Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

This paper elaborates the Palazzoli group's idea of hubris in family systems using two case examples. The first case illustrates the symmetry in a couple who are “too richly cross-joined” and the escalating hubristic position of each partner. The intervention that unbalanced the system was based on the Milanese group's theory. The second couple shows what the author calls “reverse symmetry.” They have a somewhat greater capacity for transformation than the first, which suggests a higher level of psychosexual development. In both cases, the theory behind the intervention is outlined and there is an attempt at rapprochement between systems theory and some aspects of individual psychology. For example, homeostasis and the need for safety, symmetry, projection and the repetition compulsion are shown to be common to both. Pathological narcissism which pervades the psychotic family is defined as the hubristic action itself. The form that the narcissism takes within the family in turn determines the hubristic position of its members; three forms are described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barnhill, L. R., and Longo, D. Fixation and regression in the family life cycle.Family Process, 1978,17, 469–478.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G.Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballentine, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenichel, O.The psychoanalytic theory of neurosis. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1945 (copyright renewed 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, L. “Enmeshment” and the too richly cross-jointed system.Family Process, 1975,14, 457–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohut, H. Thoughts on narcissism and narcissistic rage.The Psychoanalytic Study of The Child, 1972,27, 369–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahler, M.On human symbiosis and the viscissitudes of individuation. New York: International Universities Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melville, H. Bartleby the scrivener.The portable melville. New York: Viking Press, 1952, pp. 465–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palazzoli, M. S., Cecchin, G., Prata, G., and Boscolo, L.Paradox and counterparadox. New York: Jason Aronson, Inc., 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandler, J. and Joffee, W.G. Toward a basic psychoanalytic model.International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 1969,50, 81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, G.Passages. New York: Dutton, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Netzer, C. Hubris in the family. International Journal of Family Therapy 2, 22–38 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00931329

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00931329

Keywords

Navigation