When we were asked to coordinate a work cycle at the AMPP, we thought about giving these conferences a change of focus. We wanted to use our psychoanalytic knowledge as a means to question current issues that come to us through the media, such as slogans, as if they were unquestionable truths that we assume as such.
For this, instead of bringing the subject worked and elaborated by an expert, we decided to work in a group using the psychoanalytic tools that we have. It seemed to us that it could be an opportunity to observe the group dynamics that were taking place and that would probably exemplify why the slogans penetrate so deeply in our society.
We decided to collect for a few months a sample of the different opinions on issues that at that time seemed especially interesting: the decrease in the criminal age, the commercial censorship of the book "Understanding and healing homosexuality" and whether it was possible for ETA to dissolve and integrate into society without asking for forgiveness.
We chose these themes because of their great emotional charge, since we believe that this facilitates acting, that is to say, a performance that is the result of a conviction rather than an action that is the result of reflection.
Our first meeting consisted of working on the petition to lower the criminal age. In Spain, a change of government had just taken place 4 and the media reported this demand. This debate arose as a result of what happened in the case of Marta del Castillo5, in which the only minor was charged as a way of exonerating the elderly.
An idea seemed to emerge, perhaps a slogan? "The law was being very soft." Socially, the feeling had been generated that minors were going unpunished. The proposed solution was to lower the criminal age and stiffen the penalties. It seemed clear that if a crime had been committed, something happened when the minors did not pay for it.
In addition to the case of Marta del Castillo, other cases such as Sandra Palo6 were uncovered once again, causing much social outrage and a sense of injustice. As a result of these events, the requirement to lower the criminal age is triggered.
Work session
First block: questioning the slogan. The rescue of the need for prevention against the conviction of the minor. Approach difficulties.
The work session was held at the headquarters of our association, about twelve people attended the meeting, mostly psychotherapists, we also had the participation of other professionals with psychoanalytic training and we three as coordinators. The work session lasted an hour and a half. The first part of the session consisted of the projection of various audiovisual documents7 to bring current events from different points of view: a lecture by Juvenile Judge Emilio Calatayud, in which he explained that he was against the reduction of the criminal age and yet It highlighted other issues that were not being reflected on; for example, when there is a criminal act, something happens in the family, at school and in society.We also projected the requests of the Sandra Palo Association to change the Minors' Law and finally a television document about the reason for the need to modify the Law.
We thought that it was important not to enter directly into a psychoanalytic discourse, but to be able to use our method, but now applied to the field of social debate. Likewise, we also wanted to see how we could think, feel and elaborate the information presented.
Before having seen the audiovisuals, some people in the group, as had happened in part to us before starting to shape the day, spoke in favor of lowering the criminal age and the absurdity of maintaining the Juvenile Law unmodified, unjust and favorable to greater evils.
But curiously, after seeing the audiovisuals, the debate begins by talking about crime prevention and not conviction. Demands for help from families at social risk are denounced, demands that apparently are not heard, as if prevention were not being addressed. It asks why nothing is done in situations that are positively known to lead to crime. What could be happening so that knowing that there are unmet needs, that they are the cause of crime, the socially and legally created system does not act until the crime arrives?
Immediately the cause that is exposed is the lack of economic resources, but as the discussion progresses another hypothesis arises, perhaps the scarce prevention is explained by the difficulty involved in working with social tragedies. There is even talk that it seems that juvenile courts are more sensitive to these problems than the professionals who have permanent and direct contact with them, who are on the “front line” of work, as if they had to defend themselves against this pain. In other words, after being complacent in thinking that it is the scarcity of economic resources that justifies the non-prevention of crime, the group considers what seems to be the cause of it, the difficulty involved in approaching pain.
The following interventions question the possibility of reintegration of minors who commit criminal acts. Are they really reinserted? The group lists various difficulties that prevent intervention with these minors today, such as the lack of preparation on the part of professionals who lead multidisciplinary teams, the special multiracial and multicultural social configuration, with different codes, teenage gangs, etc. It seems that there is a return to discouragement, as if faced with difficulties it was easier to think that there is no solution.
Afterwards, the group goes back to worrying about prevention again. What do you do before there are problems? Situations that can be understood as requests for help from minors and their families are listed. Children who from a very young age are already medicated for emotional problems, parents who are overwhelmed and who ask for help, polydrug use in adolescents as a way of managing a family failure, etc.
The group also questions the need to take care of the personnel who work in this area, as well as the “mistreatment of the abused” that can occur in these institutions. If there is no continent space to think, the mistreatment of children and the professionals who work in them can be repeated. Then the group moves away from this issue again by complaining.
Second block: the dismantling of the slogan, the problem of the lack of authority and the responsibility that we all have.
After this first block, a movement begins in the group that comes closer to thinking about how to prevent and begins to talk about the need and lack of authority that exists in our society and that is directly related to the problem of prevention. This group movement alternates with another towards impotence in which the group believes that “nothing can be done”.
When speaking of authority, one thinks of the different responsibilities that each one of us has, one speaks of the authority of the school, the authority of parents, the social authority that we all have: "children belong to everyone." It is possible that criminal acts are committed as a result of a failure of authority of these bodies.
In this way, after considering the responsibility that we all have in the problem of juvenile offenders, an idea arises: the need for “fair justice”, which makes payment according to the circumstances of the juvenile. A comprehensive and restorative authority rather than punitive. The group talks about how when authority fails we lash out at the minor. The minor commits a crime and pays for the failure of the entire social structure.
Third block: With responsibility appears the word perversion. From the sentence of the minor to the perversion of the adult.
When you don't exercise authority, you enter a perverse system. It is perverse that the weight of the law is placed on minors and all the responsibilities of parents, professionals, companies that manage the institutions and those who do not report being witnesses of this problem are not analyzed. We all fall into this wicked system.
It seems that the group has been able to connect with concrete things about what to do and how to repair and perhaps that is why another movement appears, which leads us to think that this problem has no solution and that no matter how much we do, this type of thing will always happen. Hopelessness arises again and the impossibility of ending crime is pointed out, then the group recomposes itself.
A movement of approaching and distancing from the pain is repeated, in this oscillating movement the group strips off any idea-slogan connecting more with reality. This contact is difficult and therefore the complaint or doubt is repeated to get rid of the truth. But perhaps in this moment of group dynamics it is too late for this.
Movement that the task promotes in the group
We are going to analyze what happened in the group and if the proposed objective was achieved: think about the need or not to lower the criminal age.
The development of the session shows how the group makes an upward spiral movement, which implies a progressive level of deepening as well as an oscillating movement away and closer to pain that promotes thinking. The spiral is upward because the defenses that are put in place to avoid contact with pain, are weakening.
The Kleinian model of thought from which we observe group dynamics speaks of two mental functions or positions: paranoid-schizoid and depressive. There is an oscillating relationship between them, producing moments of fragmentation and dispersion characteristic of the paranoid-schizoid stage (PS) and peculiar moments of integration of the depressive position (D).
When the mind is able to sustain a new idea, tolerating the catastrophic anxiety8 that it arouses, from a paranoid-schizoid scale of values towards a depressive orientation (PS↔D), the growth of the idea will be possible.
The growth of the new produces pain and that is why the oscillation leads again to avoid thinking and thus escape from frustration. There is then no "acquisition of knowledge" but a "possession of knowledge" used to avoid the painful experience. The capacity for abstraction has been destroyed and the possibility of learning by emotional experience is excluded. Here the slogan is installed.
This movement, which goes from difficulty to think to being able to learn from experience, is reflected in the path that exists from the first group approach in which the hardening of penalties was accentuated, to the later one in which the prevention of crime, the responsibility that we all have if we do not exercise our authority, to finally arrive at the idea of equitable and non-punitive justice.
To explain this upward spiral, we are going to see the representative stages of these movements of progress and retreat, which we have described in blocks in the previous chapter.
In the first block, the first thing that appeared was the slogan: “the Juvenile Law must be toughened”, “if minors commit crimes, they must serve their sentences”, something that in principle does not have to be false. Then the idea of prevention comes up.
This thought is immediately rejected and the complaint and impotence take hold, it is as if the group said: "we have nothing to think about because there are no means to do anything." Specific situations arise to justify doing nothing: "they don't give you what you need." The other is blamed, the external, instead of making contact with their own shortcomings. Thought-promoting pain causes defenses to reactivate, threatening the group's ability to continue thinking. When the group says: “there are social demands that are not listened to” this pain appears, the most powerful feeling that a group must overcome to continue thinking.
But this oscillating movement gradually builds a space for thought to advance, despite the constant appearance of non-thought. It is as if a struggle were established within the group, on the one hand the approach to thought and on the other the distance due to the fear of impotence, in short, for everything that has to do with the emotional difficulties of containing the pain that it entails every act of thinking.
In the second block, the thinking part already has a place to hold on, there has already been an action of thinking, a clear idea arises, prevention and the idea that there are no means loses force. If prevention is necessary then what do we have to do? The need to exercise authority appears, it goes from the generic - authorities placed in others - to individual authority. From impotence, the group becomes active and powerful. There is a movement from omnipotence in which you can experience feelings of being able to do everything or of not being able to do anything, both unreal, to a feeling of power that takes into account realistic limits. Having realistic limits, the objectives also begin to be realistic and the group assumes responsibilities.
Work is still being done to make sense of all the pain that emanates from the task and not project it outside and thus be able to do something with all of it. This oscillating movement continues upwards, the group brings the idea of authority to see what can be done with so much pain, what are the responsibilities of each collective, group or person. The idea of a punitive sentence disappears, there is talk of equitable justice as a consequence of the fact that we all must assume responsibility.
In the third block, the initial approach has been reversed, of a system that punishes the minor, which only sees the visible head of the problem. Now the group talks about the wicked system in which we all participate. By taking perspective it is understood that we are all involved and that we are denying our responsibilities. The group has broadened its vision, from partial to total. The global vision is very painful, but it allows the group to get out of the slogan. The group concludes by defending crime prevention, pointing out the different lines of action, in this way the group indicates where the social debate should be.
Upward spiral movement of groupthink in the work session
The law of the minor from psychoanalysis in Spain
The graph shows how after an intervention carried out from omnipotence – impotence, thought arises. In the same way, after the thought something appears again that tries to reestablish the previous order. Despite this movement that returns to the paranoid-schizoid position, thought continues its course and evolves, there is progress in the deepening and analysis of the conflict and the bases are established for a possible resolution through the taking of measures and approaches to action.
We can end by saying that the group has carried out the proposed task, the group has gone from:
- From a concrete to an abstract thought From a partial vision to a total vision of the conflict From impotence to power From paralysis to creative action From diffuse responsibility to individual responsibility From pain avoidance to pain acceptance
Conclusions
We can say that, as we thought, using our psychoanalytic knowledge within a group with a defined setting has allowed us to unmask those ideas that can be taken for granted and not be so, totally or partially. Furthermore, this process has led to greater involvement in the task and insight, thanks to the group experience.
We believe that psychoanalytic tools promoted thought and that the framing focused the topic of the debate, broadening the vision to talk about crime prevention and not just conviction.
This was achieved because the group was able to contain the pain and went from paralysis to creativity. If more time were available, it is very likely that the group itself would form work teams, in order to implement programs and projects that would give a psychoanalytic perspective to other social groups. That, precisely, has been our experience, having more time to psychoanalytically deepen the proposed topics of debate, we went from the preconceived ideas of the beginning, to a greater understanding, which led us not only to develop this article, but to consider other collaborative projects and dissemination of current issues thought from psychoanalysis.
The work session exposed in this article shows how, on the one hand, the group avoided thinking, despite being a group with tools to contain pain, and on the other, how this containment is essential so that thinking can develop.. We believe that being able to count on this type of group design, focused on a task and with an objective to be achieved, allows the containment of the pain that is generated and that the group develops ideas promoted by creativity. For all this we can conclude that our professional collaboration with other groups could be very fruitful by providing this type of experience for the management of painful situations. In addition, sharing our psychoanalytic knowledge could be useful for the development of your projects.
This would mean taking psychoanalytic thinking out of our consultations and applying it to other contexts. In fact, historically there have been psychoanalytic contributions that have helped to create other intervention approaches in other professional fields, in 1952 René Spitz with the publication of the film "Psychogenic illness in childhood" shows the effects of emotional and maternal deprivation and was The cause of great changes, especially in the sections of the child care institutes, homes and hospitals, due to the fact that people who acquired knowledge about the impact of deprivation on child development, changed their way of proceeding.
If we want to contribute to that old ambition expressed by those who opened new routes, we will have to take into account the barriers that we have to overcome. It seems to us that psychoanalysts and psychotherapists sometimes find it very difficult to get out of our consultations, abandon the omnipotence and protection of our frame, and open ourselves to a new experience that would put us in contact with pain. Perhaps that is why we show ourselves to the outside, as if our knowledge were a “treasure” that must be protected rather than shared. Other times we want to take the frame out of our consultations, without taking into account the necessary adaptations to make it applicable, that is why it does not transcend our discourse, we cannot make ourselves understood.
Those of us who work from psychoanalysis normally see the possibility of help doing therapy or looking for means to carry out our task in the same conditions that we have in the consultation, it is costly for us to do other types of work: support to professionals, outreach, support, etc. The problem is that we are not able to adapt to social needs taking into account the limitations that reality can impose on our frame, without realizing that what really has to accompany us is our psychoanalytic attitude.
We need to be able to speak tolerating little by little, to build other spaces, other means of communication, other languages to make ourselves understandable. It is possible that our omnipotence prevents us from putting our feet on the ground and treating pain for what it is, something that will always be there, something that we will not be able to let go of. We have already seen how pain is what makes you stop thinking in the group. Perhaps in our consultations we feel the impotence in a timely manner and also very contained because we are being treated in our field. When we do our professional meetings, the pattern may be repeated, we are very calm knowing that our model answers many clinical problems. There is an expert who, from his experience, is pleased to tell us how he did to solve it.
We proposed something different where responsibility was shared, speaking from you to you about social issues that go outside our usual framework of intervention, so it is not surprising that this format was received with some surprise and skepticism.
Promoting this type of group work within psychoanalytic associations would be something very beneficial for our group, because it would allow us to activate our minds in a creative way, moving from “owning” the idea to learning through emotional experience.
In the Anglo-Saxon countries, more options are given to the new generations who are the ones who mobilize, those who bring new ideas, those who better tolerate the dislocation of not knowing. It seems that sometimes the discourse of psychoanalysts is that only some know, and that is why we are left very alone to deal with pain and difficulty. It would be different if we could think that all individuals can contribute, understand and that without prejudice, borders that give light can be crossed. This is actually what happened in the group, there was no expert, we all were. We therefore strongly agree with Dr. Meltzer 9 when he says:
“The history of the analysis of the future probably does not include the figure of the isolated pioneer who takes this discipline to new areas of the earth. Almost certainly it will be the task of a group ”.
Summary
Observing how debates on current issues unfold in our social environment, including the media, we sometimes realize the lack of reflection, depth and overall vision that discussions have and how easily a part is taken to build a everything.
Black and white approaches quickly position people and prevent them from transcending the issue and thinking about it. It is likely that the rapid positioning and defense of an argument without thinking of others, is a strategy sometimes necessary to settle issues and move on to something else that requires greater energy and concentration, but it can also be a way to avoid entering into contact with what can dislodge us too much.
It seems to us that this resistance to thinking in order to avoid the conflict and pain that it usually entails, causes a very dangerous phenomenon, as it leads to confusion and relativization of the issues, so as to prevent the defense of the truth and the taking of responsibilities. This phenomenon impoverishes our life and that of others, allows ignorance to give way without resistance to lies and lies too often take control of life.
We believe that psychoanalytic thinking has a lot to contribute to society and we think that the power of the group is enormous in trying to think about difficult issues from a social point of view. The difference of any group with this, has to be our ability to identify the difficulties that prevent other groups from thinking and moving forward.
Recommended Bibliography
- BION, WR, Experiences in Groups, Editorial Paidós, 1997 BION, W. R, Learning from Experience, Paidós, 1966. BION, WR, Returning to Think, Lumen - Hormé, 1996. FREUD, S., Introduction to narcissism, New Library, Complete Works volume 6 (1914-1917), 2006.GRINBERG, L et al., New introduction to Bion's ideas, Editorial Julián.Yébenes SA, 1991.JOSEPH, B., Psychic equilibrium and psychic change, Julián Yébenes, SA 1993. KLEIN, M., Love, guilt and reparation, Paidós, 1994. MELTZER, D., The psychoanalytic process, Ed Hormé-Paidós, 1996.
