Herding the Animals into the Barn

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

I now use the PCM for all my child evaluations, regardless of age or presenting problem of the child. In evaluations of older children I use a family discussion instead of play format.

The differences between the LTP, in which a structured seating arrangement of the family members is part of the experimental design, and the PCM, which involves a free-play situation, result in different ways of analyzing the observational data. For example, observations about body position in the PCM cannot be reliably coded, as they can in the LTP. Yet, these observations may still be clinically useful.

The observations of mother-child, father-child play, sibling play, and parent conversation in the PCM are actually observations made of sub-systems of the family rather than as observations of “dyadic relationships.” However, clinically relevant observations about the relationships in these subsystems can be made.

Sander’s work has been extremely influential to my thinking and clinical work. Both in his writings and in our discussions, Sander’s conceptualization of agency as emerging from the mutual regulatory competency of the dyadic system has been central to my understanding of children like Sean (Sander, 1985, 1995, personal communication, 2004).

This observation gives evidence for the influence all family members have on one another while playing in the same room at the same time, whether they are playing in “dyads” or all together.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Alexandra Murray Harrison

Training and Supervising Analyst, Boston Psychoanalytic Society and Institute.