Sabotage, feeding and collusion after bariatric surgery. And the winner is . . .? A psychodynamic and systemic perspective on sabotage and feeding after bariatric surgery by means of a case series analysis.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1177/13634593251319928
Friedrich Stiefel, Laurent Michaud, Céline Bourquin-Sachse, Sophia Quirke-Macfarlane, Jane Ogden
{"title":"Sabotage, feeding and collusion after bariatric surgery. And the winner is . . .? A psychodynamic and systemic perspective on sabotage and feeding after bariatric surgery by means of a case series analysis.","authors":"Friedrich Stiefel, Laurent Michaud, Céline Bourquin-Sachse, Sophia Quirke-Macfarlane, Jane Ogden","doi":"10.1177/13634593251319928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of bariatric surgery, negative social support has recently been conceptualized in terms of sabotage, feeding behaviour and collusion undermining a person's effort to lose or maintain weight. While sabotage and feeding behaviour are thought to be motivated consciously, collusion is understood as a bond, by which protagonists are tied together sharing an unresolved and unconscious psychological issue such as dependency, domination and submission, and so on. Drawing upon a systemic and psychodynamic understanding, we analysed interviews with patients (<i>n</i> = 10) who had undergone bariatric surgery and their partners (<i>n</i> = 10) focusing on support. We selected interviews (<i>n</i> = 4 + 4), illustrative of sabotage, feeding, collusion and co-evolution based on the comprehensiveness of information, their emblematic quality and suitability to delineate these phenomena. Our analysis confirms that negative social support can be considered as an attempt to reestablish a level of homeostasis within the couple. However, rather than being intentional, we consider that sabotage and feeding behaviour are better conceptualised as consequences of collusive relationships.</p>","PeriodicalId":12944,"journal":{"name":"Health","volume":" ","pages":"13634593251319928"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593251319928","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the context of bariatric surgery, negative social support has recently been conceptualized in terms of sabotage, feeding behaviour and collusion undermining a person's effort to lose or maintain weight. While sabotage and feeding behaviour are thought to be motivated consciously, collusion is understood as a bond, by which protagonists are tied together sharing an unresolved and unconscious psychological issue such as dependency, domination and submission, and so on. Drawing upon a systemic and psychodynamic understanding, we analysed interviews with patients (n = 10) who had undergone bariatric surgery and their partners (n = 10) focusing on support. We selected interviews (n = 4 + 4), illustrative of sabotage, feeding, collusion and co-evolution based on the comprehensiveness of information, their emblematic quality and suitability to delineate these phenomena. Our analysis confirms that negative social support can be considered as an attempt to reestablish a level of homeostasis within the couple. However, rather than being intentional, we consider that sabotage and feeding behaviour are better conceptualised as consequences of collusive relationships.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health
Health Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Health: is published four times per year and attempts in each number to offer a mix of articles that inform or that provoke debate. The readership of the journal is wide and drawn from different disciplines and from workers both inside and outside the health care professions. Widely abstracted, Health: ensures authors an extensive and informed readership for their work. It also seeks to offer authors as short a delay as possible between submission and publication. Most articles are reviewed within 4-6 weeks of submission and those accepted are published within a year of that decision.
期刊最新文献
Sabotage, feeding and collusion after bariatric surgery. And the winner is . . .? A psychodynamic and systemic perspective on sabotage and feeding after bariatric surgery by means of a case series analysis. Distributed decision-making for lumbar spine surgery: A qualitative interview study with patients and neurosurgeons. Stigmatising space-times: Addressing healthcare stigma beyond interpersonal interactions. Narratives of reconstruction: Looking beyond biographical disruption through three Indian breast cancer memoirs. Towards collaborative tinkering in contraceptive consultations: Negotiating side-effects in contraceptive care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1