Burnout and Psychoanalysis: A Freudo-Lacanian Point of View1

Epidemiological research concerning burnout in educators (Wisniewski and Cargiulo) concludes that half of all teachers will leave the profession within 7 years. Yearly attrition rates among general educators have been estimated at 6 to 8% per year. Among special educators these yearly attrition rates are even higher. On average, special educators remain in the classroom for approximately 6 years. Needless to say, burnout is a major problem in educators and maybe in education in general.

In the mid 1970s a systematic interest began to be taken in the phenomenon of burnout. Burnout began to be studied both clinically (Freudenberger, “Staff”) and academically (e.g., Maslach). The flood of scientific publications that have since appeared is mainly of a quantitative and correlational nature. Much attention was paid to the connection between burnout on the one hand and many individual variables on the other hand. Integral conceptual models as well as systematic qualitative studies and longitudinal research data were relatively scarce. In the last decade a change has set in, however. There is now a wish to integrate burnout into wider theoretical frameworks and to apply theory-driven research.

In 1974 Herbert Freudenberger, a New York psychoanalyst, was the first to give burnout its psychological meaning.2 Freudenberger (“Staff,” “The Staff”; Freudenberger and Richelson) considered burnout as a kind of mental exhaustion caused by the effort to impose one's will in order to reach a goal. According to him it is a chronic condition caused by a gradual depletion of energy as a result of over-commitment. He observed that people prone to burnout are idealistic persons who don't want to give in to limitations. He states, “It is the overly dedicated and the excessively committed individual who will suffer” (“The Staff” 75). “They're burning out because they've pushed themselves too hard for too long. They started out with great expectations and refu