Object Constancy or Constant Object?

Psychoanalytic theories of child development employ the useful concept of object constancy which forms a milestone in the relations between the developing ego and its images, technically referred to as objects. When for one reason or another this milestone, which is also a formidable hurdle, has not been passed the crucial question arises whether the person can nevertheless make progress towards a viable mode of living, including stable relations with others. Some of the differences between psychoanalytic theory and analytical psychology may be semantic rather than fundamental: when it comes to the application and aims of therapy the similarities may well outweigh the differences and incompatibilities of theory. Therefore a mutually acceptable model of child development may well emerge.

There is however one aspect in which analytical psychology may claim a uniquely different orientation and point to an alternative mode of development. I shall refer to this as the constant object in contrast to object constancy.

For the newly-born a need-satisfying union is established between mouth and nipple (or teat of feeding bottle). To this must be added a number of other sensory modalities, such as warmth, skin contact, smell, surrounding arms and gazing eyes, all of which create a secure situation required for satisfactory nourishment and growth. An object-less phase of fusion has been postulated to begin with but some measure of differentiation soon occurs. For example, the infant will notice that not every feed and contact is equally satisfying and he begins to distinguish between good and bad experiences which become internalized (introjected) and charged with corresponding affect.

It is assumed that in the earliest stages the emerging ego is unable to link good and bad experiences, to maintain a continuity between opposite affects and also to associate these with one and the same organ, the nipple, which is his first part object. Later on, when the manifold sensory impressio