Childhood Rejection and the Ego-Ideal: A Lacanian Case Study

Presenting Situation in This Lacanian Case Study

Pamela, 49 years old, presented herself for analysis as a successful, independent woman. She lives alone, is financially stable, and has built a respectable career in consultancy. She has been single for many years and has no children. Pamela expressed a vague dissatisfaction with life, framed initially as “feeling invisible,” despite her accomplishments.
She described herself as “self-sufficient but somehow empty,” and spoke of a repeated experience of being “second best,” particularly in romantic and social contexts. Her relationships often began with intensity, followed by a slow withdrawal, either by her or from her friends.

Initial Signifiers, Speech, and the Mark of Childhood Rejection

From the first session, the signifier crumbs appeared frequently. She described her childhood as one of “getting crumbs of affection.” Her mother was emotionally distant, and her father left when she was six. She recalled one event where her mother gave the larger slice of cake to her cousin during a birthday party and said, “You don’t need as much. You’re strong.” Pamela added, “I swallowed it and smiled.”
The word swallowed returned often in later sessions, attached to memories of hurt, rejection, and anger she “chose not to show.” She also used the phrase, “I make myself easy to drop,” especially when discussing friendships and romantic interests.
Pamela makes friends easily, but found most of them drifted away over time. When asked about these endings, she often said, “They disappointed me” or “They weren’t really who I thought they were.” There was a subtle insistence on betrayal, always just below the surface.

Early Structure: The Demand of the Other in Lacanian Psychoanalysis

As the analytic work progressed, the emphasis turned toward the early relation to the maternal Other. Pamela’s speech circled around a fundamental lack: the Other did not want me. Her mother’s preference for Pamela’s cousins, neighbours’ children, and eventually her stepfather’s children, returned in multiple occasions.
Pamela’s desire seemed organised around being the one who could compensate for this lack of love. She became an excellent student, then a high achiever, hoping unconsciously that this would make her “worth choosing.” But the response was never adequate. She constructed herself as the subject supposed to be “low maintenance,” even proud of being the one who “never asked for anything.”
In Lacanian terms, this points to her position as object a in the desire of the Other, offering herself to satisfy what was missing in the Other, while never being truly seen or recognised as a subject in her own right. Her persistent position as “second best” reflects a structure in which the signifier of her desire is already marked by privation: not the desired one, but the one who must not be too much, not too demanding.

The Imaginary, Narcissistic Injury, and Adult Relationships

Pamela’s relationships in adulthood repeated this early scene. In her words, she was “always the runner-up.” She spoke of one romantic partner who stayed with his ex “emotionally” even while dating Pamela. Another ended their relationship to marry someone he had met before her. Each of these stories was told with bitterness and a tone of betrayal, but Pamela also insisted, “I don’t blame them. I must not be memorable.”
These statements reflected a strong Imaginary investment: Pamela identified with an image of herself as “replaceable.” This self-image was fragile, easily wounded. Even small remarks or shifts in tone from friends would offend her. She often cut off friendships abruptly, explaining: “They crossed a line.”
In Lacanian terms, the ego-ideal seemed cruelly demanding, and Pamela’s ego-ideal told her she must never be demanding, emotional, or vulnerable – or she’d be rejected, which traps her in the very position she’s trying to escape: unloved, unnoticed, only worthy if silent.
She tried to live up to an image of strength and self-sufficiency, but this masked a deep vulnerability. She was highly sensitive to the gaze of the Other and constantly scanning for signs of rejection or exclusion. When others failed to reflect back the image she hoped to be seen: admired, central, chosen – she would experience it as a narcissistic wound and withdraw.

The Position of the Analyst and Maintaining the Lack

Pamela wanted to appear composed, articulate, and cooperative. But as the sessions continued, irritation would slip in when she felt her suffering wasn’t sufficiently acknowledged. Once, when I did not respond to her story of a painful breakup with the expected sympathy, she paused and said, “Maybe I’m just boring to you as well.”
Rather than reassuring her, I maintained the function of the lack, allowing Pamela’s desire to circulate without being filled by comforting responses, which helps the analysand to sit with her feelings of being unseen or rejected, without stepping in to soothe or “fix” the discomfort; this meant facing the deep wound of not being chosen, and beginning to speak from that place, rather than constantly trying to cover it up or be reassured out of it. This avoid the trap of needing someone – in this case the analyst – to fill that gap, in other words, to give her what was missing. The goal wasn’t to fill the gap with reassurance, and by not closing the hole inside of her with comfort, helps the person in analysis to see their own patterns, discover what they are really desiring, and stop repeating the same painful stories in search of something (like love, approval, recognition) that no one else can truly give us. This moment was crucial. My neutrality had allowed Pamela to recognise that this lack is part of being human, since lack is not something to be overcome or cured; rather, it’s an essential part of the human condition, since lack is the deep, existential sense of incompleteness that drives all human desire. It is constant and cannot be filled by any specific object, career, partners, attention, and outside recognition.
But in Pamela’s case, this lack is more painful due to her childhood rejection and its repetition in adulthood, in her romantic relationships, where she keeps ending up in relationships where she gets “crumbs” with emotionally unavailable partners, friendships that fade, never being the chosen one. This isn’t just bad luck. It’s her unconscious repeating a position she took early on: “I only deserve a little. That’s all I’ll get.”
The compulsion to repeat started to slowly break when she was allowed to hear her own speech, and to listen to herself during the sessions, then she began to see how she is caught in her own words – “I only got crumbs.”
“I always accept less. “I guess I make myself easy to drop.” When an analysand is allowed to be listened fully without comforting words, they can hear themselves, their own patterns, their own circle of suffering, which allows the shift from “Why does this always happen to me?” to “Why do I keep putting myself in that position?”

Conclusion: Breaking the Cycle of Repetition

Pamela’s case illustrates the psychic economy of a subject structured by early rejection, taking up the position of objet a in the field of the Other’s desire. Her difficulties with intimacy, oversensitivity, and fear of abandonment reflect a narcissistic structure tied to an ego-ideal that demanded invisibility as proof of worth.
The analytic work allowed a detachment from the Imaginary identification with lack and opened a space for her to articulate her desire differently, not as a demand to be chosen, but as a speaking subject. Her path in analysis continues, now less marked by the compulsion to repeat.

The above case study explores a Lacanian reading of a subject marked by early maternal rejection and narcissistic fragility. It is presented solely for theoretical purposes, and the name along with key details have been greatly modified to ensure confidentiality.. Anthony Bloomfield – Lacanian Psychoanalyst at private practice.