EDITOR- Jacobson is no nearer to a correct usage of the concept of
imprinting despite his recent reply. It is an inescapable fact that
imprinting as a species specific developmental event will always have a
speicific survival or reproductive purpose (i.e. a 'function'). However,
aberrant outcomes can and do occur as Jacobson points out. This, however,
is no different from any other developmental process that can go wrong
when the process is disrupted by damaging events or crucial developmental
stages fail to take place. If the authors are now suggesting that birth
trauma is a process of 'aberrant imprinting' analogous to Lorenz's
experiment with male ducklings (which was not suggested in the original
article) they would still require to explain what exactly is the putative
process of 'natural' imprinting that they claim has been disrupted (which
the original article and the later reply failed to explain). If they
cannot do so there would be no justification for continuing to suggest
that a process of imprinting is involved.
If correctly employed the concept of imprinting would claim to
identify a fundamental developmental milestone in a given species and the
matter is therefore not simply 'a semantic question'.
Riadh T. Abed
Consultant Psychiatrist and Hon. Clinical Lecturer, Rotherham Distict
General Hospital, Moorgate Road, Rotherham S60 2UD.
Rapid Response:
Imprinting revisited
EDITOR- Jacobson is no nearer to a correct usage of the concept of
imprinting despite his recent reply. It is an inescapable fact that
imprinting as a species specific developmental event will always have a
speicific survival or reproductive purpose (i.e. a 'function'). However,
aberrant outcomes can and do occur as Jacobson points out. This, however,
is no different from any other developmental process that can go wrong
when the process is disrupted by damaging events or crucial developmental
stages fail to take place. If the authors are now suggesting that birth
trauma is a process of 'aberrant imprinting' analogous to Lorenz's
experiment with male ducklings (which was not suggested in the original
article) they would still require to explain what exactly is the putative
process of 'natural' imprinting that they claim has been disrupted (which
the original article and the later reply failed to explain). If they
cannot do so there would be no justification for continuing to suggest
that a process of imprinting is involved.
If correctly employed the concept of imprinting would claim to
identify a fundamental developmental milestone in a given species and the
matter is therefore not simply 'a semantic question'.
Riadh T. Abed
Consultant Psychiatrist and Hon. Clinical Lecturer, Rotherham Distict
General Hospital, Moorgate Road, Rotherham S60 2UD.
Competing interests: No competing interests