Permission, Protection, and Potency

References

• AlexanderF.FrenchT. M. (1946). Psychoanalytic therapy: Principles and application. New York, NY: Ronald Press.
   Google Scholar
• AllenJ. R.AllenB. A. (1972). Scripts: The role of permission. Transactional Analysis Journal, 2(2), 72–74.
   Google Scholar
• AllenJ. R.AllenB.BarnesG.HibnerB.KrauszR.MoisoC.WelchC.WelchS. (1996). The role of permission: Two decades later. Transactional Analysis Journal, 26, 196–205.
   Google Scholar
• AllenR.BennettS.KearnsL. (2004). Psychological mindedness: A neglected developmental line in permissions to think. Transactional Analysis Journal, 34, 3–9.
   Google Scholar
• BanduraA. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• BerneE. (1966). Principles of group treatment. New York, NY: Grove Press.
   Google Scholar
• BerneE. (1968). Games people play: The psychology of human relationships. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin. ( Original work published 1964)
   Google Scholar
• BerneE. (1972). What do you say after you say hello? The psychology of human destiny. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• BoltenM.de JongN. (1984). Reparenting, or therapeutic regression. In SternE. (Ed.), TA: The state of the art. A European contribution (pp. 129–142). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris Publications.
   Google Scholar
• BrookK. A. (1996). A fresh look at permission. Transactional Analysis Journal, 26, 160–166.
   Google Scholar
• CamposL. P. (1988). Empowering children II: Integrating protection into script prevention work. Transactional Analysis Journal, 18, 137–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CornellW. F. (2013). “Special fields”: A brief history of an anxious dilemma and its lingering consequences for transactional analysis. Transactional Analysis Journal, 43, 7–13.
   Google Scholar
• CornellW. F.HargadenH. (Eds.). (2005). From transactions to relations: The emergence of a relational tradition in transactional analysis. Chadlington, England: Haddon Press.
   Google Scholar
• CrossmanP. (1966). Permission and protection. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 5(19), 152–154.
   Google Scholar
• CrossmanP. (2002). Letter to the editor. The Script, 32(6), 5.
   Google Scholar
• DouglasM.TudorK. (2007). Child protection. In TudorK. (Ed.), The Adult is parent to the child: Transactional analysis with children and young people (pp. 48–65). Lyme Regis, England: Russell House.
   Google Scholar
• DregoP. (1994a). Happy family: Parenting through family rituals. Bombay, India: Alfreruby Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• DregoP. (1994b). Talk to me mum and dad: Permissions for young people. Bombay, India: Alfreruby Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• EnglishF. (1972). Rackets and real feelings: Part II. Transactional Analysis Journal, 2(1), 23–25.
   Google Scholar
• EnglishF. (1978). Potency as a female therapist. Transactional Analysis Journal, 8, 297–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EriksonE. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• ErskineR. G. (1993). Inquiry, attunement, and involvement in the psychotherapy of dissociation. Transactional Analysis Journal, 23, 184–190.
   Google Scholar
• ErskineR. G.TrautmannR. L. (1997). The process of integrative psychotherapy. In ErskineR. G., Theories and methods of an integrative transactional analysis: A volume of selected articles (pp. 79–95). San Francisco, CA: TA Press. ( Original work published 1993)
   Google Scholar
• European Association for Transactional Analysis. (2014). Training and examination handbook. Retrieved from http://www.eatanews.org/training-manuals-and-supplements/
   Google Scholar
• FordL. B. (1987). The potent permissions of role-modeling. Transactional Analysis Journal, 17, 105–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FriedlanderM. (Ed.). (1987). Power [Theme issue]. Transactional Analysis Journal, 17(3).
   Google Scholar
• FromkinV.RodmanR. (1983). An introduction to language. London, England: Holt-Saunders.
   Google Scholar
• GouldingR. L.GouldingM. M. (1978). The power is in the patient: A TA/gestalt approach to psychotherapy. San Francisco, CA: Trans Pubs.
   Google Scholar
• Guggenbühl-CraigA. (1996). Power in the helping professions. Woodstock, CT: Spring Publications. ( Original work published 1971)
   Google Scholar
• GurowitzE. M. (1975). Group boundaries and leadership potency. Transactional Analysis Journal, 5, 183–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HaimowitzN. (1975). Protection. Transactional Analysis Journal, 5, 51–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HawkesL. (2007). The permission wheel. Transactional Analysis Journal, 37, 210–217.
   Google Scholar
• HollowayW. (1974). Beyond permission. Transactional Analysis Journal, 4(2), 15–17.
   Google Scholar
• IngramR. (1980). Programming for permission (PFP), a game. Transactional Analysis Journal, 10, 16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Transactional Analysis Association. (2013). Training and examination handbook. Retrieved from https://www.itaaworld.org/itaa-training-examinations-handbook
   Google Scholar
• JamesJ. (1977). Family therapy with TA. In JamesM. & Contributors, Techniques in transactional analysis for psychotherapists and counselors (pp. 351–371). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• JamesM. (1971). Curing impotency with transactional analysis. Transactional Analysis Journal, 1(1), 88–94.
   Google Scholar
• JamesM. (1977). TA therapists: As persons and professionals. In JamesM. & Contributors, Techniques in transactional analysis for psychotherapists and counselors (pp. 33–47). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• JamesM.JongewardD. (1971). Born to win: Transactional analysis with gestalt experiments. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• JanssensA. (1984). Treatment of pre-orgasmic women. In SternE. (Ed.), TA: The state of the art. A European contribution (pp. 219–224). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris Publications.
   Google Scholar
• JaouiG. (1988, 1-2 3). Les permissions en AT [Permissions in TA]. Workshop presented by JaouiG., Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• KarpmanS. B.CallaghanV. L. (1985). Protection and nutritional nervosa. Transactional Analysis Journal, 15, 168–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LomasP. (2001). The limits of interpretation. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson. ( Original work published 1987)
   Google Scholar
• New Zealand Association of Counsellors. (2014). Code of ethics. Retrieved from http://www.nzac.org.nz/code_of_ethics.cfm
   Google Scholar
• ParkinF. (2002). Expanding permissions: New perspectives on working with transactional analysis and sexual difficulties. Transactional Analysis Journal, 32, 56–61.
   Google Scholar
• PirnieC. (1976). A permission/protection score card. Transactional Analysis Journal, 6, 88–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ProctorG. (2002). The dynamics of power in counselling and psychotherapy: Ethics, politics and practice. Ross-on-Wye, England: PCCS Books.
   Google Scholar
• Royal Commission on Social Policy. (1988). The April report, Volumes I to IV. Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand: Author.
   Google Scholar
• SchiffA. W.SchiffJ. L. (1971). Passivity. Transactional Analysis Journal, 1(1), 71–78.
   Google Scholar
• SchmidP. (1999). “Face to face”—The art of encounter. In ThorneB.LambersE. (Eds.), Person-centred therapy: A European perspective (pp. 74–90). London, England: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• ShohetR. (Ed.). (2007). Passionate supervision. London, England: Jessica Kingsley.
   Google Scholar
• SmithJ. B. (2011). Licensing of psychotherapists in the United States: Evidence of societal regression? Transactional Analysis Journal, 41, 139–146.
   Google Scholar
• StarkM. (1999). Modes of therapeutic action: Enhancement of knowledge, provision of experience, and engagement in relationship. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
   Google Scholar
• SteinerC. (1966). Script and counterscript. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 5(18), 133–135.
   Google Scholar
• SteinerC. (1968). Transactional analysis as a treatment philosophy. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 7(27), 61–64.
   Google Scholar
• SteinerC. (1971). Games alcoholics play: The analysis of life scripts. New York, NY: Grove Press.
   Google Scholar
• SteinerC. (1974). Scripts people live: Transactional analysis of life scripts. New York, NY: Grove Press.
   Google Scholar
• SteinerC. (1981). The other side of power. New York, NY: Grove Press.
   Google Scholar
• SteinerC.CassidyW. (1969). Therapeutic contracts in group treatment. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 8(30), 29–31.
   Google Scholar
• TudorK. (2010). The state of the ego: Then and now. Transactional Analysis Journal, 40, 261–277.
   Google Scholar
• TudorK. (2011). There ain’t no license that protects: Bowen theory and the regulation of psychotherapy. Transactional Analysis Journal, 41, 154–161.
   Google Scholar
• TudorK.SummersG. (2014). Co-creative transactional analysis: Papers, dialogues, responses, and developments. London, England: Karnac Books.
   Google Scholar
• VagoM.KnappB. W. (1977). Parenting: Protection for growth. Transactional Analysis Journal, 7, 221–223.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VagoM.KnappB. W. (1978). Bartering for protection. Transactional Analysis Journal, 8, 129–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waitangi Tribunal. (2015). The treaty of Waitangi. Retrieved from http://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/waitangi-tribunal/treaty-of-waitangi
   Google Scholar
• WoodJ. K. (1995). The person-centered approach: Towards an understanding of its implications. The Person-Centered Journal, 2(2), 18–35.
   Google Scholar
• WoollamsS. J. (1977). From 21 to 43. In BarnesG. (Ed.), Transactional analysis after Eric Berne: Teachings and practices of three TA schools (pp. 351- 379). New York, NY: Harper’s College Press.
   Google Scholar
• WoollamsS.BrownM. (1978). Transactional analysis: A modern and comprehensive text of TA theory and practice. Dexter, MI: Huron Valley Institute.
   Google Scholar
• WoollamsS.BrownM.HuigeK. (1977). What transactional analysts want their clients to know. In BarnesG. (Ed.), Transactional analysis after Eric Berne: Teachings and practices of three TA schools (pp. 487-525). New York, NY: Harper’s College Press.
   Google Scholar