28

GoalThis article examines the so called “fusional” relationship according to a clinical approach, particularly in situations of strong “addiction” to another person. It seeks to complete the conceptual framework of psychoanalysis from Freud and Lacan, especially their notion of “the Thing” and “object a” by providing a new concept. “Object b” describes the artificial creation by the subject of an allegedly essential necessity, a “false critical need” or a “nodal need”, which condemns the subject to dependence and confusion.MethodThe author’s research has been based on daily observations over twenty years of psychoanalysis practice, and specifically here in six peculiar clinical cases corresponding to the psychoanalytic treatment of patients living with “confounding” and addictive relationships.Results“Fusion-confusion” is organised from the way “the other” and the relationship are considered by each subject, according to five basic modes: inclusion, aggregation, adhesion, duty and devotion, giving to the other a special “place”. Each form of fusion-confusion is based on necessity, on a central need that pushes the subject to require the presence of another at his side.DiscussionFrom clinical practice, highlighting the confusion between partners, it seems more appropriate to talk about confounding relationships rather than “fusional” relationships.This first study could be extended to other diversified clinical observations, supplemented by theoretical contributions of different orientations and enriched by research on families, groups, communities and genealogies...ConclusionUnlike “the Thing” and the “object a”, the “object b” is non-native: it is produced by the rapport between the dynamics of one’s own subjectivity and the socialisation constraints one meets.