You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
‘Integration, unintegration, disintegration: an introduction’, The Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 2006, 32, 2, pp. 148-52.
‘A conversation about early unintegration, disintegration and integration’, The Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 2006, 32, 2, pp. 153-57.
‘Some questions concerning states of fragmentation: unintegration, under-integration, disintegration and the nature of early integration’, The Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 2006, 32, 2, pp. 158-80. ‘Unintegration, disintegration and deintegration’, The Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 2006, vol. 32, no 2, pp. 181-92.
‘Notes on unintegration from historical and developmental perspectives’, The Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 2006, 32, 2, pp. 193-213.
Following a conference entitled ‘A Conversation on Unintegration, Disintegration and Integration’ at the Tavistock Clinic, London, on 25th February 2005, the Journal of Child Psychotherapy published five papers on different theoretical aspects of integration. The first three papers, by Margot Waddell, Edna O's haughnessy and Ann Alvarez, are revised versions of papers given at the conference, whereas Elizabeth Urban's paper elucidates Fordham's concept of deintegration and Cathy Urwin's paper seeks to make historical and developmental links to Esther Bick.
The papers deal with the most primitive bodily and emotional states represented by Bion's unfathomable ‘O’. The authors raise important questions about early development, such as whether the new born baby has an innate experience of internal space, or whether this is acquired from experience, whether the babyisprimarily seeking for an object to receive his anxiety or for an object which holds him together and whether the mechanism of projective identification operates from the beginning of