby sister. We may well imagine what this iuxtapesition signified ~ aotning less, in foct, than that little Hanna was a lumf herself = that all babies were lumi, and were born like lumfs, We can now recognize that all furniture vans, dravs ang buses were only stork-box carts, and were only of interest fo Hans as being sym bolic representations of presnancy, and that when @ heavy or heavily loaded horse fell down, he can have seen in it only one thing: @ childbirth, @ delivery. Thus, the falling horse was not only his dying father, but also his mother in childbirth And at this point Hans gave us e surprise. He had noticed his mother’s preanancy and had, ot any rate after the confinement, pieced the facts of the case together: without telling onyone, itis true, and perhoos without being able to tel! anyone. All that could be seen at the time was thot, immediately after the delivery, he hod taken up on extremely sceptical attitude towards everything that might be sup posed fo point to the presence of the stork. But that ~ in complete contradiction to > his official speeches ho knew In his unconscious where the baby come from ond a where it had been before, is proved beyond a show of doubt by the present analysis; > indeed, this is perhaps its most unassaloblefecture ° The most cogent evidence ot this is furnished by the fantasy of how Hanna had been with them at Gmundon the summer before her birth, of how she had travelled there | X< __ with them, and of how she had been able to do far more then than she had a yoor 1 - later, after she had been born. All of this wos intended as a revenge upon his father, | against whom he harboured a grudge for having misled him with the stork fable. 't was just 6s though he had meant to say: ‘H you really thovaht | was as stupid os o! that, ond expected me to believe that the stork brought Hanna, then in return | | expect you to accept my inventions as the truth’. There are not many more mysteries ahead of us now. What remains are just such confirmations on Hans’ part of analytical conclusions which our Interpretations hos! already established, Another symptomatic act, happening us though by accicl involved a confession that he had wished his father dead, for, iust at the moment his father was talking of this death.wish, Hans let a horse that he was pleying will fall down; knocked it over in foct. Furthermore, he confirmed in so many words ! hypothesis that heovily loaded corts represented his mother’s pregnancy toh and the horse's falling down was like having « baby. We have already considered Hans! two concluding fantasies, with which his r ery was rounded off, One of them Sigmuhd.Freud LA Hons! fother grasped the nature of this wishful fantasy, and did not hesitate @ moment as to the oniy interpretation it could beor. “This wos not merely a repetition of the earlier fontasy concerning the plumber and the bath, The new one was a triumphant, wishful, fantasy, and with it, he overcome his fear of castration. His other fantasy ‘April 30th, Seeing Hons playing with his imasinary children again. ‘Hallo’, | said to him, ‘are your children still alive? You know avite well @ boy con't have any children’. THE STUDY len’ Muy ‘This did not merely exhaust the content of the unconscious complexes which had been stirred up by the sight of the falling horse and which had generated his anxiety. It also corrected that portion of those thoughts which was entirely unoc: ‘centobie; for, instead of Killing his father, it made him innocuous by Promoting him to 0 morriage with Hans’ grandmother. With this fantasy, both the illness and the onalysis came to an appropriate end. Iga ene eeaoe EVALUATION Theoretical issues One of the most serious problems faced by much of Frewd’s theory in general, and the ‘case of Little Hans in particnlar, is that of alternating explanations. Ws Freud's interpretation of Hans's phobia the only reasonable, Feasible one? Amongst those whe rr Key Stullies £374 t Psychology offer alternative interpretations are two very eminent psvchoanabsts, Erich Fran) anu Jobn Bowlbs According t Frown: (1970), Fread wanted to find snpport for the theory of sex. based on adults by directly reviewing material dhawn from a child. Regarcing Ha parents’ treatment of him is concerned, was this as positive as Freud claims? Aces Wo Freud adheron absolutely necessary for m developed inty a ciseriul ing hitn grow uo and ex atic He adds: onsidering the education given by his parents, which : the omission of a usual educational sins, fandoubtosly # detouci rom the very beginning thal her to be laugh by But what about the threat of castration from the mother, her threats not to come buck the lies they told (such as those about the stork, and the mother telling Hans she has penis, which was confirmed by the father)? According to Frorin, Freud had a “blind spot’: he was a liberal, rather than «tus critic of bourgeois society. He wanted to reduce and soften the degree of severiny educational methods, hut he did not go so far as fo criticize the basis of hourgess society, namely the principle of force and threat. His original belief that his aduit patients had all been vietims of incest as children (Seduction Theory’) was later changed (10 become the ‘Oedipus Complex’) in line with this same, non-radical attitude, Emphasizing the child’s incestuous desires is a way of defending the pare nis for example, weren't dere eases of his mother actively seducing hin? (see Applic and implications below) While Freud claims that the dread of castration came from ‘ve y slight allusions Fromny believes that there were Clear, strong threats made by the mother! Nov the dream about the plumber necessarily suggest the fear of castration is facts the father, nor even that it expresses fear of istration at all, Lis atleast as pro that the dream minitests Hans’s desire to have a penis as kage ay his father's be able to exchange his small ane for a banger one: the wish to be grown up apposed to a fear of eastaation ). In fact, this scems to be the interpicy Hass father actually provides! Freud himsell makes the point dha — & Sigmuhd Freud —_— L 37k According to Mitchell (1974), by realiring that one day he woul be « father in his own tight, Hans more or less resolved his infantile fear of castration. Freud's extreme patriarchical attitude prevented him from conceiving that the woman could be the main cause of fear, Fromm (1970) maintains that: and pathogenic fears of ths father is nical observation amply pov elotively insignificant te would appear that Hans needed his faher to protect him from a menacing mother Fromm believes that the stecessful outcome of the therapy was due not so much to the interpretations made of Hans’s fear, as the proteetive role of the father and the ‘super father’ (Freud) Fromm believes the fear of horses has two origins: (i) fear of the mother (due to her castration threat); and. (ii) fear of death (he had witnessed the funeral at Gmundei fallen horse which he thought was dead). To avoid both fears, he developed a fear of being bitte both types of anxiety and then later the which protects him both from horses and from experiencing According to Freud, the boy's incestuous desire for the mother is ‘endogenous’ (ot the result of maternal seduction). But is itas intense, exclusive and spontaneous as Freud believed? Fromm points out that Hans's mother liked to have him in bed with hei ind to take him with her to the bathroom. But Hans wanted (0 sleep with Maried (their landlord’s 13-year-old daughter), and once said he preferred her company to his mother's. ally, Fromm suggests that Hans's hostility is aimed at his mother (based on her castration thre: her ‘treason’ at giving birth to Hanna, and his desire to be free from fixation on het rather than his father (as the Oedipus theory claims). Referring to a out a horse he took out of the stable: Fother, You took it out of the stables? Hans: {took it out because | wanted to whip it Id you really lke to beat? Mummy, Hanna or me? 9 their Mummy? Hy life other offen freatened fo beat hin There is much evidence of great warmth and friendship in Hany’s relationship with his father, Fromm concludes that: hobia, such as occurs in in probably have disappeared by itself without any # father’s suppor! and interest Bowlby (1973) 1 asks whether Hans’s anxiety about the availab interprets the case of Little Hans in terms of attachment theory. He ity of attachment figures played a larger part than Freud realized. Agreeing with Fromm, Bowlby argues that most of Hans ansiety arose from threats by the mother to desert the family. The main evidence comes from: (i) the sequence in which the symptoms developed and statements made by Hans himself; and (ii). evidence in the father’s account that the mother was in the habit of using threats ofan alarming kind to discipline Hans, including the threat to abandon him: The symptoms did not come out of the blue; Hans had been upset throughout the preceding week. They began when Hans had wok: why he was crying, he said to his mother up one morning in tears. Asked {thought you were gone, ond | had no Mummy coax’=cuddle], Some days later nursemaid had taken him to a local park, as usual. But he started crying in the street, and asked to be taken home, so he could ‘coax’ with his mother During that evening, he became very frightened and cried, demanding to stay with his mother, The next day, his mother, eager to find out what was wrong, took him to Schénbrunn, when the horse phobia was first noticed. But the week preceding the onset of U phobia was not the first time Hans had expressed fear his mother might disappear. Six months earlier, he made remarks such as: Suppose | was to have no Mummy, Suppose you When Hanna was born, Hans was kept away from his mother. The father states tht Hany's ‘present anxiety, which prevents him leaving the neighbourhood of the howe is in reality the longing for [his mother] which he felt then’, Freud endorses this h describing Hans's ‘enormously intensified affect’ for his mother as ‘the fundamental phenomenon in his condition’ Thus, both the sequence of events leading up to the phobia and Hany's own statements make it clear that, distinct from and preceding any fear of horses, Hans Alvaid that his mother might go away and leave him (Bowlhy, 1973), Did she acti iliveaten, implicitly or explicitly, 1o leave the kami? She certainly does use rather alarming Uireats: NT (i) To cut offhis widdler (or ‘wiawi-maker’) Gi) _Ayyear later, when the phobia was first reported, she was still trying to break him of the habit (of masturbating). She ‘war ed him’ not to touch his penis, but no det (ii) The {ils are given of the warning, © months lat |, Hans came into his father’s bed one morning and told him: Hans: When you're away, I'm afraid you're not coming home: Father, And have | ever threatened you that | shon't come home? Hans: Not you, but Mummy. Mummy's told me she won't come back Father She said that because you were naughty. Hans: Yes. (iv) Even the fear of being bitten by a horse is consistent with the view that fear of the mother’s departure is the m: the previous year, Lizzi, a little girl staying in a neighbouring house, had gone away. The luggage was taken (0 the station in a cart pulled by a white horse Lizzi’s father was there and had warned her: $n source of anxiety, During the summer holiday of Don't put your finger to the white horse or il bite you So, fear of being bitten was closely linked in Hans's mind to someone's departure, ‘Table 19.1 summarizes the different interpretations of Freud and Bowlby Gay (1988) refers to an article by an American psychoanalyst, Slap, entitled Litle Hans’ ‘Tonsillectomy (1961), in which he offers an intriguing complementary interpretation of his fear of horses, In February 1908, in the second month of the neurosis, Hans had his tonsils out, at which point the phobia worsened and, shortly after, he explicitly DIFFERENCES OF INTERPRETATION BETWEEN FREUD AND BOWLBY f ie ‘Dreams that she had gone away | Expression of fear of punishment | Expression of fear that she’d cond left him for incestuous wishes carry out threat to desert family | White horse wil bite Wish that father would go away | Fear of mother’s desertion Mother's displays of affec ‘Action which might have Natural and comforting | cand allowing him to come into | encouraged Hons’ Oedipal expression of motherly feelings | | her bed | wishes identified whitv horses as biting horses, Based on this and related evidence, Slay suggested that Litle Hans probably added his fear of the sungeon (shite mask atu coat) to his fear of the moustached father This extra fear i jnost easily explained in terms of the acquisition of a conditione«| fear response through ¢lassical conditioning (see the ease of Little Albert: ( 16), and strongly suggests that a psychoanalytic explanation may be quite compatible with one derived from learning theory. But Eysenck (1985), probably Freud’s mosi outspoken critic (see Chapter 22), wants to substitute Freud’s account with an explanation based on classical conditioning. Fysenck refers to an evaluation of th case of Little Hans by Wolpe & Rachman (1960), two eminent behaviour therapists, who propose that the incident which Freud refers to as merely the ‘exciting ease" (ic trigger) of Hans's phobia, was, in fact, the cause of the entire disorder, namely, the moment when fhe horse collapsed in the street the horse and the bus Hons: No. | only dow i he phobia] then. W ve me such a fright, realy! That was when | got the ife, as well as the fact that the Father: All ofthis was confirmed by my anxiety broke out immediately o wards, Hans's initial fear response generalized to all horses, horse-drawn buses and vans, ni features of horses such as muzzles and bli than small ones (the original incident involved a karge bus), and these were also the lastaspects of the phobia to disappear. All ofthis, they argue, is consistent with the conditioned fear explanation ers, He was more afraid of large vehicles All these (apparently conflicting) explanations of Hans's phobia can (ironically) hx accommodated within the psychoanalytic account of phobias. According to Frew! phobias (child or adult) typically represent the conscious manifestation of several unconscious sources of anxiety, which become focused on ‘compressed into the sina! phobic object or situation (through condensation, transformation, and other unconsints processes: Ward, 20011). So, fear of castration by his father (Freud), fear of his mother’s threats to castrate him (Fromm), fear of being abandoned by his mother (Bowlby), and fear of horses as a generalized conditioned fear response (Wolpe sn Rachman) can ald be seen as condensed into the single fear of being bitten by her Freud's account of phobias in general is, arguably, the only one that is broad enone! tw expla 1 how these different elements could all form part of the “sume’, specilie fear, What Freud saw in Hans was little boy full of many fears, albeit castration aunxiety was the predominant one (Ward, 2001) — L Sigmuhd Freud Ls Methodological issues Preud is aware of the methodological objections which could be raised to the fact that Hans was being analysed by his father (Max Graf, an eminent inusic critic and one of the early members of the psychoanalytic society). His wife (Hans’s mother) had been. treated by Freud before hher marriage to Hans’ father: how could the father be objective in his observations and psychoanalyse someone with whom he was so emotionally involved? Abo, the child will be susceptible to his father's suggestions. Doesn't this immediately invalidate the easestudy as an independent confirmation of Freud's Oedipal theory? Freud himself seems to agree with this eriticism by saying that Hans's father did have to put into words things Hans could not himself say, be presented with thoughts which he had not previously shown signs of possessing, and so on. However (and this is perhaps the critical point), although this ‘detracts from the evidential value of the analysis’, the ‘procedu is the same in every case" (Le. with adult patients too): For a psychoanalysis is not an impartial scientific investigation, but a therapeutic measure. is exsence is nct to prove anything but merely to alter something, While this may mect the immediate criticism outlined above, doesn’t it at the same time condemn the whole of Freud’s work to the realm of ‘non-science’, theories are all constructed on the basis of his work with neurotic patients? Isn't the consulting room his ‘laboratory’, his patients the ‘participants’, and what they say about themselves (especially their childhood) the data? since his ‘This point is answered by Storr (1987), a leading popularizer of psychoanalytic theory and himself a trained psychoanalyst. Storr claims that, although some of the hypotheses of psychoanalytic theory can be tested scientifically (they are refutable), this applies only to a minority: the majority are based on observations made in the course of psychoanalytic treatment, which cannot be regarded as a scientific procedure. Such observa and prejudice of the observer, however detached s/he tries to be, and so cannot be regarded in the same light as observations made during, say, a chemistry or physics experiment. Although it is certainly possible to study human beings as if they were objects merely responding to the sti psychology), it is not possible to conduct psychoanalysis (or any form of psychotherapy) in this way jions are inevitably contaminated by the subjective experience impinging on them (as in experimental So, do we have to accept Storr’s conclusion that psychoanalytic theory can never be One defence of Freud may be that to study people as objects ali is or truly seien thought of as scientifi responding to stin like, and so to study them in this way is not only unethical but inaccurate, Perhaps Freud is much closer to teati . because that is not what people are actually people as people and, to that extent, more of a scientist than most experimental psychologists! ee ee Key Stublies in Psychology f380 | ~ H, as Freud ektims, the case of Little Hans shares with all case-studies (i.e. all psychoanalytic tr nents) the characteristic of being a “therap than ‘an impartial scientific investigation’, ir still has some rather distinetive fears (i) inwas conducted not by the therapist author (in this case Freud) but by a second party (the father) who acted as an intermediary berween Freud and the patient (Hans): Freud had met Hans twice, once for a ‘therapeutic session’, onee 10 che him a birthday present (Gay, 1988) (i) very little was said in the case-study about technique (how the psychoanalysis wis conducted). One interesting exception is when Freud points out that the father was pushing Little Hans too hard: He asks too much and investigates in accord with his own presuppasitions the litle boy express himself. (quoted in Gay, 1988) ‘This is ironic in view of the criticisms made of Freud that he already saw Little Hans as a ‘little Oedipus’ before any therapy began (a case of the pot calling the kettle black?) By ils nalue, then, however broad its theoretical implications, ‘title Hans’, with its most unorthodox technique, hardly recommended remain unique. (Gay, 1988) 9s an exemplar, It must On the positive side, Gay argues that the case of Little Hans demonstrates what all psychoanalytic therapy has in common (the ‘excavation’ of childhood foundations of adult neurosis). But because of Little Hans’s age, compared with adult therapy, thee ‘was relatively little “digging” that needed to be done. Freud’s father died in 1896 and itis widely accepted that this had a profound effect on. him personally as well as on the development of his theory. His reflection, through, selfanalysis, on his relationship with his father was partly responsible for his emphusis on the Oedipus complex. But according to Gay (1988), what matters is no wheter Freud had, or imagined he had, an Oedipus complex, but whether his claim that everyone passes through such a complex can be empirically substantiated, However, Freud ‘did not regard his own experiences as automatically valid for all humanity’ (Gay, 1988). His work demonstrates an ambivalence he felt towards reeognition of the individual on the one hand, and universal fea psyche on the other es of the human his famous case histories eloquently rellect his simulianeous comm individuality and generality; each depicts lent w same: time belongs to category of ¢ A similar point is made by Jacobs (1992) wy “Te This relates to the idlingraphic nomothetic debate in. psychology whieh, in tur part of the more general debate about the nature of science (see Exercises for Chapter 27 Applications and implications As noted in Background and Context above, the case of Little f support Fi is intended eud’s Oedipal theory which, in turn, (largely) replaced the earlier ry of hysteria: neurotic Seduction theory of neurosis (or, more accurately, the sextual abuse the Mollon, 1998). Whereas the Seduction theory (1896) claimed 1 symptoms are the at adul esult of (actual) incest and sexual abuse experienced in childhood, according to the Oedipal theory (1905) what his patients claimed were memories of abuse, were, in fact, merely fantasies. Freud has been condemned in recent years for this retraction of the original theory, which recognized abuse as real. Alice Miller (1986), for example, holds the Oedipal theory partly res and sexual abuse in general, and Masson (1992) has accused him of cowardice: he compromised the wuth because he could not tolerate isolation from the Viennese medical establishment. More seriously: jonsible for society’s reluctance to acknowledge the extent of incest intasy = the notion from Freud that women invent allegations of sexual abuse because they dasite sex ~ continues fo play a role in un credibility of victims of sexual abuse. {Masson, 1992] mining the In his defence, Jacobs (1992) and Mollon (1998) point out that Freud didn’t totally abandon the Seduction theory: it lost its emphasis as he developed his theory of infantile sexuality, but at various points in his carcer he acknowledged that abuse docs take place. What Freud rejected was the Seduction theory as a general explanation of how all neuroses originate (Gay, 1988) More seriously, according to Esterson (1998, 2001), Israels & Schatzman (1993), and others, Masson's account of tl seductie theory (which originally appeared in Assault ‘on Truth, 1984) is mistaken, based on a fundamental misconception. In Freud’s theory, the fantasies are unconscious and so must be analytically uncovered by the therapist: reports of child sexual abuse (CSA) that the patient had always remembered don't fall into this category. The cornerstone of Masson’s (1984) account of Freud's abandonment of the ‘truth’ (that most of his female patients told him they had been sexually abused in early childhood, usually by their father) is contr licted by the contemporary documentary evidence (Esterson, 1998, 2001) Freud has not only been pilloried by Masson and many feminists for concealing the truth about CSA (thus making it more difficult for psychodynamic therapists to recognize the truth of their patients’ accounts of CSA), he has also been seen as

    You might also like