Work For Expert Ahmed. Clinical II. Week 6

Clinical Social Work Journal Vol. 27, No. 1. Spring 1999

THE APPLICATION OF OBJECT RELATIONS THEORY TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Diane L. Zosky, ACSW, LCSW

ABSTRACT: This article suggests that the addition of object relations theory to the two dominant theories of feminist theory and family systems theory can contribute to the understanding of domestic violence. Feminist theory largely contributes to the understanding of the macro issues while family systems the- ory is descriptive at the mezzo level of interpersonal processes and dynamics. Object relations theory can make a unique contribution at the micro level with an understanding of intrapsychic processes which influence adult interpersonal behavior. This article examines some of the main concepts of object relations theory as applied to the issue of domestic violence. A case discussion is offered to illuminate the application of object relations theory to domestic violence.

KEY WORDS: domestic violence; object relations theory.

INTRODUCTION

In the past twenty five years domestic violence has emerged as a significant social issue for research and theory development. Despite in- creased clinical interest and attention, this issue continues to be a per- sistent problem. Treatment theory has rapidly evolved with feminist theory and family systems theory becoming the dominant theoretical perspectives (Davis, Hagen, and Early, 1994). The theoretical orienta- tions, epistemological and ontological assumptions, and treatment in- terventions of family systems and feminist theory are vastly different. Indeed, proponents of both models maintain intractably opposed posi- tions and have experienced impassioned and bitter debate (Dell, 1989; Lamb, 1991; Myers-Avis, 1992; Sexton, 1994). While both feminist and family systems theories provide useful insights into the issue of domes- tic violence, the rarely applied theory of object relations theory can be

55 C 1999 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

56

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

instrumental in adding to the depth of understanding of this complex problem.

While family systems theory is an interpersonal theory, feminist theory is largely a sociopolitical theory (Carden, 1994). A family sys- tems understanding of domestic violence relies on general systems the- ory concepts of circular causality, reciprocity, and the system's need to maintain homeostatic balance. Violence is understood as a reciprocal, interactive dynamic with functional qualities for the maintenance of equilibrium (Fish, 1990; Giles-Sims, 1983; Lipchik, 1991; Sexton, 1994). The use of family systems theory to understand domestic violence im- plies an inherently interpersonal process. Although family systems the- ory may have some utility in adding to the understanding of domestic violence, its major limitation is that it remains largely descriptive. This theory may eloquently address the systemic qualities of violent partner- ships, however, it lacks the ability to explain why some partnerships are characterized by violence while others are not.

A feminist theoretical application to domestic violence is largely conceptualized at the macro or sociopolitical level as to how men and women are acculturated into roles of power and passivity (Garden, 1994). Feminist theory views the root of domestic violence as the un- equal distribution of power of the genders in a patriarchal society (Cae- sar and Hamberger, 1989; Garden, 1994; Rodning, 1988). Men are seen as having more access to resources and decision making, while women are devalued as secondary and inferior (Bograd, 1984). Men resort to domestic violence as a mechanism to maintain power, control, and privi- lege in a patriarchal society. Although a feminist theory application to domestic violence also has utility, its major limitation seems to be that the assumptions do not generalize to the majority of men and interper- sonal relationships. If we can accept the assumption that men are so- cialized into roles of power and control, and violence is the necessary mechanism used to maintain patriarchy, why do the majority of men not become violent with female partners? Straus, Gelles, and Steinmetz (1980) and Straus and Gelles (1986) found in two large scale, national, and randomized studies in 1975 and 1985 that about 28% of people re- ported interpersonal violence at least once in their lifetime. The extrapo- lation can be made that 72% of people never experienced violence.

The addition of object relations theory to the understanding of do- mestic violence may address some of the limitations of family systems and feminist theories. Family systems theory has been largely directed at the interpersonal or mezzo level of practice while feminist theory has been directed to a sociopolitical or macro level of understanding. Al- though both of these theories are useful, the micro or intrapersonal level has been largely overlooked. Object relations theory, which is primarily an intrapsychic theory, may provide new insights as to why some people engage in interpersonal violence while others do not.

57

DIANE L. ZOSKY

OBJECT RELATIONS THEORY AS APPLIED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Object relations theory suggests that humans are motivated from the earliest moments by the need for significant relationships with ob- jects (Fairbairn, 1952; Summers, 1994). This central concept of object relations theory deviates from classical psychoanalytic theory in that the drives are no longer primary in understanding human behavior. The formation and maintenance of human object relationships becomes the primary motivator for human behavior (Fairbairn, 1949; Summers, 1994).

The earliest significant relationships form enduring psychological "templates" for all future relationships, as well as being instrumental in psychic development and structuralization. People who experience do- mestic violence are involved in object relationships with pathological characteristics which may indicate developmental pathology in early primary relationships. Indeed, 81% of men who abused their partners were found to have witnessed domestic violence between their parents or were the recipients of abuse (Walker, 1984)

During the period of infancy, the baby's ego structure is immature and must therefore rely on the auxiliary ego from mother. The mother's ministrations serve the purpose of soothing and organizing for the child until these functions are interiorized through maturation and the con- tinuous internalization of representations. The auxiliary ego functions provided by the mother or family serve not only as the prototype for all subsequent attachment, but also stimulate the structuralization of the infant's mind (Kaneko, 1984).

There are several outcomes from the developmental period of the first years that are necessary for adequate emotional health as an adult. The infant's primary narcissism must be gratified in a consistent man- ner so that a sense of trust and security in self and the object world can be fostered. The infant must be able to gradually develop differentiated boundaries between self and other and be able to relate to others as separate objects, rather than as an extension of the self. Self and object representations must eventually become integrated so that they are ex- perienced as whole objects rather than split objects of good and bad. The individual must develop the capacity to maintain a sense of positive self- esteem, be able to regulate internal tension states, and have the toler- ance for the experience of a wide range of emotions.

The outcome of healthy emotional development is a product of con- sistent empathic attunement given by the primary caretakers. Primary caretakers must facilitate the infant's indulgence of primary narcissism, must mirror their grandiosity, act as a container for their aggression, and allow optimal frustration to foster a sense of growth. If the infant experiences consistently empathic attunement, an abundance of positive

58

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

experiences are internalized into the representational world allowing for the development of a well adjusted person. As Lucente so eloquently stated, "The lasting outcome of this primary identification and bliss is the foundation for all future object libidinal relations based on an unfor- gettable yet unrememberable reality of having been unconditionally loved" (Lucente, 1994, p. 63).

There are several enduring deficits for individuals who do not re- ceive empathically attuned nurturance during critical developmental pe- riods. Dependency needs that have been unmet in childhood will con- tinue to be a need on a primitive level as an adult. There is often a pervasive sense of rage that these needs have gone unmet, and conse- quently the search to fulfill dependency needs as an adult takes on a desperate and demanding quality. Adults who lacked appropriate nur- turance have few positive internalized representations, and therefore it becomes difficult to self-soothe during times of anxiety, maintain a healthy sense of self-esteem, and regulate emotional responses to the outside world. Adults who experienced an abundance of negative inter- nalized experiences as a child continue to carry these representations as their basic "template" for the world, significant objects, and for the self. Often representations based on negative internalized representations continue to cause distortions in adult relationships with experiences be- ing subjectively perceived according to previous negative internal work- ing models. There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that domesti- cally violent men experienced ruptures in the critical developmental years impeding their ability to develop into healthy well-adjusted adults. Dutton (1995) compared men who had been identified as domestically violent with a non-violent comparison group on several measures used to assess Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The domestically vio- lent group scored higher on both the Trauma Symptom Checklist 33 and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory for post traumatic stress disor- der. The author speculated that parental rejection and a lack of primary nurturing left the violent individuals to grow into adults with significant residual trauma. Dutton, Starzomski, and Ryan (1996) investigated the relationship between domestic violence perpetration as an adult and both the experience of violence in the family of origin as well as the experience of emotional rejection from a parent as a child. The authors found that both violence in the family of origin and parental rejection significantly correlated with becoming a perpetrator of domestic violence as an adult. This study seems to lend support to the fact that suffering emotional abuse as well as physical abuse may influence one to become violent as an adult.

The deficits in personality development continue to manifest in adult relationships. The formation and content of the representational world of individuals will be re-created in the marital or partner dyad.

59

DIANE L. ZOSKY

According to Siegel, "The content of the representational world shapes identity and contributes to distortions in how the self, spouse, and the- relationship are subjectively experienced" (Siegel, 1992, p .7). Represen- tations of self and other are laid down based on the earliest introjects from the primary caretaking relationship. The capacity for dependency, trust, and intimacy as adults are determined by the level of trust and nurturance in the encoded internalized object relations from the earliest period (Siegel, 1992). Framo (1982) believed that adult relationships are sought and formed based on early models. Internal object relations and intrapsychic conflicts are defended against, repeated, lived through, or mastered in interpersonal intimate relationships. Framo states, "Life situations in outer reality are not only unconsciously interpreted in the light of the inner world, resulting in distorted expectations of other peo- ple, but active unconscious attempts are made to force and change close relationships into fitting the internal role model" (Framo, 1982, p26). In Framo's view, people frequently select partners that they need to con- tinue to recreate early interactions, rather than select partners out of desire.

Recent research into domestic violence confirms that abusive men experienced ruptures in early developmental periods. Kesner, Julian, and McKenry (1997) investigated the relationship between domestic vio- lence and the quality of early attachment relationships in abusive men. The men's perceived lack of nurturance and caring from their primary caretaker during childhood was significantly associated with male ag- gression towards intimate partners. Dutton, Saunders, Starzomski, and Bartholomew (1994) compared violent and non-violent men on several variables, one of which was attachment style. Men with both fearful and preoccupied attachment styles were more likely to be emotionally and physically assaultive. The authors concluded that, based on early pri- mary relationships, abusive men were incapable of establishing secure attachments. They continued to evidence their previous attachment styles in adult relationships.

In addition to continued distortions based on early working models, people who experience deficits in childhood nurturance continue to have difficulty with managing a stable sense of positive well-being. As the young child encounters persecutory and rejecting interactions from the primary caretaker, the child must internalize the aspects of the critical yet loved parent in order to control the object in the internal psychic world. The child does not have the alternative of giving up the object since this would risk annihilation anxiety. The child would also still be to weak to change the object in outer reality. The child must internalize the persecutory interactions which become repressed and retained as an introject for self representations.

Several studies have documented the low self-esteem of abusers and

60

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

therefore their propensity towards fragmentation (Goldstein and Rosen- baum, 1985; Weitzman and Dreen, 1982; Wodarski, 1987; Cook and Frantz-Cook, 1984). Without the ability to regulate internally a sense of well-being, abusers often look to their partners for this function which leads to the characteristic boundary disorders of enmeshment and lack of differentiation.

In addition to self-esteem issues, people who experience childhood emotional trauma also have great difficulty being able to self-soothe during times of conflict or anxiety. An abundance of persecutory and rejecting experiences leave one with little ability to call upon positive introjects to regulate internal tension states. If as a young child, one never experiences unconditional love, one can not draw upon positive self representations to restore a sense of well being during conflict or anxiety. This often results in the individual then trying to restore a sense of soothing from external objects such as a partner. Violence may be the outcome of batterers who are unable to call upon internal self- soothing functions in times of anxiety. When the partner is unable to supply self-regulating functions, this is felt as a core injury by the abuser. Such an experience may result in narcissistic rage. This explains why the anger eruptions in domestic violence tend to appear from out- side observation as being so blind and irrational.

Boundary diffusion and looking to objects to fulfill primitive needs is characteristic of people who have experienced childhood emotional trauma. Issues of separation and individuation have not been ade- quately addressed. During infancy, the child is entirely dependent upon the caretaker for need gratification. As the infant emotionally matures, there is a growing differentiation between infant and caretaker. If the caretaker has supplied "good enough mothering" as Winnicott (1950) would describe, the infant is able to internalize a sense of confidence in their own competence. The anxiety of separation can be managed on a gradual basis since the caretaker does not abruptly threaten the infant's dependency. When dependency needs have not been adequately indulged, infants are forced to separate and individuate with an impoverished sense of self. The continued hunger to have unresolved dependency needs met and the tendency to look to others to supply emotional regula- tion often contribute to boundary maintenance difficulties.

There is ample evidence that violent couples manifest difficulty with separation and individuation. They are prone to seek fusion and the partnership is characteristically enmeshed (Colemen, 1980). Part- ners are frequently seen as need gratifying and not whole, separate ob- jects. Their anxious attachments leave abusers vulnerable to abandon- ment anxieties. Any difference of opinion expressed by the partner may leave the abuser feeling narcissistically injured with the need to lash out in blind rage. According to Miehls (1993) narcissistically vulner-

61

DIANE L. ZOSKY

able individuals are prone to humiliation and have difficulty regulating boundaries. Abusive partners frequently display intense jealousy and a need to control their partner in their failure to individuate (Wodar- ski, 1987). Prince and Arias (1994) found that abusive husbands had a greater need for control of their spouses. A particular manifestation of intense jealousy occurs with pregnancy. Gelles (1979) reported that the abuse worsened when women were pregnant and the location of the beatings changed from the face and breast to the abdomen. The growing fetus may be seen a threat to the affections of the women the abuser needs.

At the same time that the abuser and partner seek merger, they are intensely afraid of engulfments. Couples caught in a violent cycle have difficulty regulating intimacy and distance within the relationship. Al- though there is an intense desire for intimacy, the regressive qualities of dependency and vulnerability inherent in intimacy may involve intense anxieties in couples who are violent (Siegel, 1991). Violence is often a mechanism for regulation of intimacy and distance within the abusing dyad (Cook and Frantz-Cook, 1984). Feldman (1979) described a cycle of conflict used to regulate the intense unconscious anxiety generated by increased intimacy. Conflict behavior is initiated to reduce the level of intimacy. The conflict behavior, however, also causes anxiety by threat- ening an attachment. The need for intimacy then reemerges. The violent couple often participate in violent swings within this cycle of intense emotions. A ubiquitous feeling of anxiety pervades. Walker's (1979) cycle of violence parallels Feldman's model. Walker's cycle identifies three phases including the tension building phase, the violent phase, and then the honeymoon or remorse phase. The violent act balances between the tension building-distancing phase and the honeymoon-intimacy phase.

Borderline and narcissistic personality disorders are thought to emerge in the pre-oedipal phase due to empathic failures of the primary caretaking matrix (Lachkar, 1992). Lack of adequate nurturing impedes the child from developing a sense of object constancy and the ability to integrate good and bad self and object representations into whole, inte- grated representations (Kernberg, 1975). The child has typically been emotionally abandoned prematurely and little sense of a cohesive self has developed.

Due to early ruptures in primary object relationships, people with borderline personality organization are left with several characteristic manifestations. People with borderline personality disorders have im- poverished egos lacking in the ability to manage tension and conflict between the id drives, superego demands, and environmental demands. People with borderline personality disorder defend against anxiety and conflict by engaging in splitting, projection, and projective identification. Due to the continued reliance on splitting, self and object images are

62

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

excessively aggressive since the libidinal images can not neutralize the aggression. It becomes necessary to project the aggression to manage the pain and anxiety. This results in the characteristic manifestation of paranoid tendencies in people with borderline personality organization (Summers, 1994).

Defensive reactions of omnipotence and devaluation of the object are also characteristic of people with borderline personality organiza- tion. Once the all bad part self representations are projected onto ob- jects, the person with borderline personality organization identifies with the all good part representations which results in a sense of grandiosity. The object, which is now imbued with all of the negative images, is de- valued and reviled. People who suffer from borderline disorders have an extremely fragile self and are haunted by annihilation anxiety. Separa- tion anxiety threatens disintegration, therefore is usually responded to with intense rage. An internal sense of self is so lacking, borderline dis- ordered people will go to extreme measures for bonding and a sense of connection to avoid what Lachkar calls the "black hole" of meaningless- ness (Lachkar, 1992). They are therefore prone to seek mergers and have difficulty maintaining boundaries.

People with borderline disorders usually experience intense mood swings and are very impulse ridden. Borderline personality disordered individuals usually experienced narcissistic shame for having needs or even for merely existing. People with borderline personality disorder have few evocative representations of a soothing mother and therefore have little if any ability to self-soothe. Borderline personality disordered people attempt to bind their anxiety and remediate the intense core shame by seeking external soothing objects such as alcohol, drugs, pro- miscuity, suicide attempts, deviant behavior, and addictive relationships (Lachkar, 1992).

People with narcissistic personality disorders are thought to func- tion somewhat better than borderline disordered individuals (Kernberg, 1975; Nelson, 1995). Narcissistic people did receive some mirroring as children, however, the mirroring was not adequate or phase appropriate (Nelson, 1995). Kernberg (1975) attributes the development of narcissis- tic personality disorder to ruptures in the late stage three or stage four of his developmental theory. Kernberg felt that people with narcissistic personality disorder engage a pathological sense of grandiosity as de- fense rather than the use of splitting and other primitive defenses char- acteristic of borderline personality organization.

Narcissistic people are grandiose, self-centered, and feel a sense of entitlement. They usually lack the capacity for empathy and view others as objects merely to serve or complete their needs. Underneath the nar- cissistic grandiosity, however, are fragile selves with low self-esteem and a propensity towards rage. Lack of an internally derived cohesive self

63

DIANE L. ZOSKY

leaves narcissistic people needing admiration and validation from exter- nal objects. If this is not forthcoming, they will use rage and withdrawal to protect a fragile self that is easily prone to humiliation. True intimacy is nearly impossible to achieve for such individuals due to their height- ened vulnerability and incapacity for empathy (Nelson, 1995).

Several studies have documented the presence of borderline person- ality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder in abusive men (Dut- ton and Starzomski, 1993; Hamberger and Hastings, 1985; Hamberger and Hastings, 1986; Hamberger et al., 1996). In addition to evidence for Axis II diagnosis, several of the characteristics common to both borderline and narcissistic personality disorders have been documented with violent men. Violent men manifest difficulty with separation and individuation. They are prone to seek fusion and the partnership is characteristically enmeshed (Coleman, 1980). Female partners are frequently seen as need gratifying and not whole, separate objects. Their anxious attachments leave abusers vulnerable to abandonment anxieties. Any difference of opinion expressed by the partner may leave the abuser feeling narcis- sistically injured with the need to lash out in blind rage. According to Miehls (1993) narcissistically vulnerable individuals are prone to humili- ation and have difficulty regulating boundaries. Abusive men frequently display intense jealousy and a need to control their partner in their failure to individuate (Wodarski, 1987). Prince and Arias (1994) found that abu- sive husbands had a greater need for control of their spouses.

Borderline disordered people frequently use the defense of splitting to bind their anxiety. Klein (1932) described the early phase of develop- ment that engages splitting as the paranoid-schizoid position. Individ- uals are not yet capable of ambivalence toward objects. As normal devel- opment proceeds, individuals reach the phase of the depressive position. In the depressive position individuals can tolerate ambivalence and splits coalesce.

Prior to the stage of object constancy, splitting is used to keep the "all good" and "all bad" spheres polarized. This is necessary in order to preserve the all good parts from destruction by the all bad. Without achievement of a Kleinian depressive position or a Mahlerian stage of self and object constancy, anger is experienced intensely (Siegel, 1992). Due to splitting, adults experiencing primitive rage do not have the ability to call on soothing representations to modulate their anger. Judgement and reality-testing are prone to distortions as a result of splitting and there is little ability to engage an observing ego to restore calm (Siegel, 1993). Splitting seems to be common within violent rela- tionships as described by Walker's (1979) cycle of violence. The "honey- moon" phase often follows the violent episode with apparent restora- tion of the "good object" after the "bad object" experienced during the violence.

64

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

The implications of splitting are numerous for violent men. Split part objects are often projected onto the partner. Through a process of unconscious collusion, female partners then carry something for the men which they were uncomfortable with. One partner may be strong while the other is weak; one carries the anger while the other carries kindness; or one carries logic while one carries emotionality (Stewart et. al., 1975). Weitzman and Dreen (1982) have found that abusive couples often get locked into rigid complimentary opposite roles such as overade- quate-underadequate which would indicate splitting.

As long as splitting is maintained, arguments usually escalate eas- ily and rapidly. Since the partners are seen as all good or all bad, prob- lem resolution and the de-escalation of conflicts are severely challenged (Siegel, 1992). Without object constancy, abusers are unable to hold both loving and angry feelings for their partners at the same time. The good part objects are not available to modulate the bad part objects, therefore abusers act out violently towards their perceived all bad spouses. Split- ting contributes to intense mood swings as the self and object are seen as wonderful or worthless (Siegel, 1992). The defense of splitting seems to be intertwined with the difficulty regulating intimacy and distance in relationship. Depending on whether individuals are seen as all good or all bad, couples may be prone to swings between intimacy and distance. The process of splitting seems to be related to the pervasive problem of boundary diffusion or enmeshment that is characteristic of violent cou- ples. The collusive process of carrying disavowed parts for each other contributes to the diffusion of boundaries and identities (Stewart et. al., 1975).

The defense of projective identification is a derivative of splitting. Melanie Klein identified the primitive process (1946). Splitting is neces- sary for projective identification. One partner splits off a characteristic or feeling that they are uncomfortable with and projects this onto the partner. The partner consciously or unconsciously takes up and acts out this disavowed part for the other. Siegel seemed to define the process more broadly as "the process wherein an unconscious conflict from the representational world is reenacted in the marital relationship" (Siegel, 1992, p. 94). Past unfulfilled needs are demanded from the current ob- ject and when not forthcoming the result is narcissistic rage. The de- fense of projective identification may be a central part of the systemic escalation of tension that leads to violence in an abusive partnership. Abusive men are known to have low self-esteem (Coleman, 1980; Claes and Rosenthal, 1990; Goldstein and Rosenbaum, 1985; Hotaling and Sugarman, 1984). Low self-esteem may be defended against through the use of projection. The characteristic verbal abuse that violent men en- gage in may be a function of the process of projected internalized nega- tive self representations. Female victims of domestic violence are also

65

DIANE L. ZOSKY

known to suffer from low self-esteem (Okun, 1986). After multiple expe- riences of verbal abuse by their male partners, many female victims begin to believe that they are worthless. This process may actually be the complex process of projective identification as abusive men project their negative representations onto their female partners to carry for them and be controlled by them. Each partner is seduced into acting out disavowed parts of the other, mutually contributing to the escalation of conflict.

The following case description illuminates how object relations theo- ries can be helpful in the identification of early primitive needs that continue to motivate behavior in adult intimate relationships.

CASE DISCUSSION

Sheila, 43 years old, and Tom 42 years old had been married for 5 years. There had been seven episodes of Tom's physical violence towards Sheila and numerous episodes of verbal abuse since their marriage. Tom was typical of many men who are violent in that he had experienced physical and emotional abuse in his family of origin. The physical violence received from his father stopped once Tom became an adolescent, but critical, negative, and highly judg- mental verbal remarks still characterized any interaction between Tom and his family of origin. Based on Tom's earliest memories of family dynamics, it is a fair extrapolation to say that he had ruptures in early developmental periods.

Tom was typical of many men who batter in that he and his wife both identi- fied that he had very low self-esteem. Tom had seemed to have internalized an abundance of bad object experiences and seemed to have experienced far fewer good object experiences. This created in him persecutory or annihilation anxiety as a reaction to the internalized sense of "badness". In a primitive way Tom tried to defend against this anxiety by engaging in projections which later led to a projective identification process between Tom and Sheila. Tom would engage in frequent verbal tirades against Sheila with a typical theme of how stupid, ugly, and worthless she was. Sheila identified that there seemed to be a pattern of this after he had contact with his family of origin, and it was not necessarily triggered by any disagreement between them. On several of these episodes, Sheila had tried to reason with him or defend her character which infuriated Tom more. These were the episodes that escalated into physical violence. After several years of enduring emotional, verbal, and physical abuse, Sheila's self- esteem also started to plummet. As is typical of many abusive men, Tom had isolated Sheila and had forbidden her from having supportive contacts with fam- ily or friends. With Tom providing her the only feedback which was typically negative, Sheila began to believe Tom's accusation that she was stupid, ugly, and worthless. Tom seemed to be able to project his feelings of inadequacy and bad- ness onto Sheila and through the interactive dynamic between them, Sheila seemed to "take this up" for Tom and carry the split off parts. Tom was able to invoke a sense of power in the home while Sheila was passive and obsequious to him in an effort to keep peace in the family. This couple seemed to be manifest- ing in their everyday dynamics a series of projective identification cycles.

Tom seemed to manifest the typical engagement of splitting that is common with people who have not had sufficient nurturance in early caretaking experi-

66

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

ences. Tom's explosions of rage seemed to follow the cycle of violence as identified by Walker (1984). During the tension building phase and particularly during the time of violence, Tom perceived Sheila as "all bad" with little to no ability to call upon any good representations of her. After the violent episode Tom would be very apologetic, remorseful, and engage in endearing courting behavior. He would beg Sheila to stay and declared that he would cease to exist without her. As with many men who batter, Tom could vacillate between feelings of intense hatred and rage to feelings of intense longing and desire.

Tom appeared to have an inability to regulate his well-being internally or self soothe during times of anxiety, indicating splits with self representations. He did not seem to be able to call upon good internalized self representations to balance his well being during times of anxiety, therefore rage would escalate rapidly and intensely. Lack of differentiation and poor boundary maintenance seemed to be a manifestation to guard against feelings of vulnerability as he looked to his partner to be an auxiliary ego. Tom therefore, called upon Sheila to be his constant supporter while giving very little back to her emotionally. Any difference of opinion that Sheila would convey was interpreted as a narcissistic injury resulting in a rapid display of rage. One example of the boundary diffu- sion and narcissistic vulnerability of Tom was displayed in a particular episode of violence. Sheila had cooked Tom's typical breakfast for him of bacon and eggs. Tom insisted that she sit and share the meal with him "as any good wife would." Sheila did sit but declined to partake in the breakfast meal as she was on a low fat diet. Tom interpreted this as an insult and that she was rejecting him as well as the food. The argument soon escalated and resulted in the police being called. Tom sought from Sheila the unconditional love that he did not receive in early caretaking relationships, yet also expressed projected rage to her over unmet dependency needs.

Tom still seemed to function in the paranoid schizoid stage of Klein, the preambivalent or ambivalent phase of Fairbairn, or the phase of absolute depen- dency of Winnicott. Tom seemed to have an inability to invoke self or object representations which were whole and integrated thus leaving him to defend against anxiety with primitive defenses of projections, splitting, and projective identification. He seemed to have little ability to regulate his own emotional well being leaving him vulnerable to narcissistic injury and lack of differentiation as he tried to use others for auxiliary ego functions.

Treatment for Tom and Sheila took individual trajectories. Conjoint therapy is contraindicated anytime there is physical violence. The experience of violence leaves the woman in the position of not being able to participate in therapy honestly and fully due to the risk of being abused for anything she may say that would be perceived as threatening by the male partner. Tom was mandated by the adult probation department to participate in a domestic violence group. Al- though this group has an emphasis on cognitive-behavioral theory, several parts of the curriculum addressed more psychodynamically based concepts.

One area that is consistent with object relations theory is the issue of sep- aration and individuation. The domestic violence curriculum instructed the men to examine what needs they had, who they typically sought to fulfill their needs, and how this affected their boundaries with significant people in their lives.

A second area that the group tried to address was to have the men make a link from past models to their behavior in adult relationship. Men were asked to reflect through worksheets and group discussion about messages from signifi- cant adults when they were children, what overt or covert rules existed in their families, and about what models they had for adult roles, especially gender roles.

67

DIANE L. ZOSKY

Men were then asked to reflect on how these earlier messages were still playing out in their adult relationships and how some of them may be maladaptive.

A third related area of reflection consisted of a section in the curriculum regarding grief. Men were instructed to look at issues of loss other than death that they had throughout their lives. Many men in the group speak of grief issues from their family of origin regarding lack of empathic nurturance from primary caregivers. Again, the men are instructed to make connections between the past pain and how they may be trying to get these needs met inappropriately in adult relationships.

Tom did attend and complete the sixteen week domestic violence group. Un- fortunately, he never seemed to fully engage in the process and remained fairly aloof from the material. Tom continued to be well defended from the pain from his childhood and seemed unable to acknowledge the failings from his parents regarding his emotional development. Tom seemed to continue as in youth, inter- nalizing the persecutory and rejecting experiences rather than risk annihilation anxiety from the loss of the critical yet loved parent. It was far easier for him to believe he was loathsome than to believe that his parents were inadequate in facilitating his emotional development as a child.

An object relations theoretically based approach with Sheila was far more successful. Sheila entered a parallel women's group that had the same curricu- lum as Tom's. She also engaged in weekly therapy for 18 months. Sheila was able to extricate herself from the collusive process that had developed between herself and Tom which had been an attempt to fulfill his unresolved dependency needs from childhood. A psychoeducational approach in both the group and indi- vidual sessions helped Sheila recognize Tom's use of primitive defenses such as splitting and projective identification. This recognition allowed Sheila to not be seduced into carrying for Tom his split off disavowed negative projections. Soon her sense of self-esteem began to improve. Both the group sessions and individ- ual counseling sessions were spent on reality-testing what Tom was telling Sheila about herself. Through the mutual support from other women in the group and through the empathic relationship of the individual sessions, Sheila was able to see that Tom's verbal abuse was most likely his need to expel his internal sense of "badness" onto her to carry for him. Sheila was able to recog- nize over time that a pattern had developed with Sheila being expected to soothe Tom during times of anxiety. She was expected to always anticipate what Tom needed emotionally. If she failed, Tom was quite impulsive and reactionary that this was a rejection of him. Sheila came to acknowledge that there had been a sense of emotional fusion between them that was usually emotionally very de- manding and draining for her emotional health.

As Sheila became aware of all of the unhealthy processes between herself and Tom, she began to establish more differentiation between herself and Tom. She became more assertive regarding her needs and that she would no longer continue to function as Tom's auxiliary ego. She no longer emotionally accepted Tom's verbal abuse and her confidence in herself began to rise. She began dis- cussing going back to school to finish the degree she had started and stopped several years ago. Sheila was well aware that these changes would be threaten- ing to Tom and she, therefore, had a safety plan in place if she would have to leave during an escalation of an argument.

Although Tom completed an anger management program as mandated by the criminal justice system, Tom continued to engage in domestic violence with Sheila. Sheila eventually terminated the marriage and felt that Tom was incapa- ble of changing. If Tom is capable of changing, therapeutic interventions may

68

CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

need to address the deep underlying issues that motivate Tom to engage in vio- lence. Tom may be typical of many male batterers who find that behavioral an- ger management programs are insufficient to address deeper issues that moti- vate their behavior.

CONCLUSION

Object relations theories seem to have been largely overlooked in the application to domestic violence. Although the two dominant theo- ries of feminist theory and family systems theory contribute a great deal to the knowledge base and intervention methods of domestic violence, the addition of object relations theories may be useful in the identifica- tion of primitive needs that continue to motivate adult intimate behav- ior. Object relations theory offers a unique contribution of why some men engage in domestic violence while others do not.

REFERENCES

Claes, J.A. and Rosenthal, D.M. (1990). Men Who Batter Women: A Study in Power. Jour- nal of Family Violence, 5, 3, 215-224.

Coleman, K.H. (1980). Conjugal Violence: What 33 Men Report. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 6, 207-213.

Cook, D.R. and Frantz-Cook, A. (1984). A Systemic Treatment Approach to Wife Battering. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 10, 1, 83-93.

Davis, L.V., Hagen, J.L., and Early, T.J. (1994). Social Services for Battered Women: Are They Adequate, Accessible, and Appropriate. Social Work, 39, 6, 695-703.

Dutton, D.G. (1995). A Scale for Measuring Propensity of Abusiveness. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 2, 203-221.

Dutton, D.G., Saudners, K., Starzomski, A., and Bartholomew, K. (1994). Intimacy-Anger and Attachments as Precursors of Abuse in Intimate Relationships. Journal of Ap- plied Social Psychology, 24, 15, 1367-1386.

Dutton, D.G. and Starzomski, A. (1993). Borderline Personality in Perpetrators of Psycho- logical and Physical Abuse. Violence and Victims, 8, 4, 327-337.

Dutton, D.G., Starzomski, A., and Ryan, L. (1996). Antecedents of Abusive Personality and Abusive Behavior in Wife Assaulters. Journal of Family Violence, 11, 2, 113-132.

Feldman, L.B. (1979). Marital Conflict and Marital Intimacy: An Integrative Psycho- dynamic Behavioral Systemic Model. Family Process, 18, 69-78.

Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1949). Steps in the Development of an Object Relations Theory of the Personality. In: Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality. London: Tavistock, pp. 152- 161.

Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1952). An Object Relations Theory of the Personality. London: Tav- istock.

Frame, J. (1982). Explorations in Marital and Family Therapy: Selected Papers of James Framo. New York: Springer Publishing.pGelles, R. (1979). Family Violence. Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage Publications.

Goldstein, D. and Rosenbaum, A. (1985). An Evaluation of Self Esteem of Maritally Vio- lent Men. Family Relations, 34, 425-428.

Hamberger, L.K. and Hastings, J.E. (1986). Personality Correlates of Men Who Abuse Their Partners: A Cross Validation Study. Journal of Family Violence, 1, 323-346.

Hamberger, L.K., Lohr, J.M., Bonge, D., and Tolin, D.F. (1996). A Large Sample Empirical Typology of Male Spouse Abusers and Its Relationship to Dimensions of Abuse. Vio- lence and Victims, 11, 4, 277-292.

69

DIANE L. ZOSKY

Hotaling, G.T. and Sugar-man, D.B. (1984). An Identification of Risk Factors. In G.L. Bowen, M.A. Straus, A.J. Sedlak, G.T. Hotaling, and D.B. Sugarman. Domestic Viol- nence Surveillance System Feasibility Study: Phase I Report. An Identification of Out- comes and and Risk Factors. Rockville, MD: Westat, Inc.

Kaneko, S.Y. (1984). The Family System ,Temporary or Permanent Auxiliary Ego: The Differential Fate of Self-Objects. Clinical Social Work Journal, 12, 303-319.

Kernberg, O. (1975). Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. New York: Aron- son.

Kesner, J.E., Julian, T., and McKenry, P.C. (1997). Application of Attachment Theory to Male Violence Toward Female Intimates. Journal of Family Violence, 12, 2, 211-228.

Klein, M. (1932). The Psychoanalysis of Children. London: Hogarth Press. Klein, M. (1946). Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms. In Envy and Gratitude. New York:

Dell Lachkar, J. (1992). The Narcissistic Borderline Couple: A Psychoanalytic Perspective on

Marital Treatment. New York: Brunner Mazel. Lucente, R.L. (1994). The Concept of Developmental Lines in Marital Therapy. Journal of

Analytic Social Work, 2, 57-75. Miehls, D. (1993). Conjoint Treatment With Narcissistic Couples: Strategies to Increase

Empathic Interactions. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 64, 3-17. Nelson, J. (1995). Varieties of Narcissistically Vulnerable Couples: Dynamics and Practice

Implications. Clinical Social Work Journal, 23, 59-70. Okun, L. (1986). Woman Abuse: Facts Replacing Myths. Albany: State University of New

York Press. Prince, J.E. and Arias, I. (1994). The Role of Perceived Control and the Desirability of

Control Among Abusive and Non Abusive Husbands. American Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 126-134.

Siegel, J.S. (1991). Analysis of Projective Identification: An Object Relations Approach to Marital Treatment. Clinical Social Work Journal, 19, 71-80.

Siegel, J.S. (1992). Repairing Intimacy: An Object Relations Approach to Couples Therapy. Northvale, NJ. : Jason Aronson, Inc.

Stewart, R.H., Peters, T.C., Marsh, S., and Peters, M.J. (1975). An Object Relations Ap- proach to Psychotherapy With Marital Couples, Families, and Children. Family Pro- cess, 14, 161-178.

Straus, M.A. and Gelles, R.J. (1986). Societal Changes and Changes in Family Violence from 1975 to 1985 as Revealed by Two National Surveys. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 465-479.

Straus, M., Gelles, R., and Steinmentz, S. (1980). Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. Garden City: Anchor Press.

Summers, F. (1994). Object Relations Theories and Psychopathology. Hillsdale, N.J.: Ana- lytic Press.

Walker, L.E. (1979). The Battered Woman. New York: Harper Colophon Books. Walker, L.E. (1984). The Battered Woman Syndrome. New York: Springer Publishing Co. Weitzman, J. and Dreen, K. (1982). Wife Beating: A View of the Marital Dyad. Social

Casework, 63, 5, 259-265. Winnicott, D.W. (1950). Aggression in Relation to Emotional Development. In Through

Paediatrics to Psychoanalysis. New York: Basic Books. Wodarski, J.S. (1987). An Examination of Spouse Abuse: Practice Issues for the Profession.

Clinical Social Work Journal, 15, 172-186.

Diane L. Zosky, ACSW, LCSW Bradley University Social Work Program 1501 W. Bradley Avenue Peoria, IL 61625