YA No. 1 (53) 2023 Orphanhood and Parenthood

Introduction

Observing the suffering of children and adults in therapeutic practice, we catch the feeling that the natural connections between generations are undergoing catastrophic transformations – so many adults experience the impossibility of a natural birth of a child, and so many children feel orphaned even with living parents! Both experience abandonment, unrequitedness, and a lack of connection with equal intensity. This paradox of our civilization, its visible reflection in the analytical consulting room, is explored by the authors of this issue. Victoria Andreeva examines the archetypal basis of orphanhood and concludes that “orphanhood is a prerequisite for the conscious experience of individuation.” And the contemporary meaning of the well-known archetypal narrative, where a couple has everything except a child, is introduced to us by the authors of the article “Infertility is not equal to childlessness.” How can one not recall Kathrin Asper, who says that abandonment is fate, the fate of both child and adult, which is not determined by the specific circumstances of their lives¹!

Where do narcissistic wounds and the passionate desire for parenthood lead? Anna Telepina’s article discusses working with foster families and the tendency to attribute negative aspects of foster children to their biological parents. Clinical vignettes about IVF children will be found in several authors of this issue.

A separate section is dedicated to Pinocchio children – those who grow up with a sense of artificiality (IVF) or who are raised by fathers in the absence of a mother (articles by Brigitte Allain-Dupré, Valery Miller, Marina Kolyova, and Veronika Petrova). The authors' stories of “orphaned” fathers raise the important topic of fatherhood as a psychic function that may remain inaccessible to adult men.

The necessity of working with the parents of young patients is undeniable. Kai von Klitzing traces the history of interaction between the very first child analysts and parents, starting from “Little Hans,” and examines the difficult parental feelings in interaction with the analyst: resistance, rivalry, jealousy, and guilt. Whether parents become an obstacle or a support to the therapeutic process often depends on the analyst’s own capacity for triadic relationships. In Peter Blake's article, we emerge into the territory of consciousness, as the author very clearly and precisely provides detailed instructions for conducting parental meetings and anticipates all possible discussion questions.

Excellent illustrations of the reality in which a child analyst operates are presented in Angelika Stähle’s article: this includes the child, their parents, and all their internal objects, which the analyst must “contain,” accepting all their transferences and preventing them from mixing. The author examines these complex constellations using three patients with varying degrees of impairment as examples.

And finally, another article by Brigitte Allain-Dupré summarizes the development of child analysis in France and its influence on Jungian analysis. I hope our readers are also open to such influence.