SurvivingLossofaTwininChildhood:ACaseStudy

SiobhanWard

ProfessionalDoctorateinPsychoanalyticPsychotherapy

DepartmentofPsychosocialandPsychoanalyticStudies

UniversityofEssex

2018

CopyrightSiobhanWard2018

i

Inmemoriam

EllenWard(neeCampbell)(1933–2011)andBridieCampbell(1931–1940)

ii

Iwouldliketoexpressmygratitudeto

JochemWillemsen,myacademicsupervisor;

andtomytraininganalyst.

iii

Abstract

Myresearchinvestigatestheimpactonthesurvivoroflossofatwininchildhood.Usingthequalitativemethodofthematicanalysisappliedtoasinglecase,Ianalyseapublishedbiographical account of surviving this traumatic loss.My findings point to the extremeemotionalsufferinginvolved.Amongthedefencesemployedtoprotectthesurvivorfromthe anguish of separation and from survival anxiety and guilt, the dead twin isinternalised.Thetraumaandthedeadtwinareencapsulatedinthepsyche,unaffectedbyTime.Theyareexperiencedasholesinthepsycheandcontactwiththemisavoided.Theresultcanbeahalf-lifefortheadultsurvivor,withasenseofhissecretselfaswounded,weak,frightened,inhibited,andhaunted.Thisimpactofthetraumaticlossenduresuntilitisactivelymournedandintegrated,sofaraspossible,intothesurvivor’slife.Myfindingsindicatethatexternalandinternalcontainingobjectsareneededforthistask.Itisthroughmourningthatthesurvivingtwindis-identifiesfromhisdeadtwinandre-findsthelivingtwinasa life-givingand loving internalobject.Throughmourning,othercontainingandprotectiveinternalobjectsarerediscoveredandreconfigured.Theresultisanenliveningof thesurvivorandanewsenseofhimselfasemotionallycapableandcontained. Inmyconclusionsregardingtheclinical implicationsofmyfindings,Isuggestthatthereneedsto be recognition of and respect for the survivor’s great sorrow. Above all, treatmentneeds to be about connectedness and finding a way to the lost good objects. Lastly, Isuggesthowfutureresearchmighttesttheimplicationsofmyfindingsforotherkindsoflossofatwinandsiblinglossingeneral.

iv

v

TableofContentsChapter1....................................................................................................................................................1

IntroductionandLiteratureReview...........................................................................................................1

1.1. IntroductionandBackground.....................................................................................................1

1.1.1. DevelopmentofResearchInterest.....................................................................................1

1.1.2. DevelopmentofResearchProject......................................................................................1

1.2. CriticalLiteratureReview-Introduction....................................................................................2

1.2.1. HowIundertookmyCriticalLiteratureReview.................................................................2

1.2.2. Introduction........................................................................................................................3

1.3. CriticalLiteratureReview–Twin-ship........................................................................................3

1.3.1. Twin-ship’sSatisfactions....................................................................................................3

1.3.2. The‘we-self’.......................................................................................................................4

1.3.3. DevelopmentalFactors.......................................................................................................5

1.3.4. SeparationandIndividuation.............................................................................................6

1.4. CriticalLiteratureReview–LossofaTwin.................................................................................7

1.4.1. EnduringTrauma................................................................................................................7

1.4.2. SurvivingTwinisChild:ImpossibilityofMourning.............................................................7

1.4.3. MultipleLosses...................................................................................................................9

1.4.4. ParentalGriefandGuilt....................................................................................................10

1.4.5. InfluenceofGuilt..............................................................................................................11

1.4.6. UnconsciousIdentifications/IdentityFormation..............................................................13

1.4.7. LossofTheLovedTwinObject.........................................................................................15

1.4.8. LossoftheGoodTwinObject-ResearchProject.............................................................17

Chapter2..................................................................................................................................................19

MethodandEthics...................................................................................................................................19

2.1. Method.....................................................................................................................................19

2.1.1. Psychobiography..............................................................................................................19

2.1.2. Design...............................................................................................................................21

vi

2.1.3. CaseStudy........................................................................................................................21

2.1.4. TheDataProblem–thebook...........................................................................................22

2.1.5. TheDataAnalysisProblem–ThematicAnalysis..............................................................25

2.1.6. WhyIchoseThematicAnalysis........................................................................................26

2.1.7. Procedure.........................................................................................................................27

2.1.8. TheGeneralizabilityProblem...........................................................................................31

2.1.9. Validityandcredibility......................................................................................................31

2.1.10. ReflexivityandCounter-Transference..............................................................................32

2.2. Ethics........................................................................................................................................35

Chapter3..................................................................................................................................................37

Results......................................................................................................................................................37

3.1. IntroductionandSynopsis........................................................................................................37

3.1.1. Introduction......................................................................................................................37

3.1.2. Schemeofthebook..........................................................................................................38

3.1.3. Synopsis............................................................................................................................38

3.2. IntroductiontoandSummaryofThemes................................................................................40

3.2.1. Trauma.............................................................................................................................41

3.2.2. Loss...................................................................................................................................41

3.2.3. Lonetwinidentity.............................................................................................................41

3.2.4. Mourning..........................................................................................................................41

3.2.5. Guilt..................................................................................................................................41

3.2.6. Integration........................................................................................................................41

3.3. Trauma.....................................................................................................................................42

3.3.1. InexpressibleUnthinkableCatastrophicShock................................................................42

3.3.2. OverwhelmingEmotion;Devastation;Disintegration......................................................42

3.3.3. NoContainment...............................................................................................................43

3.3.4. Dissociation;Denial;Disavowal;DeadTwinFantasy........................................................44

vii

3.3.5. Traumaendures...............................................................................................................45

3.4. Loss...........................................................................................................................................47

3.4.1. LostTwinasLovedObject................................................................................................47

3.4.2. LostPre-TraumaWorldandExistence.............................................................................47

3.4.3. LostSenseofSafetyandNaturalOrder...........................................................................50

3.4.4. LostIdentity;LostPartofSelf;InternalisedDeadness.....................................................50

3.5. LoneandLesserSurvivorIdentity............................................................................................51

3.5.1. AlonenessandWithdrawal...............................................................................................51

3.5.2. AdaptiveorCopingSelf....................................................................................................52

3.5.3. EmotionalConstrictionandRestrictedLiving...................................................................53

3.5.4. LesserandWeak...............................................................................................................54

3.6. Mourning..................................................................................................................................55

3.6.1. ActiveMourning;Crying;Memoryastimetravel............................................................55

3.6.2. Reunion;Separation.........................................................................................................57

3.6.3. ContainingExternalObjects.............................................................................................58

3.6.4. ContainingInternalObjects..............................................................................................59

3.7. Guilt..........................................................................................................................................61

3.7.1. SurvivorGuilt....................................................................................................................61

3.7.2. GuiltaboutAbandonment................................................................................................62

3.7.3. NeglectedDutiestotheDead..........................................................................................63

3.8. Integration................................................................................................................................64

3.8.1. MourningasanIntegrativeProcess.................................................................................64

3.8.2. CreatingaNarrative.........................................................................................................65

3.8.3. ReconstructionofIdentity................................................................................................66

Chapter4..................................................................................................................................................67

DiscussionandConclusions......................................................................................................................67

4.1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................67

viii

4.1.1. ResearchProjectRevisited...............................................................................................67

4.1.2. AreasofDiscussion...........................................................................................................68

4.2. Theoreticalimplications...........................................................................................................68

4.2.1. TwinLossasTrauma.........................................................................................................68

4.2.2. Post-TraumaticIdentificationwithDeadTwin.................................................................71

4.2.3. ReformulationofPost-TraumaObjectWorld..................................................................74

4.2.4. DoesTwin-shipmeanDevelopmentalDeficit?.................................................................76

4.2.5. Guilt..................................................................................................................................78

4.2.6. Anger................................................................................................................................79

4.3. ClinicalImplications..................................................................................................................82

4.3.1. TraumaSurvivor...............................................................................................................82

4.3.2. Twins’SharedIdentity......................................................................................................83

4.3.3. NewGoodObject.............................................................................................................83

4.3.4. Guilt,AngerandDestructiveness.....................................................................................84

4.3.5. AvailabilityofSupport......................................................................................................86

4.3.6. TellingtheStory................................................................................................................86

4.4. ResearchImplications..............................................................................................................86

4.4.1. FutureResearch...............................................................................................................86

4.4.2. UseofPublishedText.......................................................................................................87

ix

x

1

Chapter1

IntroductionandLiteratureReview1.1. IntroductionandBackground

1.1.1. DevelopmentofResearchInterestMyresearchhasdevelopedfrommyclinicalworkwithA,anadultsurvivorofchildhoodsiblingloss1.When,inthecourseofthatwork,Ibeganlookingforpsychoanalyticwritingontheimpactofchildhoodsibling loss, I became aware of its prevalence as a clinical phenomenon,2but I found that thosecontemporary British psychoanalytic thinkers, who had made siblings their specialist subject, hadwritten relatively little on the subject (Coles,2003,p.5; Mitchell,2003,pp.169,210-215; Lewin &Sharp,2009,pp.57-60,163-164).3By contrast, I found several authors in the fields of psychology, thepsycho-socialandbiographicaljournalism,whowroteconvincinglyandmovinglyabouttheexperienceof losing a sibling during childhood (Rosen,1986; Fanos,1996; Farrant,1998; DeVita-Raeburn,2004;White,2006; Rowe,2007; Knatchbull,2010;Moorhead,2011). I searched for possible explanations fortheneglectofsibling lossbypsychoanalysis.Theseconcentratedupon itsfoundingparentsandtheirambivalentfeelingsregardingtheirowndeadsiblings(Coles,2003,pp.35-37,52;Schellinski,2014,p.191),anduponthetraditionalfocusofpsychoanalysisonverticalrelationships(BankandKahn,1997,p.299).4InotedthatNorthAmericanpsychoanalyticthinkersbeganwritingaboutchildhoodsiblinglossearlierthan their British counterparts (e.g., Pollock,1972; Bank and Kahn,1982/1997, pp.271-295;Agger,1988).Evenso,aslateas2012,thepsychoanalystEdwardregardsthefailuretoappreciatetheimpactofsiblingdeath inchildhood“ofgreatconcern”and,echoingherfellowAmericans,BankandKahn,30yearsearlier,pleadsthatsiblingloss“needstoberecognisedassuchbytheirfamiliesandbysocietyasawhole”(2012,pp.157,187;BankandKahn,1997/1982,p.295).

1.1.2. DevelopmentofResearchProjectMy project began as a proposed clinical case study of an adult survivor’s experience of childhoodsibling loss. However, ethical considerations preventedmy usingmy patient A’s clinicalmaterial forthatpurpose.

1MydutyofconfidentialitymeansthatIsaynomoreaboutAotherthanthatourworkison-going.2In2013, IattendedaFPCscientificmeetingonsibling loss ledbythepsychoanalyticpsychotherapist,PatriciaGalliland,whichdiscussedtheclinicalprevalenceofthisphenomenonandthelackofpsychoanalyticresources.3Coles’monographon transgenerational transmissionof trauma (2011) is concernedwith Fraiberg’s “ghosts”,“the visitors from the unremembered past of the parents” (1987,p.100; Cavalli,2012). A chapter onintergenerationalsibling lossreferstotheimpactofsibling lossonthesurvivingsibling(pp.28-29,34-35,40-41),butthefocusistheimpactofparents’lostsiblingsonfuturegenerations.4Inadditiontothesepossibleexplanations,Isuggestbelowthattheneglectofsiblinglossbypsychoanalysishasmuchtodowiththeneglectofsiblinglove(1.4.7).Theavailabilityofalovedandlovingsiblingasagoodinternalobjectandthepotentiallydevastatingimpactonthesurvivor’sinternalworldoflossofthatgoodobjectiscentraltomythesis(1.4.8below).

2

Inthecourseofmyresearch,Ihadread“FromaClearBlueSky”(“thebook”)byTimothyKnatchbull(“Timothy”) (2010). Timothy was 14 when he suffered the loss of his identical twin, Nicholas(“Nicholas”), in theMountbatten bomb (3.1 below). Timothy publishedhis book 31 years later. Thebooktellsthecompellingstoryofhowittook23yearsbeforeTimothywasabletoreturntoIrelandtoinvestigateNicholas’deathandmournfullyhisterribleloss.Thebookisamethodically-composedandemotionally-chargeddocument, inwhicha surviving siblingmaps the changes inhis subjective stateovertime,whilealsoprovidingahistoricalaccountofrelevantevents,usingoriginaldocuments(e.g.,journals)andverbatim(audio-recorded)eye-witnessaccounts.Inconsultationwithmysupervisorandsupervisoryboard,Ichosethebookasmysubstituteresearchmaterial.5WehadinmindSchreber’sCase(1911).Freudexplainsthepracticalexigencies,leadinghimto use Dr. Schreber’s published biography for his case study of paranoia (1911,p.9). The exigenciesinfluencingme have been ethical exigencies regarding potential harm to the patient, confidentialityandprivacy.Pollocknoteshowthesekindsofethicaldifficultiesmaybeavoidedthroughthestudyofabiographywhich,while“notthesameasthereportofanongoingpsychoanalytictherapy..stillhasitsvalue” (1982,p.333). I recognise that, in the field of history, the value of the application ofpsychoanalysistothestudyofthepasthasbeen“verycontroversial”.6Totheextentthatmyworkcanbe classified as psychobiography and therefore a genre of psychohistory,7I discuss the potentialdangersofpsychobiography,togetherwithotherpotential limitationsofusingapublishedbiographyforapsychoanalyticcasestudy,indetailbelow(2.1.1and2.1.4.5).Followingcompletionofmyfirstdraftthematicanalysisofthebook,mysupervisorandIdiscussedthedistinctive treatmentof twins in the literature. I agreewith Edward that symbiotic-like relationshipsbetween siblings are not confined to twins (2012,pp.8-10); and with Mitchell that, although theliteratureregardstwinsasanexceptionalcase,theycanequallywellberegardedasextremeinstancesof conditions of siblinghood, with much to tell us regarding sibling dynamics generally(2003,pp.209,225).Nevertheless,thoughfutureresearchcouldtesttheimplicationsofmyfindingsfornon-twinsiblings (4.4.1below),mysupervisorand Iagreed thatmyresearchquestionneeded tobereframedtoreflectthatthesiblinglossthesubjectofmyresearchmaterialistheparticularlossofanidenticaltwin.Myresearchquestion,thusrevised,became:whatistheimpactonthesurvivoroflossofanidenticaltwininchildhood?

1.2. CriticalLiteratureReview-Introduction

1.2.1. HowIundertookmyCriticalLiteratureReviewConsistentwith the scopeofmyoriginal researchproject, I commencedby reading the keyEnglish-speakingpsychoanalytictextsonsiblings(1.1.1above).Aftermyresearchprojectwasrevisedtofocuson twins, I turned to the key psychoanalytic text on working with twins (Lewin, 2004/2014). I also

5Fortheassistanceofthereader,Iprovideasynopsisofthebookbelow(3.1),togetherwithaFamilyTree,listingofPeopleandPlaces,andTimeline(Appendices1-3).6Szaluta(1999,p.2).7Szaluta,1999,pp.171-213.

3

studied Lewin and Sharp (2009); Volkan andAst (2014); Skrzypek et al. (2014);Hindle and Sherwin-White(2014);Woodward(2010);andasmanyotherpublicationsrelatingtochildhoodsiblingandtwinlossasIcouldfind(1.1.1).Inmysearchforrelevantcasestudies,IconsultedPepWeb,theSingleCaseArchive,andResearchGate.8

1.2.2. IntroductionI begin with an overview of the psychoanalytic literature on twins, showing how twin-ship isunderstood by psychoanalytic thinkers generally and, in particular, by Lewin (2014). I next give anoverview of the literature on twin and sibling loss in childhood, discussing the particular aspects oftheselosseswhichhavebeenidentifiedbypsychoanalyticthinkersasrelevanttobothkindsoflossandspecifically to twin loss. I conclude with my understanding of the limitations of the psychoanalyticliteratureonchildhoodtwinlossandmyanalysisofwhat,specifically,ismissingfromLewin’sapproachtothesubject.Thisgapgivesrisetothenecessityformyresearchproject.IexplainhowmyworkseekstotakeforwardLewin’sworkandexpandcurrentpsychoanalyticthinkingaboutchildhoodtwinloss.

1.3. CriticalLiteratureReview–Twin-shipTheemphasis inthe literature isstrikinglynegative.9Twin-ship is theoretically formulatedasamuchwished-forstateofbeing,enviedbynon-twins,andwithin-builtparticularpleasuresandsatisfactionsfor twins themselves, but which is developmentally highly problematic and frequently pathological(Burlingham,1963;Sheerin,1991;Magagna,2009;Lewin,2014,pp.48,54,61).Lewin’sthesisisthattwinsare“fundamentally”affected in theirdevelopmentbybeing twins,and that some twinswilluse theinternalstructureoftwin-shipasapsychicretreat(Steiner,1993)(Lewin,2014,pp.2-3,7)10.

1.3.1. Twin-ship’sSatisfactionsLewin’sthesisisthattheinfant’sclosepreverbalcontactwiththeunconsciousofthemotherprovidestheexperienceofbeingcompletelyunderstood,andthatthe lossofthisexperiencegivesrisetothefeeling of internal loneliness, which in turn gives rise to the “universal” longing for a twin(2014,pp.1,9,12).11Thechildfantasiesatwin–“acompanioncreatedincompensationforthelostloveobject..whowillbeever-lovingandever-present”(Arlow,1960,p.178).Thefunctionof“theimaginarytwin”istodenytherealityofthelovedobjectwhichisoutsidethechild’scontrol(Bion,1950,p.19).

8Iusedthesearchterms“siblingloss”;“lossofasibling”;“siblingdeath”;“twinloss”;“lossofatwin”;and“loss”and“twin”.Isourced181psychoanalyticcasestudiesandjournalarticles.Iretained36oftheseassignificant.9Arlowwarns:“itshouldbenotedthat[thetwin]relationshipisbasicallyahighlyambivalentandnarcissisticonefraughtwithaseriesofspecialpsychologicalhazards”(1960,p.197).Sheerin,writing30yearslater,refersto“thewealthofpsychologicaldifficulties thatmay complicate thematurationalprocessof an identical twin”, addingthatthese“complexitiesoftwin-shipscannotbeunderstated”(1991,pp.13,22).10SeealsoLacombe (1959)andOrtmeyer (1970,1975)whopostulate that twins inevitably sufferadeficit asaresultofbeingtwins.11Klein writes about the internal loneliness in everyone as the “yearning for an unattainable perfect internalstate”(1963,p.300).LewindrawsattentiontothePlatonicdiscourseonthenatureof love:“humannaturewasoriginally one andwewere awhole; and the desire and pursuit of thewhole is called love” (2014,pp.27-28).Lawrencewritesaboutthefascinationtwinsholdbecause“onsomelevelweareallsearchingfor‘ourotherhalf’toprovidethatelusivefeelingofbeingcomplete”(2005,p.101).

4

Twins are envied for their capacity to prolong the relaxed and blissful state of being perfectlyunderstood, through their capacity for deep affective contact with each other (Lewin, supra). Theysharetheuniqueexperienceofalwaysbeingpresentforeachotherinuteroandintheirmother’smind(Lewin,2014,p.57).Sheerinreferstotwins’“undoubtedadvantage”ofbeingabletofacetogether“thefrequentlyterrifyingmomentsoftheirearlydevelopment;for instance,theperiodsof lonelinessandabandonment”(1991,p.14).MagagnaandDominguezshowfromtheirobservationalstudyoftwinshowthecapacityforempathyandexpressionofemotioncandevelopveryearly(2009,pp.50,53,57).Thepsychoanalyst,Engel,(whowas a twin), refers to the availability of constant companionship; the extent to which the reliablephysical presence of each other “mitigat[ed] the trauma of separation” from their parents; and the“extraordinary power” he and his twin felt in being able to deceive others as to their respectiveidentities (1974,p.33). Theemotional andmental communion twinsexperiencemeans that they canenjoyalevelofcontinuedemotionalself-sufficiencyandpotency,evenomnipotence.12

1.3.2. The‘we-self’Twinscanexperiencethemselvesasa“we-self”(Ortmeyer,1970,p.125,andinLewin,2014,pp.61,126-129).This isnotaboutsameness; itmeansthattheydonotdistinguishbetweentheirownandtheirtwin’spersonality,butuseeachother’spersonalityasanadjuncttotheirown(ibid.).Conflictneedstobe kept to a minimum, since harm to the other is harm to oneself (Bank and Kahn,1997,p.225).Difficulties will be resolved and aggression contained by complementarity, similarity orinterchangeability,oraggressionwillbeexternalised(Lewin,2014,p.60;Sheerin,1991).Magagnashowshowprojectionofaspectsoftheselfintotheothertwincansubstantiallyweakenandlimitpersonalitydevelopment(2009,p.120).Bothidenticalandfraternaltwinscommonlyhaveasenseofsharedidentity.Leonard(1961,p.307,andin Lewin,2014,p.58), proposes the existence of a “psychological syncytium”, a sense of fusion oroneness and lack of perception of separateness or boundaries, which leads gradually through thecontinuedconfrontationwithamirrorimagetoastateofprimaryidentificationwiththeco-twinwhichpersists throughout life.13Joseph and Tabor (1961) refer to themutual inter-identification betweentwinsandthefusionofselfandobjectrepresentations,leadingtoadiffusenessofegoboundaries,asthe“twinningreaction”.Theynotethetendencyoftwinstoformtwinrelationshipswithotherpeoplein their lives. Lewin argues that the twin relationship is internalised and forms a permanent andenduringdynamicstructurewithinthebrain(2014,p.177).14

12Thenarcissisticadvantagesoftwin-shipcancombine,notonlytohelptwinsfeelspecial,butalsotogivethema sense of superiority and invincibility – they are “doubly powerful” (Lewin,2014,p.15; Sheerin,1991). LewindrawsattentiontothePlatonicideathattheoriginalnatureofmanwasadoublebeing,whomthegodssplitintotwohalves(manandwoman),becausethedoublebeingsweresofullofthemselvesthattheyroseuptoattackthegods(2014,pp27-28).13 Orr(1941),citedbyLawrence(2005),suggeststhatbeingconfrontedwithamirrorimageofoneselfcanhavestuntingeffectsonegodevelopment.14Lewin’ssubstantialcontributiontothefieldisherthesisthatitisinthetransferencethattheinternalisedtwin-shipcanbemostkeenlyfelt;theanalystistreatedaspartofthepatient(Lewin,2014,pp.84-88).Lewindiscusses

5

1.3.3. DevelopmentalFactorsThe literature emphasises the disadvantages of having to spreadmaternal resources between two(Lewin,2014,pp.3,70).AsMitchellputsit,“foodcan..becomeinsufficient”withtwins(2003,p.200).As soon as she knows she is pregnant with twins, their mother has two babies in mind and herattention is divided (Lewin,2014,pp.49-50,174-175). A twin never has the experience of being alonewith hismother or of being hismother’s unique child (Lewin,2014,p.49).15Sheerinwrites about therealityofhavingtoshareparentalsuppliesleadingtothedawningrealisationthattheco-twinisarivalfor those supplies (1991,p.14). Unconscious hostility and a need to negate the co-twin arise fromresentment about the lack of singularity (ibid.). Lewin, referring to Davison’s (1992) observationalstudiesoftwins,suggeststhattheirmother’sstateofmindiscriticaltotwins’individualdevelopmentand,inparticular,hersenseoftheindividualityofeachofthem(Lewin,2014,pp.76-79).16Wheretheirmother is unable to create a space in hermind for each twin separately, rivalry and violent hatredbetweenthemarelikelytoresult(Lewin,2014,p.30).Lewin writes that each twin impinges on the other’s relationship with the mother and that twinsinevitably suffer less containment by theirmother as a factor of the twin-ship (2014,pp.49,67-69).17Havingtowaitlongerforattention,andthereforesufferinggreaterfrustrationandragethanasingleinfant, twinswill turntoeachotherasadevelopmentalobject (ibid.,p.129).Piontelliwritesof infanttwinsbetween12and15monthswhoonly criedor rejoicedwhen separated fromor reunitedwitheach other: they had developed a “strong and prevailing horizontal attachment” (2002,p.90). Lewinsuggeststhatwherethehorizontalrelationshipbecomestheprimaryrelationship,twinswillbelockedinanemmeshedandrigidrelationship,impairingdevelopment(2014,p.51).Lewin’s thesis is that where twins use each other developmentally, this can result in an immaturecontainer foreachtwin (2014,pp.49,176).18What is internalised isanarcissistic twin-shipwhichdoes

thetwinsBertandBill,writtenaboutbyBurlingham(1963),whohadnoobjectrelationshipsexceptinattackingeachotherorothersinthechildren’shomewheretheylived.Shenotesthat,afterhehadapedtheirrowdyanddestructive behaviour, the twins made a kind of relationship with the therapist (Barron) who ran the home.Lewincomments thatBarronhadtobecomea twin toBertandBill, inorder tomakesomekindofemotionalconnectionwiththem(2014,pp133-134).15Anidenticaltwinmaywellfeelthereisnothinguniqueorpersonalabouthim(Sheerin,1991,p14).Arlowwritesofthe“wishforanunsharedchildhood”heldbybothhistwinsurvivorpatients (1960,p.195).Lawrence(2005)writesofthewishforanunsharedbreastandthedeeperwishtohavebeenbornsingle.16Sheerinconcludesthattherecanbenofeelingofclosecontactbetweenmotherandidenticaltwinuntiltheyare distinguishable (1991,p14). When their own mother cannot tell them apart, identical twins “have everyreasontofeelunrecognised,aloneandangry”(ibid.):cf.Patricia,themotherofTimothyandNicholas,whoputasmall gold bracelet on Nicholas “to differentiate us” (p.8). Lewin writes that mothers often feel guilty andneglectfultowardstheirtwinsfornottreatingthemindividuallyorequally(2014,pp.64-66).17The experience of their present and absent mother is all the more intense, since their mother always hasanotherbabytoattendto,oranotherbabyinmind(Lewin,2014,pp.10,50).18Magagna and Dominguezwrite that it is “obvious” that in early infancy and childhood “the other twin canneverbeanadequatesubstituteforthemotheroradultcaregivers”(2009,p.53).

6

notreduceanxiety(Lewin,2014,pp.11,14,54-56,137).19Deepandempathicunderstandingbetweenthetwinsispreserved,butwhichishostiletoobjectrelationshipsoutsideitself,includingwiththeparents:“Whilethe‘skin’betweenthetwinsis‘thin’,the‘skin’aroundthetwinpairisthick.”(Lewin,2014,p.19).Lack of relationships with mother, mother-substitutes, siblings, and other adults deprives twins ofuseful identifications (Burlingham,1963,p.410). Instead, the twin-ship acts as a refuge fromexperiencing loss of, and awareness of need for, the mature object (Lewin,2014,pp.3,10,15,16,76).Lewinconcludes that thismeans that there isnodevelopmentofacapacity tomournand thegoodobjectisinsufficientlyestablished(2014,pp.14,55-56).IcommentherethatLewinseemstohaveinmindaveryparticularpatientgroup,whenshewritesoftwinpairswhoside-linetheirmotherandotheradultcarerstosuchanextentduringinfancythatnogood,matureinternalobjectcanbeestablished.Piontelli(supra)remarksthatalthoughformanytwins“soonerorlater,eachnecessarilybecomesthemajorfigureofattachmentfortheother”,outofallthetwinssheobserved,onlyonecoupleofidenticaltwinswere“lockedinanexclusiverelationshipoftotalclosure to the outsideworld”, and “their post-natal environment” had “played an important role infosteringtheirpre-nataltendencies”(1989,p.425).20

1.3.4. SeparationandIndividuationThestruggletoseparateandcreateindividualidentitiesisverydifficultandevokes“intensereactions”because loss of the co-twin being experienced as loss of part of the self (Sheerin,1991,p.15;Burlingham,1963,p.403; Agger, 1988).Where the other is experienced as part of self, it cannot begivenup(Lewin,2014,p.40).Magagna’sidenticaltwinpatientHannahexperiencedhersisteras“partofme”andevenherseparatesociallifewasunbearable(2009,pp.130,132).21Lewin regards conjoined twins as the embodiment of the twin dilemma – “to separate and losesomething of oneself, perhaps with a disabling consequence; or to remain entwined with theconsequent disfigurement of the individuality that might have been achieved through separation”(pp.181-182).MagagnaandDominguezwritemovinglyof theirobservationof the impactofphysicalseparationontwoconjoinedtwininfantboys.Separationforbothwas“frighteninganddifficult,asiftheyhadlostapartofthemselves”(2009,p.48).Followingseparation,bothweresufferingfrom“theirprofoundsenseoflossofeachother”(ibid.).Oneofthem,Tom,“begantoshrivellikealeaftornfromanourishingtree”(ibid.).Theauthors’sensewasthathewasgrievingthelossofhisbetterself,whichheexperiencedaslocatedinhisbrother(ibid.).Separationfromhisbrotherhadbeen“tootraumatic”and he “was not psychologically prepared to live alone”, his psychic structure resembling that of a“newbornwhenexposed to anxieties” (2009,pp.50-51).With conjoined twins, separationoften risks

19Thecontrast iswith thereparativecapacityof the internalparentsandtheircreative intercourse,whichcantransformnamelessdreadintoanexperiencethatistolerable(Lewin,2014,pp.11,137).20 Thegreaterthematernaldeprivationandlackofmaternalaffection,thegreaterthelikelihoodthattwinswilllookinwardsforsoothing(Sheerin,1991),becomingself-regulatingobjectsforeachother(Lawrence,2005),withconsequentialdeepeningandembeddingofthetwinbond(Lewin,2014,pp.66-67,107,122).21Cf.BankandKahn’sdiscussionof thepainfulprocessofseparationof the identical twins,MarilynandVickie(1997,pp.42-46); and Lewin’s discussionof theGibbons twinswho, though separated,were still trapped in anemmeshedinternaltwin-shipwhichpreventedeitherofthemfindingaseparateidentity(2014,p.17).

7

annihilationofoneofthemandhencethetwin-ship.Lewin’sthesisisthatalltwinsseekingseparationfaceannihilationanxiety(Lewin,2014,pp.184,197;Lawrence,2005,p.90).22

1.4. CriticalLiteratureReview–LossofaTwin

1.4.1. EnduringTraumaThe literature treats lossofasibling inchildhood (twinornon-twin)asa trauma.Crehan23describeschildhood sibling loss as a ‘multi-faceted’ trauma (2004,p.203).24Christian, echoing Pollock (1972),writesthatsiblinglossinchildhood“inevitably”producesa“lastingeffect”onthesurvivor(2009,p.52).Pollockobservesthat,inhisexperience,siblinglossisconsiderablymorepathogenicinchildrenthaninadults(1986,p.9).

1.4.2. SurvivingTwinisChild:ImpossibilityofMourningTheliteratureemphasisesthatlossofatwininchildhood,beforetheoccurrenceofanyofthestandardlifeevents(e.g.,university,work,marriage,family)whichmightfacilitategradualindividuationforeachtwin, will be experienced as potentially identity-shattering and destabilising (Woodward,2010,p.60).The emphasis is upon the premature experience of separation at a time when the twin bond willpredominate. 25 Further, the younger the child when their twin dies, the greater the lack ofdevelopmentalcapacitytounderstandandmakesenseofthedeathandthegreaterthedependenceupon,andimpactof,thegrievingparents(Lewin,2014,p.209;Woodward,2010,p.23).Ifthetwindiesatbirth,thesurvivingbabyisespeciallyvulnerable(ibid.).Hedoesnothavethecapacitytodealwiththetraumaticeventoflossofhistwin,hisgrievingparentsandthetriumphofhissurvivalandislikelytoemergefeelingpersecutedandfragmented(Lewin,2014,p.201).

22They are exposed to paranoid anxieties and fear of fragmentation (Lewin,2014,p.136). In the case ofemmeshed twins, where no good internal object has been established, separation is especially terrifying(Lewin,2014,pp.56,136-137). The experience is of abandonment into the void outside the common psychicmembrane(the‘thickskin’aroundthetwinpairreferredtoin1.3.2above)(Lewin,2014,pp.137-138).23 Crehan is a child psychoanalytic psychotherapist. Rustin contrasts adult psychoanalysis with childpsychoanalytic psychotherapy’s long traditionof interest in sibling relationship and significant contributions inthistradition(2009,pp.147-148).Thisisanintriguingandpuzzlingdichotomybetweenthesetwobranchesoftheoneprofession,butoutsidethescopeofmyresearchproject.24Guntripdescribesthe“severetrauma”ofthedeathofhisyoungerbrotherwhenhewas3(1975,p.145).Thistraumawassubjecttoa“totalamnesia”whichpersistedthroughtwoanalysesbyFairbairnandWinnicott(ibid.).(Rudnytsky, contrasting Freud’s and Guntrip’s responses to loss of their respective brothers in childhood,suggests that Freud’s guilt signified greater psychological development (1988,p.424).) Abend writes that thedetailedmemories of the “traumatic deaths” in childhoodof his twoadult patients’ respectiveolder brotherswere“unearthedonlywithgreatdifficulty”,andbroughtforth“affectivecomponentsofthetraumaticsequenceswhichwerewardedoffintheinitialrecountingsofthefacts”(1986,p.100).25Thelosswillbeexperiencedasoverwhelmingifthenaturalprocessofseparationandindividuationhasnotyetbegun.Timothycontrastshissituationwiththatofhisfriendandfellowtwin-survivor,David.Hewas25whenhistwin,John,died.John“hadlivedlongenoughforthemtowanttogotheirownways”,andthisnaturalprocessof“go[ing] in separate directions” had been “painful”, full of “difficulties .. tensions .. [and] sadness” (p.221).Timothy writes: “David made me realise that in adolescence and adulthood our lives might have been verydifferent.”(p.222).Untilthen,hehad“assumedthatNick’sandmyexperienceoftwinhoodwouldhavebeenanextensionofourchildhood”(ibid.).Thatwasachildhoodinwhichtheywere“hardlyeverseparated”,spendingonlya“handful”ofdaysapart(p.11).

8

Theliteratureemphasisesthatitisachild’smindthathastomakesenseoftheirsibling’sdeath.Thereisaprematureexistentialcrisis.Thechild’s“senseoforderandmeaning”ina“nowexplicitlyuncertainandunpredictableuniverse”isdisrupted(CharlesandCharles,1986,p.73).Thebereavedchildcantakefor granted no longer “the safety of the world and the efficacy of adults” (Charles andCharles,2006,p.74).Thereisa“breakingofabasictrustandsenseoffaithintheexternalworld”and“terriblerecognitionoftheparents’inabilitytokeeptheworldsafe”(CharlesandCharles,2006,p.87).MichaelRosen,whowasa ‘replacement’ child foranolderbrotherandwho losthisownsonat19,writes about bereaved parents’ lost confidence in themselves as protectors of their children(Rowe,2007,p.183;Edward,2012,p.156).Thesurvivingtwin’sdependencyontheparentsisshakenbytheirinabilitytopreventthedeathofthetwin(Lewin,2014,p.209;Woodward,2010,p.13).Woodward treats the actual circumstances of a twin’s death in childhood as a significant factor(2010,p.1).Whether the survivorwitnessedahorribleor shockingdeath, orwhether thedead childhad prolonged or gruesome suffering before dying, will contribute to its traumatic impact on theimmatureanddevelopingmindof thesurvivor (BankandKahn,1997,pp.278-280).Rosenemphasisestheelementofshockandsurprizeandwhetherthesurvivorwasunpreparedforthedeath(1995,p80).Whetherthesurvivorattendsthefuneralisalsoinfluential(Pollock,1986,p.7).The loss will be experienced differently according to the child’s developmental age when it occurs(Woodward,2010,p.3). The younger child may lack sufficient language and intellectual capacity tounderstand death (Charles and Charles,2006,p.73), so that intense fears about death can develop(Davids,1993),and“magicalattributionsandfantasiesaboutthedeadsiblingcangounchecked”(Bankand Kahn,1997,p.281; Pollock,1982,p350). Crehan suggests that the older child may be able toconceptualisedeath,buttheresultmaybetofill themwithaterrorofdeathand leavethemwithaprematureandheightenedsenseoftheirownmortality(2004,pp.204,213;Edward,2012,pp.166-167).AlthoughCrehandistinguishesbetweendifferentcapacitiesofcomprehension,dependingontheageofthesurvivor,sheconcludesthat,evenifthebereavedchildhasarealisticunderstandingofdeath,he isunready“todecathecta lostobjectthroughtheworkofmourning”(pp.203-204).This isnottochallenge that even a very young child may miss terribly their dead sibling and yearn for them(Edward,2012,p.157, following Bowlby (1980).) However, full mourning is only possible post-adolescence(ibid.;Davids,1993,p.290;Klyman,1986,p.325).Mitchellconcludesthat,absentmourning,“therealityofadeadsiblingwillhavetobedealtwithbyunresolvedfantasies”(2003,p.212).The reality of a dead twin is frequently avoided by creation of a fantasy twin (Lewin,2014,p.201;Bion,1950).26The dead-twin fantasy allows the surviving twin to keep control over his twin object,retain his identity as a twin, and avoid the reality of the experiences of loss and aloneness and the

26OnlyoneofBion’sthreepatientswithanimaginarytwinwasanactualtwinwhowasaninfantwhenhissisterdied. The significance of this actual twinship is not commented upon. (Lewin,2014,p.91;Mitchell,2003,pp210-213).Mitchell’s view is that this patient’s imaginary twin enabled him to fend off the traumatic reality of hissister’sdeath(2003,p212;cf.Lewinetal.,2009,p.54).

9

processofmourning(Lewin,2014,pp.44,198).27Thefantasytwinmaybefelttobe,andspokentoasiftheyare,actuallypresent(Arlow,1960;Engel,1975;Pollock,1978).Disavowalwilloperate,sothatthefactthetwinhasdiedisbothknownandnotknown(Lewin,2014,p.205).28Reeves(1973)writesabouthis7-year-oldpatient,whowas3whenthefamilyfishingboatcapsized.Althoughheandhismothersurvived,thepatient’sfatherandnon-identicaltwinbrotherdrowned.Reevesshowshowhispatientsustainedabelief inthecontinuedexistenceofhis fatherandbrotherandthepossibilitytheymightonedayreturn.Reevesconcludes:“itispreciselythecapacitytoapprehendtherealthatseemstobeatleastpartiallyimperilledastheresultoftrauma”(1973,p.25).Disavowalmeansthereisarefusaltoperceivetherealityofthe loss,butthis isapre-requisiteofmourning:“Onecannotgrievewhatonedoesnotknow”(1973,p.26).29

1.4.3. MultipleLossesInadditiontolossoftheirparentstogrief30;lossofthesenseoftheirparentsasprotectors(1.4.2);andlossoftheirfamilyasitwasbeforetheirtwindied31;therearelossessufferedwhenatwindieswhichareuniquetotwin-ship.

Lewinconceptualisesdeathofatwinasanarcissisticinjurybecauseaspectsoftheselfarelostandalltheuniquesatisfactionsassociatedwiththetwin-shiphavetobegivenup(Lewin,2014,p.207).Lewin’sfocus is upon the primitive nature of the feelings aroused in the survivor, which she regards asconsequential upon the internal twin-ship psychodynamics. Since the internal twin-ship and theinternal twinobjectare inextricably linkedwith the selfatadeeperandchronologicallyearlier levelthanotherinternalobjects,separationfromtheinternaltwinisexperiencedasathreattotheintegrityof the self at a primal level (2014,pp.4,205). This involves a terrifying sense of danger and loss ofknown boundaries (ibid.). The loss is experienced as an amputation leading to fragmentation andannihilation(ibid.).Totheextentthatthetwins interactwitheachotherandtheexternalworldasa‘we-self’unit (1.3.2), theabsenceof thedeadtwinalsocreatesacuteanxiety,becauseof the lossofpersonality traits needed for the survivor to function (Lewin,2014,p.127; Magagna andDominguez,2009,p48).

27Lewinwritesaboutherpatientwhohadcreatedan imaginarytwintotaketheplaceofhisdeadtwinsister,whodiedatbirth.Thisimaginarytwin-shiphadalsoactedasarefugefromcontactwithawithdrawn,depressedandfrequentlyabsentmaternalcontainer(2014,pp.202-204andsee1.4.5below).28Cf.Pollock(1978)writesaboutKerouac’slossofhisnine-year-oldbrotherwhenhewasfour,andhowKerouacrefusedtobelievehisbrotherwasdead.Kerouac’s‘VisionsofGerald’,written30yearslater,testifiestohissensethathisbrothercontinuedtobeavailabletohim(reproducedinPollock,1978,p.465).Inhismid-40s,learningofthedeathof the friendwhowas the inspiration forDean in “On theRoad”andwhomhecalledhis “long lostbrother”,Kerouacformonthsrefusedtobelieveit(Pollock,1978,pp.469-470).29Cf.“..thepatientisawareoftheloss..butonlyinthesensethatheknowswhomhehaslostbutnotwhathehaslostinhim.”(Freud,1917,p.245,discussedinBrenman,2006,p.25).301.4.4below.31Crehanpointstothelossofthesurvivor’sfamilyasitwasbeforethedeath:lifeathomewillneverbethesameagain(2004,p.214).MiaFarrow,referringtothedeathofherolderbrotherwhenshewas16,writespoignantlythattherewere“nomoreparties”(Farrow,1997,p.60).

10

1.4.4. ParentalGriefandGuiltThe literature emphasises the persisting influence of the twin-ship on the minds of the bereavedparents,despitethefactthat‘thetwins’asanentitynolongerexist.Parentsarelikelytobeunabletoprovide the emotional containment the surviving twin needs (Lewin,2014,p.201). They will strugglewithdifficult contradictory feelings, and the surviving twin’sexperienceofhisparents is likely tobeconfusingandtroubling.Thesurvivorisapainfulreminderfortheparentsofthechildtheyhavelost:“Themissingtwinisalwayspresentinthereflectionofthesurvivingtwin.”(ibid.).Whenonetwindiesduringpregnancyorsoonafterbirth,thebirthisaneventtobecelebrated,butitisalsoladenwithgriefandloss(ibid.).Theremaybeintensereliefforthesurvivaloftheco-twin,whichmay lead them to be over-protective of the survivor (Lewin,2014,p.209;Woodward,2010,pp.13-14).Alternatively,thedeadbabymaybeidealised32,sothatthesurvivormaynotbeacceptedfullyandmayfeel devalued and neglected (Lewin,2014,pp.201,209). Woodward regards parental over-protectiveness and rejection to have the same source, namely, parents’ inability to bear theirhelplessnessinthefaceofsevereloss(2010,p.15).Pollock recognises the devastation of bereaved parents and that, though they may appreciate thesufferingoftheirsurvivingchildren,theywouldneed“herculeanstrength”toattendtotheiremotionalneeds (1986,p.7). Edward acknowledges that bereaved parents do well tomeet the basic needs oftheir remaining children (2012,p.157). Shewrites that it is “essential” thatother familymembersorfriendsrecognisetheimportanceofthelossforthesurvivingchildrenandbeavailabletooffersupportandhelpwithunderstanding(ibid.).33For Crehan, it is in the “emotional absence of bereaved parents” that “the primary threat to thebereavedsiblingresides”(2004,p.214).34ThisaspectofparentalgriefiscriticalforCrehan,asitwasforPollock (1978,p.480; 1986,p.7). Thepeople towhom the surviving siblingwouldordinarily expect toturnforhelpandsupportarethemselvesinurgentneedofhelp,andwillbeemotionallyunavailable(2004,p203; Bank and Kahn,1997,p.273; Charles and Charles,2006,p.86). As Freud indicated, theexperienceofphysicalorpsychicalhelplessnessistheessenceoftrauma(1926;Garland,2004,pp.204-207).Crehanconsidersitcentraltothetraumaofchildhoodsiblinglossanditspotentialcatastrophicconsequencesforthesurvivorthatheisonhisownwithit(Crehan,2004,pp.203,214-216).

32Theidealiseddeadcannotbebroughtinforrealisticscrutiny(Agger,1988,p.23;Reid,2014,p.281).33Crehan describes the surviving sibling as the “forgotten griever” (2004,p.203). Edward describes survivingsiblings as “unrecognised mourners” and “disenfranchised grievers, whose loss is not publically or sociallyrecognised”(2012,p.156).Klymanwritesthat,“Toooften,inthehouseofmourning,theparentsarecomfortedwhile the bewildered children stand around unattended without words to express their confused emotions”(1986,p.325).Shesuggeststhattheresourceswithinandavailabletothefamilywilldeterminewhetherthelosswillbea“majortraumathatleavesamajorscar”onthesurvivors(1986,p.326).cf.BankandKahn’scridecoeurtomedical,psychologicalandeducationalcommunitiestohelpbereavedparentscopewiththeir lossandhelpsurvivingchildrencopewiththeirs(1997,p.295).34BankandKahndescribethechildsurvivorinafamilythathaslostachildasa‘doubleorphan,losingnotonlyasisterorbrotherbutalsoanemotionallyavailableparent’(1997,p.273).Klymandescribesthechildsurvivorasa“doubleloser”(1986,p.325).

11

However, the impact of parental grief on the remaining childrenwhen a child dies extends beyondparents’ emotional unavailability (Crehan,2004,pp.203,205,214-216; Edward,2012,pp.158-172). Arecurringfeatureisparents’inabilitytotalkabouttheirdeadchild(BankandKahn,1997,pp.274-276).Edward notes that this will add to the disconnection between parents and their surviving children(2012,p.160).Crehanarguesthatsilenceaboutthedeadchildmaycontainanynumberoffrighteningcommunications (2004,pp.207-208). The developmental immaturity of the survivor is relevant here.Lackof informationaboutthedeathmay‘fuelmagicalthinkingandgiverisetomorefrighteningandpainful interpretationsoftheevent’,suchasthattheparentswereresponsibleforthedeathorthatthe survivor himself was responsible (Crehan,2004,pp.203,213; Edward,2012,pp.160-161,177). 35Distortedandirrationalfantasiesaboutthewhereaboutsofthedeadchildmaypersistuncorrectedintheabsenceofopencommunication(BankandKahn,1997,pp.281-282;Crehan,2004,p.203).BankandKahnsuggestthatitisparentalguiltthatliesbehindthe‘unspokenruleofsilence’infamilieswhohavelostachild(BankandKahn,pp.274-275).Parents’remainingchildrenareonlytooavailablefor parents to use for their projections, including guilt and shame (ibid.; Crehan,2004,pp.205-209;Coles,2011,pp.34-35).Parentsmay‘impose’guiltupontheirsurvivingchild,eitherblamingthechildforthedeathorrebukinghimfornotshowingsufficientgrief(Crehan,2004,p.210)ortellinghimheisnotas good as the dead sibling (Coles,2011,pp.78-79). Crehan and Berman draw attention to survivingsiblingswhobecome scapegoats for parental and family guilt as ameansof avoiding individual andfamilybreakdown(2004,pp.208-209;1973,pp.162-163).Thesurvivormayalreadyhavehisownguiltyfeelings,dependinguponthecircumstancesofthedeathandthenatureofhisattachmenttothedeadchild(BankandKahn,1997,p.281). Ifthesiblingrelationshiphasbeenmarkedbyrivalryandjealousy,Berman suggests that the survivor can experience intense guilt for having survived and for theirhostilitytowardstheirdeadbrotherorsister(1978,pp.575-576).Ontopofthesurvivor’sownguilt,theadditional burden of the parents’ projected guilt can be ‘crippling’ (Crehan,2004,p.208; Bank andKahn,1997,pp.275-276).

1.4.5. InfluenceofGuiltThe influence of guilt is by far the dominant narrative in the psychoanalytic literature36- whetherprojectedparentalorfamilyguilt,orthesurvivor’sownguilt(forhavingsurvived,orforpastconflicts,orforpasthostilitytowardstheirdeadbrotherorsister,orforunconsciousrivalrywiththem)(ColonnaandNewman,1983,p.301;Davids,1993,p.288; Lewin,2014,pp.200-204,206-208).Within thisdominantnarrative, guilt arising from rivalry (whether consciousorunconscious)predominates (Berman,1978;Christian,2007; Lewin,2014).With respect to survival guilt, Pollock argues that “guilt over successful

35Smith’s patient and her twin sister were born prematurely: she survived and her twin died. The patientbelievedthatshehadmurderedhersister.Smithconcludedthatherparents’refusaltotalkaboutherdeadtwinhadpushedhersister’sdeathbackintoherandhadcontributedtoherguilt(1992,p.58).36cf.Woodward’sBereavedTwinStudy(1987)wheresheinterviewed219twins.Somehadlosttheirtwinaroundthetimeofbirth;someinchildhood;andothersinadulthood.AlthoughguiltwasathemethatemergedfromtheStudy, itsclearestfindingwastheenormityofthe lossforthesurvivor(2010,p.9).Guilt feelingswerestronginthosetwinswhofeltresponsibleforthedeathorwhoseparentswishedtheothertwintohavesurvivedinstead(2010,p.15).Somesurvivorsattemptedto‘livefortwo’;someputthemselvesatriskthroughdangeroussports;somefelttheyhadnottakensufficientcareoftheirco-twin;othersfeltremorsefortimestheyhadwishedtheirtwin‘outoftheway’(pp.15-16).

12

survival is as important in somechildhood-sibling-loss casesas in the concentration-campsurvivors”(1978,p.477;alsoPollock,1982,p.350).Bereaved siblings affected by intense guilt may engage in repetitive, self-punishing behaviour(Berman,1978). Berman’s patient’s self-punishing took the formof a passive, self-defeating life-styleinvolving relationships in which he was exploited. Other possible forms of self-punishing behaviourincludeanti-socialacting-out;academicorotherfailure(Pollock,1978,pp.474-476);livingadepressive,deadenedexistencealmostinmimicryofthedeadsiblingwhom(inattemptedcompensationfortheirguilt) they dare not surpass; and attempted or actual suicide (Bank and Kahn,1997,pp.285-286;Berman,1978,p.578; Agger,1988,p.18; Crehan,2004,p.217; Garland,2004,p.214; Edward,2012,pp.165-166).37 Alternatively,thesurvivingsiblingaffectedbyunconsciousguiltmaybecomethe‘goodchild’,‘seekingthe reassurance that she has not committed murder’ (Agger,1988,p.18; Crehan,2004,p.212;Edward,2012,p.162), maybe in adulthood entering a life-saving or life-bettering profession in anunconscious attempt to undo the childhood loss (Pollock,1972; Berman,1978,p574;Crehan,2004,p.217). Christian attributes his patient’s submissive character and inhibition ofaggressivenesstoherunconsciousguiltfollowingherbrother’sdeathwhenshewas3(2007,pp.48-49).KernbergandRichardsrefertothefindingbyCainandCain(1964)thatintenseguiltforsomesurvivorsturned into a fear of losing control of anger and experiencing themselves as potential murderers(1988,p.53).Pollock(1978)drawsattentiontothe interplaybetweenguiltandaggression.Hearguesthat the survivor feels guilty for his aggression towards the parents and carries a “fantasy ofresponsibilityfortheterribleoccurrencewhichhurttheparents”(1978,p.454).Thisguiltmayprotectthe survivor from the fear that the dead sibling was actually killed by the parents (ibid.). Abendconsidersthatthe“needtobeperfect”carriedbyhispatient,bornayearafterhisbrotherdied,wasderivedfromthefantasythathisparentshad“gotridofanunsatisfactorychild”(1986,p.101).Inthetwinliteraturespecifically,consistentlywithapsychoanalyticperspectivewhichregardstwinsasprimarily rivalrous objects, the emphasis is upon guilt derived from rivalry (Arlow,1960,1975;Sheerin,1991). Lewin gives an account of her work with a man whose twin sister died at birth(2014,pp.202-204).Herpatient’sphantasywasthathehadtakentoomuchinutero,andthathadhetakenless,histwinwouldhavesurvived.Hefeltresponsibleforhissister’sdeathandfearedinevitableretribution. Inthetransference,hecouldtakenothingfromLewinsafelywithoutfearingpunishmentandwouldnegateallgainsmadeinthetherapy.38Lewin(2014,p.206)referstoArlow’s(1960)patient,whoseolderidenticaltwindiedattheageof18.Theboyshadenjoyedbeingtwins.Tenyearsaftertheloss,onmilitaryservice, thepatientwasseparatedfromhisunit,whichwasdecimated.Hereturnedhometovisitanauntwhowasasecondmother.Hercritically illhusbanddiedinthepatient’sarms.Shortlyafterwards,thepatientdevelopedasenseofdepersonalisation,afeelingoflosinghisidentity,

37Abend (1986)writes abouthis patientwith self-destructive trends,whowas17whenhisolderbrotherdiedfromaself-destructivelifestyle.Thebrotherhadbeenintenselylovedandintenselyhated.Abendconcludesthathispatientidentifiedwithhisolderbrotheroutofguiltinordertopunishandevendestroyhimself(1986,p.98).Thus,thesurvivingsiblingreinforceshisguiltysenseofbeingundeservingorworthless.38Forthesurvivingtwinwhosetwindiesatbirthorearlier,thebirthstoryorfamilymythwhichthechildlearnsaboutthebirthwillbeinfluentialandmayaddtotheburdenofsurvivalguilt(Lewin,2014,pp.202-204).

13

and an intense fear of being alone. He awoke from nightmares in great panic and suffered acuteanxiety.Arlow interpretedhispatient’s symptomsas related to conflicts concerninghisunconsciousguiltoverthedeathofhisbrotherasahatedrival,andhisintrojectionofthelostobjectasadefenceagainstsuchguiltanddenialofthedeath.39Ina laterpaper(1976),Arlowreturnstothiscaseandredefineshispatient’s lossasatraumatic lossandsuggeststhatdefencesofdenialandintrojectionwereusedtomasterthetrauma.40Consistentlywith this approach, Charles and Charles regard the child’s experience of guilt to be less aboutunconscioushostilitytowardsthedeadsibling,andmoreaboutanattempttogainmasteryorcontrolovera trauma,evenat thepriceofholdinghimself responsible (2006,p.76).Theypointout that thechild’sexperienceofguiltmaybequitedifferent fromthatof theadult, and that childrenareoftenpreoccupiedwithguiltyfeelingsandself-blame(ibid.).41

1.4.6. UnconsciousIdentifications/IdentityFormationWhen twins are identical or very alike, the confusion aboutwho iswhowill be experienced by thetwins themselves and by their parents (Lewin,2014,p.98).42Loss of a twin gives rise to furtherconfusion and a disturbing crisis of identity in the survivor (Bank and Kahn,1997,pp.284-285;Lewin,2014,p.96).BankandKahnsuggestthatwherethereisapredominanceofnarcissisticmirroringor idealisingofasiblingrelationship,as inatwin-ship,thelossofthepleasingreflectionprovidedbythe dead sibling, can lead to a devastating loss of self (1997,p.283).43Pollock writes about thesignificanceofchildhoodsiblingidentificationsinadultlife(1978,p.446)andhowthe“frozenimages”ofthedeadchildcanbecomefixedinthepsycheofthesurvivingsibling(1986,p.32).Edward suggests that, despite their parents’ silence, the remaining childrenwill knowabout andbedeeply affected by the sight of their parents’ grieving (2012,p.161). She suggests that some mayidentifywith their parents’ depressed state as ameansof connectingwith them (2012,pp.158,173).Crehan,referringtoGreen’sessay‘TheDeadMother’(1997),writesthat“thedeadmothercomplextosomedegree,or insomefashion, is theexperienceofthesurvivingsibling”(2004,p.216).The lossof

39“As long as the patient suffered, he was satisfied that his denial of his brother’s death was effective. Thebrotherstill livedwithinhimandhehadnoneedto feelguilty” (1960,p.188).Headds,“Expelling the introjectwas unconsciously equated with killing the brother again” (ibid.). Lewin draws attention to the heart attacksufferedbyEngelonthelastdayoftheperiodofmourningforhistwinintheJudaictradition(2014,pp.68-69).Engel’s reaction was relief (1975,p.25). He could now exonerate himself of the fantasied crime of killing hisbrother(whohadalsodiedofaheartattack)andtheassociatedguilt(Lewin,2014,pp.68,207).40A contemporary approach might conclude that the two traumatic events occurring 10 years after the lossreactivated the original trauma, leading to the patient re-experiencing the intense pain of loss of his belovedtwin,acuteloneliness,fearsforhisownsurvivalandsurvivalguilt(Christian,2007,p.51).41Theyconcludethat,ifguiltfeelingsremainunresolved,thesiblingmaystruggletoshifttheirattachmentfromthelostlovedobjecttonewloveobjects;intimacygenerallymaybeavoided,outoffearofbeingresponsibleforthedeathofanotherloveobject(ibid.).Cf.Woodward,2010,pp.12-13.42Timothywritesabouthow,whentheyweretoddlers,thegoldbracelettheirmotherhadputonNicholas’wristatbirth“broke,felloffhiswristandwaslost”(p.8).He“realisedeveryonewasgoingtobeconfusedaboutwhichtwinwaswhichandIfeltaflashoffearasIwonderediftheywouldeversortusout”(ibid.).43Insteadofusingtheothertwinasamirrorandbeingseenbyhim,thereisonlythedarkmirrorinwhichthesurvivorisnotreflectedandwhichsignifiesdeath(Mitchell,2003,pp.210-213)

14

thematernalobject(togrief)isexperiencedasa‘catastrophe’,causinga‘psychichole’inthesurvivorwho defensively identifies with the ‘dead’ or depressed mother (Green,1997,pp.152-154;Coles,2011,pp.ix-x,28-31;Schellinski,2014,p.198).Somesurvivingsiblings,outof love for theirgrievingparentsandpossiblywith theaddedbenefitofassuaging their own guilt, may seek to undo the cause of their parents’ pain by unconsciouslyidentifying with and thereby ‘resurrecting’ the dead child (Cain and Cain,1964; Bank andKahn,1997,pp.277-278; Coles,2011,p.29; Edward,2012,pp.158-159).44Davids (1993) writes about herpatient,whowas7whenhisbabybrothersufferedacotdeath.Somemonthslater,hearinghismothercrying,hecomfortedher,saying,“I’llbehimforyou”(1993,p.280).45AinslieandSolyomprovideanaccountofapatientwhowastheeldestsiblingandasecondmothertoher younger siblings, when her infant brother died. Her age (14) at the time of the death left thepatientsusceptibletoexperiencingthelossasifitwereherownchild.Whenshegavebirthtoherfirstdaughter two decades later, she experienced her own child as a replacement for her dead infantbrother. All of the daughters of the family gave birth to children during adolescence. The authorsunderstandthepatientandhersisterstohaveparticipatedinapatternaimedatundoingthemother’sloss (1986,p.260). This is also Klyman’s understanding of the reparative aim of pregnancy for herpatientswhohadsufferedearlychildhoodsiblingloss,butsheaddsthatforthesewomen,pregnancyalsogavethemcontroloverlifeanddeath(1986,p.327).46Similarly,Pollocksuggeststhat,forsurvivingsiblings with the gift of creativity, the creative product can become a “restitutional or reparationalproduct to replace the lost object” (1978,p481) and part of the survivor’s mourning process(1982,p.351).Identificationwith the dead siblingmay take the concrete form of developing or imitating physicalsymptomsoftheillnessfromwhichthesiblingdied(Abend,1986).Alternatively,itmaytaketheformof a depressive and deadened or bland and compromised existence marked by failure and loss(Crehan,2004,p.213;BankandKahn,pp.286,289).Krupp (1965), inhispaperaddressing identificationasadefenceagainstloss,writesabouthispatientwhowasninewhenheroldersisterdied.Thenine-year-oldresponded,“Mysisterisnotreallydead.Iwillcarryheraroundwithme”(1965,p309).Likeherkind and protective sister, she became a “good” child, but also like her sister who had died in her

44Lewindrawsattention toRosenfeld’s (1987) thesis that, in statesofmindgovernedbyprimitive forcesof aparanoid-schizoidkind,whichwouldincludetheextremelyvulnerablestateofmindofasurvivingtwin,thelifeand death instincts become defused resulting in an increased intensity in the destructiveness of the deathinstinct(2014,p.143).45JamesMBarrierecallshis13-year-oldbrother’sdeathwhenhe,Barrie,wasseven.Weekslater,inanefforttocomforthismother,heenteredherbedroomtowhichshehadretreated.Inresponsetohismother’s“Isthatyou?”,he“saidinalittlelonelyvoice,‘No,it’snothim,it’sjustme’”(reproducedinPollock,1978,p.457).Thisledtoan“intensedesiretobecomesolikehimthatevenmymothershouldnot see thedifference”, culminating inhis slipping intohismother’sbedroom,dressed inoneofhisbrother’s suits, standing with his legs apart (as his brother stood) and whistling (as his brotherwhistled)(ibid.,p.458).PollockcommentsthatBarrie’sidentificationwithhisbrotherwasanattempttohavearelationshipwithhismother“whootherwisewaswithdrawnanddeadforhim”(ibid.,p.464).46Gilkey’s research studyof teenagepregnancies draws attention to theproportionof thesewhohad a deadsibling(1988).

15

senioryear,anddespitepreviousacademicsuccess,shefailedhersenioryear.Ifparentsunconsciouslyidentify the surviving siblingwith thedead sibling andbecomeover-protective (Crehan,2004,p.209),the result may be that the surviving sibling lives a kind of half-life, afraid of taking the normaldevelopmentalrisksandunabletoseparatefromhisparents;alternatively,angrywithhisparentsanddeadsiblingfortheirdeadeningeffectonhislife,hemaycourtdanger,seekingtotriumphoveralloftheminamanicdisplayofalivenessortoprotesthisowninvulnerability(BankandKahn,1997,pp.276-277; Crehan,2004,p.213; Christian,2007; Klyman,1986). Bank and Kahn argue that the child whoidentifieswiththeirdeadsiblinglivesadualandconfusedidentity(1997,pp.277-278).There is adistinctbodyof theory relating to the “penumbrababy” (Reid,2003,2014), bornafter thedeath of a child and understood to suffer from the “replacement child syndrome” (Cain etal.,1964,p.454), a “handicap with important psychopathological risks” (Porot,1993/1966;Coles,2011,p.28; Schellinski,2014). Abramovitch describes a replacement child as “a living childwhocomestotaketheplaceofadeadone”(2013).IagreewithCrehanthat‘forparentswhohaveburiedachild,anychildtheyparentbeforeoraftertheeventwillinasensebeareplacementfortheonewhohas died’ and ‘carry expectations, projections and displacements from the one who has gone’(2004,p.207;Hartman,2008,p.536;Edward,2012,p.162).47Schellinskiwritesthat“thelifelongchallengefor thereplacementchild is tobeornot tobe” (2014,p.201).ForPorot (1993/1966) thereare threeways out of this dilemma:madness, creativity, or becoming a psychologist. Schellinski sees a fourthway, “a path of resurrection of the true self through individuation” (2014,p.207).On that path, thereplacementchildwill “face theshadowanddiscovera living rather thandead image” (2014,p.204).“Paradoxically”,shewrites(p.205),“inorder..tolivehisorherownlife,thereplacementchildmust‘kill’thedead(Couvez,1979,citedinPorot,1993/1966,p135),thephantomidentityofthedeadsiblingwithinhimorherself.”Sheadds,“Thekillingis,ofcourse,asymbolicendeavour”.

1.4.7. LossofTheLovedTwinObjectHayton, who has written extensively on womb twin loss survivors from an attachment perspective(2011,2012), argues that “the grief that twins experience when one twin dies is without equalanywhere in the fieldofhumanrelations, fornowhereelse inhuman life is theattachmentbondsostrong,thelovesodeep,andthegriefsooverwhelming”(2009,p.149).Woodward,alsowritingfroman attachment perspective, also focuses on the overwhelming sense of loss and longing, with thesurvivor “endlessly seekinganattachment that cannotbe found” (2010,p.19).48She isemphatic that“theenormoussignificanceofthelossisthemostimportantissue”andthatthelossis“veryprofound”(2010,pp.1,10).Lewinagreesthat,“whatevertheageofthetwinsorthenatureofthetwinrelationship,”thelossisa“considerable loss” (2014,p.200). However, her analysis concentrates upon the psychic structuraldimensionsoftheloss:itisthelossexperiencedaslossofpartofselfandtheconsequentialthreatto

47The replacementchildoften feels responsible for thedeath (Nagera,1967;Hartman,2008;Reid,2014).AinslieandSolyomrefertotheunconsciousattributionbyparentsofblametothereplacementchildforthelossoftheoriginalchild(1986,p.266),whobecomesthe“cuckoointhenest”(Reid,2014,p.281).48Reunionisyearnedfor(Lewin,2014,p.28).Piontelliremindsusthat,whenCastorisdoomedtodie,PolluxpraystoZeus,“Father,letmenotoutlivemydearbrother!”(1989,p.413).

16

the integrityoftheself, involving intensesurvivalanxiety,thatarecritical forher(1.4.3).There isnodiscussion49ofthelovesharedbetweentwinsandtheimpactonthesurvivoroflossofthelovedandloving twin as a good internal object. This is an intriguing omission, especially since Freud regardednegation of awareness of loss of the good object as constituting the condition of melancholia(1917,p.245). Might Lewin’s apparent blind-spot regarding twins’ availability to each other as goodinternalobjectsbeunderstoodasaprojectionofherpatients’melancholia?Theclinicalimplicationsofthisomissionaresignificant.Thepractitioner,readingLewin’sworkinsearchofatheoreticalmodelforherclinicalworkwithhersurvivingtwinpatient,mightwellconceptualisethe internaltwinobjectasrivalrousandobstructive,ratherthancaringandcontaining,andunderstandthepredominantpsychicimpactoftwinlosstobeguilt,notgrief.Theriskisthatbothpatientandtherapistcolludeinnegatingawarenessoflossofthegoodtwinobject. ThelackofattentionbyLewinandotherpsychoanalyticwriterstothelovebetweentwinsmayreflectthemoregeneralneglectbypsychoanalysisof sibling love (Rustin,2009,p.149;Pollock,1978),which Ialsoconnecttotherelativeneglectbypsychoanalysisofsiblingloss(1.1.1).FollowingFreud,psychoanalysishastendedtodescribethesiblingrelationshipwithincestatoneendand murderous rivalry at the other (Freud,1886-1889,pp.261-262; 1900,pp.249-255; 1916-1917,pp.333-334; 1918,p23; vide the full title of Mitchell’s seminal text (2003), ‘Siblings: Sex andViolence’). I agreewith Agger,who remarks howmost analysts see sibling love as “defensive”, andcontinues:“Clinicalandpersonalexperience leadsmetowonder ifwehavenotunderestimatedthestrengthanddurabilityofthisseparatereservoirofloveobjects”(1988,pp.26-27).Klyman,referringtothe “cliché” of sibling rivalry, remarks, “For every Cain and Abel, there is a Hansel andGretel pair”(1986,p.325; see Pollock,1978,pp.478-479 and Edward,2012,pp.168-169). Coles writes about thepositive aspects of sibling relationships including the reality of the experience of sibling love andcooperation(2003,pp.3,26-27,52-58,69-78,83,92).50Agger(1988)writesaboutthemutualdependenceandattachmentofsiblingswholooktoeachotherforloveandsupport.Rustinwritesaboutthecontemporarysociologicalfactorsthatmaycombinetomaketoday’ssiblings”themoststeadilyavailableattachmentfigures”foreachother(2009,p.151).BankandKahnpointoutthat sibling attachment can be particularly intense in the absence of reliable parental care(1997,pp.19,123; Agger,1988,p13). There are ‘real-life Hansels and Gretels’ for whom their siblingrelationshipistheonlycaringforceintheirlives(BankandKahn,1997,pp.112-113).Forthemtoloseasiblingwillmean losing theoneperson towhomthey look for loveandobject constancy (BankandKahn,1997,pp.28-31).Evenabsentparentaldeficiencies,thelossofasiblingmaystillbeadeeplyandintenselyfeltloss.51Evenifotherrelationshipsinthefamilysystemchange(e.g.,throughdivorce),thesibling relationship can provide continuity, stability and familiarity (Bank and Khan,1997,p.64;Crehan,2004,p.205).Thatisnottosaythatprolongedaccessbetweensiblingsisnecessaryfortheloss

49(noteveninthechapteraddressingdeathofatwininherclassictextontwins[pp.200-214))50Colesconsidersthatsiblingrelationshipscan“cruciallyenrich”whatStern(1985)callsthecapacityfor“affectattunement”throughthe“selfbeingwithanother”(2009,p110).51Charles and Charles, writing from an attachment perspective, conclude that childhood sibling loss entailsenduringgriefresponsesforsurvivors,includingfearsregardinginvestinginrelationships,sothattheirabilitytobuildsatisfyingandlong-termrelationshipsinadulthoodisimpaired(2006,pp.74,76,87).

17

tobedeeplyfelt (cf.BankandKahn,1997,p.10).Piontelli (2002)understoodherpatient,Jacob,tobeobsessively searching for his twin brother who had died in utero 2 weeks before his birth.Davidsunderstoodherpatient (whowas7whenhis8-week-oldbrotherdied) toyearn for reunionwithhisbabybrotherandtopersistinsearchingforhim(1993,pp.281-282).Guntrip’sbrotherwasonlyayearold when he died. He recalls that he (Guntrip) fell “mysteriously ill and was thought to be dying”(1975,p.149).Thefamilydoctortoldhismother,“He’sdyingofgriefforhisbrother.”(ibid.).

1.4.8. LossoftheGoodTwinObject-ResearchProjectThepressingneedforclinicallyusefulpsychoanalyticthinkingabouttwinandsiblinglossinchildhoodisacknowledged.Lewinobservesthat“it istothedetrimentofpsychoanalyticwork”that“twin(andother sibling) relationships have been neglected in both practice and analytic understanding”(2014,p.167).CharlesandCharlesnotethat“thereislittleempiricalliteratureontheeffectsofsiblingloss” inchildhood,despite the“profound long-termeffects”and“theenormityof the impactof thistypeofexperience”,(2006,p.74).ItmaybethattheemphasisinLewin’sworkonsurvivorguiltandsurvivalanxietyreflectstheparticularcomposition of her patient group. If her clinical experience is predominantly with twins in deeplyemmeshedrelationships,hostiletooutsideinfluencesanddeeplyresistanttoordinarydevelopmentalprocesses of separation and individuation, the notion of twins as potential good and containinginternalobjectsforeachotherwouldbeinconsistentwiththatclinicalexperience.52Butwhatoftwinswhofalloutsidethismoredisturbedpatientcategory?IregarditasasignificantlimitationofLewin’swork and current psychoanalytic thinking on twins that there does not seem to be room forconsideration of how the loss of a deeply loving relationship, involvingmutual understanding, care,acceptance,andcontainment,mightimpact inandof itselfuponthetwinsurvivor’sinternalworld. Isuggestthatthereisapressingneedforanalyticunderstandingoftheimpactoflossofthegoodtwinobject.53The intense emotional pain of loss of a twin may be connected with shared identity andshared history, but will also have to do with the particularity of the lost object of whose constantpresencethebereavedtwinisnowbereft(Piontelli,2002,,p.90).IseektotakeLewin’sworkforwardbyinvestigating throughmy research project the impact on the survivor’s internalworld of loss of theinternalgoodtwinobject.Engel’spaper(1975)isuniqueinanalysingfromapsychoanalyticperspectivetheimpactonhimofhistwin’sdeathwhentheywerebothmiddle-aged.MypsychoanalyticcasestudyseekstoaddtoEngel’sworkbyinvestigatingtheimpactoftwinlossinchildhoodthroughmyanalysisofTimothy’saccountofhisexperienceof that loss.The specific contributionwhich I seek tomake to currentpsychoanalytic

52cf.theliteratureofchildpsychotherapyandinfantobservation,e.g.,Piontelli’s(1989)observationsinuteroofrepeated gentle, stroking contact between twins she nicknamed “the kind twins”; and the observations byMagagnaandDominguez(2009)oflovingandprotectivegesturesinnewly-separatedconjoinedtwinsnotyet2yearsold.53WoodwardexplainshowthelackofrecognitioninherpsychoanalytictrainingandinhertwoFreudiananalysesofthesignificanceofthelossofhertwininchildhoodledhertoattachmenttheoryasatheoreticalbaseforherpractice(2010,p.8).

18

thinkingabout twins,andhowIseektoexpanduponLewin’swork, isby investigatingandanalysingtheimpactofthelostgoodtwinobjectinthesurvivor’sinternalworld.

19

Chapter2

MethodandEthics2.1. MethodInthissection,Iexplainandexaminemychoiceofresearchdataandresearchmethodology.IdonotrepeatmyaccountofhowIarrivedatmyresearchquestion(1.1above).

2.1.1. PsychobiographyFirst,Idiscusscertainintriguingquestionswhichariseregardingtherelationshipbetweenmyresearchprojectandpsychobiography.Psychobiographyisagenreofpsychohistory,whichis“theapplicationofpsychology, in its broadest sense, or psychoanalysis in a specific sense, to the study of the past, ofhistory”(Szaluta,1999,pp.1,171-213).Szalutaadvocatesforpsychohistoryonthebasisthat“itoffersamoreprofoundandfullerunderstandingofmanandhispast”,butherecognisesthe“seriousproblemsanduniquechallenges”whichthisinterdisciplinaryfieldpresents(1999,pp.13,227).Ifmyapplicationofpsychoanalytic principles to a published biographymay be regarded as a kind of psychohistory (orpsychobiography)54,what are the criticisms of this particular genre of special study? I discuss thesecriticismsbelowandrespondtotheminsofarastheyrelatetomycasestudy.

2.1.1.1. TheCriticisms

There are four main lines of argument against the application of psychoanalytic principles to thehistorical study of individual and collective life: (1) psychohistory is an attempt to fill gaps in thehistorical record by using the techniques of psychoanalysis to infer and reconstruct the past of the

54Itisaninterestingquestionwhethermyresearchprojectfallswithinthegenreofpsychobiography.Thereareargumentsbothways.Ontheonehand,itisarguablethatmyworkfallswithinthisgenresince,forthepurposeofarrivingatfindingsaboutwhathappenedtoTimothy’smindinthewakeofhisbrother’smurder,Iam“usingpsychoanalytic theoryasa techniqueof investigation” (Szaluta,1999,p.4).On theotherhand,psychobiographyinvolves the application of psychoanalysis for a particular purpose - in order to advance psychologicalexplanationsandmotivationsforwhythesubjectdidwhathedidwithhislife:“Psychohistoryisconcernedwiththe question of motivation in human behaviour, whether of the individual or the group”(Szaluta,1999,pp.2,3,64,66,68). Thus, by way of example, Brenman, discussing Bowlby’s biography of Darwin(1990), connects the fact that Darwin lost his mother when he was 8 and had no memory of her with hisdedicatedpursuit to find the “Originof Species” (2006,p.103).A comparable approachmightbe if I sought toargue that themurderof his brother explains Timothy’s decision towork as an investigative journalist on thetelevisionprogramme“Crimewatch”.However,myworkdoesnotadvancethiskindofreasoningorattempttoexplainTimothy’slifeinthisway.Further,thebookfocuses,andIfocus,upononeaspectofTimothy’slifeonly-thedestructiveimpactofhisbrother’sdeathonTimothy’sinternalworld,andhowthatinternalworldcametobereconstructed(andthegoodinternalobjectsrecovered). It isthereforearguablethatmyworkdoesnotfallwithinthegenreofpsychobiography,becauseitisconcerned,notwith“motivesforactions”(Szaluta,1999,p.3),butwiththepsychicconsequencesofothers’actions,thatis,thepsychicimpactonTimothyofthemurderofhistwin.Idonotseektoresolvethesearguments,butinsteadaddressdirectlywhethertheacknowledgedpotentialpitfallsofpsychobiographyunderminemywork.

20

historicalsubject:whatresultsisakindoffiction-writingor“conjecture”masqueradingasfact-finding(Barzun,1974,pp.42-45,59; Stannard,1980,pp.3-24); (2) to apply the principles of psychoanalysis to ahistorical subject without regard to the cultural context leads to conclusions which are structurallyunsound:it is“culturalnaïveté”tojudgethehistoricalpastbasedoncriteriaofthehistoricalpresent(Barzun,1974,pp.133-136,148,150; Stannard,1980,pp.28,119-144,156); (3) psychoanalysis is atherapeutictechniqueforuseintheconsultingroom,requiringtheexistenceofalivingsubjectandhisactive participation in the cooperative process of gaining insight: it is not an intended use ofpsychoanalysis to analyse retrospectively a historical figure who cannot participate in the task ofanalysis (Stannard,1980,pp.xvii,35,115-116); (4) psychoanalysis is not a useful addition to history orbiographybecauseitisnotastableandacademicallyrespectedbodyofknowledge.55

2.1.1.2. Responseto2.1.1.1

Asto(1),althoughIrecognisereadilythepotentialpitfallsofattemptingtoreconstructthechildhoodofasubjectusingpsychoanalytictheoryandinferencefromknownfacts inadulthood,this isnotthetaskinwhichIamengaged.Timothy’sautobiographyrecordsthefactsofhischildhoodandlaterlife:my task has been to arrive at hypotheses and interpretations regarding the changing content ofTimothy’s innerormental lifeovertime,basedonmyanalysisof thefactsherecords.Asto (2), thepsychoanalyticwriterswhoseworkinformsmyapproachtomyresearchtopicarewritingaroundthesametimeas,andwithinthesamebroadculturalcontextof,theeventsandpeoplethesubjectofmyresearch. Further,qua researcher, I have the advantage of a particular familiaritywith the relevantpolitical,culturalandhistoricalcontext,asexplainedin2.1.9below.Asto(3),Iaddressin2.1.4.5belowtheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofmyapplicationofthepsychoanalyticcasemethodtoapublishedbiographicalaccountasopposed toclinical casematerial.As to (4),while Iaccept that there remainimportantquestionsfordebateregardingtheepistemologicalstatusofpsychoanalysis(whichitwouldnotbeappropriatefullytoexaminehere)56,Idrawattentiontothedevelopmentoverrecentyearsofan evidence-based practice ideology57, together with the elaboration of systematic case studyresearch58. I suggest that many of the objections levelled against psychoanalysis as a body ofknowledge some 40 years ago59are outdated: contemporary psychoanalysis is an evidence-basedtreatment method and a respected university discipline, whose leading thinkers make substantial

55 The argument has two main planks: (a) there is insufficient credible evidence either to indicate thatpsychoanalysis works as a clinicalmethod or to support its significant theoretical concepts as an explanatoryscheme (Stannard,2018,pp.xiv-xv,26-28,33-50,88-114,149-150); and (b) it is reductionist and deterministic(ignoring difference, individuality and conscious decision-making); theoretically irrefutable (its concepts beingincapable of being negated by contradictory evidence); logically inadequate (through its reliance on thequestionable existence of the unconscious andpost hoc ergo hoc propter reasoningwhich confuses temporalrelationshipswithcausality;lackingincommonsense;useslanguagewhichistechnical,arcaneandobscure;andits practitioners are dogmatic and biased, closed to alternative explanations, with no consensus among them(Barzun,1974,pp.23,44,48-50,108,134-135,139,147-151; Stannard,1980,pp.x,xiii-xv,24-26,53-82,86-87,148,15;andseeSzaluta’srebuttals[1999,pp.9-10,). 56SeeKachele,SchachterandThoma(2009,pp.21-97)andHinshelwood(2013)forcomprehensivediscussionofthenatureandvalidityofpsychoanalysisanditsbodyofknowledgeandtheresearchchallengesitpresents.57Seee.g.Fonagyetal.(2015).58Kachele,SchachterandThoma(2009).59seefootnote55above.

21

contributions to theunderstandingofmentalhealthbyproducingworkofacademic rigourandhighresearchvalue.60

2.1.2. DesignMystudy isan independent researchstudy,whichuses thequalitative researchmethodof thematicanalysis, applied toa single case.Harperobserves thatqualitative researchmethodsareparticularlyappropriate for identifying the key elements of a phenomenon being studied and providing richdescriptionsof it (2012,p.84).Mysinglecasestudyexplores thephenomenonof surviving lossofanidenticaltwininchildhood.

2.1.3. CaseStudy

2.1.3.1. Whyacasestudy?

ThecasestudywasthemethodbywhichFreudreportedonhisfindings.61Although,sinceFreud,thecasestudymethodhasbecome“verycontroversial”,manyrespectedresearchers62argueforittorankas“onemethodwithinarangeof researchmethods in the fieldofpsychoanalysis” (Wilemsen,DellaRosaandKegerreis,2017,p.3).Thecasestudymethodprovidesauniquemethodofanalysinghowthepatient’spsychicdepthsrevealthemselvesintheclinicalencounter.Myapplicationofapsychoanalyticcase study approach to a published biographical text has a similar aim - to analyse the psychicphenomenaexperiencedbytheauthorthroughhiswrittenaccount.Inbothcases,theaimistotrytounderstand“theone”, i.e.,onepersononly inallhis“particularityandcomplexity”(Stake,1995,pp.1-2).Thefocusisuponspecificity,onthebasisthatthereispoweranddepthinspecificity.Stakewrites,“Caseresearchisnotsamplingresearch.Wedonotstudyacaseprimarilytounderstandothercases.Ourfirstobligationistounderstandthisonecase.”(1995,p.4).Timothyemphasisesthathisbookisanindividualandpersonalaccount.63

2.1.3.2. Objectionsagainstthecasestudymethod

Willemsen, Della Rosa and Kegerreis, following Midgley (2006b), list three main lines of argumentagainsttheclinicalcasestudyasaresearchmethodology.Theseare:(1)thedataproblem–thedataused in case studies is unreliable because it generally consists of the therapist’s observations,subjectivelyarrivedatandrecordedby them inprocessnotes; (2) thedataanalysisproblem–casestudies lack validity because generally the data are selected and interpreted by the therapist,subjectively, unsystematically, and in line with a particular theoretical agenda; and (3) thegeneralizabilityproblem-itisnotpossibletogeneralisefromcasestudies,sotheyareoflimitedvalue(2017,pp.1-2).

60See,e.g.,Fonagyetal(2015). 61AnnaO.(1895);Dora(1905);LittleHans(1909);TheRat-Man(1909);TheSchreberCase(1911);TheWolf-Man(1918).62listedbyWillemsenDellaRosaandKegerreis(2017,p.3)63: it is“anaccountofthepathItook”(p.xii).Hecontinues,“Ihopeitwillencourageotherstofindtheirown”,adding,“Mystoryisadescriptionnotaprescription”(ibid.).

22

As to (1),Midgley proposes several practicalmeasures (e.g., audio-taping,methodical writing-up ofnotes) to address the concern that the therapist’s process notes are unreliable data (2006b,pp.126-131). As to (2), he advocates the use of clearly defined systematic research methodologies and,following Edelson (1985), emphasises that case-study authors need explicitly to discuss alternativeexplanations for therapy outcomes, and identify data which tell against their conclusions(2006b,pp.131-136).Asto(3),Midgleysuggeststhat“theuseofcarefully-designedsinglecasedesignsis the only meaningful way to achieve generalisation” (2006b,p.139). He argues for a model ofaggregating single case studies, much as case law developed under English law, “in which thecomparison of successive cases leads to incremental conceptual refinements and reformulations”(ibid.).64Itakeinturneachofthethreeperceivedweaknessesoftheclinicalcasestudy–thedataproblem,thedataanalysisproblemandthegeneralizabilityproblem-andsetoutmyresponsebelowsofarastheyapplytomycasestudy(2.1.4–2.1.7).

2.1.4. TheDataProblem–thebookI explain belowwhy the book qualifies as data of sufficient quality for the purpose of exploringmyresearchquestion.65

2.1.4.1. Relevance

Whatledmetomyresearchprojectwasmycuriosityabouthowthemindofachildmightbeaffectedby a sibling’s death and how thatmight affect the adult that the child becomes. This is the groundcoveredby thebook, from theparticularperspectiveof a surviving twinwhowas14whenhis twindied.Thebook isanexplorationandexaminationof the“mentalandemotionalwounds” (p.xi)withwhichtheauthorwasleftafterhistwin’sdeathand“thejourney”heundertookinadulthoodto“heal”thosewounds(ibid.).Thus,thescopeofthebookfallssquarelywithinmyresearchproject.

2.1.4.2. Discoveryoftext

Ireadthebookintheveryearlystagesofmyproject.Itwasoneofseveralbookswrittenbysurvivorsofsiblingloss.Itstoodoutformethenintermsofitsjournalisticrigour(theauthorhadundertakenathorough and systematic investigation of the facts surrounding his twin’s death); the author’ssensitivitytoandreflectivenessaboutwhatheandthosearoundhimwerefeelingbeforeandafterhistwin’sdeath;andhiswillingnesstowriteopenlyabouthisemotionalstate.TheotherbooksIhadread

64Willemsen,DellaRosaandKegerreisnotethateffortsinthisdirectionarebeingmadewithinthecontextofTheSingle Case Archive, an online archive of published clinical and empirical case studies in the field ofpsychotherapy(http:/www.singlecasearchive.com)(2017,p.6). 65Savewhereotherwisestated,referencestopagenumbersaretopagesinthebook.

23

included accounts of sibling loss66and twin loss67, but Timothy’s book was the only work to focusexclusively,indepthandatlength,ononeperson’sexperienceofchildhoodsiblingloss.68

2.1.4.3. Qualitiesoftextingeneral

Thebookisanaccessible,well-organised,andclearly-expressedtext.Ithasapowerfulnarrativethrust,withoutsacrificingimportantdescriptivedetail.Thewritingofthebookgrewoutoftheauthor’sowninvestigativeproject,namely, “todiscoverwhathadhappened” tohis twinand“tounderstand [his]death”(pp.xii,5).Thisprojectwasaseriousandsubstantialcommitment,involvingtheauthorintimeandexpenseandintenseemotionalturbulenceandpain.He“spentayeartravellingbackandforthtoIreland,staying forupto tendaysata time” (ibid.,p.5)and formuchof that timewas“incapableoftouchingbusinessorpersonalmattersotherthanthesole,all-invadingissueofthebomb”(p.364).Allsources of information contained in the text and not within the author’s direct and personalknowledgeareclearlyand fully referenced (pp.382-408).All interviews for thepurposesof thebookwereaudio-recordedand transcribed (p.378).The transparencyof the investigativeprocess,and thesystematicwayinwhichtheinvestigationwaspursued,reflecttheauthor’sbackgroundininvestigativejournalism. The book is part historical document, part investigative report, and part personalbiography.

Theresultisarichlydetailed,highly-contextualisedandmulti-dimensionalaccountoftheauthor’slossofhistwin,which isabletofocusonthepersonalanddomestic,aswellasonthebroaderhistoricalandpoliticalcanvasofwhichNicholas’deathformedpart.ThebookhasreceivedcountlessfavourablereviewsintheBritishandinternationalmedia.Reviewersagreethatitisaworkofhighquality,bothintermsofcreativeexpressionandjournalisticrigour.69

2.1.4.4. Qualitiesoftextinparticular

Thereareparticularfeaturesofthebook,whichrenderitespeciallysuitableforapsychoanalyticcasestudyoftheimpactoflossofatwin.Thebookisthestoryofhowtheauthorwasaffectedemotionallyandpsychologicallybythetragedy(p.xii). The thread running through thebook iswhat the author felt (or did not feel) in response tocriticalevents,togetherwithhisreflections(thenandnow)uponhisemotionalstate.70Thus,thefocusofmyresearch–thesurvivingtwin’spsycheandwhatbecomesofit–isthesubjectattheheartofthisbook.

66E.g.,JoanneMoorhead’saccountofthelossofhersister,Clare,andLouisePatten’saccountofthelossofherbrother,Charles(Stanford,2011,pp.37-46;65-75).67E.g.,Woodward(2010).68DeVita-Raeburn (2004)givesadetailedaccountof the impactof losingherolderbrotherafteraneight-yearillnesswhenshewas14.Herbookdescribestheimpactonherofherbrother’slongillnessaswellashisdeath.Ihave preferred to choose a biographical account of sibling loss without the variable of a long-term illnesspreceding the death. This variable is outside the scope ofmy research question. (Following submission ofmythesis, I discovered a newly-published account of childhood sibling loss, “The Day that went Missing”,[Beard,2017].)69The book won the Christopher Ewart-Biggs Memorial Prize for 2009-2010. It was also shortlisted for thePEN/Ackerleyprizefor2010,whichrecognisesaliterarybiographyofexcellencewrittenbyaBritishauthor.70e.g.,pp.138,144-145,149,167,175,189,214,223,355.

24

Further, when he writes about his emotional responses, or lack of them, the author does so withreflectiveness.71His facilitywithmetaphoranddescriptive languagemeans thathe isable to conveywhat he was feeling at any given time, vividly and strikingly.72His creative gifts mean that hisdescriptionsofpeopleheinterviewedandoftheimpactonthemofrememberingthekeyeventsareequally vivid and striking.73When relating how other members of his family and other witnessesreacted to key events, he concerns himself, not only with what they did, but what they felt.74Theauthorhashadhisownpsychotherapy (p.239). The careful attentionpaidbyhim tohis andothers’innerstatesmayreflect thatexperience.Hiscapacity toexpressandreflectuponhisownsubjectiveresponsesmayalsobeconnectedwithhistherapyexperience.Importantly,intermsofresearchdatareliability,thebookringstrue.Light-heartedmomentscontinueto occur, even in the wake of appalling tragedy. The author’s sparing use of the light touch andcomedic75makesthisstoryofoverwhelmingsadnessbelievable.

2.1.4.5. Shortcomingsoftextasdata?

I followFreudinconcludingthat it is legitimatetoapplythepsychoanalyticcasestudymethodtoanindividual who “has written his own case history and brought it before the public in print”(Freud,1911,p.9).IamencouragedinsodoingbyTimothy’sexpressedmotivationinwritinghisbook,namely,tohelp“otherswhohavesufferedtraumaorgrief”(p.xii).76IseektoextendTimothy’soriginalmotivationbyusinghisbooktoprovideresourcestocliniciansworkingwiththose“others”.However,Iacceptthatreadingandanalysingabiographyisnotthesameasthetherapist’sexperienceofherpatientoverthecourseofatherapyrelationship.Iammissingalltheinformation,whichImighthavelearned,ifTimothyhadbeenmypatientandIhadbeenabletoaskhimquestions.IamwithouttheknowledgeofTimothy’semotionalstatewhichImighthavegainedfrommycounter-transferenceresponses over time; noticing nuances in Timothy’s appearance and demeanour, his tone of voice,gestures,andpatternsofspeech;and,moregenerally,noticingpatternsandchangesinhismannerofrelatingtohistherapistandtoothersoutsidehistherapy. Aside from the above accepted limitations of the book relative to clinical material, there are twoparticularobjectionsagainstthebookasresearchdata,whichIwanttoaddress.Theseobjectionsare:(1) thebook is a selectivedocument, havingbeenwritten and intended forpublication; and (2) theauthorputs forward in thebookhisunderstandingofhimself and themeaningsheattributes tohisand others’ actions and events, but all of these have been arrived at consciously. Thus, so theargumentruns,thebookisnotsuitabledataforapsychoanalyticexplorationbecausepsychoanalysisisthestudyoftheunconsciousthroughnon-selectiverememberingandfreeassociation.

71e.g.,pp.82,125-126,155,156,185,195,205,206,211,213,227,229,245,292-293,350,355-357.72e.g.,pp.159,216,249,256,284,351,370-373.73e.g.,pp.283-284,348-350.74e.g.,pp.83-84,114,294.75e.g.,pp.136,151,156,160,169,184,197,199,257,260,263,276,291,355.76Hewrites,“HadIlearnedfromsomeoneelsewhohadtroddenasimilarpathIwouldperhapshavestartedmyjourneyearlierandfoundamoredirectroute”(ibid.).

25

As to (1) it is right that the book is a constructed account of twin loss. The author’s background intelevision journalism is likely to have been instrumental in the quasi-cinematic quality of hisdescriptionsofplacesandpeople(e.g.,pp.255-257)andinhiscompellingstory-telling–thebookisagrippingpage-turner.Further,Timothyacknowledgesthat,“asapictureof theTroubles,myaccountwill be highly incomplete” (p.xii). He did not return to Ireland “to analyse the Troubles”: “Iwent toengageinahumanprocess,notapoliticalone.Iwenttounderstandmytwin’sdeath”(ibid.).Sothereader is leftwithgaps inherknowledge,andsomeofthesegiverisetoquestions, forexample,thenear-absence77ofanyexplicitexpressionordiscussionofnegative feelingson thepartof theauthortowardshisbrother’smurderersortowardsanyoneelse.ThefactthatTimothyhasselectedthematerialforinclusioninhisbookmeansthatmyexplorationoftheimpactofhimofbeingasurvivingtwincannotbetreatedastotalandexclusive.Itispossiblethatmaterial relevant to my research question has been omitted for presentation purposes, out ofconsiderationforthefeelingsofothers,orforotherundisclosedreasons.Inote,though,thatTimothyemphasisesthroughouttheimportancetohisrecoveryofuncoveringthetruthandthedetail,however“upsetting”andhowever“disgusting”(pp.279,292).Further,hetellsthereaderwhenhehaswithheldspecific information (e.g.,pp.217,265,272). The fact that Imay notice an absence ofmaterial,whichwouldconformtomytheoreticalexpectationsregardingcertainsequelaeofsiblingloss,isnotofitselfsufficientto indicatethatmaterialhasbeenexcluded,althoughitdoesgiverisetocertainquestions,especiallyregardingmaterialthatmighthavebeenomittedunconsciously.Idiscussmorefullyhowtheapparentgapsinmydatasetmayimpactuponmyfindingsin4.2.6and4.3.4below.Withrespectto(2)andthesuggestionthatthebookisanaccountofconsciousmeaning,asopposedtounconsciousmeaning,thepositionismoreinvolvedthanthisargumentwouldsuggest.Manyoftheauthor’sreflectionsincludereflectionsaboutwhatmighthavebeengoingonunconsciouslyinhimatthe relevant time (e.g.,p.364). I referred earlier to the psychotherapy undertaken by Timothy andwhich he regarded as instrumental in his “emotional recovery” (pp.231,239). Further, using mypsychoanalyticpsychotherapytrainingandexperience,Ihaveconcludedthatthematerialinthebookisexpansiveenoughtopermit interpretationsofunconsciousmeaningand Imakeanumberofsuchinterpretations in my Results chapter. In order to make these interpretations, I have adapted theinterpretativeskillsIuseintheconsultingroom.AlthoughtherearecertainclinicalskillsIamunabletouse (notedabove),my familiarity – intimacyeven -with the contentof thebook, through repeatedreading,re-readingandcontinuinganalysis,hasresultedinmydevelopinganattunedresponsetothevoiceoftheauthor.Myalertnesstocertainsubtlechangesinthevoiceoftheauthor,togetherwithmyfamiliaritywiththeauthor’suseoflanguageandmetaphor,haveinformedtheinterpretationswhichIhavefeltabletomake.

2.1.5. TheDataAnalysisProblem–ThematicAnalysisI answer the data analysis problem through my use of thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is anexplicit, defined, and standardised research method for “systematically identifying, organising, and

77Timothywritesabouthis“oneandonlyepisodeoffuryattheIRA”(pp.206-207).

26

offering insight intopatternsofmeaning (themes)acrossadata set” (Braun&Clark,2012,p.57).Theoverallaimof themethod is to identify themes fromthedataset relevant toansweringaparticularresearchquestion.Thedatasetshouldbe“goodquality”,withclarity“regardingwhat,why,andhowthey were collected, and offer[ing] rich, detailed and complex accounts of the topic” (Braun &Clark,2006,p.98).Ihaveexplainedin2.1.4abovewhythebookconstitutes“gooddata”(ibid.).

Braun & Clark have developed thematic analysis specifically in relation to psychology, providingresearchers in this field with a clear step-by-step procedure to be followed (2006,2012,2013).However, they “emphasize” that “certain skills of analysis develop only through experience andpractice”(2012,p.60). Imentionbelow(2.1.7)thattherevisionofmyresearchquestionmeantthat Iundertook two thematicanalysesof thebook.Although this substantially increased the time I spentwithmydatasetandsloweddownmyprogress,itgavemevaluableadditionalpractice(cf.BraunandClark,2006,pp.86-87).

BraunandClarkdescribethematicanalysisasanon-linear,“recursive”process,requiringimmersioninandrepeated iterativeengagementatadeep levelwith therelevantdata (2006,pp.86). It involvesa“constantmovingbackandforwardbetweentheentiredataset, thecodedextractsofdatayouareanalysing,andtheanalysisofthedatayouareproducing”(Braun&Clark,2006,p.86).Myexperienceofthis immersive, iterativeengagementwiththedatasethasbeenthatacertain levelofmentalstrainhas tobeborneandcontainedoveranextendedperiod.Although thedifferentprocedural steps in,andthecontentof,theanalysiscanberecordedinwriting,myexperiencehasbeenthatacriticalpartoftheprocesshasbeentoholdtheanalysisasaworkindevelopmentwithinmymind,andallowmymindtoworkonandwithit,continuouslyandovertime.Thementalactivity,effortandconcentrationinvolved have been strenuous and extensive. The aim has been to create a convincing analyticnarrative, composed of key themes abstracted from my data set, using a systematic, standardisedapproach,butwithoutsacrificingwhatmakesTimothy’saccountofhisexperienceoflosinghistwinapersonal,intimate,anddeeplymovingdocument.

2.1.6. WhyIchoseThematicAnalysis

2.1.6.1. Subjectivelyrelevantmaterial

It is a particular advantage of thematic analysis that it can be applied flexibly, systematically, andtransparentlytosubjectivelyrelevantmaterial,withoutsacrificingtherichnessandcomplexityofthedatabeingexamined(Joffe,2012,p.210;Braun&Clark,2012,p.65).Joffesuggeststhatthekindofdatamostappropriateto thematicanalysis issubjectively relevantmaterial,elicitedwiththeminimumofinterference from the questioner, tapping naturalistic ways of thinking about the given topic andpursuing the respondent’sownchainsof associations (2012,p.213). These criteria are satisfiedhere.ThebookisTimothy’saccountofhissubjectiveresponseovertimetohisterribleloss.Timothyalonewrote, selectedandorganisedhisbook.Hepursueshisownchainsof associations throughout.78Hisorderly presentation of the book’s content, reflective of his professional background, can still beconsistent with a description of the book as the product of his own “naturalistic ways of thinking”aboutlossofhistwin.

78e.g.,pp.144-145,166-167,216-217,247,249,255-256,364-369.

27

2.1.6.2. Accessibilityofmethod

Iconcludedthatthematicanalysiswasaparticularlysuitableresearchmethodformypsychoanalyticcasestudy.Themethod’srequirements,whichdemandin-depthandrepeatedengagementwithandexplorationofthedataset,haveresonanceswithpsychoanalysis,theaimofwhichistofindmeaningthroughaprocessofreflection,reconstructionandaprèscoup.Anexperienceisre-livedbytherapistand patient jointly, again and again, with the ultimate aim of distilling the particular meaning ormeanings that the experience holds for the patient and relating thatmeaning to the patient’s life.Similarly,inthematicanalysis,theresearcherrepeatedlyimmersesherselfintherichnessanddepthofthe data set. This deep work aims to arrive at meaning through identifying patterns, themes andcategories in the data, and taking them to a higher level of abstraction. Perez et al. note that, as adefinedmethod,thematicanalysisallowspsychoanalyststoinvestigatetextsinamannerwhich“helpsprevent the formation of any one ‘overvalued idea’ (Britton and Steiner,1994), potentially asmisleading in research as in analytic practice (Midgley,2006a).” (2015,p.661). Theymake the furtherpointthatthematicanalysisisgroundedintheordinaryeverydayrealityofhowhumanbeingsperceivetheworld:itsprinciplesarefamiliarbecause“theyformpartofhowweattempttomakesenseoftheworld–welookforpatternsintheinformationinfrontofusandthisallowsusto‘hold’anddevelopideas in our mind” (2015,p.663, following Saldana,2013). For these reasons, I consider thematicanalysistobearelativelyaccessibleresearchmethodforme:itisbasedontherealityofhowhumansmake sense of the world around them, and involves analytic skills relatable to those used in theconsultingroom.

2.1.6.3. Transparency

Joffedescribes thematicanalysisasoneof themostsystematicandtransparentqualitativemethods(2012,p.210). Thedefined requirementsof themethodmean that the researcher/psychoanalyst canshowclearlyhowshewentaboutanalysingherdataandtracethestepstakentoarriveathereventualthematic framework (see 2.1.7 below). This makes it possible to evaluate her research (Braun &Clark,2006,p.80;Yardley,2015,p.268).

2.1.6.4. Manageability

Thematic analysis can be applied to a complete text, such as a published biography, so that it ispossibletofocusonthemeaningofthetextasawhole,togetherwithindividualpartsofthetext.Thisstandsincontrasttoothermethods,suchasIPA,forinstance,whereinordertomakeapplicationofthat method manageable, I would have had to restrict my analysis to text extracts. I favoured aresearch method which could be applied to the whole book and which would result in findingsgrounded in thebookreadasawhole,aswellas in thedetailof thenarrative (2.1.7.1below). Joffedescribes certain key features of a high-quality thematic analysis, including that the analysis shoulddescribethebulkoftheavailabledata(2012,p.219).

2.1.7. ProcedureIn undertaking my thematic analysis, I followed the guidelines demarcated by Braun and Clarke(2006,2012)(2.1.5).Iorientatedmyselfbyreferencetotheirgeneralprinciplethat“athemecapturessomethingimportantaboutthedatainrelationtotheresearchquestion,andrepresentssomelevelofpatternedresponseormeaningwithinthedataset”(2006,p.82).

28

2.1.7.1. Analysisofwholebook

Thebookhasbeenreadmultipletimes.Myfirststepwastore-readthebooktogainabasicsenseofitsoverall contentandstructure,viewedsimplyasa story. I then read thebooka third time,“inanactiveway”,annotating,highlighting,cross-referencing,andmarkingpages(Braun&Clark,2006,p.87).

MysupervisorandIdiscussedwhethertoundertakeathematicanalysisofonlysomechaptersofthebook. This issue had been raised at my second supervisory board. My board had asked whetherthematicanalysisofthewholebookwasrealistic,orwhetheritwouldturnouttobeunmanageable,intermsofthevolumeofmaterialandthetimeneededtoanalysethatmaterialthoroughly.

We identified several factors in favourof analysing the complete text. First, it seemed important toidentifythemespatternedandrepeated,notonly inthedetailof individualchapters,butalsohavingregard to the overall substance and shape of the book, viewed as awhole. Second, it also seemedimportant, from the perspective of the credibility and trustworthiness ofmy findings, to be able toidentifyanddiscussapparentomissions fromthebook.Third,weconsidered that, to selectextractsfromthebookandconfinemyresearchtothoseextracts,wouldhaveriskedproducingfindingswhichdid not reflect accurately themeaning for Timothy of his loss. Timothy is clear that the book is his“accountof thepath[he] took”to“heal” the“mentalandemotionalwounds” leftbythebomband“whichrefusedtogoaway”(pp.xi,xii).Thebookisthe“story”ofthat“journey”(p.6)andofhow(hewrites)hefoundthe“senseofinnerpeacethatIhadlostthedayNicholaswaskilled”(p.xi).EverythingTimothytroubledtowriteinhisbookwasprimafacierelevanttomyresearchquestionanddeservedmy attention. To select for analysis some sections of ‘the path’ taken by Timothy, and not others,riskedapartialandincompleteanalysis,possiblyevenamisleadingone.

2.1.7.2. Pilotprojects

Having attended two training courses at my university aimed at teaching basic skills in thematicanalysis, I undertook two pilot projects. The first was a thematic analysis of a short publishedbiographical account of sibling loss written by another journalist, Joanna Moorhead(Stamford,2011,pp.37-46).Ipresentedmyanalysisandworkingstomysupervisor,whoisexperiencedin the use of thematic analysis for psychoanalytic research.79He showedme how a higher level ofabstractionwasneeded.Havingreworkedmyfirstpilotproject,Imovedontomysecond.ThiswasathematicanalysisofthePrefacetothebook.Theproblematicaspectwiththissecondpieceofwork,discussed in supervision, was the extent to which my proposed themes provided an incompleteaccountofthedata(cf.Braun&Clark,2006,p.89).Ireworkedmyanalysisandpresentedittomyfellowstudents in our doctoral workshop. Their feedback helped me further to reflect on the codes andthemesthatIhadabstractedandhowconvincinglyImightarguetheyweresupportedbythedata.

2.1.7.3. Firstthematicanalysis

Havingundertakenthesetrialanalyses,Ibeganmyinitialcodingofthebook.Itookeachchapterofthebookinturn(togetherwiththePreface,PrologueandEpilogue)and,havingnumberedtheparagraphsineachchapter,proceededtodevelop:first,aseriesofcodesforeachparagraph;second,aseriesofrevisedcodesforthechapteroverall(notingrelevantparagraphnumbersforeachrevisedcode);third,

79e.g.,Willemsenetal.,2015.

29

alistofpotentialthemes,abstractedfromtherevisedcodes,foreachchapter.Irepeatedthisexercisefor all 28 chapters of the book. As Iwent along, Iwrote upmy codes, revised codes, and potentialthemesinasearchableWorddocument.80IalsowroteupinacompanionWorddocumentquotationsfrom the book in which the author spoke directly about the impact of his loss of Nicholas and hisfeelings(orlackofthem).81

2.1.7.4. Secondthematicanalysis

Whenmy first thematic analysiswaswell underway,my supervisor and I agreed thatmy researchquestion needed to be revised to focus upon loss of a twin (1.1.2). Following review of thepsychoanalytic literature on twins and loss of a twin, I now had in mind an expanded theoreticalframeworkincludingtheoriesrelevanttobothsiblinglossandtwinloss.82

Sincemy research focus andmy theoretical framework had changed, I beganmy thematic analysisafresh. With the benefit of my earlier work, I had a good feel for the shape of Timothy’s story,especially the inner“journey”Timothyhadtraced inhisbook (p.xii).Secondtimearound, Iwasalsofamiliarwith the book’s content and layout, so I was able to adopt amore confident, flexible, andfreestyle approach. My first attempt had also provided me with valuable coding practice, so Iprogressedmorequickly.

For thepurposesof thissecondcodingexercise, Icodedthebooksequentiallyasbefore,chapterbychapter. I collated the codes in three separateWord documents, each of which represented threebroad areas of experience, which I had identified frommy first analysis. These were: Impact, TwinRelationship,andObjects.By ‘Impact’, Imeantalldatadirectly relevant to the impactof the lossofNicholas on the author and everyone else. By ‘Twin Relationship’, I meant all data relevant toTimothy’sidentityasatwin.By‘Objects’,ImeantalldataconcerningthoseobjectspeoplingTimothy’sexternalandinternalworld.

I wrote up my codes and themes in the three separateWord documents, according as codes andthemes seemed to fallwithin one or other of the three broad subject-headings. This facilitated theidentificationofthemesthough,inevitably,therewasoverlap.Aswithmyfirstcoding,mycodesweredescriptive and stayed close to the text. For this second coding exercise, I includedquoted extractsfrom the book. After rearranging the initial codes into revised codes, I identified clusters of sub-themes,whichIthengroupedintogeneralthemes.

Alongside the writing up of the threeWord documents, as a separate exercise, I prepared sets ofpostcards. Iwrote themoreprevalent codesonwhitepostcards (one codeperpostcard), collectingthesemanually inpilesandusingthemasavisualaidtohelpmepinpointpotential themes,which I

80Although Ihadattendeda training sessionon theuseof certain computer softwareprogrammes for codingandanalysingresearchdata, Icodedmanuallyasapersonalpreferencefora“hands-on”experience. I felt thissuitedmebetterandwouldhelpmesustainagoodlevelofattentivenessandactiveengagementwiththedata.81This proved a useful reference document, to which I frequently returned. It reminded me of certainmetaphoricallanguageandothermodesofexpressionfavouredbytheauthorandwhattheymightimplyformyanalysis.82Isuggestthatmyfamiliaritywiththeliteratureonsibling lossgenerallyandtwin loss inparticularhasaddeddepthtomyanalysisanddiscussionofmyfindings.

30

thenwroteoncolouredpostcards(onethemeperpostcard).Asastillfurtherparallelexercise,Ialsopreparedaseriesofmind-mapsonA3-sizewhitecard.Thesehelpedmemaintainawarenessofhowpotential sub-themes were clustering and how they might inter-relate. Throughout this process, Icontinued to annotate and cross-referencemy copy of the book.Making these explicit connectionswithinthebookhelpedmeincreasemyunderstandingofTimothy’spsychodynamicsandthedynamicsofhisfamilyrelationships(e.g.,pp.230and351;150,174and192).

2.1.7.5. Results

TheresultofmysecondcodingexercisewasadraftResultschapteridentifyingproposedthemesandsub-themes.Ipresentedthisdraftchaptertomythirdsupervisoryboard.Theirfeedbackhelpedmetoseehowmythemes,thoughembeddedinthedataandinvolvinganappropriateuseofmetaphorandsymbolism, needed to be reframed more explicitly in terms of psychoanalytic concepts, using myknowledgeofpsychoanalytictheoryandpractice.

Iwentthroughmyresearchdataagainandreconsideredmyanalysisfromthepositionofapractisingclinician, reframingmy themes and sub-themes explicitly in psychoanalytic terms. I gavemyself thefreedomtothinkmorewidely intermsofpsychoanalytictheory. Ialsore-readthosechaptersofthebookthathadgeneratedthemoreplentifulcodes.Theresultwasadeepeningofmyunderstandingofmydataset,whichledtoabroadeningofmythematicmap,andanimprovedsenseofhowmythemesand sub-themes related to each other. I providedmy redrafted Results chapter tomy supervisor insections. Our discussions led to removal of two proposed general themes in their entirety andreorderingandrefinementofthecontentofmyremainingthemes.Aftermuchworkingandreworking,Iarrivedataclearly-structuredanalyticnarrative(orstory)whichreflectsmyunderstandingofmydataset,derivedanddevelopedfrommyanalysis.Myfinalgeneralthemesarebroadclinicalconcepts.Thedetailoftheanalyticargumentiscontainedinthesubthemes.Iillustratethesub-themeswithalimitedselectionofdataextractswhichsupporttheimportantpointsIseektomake.

Thus, the identificationanddevelopmentof the themesdescribed inmyResults chapter (Chapter3below)haveinvolvedfocusedanddeepconcentration,withcontinuingreviewandre-interrogationoftherelevantdata,andcontinuingreflectivenessabouthowthedata,andmyapplicationofthematicanalysistothedata,werehelpingmetoanswermyresearchquestion.AlthoughIhavepresentedmyanalysis above as a linear, step-by-stepprocedure, itwas anon-going analytic and creativeprocess,wherethemesweredefinedandconstantlyredefinedovertime.ManyformulationswereclarifiedasIwroteupmyResults.AfterIhadcompletedthefirstfinaldraftofmythesisinitsentirety,Ireturnedtoallmycodingdocumentsandre-readthem,alongsidethebook.Thiswasaworthwhileexercise,sinceatthisstageofnear-completionofmywork,Ihadaverygoodoverallperspectiveofthematerialandmydraftconclusions,soithelpedmetorefocusandrefinetheessentialcornerstonesofmywork.

Braun and Clark note that thematic analysis often in practice uses a combination of inductive anddeductiveapproaches(2006,p.83).Asappearsabove,Iusedfirstadata-driven,inductiveapproachtoexplore the text and secondly amoreexplicit a priori, theory-driven, deductive approach. Thedata-drivenapproach,althoughinformedbypsychoanalytictheory,assistedmeinidentifyingthemesdirectfromthedata,andthetheory-drivenapproachinvolvedamarrying-upofthethemesIwasfindinginthe data with psychoanalytic theoretical concepts. This hybrid approach permitted a carefulexploration of my research question and made appropriate use of my experience and theoreticalknowledgederivedfrommyclinicalwork.

31

For completeness, I point out that I did not include prevalence of examples of a theme across theentiredata setasacriterion for inclusion. In thecontextofananalysisofabiographicalnarrative, Iconsideredtherecurrenceofatheme,togetherwithitspsychologicalgravitationalweightwithinthedatasetviewedasawhole,tobeastrongerindicatorofits“keyness”regardingmyresearchquestion,thanstatisticalprevalence(Braun&Clark,2006,pp.82-83;Joffe,2012,p.219).

2.1.8. TheGeneralizabilityProblemIdonotseektomakegeneralisationsaboutthesubjectiveexperienceofmostorallsurvivingtwinsonthebasisof the inferences ImakeregardingTimothy’s innerworld. Ihavesought tomakeacareful,rigorous and in-depth study of Timothy’s individual and unique subjective experience (cf.Giannoni,2003,pp.650-651).Iadopt,mutatismutandis,Midgley’sargumentregardingthepossibilityofaggregationandcomparisonofcarefully-designedsinglecasestudiesinordertoarriveatmeaningfulgeneralisations(2.1.3.2);(cf.Yardley,2015,pp.259-260).

2.1.9. ValidityandcredibilityIsuggestthatthefollowingfactorsenhancethevalidityandcredibilityofmyresearchfindings.

2.1.9.1. Prolongedengagement,holisticapproachandthickdescription(Geertz,1973)

The “holistic” processes which I have adopted in my analysis, together with my “prolongedengagement” with my data set, which I have descriptively presented to “let readers ‘see’ forthemselves,” go to support the validity of my findings (Cho & Trent,2006,pp.326-329, followingWolcott,1990,p.129).

2.1.9.2. Provisionofsupportingevidence

Isupportmyfindingswithrelevantquotationsandtextextracts.Thesetestifytomyclosereadingofthe data set and allow the reader to assess the sufficiency of the evidence supportingmy analyticnarrative.Ambertetal (1995,p.882),quotedbyWallerstein (2009,p.129),write that“the richnessofthequotes,theclarityoftheexamples,andthedepthoftheillustrationsinaqualitativestudyshouldservetohighlightthemostsalientfeaturesofthedata”.

2.1.9.3. Audittrail

I have retained all the postcards, mind-maps (2.1.7.5), and word-processed documents I producedthroughthedifferentstagesofmyanalysis.Theseareavailableforinspectionandreviewandallowallthestagesoftheworktoberetracedandformapapertrail,“linkingtherawdatatothefinalreport”(Yardley,2015,p.264;Mays&Pope,2000,pp.51).

2.1.9.4. Triangulationandalternativeunderstandings

Triangulation in qualitative research is generally seen as the use ofmultiplemethods or sources tobolster accuracy and reliability (Cho & Trent,2006,p.323). In thematic analysis, triangulation issometimes understood in terms of the concept of “inter-rater reliability” and the use of multipleindependent coders to increase the “accuracy” of the coding. Braun and Clark (2017) “understandcoding as an active and reflexive process that inevitably and inescapably bears the mark of the

32

researcher(s)”.Consequently,“thereisnoone‘accurate’waytocodedata”,sothat“thelogicbehindinter-raterreliability(andmulti-independentcoders)disappears”.

Triangulationmay“bebetterseenasawayofensuringcomprehensivenessandencouragingamorereflexiveanalysisofthedatathanasapuretestofvalidity”(Mays&Pope,2000,p.51)orasa“methodof enriching understanding of a phenomenon by viewing it from different perspectives”(Yardley,2015,p.264).Thisreflectsmyapproach-anopennesstoinvolvementof“thethird”, inordertopromotereflectiveness,helpavoidblindspots,anddeepenandwidenthinking.

Adoptingthisunderstandingoftriangulation, Ihavesoughttodevelopmythinkingbyusingfrequentsupervision;feedbackfrommyannualsupervisoryboard;regularresearchworkshopswithmypeers;andfeedbackfollowingpresentationofmyworkatmyuniversity’sannualresearchconference.Ialsoprovided a copy of the book and my draft Results chapter to a fellow doctoral student83and to aJungiananalyst.Mypsychodynamiccolleagueprovidedmewithsuggestionsfortheamalgamationofcertainofmythemesandconfirmationthatmythemeswereembeddedinmydataset.TheJungiananalyst’s considered response refreshedmy thinkingby remindingmeof certain striking featuresofTimothy’sstory,aswellasidentifyingparticularJungianperspectivesonthematerial.Thisunderlinesthepoint,which Iaccept (2.1.10below), thatmyanalysis reflects theobject relationsperspective inwhichIhavebeentrained.Anotherpsychotherapist,analysingthesamedata,mightarriveatdifferentthemesreflectingtheirpreferredpsychoanalyticmodel.

Midgleydrawsattention to the traditionalnarrative structureof thepsychoanalytic case study,withthetherapistasheroorheroinebattlingwithbutfinallyovercomingthepatient’sresistancetocure.Thoughtheresultmaybe‘acompellingandpersuasiveaccountofthetreatment’,thefailuretoleave‘spaceforalternativeunderstandingsorevenfordoubtanduncertainty’hasgraveimplicationsforitsscientific value (2006,pp.131-132). I recognise thereare certainaspectsofmy researchquestion leftunresolvedbymyanalysis.Idiscussthesebelow(Chapter4).

2.1.10. ReflexivityandCounter-TransferenceI am not a twin and I have not suffered the loss of a sibling. I have no relationship with TimothyKnatchbulloranyoftheotherpeoplehewritesaboutinhisbook.However,thereareaspectsofmylife,whichhaveconnectionswithmy research topic. I reflectbelowupon theextent towhich theseconnectionsmayhave influencedmy approach tomy researchdata or interferedwith the researchprocess(Mays&Pope,2007,p.51).I was born and grew up in Northern Ireland during the Troubles. I turned 18 the summer of theMountbattenBomb.Iremembergoingtoworkatmysummerjobthemorningafterthebombandageneral atmosphere of stunned silence. My birth family was part of the minority nationalistcommunity. I recall theSun’sheadlinethatday:“ThoseMurderingBastards”.Thefollowingmonth, Ileftmyhometownanddidnot return to live in Ireland again, in due course settling andworking inLondon.

83(Anexperiencedpsychodynamicpsychotherapist)

33

AlthoughIamnotatwin,myyoungersiblingandIare(whatsomepeoplecall)“Irishtwins”, that is,siblingsbornwithinayearofeachother.My“Irishtwin”andIhavecontinuedtoenjoyaverycloseandmutuallysupportiverelationship.Myexperienceof thissiblingbond is that itbothtranscendsand isdeeper thanpersonalityor character. This is notwithstanding that (as I nowunderstand),within6-8weeks of my birth, mymother will have had two babies inmind, one within and one without thewomb. It follows that the conceptsof the twinbondand the siblingbond,with sibling relationshipsenduring longer than parental relationships and providing valuable containment and emotionalresources,thoughpotentiallyinterferingwiththematernalbond,areconceptswhichIreadilyaccept,basedonmyownlifeexperience.Further,likeTimothyKnatchbull,Iknowsomethingoftheexperienceofgrowingup inahouse“heavingwith family” (pp.59,63).Still further,although Ihavenotsufferedthelossofasibling,Ihavehadtheexperienceofasiblingrecentlyfallingseriouslyill.84ForaslongasIcan remember, I have been aware of lost child siblings in previous and current generations of myextendedfamily.Reflectinguponhowsomeoralloftheabovefactsmayhaveaffectedmyresponsestothebookandmyapproachtomyresearchquestiongenerally,IhaveregardtothedepthofmeaningIattachtomyrelationship with my “Irish twin” and how it may predispose me to conceive of loss of a twin inchildhood as deeply traumatic and intensely painful. My experience of grief and turmoil when myothersiblingrecentlyfellseriouslyill,hasgivenrisetoagooddealofthinkingaboutsiblingsidentifyingwitheachotherandexperiencingeachotheraspsychicallypartofthemselves.Sofarasconcernsthegeographicalandpoliticalcontextof thebook,my immersion in thebookand in-depthanalysisof ithavecausedmetorememberand, tosomeextent,work throughandattributemeaningtomyownexperienceofgrowingupduringtheTroubles.Framed in termsofmycounter-transferenceresponses, readingandre-reading thebookhasbeenaveryemotionalexperience,withcertainchaptersfrequentlymovingmetotears.Ihaveoftenworkedatmy analysis of the book through and despitemy tears. Itmay be that on account of its subject-matter (familial and political) I have a heightened sensitivity to it. However, I also understand mydeeplyemotionalresponseasacounter-transferenceindicationoftheextentanddepthofTimothy’sownemotionalsuffering.I havewondered if the empathy for Timothy and his family evoked inme by the bookmight be acompensatoryreactionborneoutofguiltaboutoriginatingfromthatpartofthecommunityonwhosebehalftheIRApurportedlyactedwhentheirmembersdetonatedtheMountbattenbomb.Ihavealsowondered ifmyempathyforTimothymightbeanexpressionof thetwintransference(Lewin,2014),meaning thatat some level Ihaveover-identifiedwithTimothy,or idealisedhim,and the resulthasbeen a kind of twin-like psychic fusion or symbiosis,with the consequential loss ofmy analytic andobservational function. If thiswerethecase, ImightacceptunquestioninglyTimothy’saccount inhisbookasatotalaccountofhisandhisfamily’sreactiontotheloss.Inthatevent,Imightnotinvestigateor comment upon gaps in the story he tells, or other questionable aspects of the narrative, whichmightcasthimorhis family ina lessthanpositive light,butwhichmightberelevanttomyresearchquestion.Asappearsinmyfinalchapter,Idomakecertaincriticalobservationsandaskcertaincritical

84Thissiblinghassincemadeafullrecovery.

34

questionsregardingthebook.So,forinstance,Icommentuponwhether,givenTimothy’sdescriptionofhisfamilyas“intenselyclose”(p.18)andeverythingtheywentthrough,itmighthavebeendifficultforhimopenlytocriticisehismother,orfather,orgrandfatherinhisbook.ThefactthatIhavenoticedand questioned apparent omissions from the book indicates that I have retained sufficientpsychologicalseparateness fromTimothy,notwithstandingmyconsiderableempathyforhimandhissuffering.However,Idonotengageinspeculativehypothesesorinterpretations.Ihaveendeavouredtogroundallmyinterpretationsinmyresearchdata.MyaimhasbeentotreatTimothyandhisfamilywithrespect.Onbalance,IthinkmyfamiliaritywiththeTroublesismorelikelytobehelpfulthanunhelpfulforthepurposeofmycasestudy.Ithinkthesameaboutmyexperienceofbeingan“Irishtwin”,growingupinabigfamily,havingrecentlysupportedasiblingthroughalife-threateningillness,andmyawarenessoflostsiblingsinmyextendedfamily.Alloftheseconsiderationshelpmetoempathisedeeplywiththeauthor’s suffering and losses and to respond emotionally and with an open heart to what he haswritten.Theauthor’sbraveryinwritingabouttheemotionaljourneyhehasmadedeservestherespectofanopen-heartedresponse(2.2below). Iamassistedbymypointsofcontactwithhisstorytogetalongside Timothy emotionally, and open myself to imagining experiencing the feelings heexperienced. This emotional sensitivity and heightened awareness onmy part need to be counter-balancedbyananalyticapproach.Useofthesystematicandtransparentresearchmethodofthematicanalysis,togetherwithanopennesstodiscussionofmyfindingswithcolleaguesandpeers,havebeencritical in helping me to maintain this balance. My psychoanalytic training and practice have alsohelpedmetomaintainananalyticstanceandavoidbeingcarriedawayintosentimentality, flightsoffancyorother “possiblewild leapsof imagination” (cf.Piontelli,1989,p.416). It ispossible that I alsohavebeenhelpedinmaintainingabalancedresponsebythefactthatIamnotEnglish,andsomaybeless likely tobe influencedbyattitudesofdeferenceor itsopposite (classantagonism),whichmighthaveoperated,hadIbeenbornandbroughtup inEnglandandundertakenthetaskofanalysingthebiographyofanauthorwitharistocraticconnections.

Withinthecontextofprovidingdisclosureofmyprofessionalbackgroundandorientation,Iundertooktwo trainings atWPFTherapywith a combineddurationof 10 years. The first trainingwas in once-weekly psychodynamic psychotherapy and the second in three-times-weekly psychoanalyticpsychotherapy. This second training is grounded in the object relations tradition of psychoanalysis,drawing on theoretical thinking from Freud to the present-day. With respect to my professionalexperience, Ihavebeeninfull-timeprivatepractice intheCityofLondonfor7yearsandIamaBPCregistrant. My practice is long-term work. In terms of my theoretical orientation, while this iscontinuously evolving and developing, I work from an object relations perspective on humandevelopment and emotional functioning and within the theoretical framework of Freud, Klein,FairbairnandWinnicott.WhenIamworkingwithapatientwhohassufferedatraumaticcollisionwiththeexternalworld,Iamseekingwithhimtounderstandtheparticularmeaningofthetraumaticeventfor him, having regard to his internal world. I have his earliest relationships particularly inmind inassessingtheinternalresourcesavailabletohimandtheextentandnatureofrecoverythatmightbepossibleforhim.Thetransferenceandcountertransferenceareessentialandextremelyvaluabletoolstohelpmeunderstandthedynamicsofmypatient’sinternalobjectworld.

35

2.2. EthicsMydatasetisapublishedtext.Theactofpublishingindicatesprimafaciethattheauthor’smotivationwasforhistexttoberead,probablybyasmanypeopleaspossible.Ihavereferredearlier(2.1.4.5)tothe author’s express motivation to help others through sharing his story. The fact that Timothyintentionallypublicisedhisstorydoesnotavoidtheneedforthinkingabouttheethicalconsiderationsinplaywhenthesubjectofatextisanalysedsocloselywithoutthecloakofanonymity.HollwayandJeffersonsuggestthreeprinciplesforanalysingpsychosocialsubjects(2013,pp.92-94).

The firstof these is therequirementofhonesty,definedas“approachingthedataopenlyandeven-handedly,inaspiritofenquirynotadvocacy,deployingatheoreticalframeworkwhich[is]laidoutandjustified, making only such judgements as [can] be supported by the evidence, and not ignoringevidence when it suit[s] [the researcher].” (2013,p.92). I regard this principle as sound and I havesoughttofollowitinmywork.

The secondprinciple is the requirementof sympathy, definedas awillingness to share and feel theother’s feelings, to “put ourselves alongside them, attempting to use what self-knowledge we[possess],andthedifficultieswe[are] familiarwith, toassistus tounderstandtheir ‘inconsistencies,confusions,andanxieties’”(2013,p.93,followingHollway&Jefferson,1998,p.406).Isuggestabovethatmypersonalpointsofcontactwiththesubject-matterofthebookhaveheightenedmysensitivitytoit(2.1.10). I have also explained how I have found sharing the author’s feelings (as I understandmyemotionalresponsestothebook)unavoidable(2.1.10)andinformative,givingmeimportant insightsintotheauthor’ssubjective,emotionalexperience.Wherethebookhasmovedmetotears,ithasfeltentirelyappropriatethatitshould.Thisstorydeservestears.

Thethirdprincipleisthatrespectshouldbegiventothesubject,thatis,respect“inthesenseof‘topayattention to: to observe carefully” (2013,p.93). Hollway and Jefferson regard researchers’ “duty torespect” in this sense as “perhaps their primary ethical responsibility” (ibid.). It includes “[noticing]thingsthe[subjects]wouldprefertoremainunnoticed”,“whatnormallyisoverlooked”,“whatmightbe too painful to notice” (2013,p.94). My psychoanalytic training and experience prime me toapproachthedatawiththeseconsiderationsinmind.

Thereisbroadconsensusabouttheethicalissuesofpatientconsentandconfidentialityregardingtheuse of clinical material for research purposes (Gabbard,2000; McLeod,2010; Thomas-Attila,2015).Theseconsiderationsdonotapplyinthesamewaytoapublishedbiography.Thereisnopre-existingtherapyrelationshiptoconsider.Ihavethoughtabouthowtheauthor(andclosefamilymemberswhofeature inhisbook)might feel, if theyweretoreadmythesis.Myresearchstudy involvesusing theauthor’s story of his and his family’s suffering for professional purposes (to obtain a doctoralqualification), as well as for the larger purpose of providing resources for practitioners. I haveconsidered thepossibility that the author andhis familymight object tomy researchon that basis,judgingmyworkexploitative,orevenoffensive,especiallyhavingregardtomyorigins.Inlightofthatpossibility, I have considered whether to notify the author of my work and explain my researchmotivation.Ethicalconsiderationsoffairnessandbeneficence/non-maleficencecometomind. Ihavethought aboutwhether these valuesmight requireme, before submittingmy thesis, to provide theauthorwithadraftofmythesisandinvitehiscommentsor,attheleast,toalerthimtomyresearchandprovidehimwithmyabstract.

36

Onreflection,andafterdiscussionwithmysupervisor,althoughIthinkitwouldbecourteoustoadvisetheauthorofmyresearchinadvanceofsubmissionofmythesis,Idonotregarditethicallynecessaryorappropriate.Therearegoodpracticalreasons,whichtellagainstinvitingtheauthortocommentonmydraftthesisbeforesubmission.Myanalysisconfinesitselfstrictlytothebookasmydataset.Ihavechosennottointerviewtheauthororanyotheradultsurvivingtwinsforthepurposesofwhatwouldhave been a very different kind of research project. The inclusion of any detailed response by theauthortomydraftthesiswouldinvolveanextensionofmyresearchdatabeyonditsoriginalscope.IfIweretorevisemyanalysistotakeaccountoftheauthor’sremarks,theauthormightseektoreviewthose revisionsandcomment further. The result couldbeanextendeddialoguebetweenus,whichmightsignificantlydelaycompletionandsubmissionofmywork.

Itremainsanimportantconsiderationwhethermyfindingsandinterpretationsmightbeexperiencedby Timothy and his family as harmful. Hollway and Jefferson refer to the psychoanalytic concept ofrecognition: “every person needs recognition from another who is independent of his or her ownomnipotentwishes,which includedesires tobeseen inanunequivocallygood light” (2013,p.94).Solongastheother ishonestandcommunicatesherrecognitionofthesubject“inaspiritofsympathyand respect”, it is “more likely to be acknowledged” (ibid.). I have kept this concept of “truerecognition” inmind (ibid.). I have also kept inmind Freud’s remarks in his Introduction tohis casestudyofDr.Schreber’sbook(1911,pp.9-11),wherehesupportshisdecisiontopublishhiscasestudybyreferencetoDr.Schreber’sexpresseddeterminationtopublishhisbook,despiteothers’objections.Equally,Timothywritesabouthowhefearedthathe“mightdomoreharmthangood”byreturningtoIreland(p.xii).Herecordsothers’misgivingsabouthisdecisiontopublishandtheirmisunderstandingof hismotives.Hewrites, “To them I canonly say thatnooffence is intended” (p.xiii). I echo thosewords and affirm thatmyworkhasbeenundertakenwith themain aimof adding to the resourcesavailabletoassistpsychotherapists,intheirhealingworkwithsurvivingtwins.Inthisaim,Iagreewiththeauthorthat“itisthehealingthatcounts”(p.xii).

37

Chapter3

Results3.1. IntroductionandSynopsis

3.1.1. IntroductionThefrontcoverofthebookcarriesaphotograph85ofNicholasandTimothy,twoblonde-haired7-year-old boys, eachwearing a yellow lifejacket and seated in amodest-looking boat, both looking in thesamedirectionawayfromthecamera,againstabackgroundofsea,mountainandsky.Thefulltitleofthebookis“FromaClearBlueSky:SurvivingtheMountbattenBomb”.ThetitlereferstoBankHolidayMonday,27thAugust1979,whichwasasunnyandwarmdaywithnear-cloudlessskies (pp.3,56,69)86.At11.45 inthemorningofthatday, the IRA87detonatedabomb(“thebomb”)hiddenunder thecabinofa small fishingboat (‘theboat”),belonging to theboys’maternalgrandfather,EarlMountbattenofBurma.Theboathadnot long left theharbourofMullaghmore,asmallcoastalvillageinCountySligo,whereEarlMountbattenkeptaholidayhome,ClassiebawnCastle(“theCastle”).88Fourofthesevenpeopleintheboatwerekilled:EarlMountbatten,whohadbeenatthehelm(p.3);LadyBrabourne,theboys’paternalgrandmother;PaulMaxwell,aschoolboywhohadapocket-moneyjob helpingwith the boat; andNicholas. Timothy’s parents and Timothywere seriously injured, butsurvived(p.4).[ThereaderofwhatfollowsmaybeassistedbytheFamilyTree,ListingofPeopleandPlaces,andTime-LineinAppendices1-3below.]

85Takenbytheirfather,copyrightownedbyPhilipKnatchbull.86Allpagereferences(unlessstatedotherwise)arereferencestopagesinthebook.87IrishRepublicanArmy88TheCastlewasbuiltonlandconfiscatedfollowingsuppressionoftheIrishRebellionof1641.Itwasultimatelyinherited by Timothy’s maternal grandmother, Edwina, and then by Earl Mountbatten, her widower. DuringEdwina’schildhood,thefamilyhadusedtheCastleasashooting-lodgeuntilthefirst“Troubles”,whenherfather,“sensingtheturningtide”,closeditup(p.31).Thefirst“Troubles”ledtoBritain’swithdrawalin1921from26ofIreland’s32counties,theremaining6becomingNorthernIreland.Thesecond“Troubles”beganin1969.TheIRArana campaignof violenceaimedatBritishwithdrawal fromNorthern Ireland (p.339). Peacewasbrokered in1998undertheGoodFridayAgreement(p.238)and,asatthedateofwriting,thatpeacehasheld.

38

3.1.2. SchemeofthebookThe book is composed of three Parts, together with a Preface, Epilogue, Appendix of FurtherInformation,Notes,andBibliography.PartOneistitled“Family”.ThefirstChapterofthisPartistitled“Twins”.Timothygivesanaccountofhis lifewithNicholasandhowtheirrelationshipworked,asbetweenthetwoofthemandwithinthefamily(pp.7-16).Next,TimothyintroducesthereadertohisfamilyandtotheCastle.Hedescribestherhythmand feel of summer holidays there,with his grandfather at the centre of it all (p.31) and incharge (pp.32,58).ThisPart concludeswithTimothy’saccountofeventsduring the summerof1979andon27thAugust1979itself.PartTwoistitled“TheSoundoftheBomb”andcoversaperiodofroughly23yearsfromthebombupuntilTimothy’sdecisionto“returntoIrelandandfinallyaddresswhathadbeenholdingmebackforsolong”(p.241).MuchoftheinformationcontainedinthisPartaboutwhathappenedimmediatelyafterthebombistheproductofhisinvestigations,thetrajectoryofwhichisdescribedinPartThreeofthebook.ThisthirdPart istitled“ReturntoSligo”andisanaccountoftheauthor’svisitstoIrelandover2003-2004 and of the impact upon him of undertaking this physical and emotional “journey”(pp.xii,249).

3.1.3. SynopsisTimothy’sparentsmetduringWorldWar IIwhentheywerebothservingunderEarlMountbatten inCeylon (now Sri Lanka). Timothy’s father’s older brother was executed in 1941, after an escapeattemptwhileaprisoner-of-war,withtheresultthatTimothy’sfatherinheritedtheBrabournetitleandfarmingestate(p.8).Timothywasthelastandyoungestofhisparents’7children.WhenNicholasandhewereborn89,theiroldestbrother,Norton,was17.BetweenNortonandthetwins,therewereMichael-John(“Joe”)(14),Joanna(9),Amanda(7)andPhilip(2).Thefamilyhomewas inKent,buttheparentskeptahouse inLondon andwould spend some days there eachweek, pursuing their respective career and charityinterests(p.8).HelenBowden(“Nanny”)wastheir“doting”familynannyandshelivedwiththefamilyfor26years,fromshortlyafterNorton’sbirthuntilthetwinswenttoboardingschoolaged9,bywhichtimeshewas81(ibid.).Forthefirstfewyearsofthetwins’lives,shesleptintheirbedroom(p.9).Aftersheleftthefamilytolivenearby,thetwinsregularlyvisitedher,carryingoutsmallchoresforher,andbringingherpresents(p.166).Shedied,aged93,5yearsafterNicholaswaskilled(p.356).Timothy stresses his shared identity with Nicholas and their heart-to-heart connection (p.7). Astoddlers,hehada “flashof fear .. if theywouldevery sortusout”when thegoldbraceletNicholaswore(todistinguishhim)broke(p.8).HerememberswalkingintoamirrorbecausehethoughthesawNicholasontheotherside(p.9).90Hewritesthattwin-shipwas“centraltoour lives”,providing“fun

89namedNicholasTimothyandTimothyNicholas(p.7)90cf.1.4.6above;alsoMitchell,2003,pp.210-211;Lewin,2014,pp.72,98.

39

whenwewantedit,constantcompanionshipandtotalempathy”(p.10).Theboys“feltthattheworldwas our oyster” (p.13). They were “each other’s closest friend, protector and partner”; “[i]n someways”theywere“marriedtoeachother”(ibid.).The boys were months away from turning 15 when Nicholas was killed. By then, they formed aformidable and passionate intellectual pair.91 Timothy writes that “[t]he seams in our sharedintellectual tapestry appeared faultless”, giving them“the sensationof amounting tomore than thesumofourparts”(pp.13-14).Theircompetitivenesswitheachotherinsideandoutsidetheclassroomspurredthemeachontoevengreaterattainment(pp.15-16).TheyhadbeenawardedjointlythetopscholarshipatGordonstounSchoolandhadcompletedtheirfirstyeartherewhenthefamily,togetherwithotherextendedfamily,decampedasusualtotheCastlefortheholidaysin1979(p.14).Timothywrites that his grandfather “was happier there ‘than anywhere else on earth’ and I felt the same”(p.37).Itwas“aplacewherenormallifewassuspendedanddreamswereplayedout,impossibletoberegained in another time, another place” (ibid.). The family never returned to the Castle after thebomb.92Other small fishing and pleasure boats out on the water that Bank HolidayMonday witnessed theexplosion. They came to the rescue, picked up the living and the dead, andmade for the harbour(pp.75-97).Nicholas’bodywas recoveredseparately later thatday (pp.346-351).DoctorsandnurseswhohappenedtobeholidayinginMullaghmoretendedtothelivingontheharbour-sidepriortotheiradmissiontoSligoHospital(pp.86-97).Referringtohisgrandmother93,Timothywrites:

I lay in thebedbesideherswithwounds fromhead to toe.Surgical tubes led intomybody.Opposite,mymotherwasconnectedtoamachinethatbreathedforher;shewasnotexpectedto live.Her facewasunrecognisable, held together by onehundred and seventeen stitches,twentyineacheye.Inanearbyward,laymyfather,hislegstwistedandbrokenandmultiplewoundsalloverhisbody.Betweenthethreesurvivors,wehadthreefunctioningeyesandnoworkingeardrums(p.4).

TimothydidnotknowthatNicholashaddied,untilhissister, Joanna,toldhim3days laterandafterNicholas’bodyhadleftSligoHospitalforEngland(pp.125-126).RecoverywasslowandpainfulforTimothyandhisparentsandtheywerenotfittoattendthefuneralsof their dead. From their hospital beds, they watched together the live television broadcast of theState Funeral of Earl Mountbatten (pp.144-146). Family and friends gave accounts by letter of theprivatefuneralserviceforNicholasandLadyBrabourne(pp.146-151).Timothyimprovedsufficientlytoleave Sligo Hospital 12 days after admission (p.154). His older siblings, especially his sisters, tookresponsibility for his physical care, first at the Castle and then at home in England (pp.155-157,162,166).Familyfriendshadhimtostay(pp.170-178).HespentOctoberathomewithhisparents,

91Enthusedbyanewsubject,theywouldgointoacademic“overdrive”together,each“pass[ing]theintellectualballtotheother”(pp.13-14).92ItwaseventuallysoldontoaDublinhotelier,HughTunney(pp.159,247).93LadyBrabournediedfromherinjuriesthefollowingmorning(pp.109,113,115,295).

40

wherehissiblingswerefrequentvisitors,“keeping(him)happilyamused”(pp.179-180).HereturnedtoschoolinNovemberwithhisbrother,Philip,withwhomhenowenjoyeda“heightenedbond”(pp.184-185,205). ItwasPhilipwhogavehimhis firstrazorand,shavingforthefirsttime,“it feltgoodtobemovingintoanewstageoflife”(p.192).He“hadnotroublethrowingmyselfatmywork”(p.185)andfelt“enormousrelief”that“withoutNick”hewasstillabletosucceedacademically(p.192).Hisexamresults “delighted”his teachers (pp.192-193).Amemorial service for thedeadwasheld at St Paul’sCathedral in December 1979. Timothy and his parents (still in wheelchairs) were among thecongregationof2000(pp.195-196).Seeking“afreshstart”,TimothywonascholarshiptoasixthformcollegeinWales,andlateraplaceatCambridge(pp.209,213,214).Hegraduatedwithagooddegree(pp.213,214).Alongtheway,hemadefriendships(pp.214,220-222)andhadgirlfriends(pp.210,214).Healsodevelopeda“passionforflying”,obtaininghis pilot’s licence (p.214).After graduating in the summerof 1987, Timothymade a shortreturn trip to Ireland, travellingaloneandwithout telling the family (pp.214-218).Hebeganwork intelevisionproduction.In1989,hemetDavidLoftus(“David”),ayearolderandalsoasurvivingidenticaltwin, and they developed a “unique and lifelong friendship” (pp.220-222). In August 1991, Timothymadeasecondshort tripto Ireland,with friends (pp.223-224).Sometime in1995,TimothybegantohaveweeklypsychotherapysessionsandheremainedintherapyuntilJune1997(pp.228-231).Inthesummerof1996,hemetIsabella,thewomanwhobecamehiswifeinAugust1998,withDavidjoininghisbrother,Philip,asbestman(pp.232-238).ByFebruary2001,Timothyandhiswifehadtwochildren.TheirbirthsledtoTimothy’sdecisiontoembarkuponhisyearofvisitstoIreland,whichresultedinhisbook(pp.238-241).

InAugust2003,thevisitsbegan(p.245).Overthecourseofthosevisits,TimothyrevisitedtheCastleseveral times;94also Mullaghmore, its beach, harbour and the site out at sea where the bombexploded;95his rescuers (pp.249,257-258,368);hisparents’ rescuersand thedoctorsandnurseswhohelped save them (pp.278-286); thedoctors andnurseswho lookedafter all three in SligoHospital,togetherwith the hospital itself (pp.289-297,352); PaulMaxwell’s parents and Paul’s grave (pp.259-263,312-313,363-364); former household staff at the Castle (pp.264,271-273); the boat-builder(pp.266,310);theGardasergeantresponsibleatthetimeandthedetectivescalledinafterthebomb(pp.311-312,317-321); members of the lifeboat crew who recovered Nicholas’ body from the sea(pp.345-352); and the (now retired) State Pathologist who had carried out Nicholas’ post mortemexamination(pp.353-358).InhisEpiloguetheauthorwritesthat,afterhistripstoIrelandwere“complete”,he“foundasurgeofnewenergy”,movingoutofLondonandlateraddingtohisfamily(p.375).

3.2. IntroductiontoandSummaryofThemesMyanalysisledtothefollowingthemesandsub-themes:

94pp.245-248,250-254,275-277,364-368,370-37395pp.249,255-258,266-270,277,364-368

41

3.2.1. Trauma• inexpressibleunthinkablecatastrophicshock; • overwhelmingemotionalonslaught;experienceofdevastationanddisintegration; • nocontainment;absenceofandsearchforcontainment; • dissociation; denialanddisavowal;deadtwinfantasy; • traumaendures.

3.2.2. Loss• Lossoftwinaslovedobject;• Lostpre-traumaworldandexistence;lostparents,familyandtheirprotectivefunction;• Lostsenseofsafetyandnaturalorder;• Lostidentity;lostpartofself;internaliseddeadness;

3.2.3. Lonetwinidentity• Alonenessandwithdrawal; • Copingself; • Emotionalconstrictionandrestrictedliving; • Senseofselfaslesserandweak.

3.2.4. Mourning• Activemourning;crying;memoryastimetravel; • Reunion;separation; • Needforcontainingexternalobjects; • Rediscoveryofcontaininginternalobjects.

3.2.5. Guilt• Survivorguilt; • Guiltabouthavingabandonedtwintodeath; • Neglecteddutiestothedead.

3.2.6. Integration• Mourningasanintegrativeprocess;• Creatinganarrative;• Reconstructionofidentity.

42

3.3. Trauma

3.3.1. InexpressibleUnthinkableCatastrophicShockIhavefoundthat lossofatwin inchildhoodisaprofoundshockforthesurvivingtwin.Thesenseofcompletecatastropheisnotcapableofbeingputintowordsorthoughtabout.

HissisterrecallsbreakingthenewstoTimothyandseeing“completeshock;completedesperation;justaflashasthoughitwastheworstthingthatcouldeverhavehappenedtoyou,whichofcourseitwas”(p.294).6months later,Timothywakesearly,“shakentothecore”byanightmareinwhichNicholaswasdead:“…wasitjustanightmare?IcameclosetopanicasItriedandfailedtosortoutnightmarefromreality.Slowlythetruthspreadovermelikeacolddawn.”(p.205;cf.p.55).“Unexpectedly”,afewweeksearlier,theboyshadtalkedabout“howoneofuswouldfeeliftheotherdied”(ibid.).Timothycontinues,“Ilookedintohiseyesandwaslostforwords;sowashe”(p.55).

3.3.2. OverwhelmingEmotion;Devastation;DisintegrationShock, horror, sadness, loneliness, confusion, disorientation, intense survival anxieties and survivalguilt,allcombinetooverwhelmthepsyche.Ihavefoundthatthesurvivingtwinishelplessunderthisonslaught.Theexperienceisofdevastationandfragmentation.The first words of the book are, “We all have a car crash in our lives. To date I have had one; ithappened tobe abomb” (p.xi). Timothywrites that hewas “devastated”byhis twin’s death in thebomb (p.xi). The account of the explosion is one of utter devastation.96I note Timothy’s use of theword“splinter/s”whenhewritesabouttheimpactonhispsycheoffinallyworkingthroughhislosses24 years later.Writing to his rescuers after the birth of his daughter, he says that it “has been likepullingabigsplinterofgriefandemotionoutofme,andthetearsandreliefhavebeenenormousinsodoing”(p.240).Returninghomeafterthefirstvisitofhisyearofvisits,hewrites,“IfeltIhadworkedloosesomesplinterswhichhadlaindeeplyembeddedinmypsycheforyears”(p.249).IinterpretthatthepsychicimpactofthelossofNicholaswastocauseTimothy’smindtofragment,tomakeacrash-sceneofit.

Onhearing fromhis sister thatNicholaswasdead,Timothywrites,“until thatmoment Ihadhadnoinklingofthetruth”(p.125).Hecontinues,“Therewasapause...Ididnotmove,Icouldnotcollapse.Istaredather..MyvisionblurredandtheonlynoiseIcouldhearwasmycryingandmybreathcomingin spasms” (p.125). After his sister left, “[e]ach timemy tears faded, I would start to try to think”(p.125),buthe“couldmanagea shortboutofquiet concentrationand then theairwould leavemy

96Thebombmakes“matchwood”(p.348)outofthe“smallfishingboat”(p.3).Awitness,closeby,“sawtheboatgoupinpiecesintheair”and“inasecond[it]haddisappeared”,leaving“verysmallpiecesofwoodfloatingonthewater” (p.69).Others nearby recalled, “Theboatwasn’t there, thedebriswas floating on the sea” (p.75);“Therewas a puff of smoke and a large bang and a shower of little bits of timber. Then the boatwas gone”(p.80); “a cloud of smoke” and “[w]hen the smoke cleared (rather quickly) there was a scattering of debriselongatedoverthewater”(p.85);“Therewasalotofdebris,piecesofwood.. Iwaslookingforaboatbuttheboathaddisintegratedandallthatremainedwerebitsofwoodandsplinters”(p.79).

43

lungsveryslowly”,andhe“wouldhidemyface”incaseanyone“couldseemecrying”(ibid.).Amonghis “confused and racing thoughts”, Timothy felt “utter sadness forNick, and fear formyself, that Iwouldnotknowhowto leadmylifewithouthim”(pp.125-126).He“hadasensationthatthewrongtwin was dead” (p.126), and then “a flash of relief” and “an irrepressible flash of luck”, but “thisseemedselfishandgreedy”andhe“didnottellasoulaboutthis”:“HowcouldIbefeelingthiswhenIhad just learnedNickwasdead?” (ibid.)Overwhelmedby“theawful feelingsof loneliness,griefandfear”, “[p]hysically,mentally andemotionally exhausted, I lay and realised Iwouldnever againhearNicksay“Goodnight”and“GodBless”tomefromthenextdoorbed.Iwasonmyown”(ibid.).In1999,Timothyandhiswifewerewatchingateleviseddocumentaryaboutthebombwhen,“withoutanywarning”aphotographofNicholas’bodybeing liftedashorecameon-screen (p.350).Hewrites:“myworld caved in” (ibid.). He “stopped and rewound the tape, unable to believewhat I had justseen”(ibid.)Hecontinues,“Aftertheshocksubsided,Ifelltopiecesandsobbedmyeyesout”(ibid.).97Iinterpretthat,20yearslater,theshockandpainoflosingNicholasthatoverwhelmedthechildcouldstilloverwhelmthemanandleadtoaninnerexperienceofcollapseandfragmentation.

3.3.3. NoContainmentTheonepersontowhomthesurvivingtwinwouldhaveturnednaturallyforemotionalcontainmentisthetwinwhohasdied.Inhisabsence,thesurvivorturnstohisparents.Ihavefoundthatparentsandolder siblings, even when their own inner resources are substantially depleted, may provide vitalsupport,comfortandreassurancetothesurvivor,buttheycannotreplacethelostco-twinasconfidantandemotionalcontainer.Thereisnotthesameleveloftrust.Amongthe“gift[s]”oftwin-ship(p.14),Timothyprioritises“totalempathy”(p.10).Theywereeach“socompletely”oneachother’s“wavelength”(p.214),asiftheysharedonemind(pp.13-14).Further,“Ifone of us were in difficulty, the other would immediately help. Likewise we shared any worries.”(p.10).He remembers that, “whenwewere sevenyearsold,Nickoften lay awakeand talkedofhisconcernsabouttheschoolyearahead..IwantedtogotosleepbutinsteadIlayawakeandlistenedtohisworries.”(ibid.).Iamputinmindof“thekindtwins”observedbyPiontelli(1989,pp.420-424).TheboyswerestillsharingabedroomwhenNicholasdied.

Upon learningofNicholas’death, therewasadesperateturningbyTimothytowardshisparents:he“was longingtobereunitedwithmyparents” (p.126).Hewrites tohismother,“Ican’t tellyouhowmuchIamlookingforwardtoseeingyou”(p.129).“Whenalone”,he“desperatelywantedtobewith”her(ibid.).Finallypermittedtogoinhiswheelchairtoseehisfather,“beingclosetohimmademefeelreassuredthat lifewouldgoonwithsomenormality”(p.129).Beingtogetherwithhisparents inthesameward brought him comfort, despite their “incapacitated” state (pp.149,374). Hewrites of thetenderkissestheywouldgiveeachother(pp.135,145,154).His“favourite”timeofthedaywasitsend,whenhe“couldmoveovertomyparents’beds,whichwerenowdrawntogether,andliedownwiththem”,wheretheywouldremain“huddledtogether”untillightsout(p.154).Iinterpretthatallthree

97Cf.thechildTimothywho,whenfirsttoldofNicholas’death,wantedto“crymyeyesout”(p.125)

44

were soothedby thephysicalproximityofeachother98,but thatall threeweredeeply shockedandphysicallyandmentallyreelingfromthebombandNicholas’death99.Norton’sarrival in theeveningof theexplosion leftTimothy feeling“veryreassuredtoknowhewasaround”(p.111).Bythenextday,allhissiblingswerethere,which“fundamentallyalteredmystateofmind,makingmefeelsafeandsecure”(p.119).Upondischargefromhospital12days later,Timothyfelta“warm,secureglow”,“satintheheavilyarmouredcarcossetedbetweenmysistersandfeelingverycaredfor”(p.155).He“neededagreatdealofmothering”andhismother“wasclearlyunabletodothat” (p.162), thoughsometimeshe“longedforher” (pp.162,177).Hissistersprovidedsubstitute“mothering” andnecessaryphysical care (p.162).Amandawashedhim “as shehaddonewhenNickand Ihadbeen tiny tots” (p.157).Timothywrites, “Forweeks Idependedonmysisters in thisway”(ibid.). He “felt secure and content” in the company of his older adult siblings (p.155 andpp.111,117,157), but he did not confide in them. He kept his tears and fears to himself (p.xi andsee3.5.1to3.5.2below.)

3.3.4. Dissociation;Denial;Disavowal;DeadTwinFantasyI have found that the psyche, damaged and depleted by the severe shock of the trauma and theintenseemotionalpainof loss,usesmechanismsofdissociation,denialanddisavowal toprotect thesurvivorfromfurtheremotionalsuffering.Thechildisunreadytoprocesstheloss.Itisunbelievable.Itisknownandnotknown.Abelief inthedeadtwin’ssurvivalsomehowandsomewherepersists,andthatthesurvivorcontinuestosharehislifewithhim. Timothy, watching his grandfather’s state funeral on the television, “felt like a detached spectatorwatchingadistantceremonythatjusthappenedtoincludemylovedones.Itwasasifsomethinginsidehadsnappedanddisconnectedfromreality”(p.145).Hewas“dry-eyed”becausehewas“emotionallynumb”(ibid.).DuringthehospitalserviceforNicholas,therewasa“gulf..betweenwhatIwasfeelingand what I viscerally knew I needed to feel” (p.149). His emotions were “flat and muted” (ibid).ReturningbyconvoytoLondon,hefelt“verycutofffromtheconvoy,frommyfather,fromNick,fromourpastandfromnormality”(p.161).AtNicholas’grave2weekslater,“IfeltasthoughIhadarrivedata station but the train had left. I wanted to feel pain but was hit by numbness” (p.167). At hisgrandfather’sgrave,“Iwasphysicallypresent,butemotionallyabsent”(p.182). IhavefoundthatthetraumaoflosingNicholasinterferedwithTimothy’s“capacitytoapprehendthereal”(1.4.2above).Asnotedin3.3.2,onfirstlearningofNicholas’death,Timothyhadthe“sensation”there had been amistake and “thewrong twinwas dead” (p.126). The “story” had an “underlyingflaw”,goingagainsta“basictruth”oftheirtwin-ship:“physicallyNickwasmorerobustthanmesoifoneofusweregoingtodieitwouldbeme,nothim”(ibid.).Afewmonthslater,onwhatwouldhavebeenthetwins’joint15thbirthday,eachtimeTimothyopenedabirthdaycard,“itseemedtherewasanerror as the cardswere addressed ‘Darling Timmy’ instead of ‘Darling Nicky and Timmy’” (p.189). IhavefoundthatthelossofNicholasbroughtsubstantiallyalteredTimothy’srelationshipwithreality.

98Timothywrites (p.149), “Myemotionswere flat andmuted.But I didnotworry; I hadmyparents and thatmatteredmoretomethananything.”99pp.112,115-116,117,119,121,122,127,131,133,135-136.

45

Timothy“hadnever seen [Nicholas]dyingordead” (p.355).Hewrites that,hadhe seenhisbodyorcoffin,orattendedhisfuneral,he“might..haveacceptedhisdeathmorequickly”(p.175).100 Arrivingathisgraveaweekafterthefuneral,“mychild’smindhunginblankincomprehension.Ihadwonderedif he reallywas in that graveat all” (pp.355-356).He recalls “trying to imaginewhathe looked like,inside the coffin” (p.167): “ .. had he really died? Had his funeral truly taken place?Was his coffingenuinelyinthatgrave?Itallseemedsounlikely”(ibid.).Hewas“hopelesslyoutofmydepth”(ibid.).“[W]ithout any first-hand proof, his death seemed little more than hearsay” (p.180). He had the“absurd” “idea” that “perhaps for some unfathomable reason everyone had conspired tomakemethinkhewasdead.Itoldmyfamilythis,addingthatIknewitwasrubbish”(ibid.).Timothywrites,“Itwasausefulmetaphortoshowhowunrealhisdeathseemed”(ibid.).101Timothy feltNicholas“couldwalk into the roomatanymoment” (ibid.).Hismother recorded inherdiarythatTimothyfelt“hemustputhisthingstidy–ashe[Nicholas]did”;“thathedreamsabouthim;and“sometimesexpects to findhimupstairswhengoing tobed” (p.180).Timothy feltNicholaswas“merelyabsent”and thathewas “still somehowsharingmy lifewithhimwhilehe remainedoutofsight” (p.175).So thesalmonTimothycaught,whileconvalescingafter thebomb,wassomethinghe“feltIsimplyhadtoland”,“formyself”and,amongothers,“forNick”(p.172).Aschool-friendgavehima radio-controlled model airplane, which he managed to finish building and fly, because it was “adreamwhichNickandIhadshared”(p.204).Hedoubtedhisabilitytofinishtheplanebutpersevered,“whenIremindedmyselfthatNickwouldundoubtedlyhavecompletedthejob”(ibid.).Bothboyshadbeen“seton”goingtoCambridge.Timothybecame“very focusedonreachingtheuniversity; itwasthe lastmilestoneonwhichwehadjointlyplannedandIverymuchwantedtoaccomplishourgoal”(myemphasis)(pp.212-213).102

3.3.5. Traumaendures103Ihavefoundthatthetraumacontinuestoexist-raw,unprocessed,terrifyingandfrozenintime-ina‘no-go’areaofthesurvivor’sunconscious,emerginginnightmares,hyper-sensitivityandflashbacks.104Theprospectofcontactwiththetraumaandtheassociatedemotionsisofitselfterrifying.

100 Timothy’smotheralsohadnotseenherdyingordeadsonnorattendedhisfuneral.Shealsohad“difficultyinacceptingNickwasreallydead”(p.175).AskedbyNannyifshehadrememberedflowersforhisgraveonwhatwouldhavebeenhis15thbirthday,she“hadn’tthoughtofthisastomeheisn’ttherebutallaroundus”(p.189).101Itwasonlyattheveryendofhisyearofmourning,seeingthepathologist’sphotographsofNicholas’body,thatTimothy“knewforsure”that“hiswonderful,uniquelifeforcehadgoneforever”(p.356).

102NorrisMcWhirter,(whoseidenticaltwinhadalsobeenkilledbytheIRA),saidtoTimothy,“theonlyplanistodoublerather thanhalfone’saspiration for the future” (p.191).Theaddressat theSt.Paul’smemorial serviceincludedthestatementthat“Apartof[Nicholas’]spirit,Iamsure,livesoninhisbrotherTimothy”(p.196).103cf.1.4.1above.104cf.therescuers’traumatisedresponses.Onesaidthatthesmellofdiesel“foryearsafterwards”“wouldbringthewholememoryback”(p.282).Another,wheninterviewedbyTimothy,“respondedasifIhadthrownaswitchinside him” (p.283): “it was as if an electric charge passed into him” and “he looked shocked, horrified, lostalmost,asifhewasseeingitagain”,“amanpossessedbythesceneinsidehishead”(pp.283-284).Forhim,theexperience“willbeinourmindsfortherestofourdays”(p.284).Nicholas’“lifelessface”hadstayed“eversince”

46

ThetraumaofthebombwasboundupinevitablywiththetraumaofTimothy’s lossofNicholas.Thenightbeforehis15thbirthday,Timothyawoke“veryfrightened”afteranightmareinwhichhe“heardthe explosion and then the sound ofwater and pieces of boat raining into the sea” (p.189). A fewmonths later, he awoke “shaken to the core”by a nightmare thatNicholaswasdead (3.3.1 above).Hearingthevoiceofoneofhisrescuersatafamilyevent,hehadan“extraordinarysensation”andwas“transfixed”(p.183).105Ayearlater,afast-movingtrainoverheadashewalkedunderarailwaybridge“tookmecompletelybysurprize,terrifyingme”(p.229).106Heexperienced“flashinglights”“forsometime”(p.144)and,for24years,thesmellofdieselgavehim“flashbackstobeingin[myrescuers’]boat,freezingcoldandcoveredindiesel”(pp.364,282).For some 20 years, Timothy experienced auditory flashbacks to “the sound of the bomb” (pp.229-230).107Though he “could not predict or control it”, he worked out that “subconsciously” he was“connectingelectricalcircuitrywithdetonation”(ibid.).Thesoundwouldbetriggeredbythe‘click’inhis car’s electrics before his car-phone would ring; opening the fridge and the light coming on; orturning on or off a light. Timothy’s understanding was that “subconsciously” he “must have beenconnecting the click with a radio signal, and hence with the bomb, which was almost certainlydetonatedbyradiocontrol”(ibid.).IinterpretthissymptomasindicativeofthecontinuedexistenceofthetraumaofthelossofNicholasinanencapsulatedareaofTimothy’smind,connectionwithwhichwas feared to be emotionally explosive. This interpretation finds support in Timothy’s account ofmeeting the men who recovered Nicholas’ body from the sea. He writes (my emphasis) that “theunknowndetailwashorrendous”,buthewas“soothed”by“theknowndetail”,“feelingasifadevicethat had the potential to blow up in my mind had been defused” (p.351) (my emphasis). In hischaptertitled“TheSoundoftheBomb”,Timothywritesabouthispsychotherapysessionsandhowhe“slowly learnedtoseeconnectionsandrecogniseprocesses .. that Ihadoverlookedbefore” (p.231).Histherapy“wasdoingmegood”(p.231)and“tomysurprize, InoticedthatIwashearingthebombless and less” (ibid.). I interpret that, through his therapy, making connections in his mind to thetraumaticeventsofthepast(andtopeople)hadbecomelessdangerous.The rawness of his traumatic loss, despite the passage of time, is vividly conveyed by Timothy’saccountof the “maelstrom” insidehim, “unleashed”byhis visits to Ireland in2003-2004,which lefthim“incapableoftouchingbusinessorpersonalmattersotherthanthesole,all-invadingissueofthebomb”(p.364).

withoneofthemenwhorecoveredhisbody(p.345).Another“forweekshadnightmaresfromwhichhewouldwakescreamingandcrying”(p.348).105He“felt thehaironthebackofmyneckstickingup[and]thewholeworldseemedtostandstill” (ibid.).“Apowerful,distantmemorycameback”ofhearingthesamevoice“intheboat,afterIwaspulledfromthewaterfollowingtheexplosion”(p.183).106Hewasleft“screaminginfear”and“walkedonshakinglikealeaf”(p.229).107Timothy writes that he found the sound “eerie”, but also “reassuring”, since it “proved I was feelingsomething”(p.230).Myinterpretationisthat,tothecontrary,itprovidedunconsciousreassurancethathewasnotfeelinganything.

47

3.4. Loss

3.4.1. LostTwinasLovedObjectI have found that intense emotional suffering attributable to loss of and separation from a deeply-lovedobjectisexperiencedbythechildwhosetwindies.Timothy’svisitstoIrelandin2003-2004allowedhimto“reconnect”to“feelingswhichIhadbrieflyfeltbutwhichIhadnotbeenabletoresolveasachild”(p.xii).Withrespecttothose“brieflyfelt”feelings,Ihave referred to his shock, bewilderment, terror, loneliness and sadness.108This sub-theme refersspecifically to the intense pain of being without and missing his beloved brother. Watching hisgrandfather’stelevisedfuneralserviceinastateofnumbness109,Timothy“feltacrackopeninsideme”andknew“somelatentemotionwasbeginningtostir”(p.145):“ahorriblefeelingofseparationcameover me and at last tears came to my eyes” (ibid.) After the hospital service for Nicholas, he felt“strange” and “horribly absent from my home, my siblings, and most of all from Nick” (p.149).110DischargedfromhospitalandaloneintheCastlebedroomhehadsharedwithNicholas,finallyhaving“thesolitudeIwaslookingfor”,spottingafavouritegametheylovedtoplay,Timothythought“Iwouldneverplaywithhimagain” (p.156).Hewrites,“Heavingsobsandbucketingtears, Imissedhimthenmore than Ihadeverbelievedpossible” (ibid.).Hecontinues,“Now Iwas feelinghisdeath inanewway,asapain,thepainwhichNickandIhadbeenunabletoguessat,sittinginthisroomandlookinginto each other’s eyes not long before” (ibid.) (3.3.1 above). Returned to school, Timothy was“homesickwithanextratwist”,instinctivelylookingtothedeskbesidehimforNicholasattheendofeachclass(p.185).Fouryearslater,“terrified”of“failing”togetintoCambridge,“thosewerethehourswhen[he]mostwishedNickwaswithme.Thelonelinesswasalmostoverpowering”(p.213).

3.4.2. LostPre-TraumaWorldandExistenceIhavefoundthatdeathofaco-twininvolvesmultiplelossesforthesurvivor.111Thesurvivingtwinloseshis“childhood”andhis“innocence”(p.255).ReturnedtotheCastle,“aswellasmy scabs”112, Timothywas “sheddinga goodpartofmypreviousexistence” (p.157).Returned toLondon, he had moved “from the old, rural world of my childhood to the new urban one of mysiblings”(p.162).Theyhadall“movedupageneration”andhe“feltgrown-upandfree”(p.157).Beforethe bomb, his understandingwas that of “an innocent fourteen-year-old”who “did not ask difficultquestions” (p.367).113Now Timothy had knowledge that he and his family were murder targets

1083.3.1and3.3.21093.3.4110AfamilyfriendcommentedshortlybeforeTimothylefthospitalthathewas“nowbeginningtofeel..sobadly”theseparationfromNicholas(p.154).111Cf.1.4.3above112whichhisbodywasshedding“fromthedozensofsmalltearsinmyskin…likeatreelosingleavesinautumn”(p.157)113 Thechildrenhadbeenonly“dimlyaware”oftheeverydayrealitiesoftheTroubles(p.41).Theirresponsetothe arrival of detectives on rota duty at the Castle had been to play at setting up check-points in the Castle

48

(pp.208-209).114Hischildhoodandinnocencehadbeenviolated.Joanna,arrivingafterthebombattheCastle, “a place of happiness throughout her life”, had “sadly” thought, “Well, that’s buggered thisplace forever” (pp.116-117). Their11-year-old cousin, India, laterwrote, “Partofmychildhoodhadbeenraped”(p.120).115Thesurvivorloseshisparentsastheywerebeforetheloss.Timothy’sparents’absence116was“sadandstrange”(p.157).Theywerebroken-heartedoverthelossofNicholas.117Inevitably,Timothy’spresencewas a sad reminder ofNicholas’ absence118andwas sometimes eclipsedby that absence. Timothy’sfather wrote from hospital (my emphasis), “it nearly breaks our hearts to see only Timothy left”(p.142).119Similarly,whenTimothy telephoned “andgavemyparents ablow-by-blowaccount”afterlandingasalmonwhilestayingwithfamilyfriendsafewweeksafterthebomb,hismother’sresponsewasthat“Nickmusthavearrangedit”(p.173).120ThelossofNicholasplacedTimothy’smotherunderimmenseemotionalstrain.121Grief limitedheravailabilitytoTimothy.122However,her journalforthe

grounds (pp.39-40). Amanda remembers feeling “uncomfortable” about the history of English injustices inIreland, “as if there had been an unseen barrier to us truly integrating into village life” (p.276). The family’sisolationandlackofcontactwiththelocalsmadethemvulnerable:“wemaynothavelivedinanivorytower,butinourgranite castlebehindanestatewall andcrestedgatesweweredivided sociallyandphysically from thecommunity”(p.266).114Violentdeathanddangeraffectingfamilymembersinwartimewasnolongerinhistorybooks(pp.26-27).115The themeof violation and desecration of childhood and innocence resonates elsewhere. Therewas a 13-year-oldboyinoneoftherescuers’boats.Althoughtherescuerssoughtto“shelter”himbysendinghim“downintothecabin”(p.85),laterthateveninghewas“pale,shakingandintears”(p.98).Timothywritesaboutoneofthedoctorsintheaftermathofthebomb“watchingasmallchildplayinginapoolofmygrandfather’sbloodthathadcollectedinthesand”(pp.96,279).116TimothyreturnedtoEnglandinthecareofhissiblingswhilehisparentsremainedinSligohospitaluntiltheywerewellenoughtotravel(3.1.3)117Timothy’smotherwroteinherdiaryatthetimethatNicholas’deathwas“trueirreparableheartbreakforusall”(p.127).117BeingtoldofNicholas’deathwas“theworstmomentinmylife”(p.127).Hisfather’sresponsehadbeen“IwaswoundedinthewarandcouldbepositiveaboutitandgetbetterbutthisIcannotface”(p.112).(Iinterpretthisstatementtoreferalsototheemotionalwoundofthelossofhisolderbrotherwhowasexecutedduringthewar.)Timothy’sfather’s“braincouldnotacceptit”;overthenextfewdays,he“wasstillaskingaboutNickandsufferingafresheachtimesomeonetoldhimhewasdead,sayingthroughhistears,‘PoorlittleNicky’”(pp.116-117).ThiswasamanwhomTimothyhadneverpreviouslyseencry(p.4).118Timothywritesthat,whenhereturnedtoschoolandhisparentsreceivedhisschoolreport,heandtheywere“relievedthatIcoulddowellwithoutNickatmyside”,butwere“desperatelysad”that“Nickwasnotatmysidedoingwell”(p.193).119IntheambulancecarryingTimothyandhisfathertohospitalaftertheexplosion,Timothy’sfatheraskedthenurse,“Where ismyson?” (p.96).Timothyreplied,“I’mhere,Dad, I’mok” (p.97).His fatherwhispered,“But Ihaveanotherson….Hashebeenkilled?”(ibid.)120Timothywritesthatlater,whenhismotherwas“inclinedtorecallanachievementbyoneofherchildrenandautomaticallyattributeittoNick”,he“feltcomfortabletocorrecthergently”(p.212).121ReturningtoLondonafterthebomb,sherecordedinherjournalher“dread”(p.174)ofgoingintothetwins’bedroom.ReferringtoTimothyandPhilipcominghomefromschoolfortheChristmasholidays,shewrites,“Ourtwodarlingboysarrived.(Oh!Forthethird!)”(p.194).ReferringtoNicholasonNewYear’sEve,shewrites,“WhatpleasureisthereinwelcomingaNewYearofwhichheisnotapart?”(p.202).Shecontinues,“PerhapsIshouldmakemore effort to be jolly (I amat timesbut tears at others) aswell as cheerful” (ibid.). Timothy’smotheracknowledgedthe“miracle”ofhisandhisfather’ssurvival,“butforwhichlifewouldbeintolerable”,butitwasnocompensationforNicholas(p.202).122Shewritesinherdiary,“IwentuptoJoe’sroomtotrytofindsomeclothesTimwantedinNick’sschooltrunk–butfounditimpossiblephysically–andemotionally”(p.186).

49

weeksandmonthsafterthebombrecordshersorrowforwhathewasenduringandhercompassiontowardshim(pp.174,179,180,185).Lessthanaweekafterthebomb,stillgravelyinjured,shedictatesaletter:“MyheartbleedsespeciallyforlittleTimmy”(p.131).Timothy’sparentsrespondeddifferentlytothe lossovertime.123Inhis“WordswithNick”written24yearsafterthebomb,TimothytellsNicholas,“Mum’sok–sheneverreallystopsthinkingaboutyou”and “Dad’s psyche is sodifferent, he talks about youand I can tell it’s thehardest thing in his life.”(p.373).124Timothy’s father “rarely spoke about” Nicholas or any of his earlier significant losses(p.208).125Timothyandhismotherfound“talkingaboutNickcomforting”:“itdidnotmatterhowmanytimes she spoke about Nick”, since he was “happy to hear her thoughts each time and share hermemories”(pp.211,206andpp.132,208,222).Ihavefoundthat,afterthebomb,Timothyandhissiblingsbecameparentingchildren,understandingtheir role to look after their parents, “incapacitated” by their physical injuries and their continuedpsychologicalsufferingoverNicholas(pp.157,374,202).126Timothy’ssiblings“paidapriceforwhattheyenduredinIreland”(p.374;andpp.152,246).Afterwards,they“rebuilttheirlives”,though“thatistheirstory, not mine” (pp.374-375). I interpret that Timothy’s siblings each in different ways weresignificantlyaffectedandchangedby“whattheyenduredinIreland”(ibid.).I have found that the loss of the Castle and the family summers spent therewere very painful forTimothy.127Recalling their “sudden” and “final” departure less than a fortnight after the bomb, inlanguageevocativeofhis lossofNicholas inthewater,Timothy“hadtheimpressionofbeingsuckeddownawhirlpool,wrenchedfromtheplacesandpeopleweloved.Therewasnoceremonyandtimeonly for a few snatched goodbyes” (p.159).128I interpret Timothy’s loss of the Castle as signifying

123Cf.1.4.4above.124cf.TimothywritesinhisEpiloguethathe“foundmyparentslargelyunchangedbythebomb;theywerethesamestrong,caringpeople”(p.374).125Equally,Timothy’soldestbrotherfound“remindersofabsentfamily”“upsetting”(p.211).126Timothywrites that, before thebomb, “myparentshadoften found themselves at loggerheadswithPhilipwhich theyputdown tohis ‘troublesomeschoolboyperiod’” (p.153).Hecontinues, “[n]owthey foundhehad‘becomeamostgentlemanovernight’”(ibid.).ThisisthesamePhilipwho,returningtoschoolacoupleofweeksafterthebomb,“findsconcentrationdifficult”and is“distressed.. tofindall tracesofNicky ..gone..” (p.168).TimothyquotesfromthediaryofaCastleemployee,writtenontheeveningofthebomb,thatwhenapictureofNicholas cameon the screenduring the televisionnews thatnight, “[i]tnearlykilledPhilip” (p.104).Whenhissiblings visited him in hospital the day after the bomb, it was Philip who, Timothy remarked, was “plainlydisturbed” (p.117).Whilehisothersiblingssatdownandchatted,Philip“pacedquietlybackand forth” (ibid.).Philipwassupposedtohavebeenoutintheboatwiththetwinsthedayofthebomb,buthisgrandfatherhadrefusedtolethimcomewiththem(p.61).127 TimothyandhismotherfeltkeenlythelossofIrelandandtheirIrishfriends,andwerealoneinthefamilyinwantingtoreturn:“IrelandwasabereavementIfeltIwouldsomehowundooneday,byreturningandlearninghowtoenjoytheplaceagain”(p.208).128Timothy“nevercontemplatedthatourvisitsto[theCastle]wereatanend”(ibid.).Leavingbycar2dayslater,saying“We’llbeback”,hewas“shocked”whenhissiblings“chorus[ed]..wewouldnot”(p.159).Timothywrites,“Theytoldmewewouldneverbeallowedbackandevenifwewereitwouldneverbethesamehappyplace”(ibid.).

50

everythinghelostwithNicholas’death–theentiretyofhispre-traumaworldincludinghispre-traumainnerworld(pp.29,248).129

3.4.3. LostSenseofSafetyandNaturalOrder130Criticaltothesurvivor’spost-traumaworldisthelossofthesenseofsafetyinvolvedintheparentsandfamily functioning as a protective shield.131After thebomb, responsibility for the family’s security ispassedovertotheStateandbecomesamilitaryoperation(pp.116,120,133).Fordecadesafterwards,thefamilyfeltvulnerableandatriskoffurtherattack.132Closelylinkedtothelossoftheprotectiveshieldofthefamily,thereisthelostsenseofthenaturalandpredictable order of things and lost reliability of continuity in being.133For Timothy and his siblings“[t]he world had been turned upside-down; now we were looking after our parents” (p.157). Thisreversal of familial roles was one of many unnatural reversals.134The most vivid illustration of thedisorder and upheaval wrought in Timothy’s external and internal worlds is his account of visitingNicholas’graveforthefirst time.Whenhe lastvisitedthevillagegraveyardnearthefamilyhome, ithad been “a beautiful summer’s evening” and he and Nicholas had been fishing with their father(p.166). They had “all” walked “to a corner of the graveyard filled by generations of Knatchbulls”(pp.166-167).Twoemptyplotsremained.Timothy’sfather“explainedthatheandourmotherwouldbeburiedthere”(p.167).Timothyasked,“’Thenwhatwillhappen?”‘That’sforyoutoworryabout’,myfathersaid,chuckling”(ibid.).“[N]owtheplacelookedverydifferent”(ibid.).Hecontinues,“Gonewasthe neat area of undisturbed grass and in its placewere twomonstrous piles of raw brown earth,toppedbygrasssquaresandtheremainsofflowers”(ibid.).

3.4.4. LostIdentity;LostPartofSelf;InternalisedDeadnessThissub-themereferstothelossofthesurvivingtwin’spre-traumapersonalityandidentity.Thereisidentityconfusion.135Timothy’stwin-shiphadbeencentraltohis identity,notonlyforhimself(p.10),

129Oneofthenursesremarked,seeingoffthefamilyfromthehospitalbyhelicopter,thatitwas“theendofanera” (p.160).Decades later, remembering the family summers spentat theCastle, Johannadescribed themas“thepromisedland”,adding“Iknowwecannevergothere.Evenifwecoulditwouldnotbethesame”(p.368).130Cf.1.4.2above.131Timothydevotesachapterofhisbooktoaclose investigationofhowtheGarda(orguards) failedtoguardhimandthefamily(pp.309-321).132pp.83,114,117,118,123,128,130,132,143,155,159-160,161,198,199,208,209,216,225-226,245.133Onthemorningofthebomb,NicholaswaspractisinghisgolfswingnexttotheCastlewhenoneoftheballshehitcrashed intosometrees.HesaidtoPhilip,“Itdoesn’tmatter, I’ll find it later” (p.63).Nicholas’death inthebombmeantthat“later”couldnolongerbereliedupon;itscontenthadbeenrenderedwhollyuncertain.134Hisfirstthought,beingtoldofNicholas’death,hadbeenthat“thewrongtwinwasdead”,because“itwentagainstabasictruth”thathewastheweakertwin(3.3.4).Returningtoschool,attheendofclasshe“gatheredmybooksandinstinctivelylookedtothedeskbesidemeforNick”,onlytosufferhisabsenceafresh(p.185).His15th birthdaywas “the only day I felt nothing but sadness from start to end” (p.189). Opening presentswas“horrible”;openingcards,hefelt“therewasanerror”astheywereaddressedtohimonly;andhe“cutacakeallonmyown”(p.189).135ThetelegramfromtheDublinambassadorinformingtheLondonForeignOfficeaboutthebombmisidentifiedTimothyas thedeadtwin (p.99).At theCastle,adetectivetoldthewaiting family that“oneof thetwins”wasmissing,butwasunabletoidentifywhich(p.101).Carriedashoreafterthebombandlying“wrappedinasheet”

51

but for others.136I have found that survivorship replaces twin-ship as the surviving twin’s definingidentity(p.113).137Ihave found that the survivordoesnot feelwhole; there isahole inhis life.138Theexperience isofpsychicamputation.139Myinterpretationisthat, justasfollowingamputationofa limb,theamputeecanhavethesensationofa ‘ghost’or ‘phantom’ limbinplaceoftheamputated limb,thedeadtwinhauntsthepsycheofthesurvivingtwin.Thelossisexperiencedaslossofpartoftheself.Referringtohis “numbness”atNicholas’gravesideshortlyafterhisdeath,Timothy reproducesanextract fromatextbyanothersurvivingidenticaltwin(referredtoin3.5.1below),whosuggeststhattwinsshareanundifferentiatedpartofthemselves,andthatpart“willdieinthesurvivingtwin”,thattherewillbe“anactualdeadeningofsomefractionofthelivingorganism”(p.167).Theresultisthatthereisa“partialdeath”of the surviving twin (ibid.); cf.Bion’saccountofhowhediedafterwitnessing the traumaticdeathofSweetingneartheendoftheFirstWorldWar(discussedinColes,2011,p.34).

3.5. LoneandLesserSurvivorIdentity

3.5.1. AlonenessandWithdrawalIhavefoundthatthesurvivor, fearing forhissurvivalwithouthis twin,withdraws.This increaseshisexperienceofalonenessandvulnerability.

on the floor of the Pier Head Hotel, Timothywasmisidentified to PaulMaxwell’s father as Paul, causing thefather a “devastatingblow”when “he realised itwasme” (pp.91,92).HearingofNicholas’ death3days later,Timothy“hadthesensationthatthewrongtwinwasdead”(p.126).However,“confusing[ly]”,healsofelt“relief”thathe,Timothy,wasalive(ibid.).136Onthemorningofthebomb,hisgrandfathermethimenteringthediningroom.He“stoppedandwithonehandliftedmychin.Hesawmymoleandnowknewwhichtwinhewasgreeting.Leaningdownhekissedmeandsaid,‘MorningTimmy’”(pp.60-61).Timothycontinues,“Allmylife,familyandfriendshadlookedforthatmole,proofasitwasofmyidentity.Thatwasthelasttime.”(p.61).Timothy’sfatherwritesfromhishospitalbedtoafamilyfriendabouthow,whentheireldestwas17,heandhiswife“startedourlastchild,whichturnedouttobedarlingNicholasandTimothy..ourmarvellousidenticaltwinsons”(p.142).137Timothy’sintroduceshimselfinhisprefaceas,firstly,“aboy”,andsecondly,oneof“theonlysurvivors”(p.xi).Aschildren,thetwinshad“felttheworldwasouroyster”(p.11),eventotheextentoffeelingonoccasions“ataconsiderable advantageover” their father (p.9).Now thenewspapers captionedphotographsof Timothywith“SadTim”.OneofTimothy’smotivationsforleavingGordonstoun,“whereIwouldalwaysbethoughtofasOneoftheTwins”wastoseek“afreshstart,untaintedbysadremindersorsympathy”(p.209).138Timothywritesabouthisdiscovery inthe late80’sofaresearchstudyregardingsurvivingtwins,withsomesurvivorshaving“asenseofneverfeelingquitewholeagain”(p.219).Followinggraduation,he“hadanuneasyfeelingabouttheholeinmylifeleftbyNick’sdeath”(p.214).HavinglefttheuniversityheandNicholashadbothhopedtoattend,hehad“arrivedatthelastcrossroadswhichNickandIhadbeenabletoseeintheroadthenaheadofus”(p.213).139TimothyquotesNorrisMcWhirterdescribinghistwin’sdeathas“notabereavement,anamputation”(pp.190-191). I refer in 3.5.3 below to Timothy’s first trip back to the site of the explosion since the bomb, and how“appalled”hewasbyhis“unnaturalnumbness”:“Ihadheardofamanwhosearmwasseveredbymachineryandwholookeddownandpickeditup,registeringwhatwashappeningbutwithoutfeelinganypain”(pp.216-217).Iinterpretaconnectionbetweenthebrutallyseveredlimbandthebrutallyseveredtwin.Seealso1.4.3above.

52

In his wedding speech, Timothy told his guests that he had spent the previous 19 years “feelingstrangely alone” (p.236). I have found that the surviving twin seeks out solitude.140When told ofNicholas’death,Timothyhad“wantedtocurlupinmybedaloneandcryuntilIfellasleep”(p.294).141His “fear”was“formyself, that Iwouldnotknowhowto leadmy lifewithouthim” (pp.125-126).142Dischargedfromhospital,hewentforawalkwithhissiblings.Feelingtired,but“notwantingtoseemweak”,he“quicklysaidno”whentheyofferedtoaccompanyhimbacktotheCastle(p.155).“Aloneforthe first time since the bomb”, he “started to think I might collapse” and felt “really frightened”(ibid.).143Entering with his sister the bedroom he had shared with Nicholas, he “steadied” himself,remarkingthathehad“triedtohidemyfrailty”onhiswalk,andnowhewas“doingthesamewithmyemotions”(p.156).He“gavenohintofwhat Iwasfeeling inside”(p.155). Instead,he“shutthedoorandhadthesolitudeIwaslookingfor”(p.156).144Iinterpretthatthesurvivingtwin“shutsthedoor”onhisemotionalself(seefurther3.5.3below).

3.5.2. AdaptiveorCopingSelfIhave foundthat thesurvivor livesoutofa“coping”self.145Timothy’s“coping”self firstemerged inhospital.Tryashisparentsdidtohidetheirtears,theycouldnot(p.136).146Timothy“wantedtoeasetheirpainbuthadnowayofdoingsoapartfrombeinghappyaroundthemandinthisIbusiedmyself”(p.136).147“Overaperiodofmonths”afterthebomb,Timothy“piecedtogetheradailyroutinewithoutmy twin” and “was pleased to demonstrate to my parents that I was able to cope” (p.xi).148Thesurviving twinunderstands that his bereavedparents needhim to cope.Timothy “avoided crying infront ofmy parents because I did notwant them toworry aboutme” (p.154).149Timothy’smother

140Cf.PollockwritesabouthowdeQuincey,afterhis favouriteoldersisterdiedwhenhewasseven,withdrewinto books and “sought the most silent and sequestered nooks in the grounds about the house, or in theneighbouringfields”(Pollock,1978,p450).141Hewas“pleased”whenhis sisterandaunt left,becausehe“wanted tocrymyeyesoutbutnot in frontofthem”(p.125).Aftertheyleft,he“wouldhidemyfaceincasethenursesorpolicemanoutsidemydoorcouldseemecrying”(ibid.).142ThiswasalsoNorton’sresponse:“HowwillTimeverlive?Howwillhecope?”(p.131).Timothyquotesanothersurvivingtwinwho,uponthedeathofhisbrother,“weptquietly, feelingmyselfshrivelandweaken.Thetwinsweregone.Iwasalone.”[p.353].143Timothywriteshowhe“redoubledmyeffortsandconcentratedveryhard”.Having reached theCastleandmanagedtoopenthedrawing-roomdoor,he“hauledmyselfthefinalfewpacestothesofaandcollapsedintoadeepsleep”(p.155).144VisitingNicholas’grave,Timothy“askedtobealone”(p.167).Hismotherwasperplexedbyhis“wantingtogoon sleeping .. alone” in the twins’ bedroom (p.174). Receiving a letter from the Sligo Coroner, suggesting hemightonedayreturntoIreland,he“withdrewintoaroomatthebackofmyparents’Londonhome”toabsorbitscontents(p.5).9yearsafterthebomb,decidingtoreturntoIreland,he“decidednottotell”thefamilyhewasgoing;hisonlyplanwas“tospendsometimealonewithmythoughtsand feelings” (p.215).Arriving there,he“justwantedtobealonewithmymemories”(ibid.).145muchasTimothyrecordsvisitinganelderlyAnglo-IrishfamilyfriendandheirtoLisadell,“aonceproudandstatelyhouse”,livingoutof“hertinykitchen,theoneroomintheghostlymansionshekeptheated”(p.217).146Beforethebomb,hehadonlyseenhismothercryonceandhadneverseenhisfathercry(pp.4,136).147Heinventedadailymenuforthem,whichhewroteoutdaily(p.137).Intheevenings,he“askediftheywouldpreferHorlicks,Ovaltineorcocoa”andpassedontherequeststothenursingstaff(p.154).148Hewritesthatthe“balance”he“struck”was“notabadone;itgotmethroughthetoughestmonthsandletmeenjoylife”(p.175).149Cf.1.4.4above.

53

wrote to him in hospital, “I know how good and brave you are being and an inspiration to us all”(p.129).150

TheSligoCoroneradvisedTimothythattherewas“agreatresponsibility”onhim“tohelpyourparentsthroughthisterribleyear”(p.5).151Heurgedhim“tobeanexampletothecivilizedcommunityandtotheoncominggenerations”.ThisadmonitionneedstobeunderstoodintheparticularcontextofEarlMountbatten’sfameandroyalconnections.152ThismeantthatTimothy’s“copingself”wasunderthepublicgazeonaninternationalstage.Iinterpretthatthefamilywasaccustomedtomaintainingtheircomposureinpublic,whateverthementalstrain,sothatputtingabravefaceonitwasafamilytrait,amatteroffamilyhonour,andabadgeofbelongingtocivilisedsociety.153Timothywritesthat,aftertheWhitehallceremony4yearsafterthebomb,“[a]susualundertheglareofpublicityandthemightofthestate,theday leftmewithacustomarysenseofdisconnectbetweentheshowwemadeforthepublicandtheemotionalturmoilunderneath”(p.211).

3.5.3. EmotionalConstrictionandRestrictedLivingThis sub-theme refers to the process of dissociation (3.3.4) becoming part of the surviving twin’sidentity, so that the survivor becomesemotionally constricted. The survivor fears powerful emotionbreakingthroughand,whenitdoes, it isexperiencedasshameful.Thesurvivorlivesarestrictedandinhibitedlife.Upon first observing his “emotional numbness” in hospital (3.3.4), “[i]t felt unnatural” and, “deepdown”,Timothy“knewitwaswrong”,butitwasalso“convenientasitallowedmetosailthroughtheday and comfortmy parents” (p.145). Hewas aware of “the gulf that existed betweenwhat I wasfeelingandwhat IviscerallyknewIneededtofeel” (p.149). I interpretTimothy’s“passionforflying”(p.214)asametaphor for thedistancehekept fromhis “visceral”emotions.Visiting Ireland9years

150Acoupleofdays later shewrote toherhusband regardingTimothy, “Ihearhe isbeingquitemarvellous inkeepinghis peckerup” (p.131).Around the same time,his fatherwrote to theArchbishopofCanterbury thatTimothy“isrecoveringveryfastandIknowwillmakeamarvellouslifeofhisown”(p.142).FamilyfriendswithwhomTimothystayedafewweekslaterwerequicktoreassurehisparentsthat“heisabsolutelyallright”and“notdamaged”(pp.173-174).151Whenhisoldestbrother,Norton,hadaskedtheanaesthetist,TonyHeenan,“HowwillTimeverlive?Howwillhecope?”,thereplywasthat“itwasnotmehewasconcernedaboutbutmyparents‘becauseyoungmindsgetoverthings;olderonesfinditmoredifficult’”(p.131).152The family was on public display, from the memorial service at St. Paul’s Cathedral (pp.194-197) to theunveilingbytheQueenofhisgrandfather’sstatueinWhitehall4yearslater(p.211).Theylivedouttheaftermathofthebombasrepresentativesofthestate.153Timothywritesabouthisparents’ “utterdetermination”at theendof theSt.Paul’s service,despite “threebroken legs and bodies still riddled with bomb injuries” to get out of their wheelchairs and walk down thecathedral’s “magnificent” steps, photographers “snapping .. like fury” (p.197). Next day, the pictures were“plasteredacrossnewspapers”(ibid.).Timothy’smotherremembersfeeling“veryfrightened“atthetime(ibid.).Herthoughtwas,“Idon’tthinkI’mgoingtomakeitbutIhaveto”(ibid.).AskedbyPaulMaxwellifduringhistimeintheNavy,hehadeverfeltfrightened,Timothy’sgrandfatherhadreplied,“Yesbutyoubloodywelldon’tshowit”(p.259).TimothyremembersheandNicholasbeingtearfulontheirreturntoschoolaftersayinggoodbyetotheir mother, and their grandmother “command[ing]’ them, “Don’t look back, boys” (p.12). A family friend,writing to Timothy’s parents after Nicholas’ funeral, had remarked with respect to the surviving siblings,“Needlesstosayitwasaterribledayforthembuttheyreallywereincompletecontrol”and“youneedhavenofearsaboutthemnotbeingabletocope”(pp.141,152).

54

afterthebomb,hefelt“asifIwasfloatingonamagiccarpetaboveanemotionallandscapethatwouldturntodustifIsetfootinit”andthathewas“landingbehindsomeformofinvisiblebarrier,asortofemotional Iron Curtain” (pp.215-216 and p.263).154Standing on the cliff top overlooking where thebombhadexploded,allhecould“detectwasacold,rawnumbness”(ibid.).Hewrites,“Ihadheardofamanwhosearmwasseveredbymachineryandwholookeddownandpickeditup,registeringwhatwashappeningbutwithoutfeelinganypain”(pp.216-217).Hewas“appalled”atthenumbnesshewasexperiencing(p.216).155He“knewinsidemetherewasapainthathadnotyethitme,andIknewwhenitdiditwouldbeoverpowering”;he“dreaded”it(p.217).Onthesamevisit to Ireland,Timothyhadspottedhis father’soldghillie inthedistance:“Partofmewantedtorunoverandshakehimbythehand..ButIknewIwouldbreakdown”(p.216).156Writingaboutthoseoccasionswhenemotiondidbreakthrough,Timothyusesthelanguageofbreakdownandshame.Watchinghisgrandfather’stelevisedobituaryinhospital,hewrites,“destroyedbytheending,Ibrokedown”(p.138).Sayinggood-byetohisfatherbeforereturningtoschoolafterthebomb,Timothy“wanted to show I was strong and ready for the big step ahead, and to hide my doubt, fear andloneliness” (p.185), but “[s]uddenly I lost control and burst into tears in front of his mortifiedemployees”(ibid.).ArrivingatSt.Paul’sCathedral2months later,“steeled”and“sure Iwasgoingtokeepmy composureunder thepublic gaze”, “I brokedown suddenly. Itwasall toomuchand I hadnowhere to turnandnohanky to cry into” (p.195). 10years later, a journalist interviewingTimothyobserved that, when talking of Nicholas, “how carefully he controls his voice”, his “look ofconcentrated passion, and his hand presses his chest as though his heart is in imminent danger ofleapingout” (p.220).1576yearsafter that,at theendofaweekendwithhisparents in Irelandwhentheywereabout to leave for theairport, “Iunexpectedlybrokedownandwept. Itwasperhaps thefirsttimemyfatherhadseenmecrysince1979”(p.227).158IinterpretthatTimothyfeltunmannedbythoseoccasionswhenemotionoverwhelmedhim.Hewritesthat,aftertheincidentatSt.Paul’s,“FromthatdayIcarriedahandkerchiefinmypocketwhereverIwent”(p.195).

3.5.4. LesserandWeakI have found that the survivor’s sense of himself, reflecting his divided, depleted, mutilated anddeadenedinnerworld,isofinternallackandasareducedandlesserversionofwhohewasbeforetheloss.Afterthebomb,therewasarealitytoTimothy’sphysicalweaknessandhisfearsforsurvivalwithoutNicholas(3.5.1).159Timothy’slateracademicandcareersuccessshowedhe“coulddowellwithoutNick

154Heflew“alongthecoastspottingthebeachesandislands,baysandby-waysofmychildhood”(p.217).155The next day, walking along the beach and looking at the Castle, he “was feeling the same unnaturalnumbnessthatIhadfeltthedaybefore”(p.217).156Hereversedthecar,“drivingawaywithalumpinmythroat”(p.216).157Timothywritesthat,afewyearsearlier,hehadcomeacrossanoteNicholashadwrittentohimwhich“wasenoughtomakemyheartmissabeat”and“mademecryatlength”(p.211).158Finallymeetinghisrescuers24yearsafterthebomb,hewritesthathe“chokedonemotionandsatforafewmomentsinsilencefeelingfoolish”(p.257).159Recognising that “without Nick it was going to be a very different experience”, he “did not feel up to”returningtoschool(p.178).Alaterplannedreturnwaspostponedbecausehewasstill“fartooweak”(p.179).

55

by my side” (p.193). However, his visit to Ireland in his mid-twenties (3.5.3) had also shown that,though he regarded himself as “strong and bold” and “aman onmy own” (p.215), somethingwasholding him back from fully participating in his life.160By his early thirties, he had been “so oftencomplimentedforbeingso‘strong’”161,thathe“sometimeswonderedif Ihadascrewlooseandhadturnedintoapsychopath”(p.230).He“feltterriblysadandlonely”whenhewasalone,and“knewthiswasunhealthyandabnormal” (p.231).162However,marryinghiswife,he“felta transitionoccurring”(p.236)163. In “marriageand fatherhood”he founda “new levelofemotional security”.However,hestill had“mentalandemotionalwoundswhich refused togoaway” (p.xi).After thebirthofhis firstchildandexperiencing“thedeepparentalinstincttoprotect”,he“wantedtobeemotionallystrongforthefamilyIwasstarting”(pp.238-239).He“knew”heneededto“returntoIrelandandfinallyaddresswhathadbeenholdingmebackforsolong“(pp.239,241).164

3.6. MourningIhavefoundthatthepsychicimpactofthetraumaticlossinchildhoodenduresuntilthelosshasbeenfullyandactivelymourned.Mourningenablesthesurvivortodisidentifyfromthedeadtwinandrefindthelivingtwinasagoodinternalobject.

3.6.1. ActiveMourning;Crying;MemoryastimetravelTimothywrites that the kind of “deep and activemourning” he undertook as an adultwas “largelyunavailabletomeasaboy”(p.364).165Itinvolved “grappl[ing]withthetraumainclose-upandinslowmotionand fromeveryangle ..until theboxofunresolvedgriefunlock[ed]” (p.358).Hewrites that,“forme”, thiskindofmourning“providedmore thantherapy; itwas liberation” (ibid.). Ihave foundthat active mourning requires time166, attention167and knowledge168. Meeting the men who hadrecoveredNicholas’body,Timothy“wantedtoknow,deeplyandachingly”,“first-handandindetail”,

Therearepowerful resonanceswith the responseofTom, separated fromhis conjoined twin,Peter,observedandmovinglywrittenaboutbyMagagnaandDominguez(2009).160Timothywrites, “I knew sheunderstood”,whenhis therapist askedhimat the endof his therapy in 1997,“there’sstillsomethingholdingyouback,isn’tthere?”(p.228).161JohnMaxwell,fatherofPaul,toldTimothythathedidnotcryagainfor18yearsafterthedayofthebomb:“IfiguredIwouldhavetobestrongparticularlyformytwodaughters..”(p.262).162Despitehis “longing to finda soulmate”,hewas “singlewithanumberofbroken relationshipsbehindme,some of them long-lasting” (p.232). He writes that, “over the years, one after another I had brought myrelationshipstoanend”(ibid.).163“untilthenmydeepestbondhadbeenwithNick;nowitwaswithIsabella”(p.236)164He“neededtoexorcisetheremainingunresolvedgriefthatlingeredfromNick”and“gobacktoIrelandandexploreeverythingthathadlaindormantinmypsycheforsolong”(pp.239,241).165Cf.1.4.2above.166Timothywritesthat,“[h]adIspentmoretimeactivelymourning,thenIwouldhavehealedmorequicklyandsufferedless”(p.175).Ifhischildrenwereeverto“sufferbereavementwhenstillyoung”,hewould“urgethem,oncetheyareready,activelytomourn,ifitiswhattheywant”(p.358).167Timothy writes that for much of his year of visits to Ireland, he was “incapable of touching business orpersonalmattersotherthanthesole,all-invading issueof thebomb”(p.364).Freudwritesabouttheneedfor“an exclusive devotion to mourning which leaves nothing over for other purposes or other interests”(1917,p.244).168cf.1.4.2above:“Onecannotgrievewhatonedoesnotknow”(Reeves,1973,p.26).

56

“whathadhappenedtoNickimmediatelyafterthebomb”(p.346).169Thegatheringof informationinordertoknowthe“truth”,however“upsetting”,wascritical(p.279).Ihavefoundthatmourningthelosttwinisdeeplyemotional:Timothy“reconnectedtofeelingswhichIhadbrieflyfeltbutwhichIhadnotbeenabletoresolveasachild”(pp.xi-xii).Heneededtocryallhisunwepttears.170ReferringtohowTonyHeenan,thehospitalanaesthetist,hadhelpedNorton,to“pourouthisfeelings”,admonishingtheothersiblings,“Idon’twanttoseeanystiffupperlipsaroundhere”,Timothyhadnotexperienced“acompleteletting-goofmypent-upemotionsasawayofventingwhatwasbuildingup insidemeandwhichwas later to surfacechronically“ (pp.132-133).171TheextentofTimothy’sweepingoverthecourseofhisyearofvisits,dominatesPart3ofthebook.172

I have found that Timothy usedmemory as time travel to form a new relationship with Time. Thebomb stoppedTime for Timothy173. In Lacanian terms, an “epistemological rupture”occurredwhichfroze Space and Time (Davoine et al.,2004,p.88).With the recovery ofmemory,wormholes in Timewereopenedup.174Returningto Ireland,andanticipatingseeingtheCastlebefore itcame intoview,“suddenly .. Iwas lookingat itas Ihadasachild” (p.246).Visitinghis rescuers’home,“whathitmeimmediatelywasthedelicioussmellofthe..turf..onthefire”,which“transportedmemagicallybacktoboyhood”;he“pickedupapieceandturned itoverandoverbeforedropping it intotheembers,

169Havingheardthedetail,he“feltsoothedtohavegathereditup”(p.351andseep.282).Timothyalsoreferstohis ignoranceaboutthepoliticalsituationandhistoryofEnglishrule in Ireland,andabouttheambivalencefelttowardsthefamilybythelocalcommunity(p.276).170 Towardstheendofhisbook,TimothyreproducestheinscriptionfromMilton’sLycidasonthegravestoneofPaul Maxwell, which ends: “He must not float upon his watery bier/Unwept, and welter to the parchingwind/Withoutthemeedofsomemelodioustear”(p.363).(Infact,JohnMaxwelltoldTimothythathedidnotcryforanother18yearsafterthedayofthebomb(p.262)).Inhislettertohisrescuers,writtenafterhisdaughter’sbirth,Timothywritesthatoneofhis“greatestfrustrations”is“howrarelyIamabletocrythedeepcryIneedto”(p.240).Hecontinues,“Andsomepeoplemistakethetearsforpain,whenofcoursethey’renot,they’rethepaincomingout”,tellingthemthatwritinghislettertothemhadbeenlike“pullingabigsplinterofgriefandemotionoutofme,andthetearsandreliefhavebeenenormousinsodoing”(ibid.).His“waterfall”oftearsandwritinghisletterhadbeen“verytherapeutic”(p.241). 171Timothy remarks that the “resilience” shown by his siblingswould have been “augmented” by “such briefepisodesof release”, “withoutwhich theymayhavecracked” (p.133).Althoughhis familyencouragedhim“totalkandcryasmuchaspossible”(p.156),hewas“unsuretowhatextentIshouldletitout,orhow.”He“wouldhaveneededmorethanpermissionandencouragement”;he“wouldhaveneededexampleandpractice”(p.175).Whenhecried,hisfamily“cuddledandsoothed”him,whichhe“liked”,buthad“theunfortunateconsequenceofquicklydryingupmytearswhichwerethebesttonicofall”(p.156andp.125).172On his first visit to Ireland, the effect of approaching the Castle and seeing it coming into view was thatTimothy needed to pull in at the side of the road where, “[s]louched on a stone pillar beside a gate”, he“suddenlydissolvedintotears”(p.246).Havingdriventomeetwithhisrescuers,hewasunabletogetoutofthecar and “suddenly [he]was crying” (p.249). Instead, hedrove to thebeachwhere “my tears came in a silent,constantstream”,andhesataloneforhalfanhour“thebeachachannelformytears”(ibid.).173TimothywritesthatPaulMaxwellaskedhimthetimeaminuteorsobeforethebombexploded(pp.3,67).Heremembersthat,backthen,“timeseemedstrangelyirrelevant”(p.67).Whenhewastoldofthebomb,PeterNicholson,thebutlerattheCastlestoppedthekitchenclock(p.90).174WalkingontheMullaghmorestrandonthe24thanniversaryofthebomb,hefeltasiftheotherpeoplethere“didn’texist..TheywereinonedimensionandIwasinanother”(p.255).

57

mesmerised by the effect” (p.258).175Putting out to sea in his rescuers’ boat, “the stones of theharbourwall, thecolourofthewater, translucentgreen,and .. thesalty,boatysmells”,had lefthimfeeling“nothinghadchanged”andhewouldsoonseethefamily’sboat“andbewithGrandpa,Granny,Paul,Nick,MumandDadagain” (p.257).However, revisitingMullaghmoreat theendofhis yearofmourning,thethoughtthat,“Imightturnaroundandseemybrothersandsistersaschildrenatanymoment”“neverenteredmyhead”:“Isimplythought,‘Whatabeautifulspot’”(p.277).

3.6.2. Reunion;SeparationIhavefoundthatmourningenablesthesurvivortorelatetohislosttwininanewway.Thedeadtwinisfacedandseparatedfromandthepre-losslivingtwinisre-foundandre-establishedinthepsycheasagoodinternalobject.176Timothy closeshisbookwitha chapter titled “WordswithNick”, containinganaccountof “anhourthatwasthehardestandbest,perhaps,ofanyhourinmylife”(p.370).Itwasanhourhespent“alone”in theCastleonestormyautumnalnight (pp.370-371).He lita fireand“thesmells, sounds, feelandatmosphereofboyhood”oftheroomtoldhim,“Ihadarrivedascloseto1979astomakealmostnodifference”(ibid.).Heputontherecord-playera“HotHits”poprecordhehadlistenedtoin1979:“AsthemusicplayedIclosedmyeyesandaconnectiontochildhoodopened...TheCastlewascocoonedinthestormandIwascocoonedinmine”(ibid.).Asthemusic“poured”overhim,he“convulsed..intothetypeofcryingIhadnotdonesinceatinychild”,his“eyesdrippedwithtears”andhis“breathingbecame staggered” (p.372). He writes, “The Castle was empty but its rooms were charged and itspassagewaysopen”(ibid.). Timothycalls “Nicky?”“for the first timesince1979” (p.372).Hesays, “I can’tbelieveyou’realive. Iknewyouwerealive”(p.372).Hesays,“Showmeyourhand..Doesithurt?.. Comehere, Iwanttohugyou..Youhaven’tchangedabit..Whathappenedtoyouinthewater?..Howlonghaveyougot?..Doyoucomehereoften?”(pp.372-373).Aftertellinghimseveraltimes“beforeyougo”thatheloveshimandmisseshim,andthat“you’remorevividtodaythananytimeinthelasttwenty-fouryears”,heendshis“monologue”,“Iwon’tseeyouagain,will I?Will I?Nick?”(p.373).Timothywrites,“Slowly Irecoveredmystateofmind”(ibid.)177.Hefelt“lightandeasy”;“finally”he“hadsaidgoodbyetoNickandlethimgo”(ibid.).I interpret Timothy’s “WordswithNick” as their reunion,withNicholas coming “alive” in Timothy’spsychesothathemightsay“thegoodbyes[he]hadmissed”(p.6).Inorderforpsychicseparationtobe

175One of the boat’s lifejackets, recovered from the sea, made him remember “Arran jumpers and creamcrackersandBovrilandthecabin”oftheboat(p.284).Handlingthefewpartsoftheboatthathadsurvivedtheexplosion,helethis“feelingsriseandfallwiththememoriesthatfloodedback”(pp.253-254).176Cf.1.4.6177Cf.ThomasdeQuincy’saccountofthedeathofhissister,reproducedandcommenteduponbyPollock(1978).Elizabethwas2yearsolderandwashisbest-lovedsister.Onstealingintoherroomwhereherdeadbodylay,hefell into a trance. “A solemn wind began to blow” and the child had what Pollock describes as “an intensespiritualexperienceand felt grief intensely” (1978,p450).DeQuincey refers to the long intervalof timewhichpassed“duringthiswanderingorsuspensionofmyperfectmind”until“slowly Irecoveredmyself-possession”(ibid.).

58

effected, there needed first to be psychic reunion.178Timothy’sWordswith Nick “proved to be theturningpointinmytripstoIreland”(p.373).Thefollowingmonth,hemetwiththemenwhorecoveredhisbrother’sbodyfromthesea,andwasableto“lookinto[their]eyes”and“see”whattheyhadseen(3.7.3below).Afewmonthslater inFebruary2004,hesawthephotographsofNicholas’deadbody,“lookedintohiseyes”and“stared”,realising“hewasn’tin”“hisphysicalremains”(p.356).Laterinhishotelbathroom,“squeezingtoothpasteontomybrush”,he“lookedintothemirrorandsawmyfaceforthefirsttimesinceseeingNickyinthephotographs”(p.358).Hewrites,“WewerestillidenticalandIbrokedownutterly”(ibid.).IinterpretthatitisthelivingNicholasthatheseesinhisownreflectioninthemirror,anditistherealityofhisdeaththatcauseshimtobreakdown.

3.6.3. ContainingExternalObjectsThissub-themerefers to thesurvivingtwin’sneedforcontainingexternalobjects toaccompanyandsupporthimasheactivelymournshislosttwin.Timothy’syearofvisits“allowedmetoundergoavitalprocesswhichhadescapedmeasaboy: thelettinggoofmycontinuedemotionalattachmenttoNicholas” (p.xii). Itwas“at timesahorribleandpainfulprocess”,throughwhichhe“pitched”himself“backintoanintenselyfrightening179episodeofmylife”,but itwashowhe“enteredanewstageofhealing”(p.xi). Irefer in3.5.1abovetohow,for“more than twenty years” after the bomb, Timothy withdrew, kept his “mental and emotionalwounds”tohimself,andfelt“strangelyalone”.Instrikingcontrast,whenhe“finallydecidedtotrytohealmyself”,Timothy’sfirst“conclusion”was“Icouldnotdothisalone”(p.xi.)By then, Timothy had behind him his close friendship with David180; his relationship with histherapist181;andhismarriage182.Marriagewasa“crucial”emotionalcontainer.183I interpret that thecontainmentTimothyhadfoundinhistherapyandmarriageenabledhimalsotofindcontainmentintherescuers,doctors,nursesandbystanders–allstrangerstohimbeforethebomb-whoagreedtobe

178Theyearningforreunionofseparatedloversandthestateofreunionasalife-givingandlife-enhancingstateis a running theme in the book (pp.134-135). Timothy yearned for reunionwith Nicholas, just as his parentsyearnedtobereunitedand“werepiningforeachother”inhospital(p.163andpp.122,131,135,168),andjustashis grandmother had sought to be reunitedwith her husband (p.375). The address at the St. Paul’smemorialservicespokeofhow“wehavelostpartofourselveswithallofthem,butonedayweshallfinditagain”(p.196).179 Fromthestart,Timothywas“frightened”he“mightdomoreharmthangood”(p.xii).Onthefirstnightofhisfirstvisit,heawoke,feeling“uneasy”and“somethingIhadneverbeforefeltinSligo:fear,asifsomeonemightbe coming togetme” (p.245).Walking into theCastle,he “felt that Ihaddived inat thedeependand that Ineededtogobackoutsidetoacclimatise”(p.247).Arrivingathisrescuers’house,he“foundmyselfunabletogetoutofthecar”becauseitwas“toomuch”(p.249).Onhissecondvisit,enteringtheharbourtomeetwiththem,he felt likehewas “wearing lead-linedboots about to jumpoff theAtlantic Shelf” and “stoppedandheaved”(p.257). Later that day, on his way back to London, he “felt each stage of the journey as like an air-lockeddecompressionchamber,asifIwasadivercomingupfromagreatdepth”(ibid.).180TimothyconfidedinDavidandno-oneelsewhenhefellinlovewiththewomanwhobecamehiswife(p.234).181(pp.228,231,andseealsopp.239-340and364)182Sixmonthsintohistherapy,Timothywas“feelinggoodaboutlife”and,althoughsceptical,hehadstarted“tofeeldifferently,moreconfident,moreoptimistic,moreenergetic”(pp.231-232).Hefelt“asifspringtimehadarrivedinmylife,latebutwelcome”(p.232).ItwasatthispointinhislifethatTimothymethiswife.183Timothywritesthatitwas“crucial”beforeevencontemplatinghisreturntoIrelandthathe“hadfoundanewlevelofemotionalsecurity”“inmarriageandfatherhood”(p.241).

59

interviewedandtorelivewithhimhisandtheirmemoriesof thebomband itsaftermath.184In theirrespective ways, these people provided Timothy with genuine warmth and kindness, unobtrusivesupport,anddelicateattunementandresponsivenesstohisemotionalstate185.

3.6.4. ContainingInternalObjectsThissub-themereferstothesurvivingtwin’srediscovery,throughtheworkofmourning,ofthe“pre-trauma”containinginternalobjectsand,insomecases,theirstrengtheningbythenewly-discoveredcontainingexternalobjects.FacedwiththeprospectofseeingphotographsofNicholas’deadbodyattheendofhisyearofvisits,Timothywouldhave“declined”,butfor“thechancetocomefacetofaceonelasttime”(pp.355-356).Seeingthefirstphoto,hebegantofeeldistressed,butthatabatedandhesaid“veryquietly”,“That’sthejumperNannyknitted”(p.356).Timothywrites,“Shehadbeenlikeasecondmother”186(ibid.).He“hadn’t thought of that jumper since I last sawNicky” (ibid.).187He “just had not expected to haveNannytherewithme”(p.356).MovinghiseyestoNicholas’face,Timothy“lookedintohiseyes”,but(hewrites)“Ididn’tbreakdown,scream,hurlthepackofphotographsatthewallandthrowmyselfonthefloor”(ibid.).Instead,he“feltgentleandstill”(ibid.).Iinterpretthatitwastherediscoveryofthisgood internalobject - thematernal containmentNannyhadprovided tohim - thateasedTimothy’sdistressandenabledhimtofeelcontained,peacefulandcalm.I interpret that thedevelopmentofhis relationshipwithhis“rescuerparents”,DickandElizabeth,188helped Timothy to strengthen his internal objects representing his natural parents. These internalobjects and the protective function they represented were substantially weakened by the trauma

184There is a very powerful andmoving image in Timothy’s account of being brought ashore after the bomb,whichmaybeunderstoodasanticipating(orametaphorfor)thecontainmentthatwouldbecomeavailabletohim 24 years later (cf. 3.3.3). Timothywrites that, when his rescuers ran their boat onto the beach, “peoplesteppedforwardand,liftingtheentirewoodendeckfromthebottomoftheboat,carriedmeuptothePierHeadHotel”(p.90).185Timothywritesaboutthedevelopmentofhisrelationshipwithhisrescuers,DickandElizabethWood-Martin(pp.256-258).Thesewerethepeoplethathewas“unabletogetoutofthecar”tomeetonhisfirstvisit(3.6.1).Onhisnextvisit,hewrites,“Ichokedonemotionandsatforafewmomentsinsilence,feelingfoolish”(p.257).Aftertheyhadtalked“formorethantwohours”aboutothermatters,Dicksaid“hewasgoingoutinhisboatthatafternoonandaskedif Iwould liketogowithhim”(ibid.).Dick“wentahead..toprepare”, leavingTimothytofollow(ibid.).Enteringtheharbouralone,Timothywassickwithterror(see3.6.1).Hecontinues,“IcrumpledasquietlyasIcould.WeputouttoseaandIsatontheroofandwept”(ibid.).Whentheyreachedthesiteoftheexplosion,TimothycamedownfromtheroofandtalkedtoDick“inearnest”abouttheirmemoriesofthatday(ibid.).He“returnedtoMullaghmoreassoonas Icould”(p.258)and,meetingupwiththemasecondtime,hewrites,“IshookDick’shandlongandhardandkissedElizabethonbothcheeks,bigsmackersofkisses,andsheandhereciprocatedequallywarmly”(ibid.).186Asyoungsters,“NickandIsatinraresilencetowatchfilmssuchasDumboandBambifromNanny’skneeandmymother’slap”(p.19).ItwasNannytowhomthey“ranscreaming..withskinnedknees”(p.9).SheremindedTimothy’s mother about flowers for Nicholas’ grave on his birthday (p.189). It can be inferred that Nannyrememberedthingsandwasintouchwithreality.187“it had completely gone frommymind” - but nowhe “looked at that lovingly knitted little V-neck,whoseindividual strands ofwoolwere so clearly caught by .. the camera”, andwhat “jolted” himwas “the suddenreminder”ofNannyandhergriefforNicholas(p.356).188seefootnote158above

60

(3.4.2).After thebirthofhis first child,Timothywrote tohis rescuers to thank them for “thegiftofcontinuedlifeyougavemein1979”(p.240).Theyearafterhisfatherdied,TimothytookhismothertomeetElizabethandDick(pp.367-368).His“favouritemoment”wasattheendoftheirvisit.HismotherhadshakenhandswithElizabeth,butwhenTimothykissedElizabethgoodbye,“mymotherreturnedandgaveherakissaswell”.Timothy“suddenlysawaflashoftendernessbetweenthesetworesilientwomen.Bothweremothers:onehadsavedthechildoftheother”(p.368).I interpret that thedevelopmentof the“deepbondofaffectionand respect”betweenTimothyandTonyHeenan,thehospitalanaesthetist,hadasimilarstrengtheningimpactwithrespecttoTimothy’sinternalobjectsrepresentingbothhisfatherandhisgrandfather(pp.290and368-369).ExplaininghisdecisiontoreturntoIreland,Timothyrealised“asIwentforwardinlifeasafather”,he“wantedtobeemotionallystrongforthefamily Iwasstarting”(p.239).Dr.Heenan,describedbyoneofhisnursingstaff,“couldbecrossattimes”butwasnotfrighteningbecause“hewastoofatherlyforthat;wewerehisbabiesreally.Weusedtocallhim‘DaddyBear’”(p.289).Dr.Heenan“ranatightship”;hada“greatbrain”;andwas“incharge”(ibid.,).ThesequalitiesofDr.HeenanresonatewithqualitiesinTimothy’sfatherandgrandfather.189Towardstheendofhisvisits,Timothywas leaving Ireland“feeling .. love”,especiallywithrespecttoDr.Heenan,andhispersonalandmedicalethosofkindnessandcompassion(pp.295,369).Hewrites,“my heart sings” because “Heenan defeated McMahon190and I am the proof” (p.369). His “moralvacuum”hadbeen“defeated”(p.368).Hehad“failedtoturnmetohatred”(p.369).Timothynowhad“afargreaterunderstandingofthesituationinwhich[he]hadbeenimmersed”,and“accepted”that,ifhehadbeenbornandeducatedasThomasMcMahonhadbeen,“mylifemightwellhaveturnedouttheway“hisdid(p.367).Hewrites,“InthisrespectIfeltultimatelyinalienableevenfromhim”(ibid.). Iinterpretthat,throughTimothy’ssuccessfulmourning,notonlyhadthegood(containing,creativeandloving) object been firmly re-established, but the bad (murderous and terrifying) object had beentransformed.

189 Timothy’sfatherandgrandfatheremergeastwostrongpaternalobjects inTimothy’s lifebeforethebomb.ThereisatellingimageofTimothy,inthecaronthewaytotheboatonthedayofthebomb,firstonthelapofhis father in the front passenger seat, “quietly fuming at the indignity of it”; and later seated “veryuncomfortably”,“thehandbrakebeneathme”,betweenhisfatherandgrandfather(whowasdriving),Timothy’sfatherwasavalidatingpresenceforTimothygrowingup(p.9),openlyaffectionatetohiswifeandchildren(p.96),amodelof“calmenduranceandphysicalcourage”(p.279).However,hisfathersufferedthelossofhisfatherandelder brother as a youngman, and also several heart attacks. Perhaps on account of this, thismanwas verydeeply affected by his traumatic losses in the bomb (p.208). Timothy’s grandfather emerges as independent-minded,tenacious,well-organised(p.58),akeeperandrecorderofmemoriesandtellerofstories(p.200),withaparticular capacity for leadership, including moral leadership, and bravery (pp.27-28). The presence of thesequalitiesandcapacitiesmayalsobenotedinTimothy.190ThomasMcMahon,whoplantedthebomb.

61

3.7. GuiltI have found that it is only after he has fully mourned his twin, resulting in their psychologicalseparation191,thatthesurvivorisabletoconfronthisguilt.192

3.7.1. SurvivorGuiltThis sub-themeexpresses the thought that the living twin’s survival hasbeenat theexpenseof thedead twinand that therehasbeenawrongful substitution: “it shouldhavebeenme”. I have foundthat the survivor experiences guilt and joy in his survival, which joy gives rise to further guilt andshame.Thispainfulconflictofemotionsisresolvedthroughtheworkofmourning.WhenTimothywasfirsttoldofNicholas’death,hehadthe“sensationthatthewrongtwinwasdead”because“physicallyNickwasmorerobustthanmesoifoneofusweregoingtodieitwouldbeme,nothim” (p.126).193Timothyhadbeen in thewater for “about aminute”, his rescuers estimated (p.81),whenhewasspotted.194Theydidnotsearchforothersurvivors.195NoneoftheotherrescuersspottedNicholas inthewater(pp.75-92).196TherewasreliefforTimothyinthePathologist’sexplanationthatTimothy’svisibilityandNicholas’lackofvisibilitytorescuersmayhavebeendueto“theheads-I-lived,tails-I-died chance that Ihad just inhaledwhen thebombblewup”,whereas “possiblyNicholashadjustbreathedoutgivinghimlessbuoyancyandresultinginhisbodynotcomingtothesurface”(p.354).IinterpretthatTimothyexperiencedshameandguiltabouthisreliefinbeingalive.WhenhelearnedofNicholas’ death, Timothy was deeply sad and scared, but there was also “relief” (p.126).197He felt

1913.6.2andcf.1.4.5above.192Timothy makes his “Words with Nick” the last chapter of his book (chapter 28). This makes sense forpresentationpurposes.However, in chronological terms, his night at theCastle inOctober 2003precededhismeetings with the lifeboat men (who recovered Nicholas’ body) and the (retired) State Pathologist (whoexaminedNicholas’ body) in, respectively, November 2003 and February 2004. Thesemeetings are related inchapter26.193This ideaofwrongfulsubstitutionmayalsohavebeeninfluentialwithPhilip.Timothydrawsattention inhisbooktotheextenttowhichPhilip,outofallhisbrothersandsisters,wasnoticeablydisturbedbyNicholas’death(see 3.4.2). Philip would have been in the boat with the twins on the day of the bomb, but for the fact hisgrandfatherhadrefusedtolethimcomebecausehehadn’tdoneenoughschoolworkoverthesummer(p.61).194When Timothy was first spotted, his head was mistaken for “a football”. He was “buried in the water”,“bobbing up and disappearing slightly and coming up again”, his nose andmouth never breaking the surface(p.80).195After ‘haul[ing]”him intotheboat,his rescuers“lookedaround,sawtheothersurvivorswerebeing lookedafter,andheadedfortheharbour”(p.81).196Withinminutesoftheexplosion,Nicholas,hisparentsandgrandmotherhadbeenrescued.Rescuershadalsoretrieved the body of EarlMountbatten, who had been “floating higher” than the others, his jacket possiblyprovidingbuoyancy (p.76).Theyhadalso retrievedthebodyofPaulMaxwellandthe familydog,eventhoughtheywereboth“deepinthewater”(p.85).Oncetherescueboatswerelanded,“[p]eopleweresaying,‘Isthateverybody?’”,but“[t]heguardsdidnotknow”(p.92).BrianBest“askedhowmanyweremissing”,but“nobodyknew”(ibid.).HethenaskedTimothy’sfathertotellhimwhowasontheboat“andthatwaswhenIrealisedweweremissingone. ItwasNick.” (ibid.). “Someonesuggested thatboats shouldgobackoutand look forNick”,whichtheydid,buttheyreturned“empty-handed”(ibid.)197Hecontinues,“Iwasaliveanditfeltgood,verygood.. Ihadmylife,mylimbs,myhearingandoneperfecteye..anactive,normallifeaheadofme”(ibid.).

62

lucky,butwas“shocked”athow“selfishandgreedy”thisseemed:“HowcouldIbefeelingthiswhenIhad just learnedNickwasdead?” (ibid.).He“didnot tell a soulabout this” (ibid.).198I interpret thatTimothyexperiencedshameandguiltabouthisrelief inbeingalive.Returning24yearstothedaytowherehehadbeenlandedashoreafterthebomb,Timothywriteshowhehadhad“somediminnersuspicion”that“wrappedup”in“theunintelligiblesick-makinghorrorofthedestruction”,wasapieceof “joyous-get-up-and-sing news”: he had received “the greatest lottery win ever accorded to anyhuman, thechanceto liveagain” (p.256).Onthis lateroccasion,heexperiencedthesame“violentlyopposingemotions”–“extremegrief”withrespecttoNicholasandthat“thisspotwastheplaceofmylotterywin” (p.256), but he also felt “a pulse-quickening sensation of being rocket-propelled,whichmademe look up, and feel in awe” (ibid.). He felt “the incredible lightness of being”, “inspired bysimplybeingalive”(ibid.).He“hadarushofexcitementandhope”(ibid.).199Iinterpretitasaproductof his mourning that on this later occasion Timothy was able to experience, not only unqualifiedgratitudeforhissurvival,butanintenseexperienceofbeingandfeelingalive.

3.7.2. GuiltaboutAbandonmentIhave foundthat thesurviving twinexperiencesguilt forhaving failed thedeadtwinbyabandoninghimtodeath.Inhis“WordswithNick”24yearsafterthebomb,Timothyreferstohissemi-consciousattemptstogetoutoftheboatafterhehadbeenrescued.200Hesays,“Maybemysubconsciouswastryingtotellthemtheonlywayitknewhow,thatIdidn’twanttobeseparatedfromyou,iftheywantedtotakemetheymustalsobesuretheyhadyou”(p.372).Timothywritesthat“foryears[he]hadbeenunableentirelytorid[his]mindoftheagonisingthoughtthatperhapsifNickhadbeenpulledquicklyintoaboathemight have lived” (p.357).201Meetingwith the State Pathologist, Timothy “asked if Nickmight havesurvived ifhehadbeen lifted into theboatalongsideme” (ibid.). Thepathologist’sopinion that thedegreeofheadinjurysufferedbyNickmeantthathewouldnothavesurvivedmeantthat“anaggingdoubtevaporatedafterdecadesinmymind:Nickhadnotbeenlefttodieinthewater”(ibid.).Timothy“felthugereliefpassthroughme”.He“laterrealisedthattherehadexistedinmymind..afeelingthat

198Timothy’ssenseofhisgoodluckwasa“confusingimpulse”that“occasionallystreakedthrough”him(p.126).199He had a sudden memory of when he was a toddler and had seen his brother Norton drive away “anddisappearfromsight”(p.256).Hehad“thoughtaboutfollowinghim”but“didnotdoso”,thoughhe“wonderedwhatlaybeyond”(ibid.).Now,hewasfeeling“asimilartinglingsenseofbeingattheedgeofsomething”(ibid.).200Timothywasunconsciouswhenhisrescuersspottedhim“tryingtoswim”butnot“movinganywhere”(p.80).Once in the boat, hewas “mak[ing] a noise .. like barking” andwas “disoriented andmoving around” (p.81).Thinkinghewastryingto“clamberout”oftheboat,Dickshoutedtohimto“liedown”(p.82).He“shrunkintoaninnercore”,“tooweaktohelpmyself”(ibid.).“Desperatelycoldandshiveringviolently”(ibid.),hemadeseveralattemptstospeak,butreceivingwhatfeltlikeanangryresponse,he“feltashamed”andwentsilent(ibid.).201PressreportshadstatedthatNicholasandhisgrandfather“hadbeenknockedunconsciousbythebomband,unable to save themselves, haddrowned” (p.357). Timothy’sRNLI lifeboat training athis sixth-formcollege inWales,togetherwith“studentsfromaBeachRescueUnit,andaCliffRescueTeam”,mightbeinterpretedasanenactment of the search and rescue he was unable to undertake with respect to Nicholas (p.210); cf. theseparatedconjoinedtwin,Peter,who,afterhistwin,Tom,died,“waslookingforTomallthetime”(2009,p58).Thereareseveralreferencestotherescuers’senseoffailureandinadequacy.Timothy’srescuerswereconcernedabout the engine of their boat, which was “sick” (pp.80-82). Other rescuers were “regretful” about their“inadequateboat”(p.283),feelinginhindsightthattheywere“verybadlyequippedandyoulookbackandfeelthatyoustumbled”(ibid.).

63

IhadsomehowabandonedNickinthisfinalduty.Thattraceofunreasonedandunreasonableemotionnowdisappeared”(ibid.).

3.7.3. NeglectedDutiestotheDeadIhavefoundthatthesurvivingtwinsuffersdeeplypainfulregretifhedoesnothavetheopportunitytobe as intimate with his twin in death as he had been in life. This sub-theme refers to the lostopportunity to see and care for his twin’s dead body and participate fully andmeaningfully in thecustomary rituals and ceremonies to mark his passing. It includes the loss of the chance to “saygoodbye”(topartfromeachotherconsciouslyandexpressly)andthechancetogivethedeadtwinaproper“send-off”.“Abigpart”ofthe“regretwhichhadlingeredafterNick’sdeath”wasthatTimothy“hadnothadanyconsciousexperienceofthemomentwhenwewereparted”(p.363).202Hehadfelt“achingpain”“atneverhavinghadalastlookatNicky”(p.355).Hehad“neverseenhimdyingordead”(ibid.).Meetingthe lifeboatmen,whohad recoveredNicholas’ body, Timothy “felt ahuge relief to look into Sean’seyesashetoldmehowtheyhadfoundNick’sbody,andhandeditovertotheambulance”(p.351).“Hehad tears inhiseyeswhenhe toldmehowhe felt, lookingatNicky’sbody”,and“hecareddeeply”(ibid.).ThethoughtofNicholas’“littlebodyinthewater,uncaredfor,whileIwasbeinglookedafter20milesaway”hadbeendeeplydistressing(p.293).203Thelifeboatmenhaddonehim“agreatservice”inperforming the“grimtask”of recoveryand fordescribing it tohim“withsuchclarity”,because“[It]helpsmegetclosetoNick,closetohisdeath,closetothattimewhenwepartedwithoutagood-bye”(pp.351-352).The“details”“wereknowntosomeone,anduntilnowthatsomeonehadnotbeenme”,but“nowthatIhadgatheredinthedetail,itspowerhadgoneaway”(p.350).Atlast,hehad“asenseofbeingthere”(p.350).TimothyneverhadthechancetoholdNicholas’deadbody,lovinglytotendtoitandcareforit.204Hehad felt “unbalanced” “bynotbeingable to lookathiswoundsandbeas intimatewithhisbody in

202Landedon the shore,Timothywas“aboutaquarter conscious”and“lookedamess”, “like [he]mighthavebeendeadprettysoon”(pp.90,92).Intheambulance,TimothyfaintedandaskedforNicholas(pp.96-97).Hehasno recollection of this, nor his arrival at the hospital where the doctors felt he might not survive (p.107).AdmittedtoIntensiveCare,Timothywritesthathe“wasnotevencapableofmissing[Nicholas]thenIsuppose,beinginandoutofconsciousness”(pp.292-293).Afterbeingoperatedupon,hewokeup“feelingverydrugged”,“justwant[ing]toclosemyeyesandsleep”(p.110).Thenextday,heaskedhissiblingswhathadhappenedandtheysaid“somethingvagueaboutaproblemontheboat”.HeaskedabouthisgrandparentsandPaulMaxwellandaboutNicholas.Hissiblingssaidtheywereall“in thehospital” (p.118).Althoughhewas”suspicioustherewassomethingtheywerenottellingme”,“concussion,anaesthesiaandsedationmadeit impossible..tothinkclearlyorworkoutwhatwasgoingon”(ibid.).Further,thearrivalofhisbrothersandsistershadmadehimfeel“safeandsecure”(p.119).Thatnight,Timothywas“anxious,“confused”and“miserable”-“asifinanightmare”-and the following night he became very distressed (pp.119,121).On the Thursdaymorning, the bodies of thedead left thehospital forEngland(p.123).Thatnight,Timothy learnedfor thefirst timethattherehadbeenabombandthatNicholaswasdead(p.125).203Hewrites,“ohmyGodhowitmakesmecrytodaytothinkofhislittlebodyinthewater,uncaredfor,whileIwasbeinglookedafter20milesaway,mylife’spathdivergingfromhisirrevocablybutwithoutmyknowledge..Itisimpossible,impossible,impossible”.204Reproducinginhisbookanotheridenticaltwin’saccountofholding,embracingandkissinghisbrother’sdeadbody,Timothywrites,“IwishedIcouldhavehadsuchamomentwithNick”(pp.352-353).

64

deathasIhadbeeninlife”(p.357).205HavingseenthePathologist’sphotographsofNicholas’body,hefelt “more balanced in this respect” and “felt another wound has been healed” (ibid.). He was“pleased”that“atleastonememberofthefamilyhadseen[Nicholas’]sweetfaceanddiminutivebodyintheirlastappearance”(p.357).206He“laterrealised”that“afeeling”hadpersistedinhismind“thatIhadsomehowabandonedNickinthisfinalduty”(p.357).Nicholas’funeraltookplacewhile“myparentsandIlayhelplesslyinourhospitalbedsinIreland”(p.4).Duringthehospitalserviceheldsimultaneously,Timothy“feltstrangelyandhorriblyabsent frommyhome,mysiblings,andmostofallfromNick”(p.149).His inabilitytoshareinNicholas’farewellwithfamily and friendswas a further loss.207I interpret that Timothy deeply regretted that he could notperformthisfinaldutytoNicholasoftakinghisrightfulplaceaschiefmournerathisobsequies.208IinterpretTimothy’swritingofhisbookaspartofhismourningprocessandoneofthewaysinwhichhedischargeshisregretsabouthisneglecteddutiestoNicholas.Hewrites,withanunmistakeabletoneof indignation, after returning to the hospital and reading the medical records, “I now learn thateveryonewasabletosee[Nicholas]departonliveTVandyetIdidn’tknowhewasgoing”(p.293).Hecontinues,“Ididn’tevenknowhewasdead. .. I resentnothavingbeencomposmentisenough .. tohaveseenmyNickyoffandthat’swhatI’mdoingnow”(ibid.).

3.8. Integration

3.8.1. MourningasanIntegrativeProcessIhave found thatworking through the traumatic lossenables thedead twin tobe released fromanentombedpartof thepsycheand the living twin tobe re-establishedasagood internalobject. Thepastisintegratedwiththepresent.209

205Duringoneof his visits, Timothywas given a lifejacket found floatingon the sea after the attackwhichherecognisedasbelongingtohisgrandfather’sboat (p.284).Returninghomewith itand,on impulse,decidingtowashit,“IhadastrangebuttherapeuticfeelingthatIwaswashingdownhumanskin”(p.285).206Timothywrites,“Iwishsomeoneheknewandlovedhadbeentheretotakehimtohospitalandthenhome.IwishIcouldhavedonethat”(p.366).JohnMaxwell,fatherofPaul,regrettednotaccompanyinghisson’sbodytothehospitalmorgue:“TothisdayIfeelIshouldhavegonewithhim”(p.261).207Timothy writes that the St Paul’s memorial service was “particularly important” because he felt he had“sharedsomeformoffarewellwithmyfamilyandfriends”(pp.196-197).Theservicelefthimfeeling“uplifted”and “powerfully energized” (p.196). On one of his last visits to Ireland, Timothy and his sister, Amanda,participatedinafarewell“ritual”atthecliffedgeoverlookingthesiteoftheexplosion.TheyeachthrewouttoseaastonefromAmanda’shomeinEngland.BeforeTimothythrewhis,hesaid,‘WhenNickandIusedtogotosleep,Isaidtohim,“GoodnightNick.”“NightTim;sleepwell.”“Sleepwell;godbless.”“Godbless.”’(p.277).208 Timothywas “immensely pleased” to discover “much later” that one of their school-friends, who lived inIreland, had “packed his bag and sat in the car until his parents drove him, uninvited” and overnight to thefuneralchurch inEngland (p.150).He“hadpenetrated thebrouhaha ..andmade italmost to [Nicholas’] side”(p.151). Unable to get inside the church, he listened to the service on speakers. Timothy writes: “I feltdesperatelysadthathedidnothaveaseatatthefrontofthechurchbecause Iknowthat iswhatNickwouldhavewanted”(p.151).209 When Timothy first writes to his rescuers, he says that “small steps like this one are vital in the ongoingprocessofintegratingthepastintoafulfilledandhappypresent”(p.239).

65

Timothywritesabouthow,“overtheyears”,hehadallowedhimself“togaintheimpressionthatNick’sspiritwas somehow trappedat [theCastle” (p.364). Consistentwith this understanding is Timothy’s“one and only episode of fury at the IRA”when IRA protesters occupied the Castle (pp.206-207).210Timothy’sfeelingwasthat“theIRAwantedtoaddinsulttoinjury”(p.206),asiftheIRAhaddesecratedNicholas’tomb.If the Castle signified Nicholas’ tomb, it was a tomb in which he and Timothy were encapsulated(Coles,2011,pp.29-31).BothTimothyandtheCastlewerehauntedbyNicholas.211Timothyrecognisedhisneedto“exorcise”his“unresolvedgrief”forNicholas(p.239).HisfirstvisitsbacktotheCastlelefthim feeling “as if I was aboard theMary Celeste”, expecting his “grandfatherwouldwalk in at anymoment”,andatthebeachthathewas“goingtostumbleupononeofmychildhoodfamilypicnics”(pp.248-249). The Castle was a “mausoleum”, “shuttered, dusty, damp and cold” (pp.250-251). Hisreturn is resonant of the opening of a tomb, but it is “something .. like a sweet fragrance” that is“lockedup in it” (p.248).Theeffectwas“ghostly” (p.251).However,by theendofhisyearofvisits,theseghostshadbeen“laidtorestasancestors”(Loewald,1980,p.249;3.6.1above).TheCastleisnowalivingthingoffleshandblood:its“sights,sounds,smells,feelsandtastes”were“hardwired”intohisandhissiblings’heads;it“wasinourDNA”(p.277).

3.8.2. CreatingaNarrativeI have found that the creation of a narrative about the loss assists the mourning process and theprocess of integration. Timothy explains how, “[b]y returning to Ireland and piecing together thestory”,he“reconnectedtofeelings”and“foundasenseofinnerpeacethatIhadlostthedayNicholaswas killed” (p.xi).With each new piece of information, “another piece of the jigsaw fell into place”(p.258).Thus,“pieces”(“reconnected”or“piec[ed]together”)became“peace”.212Iinterpretthatthesurvivorisassistedincreatinghisnarrativebytherediscoveryofgoodcreativeandintegratingobjects.Ireferin3.6.4abovetoTimothy’srediscoveryofNanny,his“secondmother”asagood object,when he sees her “lovingly knitted little V-neck”, the camera “so clearly” catching the“individualstrandsofwool”(p.356).Timothywritesabouthow, inthecourseofwritinghisbook,hewould“weave”whatwitnesseshadseenandheard“intothechronologythatwasemerging”,claritybeing provided by “the cross-section of accounts” (p.282). He also tells us about a tree Nanny had

210Hearingallthisontheradioduringhismid-morningbreakatschool,Timothy“sworeandkicked,ventingmyanger inprivate”(p.206).He“calmed”himself“down”,butonhiswaybacktoclass,“midwaydownaflightofstairsIwashitbyanotherblindingrageandfoundmyselftalkingaloudandswearing”(ibid.).He“satinclassesseething”untilheheardlaterthatdaythatthesiegehadended(ibid.).211LeavingtheCastleforthe lasttimeafterthebomb,Timothy“suddenly”“feltas if Iwere leavingsomethingvitalbehindbutIdidnotknowwhat”(p.158).AttheendofhisfirsttripbacktotheCastle9yearsafterthebomb,he“hadasensethatonedayIwouldreturnandthattherewassomethingthere,whichIneededtogobackfor,thoughIhadnoideawhatitwas”(p.218andseep.277).Attheendofthisvisit,Timothymadeaghostlysightingofa“figure”behindhim,ashewalkedupthedrivewaytotheCastle,that“seemedtohavedisappearedintothinair”whenheturnedthebend(pp.217-218).212WritingofhisfirstvisittotheCastleformanyyears,I interpretthatTimothyconnects“theinnerpeace[he]hadlostthere”andhiswishto“piecetogetheraclearpictureoftheplaceandevents”(p.245).

66

grownfromgrapefruitseedlingsheandNicholashadgivenher,andhowhewrotehisbook“closeto..[its]fruit-ladenbranches”(p.166).213I interpretthatNannywasacreative, integratingandcontainingobjectforTimothy.214

3.8.3. ReconstructionofIdentityThisreferstohowsuccessfulmourningandintegrationofthetraumaresultsinanewsenseofvitality,wholeness, sufficiency, and safety for the survivor. There is a freeing-up of mental space for newgrowth.Anewsurvivingtwinidentityisconstructed.

Timothy explains howhis year of visits to Ireland allowedhim to find “a sense of inner peace” lostwhenNicholasdied(p.xi).The“shadowsofmypastwerelifting”(p.365);“symptomsstartedtofade”(p.xi); “oldwounds”were “healed” (p.xiii). Hewrites that his visits “washed away regretwhich hadlingeredafterNicholas’death” (p.363).Having“dispelled the regret”, “linked to that camea releasefromafear”(p.364).Thefearwasofa“sudden,unspecifiedseparation”(ibid.).Nowhewas“losingmyanxiety ..aboutpossible futureseparations” (ibid.).Hewas“freeingmyselfmentally”, the“negative,awful grip onmypsyche” of the bombhaving “withered bymy coming here and confronting it all”(ibid.)Hewasable, asneverbefore, tobea “hands-onDaddy” tohis children (p.365)and“found iteasierto live inthemoment”(p.364).He“foundanewsurgeofenergy”(p.375).Heregardshimself“nowas never before at liberty to be unconcernedwith self, and therefore to be of use to others”(ibid.).

213Afterthebomb,Timothy“felttearscoming”ashevisitedNanny,wateredthegrapefruitplantand“wentnextdoortowindtheclock”(p.166).BythetimeTimothycametowritehisbook,oneseedlinghad“thrivedandgrewintoatree”.Hewrites,“Iwrotemuchofthisbookclosetoitsfruit-ladenbranches”(ibid.).214Shewasalsoahealingone.Itwastoherthetwinswouldrun“screaming”“withskinnedknees”(p.9).Timothywrites of the “healing” effected throughhis visits. I notehowTimothy involvedhis parents and siblings in hisvisits to Ireland, someof them revisitingMullaghmore for the first time since thebomband saying their owngoodbyes(pp.277,367,368).

67

Chapter4

DiscussionandConclusions4.1. Introduction

4.1.1. ResearchProjectRevisitedFreudwrote, “Everywhere I go I find thatapoethasbeen therebeforeme” (1925a,p.60).Heaney’s“Mid-Term Break” (1966) was my literary introduction to the subject of sibling loss (Appendix 4).Heaneywas14andawayatschoolwhenhisyoungerbrotherwasknockeddownandkilledbyacar.Thefocusisontheparents–“IntheporchImetmyfathercrying”and“mymotherheldmyhand/Inhersandcoughedoutangrytearlesssighs”-andthedeadchild–“Helayinthefour-footboxasinhiscot”. The surviving sibling narrator is a silent and seemingly detached observer. An infant sibling ismentionedinpassing:“Thebabycooedandlaughedandrockedthepram/WhenIcamein”.

WhenIbeganworkwithA,IhadinmindHeaney’spoemandthebabyinthepram.Iwonderedhowthatbabymighthaverespondedtothechangesinthefamily-homedescribedbyHeaney;whatkindsof responses his cooing and laughter might have elicited; and how those responses might haveaffected his later capacity for spontaneity and joyful living. I went in search of resources in thepsychoanalytic literature. The case studies I found seemed partial accounts of the phenomenon,written in advocacy of, rather than in order to explore, a particular theoretical hypothesis. Further,thereseemedtobeapronouncedtendencytothinkintermsofsiblinghatredandrivalry,asopposedtosiblingloveandcollaboration.Therewasalsoamarkedcontrastintonebetweenthepsychoanalyticliteratureandthebiographicalandpsycho-socialwritingonsiblingloss,wheretheemphasiswasmuchmore on the experience of loss and grief. What I felt was missing from the literature was apsychoanalyticcasestudy,providingaclose-up, in-depth,explorationof the individualexperienceofthe long-term impact of sibling loss in childhood. I beganmy researchproject.Over its lifetime,myprojecthasundergonetwomodifications.Mysubjectisnowtwinlossinchildhood(ratherthansiblingloss)andmydatasetisapublishedbiographicalaccountoftwinloss(ratherthanclinicalmaterial).Myoverallaimremainstoprovidearesourceforpractitionersworkingwiththisparticularpatientgroup.

Inthischapter,Idiscussmyfindingsandhowtheyrelatetoeachother.Iconcludethattheysupportabroad theoretical framework forworkingwith childhood twin loss in the consulting room. I identifybelowthecentralcoordinatesofthisframework.

Ihavereferredearliertotheacutesufferingexperiencedbybereavedparents.Itisadelicateexercisetoexploretheextenttowhichthesufferingofbereavedparentsmayaddtothesufferingexperiencedby a bereaved twin. In this chapter, I have sought to discuss the implications of my findings withappropriatesensitivityforthefeelingsoftheauthorandhiswiderfamily.

68

4.1.2. AreasofDiscussionThediscussionwhichfollowscoversthreemainareas:

• Theoreticalimplications(4.2)• Clinicalimplications(4.3);• Researchimplications(4.4);

4.2. Theoreticalimplications

4.2.1. TwinLossasTraumaMyfindingsareconsistentwiththeexistingliterature215inconceptualisinglossofatwinasatrauma.The traumaconsistsof theoverwhelmingandchronicemotional sufferingattributable to the lossoftherelationshipwiththetwin.Thisstarting-pointhasimportanttheoreticalandclinicalimplications.Idiscussthesebelow.First,thereare two important and related questions to consider: (i) how is my analysis (that twin loss is atraumatic loss with particular psychic characteristics and sequelae) affected by the very particularcircumstances inwhich Timothy lostNicholas; and (ii) how can it bedeterminedwhetherwhatwastraumaticforTimothywasthelossofhisbrotherorhisowninvolvementinalife-threateningevent.Astothefirstquestion,thisfocusesupontheparticularcircumstancesofNicholas’death.Hewasnotonly violently murdered. The bomb which killed him was planted and detonated bymembers of aparamilitary organisation, who had targeted the family as representatives of a political status quowhichitsoughttooverturn,andwhosedeaths(theyknew)wouldobtainmaximumpublicityfortheircause(p.4).I refer in1.4.2abovetotheexisting literaturewhichrecognises that theactualcircumstancesof thedeath(itssuddenness,unexpectednessandwhetherthedeathwasparticularlygruesomeorhorrible)willaffectthepsychicimpactofthelossforthesurvivor.Ireferalsoin3.5.2abovetothepublicnatureof the traumasufferedbyTimothy.Thismeant that therewaswidespread recognitionofhis loss.216Althoughthispublicitymayhavehadsomeadvantages-Timothyrecordshowwritingletterstowell-wisherswasawelcomedistraction in theweeksafter thebomb(pp.163-164)–healso recordshowthe verypublicmemorial eventswhichhe attended left him “with a customary senseof disconnectbetweentheshowwemadeforthepublicandtheemotionalturmoilbeneath”(p.211).ItcanbeinferredreadilythattheextremelyviolentnatureofNicholas’deathwillhaveaggravatedtheshock, horror, loss of a sense of safety, and emotional sufferingwhich Timothy experienced (3.3.1-3.3.3,3.4.3),andthatthepublicnatureofhisloss(involvingthedemandtoputonagood“show”atpublicevents)willhaveintensifiedtheurgetohideandavoidcontactwithhisemotionalself,thereby

2151.4.1above.216See4.4.1below.

69

furtherimpedingthenaturalmourningprocess(3.5.1-3.5.3).However,althoughIregardtheparticularcircumstances in which Timothy lost Nicholas as aggravating factors inmy analysis of the interplaybetween the relevant facts and the relevant theory, I do not rely upon those circumstances formyfindingsregardingtheimpactoftwinlossinthesurvivor’sinternalworld.JustasTimothy’sfocusisthepersonal meaning for him of the loss itself,217similarly, my findings support current psychoanalyticthinking that the external circumstances may be relevant as factors contributing to the traumaticimpact,butitisthelossitself,asitisexperiencedinthesurvivor’sinternalworld,whichistheessentialtrauma.It isarecognisedlimitationofcasestudiesthattheyarenotgeneralizable(2.1.8above).It ishow theory plays out with the particular facts of any one case study that is the aim of case studyresearch.Thelossandrecoveryoftheinternalgoodtwinobjectarekeyfindingsofmine,andtheydonotdependontheparticularcircumstancesofNicholas’death. Next,IexaminethedifficultandintriguingquestionregardingwhetherwhatwastraumaticforTimothywasthelife-threateningexperienceofhimselfbeingavictimofthebomb,orthelossofNicholas.Asamatterofstrictcausation,thebombmaybesaidtobetheprimarytraumaticagent:iftherehadbeennobomb,Nicholaswouldnothavebeenkilled.AfurtherperspectivemightbethatTimothywasinvolved in one traumatic event (the bomb), which caused a further traumatic event (the loss ofNicholas).MyfindingsconfirmthatthefactthatTimothywasavictimofthebombrenderedthelossofNicholasevenmoretraumaticforhim.IhaveinmindTimothy’sprolongedexperienceofsurvivorguiltrelated to the questionwhether his rescue from thewater had been atNicholas’ expense, and thedeep regretshe sufferedbecausehisownbomb injuriesand incapacitated statemeant thathewasdeprived of the experience of caring for his dying or dead twin and of making his own farewell.However, although the two traumatic events of the bomb and the loss are connected in theserespects,Timothy isclear inthebookthat itwasthe lossofNicholas inthebombthat“devastated”him.His returnto Ireland24years laterwasnotpromptedbyhisown involvement in thebomb:heneededtoreturnonaccountof“thevitalprocesswhichhadescapedmeasaboy:thelettinggoofmycontinuedemotionalattachmenttoNicholas”(pp.xi-xii).Itwasthisthathadlefthimwith“alegacyofmental and emotional wounds which refused to go way” (p.xi). Through his visits to Ireland he“enteredanewstageofhealing”andwasabletorecoverthe“senseofinnerpeacethat[he]hadlostthedayNicholaswaskilled”(ibid.).EventhoughTimothywasanintendedvictimofadeadlyandterrifyingevent,whichseriouslyinjuredhisparentsandhimselfandkilledhistwinandgrandparents,theimplicationsofmyfindingsarethatwhat causedhim thegreatest sufferingandhad thedeepest impactwas the lossofhis relationshipwithhisbrother,ratherthantheexposuretoanextremelyseriousthreattohisownlife.Myfindingssuggestthat,ifbothboyshadsurvivedthebomb,notwithstandingthedeathsofotherfamilymembersandtheinjuriessustainedbyTimothyandhisparents,Timothywouldhaverecoveredpsychologicallybecause, in that event, Timothywould still havehad the twin relationship as a sourceof emotionalcontainmentandprotection.Asindicatedbymyfindings,whatrenderedthelossofNicholastraumaticwasthelossofthatcontainingrelationship.

217“Iwenttoengageinahumanprocess,notapoliticalone.Iwenttounderstandmytwin’sdeath.”(p.xii).

70

There isadditionalgoodevidence tosupportmyanalysis that the traumaof losinghis twinaffectedTimothymore deeply andmore severely than his own involvement in the bomb. In the immediateaftermath of the bomb, but understanding that Nicholas had also survived and was also receivingtreatmentinthehospital,Timothywas“sore,restless,anxious,confused,miserable”,butthearrivalofhissiblings“fundamentallyaltered”hisstateofmind,makinghimfeel“safeandsecure”.Myfindingsshowhowany sense of safetywas lostwhen Timothy learned shortly afterwards thatNicholaswasdead:hefearedforhissurvival. IhavereferredabovetoTimothy’sownsensethat itwasthelossofNicholasandthedifferentpsychologicalmeaningsthatlossheldforhimwhichledtohisenduringandchronicstateofinnerwoundedness,unhealedforover20years(pp.xi,133).WhenTimothycomments,“post-traumatic stresscounsellingwasvirtuallyunheardof in theEnglandof1979”,hedoessowithreferencetotheimpactonhimoflosingNicholas(p.232).Timothy’sbook isabookabout theMountbattenbomb,but it isaboveallabookabouthis survivalwithouthistwin.Itisaboutthe“senseofinnerpeace[he]lostthedayNicholaswaskilled”(p.xi)andabouthowheneededtoreturntoIrelandto“discoverwhathadhappenedtohim”,“tomake..senseof it”,“togrieveforhim”and“saygoodbye”(pp.xi-xii).Hispurpose inreturningwas“tounderstandmytwin’sdeath”(p.xii).HetellsDr.Heenanabout“myneedtorevisitthecircumstancesof[Nicholas’]deathinordertofindpeace”(p.295).ItisNicholasandthelossofNicholas,whichwerehismotivationtoreturntoIrelandandtowritethebook,togetherwithhiswishto“sharemystorywithotherswhohavesufferedtraumaorgrief”(p.xii).MyfindingsconfirmthatthelossofNicholasandtherediscoveryofhimthroughtheworkofmourningarethetwopivotaleventsofthebook.Theshapeandcontentofthebookreflectthis.Theboys’twin-shipandalltheirlivelyinteractions,startingwiththeirsynchronicheartbeats,begin thebook; thenNicholasdisappears fromclear sight;graduallyhecomesback intosightandisre-foundasalivingandlovedobject.Thebookbeginswiththetwins’conception(p.7);itendswiththewordsonNicholas’headstone(p.375).FurthersupportformyanalysismaybefoundinwhatTimothytellsusabouthisromanticrelationshipsbeforehemethiswife.Hewritesthat,bythen,hehad“anumberofbrokenrelationshipsbehindme,someofthemlong-lasting”,andthat,“overtheyears,oneafteranotherIhadbroughtmyrelationshipstoanend” (p.232). Thisunbrokenpatternof ending relationships suggests that something from thepast was being repeated. I interpret that Timothy was unconsciously repeating the trauma of thepremature ending of his relationship with Nicholas. Un-mourned traumatic loss is liable to berepeated.Afterenteringtherapyandbeginningtheprocessofmourninghistraumaticlosses,Timothyceases unconsciously to repeat the trauma which he suffered when his twin died. He meets andmarrieshiswife.Myfindingsopenupalargerdiscussionaboutwhatdowereallymeanwhenwespeakoftraumaandwhatistherelationshipbetweentraumaandloss.Garlandwrites,“Atraumaticeventisabreakdownincontainment,andviceversa”(Garland,2002,p.108).Myfindingssuggestthatwhatmakes lossofatwin in childhood traumatic is the loss itself, especially when that loss is sudden, unexpected andviolent.Wecoulddefinethelossasthelossoftheparticularityoftherelationshipwiththedeadtwinincludingthecontainmentthatparticularrelationshipoffered.Toputitmoresimply,wecoulddefinethelossasthelossofthelovedobject,oreventhelossoflove.Containmentislostbecausethelovedobjectislost.ItwasthesuddenandprematureruptureofhisdeepemotionalattachmenttohistwinwhichoverwhelmedTimothyandwhichhismindwassimplyunabletoprocess.

71

Inadoptingtheconceptoftraumafrommedicineandsurgery,psychoanalysisinitiallyfocusedontheideas of a violent bodily shock, a wound, and “disruptive consequences affecting the wholeorganisation”(Garland,2002,p.155).WithFreud’s“MourningandMelancholia”(1917)therewasashiftin focus from the traumatic power of shocking external events to trauma as a consequence ofseparationfromapersonwhohasbeenlost.MyfindingsfollowFreudinfocusinguponthelossofthelovedobjectandtheshatteringimpactoftheshockofthatloss.TemplepointsoutthatFreud’spaperwastheinspirationforthestudyoftraumaticlossinchildren(2002,p.156).Hedrawsattentiontotheletterwritten by Bowlby,Miller andWinnicott (1939)warning that the trauma of separating youngchildrenfromtheirmothersbyevacuationmightbeasgreatadangertothechildrenasremaininginthe cities during bombing (2002,p.156). My findings imply that loss of the loved other is moretraumaticforachildthanexposuretoashockingandviolenteventwhichthreatenshisownlife.

4.2.2. Post-TraumaticIdentificationwithDeadTwinThe surviving twin’s unconscious internalisation of the dead twin is one of my key findings. MyunderstandingoftheunconsciousmotivationsunderlyingthisinternalisationisinformedbyGarland’sconceptof “post-traumatic identification” (2002).My findings support an analysis that identificationwith the dead twin protects against guilt and the full experience of separation and loss. To put itanotherway,itallowsthesurvivingtwintoavoidtheprocessofmourning.Inthemeantime(untilthereality of the loss can be faced and mourned), the surviving twin feels haunted, and leads anemotionallyrestricted,inhibited,half-life.Timothy’sunderstandingwasthatpartofhimdiedwhenNicholasdied(3.4.4).HisaccountoflifeafterNicholasupuntilheenteredtherapyin1996issparseanduneventful.Althoughhewritesthathewas“gettingonwithmylife”(p.219),thatlifecomesacrossascolourlessandlackinginjoy.Apartfromareferenceto“occasionalmoodswings”(p.228)andhowhefelt“terriblysadandlonely”whenhewas“aloneandpeaceful”,noclearpictureofwhatTimothywaslikeasayoungadultemerges(p.231).Theyearsfrom1980to1996takeuponly2ofthebook’s28chaptersandonly24ofthebook’s375pages.InthefirstofthesechaptersTimothyremarksontheghostlyfigurehespottedneartheCastleonhisfirsttripback,andthe“strangenumbness”hefelt.Continuingthissenseofdetachment,hebeginsthesecondofthesechaptersbyreferringtohimselfinthethirdpersonthroughanewspaperarticlewhichdescribedhimas“lastheardofstudyingeconomicsatCambridgeUniversity”(p.219).Hewritesthathewas“pleasedtohavedisappearedoffthemediaradar”(ibid.).There isasensethatTimothyhimself“disappeared”duringtheseinterveningyears.218Hewritesthathisemotionswere“seizedup”(p.224).Hemade further trips to Irelandasa “first tentative step towards reconnectingwith theunresolvedemotionswithwhich I left Irelandasaboy” (ibid.),but“unexpectedlybrokedownandwept”at theendofoneofthesetrips,whichhecouldnotexplain(p.227).

218ThereissomelivelinesswhenhewritesaboutmeetingDavid,“someonewhototallyunderstoodwhatitfeltliketohaveone’stwinkilled”(p.220).Hehadbeen“tooyoungandtootraumatised”whenhehadmetNorrisMcWhirter(ibid.).ThroughhisdevelopingfriendshipwithDavid,whosetwindiedinadulthood,TimothywasabletoexplorewhatitmighthavebeenlikeforhimselfandNicholas,ifNicholashadlived,andtheyhadcometolivemoreseparatelivesasamatterofnaturaldevelopment.

72

It is the lack of any real sense of Timothy in these chapterswhich is telling. A Cambridge-educatedyoung man working in television in London, with means and (he tells us) no difficulty attractingwomen,ought tobehaving the timeofhis life.However, there isnosenseofanythingapproachingjoiedevivre inthesechapters.TheyaredominatedbythelossofNicholasandasenseofTimothyasalonewithhisdeepsadnesss.Hewritesthat“sometimes”hewas“somiserablethatevenspeakingonthephoneorgoingtotheshopswasdifficult”(p.228).219Whenheconfidedinafriend,hefeltpitied(ibid.)andthisseemstohavereinforcedafortressmentality.Everythingchanges–includingthepaceofthebookandtheportraitofTimothythatemergesfromthebook–afterTimothyenterstherapy.Itisnotonlythatshortlyafterwardshebecomesahusbandandthenafather.Healsogainsavoice,asindicatedbyhisweddingspeechandhis lettertohisrescuersafterthebirthofhisdaughter.There isanewurgencyandstrengthofpurpose.Hefurtherbecomesfleshandblood throughhisaccountofhis visits to Ireland, thepeoplehemeets thereandwhathediscovers and experiences. With his second visit, an aura of excitement enters the book. Timothywritesaboutfeeling“aburstofpleasure”,lettingout“awhoopofjoy”,experiencing“aspine-tinglingsensation”and“thethrillofendlesspossibilities” (p.252). Sensory imagesfloodthebookashisvisitscontinue and hismourning of Nicholas gathers pace (3.6.1). Freud explains how, inmourning, “theexistence of the lost object is psychically prolonged”, while “bit by bit” and in an “extraordinarilypainful”,“piecemeal”fashion,themourner“ispersuadedbythesumofthenarcissisticsatisfactionsitderives from being alive to sever its attachment to the object that has been abolished”(1917,pp.245,255). I interpretTimothy’s rememberingandmourninghis lossofNicholas throughhisvisitsastheprocessbywhichhebeginstodis-identifyfromthedeadNicholasandrediscoverthelivingNicholas.TimothywritesabouthissensethatNicholaswas“somehowtrapped”intheCastle,butthathecametorealisethatitwashismindwhichwashaunted(p.364).Hewrites,“ThroughmyreturntripsIwasfreeingmyselfmentally”(ibid.).IinterpretTimothy’s“WordswithNick”intheCastleneartheendofhisyearofvisitsasaparticularlyclear illustration of this sequence of remembering (ormourning) the past; psychic dis-identificationfromthedeadobject;recoveryofthelostgoodobject;andlookingtowardsthefuture.Timothyhadprepared the setting (the drawing room of the Castle) to evoke the “smells, sounds, feel andatmosphere of boyhood” (p.371). The effect was to open “a connection to childhood” (ibid.).RememberingthehappytimesspentinthatroomwithNicholas,he“convulsed”intothekindofcryinghehadnotdone“sinceatinychild”.Hewrites,“Isaid‘Nicky?’..forthefirsttimesince1979”.Itwasonly after “summon[ing] fromaplace farwithin” all thememorieswhichmeant he “had arrived asclose to 1979 as tomake almost no difference”, that Timothy was now able to begin an imagineddialogue with Nicholas as a separate living object (p.371). In the course of this imagined dialogue,Nicholasisrestoredastheliving(good)internalobjectwhomTimothywantsto“hug”and“squeeze”(p.372). Timothy says, “I can’t believe you’re alive. I knew you were alive.” The painful fact ofpermanentseparationisfacedandaccepted.Timothysays,“Iwon’tseeyouagain,willI?WillI?Nick?”(p.372).Nicholasisalovedandmissedobject:“Iloveyou,loveyou,missyou”(ibid.).DespitethepainenduredbyTimothyonaccountoftheirlovingattachmenttoeachother,Timothyaffirmsthatloving

219I note the extent towhich desolation features as a feeling state in someof the rescuers. So, for example,Timothydescribesoneoftherescuershevisitedaslooking“desolate”aftertellingherstory(p.282).

73

attachment.Hesays,“I’dchoosetocomebackagainasatwin, if Icouldhaveyouagain”(ibid.).Thedialogue/monologuehasmeant that “Finally I had said goodbye toNick and let himgo” (ibid.).Theweightoftheinternaliseddeadtwinislifted.Timothyfeels“lightandeasy”and“readytoroll”(ibid.).Freudwritesthatitisonly“whentheworkofmourningiscompleted[that]theegobecomesfreeanduninhibitedagain”(1917,p.245).Itisonlyafterthepsychologicalseparationeffectedthroughhis“WordswithNick”thatTimothyisabletofacehisguiltregardingbothhisdutiestothedeadandhissurvival.Timothymakeshis“WordswithNick” the last chapter of his book (chapter 28) and this makes sense for presentation purposes.However, inchronological terms,hisnightat theCastle inOctober2003precededhismeetingswithNicholas’ rescuers and the (retired) State Pathologist (who examined Nicholas’ dead body) in,respectively,November2003andFebruary2004.Thesemeetingsare related inchapter26.Timothyexplains how, through the eyes and words of themen who recovered Nicholas’ body and throughviewingthepathologist’sphotosofhisremains,Timothy’s“feelingthat[]hehadsomehowabandonedNick in this final duty” of seeing “his sweet face and diminutive body in their last appearance”“disappeared” (p.357). Asking the question and hearing from the pathologist that Nicholas’ injurieswere not survivable, the thought “decades in mymind” that Nicholas had “been left to die in thewater”“evaporated”(ibid.).Timothywrites,“Ifelthugereliefpassthroughme”(ibid.).I linkmyfindingsandtheaboveanalysisregarding identificationwiththedeadobjectwithGarland’sconceptofpost-traumatic identification(2002).220Freud,writingaboutmourning,observeshow lovecannot be given up after the loved person has died: reality demands withdrawal of love from thisobjectthatnolongerexists,butcontinuingdevotednesstothedeadobjectcanbesointensethat“aturning away from reality takes place and a clinging to the object through the medium of ahallucinatory wishful psychosis” (1917,p.244). Garland, writing about trauma, observes that for thetraumavictimexperiencingterrorandconfusion,“theimmediateresortistoturnbacktoandconnectwiththebodyoftheprimaryobject(asnon-humanprimatescandosoreadily)”(Garland,2002,p.213).However,thevictimoftraumaticlosshastheproblemthattheprimaryobject’snaturehas“changedfundamentally”:thegoodobjecthasfailedtopreventthetraumafromhappeningandhasturnedbad(ibid.,pp.212-214). Insuchacase,howarethedemandforcontinuingdevotednesstothelostobjectandforsafetytobesatisfied?Garlandsuggeststhat, inthatevent,“thesafestwayofrelatingtotheprimary object is one that involves clinging to it through being it, rather than being at a mentaldistancefromit”(ibid.,p.213).221Identificationprovidestheleastworstsolutionforthetraumavictimunwillingtogiveuphisattachmenttothe lostobjectandyet insearchofsafety.Being“atamentaldistance from” the object would involve the full painful experience of separation: identificationprotectsagainstthis.Further,identificationallowstheegotoshareinthepropertiesoftheobject.Asmyfindingsindicate,wheretheobjectisdead,thismeanssharinginthepropertyofnumbnesstopainandthepropertyofdeadnessitself,therebyhelpingtheegoavoid“thementalpainofguiltthatwouldhavetobeenduredifitweretocontinuewithitsindependenceandliveliness”(ibid.,p.214).

220Cf.Mitchell,2003,p.42.221Cf.Mitchell,2003,p.65.

74

Garlandsuggeststhatwhatneedstohappenisforthesurvivortofind“[s]omenewwayofrelatingtothislostgoodobject,andsomewayofdealingwiththisverypresentbadobject”(ibid.).Shesuggeststhatdis-identificationfromthebad(dead)objectcanonlybeachievedthroughmourningthe lossofthe relationship with the good (living) object (ibid.). She continues, “This means that the distancebetween the ego and its object can once again be tolerated, triangular space (Britton,1998)established,andtherelationshipbegintobeformulatedmentally,orsymbolised”(ibid.).I understandTimothy’s unconscious identificationwithhis deadbrother as indicativeof an arrestedmourningprocess.Whether itmay alsobe regardedas indicativeofmelancholia, as that concept isdefinedbyFreud(1917),isdebatable.ForFreud,thedistinguishingfeatureofmelancholia-absentinmourning - is “insistent communicativeness” of the melancholic’s sense of his own moralworthlessness (1917,pp.246-27). Timothy’s presentation, as it emerges from the book, seems verydifferent fromthis. Far frompersistent self-disclosure,Timothy ispersistently reticentand,althoughhis senseofhimself is as lesserandweakerwithouthis twin,he is capableof achievement inmanyareasoflife(3.5).Noristhereanyevidenceofself-punishmentorself-vilificationasdescribedbyFreud(1917,p.245).Ontheotherhand,Brenman’sunderstandingofFreud’sconceptofmelancholiaasa“negationoftheawareness of the loss of a good object as opposed to the sadness of amourner” (2006,pp.25,103)resonateswiththebook’sdepictionofTimothyaslonelyandlostandnotreallyknowingwhy(p.231).Further, I’ve referred above to Timothy’s sparse accountof the17 years followingNicholas’s death.OurknowledgeofthisperiodofTimothy’slifeislimited.Wedonotknowifheexperienceddepressiveepisodes during these years. Freud’s thesis is that themelancholic unconsciously identifieswith thelostobjectsothathemightexpresshishatredofandsadismtowardstheobjectforabandoninghim:heattacksthe lostobjectthroughhisownself-excoriationandself-denigration(1917,p.245-248).Myfindingsdonot support ananalysis along these lines.However,Brenman’sunderstandingof Freud’smelancholicasseparatedfrom“thegoodnessinothersandthemselves”(andthereforefrom“accessto help and hope”) strongly resonates with my findings (2006,pp.25-26). To the extent then, thatTimothymayberegardedashavingsufferedfrommelancholia,Iconsiderthatconditiontoreflectthedenudation of his internal world resulting from loss of the internal good object, rather than guiltrelatingtounconsciousfeelingsofhatredtowardsthelostobjectforabandoninghimorunconsciousrivalry.

4.2.3. ReformulationofPost-TraumaObjectWorldMy findings indicate that the post-trauma world of the surviving twin is the scene of a disasterinvolvingmultipleexternalandinternallosses.Thereisthelossoftheday-to-dayrelationshipwithhisliving twin, together with all the advantages and consolations that went with being part of thatmutually supportiveandprotectivecouple,which feltgreater than thesumof itsparts.There is theloss of identity. Innocence is lost, alongwith the experience of feeling carefree and optimistic, theexperienceof joiedevivre.There is the lossof theparentsastheywerebeforethey losttheirchild,andofthefamilyasitwasbeforethen.Thereisthelossoffamilylifeandofthepast:pastexperiencesare felt irretrievableandgone forever. The senseofnaturalorderand theexpectationof continuedgoing-on-beingarealso lost. The senseof theparentsand the familyasaprotective shieldare lost.Thereisthelossofthetwinasagoodinternalobject.Thesurvivor’sinnersenseofsafetyandsecurity

75

islost.Critically,thereisthelossofpsychicintegrityorwholeness(‘peaceofmind’)inthesurvivor,forhisinternalworldisnowdepleted(bythelossofthegoodobjectandalltheotherrelatedlosses),split,mutilated,andhauntedbythedeadtwinobject.Thesurvivorlosesbeliefinhimself.Thereisapainfullossofself-esteemandself-confidence.Thesurvivorneedstoreformulatehispost-traumainnerworldinordertorecoverfromtheselosses.My findings show that theavailabilityof goodexternalobjects tohelphim rememberandmourn iscritical.IhavefoundthatTimothy’sencountersduringhisyearofvisitswiththepeopleinvolvedintherescue and care of himself, his parents and Nicholas’ dead body, helped him to rediscover andreconfigure his internal good objects and thereby rebuild his inner resources. He re-finds hisgrandfatherthroughhisvisitstotheCastle:anoteonarecordsleevewas“sohim”(p.252andseealsop.248).Here-findshisgrandmothertoo,anotherpersontowhomhehadbeenunabletosaygood-bye(p.292).Throughhismeetingswith thepeoplewhohandledhisbrother’sbodyandhis “WordswithNick”Timothyrediscovershisdeadtwinasalovedandmissedobject.HealsorediscoversNanny,his“secondmother”,throughthe“lovinglyknittedlittleV-neck”inwhichNicholashadbeenkilled(p.356).What“knocked[him]sideways”whenhesawthephotographofNicholas’deadbodywas“theknittingofNanny”with“alltheindividualstrandsofwool..soclearlycaughtbythe..photographer’scamera”(ibid.).He“justhadnotexpectedtohaveNannytherewithme”whenundertakingthistaskwhichhehad dreaded (ibid.). My findings indicate that Timothy’s rediscovery of Nanny as a creative andintegrativeobjectmayhaveassistedhiminreconfiguringhisinnerobjectworldandinwritinghisbook.His rediscovery of her as a present, reliable, containing and loving object will have helped him todevelop a new capacity for self-containment. I have also referred in my findings to the movingencounter between Timothy’s mother and Elizabeth, one of Timothy’s rescuers, together withTimothy’s observations on this meeting, which suggest that the representation of his mother inTimothy’sinternalworldwasstrengthenedbythisnewrelationshipwithElizabeth(p.368).Ihavealsoreferred toDr.Heenanand thebondof friendshipquickly forgedbetween the two.There seems tohave been a strong identification with him. Timothy writes in his journal after a meeting with Dr.HeenaninNovember2003abouthisloveforhim:Hehaswit,humour,andaboveall,compassion.Hecares.” (p.369).Hewrites that his “sense”was “that ThomasMcMahon’smoral vacuumha[d] beendefeated” because he had “failed to turn me to hatred” (ibid.). He continues, “.. my heart singsbecauseonAugust27th1979HeenandefeatedMcMahonandIamtheproof”(ibid.). I interpretthatTimothyinternalisedDr.Heenanasagoodobject,strongenough–togetherwiththefactofTimothy’sownsurvival-toovercomethebadobject,McMahon,representingmurderanddeath.Timothy writes about the “liberation” he experienced at the close of his year of visits (p.358). He“foundasurgeofnewenergy”(p.375).Thesenseofgratitudeandself-beliefareespeciallystriking:“Iamnowasneverbeforeatlibertytobeunconcernedwithself,andthereforetobeofusetoothers.Whatmore could anyonewant?” (p.xiii). I link Timothy’s self-renewal and rebuilding of his internalresourcesthroughrediscoveryandreformulationofhisgoodobjectswithGarland’s thesis thatpost-trauma “the entire objectworld has to be reformulated” and that “recognition” of the loss of “thewholeofthepre-traumaworldandexistence”must lie“atthecentreofthework”withtraumatisedpatients(2002,p.214).This“dauntingtask”(ibid.)istheworkofmourning,throughwhichthemournerrebuilds“amemorytothepastcreativeaspectsoftherelationship”withthelostobject,whichinturnallows“newrelationships,withpeopleandwork”toberebuilt;themourner“allowsnewexperiencestonourishhimandhemateswiththem.”(Brenman,2006,p.30)).

76

4.2.4. DoesTwin-shipmeanDevelopmentalDeficit?Myinvestigationintothenatureoftwinlossanditsimpactonthesurvivorhasnecessarilyinvolvedanexaminationofwhatislostwhenthetwinrelationshipislost.ThefindingsIhavearrivedatconcerningthenatureofTimothy’srelationshipwithhistwinleadmetoquestionLewin’sthesis(2014)thattwinsexperienceadevelopmentaldeficitrelatedtothestrengthofthetwinbond(see1.3.3above).Lewin proposes that twins’ use of each other as a primary object interferes with each twin’srelationshipwiththemother,becausetheycanturntoeachotherforcomfortinthemother’sabsence(2014,pp.49,66-67).Herthesisisthattwinsareabletousetwin-shipasaretreatfromdevelopment,toavoidthedevelopmental tasksof learninghowtomanagethefrustrationandsadness involved intheirmother’sabsence.Consequently,theyneedneverexperiencefullythelossofthemother,andsoneedneverdevelopthecapacitytomourn.(2014,pp.14,55,76).Sheproposesthattwins’useofeachother as aprimaryobjectmeans thateach twin internalises an immature twin container, leading todisturbedratherthanrestfulstates,andinterferingwithdevelopment(2014,pp.49,176).AlthoughIacknowledgethatmyfindingsarebasedononlyonecase,IdonotrecognisethedynamicsdescribedbyLewinandsummarisedinthepreviousparagraph.MyunderstandingoftherelationshipbetweenTimothyandNicholasisthattheyeachweregoodfortheotherinthattheywereeachgoodcontaining and protective objects with respect to each other. Indeed, my findings show that whatmakes twin loss traumatic is the loss of the good (containing and protective) external and internalprimaryobjectrepresentedbythelosttwin.Timothy’slossofNicholaswastraumatic,notbecausethetwinswereinadequatecontainersforeachother,butbecausetheywereeffectivecontainersforeachotherfromquiteayoungage.222Further,myfindings indicatethat theboys’strongattachmenttoeachotherwasnotexclusiveoforhostile to other external objects inside or outside the family. Timothy writes about how, after thebomb, “Philip may not have been a twin but I had just as many laughs with him and enjoyed theheightened bond we now shared” (p.194). In particular, there was a strong mutual attachmentbetween the twins and theirmother,with themmissingher andhermissing themwhen theywentawaytoschool (pp.11-12). It is relevant, I suggest, thatby thetimeof theirbirth, thetwins’motherwas an experiencedmother, with a loving husband (p.122) and many older children who not onlyhelped her care for the twins (p.157), but who will have had their own love to give to these two“babies” of the family. This was a close and supportive family (p.287). Also, this was a particularlycaringmotherwhofromherhospitalbedinintensivecare,practicallyimmobileandunabletospeak,managedtocommunicatetothefamilyherconcernthat“theywereallsleepingwithsomeoneelse–no one on their own” (p.137) (and see 3.4.2 above). In addition, this was a pragmatic mother.Motheringwas sharedwith Nanny, keenly illustrated by Timothy’smemory of both twinswatching“films such asDumbo and Bambi from Nanny’s knee and my mother’s lap” (p.19). This was not ahousehold with a revolving door of au pairs changing every year. Timothy writes that Nanny had“joinedourfamily”shortlyafterthefirstchildwasborn,and“livedwithusandlookedafterallseven

222Timothy remembers that, as young as seven, when Nicholas feared returning to school with a new strictteacher,“Iwantedtogotosleep,butinsteadIlayawakeandlistenedtohisworries”(p.10).

77

childreninturn”,retiringonlywhenthetwinswenttoboardingschool(p.8).Shewasveryavailabletothetwins,sleepingwiththemintheirbedroomforthefirst fewyearsoftheir lives,andshewastheonetheywouldruntowithskinnedknees(p.9).Thereisalsothetwins’attachmenttoPhilip,theirnextoldest brother and “leader of our little triumvirate” (p.8) (2.1.10) and the close and enduringfriendshipstheymadeatschool(pp.15,150-151,153,179).My findings leadme to conclude that, although twinsmay become themain containing objects foreachotherintheirrespectiveinternalworlds,theyarealsoabletointernaliseothercontainingobjects,includingcontainingmaternalobjects.My findingssuggest thatwhether thetwinbondwill interferewiththematernalbond,andwhethertwinswilloffertoeachotheramatureorimmaturecontainer,willdependonarangeoffactors–thekindofmotherandmother-substituteavailable,thepresenceofoldersiblingsandthepersonalitiesofthetwinsthemselves.Thisisaquestionwhichliesoutsidethescopeofmyresearchproject.223It is interesting to think about Lewin’s thesis as illustrative of the traditional caution with whichpsychoanalysis regards strong horizontal attachments, in contrast with strong vertical attachments.Twin-shipisthemostextremecaseofaclosesiblingattachment.Theemphasisintheliteratureislessuponthebenefitsoftwin-shipbutratheruponhowitdisplacestheprimacyofthemother-infantbond.An alternative perspective is that the experience of a loving and empathic twin-ship helps twins todevelop a deep capacity for loving another wholeheartedly, together with related capacities ofcommitment,empathyandemotionalexpressivenessandsensitivity(cf.Magagnaetal.2009).Timothywritesabouttheimportanceofhiscapacityforempathiclisteninginhisquesttowinhiswife(pp.233-234).Healsowritesabouthiscapacityfordeep loveanddevotedness intheirrelationship(ibid.andp.236). I note Timothy’s consideration for others’ feelings. In his wedding speech, he spoke of histhoughtsabouthowhiswife’ssister“mustfeelassheseesIsabellamarrytoday”(p.236).Hegoesontosaythattheirsisterhoodwasmorelikeatwinhood“andthat’sarelationshipIunderstandmorethanmost” (ibid.). I interpret that Timothy’s experience of a loving relationship with Nicholas, far frominvolvinganykindofpsychicretreatawayfromrelatingwithothers,wassignificantindevelopinghiscapacitytorespondsensitivelytoothers’emotionalstates.

223AfurtherrelatedquestionwhichliesoutsidethescopeofmyresearchprojectistheimpactonTimothyandhis twin-shipwithNicholasofhavingexperiencedanupbringingwithin the traditionof theEnglisharistocracy.This upbringing carried with it social status (on account of the family’s connections with the Royal Family;glamour (on account of Timothy’s father’s award-winning career as a film producer);material privileges (e.g.,holidays in the family’s second home in the Bahamas); together with other privileges which contemporarypsychoanalysiswouldregardasquestionable(alive-innannyandboardingfromtheageof9).Coles(2015)writesabout“theshadowofthesecondmother”andthedamagingimpactshemayhaveonthebondbetweenmotherandchild.Schaverien(2015)writesaboutboardingschoolsyndromeandtheimpactonpersonalitydevelopmentofthelossofhomeandfamilyatanearlyage.Bothwriterssuggestthatnanniesandboardingschoolcaneachimpactonthecapacitytotrustandformintimaterelationshipsinadulthood.Ilacksufficientresearchmaterialinorder toarriveat findingson thesequestions so faras they concernTimothy.However, asnotedabove, suchevidenceasexistssupportsaninferencethatthemotheringTimothyreceivedfrombothhismotherandNannycontributed to his emotional and creative development. Regarding boarding school, I suggest that the factTimothy and Nicholas experienced the inevitable deprivations of boarding school together is likely to havelessened theirdistressatbeingaway fromhomeandstrengthened further thebondbetween them(see1.3.1above,esp,Sheerin(1991)andEngel(1974)).

78

4.2.5. GuiltTimothy does not use theword “guilt” to describe his feeling state. Instead, he generally speaks intermsof“regret”.Healsospeaksofforgiveness.Hewriteshowintheyearsafterthebombhe“felttheneed to forgive” but he “found [him]self with more questions than answers” (p.xiii). One of thosequestionswas“WhomshouldIforgive?”(ibid.).Otherpeoplesufferfromguilt.224WhenhefirsthearsofNicholas’death,hewritesofhisshockandconfusionuponexperiencingreliefathisownsurvival,buthedoesnotgoontosayhefeltguiltyaboutthis.Similarly,whenhewritesaboutlearning24yearslaterthatNicholas’injurieswerenotsurvivable,hesaysthat“anaggingdoubt”thatNicholashadbeenlefttodieinthewater“evaporated”andhefelta“hugerelief”.HedoesnotsaythathehadpreviouslyfeltguiltyaboutleavingNicholastodieinthewater.Nordoeshecommentfurther,whenherefersinhisaccountofThomasMcMahon’s trial to the likelihood thatNicholaswas in thecabinof theboat,andsotookthefullforceofthebombhiddenunderneathhisfeet,whilehe,Timothy,wasseatedontopof thecabin.DespiteTimothy’snon-useof theword“guilt”, I concludethatmy findingssupportthe existing literature regarding the prevalence of unconscious survival guilt, especiallywhere twinsareinvolvedinthesamelife-threateningevent(1.4.5).Myfindingsmaybesaidtoaddtothisliteraturein supportinga thesis that the surviving twin,whohasnotbeenable to seeor care forhisdyingordeadtwin,maycarryanadditionalburdenofguilt(orregret)forhavingabandonedhistwinbyfailingin this final duty. I regard this additional burden of guilt as another aspect of survival guilt. Acomparisonmaybemadewith theguilt andanguish sufferedby the soldierwhose special comradehas been killed andwho is deprivedof theopportunity to payhis respects or prepare thebody forshipmenthome(Shay,1994,pp.63-67).The existing literature regarding twin and sibling loss has a strong focus on unconscious guiltattributable to unconscious sibling rivalry andmurderousness. Indeed Klein (1940) stated that “thedeathofasibling,howevershatteringforotherreasons, istosomeextentavictoryandgivesrisetotriumphandthereforeallthemoretoguilt”.MightTimothy’s“naggingdoubt”thatNicholaswaslefttodie inthewaterreflectunconsciousguilt forhavingtriumphedintheultimatecompetition-thatforsurvival?Thereiscertainlyplentyofevidencethattheboyswerecompetitivewitheachother.(Shortlybeforethebombexploded,TimothyremarksuponhowheandNicholaswereeach“hoveringclosetothe helm” in case their grandfather chose to hand over the helm to one of them (p.67).) Timothystressesthatthetwinsusedtheircompetitiveness,sothattheyeachperformedattheiroptimumleveland,together,surpassedeveryoneelse.Ireferredattheoutsettotheirmutualdreadthat,ifdisasterweretobefall them,onewouldsurviveandtheotherwouldnot.Timothysaysthattheyalsofearedsurpassing each other at school: it was a relief when they were jointly awarded the scholarship toGordonstoun.Inote,however,thatintheirsummerexamsbeforethedisaster,Timothy’smarksweremarginallybetterthanNicholas’.It is interesting to consider what kind of evidence in the book might support an interpretation ofunconsciousguiltderivedfromunconscioussiblingrivalryandhatred.Suchaninterpretationmightbe

224TimothywritesthatJohnMaxwell,“withtwochildrenfromhissecondmarriage”,“startedtofeelagreatguiltabouttheattentionhewasgivingtohisson,Robbie,”who“seemedtobesupplantingPaulinhismind”(p.262).Itwastwoyearsafterthebirthofhissecondchild,ason,thatTimothybeganhisyearofvisitstoIreland(p.241).

79

plausible if there were evidence of other relationships (whether with his other siblings, peers,colleagues, friends, or spouse) marked by envy or rivalry. On the contrary, the book records whatseemstobeTimothy’sgiftforfriendshipandhiscapacityforbenignrelatinggenerally.His“uniqueandlifelongfriendship”withDavidisagoodexampleofthis(p.222).Theclose,open,empathicrelationshipthese two surviving twins formed together is indicative of the capacity for relationship they eachderivedfromtwinship. I regardTimothy’scapacityforrelationshipandsenseofgratitudeasstronglyindicativeofthelovingandopenlyaffectionaterelationshipheenjoyedwithNicholas,asdescribedindetailinhisbook.Myfindingsindicatethatthetwinshadastrongmodelforsucharelationshipinthelovingandopenlyaffectionaterelationshipoftheirparents.Timothy’s father remarks in the hospital (my emphasis), “it nearly breaks our hearts to see onlyTimothy left”(p.142).Thisremarksuggeststhat, inthe immediateaftermathofthebomb,Timothy’sidentical appearance to his dead brotherwas deeply upsetting to his parents. However, hismotheralsoregardedhissurvivalas“amiracle”(p.202).Timothyislikelytohavebeenaffectedbyhisparents’conflictingemotions,howevermuchtheytriedtoconcealthem.Crehan(2004),writingaboutsiblingloss,focusesontheparentsandtheirunconsciousguiltabouthavingfailedtoprotecttheirdeadchild.Shesuggeststhatparentalguiltmaybeprojectedontothesurvivingsibling,particularlywherethereisparentalsilenceaboutthedeath,orwherethere isanunconsciouscommunicationfromtheparentsthatthesurvivingsiblingisnotgrievingenough.TheremightbesomehintofthisinTimothy’smother’sjournals,wheresheexpressesherbafflementthatTimothycontinuedtosleepinthetwins’bedroom(pp.174,192).Thepositionregardingparentalorfamilysilenceaboutthedeathisnotstraightforward.MyfindingsshowthatTimothy’smotherwashappytotalkaboutNicholas,whereashisfatherwaslessso,andhisoldestbrotherwasnot(3.4.2).Theearlycapture,trialandimprisonmentofoneofNicholas’murderersmeant that the guilty had been formally identified and found guilty. Itmay be that thislimitedtheextentofunconsciousguiltavailableforprojectionintofamilymembers.Crehan(2004)alsoarguesthatitisthelossoftheparents,especiallythemother,ascontainer,whichiscritical. Timothy describes his parents at the time as “incapacitated” (p.374). They were not onlyreelingfromtheshockingmurderoftheirson,butalsohadlife-threateninginjuries.MyfindingsshowthatTimothyderivedconsiderablecomfortfromphysicalproximitytohis injuredparents inhospital,butthatcomfortwasnotenoughtopreventhislossofNicholasfromhavingatraumaticimpact.Itisdifficulttoimaginewhatcouldhavepreventedthatoutcomeintheseparticularcircumstances.

4.2.6. AngerIsingleoutfordetailedexplorationthenear-absenceofangerandaggressioninTimothy’sresponsetohis twin’s death, as recorded in his book. I expected to find considerable anger, given the terriblewrong that had been committed, so I discuss below this apparent gap in my findings and theuncertaintiestowhichitgivesrise.Althoughamuted tone f disgustmay just bediscerniblewhenTimothywrites about “themenwhowere later to replace the IRA’s Armalite rifles with Armani suits” (p.342 and see p.xiii), the book

80

records only three occasionswhen Timothy actually expresses anger (3.4.2 and 3.7.3 above).225Thefirst of these is what he describes as his “one and only episode of fury at the IRA” (p.206). Thisoccurred18monthsafterthebombwhenhelearnedduringhismid-morningbreakatschoolthattheIRAhadoccupiedtheCastleasaprotest.Hewrites,“Isworeandkicked,ventingmyangerinprivate”(ibid.).Having“calmedmyselfdown”,hemadetoreturntoclass,“butmidwaydownaflightofstairsIwashitbyanotherblindingrageandfoundmyselftalkingaloudandswearing”(ibid.).Hesatinclass“seething”, relaxing onlywhenhe learned the “siege” had ended “quickly and peacefully” (ibid.) 18yearslater,whileattheKennedySchoolofGovernmentatHarvard,TimothyattendedalecturegivenbyMartinMcGuinness(pp.341-342).Timothywritesthat,“disgusted”bytheconductofthepresidingacademic at the lecture,which had the tone of an IRA fundraising event, hewent to see theDean(p.342).Hewrites,“IputaphotographofNickonhisdesk”,andplayedarecordingoftheevent,afterwhich theDean agreed there had been a “cock-up” (ibid.). There is a third flash of angerwhen, 24yearsafterthebombandafterviewingNicholas’hospitalrecords,hewrites,

InowlearnthateveryonewasabletoseehimdepartonliveTVandyetIdidn’tknowhewasgoing. I didn’t even knowhewas dead. I remember the days and nights in thatward and IresentnothavingbeencomposmentisenoughnottohaveseenmyNickyoff.Andthat’swhatI’mdoingnow.(p.293).

TheabovetextextractssuggestthatTimothywasangrywiththeIRAforhavingkilledhisbrotherandforhaving lefthimso incapacitatedthathewasdeprivedofa farewell.Theunansweredquestion is:whathappened to thatanger? It seems thatTimothy’sparentswerealsoangry,butagain thereareonly a couple of occasions in the bookwhere this ismentioned, and the same question arises. So,Timothy’sfatherhadinsistedfromhishospitalbedthathewouldattendthefuneralsinEngland,latertellingTimothy“therehadbeenanelementof‘fuckyou’inthisasifindefianceoftheattack”(p.132).Equally, Timothy’s mother wrote in her diary after visiting her father’s grave, on their return toEngland:“Nice,butJohnandIfelt“BloodyIRA”(p.182).Acluemaybefound inTimothy’s father’sresponseto learningofthetriumphalismdisplayedbythetwoIRAmenwhoappearedintheSpecialCriminalCourtinDublinafewdaysafterthebombandwerechargedwithmurder.HetoldTimothy24yearslaterthat,ashe“layinthathospitalbedandthoughtaboutit”,he“decidedtheonlythingIcoulddowascut[them]outofmylife”(p.127).Ispeculatethat“them”hasbeensubstituted fora swearwordand interpret thatTimothy’s father’sdecisionwas todetach(orcutoff)fromanyangerhecouldfeeltowardstheIRA,andthatTimothyandtherestofhisfamilyfollowedthatlead.TimothywritesinhisEpiloguethat,“emergingfrombandagesanddrugsinSeptember 1979”, his “parents’ example guided me” (p.374). I have already referred to Timothy’ssenseofhimselfasemotionally“numb”afterthebomb(3.3.4).InotethedetachedtoneofhisaccountofThomasMcMahon’strial(pp.298-308),whichcontrastsmarkedlywiththedeeplyemotionaltoneof

225 Inote that, followingdischarge fromSligohospital,Timothygoes toconvalescewith friendswherehe firstcatchesasalmonandlatershootstwogrouse(pp.172,177).Thelandingofthesalmonreadspowerfullyasafighttothedeath(p.172).ApossibleinferenceisthatTimothyfoundanimmediateoutletforhisangerandaggressiontowardshisbrother’skillersinthesefieldsports.

81

theremainderofthebook.ThereisonepointedremarkwithrespecttoMcMahon’saccomplicewhichgives some hint of emotion underneath (p.306). Otherwise, Timothy writes about McMahon’sconviction that, “In a detached, clinical way I felt satisfied” (p.189). I infer that Timothy, eitherfollowinghisfather’smodel,orunconsciouslyseekingtoavoidtheexperienceofangeroraggressionandtheunconsciousguiltthatmighthaveengendered(1.4.5),splitoffhisanger.Thismayprovideanadditionalexplanationforthedepressed,deadenedexistencehefoundhimselfleadinginadulthood.Yet this is abookwhereotherpeopleareangryandgivevent to their anger.There is the IRAman,quotedbyTimothy,whoregardstheIRAas“history’svengefulchildren”,expressing“thestifledrageofourancestors”(p.328).Butthereisangerclosertohome.Dr.BrianBestfelt“ahugesurgeofanger”whenhe spotted the toddlerplaying in theblood-stainedpoolofwater (p.96and seep.280). Philipwas “furious” with the detective who could not identify which twin had died (p.101). Amanda andNortonexpressedtheirfurytowardsanintrusiveworldpressinthedaysafterthebomb(pp.104and115).Timothyalsorecordsthewidespreadoutrage,disgustandangerexpressedinthe“thousands”ofletters from strangers received by the family (e.g.,p.163 and see also pp.186,191,286-287). WhenMcMahon was being reviewed for parole, his cousin wrote to the Times that this was “utterlycontemptible”andthatMcMahon“shouldneverbeallowedoutoftheprisongatesuntilheisdrivenoutinahearse(p.225).Timothywritesthat,atthetime,“asnormal”he“chosenottosayanything”,but that later hewrote an article for thenewspaper becausehewanted “tooffer a different view”(ibid.) In fact, his article offered the opposite viewpoint, suggesting that “at somepoint”McMahonshould be released “to live out the autumn years of his life with his family, his children andgrandchildren”(ibid.).OfparticularinterestinthisconnectionisTimothy’saccountofPaulMaxwell’sfather’shyper-aroused,desperate, tormented, “berserk” state on the day of the bomb (p.91 and cf. Shay,1994,pp.77-99).Sittinginhisgardenhalfamileawayandhearingthebangofthebomb,JohnMaxwellfelt“it’sgottobetheboat”anddrove“likemad”totheheadland(p.81).Friendswerepersuadedtotakehimouttosea (p.87).Once they reached the site of the explosion, Johnwas “besidehimself” and theyhad to“restrain”him“from jumping into thewater” (p.88).His “shoutsofanguish”couldbeheardas theyturnedback(ibid.).Returnedtotheharbour,Johnwas“runninground.. lookingforPaul”,andwhenthe boat with Paul’s body was landed, he “rushed to the end of the harbour” (p.91). A witnessdescribed John “roaring like an animal”, “walking up and down the quay, sort of screaming” (ibid.).JohntoldTimothy24yearslaterthathehad“suddenlygotinatremendousrage”and“completelylostit”(ibid.).Hehadshoutedthattheattackerswere“cowards”and“thattheywerekillingoneoftheirown”and“I’mafuckingIrishman,thesebastards”(ibid.).IwonderifTimothymighthaveenviedJohnMaxwellhisberserkstate,withitsbeast-likeandgod-likelackofrestraint(cf.Shay,1992,pp.77-99).TimothywritesabouthowhefeltbondedwithJohnMaxwelland there are several points of identification (pp.260,262-263). Such envywould also be consistentwith Timothy’s regret about his inability to search for, see and be with his dead twin (see 3.7.2and 3.7.3 above). Perhaps Timothy felt the “responsibility .. to be an example to the civilisedcommunity”,asurgeduponhimbytheSligocoronerin1979(p.5),andnottobetrayanytraceofangryemotionorvengefulnessinpublic.SuchastancemightberegardedasaversionofAgger’s‘goodchild’(1.4.5).AfurtherpossibilityisthatTimothydefendedhimselfagainsttheexperienceofanger,toavoidopening the floodgates. Ihave readTimothy’saccountof JohnMaxwell’s response to the lossofhis

82

son in the bomb many times and, despite my best efforts, it still causes me to weep. The fullexperienceofangermighthaveledTimothytothefullexperienceofloss.Itmightalsohaveledhimtootherobjectsforhisanger.Inthebook,TimothyinvestigatesthesecuritymeasuresattheCastleandthedecisionsmaderegardingsecurity(orthelackofit),whichlefthisfamilyvulnerable.Hewritesalsoaboutthelikelihoodthatlocalpeoplemayhavebeen“willingtoturnablindeye”(p.331)inthedaysleadinguptothebomb.Throughout,thereisnomentionofanyangertowardsthepeoplewhomighthave been expected to, but who failed to, protect Nicholas and himself. These people may haveincludedhisgrandfatherandhisparents.226Thisisanarealeftunexploredbythebook.Withrespecttothis aspect ofmy research study, I accept the limitations ofmy research data and leave open andunresolved the question of Timothy’s anger towards his brother’smurderers or towards any of theotherpeopleinvolvedinthesecurityofthefamily.Equally, I leave unresolved the question of Timothy’s possible anger towards Nicholas for havingabandonedhimtolifealone.AhintofsuchangermaybeinferredinTimothy’s“WordswithNicholas”,where he remarks, “You would have loved being a grown-up. But I’m glad you didn’t have to gothrough some of the shit” (p.373). I also leave unresolved the question of Timothy’s possible angertowards his family for not telling him aboutNicholas’ death until itwas too late for him to see hisbrother’s body. I infer from the book that Timothy attributes this loss wholly to his brother’smurderers.

4.3. ClinicalImplicationsMy study is a studyof a single case. It is also a studyof aparticular kindof twin loss. Timothy andNicholas were caught up in a violent, murderous attack, which left one twin dead and the otherseriouslyinjured.ItisnotonlythatTimothyhadthetraumaofhisownexperienceofthebombanditsaftermath to contendwith, aswell as the trauma of loss of his twin. It is also that theywere bothinvolvedinthesamelife-threateningincidentinwhichonesurvivedandtheotherdidnot.Therearefurthersignificantfeatures.Bothboyswere14atthetimeoftheloss.Further,Timothyistheyoungestof his large family, with several older, adult siblings available at the time to provide practical andemotional support.My findings in thisoneparticularcaseof lossofa twin leadme to the followingpractice-oriented conclusions for therapists workingwith adults who have lost a twin in childhood.Therapists working with child survivors will note with interest Timothy’s sense that he was muchhelpedby stayingwith family friends,whereheatewell, sleptwellandhadsmalladventureswhichgavehimasenseofmasteryoverhisenvironment(p.170).

4.3.1. TraumaSurvivorTheclearimplicationforpsychotherapistsworkingwithsurvivingtwinsisthattheextensiveemotionalsufferinginvolvedinthiskindoftraumaticchildhoodlossneedstobefullyunderstood.Thedefencesagainstexperiencingthissuffering,whichhaveservedthesurvivortodate,needtoberespected.The

226Theauthor iscriticalofthe“comfortable..veilof ignorance”whichthefamilyhadallowedtodescendoverwhathadhappenedinIreland(ref.).

83

intensityoftheterrorofbeingoverwhelmedbytheirsufferingwhichpersistsatadeeplevelneedstobeappreciated.

Therunningthreadthroughmythemes is theenormityof the lossand itsexplosiveanddevastatingimpactonthesurvivor’spsyche.Garlandemphasisesthat“atthecentreofthework”withtraumatisedpatients“mustlietherecognitionofthatsenseofloss,onesogreatthatitseemstoincludethewholeofthepre-traumaworldandexistence”(2002,p.214).Guiltandregretarefeaturesofthephenomenonof twin loss survival, but it is the heartbreak – the emotional suffering involved in the prematurerupture of a deep and identifying attachment (togetherwith the defences employed to protect thepsychefrombeingoverwhelmedbysuchsuffering)-whichisattheheartofthebook.Thepersonwhohassufferedthiskindoftrauma(orheartbreak)needstobemetwithgenuineness,warmthandhighly-sensitisedattunement.

In particular, the therapist needs tobe attuned to the survivor’s terror and senseof theworld as adangerousplace.Theemphasisneedstobeonhelpingthepatienttohaveanexperienceofsafety.Tobeginwith,andmaybeforalongtime,thetherapistneedstobetheretohold,orsimplybewith,herpatient,untilhebeginstofeelsafeagain.Timothyrecountshow,landedonthebeachandawaitingtheambulance,theboatbuildercameandspoketohimandwhenhemadetogoTimothysaid“Don’tgo”,but hewent (p.90). Equally, theremaybe an understandable fear of dependency. It seems to havebeenimportanttoTimothy,inmakingthedecisiontoentertherapy,thathisGPtoldhimthat,whenhehadtherapy,“hehadknownwhenitwastimetofinish”(p.228).

4.3.2. Twins’SharedIdentityInorderthebettertoappreciatetheexistentialcrisissufferedbythesurvivor,thetherapistneedstohaveaclearunderstandingofpsychoanalytictheoryregardingtwins’sharedidentityandtheiruseofeachotherasaprimaryobject.However,myfindingsimplythatthetherapistneedstoguardagainsttheoretical assumptions connecting twin-ship with developmental deficit and hostility towardsexternalrelationships.

4.3.3. NewGoodObjectThesurvivingtwin,whosemostsignificant internalobject isadeadandabsentobject (hisdeadtwinwithwhomheis identified),needsatherapistwhoisfullypresentandalive(inthesenseofwarmthand the careful attunement and adjustment mentioned earlier), and who is interested in trying tounderstand how the survivor is feeling and help them rediscover and reconnect with their goodinternal objects, in part through their experience of the therapist herself and in part through theprocessof remembering (cf.Magagna’sattunedapproach toheradolescentanorexic femalepatientwhowastraumatisedbyseparationfromhertwin[Lewinetal.,2009]).IhavereferredearliertoTonyHeenanandhis importancetoTimothy’semotional recovery. Inote thatTimothydrawsattention inparticular toDr.Heenan’skindness (p.295)andhow important itwasforhimto feel that“hecares”(p.369). I conclude that the therapistneeds tocareaboutandbewilling tohearaboutherpatient’semotionalsuffering.

Timothy says very little about his therapist, Berenice. He had stopped his sessions with a previoustherapist after some months, feeling he had “made little progress” (p.231). With Berenice, “thedifferencewasmarked”(ibid.).Headds,“shepractised inastylewhichsuitedmebetter”.Timothy’s

84

shortdescriptionofhissessionsimpliessomethingaboutquietness,slownessandasenseofsafetyandreliability. His therapist seems to have succeeded in helping Timothy to avoid toomuch emotionalarousalbylettinghimdictatethepaceandtherebytofindathinkingspace.227Timothywritesthathe“slowly learned to see connections and recogniseprocesses, conscious and subconscious, that I hadoverlooked before” (ibid.). He writes, “I knew she understood” (p.228). Timothy singles out formentionhis therapist’s suggestionthathehave“somequiet time”beforehis sessions.Adoptinghersuggestion, he fell into a routine of turning off the car radio and his telephone on his way to hissessionsandonhiswayhomestoppingoffatapetrolstationforasnackwhile“turningonmymobilephoneandreconnectingmyselftomyroutine”(p.231).Later,walkingonMullaghmorebeach24yearstothedayofthebomb,Timothywritesabouthowhe“screenedoutthenoiseandactivityaroundmeand tuned myself to an inner frequency” (p.255). Possibly Timothy was helped by his therapy todevelopthiscapacitytoreconnecttomemoryandemotion.

ThepersonalityofTimothy’stherapistdoesnotemergefromthebook;sheexistsforthereadersimplyasatherapeuticfunction.Thisinitselfistelling,Isuggest,sinceitsuggestsanunobtrusive,facilitativeand supportive presence. I suggest that Timothywas able to take awaywith him his experience ofconnectednessandcaringcontainmentbyhis therapistover thecourseof their relationshipandusethat experience to connect with new external containing objects and rediscover his lost containingobjects.Timothy’sbookgivesusaprivilegedwindow intohow, justas traumacanhaveanenduringimpact,sotoocanagoodtherapyexperience(cf.Guntrip,1975,p.145228).

Itmaybearguedthatamodelforworkingpsychoanalyticallywithsurvivorsofchildhoodsiblinglossofcarefulattunement,asupportive,non-impingingtherapeuticpresence,andafocusuponcollaborativemeaning-making, is no more than what most therapists offer their patients as a matter of course.However, this would be a mistaken assumption. Practitioners familiar with current psychoanalyticthinking on twin loss and its emphasis on survivor guiltmight readily conclude (as Imistakenly didbefore undertaking my research study) that the focus of clinical work with survivors of childhoodsiblinglossoughttobeinterpretationofguiltandangertowardsthelostobject.Myfindingssuggestthat this kind of approach will leave the patient who has lost a deeply-loved twin feelingmisunderstood and alienated, at the mercy of and overwhelmed by his bad objects, rather thanconnectedwithhistherapistandmovingtowardsconnectednesswithhislostgoodobjects.

4.3.4. Guilt,AngerandDestructivenessTo the extent that the survivormay feel persecutedby his dead twinobject (for having abandonedhim, for surviving the disaster, for going on living), I suggest that it is unhelpful for his therapist tointerpret the survivor’s unconscious guilt. The result might be that the survivor feels doublypersecuted, by his dead twin and by his therapist, and judged and found wanting by both. In thatevent, the effect could be to strengthen, rather than weaken, the influence of the dead object. Ifanything,myanalysissuggeststhatthesurvivormaybehelpedbyexpressrecognitionthathe isnot

227AcontrastmaybedrawnwiththefirstofTimothy’svisitstoIrelandinhisyearofvisits,whenthestimuliofsightsandsoundsfrequentlyoverpoweredhimandheneededtotakeastepback(pp.246-249).228“Analysts are advised to be open to post-analytic improvements .. We must know about post-analyticdevelopmentsifwearetoassesstheactualresultsoftheprimaryanalysis.”

85

guiltyofhistwin’sdeath(p.357).Myfindingspointtothesurvivingtwin’sneedforagenuinelycaringandkindlistener,whowillhelpthesurvivingtwintorememberandreconnectwithhis losttwinandthe relationship theyenjoyedbefore thedeathandallhisother lostgoodobjects.This isnot tosaythatexistingtheorypointingtotheinfluenceofunconscioussurvivalguiltandsiblingrivalryshouldbediscounted,butratherthatitshouldbereflecteduponbythetherapistinthecontextoftheparticularsiblingrelationshipherpatientexperienced.229

Equally,myfindingssuggestthatitdependsonthepersonalityofthepatientwhetherornotandtheextenttowhichtheyexperiencerageorangeronthebasisofhavingbeenabandonedbytheirdeadtwin.Thetherapistneedstotreatcarefullytheory,whichwouldsuggestfeelingsofabandonmentandresulting rage against the lost object are inevitable sequelae of twin or sibling loss. Timothy comesacross inhis bookas gentle, capableofbeing firmanddirect, but calmand tranquil of spirit. ThesepersonalityattributesmaybeconnectedwiththeinfluenceofNanny.Inotehowhewritesthat,afterrediscoveringNannyinthepathologist’sofficewhenlookingathisphotosofNicholas,“Ididn’tbreakdown,scream,hurlthepackofphotographsatthewallandthrowmyselfonthefloor.Ifeltgentleandstill ..” (p.356). He describes himself as “philosophical” (p.189). I have referred earlier to Timothy’sconsiderationforothers’feelings.Meetingthebutler,Peter,again,looking“linedandpained”,he“justwanted to give him a hug and cry” (p.264). Seeing his father being stretchered into the ambulanceafterthebomb,Timothyrememberssmilingbroadlyandgreetinghim,“thinkingImustdoeverythingIcouldtolifthisspiritsandnotbetrayhowawfulhelooked”(p.96).Hewritesaboutreassuringhissister(thatshehadnotdonethewrongthingbyleavinghimaloneaftertellinghimNicholashaddied)andsomeof the rescuers (who felt that theyhadnotdoneagood job) (pp.125,294,283).Healsowritesabouthowinhospitalhefelt“veryreassured”byhissiblings(p.111)andafterhehadbeentakentoseehisfather(p.129).Thiswasafamilywhocomfortedandconsoledeachother.Timothyquotesfroma letter froma family friendwho came tohelp at thehospitalwhich refers to Timothy’smother as“always thinking of others first” (p.138). The continuing practical and emotional care Timothyexperienced from all his siblings in the wake of the bomb is very strong evidence of the kind ofupbringingtheyreceivedbothfromtheirparentsandfromNanny.Idonotdiscountthepossibilitythatangerandaggressionwerefearedandrepressed(assuggestedbytheauthorsnotedin1.4.5),butmyanalysissuggeststhattheextenttowhichthesearefeaturesofthelosswilldependonthepersonalityof the survivor, the nature of his upbringing, and the particular relationship enjoyedwith the deadsibling.

229IreferredearliertoanotherrecentlypublishedaccountofsiblinglosswhichIdiscoveredafterIsubmittedmythesis(Beard,2017).ThismemoirtellsthestoryofthedeathbydrowningofBeard’syoungerbrother(aged9andalsocalledNicky),whenheandtheauthor(aged11)werejumpingwavesontheCornishcoastandaripcurrentpulledtheyoungerchildouttoseaandtohisdeath.ThememoiristheresultofBeard’sinvestigationinmiddle-ageofNicky’sdeathafteralifetimeof“lookingaway”.Thisbookisfullofangerandguilt.Beardisangrywithhisfatherfornotsavinghisbrother,hismotherandboardingschoolfordenialoftheloss,andathisbrotherforhiscompetitiveness.Hefeelsguiltythathedidn’tlikehisyoungerbrother(whowasmoretalentedthanhim)andforgoading his brother into the sea and not trying to save him when he got into difficulties. It would be aninterestingfutureresearchprojecttoundertakeapsychoanalyticcasestudyofBeard’saccountandcompareandcontrastthefindingswiththefindingsinthiscasestudy.

86

4.3.5. AvailabilityofSupportAlthoughtheorywouldsuggestthatbereavedparentsstruggletomakespaceintheirmindsfortheirbereaved children, my findings show that Timothy’s parents (and siblings) despite everything theyendured,wereabletoempathisewithTimothy’slossanddistressandwereconcernedabouthim.Thissuggeststhatthetherapistneedstokeepanopenmindabouttheavailabilityofparentalandfamilysupportforthetwinwhoisbereavedinchildhood.

4.3.6. TellingtheStoryMyfindingsindicatetheimportanceforthesurvivor,fromtheperspectiveofintegratingthetraumaoftheloss,oftellinghisstoryandplacingthelossofhistwinwithinthenarrativearcofthatstory.Asmyfindingsindicate,traumafracturesnarrative.Thingsaretornapart.Thereisachaoticmess.Thetraumamay be fenced off in the psyche, but all psychic roads lead to it, even if there are ‘no entry’ signseverywhere.The forsakenCastlevisitedbyTimothy in2003,witheverything left inplace–eventhebottles on the drinks trolley (p.248) – just as itwaswhen the family departed 24 years earlier, is apowerfulmetaphorforthe‘frozen-in-time’qualityofthetraumainTimothy’spsyche.Timothywritesthat he felt as if he was “aboard theMarie Celeste” (ibid.). Analysis of my themes points to theenormity and enduring nature of the traumatic impact of loss of a twin.My findings show that theexperienceoftraumaticlosslivesonindefinitely–fordecadeseven-inasplit-offpartofthesurvivor’spsyche,untilandinsofarasthelossiscapableofbeingmournedandthetraumaintegratedintothesurvivor’slife.ThebookstandsasakindofmemorialortributetoNicholas-the“send-off”Timothymissedwhenhewaslying,injured,inhospitalandunawareofhisbrother’sdeath.ItnotonlytellsthestoryofNicholas’life. It tells the story of how much he was loved, especially by Timothy. The book also has theadvantageofbeingaconcretething,whichisseparatefromTimothy,andwhichbringsNicholasbackto life in itspages.Timothyhasconductedathoroughinvestigationofhisbrother’sdeath.Thereisasense of justice having been done.230Not every surviving twin will have Timothy’s creative gifts,reflectivenatureand journalisticbackground.Noteverysurvivingtwinwillevenwanttowriteabouttheir loss.231My findingswould indicate, nonetheless, that by encouraging andhelping the survivingtwinto“piecetogether”(p.xi)hisstory,asTimothydid,thetherapistcanalsohelpthesurvivingtwinto“piecetogether”anewpost-traumainternalworld.

4.4. ResearchImplications

4.4.1. FutureResearchMyresearchhastakentheformofonecasestudywherethetwinswereidenticalboyswhoenjoyedacloseandlovingbond.Futureresearchcouldadoptacomparativecasestudyapproachandinvestigate

230 It is the biographer's quest to rescue his subject from the past: 'all is not lost, your timewill come again,justicemayyetbedone'(Smith,2003).231JohnMaxwellalsohadtherapyandhisessayandpoemwrittenafterwardsabouthislosshavebeenpublished(p.262).

87

otherkindsof twin lossandsibling loss.Thiskindof theoreticalsampling isveryvaluable.So, futurecasestudiescouldinvestigatetheimpactoftwinlosswherethetwinsarenon-identicalorwherethetwinrelationshipismarkedbyopenrivalryandenvy.232Afurtherareaforresearchmightbetheimpactoflossofatwinwherethetwinsaretheoldest,ratherthantheyoungestinthefamily.ThefactthatTimothywas the youngest of his large familymeant that hewas able to turn for practical help andcompanytohisoldersiblings.Thebookrecordstheextensivesupporttheyprovided.Futureresearchcould investigate the impact of twin losswhen the survivor does not have supportive older siblingswilling tohelphim.A furtherdistinguishing factor inTimothy’scase is thathis lossofhis twinmadefront-page news across the world. His status as griever was fully acknowledged, not least in the“thousands”oflettersthefamilyreceived.Futureresearchcouldtesttheimpactonthesurvivingtwininthemoreusualcasewherethelossisacknowledgedlesswidely.

Futurecasestudiesmightalsoinvestigatetheimpactofsiblinglosswhere(i)thesiblingsarenottwins,butarea“pair”or“couple”inthesensethattheyrelyoneachothersimilarlytotwins233:and(ii)thesiblingsarenottwinsandarenotatwin-likesiblingpair.Itisaninterestingquestionhowmuchoftheemotional suffering experienced by Timothy was attributable to the fact he and Nicholas werebrothers,asdistinctfromtwinbrothers.TimothyrefersinhisEpilogueinteraliatohissiblingsandthe“price”theypaid“forwhattheyenduredinIreland”(p.374).Hewritesthattheyhavetheirownstoriestotell(pp.374-375).Inthisconnection,Iamstruckbytheuseoflanguageandmetaphorsverysimilarto thoseusedbyTimothy in JoannaMoorehead’s shortaccountof thedeathofheryoungest sister,Clare(Stamford,2011,pp.37-46).234Joannaevenwrites,“Andallthiswashappeningunderacloudless,perfect sky” (ibid.,p.38). Very similar themes to those I have identified in my findings emerge inJoanna’saccount.Shewritesthat,immediatelybeforethedeath,the3oldersiblingswere“playingoutthe finalhoursofour childhood”.Afterwards, “nothing [would]everbe the sameagain ..our idyllicfamily life [came] toanend”. Joannaneeded“someevidence thatClarewas reallydead”and therewasno “hardevidence”. Sheneeded to “bury [the] grief very, verydeep inside”,but “it never goesaway”.Inadulthood,sheneeded“tomakeanactual journey”aswellas“apsychological journey”totheplaceoftheaccident.Aftercompletinghermourning,shehasthesensethatClareis“stillalive–ina way – inside of me” (Stamford,2011,pp.38-45). These comparisons are fascinating and suggestplentifulquestionsforfurtherresearchinthisarea.

4.4.2. UseofPublishedTextIacknowledgethatmyuseofapublishedtext, rather thanclinicalmaterial,givesrise to thegaps inknowledge,unansweredquestionsandareasofuncertaintynotedin4.2.6above.Futureresearchintosurvivingtwinlosscoulduseprimarydata,thoughincreasinglyethicalconsiderationsmaketheuseofclinicalmaterialproblematic.

232Cf.Beard(2017).233I agreewith Edward that symbiotic-like relationshipsbetween siblings arenot confined to siblingswhoaretwins (2012,pp8-10). I alsoagreewithMitchell that,although the literaturewould seemto regard twinsasanexceptional case, they canequallywell be regardedas extreme instancesof conditionsof siblinghood, and sohavemuchtotelluswithregardtosiblingdynamicsgenerally(2003,pp209,225).234Joannawas9andClare3whenClarewaskilledbyacar.

88

My experience of using a published biography for my research leads me to recommend otherresearchers to consider this approach to investigating a phenomenon which they are unable toinvestigateusingclinicalmaterial.Theprocesshasbeendeeplysatisfyingandrewarding.IhavebeenfortunateinhavingavailabletometheparticularbookwhichIhaveused.Iconsideritarichresourceof high literary quality, whichmanages amasterly combination of a portrayal of an emotional andpoeticjourneywithaninvestigativereport.ThebookdoeswhatTimothyadviseshischildrentodo,iftheysufferabereavementwhileyoung– it“grapple(s)withthetraumainclose-upandslowmotionandfromeveryangle..untiltheboxofunresolvedgriefunlocks”(p.358).Itfollowsthatthequalityofmy research project owes a considerable debt to the quality of Timothy’s book. My intention hasalwaysbeentoseektodoitjustice.

89

Appendix1

FAMILYTREE

Lord Louis Mountbatten

Lady Edwina Mountbatten

John Knatchbull David Hicks

Norton

Michael John ‘Joe’

Amanda

Jane

Philip

Nicholas

Edwina

Pamela Patricia

Timothy

Ashley

India

90

Appendix2

PEOPLEANDPLACES

(inalphabeticalorder)

Bowden,Helen‘Nanny’ Nannytoall7Knatchbullchildren

Best,Dr.Brian surgeonatRoyalVictoriaHospital,Belfast,rescuer

Brabourne,DowagerLady‘Dodo’ motherofJohnKnatchbull,grandmotherofhis7children

ClassiebawnCastle LordMountbatten’sholidayhomeatMullaghmore,Co.Sligo

Garda,the(AnGardaSiochana) policeforceoftheRepublicofIreland

Heenan,Dr.Anthony(Tony) anaesthetist,SligoGeneralHospital

Hicks,Ashley cousinofKnatchbulls,yearyoungerthanNicholasandTimothy

Hicks,David husbandofPamela,fatherofEdwina,Ashley,andIndia

Hicks,Edwina cousinofKnatchbulls,sameageasPhilipKnatchbull

Hicks,India cousinofKnatchbulls,2yrsyoungerthanNicholasandTimothy

Hicks,LadyPamela youngerdaughterofLordMountbattenofBurma,sisterofPatricia,motherofEdwina,AshleyandIndia

IrishRepublicanArmy(IRA) anyofseveralmovementsinthe20thand21stcenturiesaimedatsecuringbyviolenceanindependentrepublicforallIreland

Knatchbull,LadyAmanda oldersisterofNicholasandTimothy,aged7attheirbirth

Knatchbull,Amber eldestdaughterofTimothyandIsabellaKnatchbull

Knatchbull,Isabella wifeofTimothyKnatchbull

Knatchbull,LadyJoanna oldersisterofNicholasandTimothy,aged9attheirbirth

Knatchbull,John,7thLordBrabourne fatherofNicholasandTimothy,husbandofPatriciaKnatchbull

Knatchbull,TheHon.Michael-John(Joe)olderbrotherofNicholasandTimothy,aged14attheirbirth

Knatchbull,Milo secondchildofTimothyandIsabellaKnatchbull

Knatchbull,TheHon.Nicholas twinbrotherofTimothy

Knatchbull,TheHon.Norton eldestsiblingofNicholasandTimothy,aged17attheirbirth

Knatchbull,Patricia,LadyBrabourne motherofNicholasandTimothy,wifeofJohnKnatchbull, elderdaughterofLordMountbattenofBurma

Knatchbull,TheHon.Philip brotherclosestinagetoNicholasandTimothy,3attheirbirth

91

Knatchbull,TheHon.Timothy twinbrotherofNicholas,authorof‘FromaClear,BlueSky’

Loftus,David survivingtwin,Timothy’sbestman(withPhilip)athiswedding

McGirl,Francis chargedwithThomasMcMahon;acquittedofmurders

McGuinness,Martin formerIRAcommander,chiefSinnFeinnegotiatorinpeaceprocessthatledtoGoodFridayAgreement

McMahon,Thomas formerIRAbombmaker,convictedofmurderofNicholas,PaulMaxwell,DowagerLadyBrabourneandLordMountbattenofBurma

McWhirter,Norris survivingtwinofRoss

McWhirter,Ross murderedbyIRAin1975

Maxwell,John fatherofPaulMaxwell

Maxwell,Paul 15-year-oldschoolboyemployedbyLordMountbattentolookafterhisboatatMullaghmoreinAugust1979

MountbattenofBurma,LadyEdwina wifeofLordLouisMountbattenofBurma

MountbattenofBurma,LordLouis grandfatherofNicholasandTimothy,fatherofPatrica

Mullaghmore smallseasidevillagewithsmallharbour

Nicholson,Peter butleratClassiebawnCastle

SinnFein politicalpartyaimedatsecuringindependentrepublicforallIreland

Tunney,Hugh occupierandownerofClassiebawnCastleafter1979

Wood-Martin,Elizabeth wifeofRichard,rescuerofTimothy

Wood-Martin,Richard(Dick) husbandofElizabeth,rescuerofTimothy

92

Appendix3

TIME-LINE

1641 IrishRebellion

1642-1645 ConfiscationoflandonwhichClassiebawnCastlelaterbuilt;grantoflandtoSirJohnTemple,MasteroftheRollsinIrelandasrewardforroleinputtingdownIrishRebellion

1860-1874 ClassiebawnCastleandharbouratMullaghmorebuilt,commissionedby3rdViscountPalmerston,descendantofSirJohnTemple

1907-1916 ClassiebawnCastleinheritedbyEvelynAshley,fatherofEdwina(laterLadyMountbattenofBurma),andoccupiedbyAshleyfamily

1916-1950 ClassiebawnCastleempty

1921 Britain’swithdrawalfrom26ofIreland’s32counties,theremaining6becomingNorthernIreland

1922 LouisMountbattenmarriesEdwinaAshley

1939 Edwina,LadyMountbattenofBurma,inheritsClassiebawnCastle

1939 JohnKnatchbull’sfather,5thLordBrabourne,dies.

15September1943 JohnKnatchbull’selderbrother,Norton,6thLordBrabourne,executed.

October1946 JohnKnatchbull,7thLordBrabourne,marriesPatriciaMountbatten

1950s LordandLadyMountbattensrenovateClassiebawnCastleforuseasholidayhome

1960 LadyMountbattendies;LordMountbatteninheritsClassiebawnCastle.

18November1964 BirthofNicholasKnatchbulland,20minuteslater,TimothyKnatchbull

1968 ‘Troubles’startinNorthernIreland

26August1979,evening BombhiddenunderdeckandclosetocabinofLordMountbatten’sboatmooredinharbourofMullaghmore,CoSligo

9.45am,27August1979 ThomasMcMahonandFrancisMcGirlstoppedatroutinecarcheckpointatGranard,86milesfromMullaghmore;detainedatGranardpolicestation

93

11.45am,27August1979 BombinLordMountbatten’sboatexplodesoutatsea,killingoutrightNicholasKnatchbull,PaulMaxwellandLordMountbattenofBurma;minuteslaterdeadandsurvivorspulledintorescuers’smallboats

11.50am,27August1979 ThomasMcMahonandFrancisMcGirlarrestedatGranardpolicestation

12.40pm,27August1979 DowagerLadyBrabourneandPatriciaKnatchbull(LadyBrabourne)admittedtoSligoGeneralHospital

12.55pm,27August1979 JohnKnatchbull(LordBrabourne)andTimothyKnatchbulladmittedtoSligoGeneralHospital

1.30pm,27August1979 NicholasKnatchbull’sbodyrecoveredfromthesea

3pm,27August1979 TimothyKnatchbulloperatedupon.

27/28August1979 Norton,Joe,Joanna,Amanda,andPhilipKnatchbullarriveathospital

earlymorning28August1979 DowagerLadyBrabournedies.

29August1979 FuneralofPaulMaxwell

30August1979,morning BodiesofNicholasKnatchbull,LordMountbattenofBurmaandDowagerLadyBrabourneleaveSligoGeneralHospitalforEngland

30August1979,evening JoannatellsTimothyKnatchbullofNicholas’sdeath

31August1979 Hersister,PamelaHicks,tellsPatriciaKnatchbullofNicholas’sdeath

31August1979 ThomasMcMahonandFrancisMcGirlchargedwithmurderinSpecialCriminalCourt,Dublin

1September1979 Timothyvisitshisfather,JohnKnatchbull,inhishospitalbed.

3September1979 Patricia,JohnandTimothyKnatchbullsharesamehospitalward

3/4September1979 StitchesremovedfromTimothy’selbow,thighandstomach

5September1979 StatefuneralofLordMountbattenofBurma(televised)

6September1979 PrivatefuneralofNicholasKnatchbullandDowagerLadyBrabourneinKent;simultaneousreligiousserviceinSligoHospital

8September1979 TimothyKnatchbulldischargedfromhospitalintocareofsisters;returntoClassiebawnCastle

10September1979 TimothyKnatchbullleavesClassiebawnCastleandreturnstofamily’sLondonhomewithremainingsiblings

13September1979 TimothyKnatchbullreturnstofamilyhomeinKent;visitsNanny(HelenBowden)andNicholas’sgrave

94

18-30September1979 TimothystayswithfamilyfriendsinScotland

2October1979 JohnandPatricaKnatchbullreturntofamilyhomeinKent

20October1979 weddingofNortonandPennyKnatchbull

29October1979 TimothyreturnstoGordonstounSchool,Scotland

18November1979 Timothy’s15thbirthday

23November1979 ThomasMcMahonfoundguiltyofmurderatDublinCentralCriminalCourt

25November1979 TimothyKnatchbullmeetsNorrisMcWhirter

20December1979 St.Paul’sMemorialService

Christmas1979 Timothybeginstoexperiencesoundofbombinhishead

Summer1980 OperationonTimothy’sdamagedrighteye

24April1981 OccupationofClassiebawnCastlebyprotestersinsupportofIRA

Summer1981 WhitehallceremonyofunveilingofstatueofLordMountbatten

September1981 TimothyleavesGordonstounforsixthformatAtlanticCollege(Wales);enrolsinRNLIlifeboattrainingandjoinslocalRNLIlifeboatteam

1983 ReadsEconomics(laterSocialandPoliticalScience)atChrist’sCollege,Cambridge;enrolsatcivilianflyingschool;laterobtainspilot’slicence

1984 HelenBowden(Nanny)dies

1986-87 GraduatesfromCambridgeUniversity;gapyear

1987 Timothy’sfirstshortvisittoIrelandandMulllaghmoresince1979;startsworkintelevisionproduction.

September1989 TimothymeetsDavidLoftus

August1991 Timothy’ssecondshortvisittoMullaghmore

1994 Timothy,nowworkingasBBCjournalist,assignedtoCrimewatchUK

31August1994 IRAceasefire

Early1995 Timothy’sfirstexperienceofpsychotherapy;endsafterfewmonths

June1995 FamilyvisittoAasleagh,JohnKnatchbull’schildhoodhomeinIreland

Late1995 Timothybeginsweeklysessionswithnewpsychotherapist,Berenice

August1996 TimothymeetsIsabellaNorman

95

June1997 AgreedendingofpsychotherapywithBerenice

August1997 TimothyandIsabellamovetoBoston;TimothybeginsMastersdegreeatKennedySchoolofGovernment,HarvardUniversity

November1997 AddressbyMartinMcGuinness,VisitingSpeakeratKennedySchoolofGovernment,Harvard

10April1998 GoodFridayAgreement

August1998 MarriageofTimothyandIsabella;movetoWashingtonwhereTimothyjoinsDiscoveryChannel.

3January2000 BirthofAmber,firstchildofTimothyandIsabella

30March2000 Timothy’sletterofgratitudetoElizabethandDickWood-Martin,hisrescuers

26February2001 BirthofMilo,secondchildofTimothyandIsabella

2001-2 ReturntoLondonofTimothyandhisfamily

July2002 IRAapologyfordeathsandinjuriesamongcivilians

midAugust2003 First visitof YearofVisits toSligo; TimothyvisitsClassiebawnCastle;attemptedvisittoDickandElizabethWood-Martin

25-27August2003 TimothyvisitsClassiebawnCastle,Mullaghmoreharbourandsiteofexplosion,andmeetsDickandElizabethWood-Martin

earlyOctober2003 TimothymeetsWood-MartinsagainandPaulNicholson

8October2003 Timothy’s“WordswithNick”atClassiebawnCastle

9November2003 TimothymeetsTonyHeenan

11November2003 TimothymeetslifeboatmenwhorecoveredNicholas’body

12November2003 TimothymeetsJohnMaxwell,PaulMaxwell’sfather

December2003 TimothymeetsMary,PaulMaxwell’smother,BrianBestandotherrescuers;obtainslifejacketretrievedfromsceneofexplosion

January2004 TimothyandAmandavisitMullaghmore,Classiebawn,andSligoHospitalandMortuary

March2004 Timothy’smeetingwithStatePathologistwhoundertookpostmortemexaminationofNicholas’sbodyin1979;visitsPaulMaxwell’sgravewithJohnMaxwell

August2004 TimothyvisitsMullaghmoreandstaysatClassiebawnCastlewithwifeandchildren

96

27August2004 TimothyvisitsMullaghmoreon25thanniversaryofNicholas’sdeath

July2005 IRAdeclarationofendtoviolence

22September2005 JohnKnatchbull,7thLordBrabourne,dies

2009 Publicationof‘FromaClearBlueSky’.

97

Appendix4

Mid-TermBreakIsatallmorninginthecollegesickbayCountingbellsknellingclassestoaclose.Attwoo'clockourneighboursdrovemehome.IntheporchImetmyfathercrying—Hehadalwaystakenfuneralsinhisstride—AndBigJimEvanssayingitwasahardblow.ThebabycooedandlaughedandrockedthepramWhenIcamein,andIwasembarrassedByoldmenstandinguptoshakemyhandAndtellmetheywere'sorryformytrouble'.WhispersinformedstrangersIwastheeldest,Awayatschool,asmymotherheldmyhandInhersandcoughedoutangrytearlesssighs.Atteno'clocktheambulancearrivedWiththecorpse,stanchedandbandagedbythenurses.NextmorningIwentupintotheroom.SnowdropsAndcandlessoothedthebedside;IsawhimForthefirsttimeinsixweeks.Palernow,Wearingapoppybruiseonhislefttemple,Helayinthefour-footboxasinhiscot.Nogaudyscars,thebumperknockedhimclear.Afour-footbox,afootforeveryyear.

SeamusHeaney

98

References

Abend,S.,(1986).InA.Rothstein,(Ed.),.TheReconstructionofTrauma:ItsSignificanceinClinicalWork.

pp.95-104.Madison,CT:InternationalUniversitiesPress.

Abraham,H.C.,(1950).TwinRelationshipandWombFantasiesinaCaseofAnxietyHysteria.

InternationalJournalofPsychoanalysis,34,219-227.

Abramovitch,H.,(2013).BrothersandSisters:MythandReality,FayLectureSeriesinAnalytical

Psychology,CollegeStationTexas.Texas:A&MUniversity.

Adler,A.,(1959).UnderstandingHumanNature.NewYork:FawcettPublications.

Agger,E.M.,(1988).PsychoanalyticPerspectivesonSiblingRelationships.PsychoanalyticInquiry,8,3-

30.

Ainslie,R.,Solyom,A.,(1986).TheReplacementoftheFantasiedOedipalChild-ADisruptiveEffectof

SiblingLossontheMother-InfantRelationship.PsychoanalyticPsychology,3,257-268.

Ambert,A.,Adler,pA.,Adler,p,Detzner,D.,(1995).Understandingandevaluatingqualitativeresearch.

JournalofMarriageandFamily,57,879-893.

Arlow,J.A.,(1960).FantasySystemsinTwins.PsychoanalyticQuarterly,29,175-199.

Bank,S.P.,andKahn,M.D.,(1997).TheSiblingBond.NewYork:BasicBooks.

Barzun,J.,(1974).ClioandtheDoctors:Psycho-History,Quanto-HistoryandHistory.Chicago:University

ofChicagoPress.

Beard,R.,(2017).TheDaythatwentMissing.London:HarvillSecker

Berman,L.,(1978).SiblingLossasanOrganizerofUnconsciousGuilt:ACaseStudy.Psychoanalytic

Quarterly.47,568-587.

99

Bernstein,B.,(1980).SiblingsofTwins.PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,35,135-154.

Bion,W.R.,(1950).TheImaginaryTwin.InW.R.Bion,(1967).SecondThoughts:SelectedPaperson

Psychoanalysis.pp.3-22.London:HeinemannMedical.

Bowlby,J.(1980).AttachmentandLoss,Vol.3:Loss:SadnessandDepression.London:Pimlico,1998.

Braun,V.,Clarke,V.,(2006).UsingThematicAnalysisinPsychology.QualitativeResearchinPsychology.

3(2),77-101.

Braun,V.,Clarke,V.,(2012).ThematicAnalysis.InH.Cooper,(Ed.).APAHandbookofresearchmethods

inpsychology,Volume2.pp.57-71.Washington,DC:Magination.

Braun,V.,Clarke,V.,(2013).Successfulqualitativeresearch:apracticalguideforbeginners.London:

Sage.

Braun,V.,Clarke,V.,(2017).FrequentlyAskedQuestionsaboutThematicAnalysis.Retrievedfrom

https://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/our-research/research-groups/thematic-

analysis/frequently-asked-questions-8.html

Brenman,E.,(2006).RecoveryoftheLostGoodObject.Routledge:London.

BrittonR.,Steiner,J.,(1994).Interpretation:Selectedfactorovervaluedidea?InternationalJournalof

Psychoanalysis,75,1069-1078.

Burlingham,D.T.,(1945).TheFantasyofHavingaTwin.PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,1,205-210.

Burlingham,D.,(1952).Twins:AStudyofThreePairsofIdenticalTwins.London:Image.

Burlingham,D.,(1963).AStudyofIdenticalTwins-TheirAnalyticMaterialcomparedwithExisting

ObservationDataoftheirEarlyChildhood.PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,18,367-423.

Cain,A.C,Cain,B.S.,(1964).Onreplacingachild.JournaloftheAmericanAcademyofChildPsychiatry,

3,443-456.

100

Case,B.J.,(1993).LivingWithoutYourTwin.Portland,Oregon:TibbuttPublishing.

Cavalli,A.(2012).TransgenerationalTransmissionofIndigestibleFacts:FromTrauma,DeadlyGhosts

andMentalVoidstoMeaning-MakingInterpretations.JournalofAnalyticalPsychology.57,597-614.

Charles,D.R.,Charles,M.,(2006).SiblingLossandAttachmentStyle:AnExploratoryStudy.

PsychoanalyticPsychology,23(1),72-90.

Cho,J.,Trent,A.,(2006).ValidityinQualitativeResearchRevisited.QualitativeResearch,6(3),319-340.

Christian,C.,(2007).SiblingLoss,GuiltandReparation:ACaseStudy.InternationalJournalofPsycho-

Analysis,88(1),41-54.

Coles,P.,(2003).TheImportanceofSiblingRelationshipsinPsychoanalysis.London:H.Karnac(Books)

Limited.

Coles,P.,(2009).SiblingIncest.InV.Lewin,B.Sharp,(Eds.).SiblingsinDevelopment:A

PsychoanalyticalView.pp.101-113.London:Karnac.

Coles,P.,(2011).TheUninvitedGuestfromtheUnrememberedPast.London:Karnac.

Coles,P.,(2015).TheShadowoftheSecondMother:Nursesandnanniesintheoriesofinfant

development.Hove:Routledge.

Colonna,A.,Newman,L.,(1983).ThePsychoanalyticLiteratureonSiblings.PsychoanalyticStudyofthe

Child,38,285-309.

Crehan,G.,(2004).TheSurvivingSibling:TheEffectsofSiblingDeathinChildhood.Psychoanalytic

Psychotherapy,18:202-219.

Davids,J.(1993).TheReactionofanEarlyLatencyBoytotheSuddendeathofhisBabyBrother.

PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,48,277-292.

101

Davison,S.,(1992).Mother,OtherandSelf-LoveandRivalryforTwinsintheirFirstYearofLife.

InternationalreviewofPsycho-Analysis,19,359-374.

Davoine,F.,Gaudilliere,J.-M.,(2004).AHistoryofTrauma.WhereofOneCannotSpeak,ThereofOne

CannotStaySilent.NewYork:OtherPress.

DeVita-Raeburn,E.,(2004).TheEmptyRoom:Survivingthelossofabrotherorsisteratanyage.New

York:Scribner.

Edelson,M.,(1985).Thehermeneuticturnandthesinglecasestudyinpsychoanalysis.Psychoanalysis

andContemporaryThought,8,4567-4614.

Edward,J.,(2012).TheSiblingRelationship:Aforceforgrowthandconflict.Plymouth:JasonAronson

Engel,G.L.,(1975).TheDeathofaTwin:MourningandAnniversaryReactions.Fragmentsof10years

ofSelf-Analysis.InternationalJournalofPsycho-Analysis,45(1),23-40.

Fanos,J.,(1996).SiblingLoss.NewJersey:LaurenceErlbaumAssociates.

Farrant,A.,(1998).SiblingBereavement:HelpingChildrenCopewithLoss.London:Cassell.

Farrow,M.,(1997).Whatfallsaway.London:Doubleday.

Fonagy,P.,Rost,F.,Carlyle,J.,McPherson,S.,Thomas,R.,PascoFearan,R.M.,Goldberg,D.,Taylor,D.,

(2015).Pragmaticrandomizedcontrolledtrialoflong-termpsychoanalyticpsychotherapyfor

treatment-resistantdepression:theTavistockAdultDepressionStudy(TADS).WorldPsychiatry,14,

312-321

Fraiberg,S.,Edelson,E.,&Shapiro,V.(1975).GhostsintheNursery:APsychoanalyticApproachtothe

ProblemsofImpairedInfant-MotherRelationships.InS.Fraiberg,L.Fraiberg,(Eds.).SelectedWritings.

Columbus,OH:OhioStateUniversityPress.

Freud,A.,(1958).Adolescence.PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,13,255-278.

102

Freud,S.,(1886-1899).ExtractsfromtheFleisspapers.S.E.1.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1895).StudiesonHysteria.S.E.2.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1900).TheInterpretationofDreams.S.E.4andS.E.5.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1905).FragmentofanAnalysisofaCaseofHysteria.S.E.7.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1909).AnalysisofaPhobiainaFive-Year-OldBoy.S.E.10.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1909).NotesuponaCaseofObsessionalNeurosis.S.E.10.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1911).PsychoanalyticNotesonanAutobiographicalAccountofaCaseofParanoia.S.E.12.

London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1916-1917).Introductorylecturesonpsycho-analysis.S.E.15-16.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1917).MourningandMelancholia.S.E.14.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.,(1918[1914])FromtheHistoryofanInfantileNeurosis.S.E.17.London:Hogarth.

Freud,S.(1926)Inhibitions,SymptomsandAnxiety.S.E.20.London:Hogarth.

Frith,H.,Gleeson,K.,(2012)QualitativeDataCollection:AskingtheRightQuestions.InD.Harper,A.

Thompson,(Eds.).QualitativeResearchMethodsinMentalHealthandPsychotherapy,(pp.55-67).

Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.

Gabbard,G.O.,(2000).DisguiseorConsent:ProblemsandRecommendationsconcerningthe

PublicationandPresentationofClinicalMaterial.InternationalJournalofPsycho-analysis,81(6),1071-

1086.

Garland,C.,(2002).Action,IdentificationandThoughtinPost-TraumaticStates.InUnderstanding

Trauma:Apsychoanalyticalapproach(pp.199-215).London;Karnac.

Geertz,C.,(1973).TheInterpretationofCultures:SelectedEssays.NewYork:BasicBooks.

103

Giannoni,M.,(2003).Psychoanalysisandempiricalresearch.JournalofAnalyticPsychology.48,643-

658.

Glenn,J.,(1966).OppositeSexTwins.JournalofAmericanPsychoanalyticAssociation,14,627-657.

Green,A.,(1983).TheDeadMother.InOnPrivateMadness(pp.142-174).London:Rebus.AlsoinLife

Narcissism,DeathNarcissism(pp.170-200).London:FreeAssociationBooks.

Guntrip,H.,(1975).MyExperienceofAnalysiswithFairbairnandWinnicott.InternationalReviewof

Psycho-Analysis,2,145-156.

Harper,D.,(2012).ChoosingaQualitativeResearchMethod.InD.Harper,A.Thompson,A.,(Eds.).

QualitativeResearchMethodsinMentalHealthandPsychotherapy.pp.83-97.Chichester:Wiley-

Blackwell.

Hartman,J.J.,(2008).Dali'sHomagetoRothko:ADefenceagainstFusionwiththeVictim.

PsychoanalyticQuarterly,77(2),531-567.

Hayton,A.,(2009).AttachmentIssuesAssociatedwiththeLossofaCo-twinbeforeBirth.Attachment:

NewDirectionsinPsychotherapyandRelationalPsychoanalysis.3(2),144-156.

Hayton,A.,(2011).WombTwinSurvivors:TheLostTwinintheDreamoftheWomb.St.Alban's,Herts.:

WrenPublications.

Heaney, S., (1966). Mid-Term Break. In: Death of a Naturalist. London: Faber and Faber.

Hayton,A.,(2012).AHealingPathforWombTwinSurvivors.St.Alban's,Herts.:WrenPublications.

Hindle,D.,Sherwin-White,S.,(Eds.).(2014).SiblingMatters:APsychoanalytic,Developmentaland

SystemicApproach.London:Karnac.

Hinshelwood,R.,(2013).ResearchontheCouch:Single-CaseStudies,SubjectivityandPsychoanalytic

Knowledge.Hove:Routledge.

104

Hollway,W.,Jefferson,T.,(1998)."Akissisjustakiss":daterape,genderandcontradictory

subjectivities.Sexualities,1(4),405-424.

Hollway,W.,Jefferson,T.,(2013).DoingQualitativeResearchDifferently:APsychosocialApproach.

London:Sage.

Joffe,H.,(2012).ThematicAnalysis.InD.Harper,A.Thompson,(Eds.).QualitativeResearchMethodsin

MentalHealthandPsychotherapy.pp.209-223.Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.

Joseph,E.D.,Tabor,P.J.,(1961).TheSimultaneousAnalysisofaPairofIdenticalTwinsandthe

TwinningReaction.PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,16,275-299.

Joseph,E.D.,(1975).Psychoanalysis-scienceandresearch:twinstudiesasaparadigm.Journalofthe

AmericanPsychoanalyticAssociation,23,3-31.

Kachele,H.,Schachter,J.,Thoma,H.,(2009).NewYork:Routledge.

Kernberg,pF.,Richards,A.K.,(1988).SiblingsofPreadolescents:TheirRoleinDevelopment.

PsychoanalyticInquiry,8(1),51-65.

Klein,M.,(1963).OntheSenseofLoneliness.InEnvyandGratitudeandOtherWorks(pp.300-313).

London:TheHogarthPress.

Klyman,C.M.,(1986).PregnancyasareactiontoEarlyChildhoodSiblingLoss.JournaloftheAmerican

AcademyofPsychonalysisandDynamicPsychiatry.14,323-335.

Knatchbull,T.,(2010).FromaClearBlueSky:SurvivingtheMountbattenBomb.London:ArrowBooks.

Kohut,H.,(1984).HowdoesAnalysisCure?Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Krupp,G.,(1965).IdentificationasaDefenceagainstAnxietyinCopingwithLoss.InternationalJournal

ofPsycho-Analysis,46,303-314.

105

Lacombe,p,(1959).TheProblemoftheIdenticalTwinasreflectedinaMasochisticCompulsionto

Cheat.InternationalJournalofPsycho-Analysis,40,6-12.

Lawrence,L.S.,(2005).MergeorPurge:ChallengesofTreatinganIdenticaltwinwithanEating

Disorder.PsychoanalyticSocialWork,12(2),83-104.

Leonard,M.,(1961).ProblemsinIdentificationandEgoDevelopmentinTwins.PsychoanalyticStudyof

theChild,16,300-320.

Lewin,V.,Sharp,B.,(Eds.)(2009).SiblingsinDevelopment:APsychoanalyticalView.London:Karnac.

Lewin,V.,(2014).TheTwinintheTransference.London:Karnac.

Lewis,E.,andBryan,E.M.,(1988).ManagementofPerinatalLossofaTwin.BritishMedical

Journal,29(7),1321-1323.

Loewald,H.,(1980).PapersonPsychoanalysis.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.

McLeod,J.,(2010).CaseStudyResearchinCounsellingandPsychotherapy.London:Sage.

Magagna,J.,(2009).Developingasenseofidentityasanindividual.InV.Lewin,B.Sharp,(Eds.).

SiblingsinDevelopment:APsychoanalyticalView.pp.117-145.London:Karnac.

Magagna,J.,Dominguez,G.,MarsoniA.,(2009).Theinfluenceofconjoinedtwinsoneachother.InV.

Lewin,B.Sharp,(Eds.).pp.37-62.SiblingsinDevelopment:APsychoanalyticalView.London:Karnac.

Mays, N., Pope, C., (2000). Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ: British Medical

Journal, 320(7226), 50-52.

Midgley,N.,(2006b).The"inseparablebondbetweencureandresearch":clinicalcasestudyasa

methodofpsychoanalyticinquiry.JournalofChildPsychotherapy,32,122-147.

Mitchell,J.,(2003).Siblings.Cambridge:PolityPress.

106

Moorhead,J.,(2011).Clare.InP.Stanford,(Ed.).TheDeathofaChild.pp.37-46.London:Continuum.

Morrison,A.,(1984).WorkingwithShameinPsychoanalyticTreatment.JournaloftheAmerican

PsychoanalyticAssociation,32,479-505.

Nagera,H.,(1969).TheImaginaryCompanion.PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,24,165-196.

Ortmeyer,D.H.,(1970).TheWe-SelfofIdenticalTwins.ContemporaryPsychoanalysis,6,125-142.

Orr,D.W.,(1941).APsychoanalyticStudyofaFraternalTwin.PsychoanalyticQuarterly,10,284-296.

Ortmeyer,D.H.,(1975).CommentsandCriticisms.ContemporaryPsychoanalysis,11,511-512.

Patten,L.(2011).Charles.InP.Stanford,(Ed.).TheDeathofaChild.pp.65-75.London:Continuum.

Perez,A.,Crick,p,Lawrence,S.(2015).Delvingintothe'emotionalstorms':Athematicanalysisof

psychoanalysts'initialconsultationreports.InternationalJournalofPsychoanalysis,96,659-680.

Piontelli,A.,(1989).Twinsbeforeandafterbirth.InternationalReviewofBooks,16(4),413-426.

Piontelli,A.,(2002).FromFetustoChild:Anobservationalandpsychoanalyticstudy.London,NewYork,

NY:Routledge.

Pollock,G.H.,(1972).BerthaPappenheim’spathologicalmourning:Possibleeffectsofsiblingloss.

JournaloftheAmericanPsychoanalyticAssociation,20,476-493.

Pollock,G.H.,(1978).OnSiblings,ChildhoodSiblingLoss,andCreativity.AnnualofPsychoanalysis,6,

443-481.

Pollock,G.H.,(1982).TheMourning-LiberationProcessandCreativity.AnnualofPsychoanalysis,10,

333-353.

Pollock,G.H.,(1986).ChildhoodSiblingLoss:AFamilyTragedy.AnnualofPsychoanalysis,14,5-34.

Porot,M.,(1993/1966).L'enfantderemplacement.Paris:Frison-Roche.

107

Powell,M.,(1991).Thepsychosocialimpactofsuddeninfantdeathsyndromeonsiblings.TheIrish

JournalofPsychology,12,235-247.

Rank,O.,(1914).TheDouble.InO.Rank,(1989).TheDouble:APsychoanalyticStudy.London:Karnac

Books.

Reid,M.,(2003).ClinicalResearch:Theinnerworldofthemotherandhernewbaby-borninthe

shadowofdeath.JournalofChildPsychotherapy,29(2),207-226.

Reid,M.,(2014).Lostbabies-lostsiblings:theeffectofperinatallossinthenextgeneration.InD.

Hindle,S.Sherwin-White,(Eds.).SiblingMatters:APsychoanalytic,DevelopmentalandSystemic

Approach.pp.269-185.London:Karnac.

Rosen,H.,(1986).UnspokenGrief:CopingwithChildhoodSiblingLoss.LexingtonBooks:

Massachusetts/Toronto.

Rowe,D.,(2007).MyDearestEnemy,MyDangerousFriend:MakingandBreakingSiblingBonds.New

York:Routledge.

Rudnytsky,pL.,(1988).RedefiningtheRevenant-GuiltandSiblingLossinGuntripandFreud.

PsychoanalyticStudyoftheChild,43,423-432.

Rustin,M.,(2009).Takingaccountofsiblings-aviewfromchildpsychotherapy.InV.Lewin,B.Sharp,

(Eds.).SiblingsinDevelopment:APsychoanalyticalView.pp.147-168.London:Karnac.

Saldana,J.,(2013).TheCodingManualforQualitativeResearchers.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.

Schaverien,J.,(2015).BoardingSchoolSyndrome.Hove:Routledge.

Schellinski,K.,(2014).WhoamI?JournalofAnalyticPsychology,59(2),189-210.

Sheerin,D.F.,(1991).FundamentalConsiderationsinthePsychotherapyofanIdenticalTwin.British

JournalofPsychotherapy,8(1),13-25.

108

Skrypek,K.,Maciejewska-Sobczak,B.,Standnicka-Dmitriew,Z.,(Eds.)(2014).Siblings:EnvyandRivalry,

CoexistenceandConcern.London:Karnac.

Stanford,P,(Ed.)(2011).TheDeathofaChild.London:Continuum.

Stannard,D.,(1980).ShrinkingHistory:OnFreudandtheFailureofPsychohistory.Oxford:Oxford

UniversityPress.

Steiner,J.,(1993).PsychicRetreats.PathologicalOrganisationsinPsychotic,NeuroticandBorderline

Patients.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.

Stern,D.N.,(1985).TheInterpersonalWorldoftheChild:AViewfromPsychoanalysisand

DevelopmentalPsychology.NewYork:BasicBooks.

Thomas-Attila,K.,(2015)ConfidentialityandConsentIssuesinPsychotherapyCaseReports:TheWolf

Man,GloriaandJeremy.BritishJournalofPsychotherapy,31(3),360.

Volkan,V.D.,Ast,G.,(2014).SiblingsintheUnconsciousandPsychopathology.London:Karnac.

Wallerstein,R.,(2009).Whatkindofresearchispsychoanalyticscience?InternationalJournalof

Psychoanalysis,90(1),pp109-133.

White,p,(2006).SiblingGrief:Healingafterthedeathofasisterorbrother.Bloomington:iUniverse

Star.

Willemsen,J.,Inslegers,R.,Meganck,R.,Geerardyn,F.,Desmet,M.,Vanheule,S.(2015).A

metasynthesisofpublishedcasestudiesthroughLacan'sL-schema:Transferenceinperversion.

InternationalJournalofPsychoanalysis,96,773-795.

Willemsen,J.,DellaRosa,E.,Kegerreis,S.,(2017).ClinicalCaseStudiesinPsychodynamicand

PsychoanalyticTreatment.FrontiersinPsychology,8,Article108.

109

Wolcott,H.,(1990).‘OnSeeking–andRejecting–ValidityinQualitativeResearch’,inE.Eisner,A.

Peshkin,(Eds.).QualitativeInquiryinEducation:TheContinuingDebate,pp121–52.NewYork:Teachers

CollegePress.

Woodward,J.,(1987).TheBereavedTwin.ProceedingsoftheInternationalCongressofTwinStudies

1986.Rome:AGMG/TwinResearch.

Woodward,J.,(2010).TheLoneTwin.London:FreeAssociationBooks.

Yardley,L.,(2015).Demonstratingvalidityinqualitativepsychology.InJ.A.Smith(Ed.),Qualitative

psychology:Apracticalguidetoresearchmethods.pp.257-272.London:Sage.

110