Conceptual Problems of Acting out in Children

Psychoanalytic concepts have had a varied fate in the course of the half century or so which has elapsed since their first introduction. Some of them have retained their original precision in a changing analytical scene or have become even more refined on the basis of accumulated clinical experiences and research. Within this category we might include the conceptualization of the various phases of libidinal development, of certain defence mechanisms, the super-ego and, on the clinical side, concepts like resistance or treatment alliance, to name only a few.

Many other concepts have developed in the opposite direction, i.e. from the precise to the imprecise. They started their lives with reference to well-circumscribed areas of mental functioning or as clearly and narrowly defined clincal concepts. But subsequently they were applied to a much wider range of phenomena and thus became generalised and watered down to a point of virtual meaninglessness (cf. Sandler, J., Holder, A. and Dare, C., 1970). Anna Freud has recently (1968) made some succinct comments on these developments and she noted the following, with particular reference to the concept of acting out: “Most psycho-analytic concepts owe their origin to a particular era of analytic theory or to a particular field of clinical application or a particular stage of technical procedure. They are carried forward unaltered from there, only too frequently, regardless of changes in these fields. Notwithstanding their having been firmly rooted in their home ground, they cease to fit the changed circumstances where they lead an uneasy existence and lend themselves to all kinds of theoretical misconceptions.” (p. 165).

I feel that it is not only the danger of theoretical misconception which is at stake here but something more serious and disturbing. Acting out, like cathexis and other concepts, belong to that group of analytic terms which we tend to use rather glibly and indiscriminately, often to cover up our i