Discussion

As I read Dr. Rudden's introduction to her analysis with Ms. A, I was struck by the extremely complicated family structure, particularly that of her mother, a Holocaust survivor. My difficulty in integrating her story led me to wonder about its impact on Ms. A. How does a little girl piece together bits of family history as she hears about them? It is no wonder that Ms. A always considered her mother a tragic figure. How can a little child be angry at a mother who has suffered so much and how can the little child deal with the burdens placed on her?

The other parent, an aggressive, critical, demanding person, promised and then reneged. He teased her and then accused Ms. A for not having a sense of humor. The parents fought with each other (they divorced when Ms. A was 7) and the siblings also fought with one another (Ms. A was the second of three). As a result of the turmoil, she experienced her childhood as sad and anxiety ridden. Is it any wonder that she had troubled relationships with men since her first boyfriend at 17? She was in her thirties at the beginning of the analysis and had terminated a relationship of several years. Ms. A hoped that analysis could help her “understand how she allowed herself to get so little from a relationship which had ‘obsessed’ her.”

During the consultation, Dr. Rudden felt that “an analytic endeavor might be difficult because of prominent preoedipal issues.” Do prominent preoedipal issues always lead to difficult analyses? I wonder whether Dr. Rudden's concern was a result of her own preconscious awareness of several factors in the patient. Did the patient communicate her identification with the father so that, like father, she promised a certain fee and then would renege? Did Dr. Rudden