Ethical Suffering

In Civilization and its Discontents, Freud (1930) admits that “it is not possible, within the limits of a short survey, to discuss adequately the significance of work for the economics of the libido” (p. 80, note 1). Classically, and in the absence of the question of what work is from a metapsychological point of view (Lantos, 1952), ordinary working conditions are considered pathogenic only because of the fragility of the psychic apparatus, whilst the organisation of work is perceived as a stage on which pre-existing conflicts emerging from the history of childhood are revealed.

Today, the pertinence of this question is based on the discussion initiated by the clinical analysis of work, in particular the dimension of ethical suffering (Dejours, 1998). The latter occurs when the subject carries out orders of which he/she nevertheless disapproves. For some, engaging in work they disapprove of, participating in “dirty work”, can produce various moral feelings such as shame, unworthiness, or guilt. On the other hand, other subjects are exempt from it and display an apparent normality and/or somatic disorders. Thus, in contrast to the repression of sexual desire, which characterises “civilized sexual morality”, it is the thorny problem of the psychopathological impact of repression of the moral sense in the workplace that is raised here.

During his first interviews, a man complained mainly about diffuse musculoarticular pains, accompanied by fatigue that was resistant to rest and psychotropic substances. He wanted to get rid of the vertigo and bouts of distress that hampered his family life and “weakened” him from a professional point of view. As a manager in the retail distribution field, he had climbed the ladder step by step before being demoted without any reason. He insisted on his loyalty and cryptically evoked a robbery, but also a hoped-for promotion accompanied by increasing investment, embezzlement, dismissals, and so on. His story became animated and the chrono