Your Primal Wound: What Happened in Childhood?

psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/moral-landscapes/201711/your-primal-wound-what-happened-in-childhood

Psychosynthesis considers a human life to move toward self-realization: “developing a

committed relationship to the source of our being, a willingness to follow the call or
vocation of our deepest truth, no matter the experiences in which we find ourselves”
(Firman & Gila, 1997, p. 181). At all stages of life, the individual immanent “I” (non-ego)
and the transcendent (Common)Self are connected. Thus, (Common)Self realization
involves both personal development and transpersonal development. When things go
well, we experience a continuum of growth and flourishing under natural conditions.

The mother is the initial conduit for the child of the larger ground of being. She is the
primal relationship that nurtures the child’s being. Her love forms a protective shield
around the child that can neutralize or at least decrease the stresses of life (Verny & Kelly,
1981).

Ideally the mother stays close by throughout the first days, months and years of life while
the child’s sense of the world expands to include supportive others. Mother and others do
not consider the child a defective adult but as a sensing, feeling person with agency,
feelings and goals. Ideally, parents and other caregivers treat the child like a “Thou,” with
reverence, honoring the needs of the child, understanding that the infant is already a
person, having started his or her personhood (“hominization”) at some point during
gestation. This I-Thou terminology is Martin Buber’s (1958).

1/5
As Firman and Gila point out in A Psychotherapy of Love: Psychosynthesis in Practice
(2010), what supports the unfoldment of human potential begins in early life with what
psychotherapist scholars call “self-regulating others” (Stern, 1985); “holding” and
“mirroring” of the child by the caregiver (Winnicott, 1987); empathic attunement from
caregivers bringing into being the “nuclear self” (Kohut, 1984); responsive caregivers
facilitating secure attachment (Cassidy & Shaver, 1999); loving caregivers providing
“limbic resonance” that shapes the “neural core of the self” (Lewis, Amini, & Lannon
2001; Siegel, 1999); and a “mutually-responsive orientation” between caregiver and child
facilitating a cooperative, caring moral self (Kochanska, 2002). These descriptions
describe the appropriate environment for a child’s development.

What develops? According to psychosynthesists, the child’s spirit blossoms from the
intimate union of the body and soul. The child’s physical presence must be well nurtured
for the spirit to feel comfortable showing itself.

Children are born ready for relationship. In fact, after several months of development,
fetuses are ready to communicate with mother and others. They are active in relationship
from the start and are shaped and self-shaping by their social experience. Infants, born 18
months immature because of head size, expect a continuity of being, a continuation of the
womb experience as brain and body systems are establishing their parameters and
thresholds. Interestingly, Winnicott (1987) suggested that an infant may not really come
into existence if the continuity of being is broken. Specifically, if maternal care is not
“good enough,” absent the empathic holding environment for that child’s emergence. No
child can become him or herself without the type of caregiving environment described
above. When the relationship is broken, with an absent mother (emotionally, psychically,
and/or physically), it causes anxiety: “hunger, pain, emptiness, cold, helplessness, utter
loneliness, loss of all security and shelteredness…a headlong fall into the forsakenness
and fear of the bottomless void” (Neumann, 1973, p. 75).

But most children today do not experience a continuum of empathic support. Fewer and
fewer children are provided the foundations for a thriving life.

How are they wounded?

When parents and caregivers are not empathic with the child’s needs, when the child is
treated as an object rather than a living, conscious human being, the child is being treated
like an “it.” An empathic break occurs and the child’s developing personhood is violated.
In modern societies, caregivers often have blind spots, are unable to mirror the wholeness
of the child’s nature, thereby leaving out areas of being in the child’s developing spirit.
Even loving parents may not be empathic, attending to the child in the way needed at the
time (Miller, 1981).

article continues after advertisement

Note that pain itself is not the pathology. Rather, it is the break in empathic connection
that causes trauma: “It is the absence of adequate attunement and responsiveness to the
child’s painful emotional reactions that renders them unendurable and thus a source of

2/5
traumatic states and psychopathology” (Stolorow and Atwood, 1992, p. 54)

Many children through history have not received empathic care. Instead, they have been
treated like an “It.” Lloyd deMause (1974) examined the history of parent-child relations
and described six historical phases reflecting changing attitudes: (1) Infanticidal
(antiquity to 4th century AD) which included infanticide and sodomizing of children; (2)
Abandonment (4th - 13th century) represented by both physical and emotional
abandonment; (3) Ambivalent Mode (14th -17th centuries) where children were beaten
into shape; (4) Intrusive Mode (19th century) when empathy emerged but still a focus on
controlling the child in every way; (5) Socialization Mode (19th - 20th centuries) when
socialization focused on channeling impulses; (6) Helping Mode (beginning to mid-20th
century till present) where parents became involved in empathizing and fulfilling child
needs.

It seems that many parents and professionals today still have notions of young children as
dumb or mindless (mode 3), leading to continued mistreatment (Chamberlain, 1994).
They treat babies as if they don’t feel pain (infant circumcision) or as if their crying is
reflexive instead of communicative. Many adults bring their own sense of abandonment
into the caregiving relationship (#2) and pass on that trauma with unempathic care (e.g.,
leaving babies to cry). Even if Mode 6, Helping, were widespread, it does not represent the
nurturing environment young children need.

Note that deMause's modes cover the period of human civilization (settled societies
reliant on monoagriculture), which represent approximately the last 1% of human genus
existence. Civilization emerged around 10,000 years ago but humans have been around
for about two million years. So these modes are from the 1% of human genus existence.
What does that matter?

article continues after advertisement

“Uncivilized” societies continued to exist in parallel with the civilized and some still exist
today (though globalization pressures are exterminating some). Life was and is very
different for humans in small-band hunter-gatherer societies, the type of society in which
humans spent 99% of their genus existence. And these societies raise children very
differently from most civilized societies. They provide the evolved nest.

Although theorists have typically emphasized vision in their discussions—“when I look I

am seen, so I exist” (Winnicott, 1988b, p. 134), the first relays of empathic support and
being acknowledged as a person come from other senses: affectionate touch and the
sound of mother’s voice. These are part of the evolved nest.

The evolved nest is the description of the elements of the evolved holding environment. It
involves not only responsiveness (the most studied and discussed) but nearly constant
affectionate touch in the early years, breastfeeding on request for several years, self-
directed play with responsive play mates, play in and connection to the natural world, a
community of responsive caregivers, positive social support and climate for mother and
child. (More here about the Evolved Nest.)

3/5
Offspring of other animals who are deprived of their typical nest are malformed (see
Harry Harlow’s experiments). We have increasing amounts of data showing that humans
who do not experience the evolved nest are wounded in many ways, from physiological to
psychological, emotional, intellectual wellbeing.

It all comes back to mother, father, and other caregivers. To be an effective empathic
caregiver of children requires one to heal the self first through self-knowledge, empathy
towards one’s own woundedness, a commitment to healing and self-transformation. But it
goes beyond the individual. Each parent needs to feel the support of the community and
to be given the leisure needed to attend to baby’s needs. And baby needs to expand their
sense of good enough holding to more than mother.

article continues after advertisement

What’s an adult to do to get back on the path to self-realization? We discuss the

psychosynthesis answer in the next post.

NEXT: How to heal the primal wound

Series

1 The Primal Wound: Do You Have One?

2 What childhood experiences lead to primal wounding?

3 How to heal the primal wound

4 Fantasyland: A Nation of Primally-Wounded People

5 Tales of the Primally Wounded

6 Stories That Heal Primal Wounds

7 Stories of Connection to Heal the Primal Wound

8 Addressing the Primal Wound

REFERENCES

Assagioli, Roberto (1973). The act of will. New York: Penguin.

Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou (R.G. Smith, trans.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

J. Cassidy, P. R. Shaver, J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (1999) (Eds.), Handbook of attachment:

Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed.) (pp. 503-531). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.

Chamberlain, D. (1994). The sentient prenate: What every parent should know. Pre- and
Perinatal Psychology Journal 9(1), 9-31.

Chamberlain, D. (1988). Babies remember birth. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher. p. xx

4/5
deMause, L. (1974). The history of childhood: The untold story of child abuse. New York:
Peter Bedrick Books.

article continues after advertisement

Firman, John, & Gila, Ann. (1997). The Primal wound: A transpersonal view of trauma,
addiction, and growth. Albany, NY: State University of New York.

----A Psychotherapy of Love: Psychosynthesis in Practice (2010),

Kochanska, G. (2002). Committed compliance, moral self, and internalization: A

mediational model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 339-351.

Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? in A. Goldberg (Ed.). Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press.

Lewis, T., Amini, F., & Lannon, R. (2000). A General Theory of love. New York: Vintage.

Miller, A. (1981). The drama of the gifted child. New York: Basic Books.

Neumann, E. (1973). The child, R. Manheim, transl. London: Maresfield Library.

Richards, D.G. (1990). Dissociation and transformation. Journal of Humanistic

Psychology, 30(3), 54-83.

Rowan, J. (1990). Subpersonalities: The people inside us. New York: Routledge.

Siegel, D. (1999). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape
who we are. New York: Guilford Press.

Stern, D.N. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant. New York: Basic Books.

Stolorow, R.D., & Atwood, G.E. (1992). Contexts of being: The intersubjective foundations
of psychological life. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press.

Verny, T., & Kelly, J. (1981). The secret life of the unborn child. New York: Dell.

Winnicott, D.W. (1987). The maturational processes and the facilitating environment.
London: The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.

5/5