Models of Early Infantile Development - Essay Example

Models of Early Infantile Development: Comparing and Contrasting Between Klein and Winnicott Models of Early Infantile Development: Comparing and Contrasting Between Klein and Winnicott The issue of early infantile development is one which must be taken into the most serious consideration, and this matter is one that is incredibly complex and which needs to be looked at from all different views and perspectives in order to be able to gain even a remote grasp on it in general. As well, there are so many contrasting and controversial opinions in regards to this subject, and two opinions in particular that are going to be discussed here is that of Melanie Klein and D.W. Winnicott; these two are a set of people that have made a tremendous difference in regards to the issue of early infantile development in general, and their work is truly what has made the most substantial difference in reference to this topic overall. In order to gain a properly understanding viewpoint on the matter at hand, we will be discussing and comparing these two views, as well as show examples of how their theories are being understood in terms of oneself and ones own life experiences, as well as in terms of clients or other people that are related to this issue in general. Once all of this is discussed, we will have gained an incredibly more knowledgeable and critical viewpoint on this subject matter. This is what will be dissertated in the following. The first thing that has to be understood in regards to this issue is that of the two opinions that we will be particularly discussing, and that involves Melanie Klein and D.W. Winnicott. Melanie Klein was an Austrian born British psychoanalyst, who devised therapeutic techniques for children with great impact on contemporary methods of child care and rearing. She was born in Vienna, and then she became a psychoanalyst once she was grown up and she began analyzing children in 1919. Klein was incredibly innovative in the techniques that she used, and "Apart from her successful introduction of triumphant psychoanalytic concepts, Melanie Klein's life was full of tragic events. She She was the product of an unwanted birth - her parents showed her little affection. Her much loved elder sister died when Klein was four, and she was made to feel responsible for her brother's death. Her academic studies were interrupted by marriage and children. Her marriage failed and her son died, while her daughter, the well-known psychoanalyst Melitta Schmideberg, fought her openly in the British Psycho-analytic Society and emigrated to America. Mother and daughter were not reconciled before Klein's death, and Schmideberg did not attend Klein's funeral. Melanie Klein was also clinically depressed." (Wikipedia, 2006). In regards to D.W. Winnicott (Donald Woods Winnicott), he was a pediatrician and psychoanalyst, and he decided to become a doctor quite early on in his life, and he truly rose to prominence just as the followers of Freud were battling those of Melanie Klein in fact, and Winnicott become known as a sort of contrasting opinion when compared to Melanie Klein's work, and this is why the two are so interrelated; their distinctions from one another is what makes their work comparable and notable. One of the most important factors to realize about Winnicott is that his actual treatment of physically disturbed children is what truly gave him the experience and knowledge in his life that he needed in order to be able to build his most influential concepts; he had a truly incredible impact on the object relations theory as well as other related theories, and his work for the most part focused on that of familiar, inanimate objects that children use to starve off anxiety during times of stress. Furthermore, his theoretical writings truly and earnestly "emphasized empathy, imagination, and, in the words of philosopher Martha Nussbaum, who has been a proponent of his work, 'the highly particular transactions that constitute love between two imperfect people'. A prime example of this is his notion of 'good enough mothering', in which the inevitably imperfect mother generally does a 'good enough' job that her child can grow up normally." (Wikipedia2, 2006). Klein's model of early infantile development was for the most part based around her writing, and her writing was often evocative rather than sympathetic; she often times tended to elaborate theoretical paradigms without being able to fully incorporate or rework later concepts. When we look at Winnicott's basic model of the same issue, we see that his was much more sympathetic, and that he tended to in fact overanalyze rather than be subtle about it - this is one of the biggest contrasts between their works. Furthermore, Klein's later concepts regarding the paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions were far better known for a lengthy period of time than that of Winnicott's, and as well, the central thesis of Klein's work was that regarding the fact that she believed that objects play an incredibly decisive role in the development of a subject and although Winnicott absolutely and clearly believed in this fact as well, he was not as thorough as Klein was about it, and he did not make as many overt references in regards to this being any sort of serious importance in his work. At first glance we can quite obviously see that Klein's psychoanalytic system was not necessary the most fruitful approach, especially in regards to religion, and her theory did not appear to offer any sort of concepts that are immediately relevant to that of a psychoanalytic understanding of religion. "Looking at religion through a Kleinian lens is not merely a matter of extending Freud's analysis back in developmental time from oedipal to preoedipal dynamics, from a phallo - and patricentric to a mammo - and matricentric focus. For one thing, the Kleinian theory the Oedipus is already 'preoedipal' in that it is situated, albeit differently, in both the paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions." (Foster & Carveth, n.d.). We then look more closely at Winnicott's model of early infantile development, and his way is one that truly offers a much more radical approach to it all, and in his work, psychopathology is increasingly seen as having been derived from that of environmental failure, rather than simply from maladaptive defenses against drives, for instance; as well, completely opposite of Klein's opinion and work, Winnicott sees the infant moving from a state of 'subjective omnipotence' to the experience of objective reality by means of the mother's actual and often gradual withdrawal as the main facilitator of the infant. As Winnicott himself wrote, "It is assumed here that the task of reality acceptance is never completed, that no human being is free from the strain of relating inner and outer reality, and that relief from this strain is provided by an immediate area of experience which is not challenged. This immediate area is in direct continuity with the play area of the small child who is 'lost' in play." (Forster & Carveth, n.d.). We can easily see that both Klein's and Winnicott's theories are being understand in terms of oneself and ones own life experience; people all over the world have incredibly varying opinions on these two psychoanalysts, and this is why there has been so much constant criticism and controversy in regards to both; depending on your own personal preference is the only way that you yourself will be able to side with one or the other, however after an objective dissertation such as this, the choice is made much easier, because we now have an objective and knowledgeable understanding on both accounts, and we can see for instance that while Klein's work was much more evocative, Winnicott's was more empathetic and sympathetic, and that this is in fact the most different factor of all in regards to this issue in general. Thus, in conclusion we can see that while Klein theorizes in terms of drives, and uses the terms libido and aggression to refer to the emotions of love and hate for instance, Winnicott is more apt in his work to use actual terms in relation to what they mean, rather than classifying completely different phrases for them. There is one similarity that absolutely must be note of between the two, and this is the fact that they both understand psychic development as a non-linear process; "Whereas Freud viewed normal development as the child passing through a series of stages to finally achieve, short of regression, a relatively static state of mental equilibrium, Klein and Winnicott posit a movement back and forth between differing ways of organizing experience. Both agree with Freud that the child moves developmentally from a state of subjectivity to objectivity." (Forster & Carver, 2006). Thus we can see that although they do have dramatically differing viewpoints and ideas, they do have random similarities which are just as important to take into consideration as the differences; only by doing this can we attain a truly judgmental and opinionated understanding on both of their preferences and focuses, and thus this is the only way that a proper conclusion can be made. References Blass, R. (2001). On the Ethical and Evaluative Nature of Developmental Models in Psychoanal. St. Child, 56: 193-218. Forster, S.E., & Carveth, D.L. (n.d.). Christianity: A Kleinian Perspective. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from http://www.yorku.ca/dcarveth/klein.htm Lafarge, L. (1995). Melanie Klein: Volumes I & II.: By Jean-Michel Petot. Madison, CT: Int. Univ. Press, 1990 & 1991, 313 pp. & 281 pp., $40 each volume.. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 43:606-610. Mitchell, S.A. (1986). The Wings of Icarus: Illusion and the Problem of Narcissism. Contemporary Psychoanalsyis, 22:1. Ogden, TH. (1992). The Dialectically Constituted / Decentered Subject of Psychoanalysis. The Contributions of Klein and Winnicott. Int J Psychoanal. 73(4): 613-26. Penn. (2006). Newborn Development. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from http://www.pennhealth.com/ency/article/002004.htm Rafferty, M.A. (2000). A Conceptual Model for Clinical Supervision in Nursing and Health Visiting Based Upon Winnicott's (1960) Theory of the Parent-Infant Relationship. Journal of Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing. 7(2): 153. Rohmann, E. (1977). Significance of Damaging Factors in Development of Early Infantile Brain Damage. Kinderarztl Prax. 45(7): 299-304. Segal, H. (1982). Early Infantile Development as Reflected in the Psychoanalytical Process: Steps in Integration. Int J Psycho-Anal., 63: 15-22. Thomas, K.R., & McGinnis, J.D. (2006). The Psychoanalytic Theories of D.W. Winnicott as Applied to Rehabilitation. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0825/is_n3_v57/ai_11361019 Wasson, S. (1920). Object Relations. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from http://www.litencyc.com/php/stopics.phprec=true&UID=782 Wikipedia. (2006). Melanie Klein. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanie_Klein Wikipedia2. (2006). Donald Winnicott. Retrieved December 11, 2006, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.W._Winnicott Read More