| Touch is essential to the survival and psycho-sexual development of the infant. The need for touch begins at the mother's breast with Lewin's dream screen and continues in manifestations of orality for the rest of our lives. Spitz has proven that infants deprived of touch become handicapped adults. The dilemma we face as therapists is whether to deny our patients touch and recreate Rosen's early maternal environment, or risk using touch in our practice to reparent our patients.; Beginning with the work of Freud and Forenzi, this paper examines the debate that has raged over touch in psychoanalysis since its inception. It looks at touch in its historical, philosophical, and cross-cultural frames and seeks to understand the various influences that have shaped attitudes towards touch in different eras and different cultures.; Clinical examples from the author's experience and from other therapists illustrate that touch in the therapeutic milieu can be a step in helping patients break their pathological bonds. It offers them a chance to try out new behaviors within the safety of the analytic frame and to become comfortable with this essential component to our survival and well being. Perhaps most valuable of all, touch in therapy enables therapists to tap primary process material.; In spite of the legal, moral, and ethical issues involved, and the counter-transferrence issues that can arise, touch and human contact are far too important to be overlooked in the therapeutic alliance. Therapists need to be responsible but open to risk-taking and ready to deal with any material that arises. While touch is not appropriate for every patient or every therapist, we need to be more open in dealing with the possibility. There need to be more research on the effects of touch in therapy and more honest discussion of the issue.; This is an exploratory rather than definitive document. As a result of this paper, I hope that others will reflect on, examine, and further pursue this very delicate research problem. |
