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.
The first part of this extensive paper is devoted to a general discussion of object relations as they appear in different types of libidinal organization. In orally and anally regressed patients, object relations are archaic in type, consistent with the immaturity of their libidinal development and the weakness of their ego functions. Object relations in the pregenital stage are strongly colored with aggression, have a character of extreme strength and urgency, and tend to follow an all-or-nothing pattern. The patient strives to maintain object relations at any cost by utilizing all possible mechanisms, particularly displacement and symbolization. The attachment to the object is stable in anal characters while in oral characters there is great mobility. In the genital phase there is a relative independence of the object due to the particular strength of the ego. The relationship to reality is not archaic and there is less reliance on magical thinking and symbolic displacements. The emotions toward the objects are more finely shaded and there is no incoercible need for the object.
After noting the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic importance of the study of object relationships, Bouvet delineates their characteristics in different nosological entities, particularly in the obsessional neurosis (where they bear the imprint of the anal-sadistic stage of development), in phobia and conversion hysteria (where object relations are chiefly patterned on the need to defend against the drives), in perversions (where they are dominated by the need to identify projectively with the object), and finally, in psychosis (where the need for the restitution of lost object relations is paramount).
Brief clinical examples are given.