The Parental Imago: How Childhood Experiences Affect Us

Childhood experiences influence how people build relationships, cope with anxiety and see themselves. Familiar ways of showing love, resolving conflicts and talking about feelings can take root in family life and persist into adulthood—but this is not an inevitable script: you can notice and change your reactions.

The term “parental imago” offers a way to look at this process: it refers to an inner image of parents that takes shape in childhood and can influence expectations of loved ones and one’s own parenting. Let’s explore how family beliefs show up in adult life and what can help distinguish learned habits from personal choices.

• 1968 year in the bibliographic citation for Mendel, given alongside the definition of imago
• 125 page number in the citation for Mendel (1968, 125)

What does “parental imago” mean?

The parental imago is an unconscious mental image of the mother or father that takes shape in a child through early relationship experiences. The “Concept of the Maternal and Paternal Imago” gives a definition attributed to Mendel (1968, 125): an imago is an unconscious mental representation of drives that emerges after an encounter with an object.

An imago is neither an exact photograph of a parent nor a list of childhood episodes. It is an inner representation connected with how a child experienced their relationships with their mother and father; in descriptions of the concept, the maternal and paternal images are treated as distinct aspects of early psychological experience.

What the concept explains—and what it doesn’t prove

The concept of the parental imago helps raise the question of how early relationships may be connected with perceptions of oneself and others in adulthood, including one’s relationship with one’s own child. But on its own, it does not establish the cause of a particular adult reaction: looking to childhood experiences alone isn’t enough to understand it. The description provided does not give a definitive answer about exactly how the maternal and paternal imagos affect relationships with one’s own children.

How might images of the mother and father affect adult parenting?

The maternal and paternal imagos may affect adult parenting as distinct, contrasting images connected with a child’s early psychological experience, but they do not, on their own, predict what kind of parent that child will become. After becoming a parent, someone may notice that a present-day situation reminds them of childhood: for example, expectations of obedience, an attempt to comfort a child or a response to their crying may bring up familiar feelings and ways of acting.

Similarity is a reason to take a closer look, not to make a diagnosis

A recurring pattern is worth examining through a specific episode: what happened, what the adult expected of the child, how they responded to the crying and what they felt afterward. For example, if a child’s refusal immediately prompts a demand for compliance, it may help to look separately at the refusal itself, the expectation of obedience and one’s own reaction—without automatically declaring them the result of a maternal or paternal image.

The description of the imago does not offer a universal template that explains every adult’s relationship with their child. The available material draws no such conclusion: the circumstances of the particular family and episode matter, and a resemblance to one’s own childhood remains a hypothesis to consider—not a ready-made explanation of behavior or a diagnosis.

How can you notice a family pattern repeating?

Situation — reaction — choice

You may notice a family pattern repeating if, in similar situations, you once again respond in a familiar way that reminds you of your childhood experiences. Take one recent episode—for example, your child refusing to put on a coat—and retrace it in order: what happened before you reacted, what you felt and what you did.

• Observation: The child didn’t put on a coat. This describes what happened.
• Judgment: “They’re doing it to spite me.” This is an assumption about motive, not an established fact.
• Reaction: Note exactly what you felt and how you responded—for example, whether you punished them straight away or raised your voice.

Then ask yourself whether this response reminds you of your own childhood experiences and whether it comes up in similar situations. There’s no need to assign blame—to yourself or your parents: the goal isn’t to pass judgment on anyone, but to recognize the familiar link between an event and a reaction.

Compare your automatic response with what you want for your child now. For example, if you usually punish them straight away for refusing to get dressed, try stating the rule first and explaining the boundary: you’re not abandoning the expectation, but choosing how to communicate it.

What can you do if you want to change a familiar reaction?

To change a familiar parenting reaction, choose a specific intention for the next similar situation: for example, not to raise your voice and to pause first. This is a practical plan, not a promise that you’ll automatically respond differently in a tense moment.

After the episode, review it in three points: what triggered the reaction, what you did and what you’ll try next time. Writing this down helps you discuss specific behavior instead of labeling yourself a “bad parent.”

How to talk about a recurring situation

Tell another adult close to you about one recurring episode and how you’d like to respond to it in the future. Family memories can be a reason to start a conversation, but on their own they neither confirm a diagnosis nor prove why a reaction is happening now.

Materials on art therapy mention techniques for working with parents, but no specific exercise, its duration or a confirmed result is described. So it’s best not to expect a particular effect from an unnamed practice: first, it may be more useful to write down the situation and the response you’d like to try, then discuss them with another adult close to you.

When doesn’t the concept of the imago provide a definitive answer?

Don’t confuse an explanation with proof

The concept of the imago does not provide a definitive answer about the causes of a parent’s behavior: a similar reaction may be connected not only with childhood experiences but also with the circumstances of that particular day. So an image from the past can be considered one possible lens for understanding yourself, not an established explanation for every action.

An imago is a psychological concept, not a medical diagnosis or proof that parents deliberately caused harm. The concept describes an unconscious mental image of a parent; that definition alone cannot establish the intentions of specific people or make a clinical assessment of them.

• About the adult child’s experiences: These can be described as personal experience, but the concept of the imago alone is not enough to prove the cause of those experiences.
• About passing a pattern on to children: In the description provided, empirical studies of relationships with children who have already grown up are said to be practically nonexistent. This limits how confidently we can draw conclusions about family patterns repeating across generations.
• About the “mental trap” metaphor: The article “The Grandiose Parental Imago as a Cause of Being Stuck …” on B17 uses this image, but one piece of material does not establish a universal rule for all families.

Thus, the imago may be a useful hypothesis to reflect on, but it does not replace information about a particular family. It is especially important to be cautious when drawing conclusions about a connection between childhood experiences and an adult’s relationship with their own child: the description of the research provided explicitly points to a lack of empirical studies in this area.

Why distinguish between a childhood memory and an imago?

Distinguishing between a childhood memory and an imago can help prevent treating an account of a specific scene as a complete explanation of your current relationship with your child. A memory is what a person remembers happening, while an imago is an inner image of a parent that is also connected with feelings and expectations. So asking two questions—“What do I remember?” and “What am I expecting of my parent or myself right now?”—can help keep the event separate from its psychological meaning.

From a past episode to a recurring action

Even a detailed account of childhood does not, on its own, explain why a parent reacts sharply to their child today: it matters to notice what is happening in the relationship right now. Instead of arguing over the accuracy of every old scene, name a specific recurring action: for example, a parent raises their voice when the child disagrees and wants to learn to pause before responding. The focus here is the observable reaction in the present, not proof that one memory caused it.

This distinction preserves the meaning of the imago as an inner image without turning it into an accusation against parents or declaring it the sole cause of family difficulties. The materials provided describe the imago as an unconscious mental representation; at the same time, they offer no definitive answer about exactly how it affects an adult’s relationship with their own child. It may therefore be more useful to treat the concept as a reason to notice expectations and feelings, and to focus change on which actions the parent wants to repeat less often.

Frequently asked questions

Written byEkaterina Sarzevskaya

Екатерина Саржевская фокусируется на вопросах здоровья и благополучия женщин, особенно в период беременности и родов. Она делится полезной информацией о рационе, физической активности и эмоциональном состоянии будущих мам. Ее цель — помочь женщинам чувствовать себя уверенно и комфортно в этот важный период.