Introduction
Winnicott's theory of maturational processes reverses the theoretical paradigm of traditional psychoanalysis to understand human nature, and thus transforms clinically the analytical work of the therapist, so that the therapist re-recognizes the nature of difficulties encountered by the patients, and what is the kind of help they need. The so-called 'Winnicottian patients / patients in Winnicottian perspective' should focus on the 'Winnicottian perspective'. From this perspective, the therapist will see the maturational problems that the patient needs to solve, and will speak the easy-to-understand language in order to communicate with the patient, as well as use new treatment procedures to better adapt to the patient's maturational needs.
To understand the 'Winnicottian Perspective' in the Chinese context, it will need the assistance of Chinese Winnicott research and training materials, and therefore it is necessary to translate Winnicott's English language into Chinese. Part of Winnicott's terminology is the borrowing and adjustment of traditional psychoanalytic terms, and the rest part, a larger part of his language is his own common English. In the Chinese context, what kind of restoration and 'refraction' will occur for understanding of 'Winnicottian perspective'?
I. The Winnicott's patients
The questions that arose in me from the 'Winnicottian Patients' are the following: What is this Winnicottian perspective? What kind of patient is seen from this perspective? The helpful materials in study these questions are the records from Winnicott's own patients. In other words, we can observe for what the patients are seeking help, and why should they find Winnicott?
As a psychotherapist, I am easily attracted to this problem because the purpose of psychotherapy is to provide therapeutic help for the patients to solve mental and psychological problems, while 'psychotic problems' in the field of general psychiatry and traditional psychoanalysis understanding is also in view of a mental disorder as a hindrance that requires treatment or removal. 'The patient at Winnicott's perspective' is, apparently, first and foremost a perspective on the performance and obstacles of the patient in the clinic. Winnicott himself mentioned that if a large number of cases and conditions were observed, the therapist would find similar patterns in the case, which also provides clues for us to evaluate the severity of the patient's disease.
The degree of illness in the following case can be seen in the fact that the details are very much like those of many other cases. It is healthy boys and girls who are entirely individual and unlike each other. Illness patterns have resemblances, and the degree of illness is often measured by the fixity of the illness pattern. （Winnicott, 'Case 'George' aet 13 years', 1971, p. 380.）
I will leave the 'healthy individual' to the discussion later, and try to continue from my beginning idea. So what I came across was a question about 'what the patient was behaving' -- or maybe people were more accustomed to 'what the patient's 'symptoms' were'. The more intuitive and helpful materials are naturally the cases that Winnicott himself has treated, especially the records of the patients whom he has treated. In other words, we can observe from the clinical data, why are the patients find Winnicott asking for help, and why would they find Winnicott to help them?
1. Dr. Margaret Little (1901-1994) - identity, holding, regression
Margaret Isabel Little was born in Bedford as the second of five children. Her father was a maths teacher, her mother was musical and artistic, but also chaotic and controlling. Margaret Little read medicine and completed her clinical training at St. Mary's Hospital in 1927. From 1928 to 1939 she worked as a general practitioner in Edgware in West London. During this time she had been a clinical assistant at the Tavistock Clinic (1936 to 1939), where she trained as a psychotherapist.
Due to personal problems Margaret Little undertook her first analysis from 1936 to 1938 with a Jungian analyst she called 'Dr. X'. From 1940 to 1947 she went into analysis with Ella Sharpe, who became her training analyst. She was elected as an associate member of the British Psychoanalytical Society (BPAS) in 1945 and a full member the following year. Dr. X and Ella Sharpe failed, as Little herself accounted, to realize the psychotic character of Margaret Little's anxieties, so she began a further analysis with Donald W. Winnicott, lasting from 1949 to 1955, and resuming in 1957, which turned out to be a successful one regarding her issue. In her book Psychotic Anxieties and Containment (1990) she gave an account of her own analyses. Margaret Little became a training analyst of the BPAS in 1949. She is particularly known for her contributions on counter-transference.
In M. Little's book, she clearly illustrates the different experiences and effects of the classic Freudian psychoanalysis (represented by Sharpe) and Winnicott's analysis, and their theoretical and clinical perspectives. The difference. She wrote that, according to Freud's understanding, when the patient's anxiety is related to the Oedipus complex, the main concern is castration anxiety, which is associated with the loss of a certain part (including part of the body, object or self-esteem). Clinically, classical analysts should be used as a substitute for this missing part, allowing patients to develop a transference neurosis in the analysis, and then solve it through traditional interpretation techniques (see M. Little, 1990, p. 17).
For example, in the analysis of M. Little and Ms. Sharpe, Ms. Sharpe worked on the classic understanding of the Oedipus complex, and her work:
[...] her way of working, founded on the idea that psychoanalysis is wholly concerned with infantile sexuality in all its forms, i.e., relating to the Oepidus complex; and with repressed phantasies about the parents that can only be recovered via the transference neurosis. Patients must not be allowed to use reality as a defense against these; the analyst's integrity consists in his asking of himself everything that he asks of his patient; existence is justified by allowing the right to it to others. (M. Little, 1990, p. 32)
As a classic analyst, Ms. Sharpe, by recognizing that M. Little has the right to have a relatively integrated identity with herself, and took for granted to treat M. Little as a relatively whole person. In the analysis, Ms. Sharpe would also interpret Little's fear as castration anxiety, linked to Oedipus complex, and always focused on Little's issue of infantile sexuality from the perspective of triangular relationship (see M. Little, 1990, p 32).
However, M. Little has been trying to communicate with Ms. Sharpe, hoping to let her know that her real problem was not the fear associated with castration anxiety, but in another nature.
[I tried] to convay to her that my real problems were matters of existence and identity: I did not know what 'myself' was; sexuality (even if known) was totally irrelevant and meaningless unless existence and survival could be taken for granted, and personal identity established. (M. Little, 1990, p. 33)
Also, when compared to the classic Freudian understanding, Little mentioned:
But where anxieties concerning existence, survival, or identity predominated (narcissistic neuroses and psychoses), transference neurosis did not develop and psychoanalysis (in its classical form) was ineffective. (M. Little, 1990, p. 18)
Those 'anxieties concerning existence, survival, or identity' were she called psychotic anxieties, or in Winnicott's language, pre-verbal unthinkable agonies. In order to contain psychotic anxieties, Little also indicated certain principles of Winnicott's clinic work:
Winnicott's work is based clearly and definitely on certain principles. Its hallmarks are: recognition of the importance not only of the individual human being himself, but also of his earliest environment; empathy (understanding nonverbal communication and body language, far beyond the recognition of unconscious movement, posture, etc.) and experience of mutuality; consistency without rigidity; allowing 'regression to dependence'(Winnicott 1954a, b); 'holding' (Winnicott 1962b, 1963f) and (Winnicott 1971b). (M. Little, 1990, p. 19)
The anxiety that makes M. Little suffering is not the castration anxiety in the traditional sense, that is, due to the loss of a certain part or to the frastration of a certain desire. What she fears is that her psycho-somatic existence will be completely destroyed - 'My fear [...] was of utter destruction, being bodily dismembered' (M. Little, 1990, p. 32) - a fear that a unitary identity will be annihilated. Based on Little's symptoms and her personal history, Winnicott also diagnosed her environmental deficiencies in her early life, which largely led to Little's primary and psychotic anxiety. According to Little's description of her mother and her clinical manifestations in the analysis, Winnicott also recognized the chaotic state of Little's mother. He once commented, 'Your mother is unpredictable, chaotic, and she organizes chaos around her. [...] She's like a Jack-in-a-box, all over the place.' (M. Little, 1990, p. 49) Little has a deep understanding of this, she wrote, 'This had indeed been my earliest environment from which I could not separate myself despite my father's stability and reliability, for her chaos affected him too.' (M. Little, 1990, p. 49)
It is not difficult to understand that such an unpredictable early environment pattern will make a small baby's just established personal identity in a precarious state, which in turn will give the baby a distrustful experience. The state of being is unsustainable and it is not safe for going on being. Little seeks help from Winnicott for this purpose, and the need for therapist will be high, which requires the therapist to have both the ability and the willingness to withstand the treatment, stand a lot of anxiety and pain, accept uncertainty and helplessness, and even suffer some unbearable things instead of defending his own emotional experience, and as in the case of Little, allow patients to regress to dependence for a period of time, and be able to hold the entire situation.
2. H. Guntrip case - communication, being by doing
Harry Guntrip is another person who uses his own record of analysis to illustrate Winniecott's clinical work style. In 1975, he published an article entitled 'My experience of analysis with Fairbairn and Winnicott' (Guntrip, 1975. International Journal of Psycho-Anal. 2, 145-156.), describing his analytical experience with the two analysts and how his personal issue - the amnesia associated with the death of his brother Percy when Guntrip was three years old - was getting resolved.
H. Guntrip, English, born in 1901, died in 1975. His father had been a preacher in the Local Methodist Church who built and led an evangelical centre. His mother was an active woman, with a tendency to business and little inclination to motherhood or the devotion that being a mother requires. When she married Guntrip’s father, she was unwilling to have children. She once told Guntrip that she had only breastfed him to avoid getting pregnant again. He graduated in the London University and at the age of 37 he became a preacher. After being a minister, he became a professor of psychology in the University of Leeds and also a psychoanalyst. Guntrip's contribution to the theory of object relationships was considered important and he exerted considerable influence in the Middle Group (between 1961 and 1975).
Harry Guntrip was known for his unrelenting energy and activity. According to friends, he simply could not stop and was always on the lookout for something, working, reading, writing, thinking and talking about his topics, constantly. This was the strongest impression that Guntrip left on every person that got to know him. Restless, sociable and loud, he was the opposite of quietness and serenity. It also can be said he was an excellent professor who had a unique facility to present the range of theoretical perspectives that emerged in the psychoanalytical universe.
Guntrip used to associate all his suffering to a traumatic episode of his life: the death of his brother when he was still a young child. Regarding the traumatic episode, his mother told Harry that when he was three years old, he entered his bedroom and saw Percy lying, naked and dead, on their mother’s lap. He ran, grabbed his brother and told his mother: “Do not let him go. You will never have him back”. So, she sent him out of the room and Harry got so sick that they thought that he was dying. The doctor came for a consultation with him and stated that he was “dying of sadness for his brother”, to which he added to the mother: “If your maternal sense cannot save him, neither can I”. So, she took him to a maternal aunt and, living with this family, he got better.
After Percy died, his mother dedicated herself almost completely to work. Guntrip tried to make her be busy with him, presenting several illnesses so that she would come and go from her store so she would see him. From his record, we can see that Guntrip's mother is not very competent in being a mother, and even indifferent and alienated from the children. Later, in the analysis with Winnicott, it was discovered that such a mother was also the environment where Guntrip lived from the beginning. This mother obviously does not have the ability of primary maternal preoccupation. Guntrip also tried to explain this to Fairbairn:
I began to insist that my real problem was not the bad relationships of the post-Percy period, but mother’s basic 'failure to relateat all' right from the start. I said that I felt Oedipal analysis kept me marking time on the same spot, making me use bad relationships as better than none at all, keeping them operative in my inner world as a defence against the deeper schizoid problem. (H. Guntrip, 1975/1996, p. 743).
The 'oedipus interpretation' in the citation was Fairbairn's basic interpretation of Guntrip, that is, he is so attached to the mother because exactly the mother's lack of maternal care, he can only find and seize any 'bad relationship' with his mother, at least it is better than 'no relationship', and his pain is the outcome of internalized Oedipal bad object relationships. His suffering was the outcome of internalized conflicting relationships.
However, as Winnicott will clarify, Guntrip would get attached to his mother because she always escaped from him. The insistent connection with an unsatisfactory mother derives from the fact that the individual could not incorporate his mother’s cares due to her instability in adapting to his needs; as a consequence, his ego is weak, which impedes the individual from becoming autonomous and keeps him returning to the source.
But Guntrip is always looking for and acting, he can't calm or quiet down. For him, because the mother has not been able to establish a connection with him from the very beginning of his life, he did not get a starting point for a quiet existence. In other words, it is equivalent to cease to exist as to be quiet. This is similar to the primitive unthinkable agony that “the sense of existence is annihilated” mentioned by Little. Guntrip's approach is to live the 'being by doing'. He exaggeratedly uses his intellectual function, and from this position begins to form all his personal life. From the seemingly energetic and unremitting activities of Guntrip, Winnicott also saw his split-off intellect defence. His prematurely activated mind began to function, out of the experience, and out of the psycho-somatic existence. This kind of defense hides a schizophrenic problem. Individuals who used his mind to take care of himself from a early stage of life, while avoiding being interrupted again by environmental intrusion, also blocked the exchange of experience between their personal and real personality core and the outside world.
II. Winnicott's Perspective: The Maturatioanl Processes and the role of environment
The above two cases gave me a deep impression during the learning process. Little and Guntrip, as analysts, contributed their first-hand work with Winnicott himself through their own records. Both of them have professional theories and clinical training backgrounds, and are working hard to carry out professional work and actively explore personal issues. They live by the mature part of their personality and suffer from the immature part of their personality. Their psychotic anxieties are not anxiety in the sense of traditional psychoanalysis, but they are also not schizophrenic patients who need to live in closed wards. In Winnicott's perspective, they are clinically the borderline cases, and Winnicott's help is first of all to identify the part of the patient's 'immaturity'.
Winnicott can see this immaturity, and apply his knowledge clinically to deal with this immaturity, due to, on the one hand, the fact that he is intensively trained in his psychoanalytic training. More importantly, he is also a pediatrician. He has long-term experience with infants, young children and their parents. He combines the knowledge of his pediatric clinical work with his adult psychiatric patient treatments, using pediatric experience to understand the regressive symptoms of adult patients, and conversely, through the needs of adult patients for regression and dependence, to understand the emotional development process that people experience in the early stages of life, as well as the requirements for environmental care. As a result, he gradually formed a theory of emotional maturational processes of human individuals, and used this as a backbone idea for his clinical work.
Winnicott's so-called maturation refers to an essential nature of human beings. It is an innate growth tendency. Once an individual's life is conceived and started, it is the necessity to grow up to be an integrated person that also initiated as the genetic quality of individual life. In this regard, there is a very vivid metaphor from Winnicott's The Child, the Family and the Outside World (1957). When I translated this book, it was a description of Winnicott's that led to my 'love at first sight' for his work.
Now I want to make just one thing clear. It is this. Your baby does not depend on you for growth and development. Each baby is a going concern. In each baby is a vital spark, and this urge towards life and growth and development is a part of the baby, something the child is born with and which is carried forward in a way that we do not have to understand. For instance, if you have just put a bulb in the window-box you know perfectly well that you do not have to make the bulb grow into a daffodil. You supply the right kind of earth or fibre and you keep the bulb watered just the right amount, and the rest comes naturally, because the bulb has life in it. Now, the care of infants is very much more complicated than the care of a daffodil bulb, but the illustration serves my pur¬pose because, both with the bulb and with the infant, there is something going on which is not your responsibility. The baby was conceived in you and from that moment became a lodger in your body. After birth the baby became a lodger in your arms. This is a temporary affair. It will not last for ever, in fact it will not last for long. The baby will only too soon be at school. Just at the moment this lodger is tiny and weak in body, and needing the special care that comes from your love. This does not alter the fact that the tendency towards life and growth is something inherent in the baby. (Winnicott, 1957, p. 26-27)
To underline some highlights in this quotation:
The tendency towards life and growth is something inherent in the human being. It does not depend on us and has not yet been fully understood.
Time factor and a 'going concern'. In understanding Winnicott's theory of maturational processes, we see an individual person as a time-sample of Human Nature. We see life as a developing process, starting off from the very beginning - when infant's absolute dependence on environment is a fact, mother-infant is a merged setup, and the environmental provision is vital - towards independence and maturation till the end.
Just at the moment this individual is tiny and dependent, the environmental care is an essential element. Of course, the environment can both promote and hinder, or even distort, the maturational process. When any privation or failure from the environment occurs in very early stages of emotional development, leading the immature individual having to cope with and defend against this intrusion, therefore interrupting the individual's 'going on being', it would severely disturb the basic structuring of a whole personality, even totally annihilate the primary identity and lay down the basis of 'an environmental deficiency disease', the psychotic disorder.
From the perspective of Winnicott, when patients have some kind of immaturity or environmental deficient disease to seek help, they do have a need for regression in treatment, and need to be able to return to the stage before the intrusion occurs. During treatment, the patient needs to return to - even for the first time to have - a quiet and reliable place that allow him to be; because this is a 'place', 'starting point', 'base', 'platform', or a 'safety net' between the falling and the bottomless pit, so the returning to it needs to be holding in the relationship with the therapist. Winnicott has said that,
In a psycho-analytic statement of theory we say that defences are formed in relation to anxiety. Watching a living infant we say that the infant experiences intolerable anxiety with recovery through the organisation of defences. From this it follows that the successful outcome of an analysis depends, not on the patient's understanding of the meaning of the defences, but on the patient's ability, through the analysis, and in the transference, to re-experience this intolerable anxiety on account of which defences were organised. (Winnicott, 1989, p. 74)
Therefore, if the patient is able not to organize the defense, re-experience the unbearable extreme anxiety, and recover and gain ego-strength, he will need to have the opportunity to regress to dependence, but this requires the therapist to have the ability to hold the whole situation, and it will last for a while. In such 'holding',
'Holding,'of which 'management' was always a part, meant taking full responsibility, supplying whatever ego strength a patient could not find in himself, and withdrawing it gradually as the patient could take over on his own. In other words, providing the 'facilitating environment', where it was safe to be. (M. Little, 1990, p. 45)
When we often mention Winnicott's treatment, we can't get around the idea of 'regression to dependence.' Such a simple descriptive term, and its seemingly straightforward meaning, makes it easy to become a sign of genre, or a unique tool that cloaked with a magical coat; however, it nevertheless can't be used as a technical means or as a slogan.
“Regression” is inseparable from the therapist's ability to hold and the ability to manage the treatment situation. The patient usually needs to go through a long period of treatment preparation, in which the therapist slowly sees the point at which the patient initially formed the defense. At the same time, he has to assess whether the patient has some good experience, some healthy parts or resources that can be cooperated; the therapist has to be prepared by himself. Maybe there is an analogy that is not necessarily appropriate. Is this process similar to the construction of a woman's pre-pregnancy thoughts? Is it possible for the mother to have something practical to count on? Does she have someone can be relied on? And what is important is, does she ready?
Even Winnicott himself said that because the analyst is not as the good enough mother, who can rely on the natural characteristic of the primary maternal preoccupation, even if he is likely to do better than a mother in technical operation, but
[…] the clumsiness of the psycho-therapist as compared with the mother makes it inconceivable that regression to dependence even in a carefully controlled treatment is pleasurable” (Winnicott, 1988, p. 159).
In treatment, we need to respect objective facts, not just by intuition, and we should be careful to avoid using theoretical terms that may induce the occurrence of certain artificial clinical phenomena.
For example, we know that Winnicott would say that the therapist should be able to tolerate and allow the patient's need of 'regression to dependence' in the transference relationship, which is the patient's preparative step to restart the maturational process. However, the therapist does not actively encourage or even emphasize to the patient that “you need to regress”, because on the one hand, “regression to dependence” is a process that the patient naturally tries to experience only after he gains enough trust in the therapist. The therapist is only ready and provides conditions to accept the emergence and completion of the process. On the other hand, 'regression' and similar theoretical terms are the terms we can use for professional discussion and communication here, but for patients in their daily life, these terms are too easy for them to misunderstand and misuse, even becoming a defense against their real problem or a collusion with the therapist. Once the patient has learned this theoretical term wisely, he is likely to become deliberately childish, or to behave as a child as a 'regression', and if the therapist understands it as helping the patient to regress, taking this as having curative effects, I am afraid that there will be a risk of 'secondary benefits' rather than healing.
III. How to achieve this specialization - the therapists can be trained
In any case, as a therapist, in order to be able to treat the Winnicottian patients, we must have our professional training in “Maturational Theory Learning Case Supervision Personal Experience”. Theoretical study, text reading, and lectures are of course necessary, but they are not enough, because they will eventually be affected by translation limitations and the intellectual processing of learners.
I encountered some difficulties in translation when I was revising Dr. Elsa's Winnicott's Theory of the Maturational Processes (2016). For example, the quote that illustrated above has just been translated after the revision, and the original translation in comparison is the following:
[...] the clumsiness of the psycho-therapist as compared with the mother makes it inconceivable that regression to dependence even in a carefully controlled treatment is pleasurable” (1988, p. 159).
原：[…]与母亲相比较，心理治疗师的笨拙使得病人退行到依赖这件事，甚至在小心谨慎的控制性治疗中，是一件令人愉快的事情”
校：[…] 与母亲相比较，心理治疗师的笨拙使我们难以认为病人退行到依赖这件事——甚至在小心谨慎的控制性治疗中——会是一件令人轻松愉快的事情”
When I came to try and learn what there was to be learned about psycho-analysis, I found that in those days we were being taught about everything in terms of the 2-, 3-, and 4-year-old Oedipus complex and regression from it. It was very distressing to me as someone who had been looking at babies—at mothers and babies—for a long time (already ten to fifteen years) to find that this was so, because I knew that I’d watched a lot of babies start off ill and a lot of them become ill early. (1989f, p. 574)
原：当我开始尝试和运用曾经学习到的精神分析知识时，我发现在我学习精神分析的时候，我们被教会任何现象都要从2岁、3岁、4岁的俄狄浦斯情结的视角来思考，并且都被认为都是从俄狄浦斯期开始退行。由于我一直在观察婴儿——观察母亲和婴儿——已经很长时间了(已有10到15年)，当我发现问题原来是这么回事的时候，这让我感到非常地难过，因为我知道我已经观察过很多刚刚起病的孩子，其中很多孩子起病的时间很早(1989f,p.574)。
校：当我开始尝试和运用曾经学习到的精神分析知识时，我发现在我学习精神分析的时候，我们被教会任何现象都要从2岁、3岁、4岁的俄狄浦斯情结的视角来思考，或者认为都是从俄狄浦斯期开始的退行。我作为一直在观察婴儿——观察母亲和婴儿——已经很长时间的人(已有10到15年)，当我发现精神分析却是这么回事的时候，这让我感到非常地难过，因为我知道我已经观察过很多婴儿就开始起病了，其中还有很多更早就已经生病了(1989f,p.574)。
[…] there is no such thing as relief of suffering in vacuo; some person who suffers can be relieved; but it does not seem possible (to one holding my view on this point) to take responsibility for changing the person from one who suffers into quite something else, a part-human that does not suffer but which is not the original person who was brought for treatment. (1988, p. 53)
原：[…] 要想在没有体验的真空中真正地缓解人类的痛苦，是一种无稽之谈；我们有可能帮助某些人缓解了痛苦；但是要想负责任地把一个遭受痛苦的人改变成别的什么东西，即那个不再感到痛苦的不完整（部分）的人，这似乎是不太可能做到的事情(在这一点上我坚持我的观点)，因为这个不完整的人已经不再是一开始被带来寻求治疗的那个人了。(1988,p.53)
校：[…] 要想在没有体验的真空中真正地缓解人类的痛苦，是一种无稽之谈；我们有可能帮助某些人缓解了痛苦；但是看起来(在这一点上我坚持我的观点) 把一个遭受痛苦的人改变成别的什么东西是不负责任的，因为那个不再感到痛苦的不完整（部分）的人，已经不再是一开始被带来寻求治疗的那个人了。(1988,p.53)
For those psychiatrists who are interested not so much in people as in diseases—diseases of the mind, they would call them—life is relatively easy. But for those of us who tend to think of psychiatric patients not as so many diseases but as people who are casualties in the human struggle for development for adaptation, and for living, our tasks is rendered infinitely complex. (1961a, p. 72)
原：对于那些对疾病（他们称之为心智疾病）比对人更加感兴趣的精神病学医师们来说，生命（活）是一种相当容易的事情。（原第11页）但是，对于我们这些人来说，我们倾向于把患有精神疾病的人看作与患有其他疾病的许多人一样，他们都是在为了发展、为了适应和为了生存而奋斗的人类生命旅程中受了伤的人，我们所面临的问题和任务是无限复杂的。（1961a，p.72）校：对于那些对疾病（他们称之为心智疾病）比对人更加感兴趣的精神病学医师们来说，生命（活）是一种相当容易的事情。（原第11页）但是，对于我们这些人来说，我们倾向于把患有精神疾病的人更多看作是人，而不只是疾病；这些人都是在为了发展、为了适应和为了生存而奋斗的人类生命旅程中受了伤的人，以致于我们所面临的问题和任务是无限复杂的。（1961a，p.72）
Summary
Continuous learning, reading, supervision and personal experience have made me feel that the tendency of Winnicott's treatment is towards health, and not always focus only on the symptoms of the disease. Winnicott also mentioned in the article 'The Concept of Healthy Individuals', that '[...] we have to decide how far to include, and whether to include, those who reach to health in spite of handicaps '(Winnicott, 1967/1986). In any case, Winnicott gives people a sense of confidence in the process of maturation, with a feeling of hope and believing in something, even when the hopelessness temporarily covers the scene. This faith of 'believing in' prompts our therapists to invest in the scientific exploration of human nature.
References:Dias, E. (2016). Winnicott's Theory of the MaturationalProcesses.Guntrip, H. (1975). My experience of analysis with Fairbairn andWinnicott, in InternationalJournal of Psycho-Anal. 2, 145-156.Little, M. (1990). Psychotic Anxieties and Containment.Winnicott, D.W. (1957). The Child, the Family, and the Outside World.Winnicott, D.W. (1967/1986).The Concept of a Healthy Individual, in Home is where we start from.Winnicott, D.W. (1971). Therapeutic Consultations in Child Psychiatry.Winnicott, D.W. (1989). Psychoanalytical Explorations.
摄影：阿龟
于里斯本国家艺术博物馆
Photographer: Lynn
Lisbon
