Historical review
The controversy around the
notion of dissociation dates back to Freud. The more we explore his views on
dissociation, the deeper we are impressed how much Freud attempted to distance
himself from the idea. It was already obvious in the “Studies of Hysteria”that
he co-authored with Joseph Breuer, far before his well known conflict with
Pierre Janet on the topic. What is remarkable is that Freud’s attitude toward
dissociation as well as dissociative patients replicates itself in current
psychoanalysis.
When Freud realized that many hysterical patients suffered from childhood abuse and trauma, he nudged Breuer into writing the book with him. Freud proposed that there are different types of hysteria, such as hypnoid hysteria as well as retention hysteria and defense hysterial. However, his dissatisfaction with Breuer's idea of hypnoid (dissociative) state was obvious in the same book. He later made it clearer in “Dora’s case” as follows.
When Freud realized that many hysterical patients suffered from childhood abuse and trauma, he nudged Breuer into writing the book with him. Freud proposed that there are different types of hysteria, such as hypnoid hysteria as well as retention hysteria and defense hysterial. However, his dissatisfaction with Breuer's idea of hypnoid (dissociative) state was obvious in the same book. He later made it clearer in “Dora’s case” as follows.
…I should like to take this opportunity of stating that the hypothesis
of ‘hypnoid states’—which many reviewers were inclined to regard as the central
portion of our work—sprang entirely from the initiative of Breuer. I regard the
use of such a term as superfluous and misleading, because it interrupts the
continuity of the problem as to the nature of the psychological process
accompanying the formation of hysterical symptoms. （Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria (1905) P27 ）
