This is the full version of an essay
written by Sharlene Weitzman as an assignment in her Morita Programme
studies. An abridged version was published in the Summer 2003 issue of
'Play for Life'. It highlights the need to balance the use of
'technology' to gather quantitative evidence with the need to preserve a
humane approach in play therapy.
A printable PDF version is available
click HERE.
'If there is one lesson that I have drawn from my travels, it is that
cultural and biological diversity are far more that the foundation of
stability, they are an article of faith, a fundamental truth that
dictates the way things are supposed to be. If diversity is a source of
wonder, its opposite—the ubiquitous condensation to some blandly
amorphous and singularly generic modern culture that I have witnessed in
all parts of the world—is a source of dismay.
…We are living in the midst of an ecological catastrophe every bit as
tragic as that of the slaughter of the buffalo and the passenger pigeon.
Wherever one looks, there are governmental policies that are equally
blind, economic rationales equally compelling. All memory is convulsed
in an upheaval of violence. There is a fire burning over the earth,
taking with it plants, animals, cultures, languages, ancient skills and
visionary wisdom. Quelling this flame and reinventing the poetry of
diversity is the most important challenge of our times.'
(Davis, 1998, p. 231).
In a response to the League of
Nations International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, Albert
Einstein wrote to Sigmund Freud in their 1932 correspondence, Why War?
I feel elated that through a request of the League of Nations I have
been given the unique opportunity to discuss with you those questions,
which in the present state of world affairs appear to me to be the most
important ones facing civilization. Is there a way to liberate mankind
from the doom of war? Although it has become common knowledge that
because of technological progress a threat to our very existence is the
fundamental part of this question, the most ardent efforts at solving it
have failed to a frightening degree. Isn’t it gratifying that some of
those who practically and professionally concerned with this problem now
wish, out of a certain feeling of powerlessness, to learn from those men
whose scientific work has given them an insight into the depth of human
wishes and feelings. In this exchange of ideas, I cannot do much more
than try to define the question and, by dealing with the more
superficial attempts at a solution, enable you to discuss the problem
from the vantage point of your profound knowledge of human instincts. I
trust that you will be able to point out educational methods which
might, in an apolitical way, remove psychological obstacles at which the
psychologically untrained may only guess, whose connections and nature
he cannot judge.
(Einstein, 1932, p.1).
In light of recent world events, I have found this correspondence and
the notions of psychology, science, technology and expertise that are
relayed in terms of the threat of war to be remarkably relevant and
applicable in today’s global climate.
Further, I am struck by the pungency that the notion of technology and
the role it plays in the social sciences, specifically child
psychotherapy and play therapy, is as relevant in our discussions today,
perhaps even more so than it was 70 years ago. I find myself asking if
we have found any answers in the last century to the same questions we
continue to pose? That being an attempt, " To discover the true causes
of human behaviour-those unseen processes of the mind which take place
in response to external events and other stimuli" (Hunt, 1993, p.7). I
find this topic to be of primary importance in the field of child
psychology, specifically in the research realm as it continues to move
rapidly in the direction of a quantitative and scientifically motivated
format in an attempt to categorize people in their human lives.
Empiricism is the mode of the day. As such, what role is technology
playing in the field of child psychology and play therapy? George Grant
notes in his essay, Faith and Multiversity that,
The ‘helping’ professions-psychiatrists, social workers etc.-are
important means of bringing people under objective control. This is
largely done by the claim that they understand families better than
families understand themselves (Grant, 1986, p. 53).
In essence the individual and the primacy of their own expertise about
themselves has been negated with an increasing emphasis being placed on
the expertise of objective scientific inquiry. In the field of child
psychology today, value and emphasis is being placed upon objectifying
individuals and families. This is done by completing research based upon
assessment tools. These tools are formulated to make conclusions based
upon predetermined generalized factors. The importance and value of the
individual and their family as an expert about themselves and the
observation of that individual that was critical to Piaget’s theoretical
approach with children, has the potential to become virtually nullified
and made obsolete by these assessment and evaluation tools.
As Einstein pointed out above, technological advancements, despite
modernist assumptions otherwise, are not without their limitations.
Einstein points out one pitfall as, being able to grasp the structure of
an argument as a measure of success despite any hands on experience. In
pointing this out, the greatest scientific mind of the 20th Century sums
up the limitations of science and technology. His words have a resonance
today that is as relevant in the world climate, as they were stunningly
simplistic in their truth.
As a brilliant thinker, Einstein was given a choice of whom he wished to
correspond with and which topic to address. As an objective, scientific
thinker, he chose to communicate with the 20th century’s most famous
researcher of human instincts, Sigmund Freud. By virtue of this choice,
Einstein further, conveys the inability of the scientific mind,
therefore process, to understand the complexities of human nature and
the human condition. At the same time, he espouses the benefits of the
objectivity that science can offer when trying to filter through complex
human issues.
It seems increasingly apparent that the world of science and technology
and that of social or human sciences is interwoven and cannot, in a
modern time such as this, be used independently to address social
issues. George Grant pontificates on this topic in his essay Thinking
About Technology,
The mobilization of the objective arts and sciences at their apogee
comes more and more to be unified around the planning and control of
human activity. What must be emphasized here is that the new
technologies of both human and non-human nature have been the dominant
responses to the crisis caused by technology itself. This illustrates
how ‘technology’ is the pervasive mode of being in our political and
social lives. (Grant, 1996, p.17).
Grant further discusses the domino effect the role of technology plays
in our human/social and political lives, specifically during times of
crisis, such as the one we are currently experiencing. Grant states
that,
The political response to these interlocking emergencies has been a call
to even greater mobilization of technology, which illustrates the
determining power of our technological representation of reality. More
technology is needed to meet the emergencies which technology has
produced. (Grant, 1986, p.16).
These remarks by Grant are in sync with the thoughts expressed above by
Einstein, although the time frame between the two is 54 years. In
carrying this line of thought further, the determining nature of
technology (science and research) on the social sciences (psychology)
has been seen in attempts over the last eighty years to professionalize
and technologize the field. Grant further notes that in
professionalizing the field, we have become elite experts about the
people we work with. In doing so, "The profession has become a chief
instrument for tightening social control"(p.16).
To summarize the discussion so far, technology exists and the creation
of technology further creates more technology. Objectivity is a direct
result of technology as there are tools ascribed to each technological
process. Those who claim exclusive rights to the tools of a particular
technology (research) are considered experts or professionals within the
field of that technology. In so far as this argument goes, the people
that technology is designed to work with, no longer hold claim to being
experts about themselves. Rather, the professionals within the field of
that technology are now considered experts about the whole of the
clients’ experience. This begs the question in the technological age;
does the client have a voice?
The influence of behaviourism in the early part of the last century
moved child psychology to be research oriented. Behaviourism
concentrated on determining norms as shown by the advent of standardized
mental testing (Hunt, 1993, p. 354). This was evident in Hall’s "child
study movement" which focused on experimentation and data gathering
(Hunt, 1993, p. 354). In response to the question, does the client have
a voice, Hall may have stated that the client does not have an
individual voice, rather that there is a collective voice in research
that determines "norms".
On the other hand, Piaget placed the highest value on knowledge based on
the experiences of both the ‘client’ and the professional. In this
belief he created modern developmental psychology. Piaget believed in
utilizing the dialectic of research and theory and watched children
play, while also playing with them. He developed his theories based upon
this dialectic. While research, often painstaking (Hunt, 1993, p. 355)
was a major component of his studies, this research was practically
based upon experience. Thus, his compulsion with epistemology was
influenced by both the spirit of the times, by Darwinian biological
determinism combined with concepts of the cognitive process (Hunt, 1993,
p.355). This belief in the advancement of human kind through
metamorphosis of accumulated experience created an advancement of
psychology that was unprecedented although limited by Piaget’s theory
that development ended in the late teen years. It was however, Piaget’s
brilliance in recognizing the value of the dialectic that has influenced
modern psychology to combine technology/research with practical
application and thus, the focus on efficacy of treatment protocols.
Of primary importance to the flavour of this essay, is an understanding
of the integral part that play, playing with and the playing of
children, has had in developing this psychology. While Freud had alluded
to the importance of childhood experiences on the development of ones
psyche, he spoke in terms of sexuality, thus alienating him from the
puritans who believe that children do not possess inherent sexual
characteristics (Hunt, pp. 196). On the other hand, Piaget embraced the
notion of the child as innocent, developing and influenced not only by
their biological processes, but the processes of their interaction with
the world, answering the age-old question of nature verses nurture. For
Piaget a large part of that interaction involved his participation in
the process of play.
Perhaps it was Piaget’s lack of formal training in psychology and his
interest in natural science, further combined with his role as a father,
which allowed him to view the cognitive development of a child as a
unique yet quantifiable experience. However, maturation remained an
unexplored area for Piaget although today, modern neuroscientific
research is providing further information in this field. With the advent
of developmentalism, child psychology became a legitimate area of
scientific inquiry. This lead to further study within infant development
on topics such as: maturation (Dennis), perception (Franz), personality&
attachment (Bolwby &Ainsworth) psychoanalytical development (Anna Freud)
behaviourism (Klein &Tustin), (Winnicott), lifespan development (Erikson),
moral development (Kohlberg)
Play therapy and studies with children have focused on the social
learning views and the role of play in the developmental process. (Sroufe
and Cooper). Sroufe and Cooper speak about play as a forum for learning
self-control in a social context (Hunt, 1993,p.374). Piaget also
believed that morality developed within the context of game playing
(Hunt, p.379). And so the field began to develop as a unique,
independent area of inquiry.
PLAY THERAPY
Play Therapy has its roots in a plethora of disciplines including:
Anthropology, Sociology, Social Work, Education, Psychiatry and
Psychology. With Freud’s psychoanalytical approach to therapy and the
discovery of the psyche, combined with Jung’s unconscious and symbolism,
the stage was set for the inevitable development of play therapy.
The turn of the twentieth century was a milestone in the development of
western ‘civilized’ society. Charles Darwin had written his Origin of
the Species and Sigmund Freud was discovering the inner workings of the
human mind and spirit. The impressionists were alive and thriving and
the surreal movement was developing out of the notion that inner symbols
could be expressed through the medium of art. The western world was ripe
for the advent of play as therapy.
Piaget’s theory of cognitive developmentalism was established and with
it, a man not formally educated in psychology, discovered the enormous
and far reaching implications of play as a way of tapping into the inner
self through external expression in a realm that was taken for granted
for centuries, the realm of play.
He began the empiricist approach to studying the validity and
reliability of play as a medium for expression and analysis and the
therapeutic components inherent in play. In my opinion, Piaget was most
successful in his ability to balance nature verses nurture. Perhaps this
came out of his perspective as a father and a scientist. From these
early beginnings, psychology has branched of into many areas including,
psycholinguistics, neuropsychology, clinical, academic and social
psychology to name a few.
With the advent of Bowlby and his theories of attachment, child
psychology and play therapy became firmly entrenched as sound and
relevant areas of study. Separation and attachment theories use play as
one of the primary areas of assessment with respect to parental meeting
of needs. Bowlby’s theories have had far reaching implications for child
psychology and play therapy, as he laid the foundation for much of
today’s continued work on the importance, relevance and validity of
meeting a child’s need throughout the initial stages of development and
the implications of not doing so on later mental health. Today studies
in topics such as: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders, Anxiety
Disorders, Behavioural Disorders, Developmental Disorders, Physical,
Sexual and Emotional Abuse, Substance Abuse, Gender Identity Disorders,
Eating Disorders, Communication Disorder, Abuse and Neglect,
Depressions, Anxieties and Fears, all point to the role of attachment,
pre and post natal in the forming of a healthy person. Even the
Diagnostic Statistics Manual IV is now inclusive of childhood disorders.
Developmentalist approaches created a milieu in which that theory is
inherent in today’s psychology, whereas prior to Piaget it was not.
Within the field of play therapy there are different theories that form
the basis of a practitioner’s involvement with their client. These
theories include: psychoanalytical, release and structured, client
centered, focal, behavioral, gestalt, Jungian, filial, theraplay,
humanistic, cognitive/behavioural and eclectic. Determining the value of
directive verses non-directive approaches also influences ones work with
children. Choosing tools to use when working with children also
influences our level of involvement in the play therapy process.
However, according to Russ in her article, Play Psychotherapy Research
State of the Science, despite the existence of these theories, the
literature, "Need(s) to be integrated into a theoretical framework that
leads to the establishment of a systemic program of research and
clinical practice" (pp.366).
In our modern world where funding is based on facts, there is a
necessity for play therapy research that creates assessment and
diagnostic tools. There is a necessity for valid, rigorous,
methodologically sound research that will encourage play therapy to
develop as a field of intervention that is proven to be effective. This
can be accomplished by developing a formatted and well-documented
approach to meeting the needs of children. In response to this need, the
development of interventions that have universal application will ensure
service implementation that is appropriate and effective. This is the
major goal of empiricism. This also allows for assessment of
practitioner’s interventions and ultimately will lead to implementing
the most appropriate and effective interventions for each client, while
ensuring individual accountability for therapists.
There is much merit in science and research, there is also much
potential for dehumanizing the experiences of children. An awareness of
this potential pitfall is integral to providing interventions that are
developed based upon individual needs. Mark Barnes reminds us that,
"Healing occurs below jaw level. Getting stuck up in our heads only
serves to stop or delay the process." (Barnes, 1996, p.141.). Science
and empiricism remain important tools that will promote the growth of
the field, let us not forget that intuition, feeling and empathy for the
client are equally important.
Despite the value of empiricism and the necessity for it to receive
funding for programs, there remains an inherent dilemma the in child
psychology and play therapy. This dilemma is in the importance of
recognizing the uniqueness of the individual while recognizing and
utilizing the gained knowledge through research and
technology/empiricism. This is not a new dilemma, but a pervasive and
persistent one. This responsibility falls to individual practitioners.
While human beings share certain aspects of the human condition, each
experience, like each person and child is unique unto himself or
herself. It is this challenge that makes the field endlessly interesting
and infinitely ripe for study.
If the inherent goodness of technology/empiricism is questioned, then an
examination of the growing trend towards it’s use of technological tools
within the field of child psychotherapy/ play therapy is critical if the
field/profession is to remain reflective and just. As post-modern
theories question the core of the human sciences, so did modernism
question the practice before it’s time. In 70 years will the same
questions be asked of today’s practice and of future practice?
In a world in which the foreseeable future holds the continued
exponential growth of technological intrusion in the lives of human
beings, recognizing that technology creates connections between agencies
in society on many levels is of vital importance. Utilizing technology
to make connections with clients is an increasing challenge within the
field of child psychology and play therapy.
Despite the integral role of computers and the tools that accompany them
in the field of psychotherapy, the therapist can still maintain a
subjective and pivotal role in determining the nature of the
relationship with the client. There is optimism in this fact. The future
of the field will be determined by the continued ability of individual
therapists to retain this power as well as, the ability of agencies and
governments to encourage this. Observation, questionnaires, data
collection, experimentation, correlation analysis, mental testing,
emotional development, morality testing, must also be used to accomplish
these goals.
Despite efforts to place people into categories and even within the
constraints that these categories impose, the individual therapist can
continue to value the primacy of the therapeutic relationship and the
uniqueness of the individual client. This can be done in an effort to
determine services for children and their family that takes into account
their individual needs. Working for the good of the whole by working for
the good of the individual.
Freud reiterated this sentiment when he replied to Einstein’s inquiry
regarding war. He did so by speaking about human nature as dichotomous,
love and hate, pacifism and destructiveness. These forces, like those of
technology and human beings are interwoven and rarely act independently
of one another. The field of play therapy will continue to develop
within it’s own dialectic or dichotomy, empiricism and clinical
intervention. Although this may be accomplished conversely, by working
for the good of the individual by working for the good of the whole.
This will be accomplished through relevant and valid research within the
field related to specific areas of inquiry.
Freud also says that through the process of civilization continuing to
prioritize the intellect over instinct, we maybe able to eradicate our
inherent tendencies to aggression and destruction (he was clearly a
pessimist). In other words, utopia through intellectual supremacy. Will
science, research, empiricism bring us to this utopian state of being?
Can science and technology continue to move us in this direction? If we
use it to dehumanize and objectify people while concurrently increasing
the rift between the professional and layperson, history has and
continues to show us that the end result will not be successful.
If we follow Piaget’s notion of cognitive development, play therapy does
not appear to be in its infancy. It is a toddler who is influenced today
by therapists, academics researchers and the children and families it
serves. It will be critical for all of these parties to play a role in
creating a body of research that quantifiably establishes, "How play
helps, what it helps with, can we teach good play skills, and how the
therapist can use play most effectively to help the child (Russ,
pp.366).
There is a necessity for assessment and diagnostic tools that can be
used in a systemic fashion. There is the need for a consistent
assessment of when intervention is needed for children. To date, there
exist some assessment tools, yet they are not broadly used. Russ (1995)
mentions some of these scales including the Affect in Play Scale and the
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children. More often than not,
however, when a child is referred for therapy there is no valid
assessment of whether therapy will in fact be helpful and if it is in
fact a necessary intervention.
There is a need for the development of creative, effective
service-delivery models. Trained child psychotherapists/play therapist
could implement these. Part of this process is the need to assess each
child, before, during and after the therapeutic process takes place.
There have been studies that show the effectiveness of play therapy
interventions, yet the methodological soundness of many has been
questioned. Interestingly many have historically failed to have a
control group as part of the study. In attempting to avoid this type of
invalid or questionable research Weisz (1993), in Russ (1995) refers to
studies that show positive results as those that, "Zoom in on specific
problems with careful planning of the intervention" (Russ, pp.379). As
well, there is notation of the value in, "Including children (in
research) who are not clinic-referred, having homogeneous samples, and
by having a focal problem that the therapy is focused on" (Russ,
pp.380).
It appears that the future direction of the field of child psychology
and play therapy is in the area of cognitive-behavioural treatment. This
is proving to be an area of research where valid studies have shown the
effectiveness of play therapy interventions. This is as result of the
nature of cognitive-bahvioural interventions and their focus on specific
treatment goals (Russ, pp.379). Conversely there has been limited
research into the affective benefits of play therapy interventions
(Russ, 1995). The future assessment, diagnostic and clinical models will
also need to be inclusive in the area of affect.
Research in child development, specifically infant mental health and
attachment regulation, speaks to the importance of play in the
development of the executive functions. It does not take a huge leap of
faith for those in the field of child psychotherapy to realize the
implications of this on the field of play therapy. However, there must
be a leap taken in the area of research to fill the gap between what is
known in the field of child development as empirically sound and
effective and what will be proven to be sound and effective play therapy
interventions.
This research must also include evaluation methods in identifying and
determining the effectiveness, beyond the most obvious and widely used
tool to date, which is observation of a positive change or elimination
of the concerning or challenging behaviour. Doing this will mean
implementing longitudinal studies that track the behavioural, cognitive
and affective changes over the course of time. Where will the money come
form for this type of research? It is a cyclical debate.
Completing research that determines the efficacy of play therapy
interventions will create increased funding for future research?
Scholars can conduct research, but this can exclude the input of the
hands on clinician in the process. As such, it would be most efficacious
for individual case studies to be completed by therapist practicing in
the field. While this is not practical for all, due to realistic
constraints, for those who can accomplish such studies, the benefits
will be great. A corollary of the benefits will be in adding to the
limited literature that is empirically based and sound. In doing so
future meta-analysis will prove to have a more profound impact on
verifying the validity the field as a whole.
And so we return to Freud and Einstein, yet another dichotomy. Freud, a
man of the humanities, Einstein, a man of empiricism, everywhere we turn
there is a dialectic. However, there is no such dialectic when these two
men discuss war. Despite Freud’s belief that human nature strives
towards it’s own destruction (the death instinct), both he and Einstein
are clear that civilization and culturization move us away from this
destructive mode. In my interpretation, Freud is saying that knowledge
creates positive change. In doing so, the knowledge that children can
gain through the play therapy process, be it directive or non-directive,
internalized or externalized, is a knowledge that will move them towards
healing. Let us combine the dialectic of technology and research with
practical application and thus develop an efficacious treatment
protocol. Let us not forget how effective Piaget was in balancing the
value of empiricism with the value of hands on clinical intervention. Of
all of the things he has contributed to the field, in my opinion this
was his greatest achievement.
We are currently waging a war on terrorism. A war that has resulted in
despairingly huge rifts between the ideals and realities of different
cultures. As Marx put it, the have’s and the have-nots. Desperation
leads to fanaticism and to a disregard for human life. Separation of
people through many means, but through technology and science
specifically only works to further the differences amongst people. The
contradiction of technology in human services is that it means to move
people to integration while conversely acting as a mechanism of
categorization and separation.
This notion is applicable on a global scale, on a governmental scale, on
an agency and field scale and on an individual level. Separation of the
client from the service and the service provider only exacerbates the
already cumbersome division that can exist between them as professional
and layperson. While it is possible for individual clinician’s to
utilize technology while maintaining a sense of humanism in their work,
this is not an expectation or requirement in the field as a whole. It is
important, fundamental in fact, that this humanism not be lost, but
rather fostered into the technological processes by which we perform our
jobs. If we are successful in accomplishing this task, technology will
look very different. Let us not forget the ‘’poetry of diversity’’
rather, let us use technology and research as a tool to improve
application without loosing the art of play as a creative endeavor that
cannot be put into a formula.
Go to Top
