CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 32Climate Change Communication and PerceptionPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchPsychology and Mental Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Climate change: Clinical considerations

Haseley, Dennis·2019·International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies
DOI 10.1002/aps.1617
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Psychological reactions to climate change run the gamut from a sense of the need for urgent action to utter denial. This paper looks at some categories of defenses that block acknowledgement of this pressing threat. It cites the work of Renee Lertzman, an analytically oriented social scientist, whose research suggested that disavowal, negation, or denial could be deconstructed and viewed as defenses against intolerable anxieties, feelings of helplessness and disappointment, loss and guilt, and warded‐off wishes for agency and reparation. Clinical examples and personal self‐reflection are employed to posit that when anxiety over climate change, a serious disquiet in its own right, gets confused with childhood traumatic anxiety, with its attendant feelings of helplessness, smallness, hopelessness, shame, isolation, and useless rage, then dysfunctional defenses and affects are more likely to come to the fore. In contrast to this, realistic anxiety over our changing climate and need to shift from a carbon‐based culture can be made more tolerable and can allow one to face the uncertain future, to feel one's feelings, to work them through, to share them without shame, and to feel a certain amount of agency in confronting the climate future and working to cope with it, both individually and societally. Finally, the paper suggests that we clinicians need to listen with new awareness to patients' references to and defenses against climate change, as not simply displacements but also as allusions to a looming reality that is a thing in itself. It is suggested that although we cannot impose our agendas on our patients, as climate change disavowal breaks down, we do have in our tool kit ways of helping our patients with it, depending of course very much on the state of our own disavowal.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/aps.1617

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Erikson E., 1982, The Life Cycle Completed
  2. Waugh M., 1981, The Psychological Fallout of Surface Nuclear Testing, American Imago, Fall, 38, 305

Cited by

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Haseley, D.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Haseley, Dennis
ORCID
Haseley, Dennis
Venue
International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-06
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
109-115
ISSN
  • 1521-1401 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-3341
  • 1556-9187
DOI
10.1002/aps.1617
OpenAlex
W2953962610
Cited by
31
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1
FWCI
6.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 27 d)
Locations
International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
Keywords
climate change, defense mechanisms, denial, disavowal, anxiety, helplessness, guilt, agency, psychoanalytic practice, clinician self-reflection, climate change denial

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review