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.
DISCUSSION: Dr. Eleanor Galenson stated that considerable support for a genetic proposition such as Dr. Coleman offered for the "developmental phobia" comes from the data of infant observation. When a child is between 13 and 16 months of age, a number of ego functions, including intentionality, independent locomotion, and symbolic function, undergo definitive integration and stabilization. This involves a consolidation of the sense of self as distinct from the object, which appears to spark primary ambivalence. Hostile attacks on the mother are frequent at this age. Although the mother "in the flesh" is relatively safe from the effects of the attacks, the still unstable mental representation of the mother is not safe, and the parallel mental representation of the child as well as that of the mother must somehow be protected from the onslaughts of the child's primitive rage. The main thrust of development, then, seems to be the need to protect the object representation against the destructive force of the child's rage; the resulting regression and/or resomatization delays or inhibits the child's further individuation and ego development. Regarding the "mid-life phobic syndrome," Dr. Galenson suggested that Dr. Coleman may have underestimated the significance of the oedipal period for these patients. Taking exception to Dr. Coleman's view of the therapeutic implications of the genesis of these two phobic syndromes, she felt that the transference must be the vehicle through