I recognize that there has been a backlash against Alice Miller’s way of thinking, that there is the sense that she has overstated her case against the cruelties parents ignorantly inflict on their children. In the 1980s, when I first discovered her works (For Your Own Good and Thou Shalt Not Be Aware), I became a father and was given much to chew on.
There’s in Miller a very strong, earnest message, a way of seeing child-rearing that is much at odds with the general way we in the West have practiced it for millennia. Her message is no less earthshaking than Freud’s, when he insisted that children carried within them powerful sexual desires that very often led people into neurotic behavior as adults. Miller, on the other hand, contends that children are innocent of such desires, and that natural cravings for love in children are quashed and demeaned by parents compelled to repeat their own, similar, traumatic upbringings.
The word “trauma” triggers for most of us a vision of large emotional explosions, but Miller asserts that the occasions for psychic wounds may be as easily be a parent’s silence and absence. She explains that the sensitive child, in particular, is more apt to react with grief, bewilderment, and repressed hurt to parents’ slights.
In the two books I’d read earlier, with their scholarly review of pedagogical texts through the centuries and the series of case studies, there seemed a poetic leap, a bridging of phenomena with an imaginative reconstruction of emotion and affect. While intuitively, it sounds plausible, there has always been at the back of my mind the question about what one does as an adult to abolish the trauma and resume the loving, innocent naivete of one’s childhood…? I envision it as an attempt to return to Edenic circumstances, a quest that will never be fulfilled.
A further concern as a parent is what, specifically, does good parenting look like…? There are suggestions that it entails a selfless concern for the child’s welfare, but in my experience that is nearly impossible. (And perhaps that is my own upbringing that is speaking; the unwillingness or inability to give wholly and selflessly to ensure my child’s intact psyche.)
In any case, this later work by Miller covers the same ground and makes the case that a “witness” may help an abusive parent uncover the wellsprings of his or her abusive behavior in their own upbringing. But there seems a mechanism in the rehabilitation of the abusive parent that is missing; how does knowledge of the past make a better parent (or restore to the parent what he had himself suppressed)...?
The underlying point Miller makes is sound; parents can be unnecessarily and ignorantly cruel, little realizing the harm they can do, even when their cruelty entails only silence, absence or slighting words. Care and vigilance may help to break the cycle of abuse (and it can be ever so slight to constitute “abuse” in her estimation), but this hypervigilance is a challenge that few of us will be able to implement. Not that we shouldn’t try…