Neuropsychoanalysis re-finds and refines psychoanalysis

The pages of Neuropsychoanalysis have witnessed numerous challenges to Freudian propositions, as well as rediscoveries of un- or under-appreciated insights. One of these surely is the role of hallucinatory wish fulfillment in perception. In the first issue of our journal, Barry Opatow (1999) portrayed this proposition as fundamental to psychoanalytic theory. Subsequently, Mark Solms (2013), in a footnote in his “Conscious Id” paper, cited the work of Jan Dirk Blom (2015) documenting the now well-accepted position that all our percepts are “hallucinatory” in nature. And then Schonbachler et al integrated it all in their paper on “wish and wishing” (2016).

And so it is with Michael Michael’s paper in this issue. In “On the Scientific Prospects for Freud’s Theory of Hysteria,” Dr. Michael takes us back to the dawn of psychoanalysis and the Studies on Hysteria (1895). He outlines Freud’s theory about the role of trauma, particularly sexual trauma, in the pathogenesis of conversion reactions, and evaluates how the theory fares (pretty well!) in light of two prominent empirical studies, as well as research attempting to demonstrate the existence of repression. He then offers a new neuropsychoanalytic account of conversion, utilizing a Bayesian model of brain functioning. In conclusion, Michael’s paper suggests that one important issue warranting considerably more research attention is that of our understanding of repression.

In that vein, the wonderfully thorough report by Daniela Flores Mosri of the 19th Congress of the International Neuropsychoanalysis Society, which took place in Mexico City from August 31st to September 2nd, 2018, could not be more timely, as its topic was repression and defense. Flores Mosri provides a summary of the nuanced keynote presentations from Michael Anderson, Cristina Alberini, Nikolai Axmacher, Mark Solms, herself and other speakers; the broad range of talks offered a wealth of empirical data and theoretical formulations related to repression, inhibition, suppression, memory, and affect regulation. Readers will find this report an excellent introduction to various lines of research, and should follow up by exploring the presenters’ publications for more detail.

Themes of inhibition and memory, as well as a wide variety of other neuropsychoanalytic topics, were the subject of research presentations at the Congress. The Research and Symposia Abstracts from the Congress, published in this issue, provide a window into the rich subject matter for those who were not able to attend the meeting.

The second original article in this issue is a moving contribution to a more recently developing line in neuropsychoanalysis: demonstrating clinical applications of neuropsychoanalytic perspectives. This is most obvious when one considers the numerous articles, in our journal and elsewhere, that bring psychoanalytic perspectives to the exploration of the pathology of patients with brain lesions and to their treatment. In this issue, the widening use of psychoanalytic tools, informed by neurobiology, is illustrated in Gil Kliman’s article “Reflective network therapy for childhood autism and childhood PTSD.” There he likens these disorders to late arising post-traumatic stress disorder, building on the psychoanalytically and neurobiologically informed account of autism seen recently in our pages (Singletary, 2015). In his paper, Kliman offers two richly detailed clinical narratives demonstrating the technique and impact of his “reflective network therapy,” so named because the therapist, teacher, parents, and even other children in the classroom are recruited as a network of sources to reflect back to the child what she or he is thinking and feeling, thus helping the child to deal with overwhelming stress and resulting coping mechanisms that include aggression or withdrawal. The nuanced vignettes demonstrate the power of a therapist taking into account the subjective inner world of the child. This approach, which is also based on a neurobiological theory of the reverberating interactions of stress and expectations of harm in a neurologically vulnerable child, thus bring a psychodynamic perspective to a disorder that is too often treated in a more mechanistic way.

Finally, we are delighted to provide news, as always, from our active regional groups around the world. Colleagues from Brazil, Italy, Portugal, and Turkey share their intriguing publications and rich interdisciplinary meetings with us. For more information on the regional groups of the International Neuropsychoanalysis Society, please visit https://npsa-association.org/who-we-are/the-international-neuropsychoanalysis-society/.

We look forward to re-convening with friends and colleagues at our 20th Annual Congress of the International Neuropsychoanalysis Society, to be held in Brussels, July 18-20, 2019. For more details, visit https://npsa-association.org/events/npsa-congress-brussels-2019/. See you soon!