PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE’

A Contribution to the Libido Theory

THERESE DENEDEK, M.D.

T h e libido theory implies that the integration of the sesual

drive from its pregenital beginnings to its genital primacy is the
process by which the organization of the personality takes place.
T h e impact of physiological changes at puberty sets i n motion the
adolescent processes of integration which lead toward maturity.
Maturity includes, besides the physiological readiness for procrea-
tion, the individual’s ability to find gratification for his instinctual
needs within the frame of his culturally determined realities.
This level of maturity in turn initiates motivation for the next
phase of development which is parenthood.2 Since it has been
assumed that the individual reaches .this goal of personality inte-
gration during adolescence, the genetic theory does not include
the psychodynamic processes of reproduction and parenthood as
drive motivations for further development.
T h e aim of this presentation is to demonstrate that personality
development continues beyond adolescence, under the in fliipnrp
of reproductive physiology and that parenthood utirlLes the same
primary processes which operate from infancy on in mental
growth and development.
I
TVlien birth interrupts intrauterine existence the infant has not
yet developed mentally to a degree that he is aware of separation.
1 Presented in condensed form at the Fall Meeting of the Amerimn Psychoanalytic
Assodation, New York, December 7, 1958.
2 Erikson’s concept of ego identity implicl cultural inheritance, maturational
development. adult capacities and commitments. H e assumes that this “sense of
more or less actually attained but forever to-be-revised” sense of reality of the self
within social reality is achieved through the adolescent process of self-integration (6).

389
390 THERESE BENEDEK

After breathing is established, hunger is the first indicator of being

separated and also the stimulus for overcoming separation. Satia-
tion and the subsequent resumption of sleep o r a sleeplike condi-
tion means to the child that the separation has been temporarily
overcome. I t takes several weeks of postnatal development3 with
many repetitions of experiencing need followed by gratification
before the infant perceives that the source of his need associated
with hunger, pain, and discomfort is within and the source of
gratification is outside the self. It is then that separation in a
psychological sense begins to exist for the infant.
Introducing the concept of narcissism, Freud (9) outlined an
“undifferentiated phase” of instinctual development i n which the
subject-needful infant-and the object-need-satisfying mother
-together represent the source of energy which becomes stored
in the infant. H e calls “this state of things absolute primary nar-
cissism’’ (12). I n a previous pubIication I refer to this “state of
primary narcissism” as symbiosis, a primary unity of mother and
child (2). This is based upon the concept that the physiological
and psychodynamic processes of pregnancy and lactation maintain
in the mother a drive organization toward motherhood and the
activities of motherliness. T h e object of this drive is the child.
T h e infant’s need for the mother is absolute, while the mother’s
for the infant is relative. Accordingly, the participation of primary
drives i n the symbiotic state has different “meanings” for mother
and child. Yet in the symbiotic processes, the mother is not only
a giver, but also a receiver.
As the infant matures and perceives the breast and the mother
as outside the self, his ego begins to cathect the objects of his need.
IVith each feeding and with each disappearance of the outward-
directed hunger drive, that part of the environment which was
instrumental in satisfying the need, becomes introjected into the
self of the infant. I n the feeding process, sensations arise not only
from the gratifying object (breast-mother) but also from tactile
sensations of the mouth, sensations of sucking, olfactory and
3 1 use the term “development” and not maturation since I refer not to the
manifold neuronal, muscular, and other aspects of paced organic growth, but to
the intrapsychic processes by which the awareness of separateness evolves, and in
continuous interaction with this, the self as a mental structure becomes organized.
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPAIENTAL PHASE 39 1
kinesthetic sensations of bod. ’posture, of stretching and pulling of
legs and arms, the agreeable feeling of satiation, and the disturb-
ance of stomach distention. I n brief, all the perceptual systems
participating in the drive experience form parts of the introject.
If the drive is not satisfied, the sense of frustration, the accom-
panying anger, and the phenomena of the crying fits are also
introjected along with the object of the frustrated drive which
then becomes the introjected object of anger. T h e introjected
object is merged with the introjected self in the drive experience
and thereby object representations and self-representations are
established in inseparable connection with each other.
Introjections and identifications are tlie primary processes by
which mental structures develop. They represent the patterns for
all later development of the mind. On the basis of processes which
Freud studied in “Mourning and Melancholia” (10) lie assumed
that “the character of the ego is a precipitate of abandoned object-
cathexes and that it contains a record of past object choices.” More
appropriate to our present study is Freud’s consideration of “simuI-
taneous object cathexis and identification, in which the alteration
in character occurs beEore the object has been given up” (11).
Indeed, the introjection of the “object” of the drive along with
the sensations, affects, related to the gratification or to the frustra-
tion of the drive, are basic to continuity of interpersonal com-
munication. As the continuity of object relationship is maintained,
the memories of object relationship plus drive experience become
stored as object representations and self-representations and be-
come the nuclei of organization in the mental apparatus.
“The subject of identification becomes an extension of bio-
logical tlieory. . . . Identifications constitute theoretical bridges
between biology and personality and between personalities and
social groups” (Grinker, 14). I n this sense, introjection and iden-
tifications are terms which refer to processcs by which memory
traces of drive-motivated interpersonal relationsliip are stored
during the entire course of life.
In tlie earliest stage of the neonatal period the drive experience
relates mainly to alimentation. T h e primary model is simple:
need+ mother+ satiation. All other needs and gratifications, all
kinds of perception, tactile, olfactory, auditory, visual sensations,
332 THERESE BENEDEK
seem to be submerged within the primary model of orality. T h e
repetition of these experiences add up to a memory of pleasant-
feeding-mother equated with pleasant-feeding-self. The same
mother in dissimilar feeding situations may also be associated with
unpleasant memory traces and become the introject of pain: pain-
ful-bad-mother equated with painful-unpleasant-self. T h e mother’s
gratification in satisfying her infant’s needs as ~vellas her frus-
tration when she is unable to do so affect her emotional life and
again reciprocally that of the child. Thus there develops a spiral
of interpersonal processes which I refer to as emotional symbiosis.
T h e term “emotional sytnbiosis” describes n recijirocal interaction
between mother arid child which, throiigh the processes of “intro-
jecliorz_identification,” creates strzicturaf change in each of the
pwtici@zts (31.4
Through each single and interrelated series of identifications
not only is an image of the object internalized, but also the mirror
image of the object’s attitude toward the self. “I am good because
she sees me as good and treats me as good; I am bad because she is
bad to me and she sees me as bad.” These details about the psy-
chology of identifications (19) were implicit in Freud’s concept
of the development of self-esteem as a precipitate of infantile rela-
tions and early “oral” identifications. Yet there are forerunners of
“self-esteem.”
Studying the adaptations of infants to the realities of the feeding
situation in both healthy and hospitalized children, I arrived at
the assumption that as the infant introjects the “good mother =
good self,” he also establishes a mental attitude of confidence (2).
T h e term confidence refers to a primary mental construct which
develops through multiple repetitions of the experience that need
is relieved by gratification and results in a positive emotional
balance. As the child learns to know the mother as the need-
gratifying person outside the self, he also learns to maintain the
mother-child unity on a psychological level. Whether we call this
“primary love” (1) or primary object relationship, it enables the
4 Similar reciprocal processes can be attributed to any meaningful (dynamic)
interpersonal relationship. i.e.. to any such relationship in which exchange of
libidinal cathexis takes place. Freud described this process first in connection with
the dynamic of romantic love (9) and derived from it his insight into the p r o c w s
by which the ego contains “a record of past object choices.”
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPhfENTAL PHASE 393
infant to project expectations of gratification into the future.
Observations show that a four- to six-month-old infant may reveal
a confident attitude at the time of feeding, even in a state of
moderate hunger. Protected from the sense of frustration by psychic
structure of libidinous origin, the infant has learned, commensur-
ate with his maturational level, to wait.
T h e mental construct of confidence is integrated not only with
the object representation of the “good-feeding-mother” and the
self-representation of “good-feeding-fed-self,” but also with the
precipitate of the affects which accompany the drive experience-
satiation, falling asleep, etc.6 T h e functions of the primary mental
construct of confidence are manifold. It serves as a defense against
the sense of.frustration, which it delays; it facilitates other relation-
ships beyond the primary object, and it furthers the integration of
self-representations within the value system of “self-esteem.”
Our assumption is that these processes apply also to the mother.
Parallel with the experiences which lead to confidence in the in-
fant, the mother, through introjecting the gratifying experience of
successful mothering, establishes self-confidence in her motherli-
ness. T h e mother’s confidence in her motherliness is not just a
“reflection” of the child’s gratification, a “mirror image” of the
smile of her thriving child. T h e study of the psychodynamic
processes of the female reproductive function reveals that the
drive organization which motivates motherhood and the activities
of mothering maintains dynamic communication between mother
and child and leads to changes not only in the infant but in the
mother as well. T ~ Uthere S are reciprocal ego developments. I n
the infant, through the introjection of good mother = good self,
the infant develops confidence. I n the mother, through introjection
of good-thriving-infant = good-mother-self, the mother achieves
a new integration in her personality. As we compare the integra-
6 The affects originating in the libido of the symbiotic state (primary narcissism)
become neutralized in the process of forming the primary ego construct-confi-
dence. This is a gradual process. The bthvioral manifestations of conEdence, for
example, the ability to wait, appear early (in the first three to six months of life).
It is tested again and again by transient frustrations and the affects mobilized by
them tolvard the same object, mother-self. Thus the neutralization of drive carheses
necessary to maintain confidence as a part of the ego organization can develop only
step by step through a longer period of development.
394 THERESE SENEDEK

tive process of the mother with that of her infant, we can recog-
nize implicit differences in the complex personality of the adult.
On one level, the parallel is simple. Mothering, nursing is mo-
tivated by a primary drive, the object of which is the infant. IYhile
the infant incorporates the nipple, the mother feels united with
the baby. But this identification, pleasurable as it is, is not the
main source of the regressive processes of the mother for they are
inherent in the female reproductive function. Each phase of
motherhood-pregnancy, lactation, and also the preparation for
these during the progesterone phase of each sexual cycle-is ac-
companied by a regression to the oral phase of development. T h e
female reproductive functions reactivate the object and self-repre-
sentations integrated during the oral phase of her development
and bring about a repetition of intrapsychic processes which
originate in the mother-child relationship during her infancy (4).
Thus the mother’s object relationship with the child is motivated
by psychic energies originating in two levels of her psychosexual
organization. One is the primary reproductive drive; the other is
a secondary organization, derived from the oral phase of develop-
ment. T h e first is expressed by the adult tendency to give, to
nurse, and to succor; the other by manifestations of receptive ten-
dencies. This facilitates the moher’s identifications with her child.
T h e oral-dependent needs of the child as well as the psychologic
processes which evolve from them have been well studied. T h e
mother’s receptive needs from the child, however, are not easily
recognized in their healthy manifestations except through psycho-
analysis. T h e analysis of those who cannot stand the physiological
and psychological stresses of motherhood reveals that the pathol-
ogy of pregnancy and post-partum period is brought about by
regression to the oral phase.GT h e affect hunger of the mother, her
need for love and affection, her wish to reunite with her baby, “to
overprotect” and “overpossess” him are pathologic exaggerations of
pa norm ally, the infant, by the very fact of his existence, represents the most
significant fulfillment of the mother’s receptive tendency. With her baby the mother
feels ‘whole.’ ‘complete.’ but not without him. (Many young mothers feel ’empti-
ness’ after delivery; when they leave the child they feel a slight depression or feel
compelled to eat. These are minimal manifestations of a ‘separation trauma’ which
some women may elaborate in fantasies of ‘eating up’ or ‘putting back‘ the child,
even if they do not undergo Severe regression.)” (3, p. 397).
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE 395
the normal process of mothering. TVhiIe they disturb the smooth
course of symbiotic events, they offer evidence that the post-
partum symbiosis is “oral, alimentary for both infant and mother”
(3). T h e mother’s ability to receive from her child is strongly
affected by the confidence which the mother herself has incorpo-
rated into her mental structure while receiving from her own
mother. Her “giving,” her patience and motherliness are derived
from the developmental vicissitudes of primary identifications
with her mother. These were fantasies before; now with the
actuality of motherhood they are tested in reality.
T h e child’s identification with the mother evolves step by step
i n accordance with the mother’s changing functions in the growing
child’s .personality organization, with her role in the gratification
of the child’s drive requirements in the various phases of develop-
ment. This means that the child is not able to identify with the
actual experience of the mother. T h e area of the mother’s experi-
ence for which the infant has “empathy” are the emotions which
affect the infant’s security and mobilize anxietylike tensions in
him, such as the insecurity of the mother concerning her mother-
ing activities, her anger toward the child, etc. Thus the empathy
of the infant with the mother is on the level of primary affects
which do not involve organized ego. As the infant does not have
the physiologic and psychic organization for motherhood, lie can-
not envy the mother her breast, or her capacity to nurse (17). T h e
mother, however, having been a child and having introjected the
memory traces of being fed, nursed, cared for, in her own mother-
ing experiences relives with her infant the pleasure and pains of
infancy. T h e empathy of the mother for her child originates in the
experiences of her early infancy which are reanimated by the emo-
tions of the current experience of her motherhood. Through the
gratifying experiences of mothering, sustained by her thriving
infant, the mother substantiates the confidence in her motherli-
ness. Hojvever complex this intrapsychic process seems, the inte-
grative effect of confidence is the same in the mother as i t is in the
child. It serves as a defense against the fear of frustration which
may occur in every mother’s experience and it increases the
mother’s capacity to love the child. Since through this the mother
approaches the realization of one aspiration of her ego ideal-
396 THERESE BENEDEK
namely, to be a good mother-confidence supports the mother’s
self-esteem and becomes a source of secondary narcissism and self-
assurance. Since motherliness involves the repetition and working
through of the primary, oral conflicts with the mother’s own
mother, the healthy, normal process of mothering allows for resolu-
tion of those conflicts, i.e., for intrapsychic “reconciliation” with
the mother. T ~ Lmotherhood
IS facilitates the psychosexual devel-
opment toward completion,
Just as the positive balance of the transactional processes leads
to confidence in the child and to self-confidence in the mother,
so we can recognize the effects of the negative balance of the
transactional processes in the mother and in the child. T h e frus-
trated infant frustrates his mother; by this he induces a regression
in the mother which intensifies the aggressive components of her
receptive needs. TVhile in the infant such tendency is directed
toward the self = mother, in the mother the aggression is directed
toward her infant and toward her own mother, and, through the
identification with both, toward herself.
T h e regression stirs up in the mother the preverbal memories
of the oral-dependent phase of her own development. If the re-
cathesis of the infantile relationship with her own mother acti-
vates in the mother confidence and hope, she will overcome the
actual disappointment and frustration, secure in her wish to love
the child and to take care of him as she herself was loved and cared
for. But if the crying fits of the infant or signs of his feebleness
stir up not only justified concern, but beyond this, anxieties which
originate in the mother’s oral-dependent conflicts, the psycho-
dynamics of the mother’s response “can best be formulated by
stating that both levels of her identification, that with her mother
and with her child, turn negative. This means in terms of herself
that she becomes the ‘bad, frustrating mother’ of her child, as
well as the ‘bad, frustrating infant’ of her mother again. I n terms
of the infant i t means that the ‘bad, frustrating infant’ becomes
the irreconcilable ‘hated self;’ and at the same time her infant now
becomes, as her mother once was, the needed and feared object.
Just as she could regain emotional equilibrium as a child by
satiation through her mother, her emotional balance can now be
re-established only by ‘reconciliation’ through the thriving of her
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE 397
child. As a child, when the mother was the receiving part of the
symbiotic unit, her frustration led to the incorporation of the
ambivalcnt core in her personality organization, and now when
she is the active, giving part of the symbiosis, hcr infant’s frus-
tration mobilizes the ’ambivalent core’ of her personality” (3, pp.
405-406). This interferes with those integrative processes which
make motherhood a phase of normal development. Clinically, it
leads to a variety of depressive manifestations which are expressed,
so far as the child is concerned, i n disturbances of motherliness.
Disturbed motliering turns the symbiotic relationship into a vi-
cious circle. This leads to introjection of objects and self-repre-
sentations in the child charged with aggressive cathexes. Conse-
quently, the ambivalent core is implanted in the psychic organiza-
tion of the child.
Confidence arid the ambivalent core are primary mental con-
structs. \Vc assume that one originates in the cRects of the positive,
the other in the outcome of the negative transactional processes
between motlier and infant. Each of these primary structures inter-
acts with the other in the further development of the child’s
personality and concurrently modifies i n specific ways the further
“emotional symbiosis,” i.e., the rcc.iproca1 relationship between
mother and child.
T h e conceptualization of the processes resulting in “confidence”
and in the “depressive core” also serves as models of the trans-
actional processes between parent and child in the later develop-
mental phases. I propose that not only corresponding with and as
a result of the physiologic symbiosis of pregnancy and the oral
phase of development, but in each “critical period” the child re-
vives in thc parent his related developmental conflicts. This brings
about either pathologic manifestations in the parent, or by resolu-
tion of the conflict it achieves a new level of integration in the
parent. I n turn, the child reaches each “critical period” with a
repetition oE the transactional processes which lead anew to the
integration of the drive experience with the related object and
self-representations.
Before embarking upon material which supports this hypothesis,
the father should be considered. Is there also a drive organization
which motivates a reciprocal interaction between father and child?
398 THERESE BENEDEK
Since man’s reproductive function depends upon a single act, the
motivation of which is experienced as n compelling desire for
orgastic discharge, one might ask whether there exists in men a
primary biological tendency toward becoming and being a father,
protector, and provider. Can one differentiate in man as in woman
two goals of the reproductive drive?
In man as in woman, one can differentiate two arcs of the re-
productive cycle. JVliile in the female the short arc reflects the
cyclical stimulation of the ovarian hormones, in the male the short
cycle evolves without recognizable regularity, from one increase
of compelling sexual urge to another. With the consummatory
act the short cycle of the man’s reproductive function is com-
pleted. T h e long arc of the reproductive cycle i n man evolves
from the time of being conceived as a male to the time when he
attains sexual maturity and is able to fulfill his function in pro-
creation. Propagation is a special manifestation of growth. T h e
individual, after having achieved maturity, surpasses the growth
of his own body and becomes able to produce a new individual.
Under conditions which impede the reproductive function, such
as sterility of either of the marital partners or enforced separation
during war, man’s instinct for survival becomes conscious and
accessible to psychoanalytic study. Man’s desire to survive, espe-
cially in the offspring of his own sex, is also documented by rites
and religions, by customs and socioeconomic organization. There
need be no doubt that the male reproductive drive has psychic
representations of instinctual, biological origin. Yet for the pur-
pose of our present problem, the question is whether we can dif-
ferentiate in the male a drive organization which, parallel with
motherliness, directs the reproductive drive toward fatherliness.
hjfy answer is affirmative, based upon the assumption that there
are two sources of fatherliness: one, biological bisexuality; and the
other, the biological dependency upon the mother.
For the first part of this assumption, zoologists give us support.
In the reproductive functions of nonmammalian vertebrates
zoologists have found strikingly different patterns of courtship,
preparatory activities and-especially surprising to us-marked
variations in patterns oE caring for the young. Our knowledge of
man’s bisexuality, however, is extremely limited.
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE 399

The long-lasting dependence of tlie human infant is a biological

characteristic of the species. This accounts for the significance that
the oral-dependent phase lias for the personality organization of
individuals of both sexes. Each man’s earliest security as well as
his earliest orientation to his world have been learned through
identification with his mother. In the normal course of the devel-
opment in the male, the early emotional dependence upon and
identification with the mother is siirpassed by tlie identifications
with the father, directed by the innate maleness of the boy. This
results not only in sexual competition with the father but also in
identifications with the various roles of the fatlier as protector and
provider. These secondary manifestations of maleness are in con-
tinual transactions with those psychic representations which were
established as a result of the oral-dependent relationship with the
mother.
T h e primary drive organization of the oral phase-the pre-
requisite and consequence of the metabolic processes which sus-
tain growth, maturation, and lead to the differentiation of the
reproductive function-is the origin of parental tendencies, of
motlierliness and fatlierliness. Since in man parental functions
do not involve specific physiologic processes, tliere is no hormonal
stimulation which, like the progesterone phase of the woman,
would cyclically reactivate the oral phase of development. T h e
drive organization which channels passive-receptive tendencies
into the active object-directed behavior of fatherliness reaclies its
goal through the developmental resohtion between male and fe-
male identifications, so that the adult male includes in his ego
ideal the aspiration to complete his role in procreation by fatlier-
liness.
This culturally infliienced drive organization which motivates
tnan’s developmental goals toward marriage and fatlicrhood be-
comes integrated with tlie “regressive” tendencies tlirough iden-
tification with his wife during lier pregnancy. Sharing her fan-
tasies and projecting his own about their yet unborn child, the
father revives and relives his identifications with his mother and
father in their specific developmental significance.
TVhen Freud (9) states, “That which the fond parent projects
ahead of him as his ideal in the child is merely a substitute for
400 THERESE BENEDEK
the lost narcissism of childhood,” he implies that the child repre-
sents not only the parent’s self as a child but also, or more so, his
hope and expectation of self-realization through the child. Parents
and children strive toward this goal through the unconscious
processes of reciprocal introjections and identifications.
I V e have discussed the vicissitudes of communication between
mother and child in that developmental phase when these processes
are closest to their biological origin, during the post-partum
period and infancy. But even in this state of emotional symbiosis
we do not deal with a dyad only. T h e emotional attitude of the
father in the family triad is significant from conception on. He
responds to the receptive-dependent needs of his wife which are
increased by her pregnancy, by her anxieties about parturition
and the care of the child. Soon after the birth of the child a direct
object relationship to the child begins to develop. Independent
of hormonal stimulation, the father’s relationship to the child
is directed more by hope than by drive. Since the infant’s per-
ceptive system develops faster than his object relationships to
“total objects,” the infant soon begins to look, smile, and coo at
the father and so reactivates his “motherliness.” T h e father, sooth-
ing, comforting the child, playing with him, receives pleasure
from the child. Besides the primary, libidinal gratification, he also
csperiences a secondary narcissistic gratification in the reassurance
of his ego ideal that he is a good father.
It is characteristic of the spiral of human development that the
representations of the primary object relationship with the mother
are in continual transaction with the representations of all later
object relationships according to the age and maturity of the
child and the significance of the particular object. T h e first and
most important among the secondary object relationships is, of
course, the father. In societies where the organization of the family
is based on the biological unit, father-mother-child, the inter-
action between father and child occurs through the processes of
introjection and identification, as between mother and child. T h e
father, like the mother, repeats with each child, in a different way,
the steps of his own development, and under fortunate circum-
stances achieves further resolution of his conflicts. T h e primary
source of development through fatherhood is the same as for
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE 40 1

development through inotherhood. It holds true for both seses

that “when higher integration requires a fresh supply of psychic
energy, it is produced through the intensification of the receptive-
retentive tendencies which were involved in the primary organiza-
tion of the psychic structure” (3, p. 419).
IVhatever the meaning of such “regression” for the father’s
psychology, the secondary object relationships of infancy with
father and also with other persons hold great importance for the
development of the child. They diminish the esclusive object
interest in the mother and wean the child away from symbiosis.
Through the distribution of the gratifications of dependent needs,
object relationships are formed which channelize the cathesis of
the primary -object relationship and its unconscious drive repre-
sentations.
I1
T h e tendency to internalize outer reality is hereditary, as is the
central organization which in man permits a manifold working
over of the interacting psychic patterns from their incipient drive-
object-self-representations to their integration within the ego or-
ganization and the p~rsonality.~ T h e sequence of these processes
is conceptualized around one individual, the child. In this presen-
tation, however, which concentrates upon the parent-and-child
interaction, i t must be emphasized that internalization and sub-
sequent identification requires more than a parent-child relation-
ship. Originating in the biological pattern-need-satiation-the
transactional processes between parent and child show individual
variations from their beginning. T h e self-action pattern of the
child motivates his readiness to respond, the choice of response,
and its affective meaning; this in turn brings about the integration
of responses into patterns which become characteristic for the indi-
vidual. T h e parents, on the other hand, meet the child’s needs as
7 No matter how intriguingly anthropomorphic the “imprinting” of animals may
appear (18), imprinting is not identical with learning through identifications. It is
just the opposite. Imprinting represents a memory hation of a traumatic cxperi-
ence. Because it occurred early (in a critical period) of life and because of the
limited potential for mental growth, it cannot be overcome by accumulation of
other experiences, i.e., by emotional learning. Thus “imprinting” can be compared
in humans with inhibiting trauma, but not with identification.
402 THERESE BENEDEK
adult individuals. Their personalities, acting relatively spon-
taneously, motivate their emotional attitudes and behavior toward
the child; they determine tlie parents’ particular interpretations
of the child’s behavior and their responses to it. This in turn will
influence the intrapsychic processes of introjections and identi-
fications in all three of the participants and set the tone of mutual
anticipations in the continuum of the transactional processes.
TVith the loosening of the symbiotic relationship the ego
boundaries of the child evolve and expand. It sliould be recalled
that the newborn seems to behave as if he had two sources of
gratification, one in reality outside his body and the other from
witliin his body. In tlie sucking behavior of the infant one may
recognize the precursor of mastery and antecedents of the im-
pulses which, combined with confidence and/or the ambivalent
core, become integrated to enable tlie child to evaluate his ability
to achieve self-set aims by liis own effort.
Spitz (21) describes how the self-action pattern of tlie yes and of
no evolves from its neuromuscular anlage to its semantic expres-
sion. From the viewpoint of the parent, the yes of the infant repre-
sents a manifestation of a satisfactory projection of the self-image;
it keeps the child included in tlie parents’ self-system, enhancing
love, hope, and expectations for the future of the child and
through tliis for oneself. T h e response is different to the child’s
consistent ao or intensively negativistic behavior. T h e parent’s
response then depends upon the genuineness of his parental feel-
ings and also upon the role of the original object whom the child
represents. T h e negativistic behavior of the child separates him
from the self-system of the parent, and this forces tlie parent “to
see” what he or slie does not like within himself or in significant
objects of his present or past. If it activates a regressive pattern, the
opposed parent feels compelled to oppose the child. Under tlie
impact of frustration by the child, tlie parent’s ego boundaries
weaken so that the angry parent identifies with the angry child.
T h e healthy, adaptive response to the negativistic behavior of
the child strengthens the ego boundaries of the parent, making
him conscious of liis role as educator. T h e culturally assigned
role of the parent derives its motivation, however, not only from
its conscious goal, but also from repressed and remembered
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE 403

significant incidents and conflicts of his developmental experi-

ences. These then motivate the reciprocal interaction between
parent and child.
Jacobson (15) studied the parent-child interaction from the
point of view of the ego organization of the child within each
phase of development. Slie states, “Parental demands and pro-
hibitions can probably become internalized only by joining
forces with the child’s own narcissistic, ambitious striving to
which they give new direction.” But what determines die parent’s
ability to wait until the child has matured sufficiently to join
forces with the parent’s goals? And what determines the parent’s
anxious pressures on the child, watching and urging him to
grow and develop according to expectations?
Pediatricians observe mothers with whom “demand feeding”
does not work because of their eagerness to feed. Pediatricians
as well as psychiatrists know about the anxious ambition with
ivliich some parents concentrate upon the toilet training of the
child, and about the permissiveness of others which delays the
child’s development. Even more conspicuous are tlie symptoms
which originate in the alternations of both of these extreme
attitudes. Recently, the interaction between parent and child has
been studied, although primarily with the aim of explaining the
pathology of tlie child.
Adelaide M. Johnson (16) in several publications calls attention
to the fact that the child’s ego seems to be weakest in those areas
wliich correspond to iinresolved conflicts of the mother, father,
or significant parent surrogate. This means that the transactional
relation between parent and child evolves relatively smoothly until
the child reaches the developmental level at which the parent,
because of his own developmental conflict, is unable to respond to
the child according to the accepted cultural standard and therefore
becomes insecure with the child. T h e child feels the parents’
insecurity and interprets it as weakness. This diminishes the child’s
sense of protectedness, which in turn increases his anxiety. T h e
anxiety motivates tlie child’s regression which serves as a defense
against emotional isolation by increasing tlie demand for the par-
ent’s protection. Thus a regressive interaction develops. T h e child
in adapting to the parent’s conflictful behavior either does not
40J THERESE BENEDEK

learn new controls or may give up those which were already estab-
lished. In order to avoid emotional isolation from the parent,’the
child introjects the conflict of the parent which threatens his
security. I n his “regressive adaptation” to the parent’s conflictful
behavior, the child incorporates a “fixation,” thus making certain
that he will not become a better person than his parent is.
Johnson’s investigations concerning “actingout” behavior were
conducted by “collaborative therapy,” i.e., by parallel investiga-
tions of the child and the significant parent. Her case material illu-
strates that the incorporation of the parent’s conflicts into the
psychic structure of the child occurs beyond the oral phase of
development, during the anal, phallic, and oedipal phases. John-
son’s investigations seem to offer clinical evidence for Jacobson’s
metapsycliological study of the development of the self-concept
through internalization of the object world. Both investigators,
however, deal only with the world of the child in which the parent
has a central role.
Is there any psychoanalytic evidence which would support the
thesis that the child, being the object of the parent’s drive, has,
psychologically speaking, a similar function i n the psychic struc-
ture of the parent? Does the child, evoking and maintaining
reciprocal intrapsychic processes in the parent, become instru-
mental in further developmental integration or its failure in the
parent? Answers to these questions can be more easily elicited
from pathologic than from normal situations. In individual in-
stances when conflicts with children cause undue stress for a par-
ent, or for both parents, we understand its pathogenic significance.
TVliether it be disappointment in the child’s development, anxiety
for his well-being, whether it be fear of separation and of illness
or real mourning, we understand its meaning by empathy and
interpret it in the frame of the developmental history and per-
sonality structure of the parent. If we interpret the parent’s pres-
ent plight only in terms of his individual past, we fail to take into
account the infinite minute happenings, affective communications
which, by keeping the spiral of reciprocal interactions going, actu-
ally lead to pathology.
Yet Johnson’s investigations reveal that each child in a different
way and in a different measure stirs u p through his own phasic
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPhlENTAL PHASE 405
development the corresponding unconscious developmental con-
flict of the parent. T h e parent meets in each child in a particular
way the projections of his own conflicts. It is possible that what is
more desirable happens more often. Since it does not cause pathol-
ogy, it does not come to our attention. Parents meet in their chil-
dren not only the projections of their own conflicts incorporated
in the child, but also the promise of their hopes and ambitions.
T h e parent, each in his own way, has to deal with the positive as
well as the negative revelations of the self in the child. It is the
individually varying degree of confidence in oneself = child and
the individually different level of maturity which help the parent
not to overemphasize the positive and not to be overwhelmed by
the negative aspects of the self as it is exposed through the child.
In any case, the parent cannot help but deal with his own conflict
unconsciously, while consciously he tries to help the child achieve
his developmental goal.

Based upon the reciprocal interaction between parent and child

during the oral phase, we may generalize that the spiral of trans-
action between parent and child can be interpreted in each phase
on two levels of motivation and in terms of each of the partici-
pants. One is determined by the past which motivates current
behavior, and the other is the current experience in which the
motivational patterns of each of the participants meet. T h e result-
ing current experience is introjected and stored as object and
self-representations along with the emotional quality which accom-
panied the drive experience. This introduces a third aspect into
the motivational pattern, namely, the anticipation of the emo-
tional course of future experiences. This has paramount influence
upon the course of parent-child interactions.
T h e significance of the child's anticipation of the parent's re-
action to his behavior is well known. T h e child's confident ex-
pectation of gratification, his fear of frustration and punishment
modifies his sense of security with his parents. Through the day-by-
day repetitions of minute happenings between parents and child,
the child learns to trust his anticipation. This, more than massive
406 THERESE BENEDEK

anxiety, accounts for the autoplastic and alloplastic adaptive pat-

terns in the ego of the child.
It is expected that it would be different with the parents. T h e
behavior patterns of the parent toward the child are motivated
by his long individual history, through wliicli his identity has been
established. It is generally assumed that his ego organization is
such that lie is not subject to changes in his self-representations
through drive-determined object relationship with his child. In-
deed, the self-assurance of the parent in his mature motivations
toward his child justifies his authority. His authority functions,
however, not only to protect the child, but also to insure him
against being affected by the child's behavior. It helps the parent
to repress and/or deny his anticipations, fears, and his unconscious
feelings toward the child. Thus Freud mentions only the fond
parents' narcissistic expectations projected onto the child. Today
it is difficult to imagine the emotional security of the Victorian
parent toward his child, so aware are wc of current parents' anx-
ieties. Psychoanalysis often demonstrates that parents become
aware of their own unconscious motivations toward their children
by anticipating the child's behavior and its unconscious motiva-
tions. Parents, anticipating negativistic attitudes in their children,
feel insecure, afraid, and angry even before the child acts, some-
times even more if the child does not act according to negative
anticipation. T h e prevalence of introjection in the communica-
tion between parent and child invites comparison with paranoid
processes. It seems that parents and children, like paranoids,
achieve what they anticipate with anxiety, and intend to avoid.
Psychoanalysis takes into account the individual variations in
the behavior of the parent toward the child but considers them as
exceptions and the ideal parent the rule. And rightly so. Idealiza-
tion of the parent is not just a cultiirally determined residue of
the Victorian era. It originates in the instinct of self-preservation
and evolves through reciprocal communications between parent
and child.
Here we shall consider imitation as a manifestation of the
reciprocal psychic processes. Imitation is usually investigated only
as it concerns the intrapsychic processes of the child. Jacobson
states: ". . . imitation of parental emotional expression influences
 PARENTHOOD AS A DE\rELOPhIENTAL PHASE 407

the child’s own discharge patterns . . . to induce identical affective

phenomena” (15, p. 100). Yet observation of the smiling response I

makes us ask, wlio imitates wl.om2 IVeeks before tlie smiling re-
sponse develops, the flecting “stomach smile” of the neonate
makes tlie motlier anticipate the pleasure of her smiling baby, and
she cannot help but smile. Since the affective communications
between parent and infant are reciprocal, we can hope that closer
observations, by cinematographic studies, will allow for a more
precise analysis of the interaction and better understanding of the
processes wliicli lead to overt imitation by tlie child. For this may
be secondary, a reaction to tlie parent’s unconscious identification
with the child and anticipation of his responses.
As a means. of communication, imitation enters into the spiral
of emotional transactions and influences the parent-child relation-
ship. T h e imitating child holds up a mirror image to the parent.
Nai’vc and completcly intuitive as the child’s gestures are, they are
also unmistakably true. Thus the parent responding to the mirror
image may recognize and even say to tlie child, “This is your
father; this is me in you,” or someone else wliom the child prob-
ably never saw. In this way innate patterns may be enacted in
which the parent recognizes himself or persons significant in his
or her own past and present. If the child’s imitative behavior ex-
presses positive aspects of the parent and positive attitudes be-
tween them, it shows that both parent and child are lovable. Thus
imitation brings to the fore and by repetition enforces the positive
arc of tlie emotional symbiosis. It can also happen that the parent
is shocked by the child’s imitative behavior when the child re-
enacts representations of negative experiences, sometimes with
threatening hostility. Imitation of tlie parent by the child then
stimulates, and by repetition may reinforce the negative arc of the
emotional symbiosis. It depends upon the maturity of the parent
and the genuineness of his love for the child whether such a warn-
ing is heeded or whether it leads to rejection of the unloved self =
unloved child.
This indicates that imitation is a means of interpersonal com-
munication by externalizing what has been already internalized.
DeveIopmentally, imitation is considered the antecedent of true
ego identification. Yet it occurs at any age and level of maturity.
408 THERESE BENEDEK
It is true for animals and man alike that if the ego feels helpless in
mastering overwhelming emotions, it reverts to this infantile ex-
pression of identification with the ‘aggressor. There are gestures,
Inimical expressions (5) “designed” to disarm the aggressors, others
to threaten them. TVe can assume that in the imitative behavior
of the child a tendency to master one’s own emotions and at the
same time influence the environment is expressed. Playful as well
as hostile imitations represent manifestations of the repetition
compulsion, the tendency through which traumatic memories are
overcome.
Since the parents’, especially the mother’s, relationship to the
infant is often highly charged with emotions, imitation of the
child is. uscd by the parents, often deliberately, and usually uncon-
sciously, as a means of mastering the affects, be they love and
admiration for the child’s activities, or anger and even despondency
because of them. TVe assume that while parents thus deliberately
manipulate the beliavior of the child and their current relation-
ship with him, unconsciously they also modify their own intra-
psychic processes. T h e representations of the transacting expcri-
ence become introjected and influence their anticipations in
regard to future events.
T h e child’s playful imitation -of the parents’ activities consti-
tutes an affective means of learning, coordination, and function.
T h e self-action pattern of the child leans on the parent and uses
imitation as the vehicle. This is especially conspicuous in the two-
or three-year-old, in the preoeclifinl child. Children of both sexes,
beginning to struggle with bowel control, having mastered loco-
motion, learn to use the parents’ tools. Little boys and girls alike
learn to sweep, to dust, and to dry dishes with the exact gestures
of their mother. A little later, when the girl turns to dolls and the
boy to the lawn mower and hammer, the parents delight in the
skillfulness of the child and find gratification in such impersona-
tions. For the child, imitation functions in the same way as fan-
tasy; it forecasts (for the child) what he will .be able to do, to be
sometime in the future. In imitating the parent, the child charges
his own actions with the wonderment and admiration which he
feels for adults. T h e gratification from his own actions becomes
exaggerated by this.
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE 409
T h e secondary narcissistic gratification so achieved is a deriva-
tive of the primary narcissism of the child originating in his
&‘actionlust,” enhanced as it was at an earlier developmental age
by tlie loving acceptance of the parents. Now the child knows that
they can do it better than he. This increases the child’s self-assur-
ante on one hand and on the other his confidence that the parents
are able and willing to protect him, whatever his nest step may be.
Tli~isa reciprocal interchange of narcissistic gratifications brings
about tlie child’s magic participation in the “magic omnipotence”
of the parent.
This constellation of positive communications between parent
and child suggests the elaboration of confidence on the develop-
mental level of the preoedipal child. During the oral phase of
development the confidence that needs will be satisfied provides
intrapsychic protection against fear of frustration. TVith the loosen-
ing of the synibiotic relationship the self-action patterns direct the
cliild’s striving toward mastery. Paralleling the growing inde-
pendence of the child, a more complex introject-identification
with the omnipotent parents is needed to afford intrapsychic pro-
tection and to maintain the parent-child unity on the psychological
level, ivliile it is being severed step.by step in reality. TVhile the
secondary narcissistic elaboration of confidence is the source of the
omnipotent fantasies of the child, it is also the antecedent of the
child’s idealization of the parents. Thus it prepares for the next
level, the oedipal phase of development.
Tl’hat is the corresponding psychodynamic process in the par-
ent? Since the omnipotent fantasies of the child and the corre-
sponding idealization of the parent represent the positive arc of
the transactional pattern, it facilitates the parent’s identification
with the child for two reasons. One is that the child’s fantasies
reactivate i n the parent the omnipotent fantasies of his own
childhood; the other is that the parent, identifying with the cur-
rent fantasies of the child, accepts the role of omnipotence at-
tributed to him. T h e normal parent, in spite of his insight into
his realistic limitations, embraces tlie gratifying role of omnipo-
tence. It induces him to identify with his own parent now in
reality as he anticipated being able to do in his childhood fan-
tasies. TVhatever the real course of events has been between him-
410 THERESE BENEDEK

self and his parents, as long as the fantasies of his child do not
become hostile against him, the parent derives from the process
of preoedipal identifications the reassurance that he is a good
parent and, even more, the hope that he is or can be better than
his own parent was.
Under normal circumstances, i.e., if tlie process of preocdipal
identifications is not disrupted too often and by too intense am-
bivalent interplay, the reciprocal interaction of omnipotent fan-
tasies makes the task of the parent educator easy. This is the
process by which the value system of the parent becomes inte-
grated into the precursors of the superego in the cliild. This be-
comes very difficult, however, if tlie parents anticipate that the
child’s, independent activities kill expose their mistakes, inferior-
ity, and thus diminish their self-esteem. T h e spiral of negative
transactions can be activated at any time. This hazard increases
with the growing self-differentiation of the child. This multiplies
the factors which may activate the parent’s ambivalent response
and interfere with the further course of development.

IV
In this presentation tlic reciprocal interaction between parent
and child has been discussed without differentiating the sex of
either the parent or the cliild. T h e significance of the child’s iden-
tification with the parent of his own sex and the role of the parent
of the opposite sex in the oedipal phase of development has been
established in general. I n particular, considering the actual moti-
vations of parent-child interactions, i t seems easiest to paraphrase
Freud: “IVhere there are two people interacting, one can always
see four” (7). Any current interaction between parent and child is
motivated by the parent’s past relationship with both of his own
parents. TVlien a cliild reachcs his preoedipal phase, his iden-
tifications with the parent of his own sex are determined not only
by the past history of that relationship but also by the incorporated
history of his interactions with the parent of the other sex. (Since
the parents’ interactions with each other, and especially with thcir
children, are motivated by the total developmental past of each,
the simplest family triad, early in the anal phase of development
 PARENTHOOD AS A D;EVELOPAlENTAL PHASE 41 1
and definitely in tlie preoedipal phase, is influenced by twelve
sources of interacting motivations.)
Since Freud discovered the significance of infantile sexuality, it
is taken for granted that the oedipal phase is a spontaneous mani-
festation of the innate pattern of tlie sexual drive. T h e parents’
participation i n its evolution is considered only in exceptional,
pathological instances. T h e study of the patterns of reciprocal
interactions between parent and child and the resulting shifts in
the object and self-representations indicate the role of the ego
organization in the development of the oedipal conflict.
T h e recent literature on the significance of the oedipus com-
plex in psychopathology and in normal character structure reveals
more and more convincingly that the processes which were cus-
tomarily related to the vicissitudes of the oedipus complex are
motivated by experiences arising in earlier phases of development.
It seems that the oedipus complex “. . . has apical importance not
so much as the nucleus of the neuroses but as the nucleus of normal
character structure” (Gitelson, 13, p. 354). In this presentation,
it is assumed that the oedipus complex evolves as ‘the consequence
of tlie positive balance of the transactional processes between
parents and child which, in spite of transient fluctuations, lead the
child from one critical period to the other successfully. In contrast,
if the negative emotional balance maintains an ambivalent course
of transactions, this results in failure of the development and of
tlie dissolution of the oedipus complex. This thesis is significant
enough to warrant surveying again the reciprocal patterns of iden-
tifications between parent and child.
As stated, the child’s identifications with the parent evolve step
by step in accordance with tlie drive requirements which the par-
ent satisfies in various phases of the child’s development. Ac-
cordingly, tlie parent is at the beginning a “partial object” com-
pletely cathected with the child’s drive requirement and intro-
jccted by the child with his drive experience. Corresponding with
the growth and maturation of the child, the parent becomes step
by step a “total object” cathected not only with primary drive
requirements of the child, but as a person outside the self, Ivith
whom the child forms relationsliips of different order, meaning,
and value.
412 THERESE BENEDEK
There is a corresponding shift in the parent’s object relation-
ship with the child. TVe have discussed how the fetus and the new-
born are total objects of the mother’s drive organization culminat-
ing in motherhood and motherliness. T h e newborn is the total
object of the primary narcissism of the mother. For the father the
newborn represents survival and also the hope of self-realization;
thus the infant is also a ”total object” of the father’s secondary
narcissism. As the child with each progression in his maturation
becomes more a person outside the parent, and at least partially
independent of the parents’ projections, he becomes the object
of the partial drives of the parent. If this involves only aim-in-
liibited drive manifestations such as tenderness, empathy, helpful-
ness, etc., the emotional interaction is positive and satisfactory for
each participant. If, however, the parent becomes aware of sexual
impulses toward the child, his guilt may cause negative transac-
tions even if not acted out. Even more disturbing is the effect
when the parent succeeds in denying the nature of his impulses.
Normally the child’s idealization of the parent feeds the parent
with gratification. T h e parent cannot help but respond to the
child’s pregenital strivings with increased object love for the child.
There is no need to elaborate ypon the father’s response to the
admiration of his son, o r to the flirtation of his four-year-old
daughter. Just as obvious is the mother’s satisfaction in her daugh-
ter’s expression of the wish to become like her and/or in the
promise of her four-year-old son to marry her because she is the
best or most beautiful mother. Innocent as parents and children
are in these exprcssions of their satisfaction with each other, these
are the antecedents of the crucial developmental period, the oedi-
pal phase. Since the hormonal and physiologic equipment of the
child does not permit the realization of oedipal strivings, the ques-
tion arises: what accounts for the intensity and significance of the
castration fear, the punishment for a sin which cannot be com-
mitted?
Not the child but the parent is in possession of the mental and
physiological equipment which stimulates sexual impulses and
the fear of its consequences. In our culture, the ego ideal and the
superego of the parent require complete repression of the parent’s
incestuous wishes toward the child. I t happens more often than
our case histories or conceptualizations account for that the analy-
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPhIENTAL PHASE 413
ses of individuals with high superego standards reveal various
forms of neurosis resulting from a disturbance of the interaction
between parent and child, beginning, for example, when a father
becomes aware of a sexual response to his daughter, or when a
mother is shocked by her fascination with her son’s penis. T h e
emphasis here is on the normal processes. We assume that the
gratifying preoedipal relationship between parent and child en-
hances the object love and stimulates the sexual drive of the
parent, the object of which is the child. Normally, i.e., under cir-
cumstances which account for successful neutralization of the drive
energies involved in the oedipus complex of the parent, his well-
integrated superego inhibits sexual impulses directed toward the
child before they ever reach consciousness. Yet that does not mean
that the child cannot be affected by the aim-inhibited emotions
of the parent.
I n discussing the oedipal phase, we take, as is customary, the
father and son as an example. TVhy does the father consider him a
rival? T h e father’s attitude in this critical period as well as before
and after is motivated by his developmental history and by the
current interactions with his son. Yet the current interactions with
his son are influenced by his own development. T h e intensity of
the castration fear when he was a child, the resulting strictness
of his superego are responsible for his severity toward his own
impulses and also toward his son. This brings us back to the ques-
tion: what makes the fear of punishment so effective for a sin
which cannot be committed? T h e answer to this question can be
approached from many aspects. Freud in Totem and Taboo (8)
traces the answer to the mystical origin of civilization. Today, how-
ever, we have sufficient clinical evidence to support the assump-
tion that the aging father by necessity considers the grown son a
rival, and therefore begrudges and fears the virility he bequeathes
to him. But why should a four- or five-year-old raised in our cul-
ture of relatively little violence between parent and child con-
sider himself a feared and therefore threatened rival?* T h e com-
munication between parent and child facilitates the identifica-
8This seems to be to some degree independent of immediate cultural influence.
In our present culture the declining authoritative behavior of the parent diminishes
the intensity of the conflict and thus the impetus for the organization of the
superego. In consequence, the oedipal impulses and the fear connected with them
undergo other vicissitudes in the intrapsychic organization.
4 14 THERESE BENEDER

tion between parent and child on the level of fantasied omnipo-

tence. When the father is called upon to restrict his impulses
toward his daughter for one reason and toward his son for another,
the father’s superego conveys to the child the ovenvhelmingly
dangerous significance of the irnprilscs which arise in him. Thus
the castntion fear of the child corresponds with the incorporated
castration fear of the parent, to the strictness of the superego.
Rangell (20, p. 13) states: “The oedipus complex has a continu-
ous and dynamic line of development from its earliest origin
through the various phases in the life of man.” He describes the
exacerbations of the oedipus complex in the parents as responses
to the puberty or to the marriage of the younger generation, and
also tlie returning of the repressed when the parent’s powers of
repression and ego integration decline, as occurs in illness and old
age. TVliether in classical literature or in case histories, we do not
consider these tragic incidents as simple repetitions of the past,
using the current love object as a substitute for the original. T h e
adolescent or adult married daughter substituting for the father’s
own mother, or the son substituting for the mother’s father, does
not suddenly revive the infantile oedipal complex with pathologic
vehemence. A complex intrapsycliic structure, which has been
built up in the parent through the processes of his participation
in the development of his children, undergoes a period of de-
terioration before it breaks down. T h e crash serves as evidence
that the structure existed.
Here, however, we are dealing with normal processes of de-
velopment which bring about tlie oedipal phase in the child and
activate a reciprocal developmental pattern in. the parent. Our
concept emphasizes the “continuous and dynamic line of de-
velopment” of the oedipus complex: (1) T h e oedipus complex
originates in tlie dynamics of reciprocal transactions between
parent and child beginning with individual existence. (2) IVhen
the child reaches the oedipal phase the parent has participated
i n its evolution, just as he will be instrumental in its repression
and resolution. (3) Since the child is the object of the parent’s
libido, he activates in the parent a new process of repression and
neutralization of the energies participating in the conflict. (4) T h e
conflict in the father, as in the son, is between the id impulse and
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPhIENTAL PHASE 415

the intrapsychic repressing forces. I n thc parent this is integrated

in his superego; in the child, only the precursors of tlie superego
and fear of punishment press toward repression. ( 5 ) After rcpres-
sion the introjected drive being neutralized permits the object
and self-representations to bc integrated into tlic superego sys-
tem. It is a neiv level of development for tlic child. In the parent
the dynamic processes of parenthood use the already established
organizations of ttic psychic system. But a new phase in the parents’
superego evolves. This encompasses the object representations of
the child and self-representations originating in the mature ex-
periences of parenthood. Tlie conflicts which were incorporated
in tlie superego when the parent was a child are “worked over”
through the esperiences of parenthood; this accounts for a neiv
pliasc of maturation in tlie parent. Through the successful rela-
tionship of tlie parent with his child or children, his superego
loses some of its strictness; and as it allows for a broader, deeper
capacity of experience, it indicates a new step toward the dissolu-
tion of its infantile origin. T h e opposite may also be true. Un-
successful experience of the parent with unsuccessful children un-
dermines the parent’s self-esteem and enhances the strictness of
his superego and thus renders it pathogenic for the parent as well
as for the child. Incorporated into the psychic system of the
parent, tlie child may mitigate or intensify tlie strictness of the
parent’s superego.
Here I recall tlie Austrian poet, Anton TVildgans (22) who in a
poem musing about his newborn son says: “Oiir judge you may
become-you are he already.” T h e poet expresses in a few words
what modern parents, deprived of the security of parents of less
individualistic, more authoritarian cultures, so often feel with
more or less anxiety. T h e child at birth is an enigma. H e reprc-
sents hope and promise for self-realization and at tlic same time
he forewarns that he may expose not one’s virtues but one’s
faults. This threat to the self-esteem of the insecure parent acti-
vates the strictness of his superego and intensifies, sometimes to
a pathologic degree, his efforts to avert errors, to avoid faults.
Thus parental behavior is directed by the established superego.
This directs the psychodynamic processes of the reciprocal com-
munication between parent and child. T h e intrapsychic processes
416 THERESE BENEDEK

which result from tlie interpersonal relationships through the

course oE the child’s development establish the object representa-
tions of tlie child as a part of the psychic structure of the parent.
Considering the transactional proccss oE the oedipal phase and its
resolution in the child and in the parent, we venture to say that
the object representations of the child become a part of the
parent’s superego.
Thus we assume two levels of superego in the parents of grow-
ing children, one which is incorporated in the parent’s personality
through his development from infancy to parenthood. This di-
rects his behavior toward the fulfillment of his ego aspirations,
particularly to be a good parent, and by being a good parent to
raise a child who by growing u p to his own self-realization also
fulfills the parent’s aspirations. I n the process of striving toward
this goal, through the continual alternations between success and
threatening failures of parenthood, the parent’s personality under-
goes changes which under normal circumstances seem to justify
o u r assumption that parenthood is a developnzetital phase.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Balint, A. Low for the mother and mother-love. Znt. J . Pqchoanal., 30:251-259,
1949.
2. Benedek, T. T h e psychosomatic implications of the primary unit: mother-
child. A m . J. Orfhopsychiat., 19:M2-654, 19-19. (Republished as Chapter 12, i n
Bencdek, T.. Psjchosexual Functions in Women. New York: Ronald Press,
1932.)
3. Benedek, T. Toivard the biology of the depressive constellation. This Journal,
4:333-427, 1956.
4. Benedek, T. T h e organization of the reproductive drive. Rcvkion of a paper
of the same title originally presented a t the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Meeting,
Institute for Psychoanalysis, Chicago. November IG, 1957. Znt. J . Psychoanal.
(in print).
5. Danvin, C . T h e Expression of the Emotions in hian and Animals. London:
1. hfurrav. 1872.
6. j’Erikson, El H. T h e problem of ego identity. This Journal, 4:56-121, 1936.
7. Freud, S. T h e Origins of Psychoanalysis; Letters to 1Yilhelm FIiess, 1887-1902,
ed. hfarie Bonaparte, Anna Freud. Ernst h i s . New York: Basic Books, 1954.
8. Freud, S. Totem and taboo (1913). Standard Edifion, 13:l-161. London: Hogarth
Press, 1935.
9. Freud, S. On narcissism: a n introduction (1914). Standard Edition, 14:73-102.
London: H o p r t h Press, 1937.
10. Freud, S. hfourning and melancholia (1917). Standard Edition, 143243-258.
London: Hogarth Press, 1937.
11. Freud, S . T h e Ego and the Zd (1923). London: IIogarth Press, 1927, p. 37.
 PARENTHOOD AS A DEVELOPhIENTAL PHASE 417
12. Freud, S. A n Outline of Psychoanalysis (1938). Neiv York: Norton, 1949, p. 23.
13. Gitelson, hl. Re-evaluation of the role of the oedipus complex. Znf. J . Psy-
rhoanal., 33351-354, 1952.
14. Grinker, R. R. On identification. Znt. J. Psychoanal., 38:379-890,1957.
15. Jacobson. E. The self and the object world. T h e Psychoanalyfic Study of the
Child, 9:75-127. New York: International Universities Press, 1954.
16. Johnson, A. hI. Factors in the etiology of h a t i o n s and symptom choice. Psy-
choanal. Quart., 22:475-496, 1953.
17. Llein, hI. Envy and Gratifude. London: Tavktock, 1957.
18. Lorenz, K. King SoIomon’s Ring. Neiv York: Croivell. 1952.
19. Parsons. T.. Bales. R. F., et al. Family, Socialization and Znferaction Process.
Chicaro: Free Press, 1955.
- Y

20. Rangell, L. T h e role of the parent i n the oedipus complex. Bull. Afenninger
Clin., 19:9-15, 1955.
21. Spitz. R. A. No and Yes; On the Genesis of Human Communication. New York:
International Universities Press, 1957.
22. IVildgans, A. Zrn Anschaun nieines Kindes. 1913.

Submitted January 16, 1959