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.
In a previous paper (Mendelsohn, 2009) I attempted to expand the concept of projective identification, currently understood in a limited way as a process seen primarily in severe character pathology, to a much more common process of communication between intimates.
In the present paper, I intend to revisit projective identification in its more malignant form: that is, I will describe a couple whose primary mode of communication with each other is projective identification. I aim to show how reliance on projective mechanisms can be very disruptive to a relationship and to the psychoanalytic work, and how the use of countertransference data (Mendelsohn, Bucci, & Chouhy, 1992) is essential both in grounding the therapist and directing the work with such a disturbed couple.
Projective identification (PI) is a term first introduced by Melanie Klein (1946). It refers to a psychological process in which a person strives for emotional balance by engaging in a particular kind of projection. Projective identification is more complex than simple projection in that it involves an interactive process between two people. At the core of this process is the idea of acting “as if”: That is, a person engaging in PI is essentially making assumptions about the motives and beliefs of the other, and then acting “as if” their assumptions are true. In other words, the person engaging in PI projects motives, beliefs and feelings onto the other, and then