Jung on the Problem Child

the things which have the most powerful effect upon children do not come from the conscious state

of the parents but from their unconscious background.[1]

C.G. Jung, 1927

It is of course not possible for parents to have no complexes at all. That would be superhuman. But

they should at least come to terms with them consciously; they should make it a duty to work out their

inner difficulties for the sake of the children.[2]

C.G. Jung, 1924

If there is anything that we wish to change in our children, we should first examine it and see whether

it is not something that could better be changed in ourselves.[3]

C.G. June, 1932

This essay derives from a student-generated Jungian Center course on parenting from a

Jungian perspective. While that course included multiple topics,[4] this essay focuses on just one: the

child with problems. We will consider this topic in several ways. First, we will examine Jungs image of

the childhow he regarded the child, the qualities and opinions he had about children, and the

archetype of the child. Then we will consider the 5 main types of children with difficulties that Jung

recognized, including discussion of some definitions of terms he used to describe these types of

children. Third, we will discuss the factors Jung felt have to be considered when dealing with a

disturbed child. Finally we will review some key principles Jung offered for handling children with

problems.

Jungs Image of the Child

We begin with Jungs image of the child because it differs rather starkly from conventional

American thinking, which owes much to Lockes idea of the tabula rasaor blank slateas the image

of how everyone starts out in life.[5] Given our democratic ethos, myth of equality and cultural

appreciation for the Horatio Alger ideal of the self-made man, Lockes idea has enjoyed a large

following in both American education and politics. Jungs child image runs counter to our social and

educational theory in its insistence that children are not blank slates: they are heirs to the whole

human race[6]--with all the potentials and innate tendencies that have developed over millennia of

human evolution[7]and also the product of many generations of their family history.[8]

Jung believed that the child comes into life as a very complex organism with existing

determinants that never waver through life.[9] These determinants give children their character and
most parents are familiar with the surprise this can create within the family, when their child turns out to

be furnished with a character which is not in the least like that of the parents and sometimes seems

to be quite frighteningly alien.[10] Alien, and often very different from both parents and his or her

siblings. Of such stuff are family misunderstandings and conflicts born.

Each child, Jung felt, should be recognized as a new experiment of life in her ever-changing

moods, and an attempt at a new solution or new adaptation.[11] As a new and individual

creature,[12] the child had to be faithful to the law of his being,[13] meaning that his parents had to

recognize their childs unique nature, so as to help the child toward authentic living.

Jung appreciated children as our potential future,[14] as beings evolving toward

independence,[15] full of sensitivity,[16] and easily affected by others emotions.[17] Impressionable[18]

and pre-rational,[19] the child had to be cared for with understanding and respect. So lovely[20] were

Jungs words describing children. But Jung was no romantic: he recognized that children are

unconscious[21] and by no means innocent: they can sense evil.[22] Nor are they unaware: Jung felt a

10-year-old child knows much more than his parents would guess.[23] In the same sentence that he

calls children so lovely he also noted There is nothing more cruel than children[24]

Archetypes are a central component of Jungs thought, and he defined child not only as the

little beings that attend day care, pre-school and school. The child also lives in each of us, regardless

of our age, as one of the paired archetypes (the opposite in this pair is the senex, or old person).[25]

Jung felt that, while each human has both these archetypes, one of them is our preferred way of

approaching life. Perceptives tend to lean more toward the child, while Judging types tend more toward

the senex side. In type theory, therefore, Perceptives are more likely to have the flexibility and

adaptability required to make good parents.[26]

The Five Types of Problem Children

In his essay Analytical Psychology and Education,[27] Jung identified 5 types of psychic

disturbance in children.[28] The first is what he called the backward, or mental defective[29] child,

with low intelligence and incapacity to understand. This type might be what we today would call the

child with Downs syndrome.

Jungs second category of psychically disturbed child is the psychopath, or child with moral

insanity, due to a congenital problem or brain injury. This child lacks the capacity to make moral

decisions and is unable to interact with others in normal ways.[30]

The third group is the epileptic child, in either the mild (petit mal) or severe form. Jung

identified irritability, rages, greediness, egotism, ferocity and sticky sentimentality as personality traits of

the child with severe epilepsy.[31]

 Jung described as incomprehensible the fourth category: children who are psychotic, or in the

first stage of what would become schizophrenia in adolescence.[32] These 4 types would be called in

modern parlance special needs children.

The fifth of Jungs 5 types is the child whose problem is not so obvious or severe, the child that

teachers, parents, siblings and others label as a problem or troubled, but not a special needs child.

This is the neurotic child, troubled in a physical, mental or moral way.[33] This is the type we will focus

on, since it is this type that most commonly causes the family, teachers, classmates and school

administrators to seek help.

Some definitions are in order. What is meant by neurosis? The English word comes from the

Greek neuron, meaning nerve, and neurosis is the term for

a mild nervous disorder showing emotional disturbance with no apparent organic change. The nerve

function is deranged and characterized by anxiety and a feeling of insecurity: A neurosis is an

emotional problem that is solved in an irrational manner.[34]

Jung felt a childs neurosis usually formed in the home, in a domestic environment that was itself

neurotic:

I myself make it a rule to look first for the cause of infantile neuroses in the mother, as I know from

experience that a child is much more likely to develop normally than neurotically, and that in the great

majority of cases definite causes of disturbances can be found in the parents, especially in the mother.

[35]

This is because, Jung felt,

Children are so deeply involved in the psychological attitude of their parents that it is no wonder that

most of the nervous disturbances in childhood can be traced back to a disturbed psychic atmosphere in

the home.[36]

The childs interactions with his family in such a disturbed atmosphere led to the constellation of

archetypes, the production of fantasies and the development of neuroses.[37] These interactions also

affect the formation of the parental imagoesthe father imago and the mother imago.

What is meant by parental imago? Jung recognized that mother and father were

archetypes, like the child (puer) and old person (senex). As such, they are innate: we are born with an

inner sense, or image (imago) of these two figures.[38] Our personal experience of our real-life mother

and father flesh out these archetypes, since all archetypes get their contents from the material of

conscious experience.[39] Jung explained the concept in one of his essays on analytical psychology:

The simple soul is of course quite unaware of the fact that his nearest relations, who exercise

immediate influence over him, create in him an image which is only partly a replica of themselves, while

its other part is compounded of elements derived from himself. The imago is built up of parental

influence plus the specific reactions of the child; it is therefore an image that reflects the object with
very considerable qualifications. Naturally, the simple soul believes that his parents are as he sees

them. The image is unconsciously projected, and when the parents die, the projected imago goes on

working as though it were a spirit existing on its own. The primitive then speaks of parental spirits who

return by night (revenants), while the modern man calls it a father or mother complex.[40]

Our parents may die, but the imago of them never dies. While our actual parents may pass on, the

image of them that we have within us remains in the collective unconscious where they continue to

attract the same ego-dissolving projections as before.[41] This ego-dissolving power is due to the

high energy charge[42] that these images acquire in childhood. This charge never leaves, no matter

how long we live, which is why Jung urged people to get wise to these inner forces and work to

integrate them.[43] Without such conscious attention, the parental imagoes will exert an influence

(often baneful) on our relationships, romantic prospects, choice of marriage partner, marital success or

failurea host of significant areas of life.

The personal coloration of the parental imagoes begins in childhood,[44] often being at the root

of the problem in the problem child. When a child is termed neurotic Jung felt the cause was likely

something about the domestic environment or the relation between parent (especially mother) and

child, or in the mother herself, or in the relationship between the parents.[45] The child developed the

neurosis from gross parental negligence, parental slothfulness, neurotic anxiety or soulless

conventionality[46] By soulless conventionality Jung meant that the parents had developed strong

personas in trying to conform to the expectations of their social group, and, as a result, were living

inauthentic lives).

Factors to Consider in Dealing with the Disturbed Child

Jung provided some guidelines to help parents and educators deal with neurotic children. Jung

felt if a child was doing poorly in school that could be a sign of neurosis.[47] To rule out something in

the school environment Jung suggested beginning by examining the method of education the child was

receiving. He recognized that not all children are well-suited to the system of collective education.[48]

Some children need more personal attention than others. Some children (especially strong Feeling

types) must have a sense of emotional rapport with the teacher if they are to function well in school.[49]

Feelers wont do well, or feel safe, with teachers who are cold, overly strict or demanding. Highly

Intuitive children, whose imagination and capacity for fantasy are strong, will need support and

encouragement to help them cope with a system that is geared much more to Sensates and

practicality.[50] In some cases of disturbance in a child, changes in the form or structure of the learning

environment would be enough to set things right.

Much more common, Jung felt, was the situation in which the predominant family atmosphere
was neurotic. The parents had problems themselvesfinancial, emotional, marital, psychological

which created a breeding ground for neuroses[51] (all unconsciously, of course).

This was the second guideline Jung offered: inquire as to the way the parents lived, the aspirations

they had in life that they had fulfilled, and the hopes they had neglected or given up.[52] Were they

happy? frustrated? discontent? fulfilled? Were they living out their destiny or were they living

inauthentically? Did they fight or allow things to hang in the air.[53] Jung thought it was much harder

on the children if the parents tried to suppress their problems rather than engage in open conflict

because the hard feelings, anger etc. left to fester would be vaguely felt by the child, creating an

oppressive atmosphere of apprehension and foreboding,[54] which would affect the childs psyche like

a poison and create a condition fostering neurosis. In short, Jung tried to determine if the parents had

an unlived life[55] and if so, what its effects were on the children.

It was not uncommon for Jung to find that the parents of a neurotic child were fanatical in

wanting to do their best for their children and to live only for them.[56] Rather than help the children,

this attitude created a monster, because the focus had turned from the parents own growth and

development to their forcing their best down their childrens throats. Jung felt this best was often the

very thing the parents had neglected in themselves.[57]

So Jung would work to identify what was going on within the parents: was one or both of them

neurotic? He focused especially on the mother, because she is usually the parent who is most

responsible for creating the domestic environment, and she is (or was, back in Jungs day, 50 years

ago) the parent most likely to sacrifice her own ambitions and live through her children. As Jung did his

initial interview and determined what was going on, it was not uncommon for the mother to storm out of

Jungs office in fury at being called the source of her childs problem.[58] Jung was not deterred: the

psychic state of the parents was most often the root cause of the childs dilemma. He saw little point in

treating the child when the real problem lay with the parents,[59] and he felt parents should make it a

duty to work out their inner difficulties for the sake of the children[60] Which brings us to some key

principles Jung offered for dealing with the problem child.

Some Key Principles

Neuroses can be inherited.

Jung recognized the wisdom in the Greek myth of Atreus,[61] and the curse that descended on his

house.[62] Jung knew that children are born into a family matrix that has a multi-generational history:

the parents must be viewed as children of the grandparents. The curse of the House of Atreus is

no empty phrase.[63] Addictions, perversions, neurotic behaviorsall these are as likely as genetic

problems to be passed down from grandparent to parent to grandchild.

 neurotic states are often passed on from generation to generation, like the curse of Atreus. The

children are infected indirectly through the attitude they instinctively adopt toward their parents state of

mind: either they fight against it with unspoken protest (although occasionally the protest is vociferous)

or else they succumb to a paralyzing and compulsive imitation.[64]

Just as genetic conditions can show up in life, so we can see the psychological inheritance in the natal

chart, especially in reference to the 12th house, planets in the 12th house, afflictions to the ruler of the

12th and hard aspects to the Nodes of the Moon.[65]

Consider the phenomenon of participation mystique.

The child does not create the domestic environment, but due to his participation mystique [66]

with his parents, he is particularly susceptible to picking up the psychological qualities of father and

especially of mother.[67] The child is born into a reality created by his parents. Is it a healthy or

disturbed reality? If a child has a neurosis, look first to the mother, because the child is likely to develop

normally unless the child is in a neurotic environment, and the mother is the biggest influence in

creating a neurotic environment in the home.

Remember the influence of the parents unlived life

As noted above, Jung believed that the strongest psychic effect on children is the life their

parents have not lived. Children re-enact under unconscious compulsion the unlived lives of their

parents.[68]the lives the parents didnt know, didnt dare or denied to exist. Without being

conscious of it, without being able to articulate just what is going on, children pick up their parents

failure to live authentically, and take on this burden. The responsible parent, therefore, if confronted

with a problem child, should look in the mirror and reflect on his or her life.

Regard the problem child as a symptom of a pathological family matrix.

The responsible party in situations with problem children is not the weak, dependent,

impressionable child, unable to craft a life of his own. Rather, those in a position to work for change are

the parents. Jung was explicit about this:

If a parent sees something in their child that they wish to change [which is very likely when a child is a

problem] they must first examine themselves, to see if it is something they have to change in

themselves.[69]

Just as the nature of a dog can tell a lot about its owners temperament and psychic state, so children

can reveal a lot about their parents and the psychic quality of the home in which they live. Therapists

who work with children do well to educate the parents, to get them on the childs side.[70] For, in many

situations when there is a problem child in a family, the parents are deeply invested, unconsciously, in

using the child as a scapegoat.[71]

Conclusion
 Jung saw how society labels children as problems when most often the real source lies with

the parents and the home environment they create. Jung would turn to the parents to work the changes

needed to foster a mentally healthy domestic scene. Parental efforts toward their own individuation,

and their work to become conscious of the unconscious were Jungs most frequent prescription for

healing what ailed a problem child. Jung rarely analyzed children, feeling it was as difficult as it was

inappropriate, in most situations.[72]

What does his model offer us? Modern parents have the challenge of looking within, if they

have a child with problems. The child is holding up a mirror to the familys domestic reality, and

presenting his parents with the opportunity to grow and move more fully into an authentic way of being.