Colette Soler's analysis of Lacan's concept of forclusion, exploring its evolution from a passive, generationally transmitted mechanism to an active, enunciative act in the subject's discourse.
Extract
[...] She emphasizes the need for a clinical approach that balances the recognition of this autonomy with empathetic and comprehensive support, in order to avoid stigmatizing the patient or reducing their experience to a simple personal fault (Soler, 2015). For Soler, the ethical challenge is therefore to recognize the active role of the patient in the formation of their psychotic symptoms, while avoiding excessive attribution of responsibility or guilt. The emphasis is on providing support to the patient in a process of reintegration and symbolic reconstruction, without judging or accusing them of the presence of psychosis. 4. Theoretical Incidences Soler's (2015) emphasis on the act and enunciation opens up new theoretical perspectives on psychosis and other mental disorders. [...]
[...] Clinical Implications This distinction between the forclusion suffered and the forclusion enunciative opens up interesting perspectives in terms of clinical prevention of psychosis. Considering forclusion as an act and not as a simple passive consequence of an inheritance or family history implies that the subject plays an active role in the formation of their psychosis. This perspective modifies the way clinicians approach the treatment of patients who present psychotic symptoms. Traditionally, the clinical approach to psychosis has often focused on exploring past traumas, family relationships, and intergenerational dynamics, with the aim of understanding the origins of the illness. [...]
[...] This term suggests that forclusion is an active act where the subject plays an important role in the way certain elements of reality are excluded from their discourse. In other words, the subject is not simply a passive receptacle of transgenerational influences but an actor who actively decides what to exclude or not from their discourse. Thus, according to Soler, forclusion is not simply a suffered state, but rather an enunciative act. Enunciative forclusion is therefore that which occurs in act, that is, within the framework of the subject's speech and discourse. [...]
[...] However, Soler (2015) opens up a new path that involves considering forclusion as a subjective decision and an enunciative act. From this perspective, using this method could encourage therapists to focus more on the patient's current choices, language acts, and thought processes that support the psychotic structure. Thus, instead of simply interpreting symptoms as manifestations of a repressed past, clinicians could examine how the patient chooses to exclude certain elements of reality or language from their current discourse. This would involve listening more closely to the patient's silences, omissions, and particular formulations, which could reveal the active mechanisms of forclusion in action. [...]
[...] This exclusion is therefore an enunciative act by which the subject decides what they are willing to say or not say. This exclusion is therefore an enunciative act by which the subject decides what they are willing to say or not say. The enunciative forclusion thus emphasizes the act of speech as an essential vector in the understanding of this psychic mechanism. Rather than being perceived as an automatic or unconscious failure, the enunciative forclusion is a subjective decision of the subject, a choice that manifests itself in the way the subject speaks and behaves. [...]
