Applications of Family

and Group Theraplay

Applications of Family
and Group Theraplay

Edited by
Evangeline Munns

JASON ARONSON

Lanham • Boulder • New York • Toronto • Plymouth, UK

Published in the United States of America
by Jason Aronson
An imprint of Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

A wholly owned subsidiary of

The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706
www.rowmanlittlefield.com

Estover Road
Plymouth PL6 7PY
United Kingdom

Copyright © 2009 by Jason Aronson

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Applications of family and group theraplay / edited by Evangeline Munns.
p. ; cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-7657-0594-5 (cloth : alk. paper)
eISBN 978-0-7657-0645-4
1. Group play therapy. 2. Group psychotherapy for children. 3. Family
psychotherapy. I. Munns, Evangeline.
[DNLM: 1. Play Therapy. 2. Child. 3. Family Therapy—methods. WS 350.2
A652 2009]

RJ505.P6A67 2009
618.92’891653—dc22 2008047584

Printed in the United States of America

⬁ ™ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of

American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper
for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.
 With gratitude and love to my parents, Nick and Vera Scraba, for their
caring and dedication to the welfare of all of their children,

to my siblings, Jean, Mary, Lois, Ernie, Diana, and Gail for strong family
ties that will always last,

and to my present family, my husband Tom, and daughter Catherine, for

their patience, love and support.
Contents

Preface ix
Acknowledgments xi
Introduction xiii

Part One: Background and Fundamentals of Theraplay

1 Family and Group Theraplay 3
Evangeline Munns
2 Research on Theraplay Effectiveness 17
James L. Wardrop and Linda A. Meyer

Part Two: Theraplay with Special Populations

3 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 27
Lisbeth DiPasquale
4 Theraplay with Overtly and Passively Resistant Children 45
Shirley Eyles, Maria Boada, and Catherine Munns
5 Theraplay with Adopted Children 57
Sandra Lindaman and Dafna Lender
6 Theraplay Approaches for Children with Autism
Spectrum Disorders 69
Paris Goodyear-Brown
7 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 81
Karen Doyle Buckwalter and Annette L. Finlay
vii
viii Contents

Part Three: Theraplay and Cultural Diversity

8 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 97
Linda Perry and Patti Sutherland
9 Theraplay for Chinese Children 115
Angela Siu
10 Theraplay in Germany 127
Ulrike Franke
11 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 137
Nancy J. Atkinson

Part Four: Theraplay Integrated with Other Therapies

12 In Sync 161
Gail Smillie
13 Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy 171
Phyllis B. Rubin, Dafna Lender, and Jessica Mroz
14 Parent Session in Theraplay: A Way to Consolidate
Therapeutic Alliance and Joint Focus 183
Minna Laakso
15 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling
Techniques: The Body/Mind Connection in Pediatrics 197
Anita Johanson Maddox and Carol R. Bettendorf
16 Relinquishment Visits: Saying Goodbye Is an
Unnatural Process 211
Terra Bovingdon and Karen Fabian
17 Equine Assisted Therapy and Theraplay 225
Deborah Weiss

Part Five: Group Theraplay

18 Father–Son Group Theraplay 237
Jamie Sherman
19 Working with Adolescents 249
Brijin Gardner and Mary Spickelmier
Appendix 265
Index 283
About the Contributors 293
Preface

This book was inspired by the often amazing results I saw in the work of
Theraplay® therapists across North America during my travels teaching
workshops in Theraplay. This was particularly true when I was teaching the
more advanced workshops and was able to view tapes of Theraplay sessions
offered by professionals from varying backgrounds: psychologists, social
workers, child care workers, nurses, teachers, early childhood specialists,
speech therapists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, the occasional
psychiatrist, and other workers in the mental health field. Troubled chil-
dren and their parents were being helped in a comparatively short time,
even though their problems were often severe in nature and chronicity.
Therapists often commented that previous treatments had not worked, but
Theraplay was moving their clients in a positive direction. Sometimes Ther-
aplay had to be modified (particularly with traumatized clients) and this
led to some very creative approaches or led to combining Theraplay with
other treatment methods. This book reflects some of those modifications
and integrations with other treatment methods—a growing trend in the
play therapy field. As well, I was impressed with the variety of populations
that Theraplay seems to help—in terms of types of problems and in cultural
diversity. I felt that workers in the mental health field needed to know about
the significant results that were obtained by the authors in this book,
whether they were working with families or groups.
This book begins with an overview of the fundamentals of Theraplay in-
cluding its theory, main dimensions, and research to give a grounding for
readers who may not be that familiar with Theraplay.
Part two focuses on the use of Theraplay with a wide range of populations
especially those who have relationship and/or attachment difficulties such

ix
x Preface

as the dysregulated child, the resistant child, those who have been adopted,
autistic children, and those who have been placed in residential care.
Part three looks at the adaptability of Theraplay to a diversity of cultures
around the world—from the aboriginal peoples in Canada living with a
traumatic past, to the Asian and German families coping with a strong cul-
tural pressure for achievement, and to those in a multi-cultural environ-
ment in the United States, where a variety of cultural traditions need to be
respected and incorporated into treatment.
Part four looks at how Theraplay has been integrated with other treat-
ment methods. Theraplay, by itself, has been successful with many clients,
but sometimes other treatment methods are needed when problems are
very severe or complex or unique. The chapter “In Sync” describes integrat-
ing Theraplay with the Circle of Security program with 0 to 6 year olds,
while the next chapter deals with using Dan Hughe’s Dyadic Developmen-
tal Psychotherapy and Theraplay with traumatized children. Including the
parent is extremely important. Often their own history interferes with treat-
ment progress. This is addressed in the chapter on forming a therapeutic al-
liance with the parent. Theraplay often uses sensory motor activities to en-
gage the child and fits in well with sensory motor approaches as described
in chapter 15. Using Theraplay to help children say goodbye to their birth
parents created a unique program for grieving children about to be adopted
(Relinquishment Visits chapter). Children often relate easier to animals
than to humans. Using horses to promote caring and nurturance and build-
ing relationships with the help of Theraplay is described in the chapter on
equine assisted therapy.
Part five focuses on group Theraplay such as father/son Theraplay groups
that often have profound effects on the parent/child relationship. In the
mental health field the emphasis is most often placed on mother/child re-
lationships, but fathers have a very important role to play too. The need to
be included was reflected in almost perfect attendance in these groups and
comments from fathers that the Theraplay hour was the most precious time
of the week for themselves and their sons. The chapter on adolescents de-
scribes how Theraplay was used with a reactive and difficult to engage age
group—troubled adolescents and juvenile offenders.
This book covers the very wide range of social, emotional, and behavioral
problems and ages where Theraplay has been used to help children and par-
ents grow within themselves and in their relationships with each other. An
attempt has been made to give this book a practical emphasis so that the
reader can translate theory into how Theraplay sessions actually are carried
out. The majority of authors have included agendas from their Theraplay
sessions, and activities are described in full detail in many of the chapters
and in the appendix at the end of the book. It is hoped that this book will
stimulate readers to stretching their thinking on how Theraplay can be used
successfully in their own work.
Acknowledgments

First of all I would like to acknowledge the often heroic efforts of the ther-
apists I have encountered in my field. One has to believe in the resiliency
of the clients we work with, no matter how troubled, to put out so much ef-
fort in our attempts to help the families with whom we work. We also need
to have a belief and a passion for what we do, and I want to thank Ann Jern-
berg and her right-hand person, Phyllis Booth, for giving us Theraplay, a
treatment method that we can believe in and one that frequently is so ef-
fective in a short period of time.
I also want to thank Peter Rossborough, the former executive director of
Blue Hills Child and Family Centre in Aurora, Ontario, who entrusted me
to form and direct the play therapy services department where I first started
using Theraplay and became so motivated from the results we were getting.
I also want to thank the authors of this book, who put so much time and
energy into their chapters and reacted with such grace when they were asked
to do further drafts. Their creativity and courage in attempting to find new
ways of adapting Theraplay to such a wide range of clients is admirable.
Thanks as well to my daughter, Catherine, for her encouragement and ex-
citement with the clinical results using Theraplay with her own clients.
My husband, Tom, was invaluable in helping me with computer chal-
lenges and without his support and help this book would not have been
completed in any timely fashion.
Finally, I want to thank the staff at Jason Aronson for their help and flex-
ibility.

xi
Introduction

In the early 1980s I attended a workshop on Theraplay® that was given by

Dr. Ann Jernberg, the founder of Theraplay. I was so impressed with this
comparatively new therapy. I felt that children would love it. The emphasis
was on building the positive strengths of the child, resulting in a boost of
self-esteem, which all children need, but particularly those who walk into
the doors of our clinics. Those children know that something is wrong and
somehow they are to blame; “He’s nothing but trouble!” This has often
been drummed into them by parents, teachers, siblings, and peers. They
come reluctantly with head hung low or with open defiance ready to resist
whatever. Instead, the Theraplay therapist greets him or her with a cheerful
hello and starts noticing something positive—“Hi Johnny, I’ve been look-
ing forward all morning to meeting you. I notice that you have shiny dark
brown hair and your eyes match the color of your hair. And wait a minute—
do you know that there’s a sparkle in your eyes when the light shines on
them—wow!” The therapist then engages the child in something playful
and fun or if he feels the child is receptive, may nurture the child by notic-
ing his bruises or “boo-boos” and putting soothing lotion or powder on
them. The child has already learned three things. “This adult thinks there is
something positive about me (she is not going to start talking about my dif-
ficulties), she is taking care of me, and I don’t have to perform or achieve
something to get her approval.” This is a healthy start to changing the neg-
ative self-concept (or inner working model) that children usually have
when they are brought into treatment.
Theraplay’s main goals are to enhance the positive relationship and/or at-
tachment between child and parent and to increase self-esteem and trust, all

xiii
xiv Introduction

often needing attention in troubled children. These goals can be applied to

parents as well. I felt that it was crucial to involve parents if one hoped to
achieve good generalization of treatment effects. This was another facet of
Theraplay that appealed to me. Parents first observe the therapist with their
child for a few sessions (modeling sessions) and then directly participate
with their child under the guidance of the therapist. As well, I always in-
cluded a parent counseling session immediately after the Theraplay session
where debriefing could take place, as well as a discussion of child manage-
ment issues at home or at school. Sometimes this discussion would lead to
examining the parents’ own family histories whose issues were sometimes
repeated with their own children (intergenerational transmission of attach-
ment patterns) (Zeanah and Zeanah, 1989).
Living under restrictive budget and time constraints (common problems
in the mental health field) made Theraplay even more appealing as it uses
no toys and treatment is usually short-term (from 8 to 16 sessions—possi-
bly longer for more severe cases). As well, Theraplay can be applied across
the age span from infants to the elderly and is applicable to a wide range of
emotional, social, and behavioral difficulties.
I started experimenting using Theraplay soon after Dr. Jernberg’s work-
shop and decided this was a treatment method in which I wanted to be
fully trained. With the support of Peter Rossborough, then the executive
director of Blue Hills Child and Family Services, I arranged for a series of
Theraplay workshops at our agency, led by Dr. Jernberg and Phyllis
Booth (then the training director of the Theraplay Institute in Chicago).
In 1991 Mr. Rossborough asked me to start and direct a new department,
Play Therapy Services, in our agency which led to forming a training
school where professionals came to be trained not only in Theraplay, but
in non-directive play therapy and filial play therapy. However, Theraplay
was the main thrust of our dept. Our efforts soon become recognized in
the community and at one time we had a 5-year waiting list. This moti-
vated us to adapt Theraplay where more clients could be seen through
parent/child groups and multi-family groups. The father/son groups for
example, were exceptionally powerful where fathers and their sons be-
came closer, enjoyed each other, and children were more cooperative.
Usually, the participants did not want the groups to end. We learned that
some families with particularly complicated problems could not be ade-
quately treated through groups and those were given more individually
focused treatment. Meanwhile, our training school grew to be the largest
training school in Canada. I became a certified Theraplay therapist, su-
pervisor, and trainer and gave workshops across North America, which I
do to this day. Professionals have been trained from every province in
Canada, and there are centers that practice theraplay in most of the
 Introduction xv

provinces. With the leadership of the Theraplay Institute in Chicago,

which serves as an international training center and sends trainers world-
wide, Theraplay has become an important therapeutic model and is cur-
rently practiced all over the world.
The therapeutic atmosphere that we work in today is changing and is be-
ing influenced by the latest research from psychobiologists and neuroscien-
tists in their studies on the effect of the environment on the developing
brain. The emphasis on verbal therapies with their dependence on higher
cortical functioning is being questioned when working with traumatized
clients or young children, whose emotional responses may be governed by
the mid-brain and lower brain centers. Non-verbal therapies are being in-
creasingly recognized such as sandplay, EMDR (eye movement desensitiza-
tion remediation), art and play therapies, movement and dance, medita-
tion, sensory-motor training, etc., as well as Theraplay.
There are well-controlled research studies (Field, 2001) that are being rec-
ognized in the field of touch and pointing to the importance of touch for
all human beings. Not only are we a herd animal, but our early beginnings
are dependent on warm nurturing, responsive touch. When we are born,
the most advanced sensory system is the sense of touch. But in North Amer-
ica, we live in a touch phobic society that is reflected in the fear that both
parents and teachers have in touching even young children. We have laws
now that prohibit not only teachers from touching their children in any
way, but in some parts of the country, peers are not allowed to touch each
other—not even positive touch such as hugging. It has been suggested that
not touching might be another form of abuse and that children may be
reaching out for touch through aggressive acts and learning that aggressive
touch such as pushing, shoving, pinching, and hitting are more acceptable
in our society. There is a growing concern over the rise of violence in our
country. Research (Thayer, 1998) has shown that violence rates within
countries are correlated with the amount of positive touch among family
units.
Theraplay is a non-verbal therapy that replicates normal parent-child in-
teractions emphasizing the importance of touch, of consistent, attuned re-
sponsiveness to the child’s needs and co-regulation of the child. There is
also the belief that if the child has missed out on this early caring, that giv-
ing the child these missing elements when he/she is older will help to fill
in these gaps. It is not known conclusively whether the gaps get filled, but
what is known at least clinically and now to a certain extent research-wise,
is that families receiving Theraplay function in a more positive way with
closer family relationships, higher self-esteem, greater cooperation, and less
anger and defiance among its members. The families become more func-
tional.
xvi Introduction

REFERENCES

Field, T. (2001). Touch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thayer, T. (1998). March Encounters. Psychology Today, 31–36.
Zeanah, C. and P. Zeanah. (1989). “Intergenerational Transmission of Maltreat-
ment. Insights from Attachment Theory and Research.” Psychiatry, 52, 171–196.
I
BACKGROUND AND
FUNDAMENTALS OF THERAPLAY
1
Family and Group Theraplay
Evangeline Munns

Theraplay® is a structured form of play therapy that children often view as

“fun! I could come here forever!” (This statement came from an aggressive
adolescent.) They frequently do not want therapy to end and often try to
prolong sessions. Attendance is usually very high. Why does this happen?
The answer is multi-faceted, but a key factor may be Theraplay’s emphasis
on noticing the positive strengths in a child and trying to strengthen them.
So a child comes into the clinic expecting a reiteration of all the problems
he has and instead he is treated as someone who is special, valuable, has
many interesting qualities, and is a delight to be with. This is a new begin-
ning for him or her. Parents’ perceptions of their child during the first few
sessions, where they are observing through a one-way mirror or sitting qui-
etly in a corner of the room, start to change. Just maybe there is hope for
their child—just maybe he is not really the little “monster” they have come
to label in their minds “or that troubling child.” Positive changes often oc-
cur within a short period of time—sometimes therapy lasts for as few as 8
sessions, but if difficulties are very severe or complex, then 16 or more ses-
sions may be required. Sometimes Theraplay is used as a starting point with
other treatments recommended later or integrated right within the Thera-
play sessions (see chapters in part four of this book).
Sessions are based on therapist/parent/child interactions. No toys are used
so therapy is cost effective. The sessions are structured, and led first by the
therapist, while parents observe for 3 or 4 sessions (ideally behind a one-way
mirror with an interpreting therapist to explain the activities, but this may not
always be possible). Parents are then brought into direct participation with
their child. In later sessions parents are encouraged to lead the activities. Four
checkup sessions are held during the year following the end of treatment.

3
4 Chapter 1

Essentially, Theraplay is non-verbal, although reflections are given, “that

made you uncomfortable, we’ll try another way,” but no interpretations are
given to the child and no probing questions are asked. Theraplay is not a
cognitive or insight-based therapy with its involvement of the cortex or
higher brain (although sometimes Theraplay has been integrated with such
therapies—see chapters13 and 19). It is involved more with reaching the
emotional or lower part of the brain (brainstem and diencephlon) (Gaskill,
2008).
Clients suitable for Theraplay come from a wide age range. Children from
infancy, preschoolers, latency-age, adolescents, adults, and the elderly have
been treated successfully by theraplay. As well, Theraplay has been used for
a variety of emotional, social, and behavioral problems ranging from the
acting out aggressive child; the impulsive, dysregulated child; the timid,
fearful child (including mutism); the neurotic or character-disordered
child; and those who are depressed and even suicidal. Theraplay is most
suited to children who are poorly attached or have difficulty in forming re-
lationships such as autistic children, those who have been adopted or fos-
tered, and step-children who have to form new relationships (see chapters
in part two). Theraplay would not be recommended for children who have
been very recently traumatized such as children who are grieving from a
death in the family, those recovering from recent surgery or abuse or those
who panic at the approach of an adult. More traditional therapies would be
used first with possibly Theraplay used later.

THEORY

Theraplay tries to replicate the normal interactions that occur between par-
ent and a young child (Jernberg and Booth, 1999). It is based on attach-
ment theory that proposes that the first relationship a child has, forms the
template for all other relationships and if that first attachment is not a
healthy, strong one, then the child will have difficulty in forming connec-
tions with others and will have emotional and social difficulties later in life.
Attachment research from around the world has supported this premise
(Rutter, 1994)
After taking a thorough developmental and family history and obtaining
assessments such as the Marschak Interaction Method (DiPasquale, 2000),
the theraplay treatment plan goes back to the developmental stages where
the child’s emotional growth stopped and the attachment process was dis-
rupted. The histories of troubled children often reveal that there were early
periods where conditions were not optimal for the child for creating a se-
cure attachment base with a chief caregiver. Theraplay tries to meet the child
at his/her emotional level, (which is often much younger than the chrono-
 Family and Group Theraplay 5

logical age of the child) and to give to the child the positive, attuned atten-
tion, warm nurturing, the feeling that he/she is valued and important and
will receive consistent responsive caring, and help in regulating his/her feel-
ings, that were missing in his/her early childhood. This approach is sub-
stantiated by some of the latest findings from neuroscientists such as Dr.
Bruce Perry, who starts interventions at the developmental stage where there
was neglect or trauma and then progresses to the child’s biological age
(neurosequential programming) (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006). (This will be
discussed in greater detail later.)
In theraplay, sometimes nurturing may take the form of cradling and
rocking the child and singing a special song using the child’s name while
feeding him/her a lollipop. Lotioning or powdering of “hurts” or “boo-
boos” on the child’s hands or feet is included in every session. Nurturing is
emphasized with all children, but particularly with those who have been
abused, neglected, deprived, or traumatized. Care is taken to modify activ-
ities so they are acceptable to the child. Nothing is forced. (These children
need to be empowered, not disempowered.) In later sessions, more activi-
ties are geared to the child’s chronological age.
There is a lot of positive, physical contact in Theraplay sessions, partly be-
cause this replicates what normal parents do with their young children and
we know that the tactile sensory system is the first and most highly devel-
oped sensory system in the newborn. Children need affectionate touch to
thrive (Gerhardt, 2004) (Sunderland, 2006). How a child is touched, held,
rocked, picked up or put down, gives the child his/her first images of self,
and the feeling as to whether he is valued and wanted (Ford, 1993). Most
babies are soothed when they are picked up. Close bodily contact activates
the release of calming hormones such as opioids and oxytocin, thus regu-
lating the baby’s arousal system while promoting bonding between parent
and child. “There is a mass of scientific evidence to demonstrate that the
more touch a child gets in childhood, the calmer and less fearful he is likely
to be in adulthood. This is because physical contact helps regulate the stress
response system in the brain—which, without this regulation, can become
hard wired for oversensitivity. When this is the case, it can be very difficult
for the child, as he grows up, to calm himself down when stressed” (Sun-
derland, 2006, p. 171). As well, there are many well-controlled studies
showing that positive touch (such as massage) helps the baby to thrive
physically, emotionally, and socially (Field, 2001) (Field and Reite, 1985).
Additionally, a lack of touch has been significantly correlated with rates of
violence (Thayer, 1998). The less touch in a society, the more aggression.
There is a growing concern that children in our touch phobic society may
be using aggressive touch such as pushing, hitting, shoving, pinching as at-
tempts to obtain physical contact. They have learned that aggressive touch
may be more acceptable in our society, than affectionate touch. This needs
6 Chapter 1

to be explored further, considering that the rates of violent acts within our
society appear to be rising.
Touch and rhythm are necessary for organizing the first areas of the brain
to be developed (lowest and most central brain regions). Since neural sys-
tems are organized and become functional in a sequential manner, it is im-
portant that each system gets adequate stimulation at each developmental
stage. Dr. Bruce Perry has incorporated this knowledge into treating neg-
lected and traumatized children using a neurosequential approach (as has
been mentioned before). “These children need patterned, repetitive experi-
ences appropriate to their developmental needs, needs that reflect the age
at which they’d missed important stimuli or had been traumatized, not
their current chronological age” (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006, p. 138). Dr.
Perry targets his interventions to the areas of the brain that were damaged,
or underdeveloped in the order in which they were affected by neglect or
trauma. In describing his neurosequential programming with an adolescent
boy who had suffered early neglect from infancy, Perry first used massage
(with the mother’s aid) in a gradual, repetitive, systemic way to give the
child the affectionate touch he had missed early on. Later, a music and
movement class helped him to develop a sense of rhythm which was a fac-
tor in regulating his stress response system. In a later phase of treatment, so-
cialization skills were taught on a one to one basis and finally, much fur-
ther along in treatment, a more cognitive, verbal approach was taken where
problems were discussed. Theraplay uses an approach that has similarities
to Dr. Perry’s program in that activities are first geared to the emotional
level of the child (sometimes this is at an infant or toddler level, where ap-
propriate touch and nursery rhymes are included) and then progresses to
the child’s chronological age as treatment moves forward.
It has already been mentioned that a baby needs an adult to help regulate
his/her feelings. If a parent responds to the baby’s signals then they are “help-
ing the baby’s nervous system to mature in such a way so that it does not get
overstressed” (Gerhardt, 2004, p. 210). Parental responsiveness not only
helps the baby develop a healthy immune system and stress response system,
but helps the baby’s brain to develop such as the prefrontal cortex, which is
associated with the “child’s capacity to hold information in mind, to reflect
on feelings, to restrain impulses, that will be a vital part of his or her future
capacity to behave socially” (Gerhardt, 2004, p. 210). However, a parent not
only has to help soothe a baby, so that stress hormones like cortisol are not
produced in such quantity that damage occurs in its vulnerable, developing
brain (van der Kolk, 2003), but a parent also needs to stimulate the baby, and
in so doing, the child learns how to manage more exciting events. New expe-
riences can sometimes be frightening to a little one, but with the parent’s re-
assurance the child is not overwhelmed. The baby has to learn that taking
some risks can bring mastery, wonder, and excitement. Children need exhila-
 Family and Group Theraplay 7

ration and a sense of joy (Schore, 1994). Sunderland (2006) writes about “joy
juice.” Optimal levels of dopamine and opioids in the brain, with surges of
adrenaline throughout our body, can produce excitement and joy. These peak
experiences can help a child to develop spontaneity, to be hopeful and opti-
mistic, to be motivated, and to feel awe, wonder, and delight. This is what
makes us alive! This also promotes resilience—a feeling of being able to han-
dle minor stresses. Futhermore, physical play, where there is lots of body con-
tact, where there is laughter and delight, can produce powerful emotional
states that activate emotion-regulating regions in the frontal lobes of the brain
(Panksepp, 1993). Lots of physical play can help children to manage their
emotions and stress (Sunderland, 2006).
The theraplay therapist helps the child to regulate his/her feelings. This is
done by interspersing soothing, calming activities with more stimulating
ones. If a child is dysregulated (such as the ADHD child) then more calm-
ing activities are introduced and structure is increased, until the child re-
laxes and slows down. With the easily excited child, some stimulating in-
teractions take place, but gradually, so the child learns how to respond,
without losing control of his feelings or impulses. If the child is withdrawn
and depressed, more stimulating activities are carried out. All children need
to learn how to be quiet and relaxed, but also how to let go and experience
“joy juice” in their lives.

RESEARCH

The research using Theraplay is discussed in the next chapter. Although

Theraplay’s main goal is to enhance parent/child relationships and attach-
ments, there is a dearth of Theraplay studies that use attachment measures.
Part of the difficulty lies in the fact that there are few attachment measures
that are valid and cost effective with children across the age span. Never-
theless, studies that obtain significant results improving parent/child and
peer relationships using Theraplay have been obtained. As well, several
studies indicate that Theraplay does have a significant impact in reducing
aggression in behavior disordered children and self-esteem is raised (see the
next chapter for details and for more research results).
There has been a welcome increase in research with Theraplay using ran-
domized control groups. More are needed. What still needs to happen is to
have control groups with some face to face interaction so subjects in the
control group believe that they will be helped, thus controlling for the
“placebo effect.” Finally, research is needed that compares theraplay with
other treatment methods that have been well validated. There are a number
of research projects in progress (in the United States, Finland, Germany,
and South Korea), so hopefully this will happen in the near future.
8 Chapter 1

THERAPLAY DIMENSIONS

When Dr. Jernberg was given a federal grant to increase the attachments be-
tween headstart mothers and their children in 1967, in Chicago, she made
hundreds of observations of normal parent/child interactions. She catego-
rized these observations under 4 main dimensions which underlie all Ther-
aplay activities. Certain dimensions are emphasized depending on the
child’s needs. They are: Structure, Challenge, Engagement, and Nurture. All
activities are done in a playful atmosphere.

Structure
The structure in a child’s life brings a sense of orderliness, predictability,
and security. The regularity of feeding, sleeping, bath and play times helps
to create a rhythm in the child’s daily routine promoting his own self-
regulation. As the child gets older, more rules for behavior are put into place
so the child learns to control his impulses and distinguishes what is ac-
ceptable socially. The parent ordinarily is in charge, which gives the child a
sense of safety.
In Theraplay, structure is evident in the format of the session with a clear
beginning and end and usually limited to approximately a half-hour time
wise. It is usually started with a fun entrance, a welcome song or special
handshake, an inventory or checkup (where positive physical features of the
child are noticed—i.e., “I see you have brought your rosy cheeks, bright blue
eyes and that dimple in your chin! Let me see that strong arm. I’m going to
measure those big arm muscles with this fruit loop and then feed it to
you!”). This is followed by activities representing all of the dimensions and
the session ends with a goodbye song or handshake.
Structure is also maintained with the therapist preplanning and leading
the activities and making certain rules such as “no hurts,” are followed.
This dimension is particularly needed with children who have come from
chaotic backgrounds or are impulsive, having little self control or have be-
come tyrants in their homes or are parentified.

Challenge
All children meet and need challenges in their life gaining a sense of mas-
tery and self-confidence on the way. The child learns to communicate his or
her needs, to sit, walk, and run, all the while learning that taking risks can
bring its rewards. Hopefully the challenges he meets are within his capabil-
ity of achieving so that he ends up feeling competent and strong. He may
fail, but he must learn how to cope with that too.
 Family and Group Theraplay 9

In Theraplay challenges are geared to the developmental abilities of the

child, so the child can succeed and feel confident. Some risks are built in so
the child has to stretch himself a little, but still within the range of his capa-
bilities. The child might be asked to remember a progressively more com-
plicated sequence of clap patterns, or walk a straight line while balancing a
bean bag on his head, or blow cotton balls away from his area and into his
opponent’s, or arm/thumb wrestle, etc. Challenge is needed by timid, fearful
children who have been overprotected and not allowed to take risks. Chal-
lenging activities usually require some cooperation with another person and
are also a safe way to release inner tensions within aggressive children.

Engagement
Parents learn to engage their children often in delightful ways such as
playing peek-a-boo with their baby, lifting them up in the air, giving them
a horsey ride, reciting nursery rhymes, etc., playfully intruding in their
child’s space, but in a way that brings pleasure and joy to both. The child
learns about his body image and boundaries, that surprises can be fun and
that he can be a source of delight to others. Engagement creates connection
with others. He is not alone.
In Theraplay the therapist must engage the child right from the begin-
ning. This is done with a cheerful greeting and an involvement of the child
in an appealing way (entrance) into the room, such as walking on “stepping
stones” (small sheets of paper) that have an M&M hidden under some of
the stones leading to a cushion or bean bag chair in the room where other
activities will continue.
The therapist soon learns to make transition periods short, so that the
child’s attention is not lost in between activities, especially when working
with a hyperactive child. The therapist strives to be attuned to the child’s
cues so that interactions are mutually enjoyable, but also geared to the
child’s needs.
Engagement is particularly needed with withdrawn children, those who
are depressed or fearful, or have protective, rigid barriers such as autistic
children.

Nurture
This is the most important dimension of all and needed by all children.
Every child needs nurturing to thrive. Parents show their love through ful-
filling their child’s needs through tender caring of their child such as feed-
ing, bathing, cradling, rocking, caressing, hugging, kissing, singing, prais-
ing, and expressing their affection in many ways. If this is done in sensitive
10 Chapter 1

responsiveness to their baby’s signals consistently, the child will most likely
develop a positive inner image (inner working model) and a secure base, a
secure attachment to those parents (Bowlby, 1988).
In Theraplay, every child receives some nurturing in every session. This is
done through activities such as feeding of snacks (occasionally through
feeding a juice box or bottle while cradling and singing to the child), lo-
tioning or powdering of “hurts” on hands or feet, rocking the child in a
blanket while singing a special song about him, cotton ball soothe (mov-
ing a cotton ball on the child’s face and/or hands while noticing positive fa-
cial features), powder hand prints, etc. These activities are low key and of-
ten soothing and calming for the child.
Children who have come from deprived, neglectful, or abusive environ-
ments are in need of a lot of nurturing. Acting out, aggressive children who
are constantly in trouble also need much nurturing, as do those who are
pseudomature or overachieving.
(For more Theraplay activities please see the appendix.)
Sessions typically take about a half-hour followed by a parent counseling
session (the latter was introduced by the present author and is not always
included in other clinical settings) where debriefing and discussion of
home and school issues takes place.
Parents are encouraged to practice Theraplay activities at home. If siblings
want to be included as well, then that may be allowed depending on the
progress of the referred child. Sometimes siblings are brought into the Ther-
aplay sessions right from the beginning of treatment under the guidance of
the therapist. This may happen if there is a lot of sibling rivalry.

SESSION (4TH) EXAMPLE

Entrance: (child follows the leader into the room imitating animal motions
and sounds)
Welcome Song (sitting while holding hands) or special handshake: “Hello,
Johnny, hello Sally hello everyone—we’re glad you came to play”
Inventory or Checkup: therapist comments on positive physical features of
the child (“you have shiny, curly hair”) and may make a few measurements
such as height, length of arms compared to legs, size of arm muscles, num-
ber of freckles, etc.
Lotioning or powdering of hurts: therapist notices and lotions any bruises,
scratches, “boo-boos” on child’s hands or feet.
Mirroring: therapist and child stand facing each other. Therapist moves
his arms and body slowly and child imitates movements exactly at the same
time, acting as a mirror.
Parents enter room.
 Family and Group Theraplay 11

Balloon toss: A balloon is tossed from one person to another and then every-
one tries to keep the balloon in the air. Several more balloons may be added.
Simon Says: Everyone stands in a row facing the leader who says: “When I
say Simon says, you do it, but if I don’t say Simon says first, you don’t do it.
Okay, Simon says to raise up your arms,” etc. The theraplay twist to this ac-
tivity is to add commands like: “Simon says to give your neighbor a hug (or
a handshake)” or “Simon says to say one thing you like about your neighbor.”
Pass a funny face: With everyone sitting in a circle, the leader makes a
funny face that the next person imitates and passes around or makes up a
new funny face.
Peanut-butter jelly: the leader calls out “peanut-butter” and the group an-
swers “jelly.” The leader changes the loudness and pace and tone of the
words and the group imitates.
Tracing shapes and back rubs: Parent traces, with her finger, a simple shape, or
letter or number on the back of child who guesses what has been traced. The
parent then rubs off the shape by moving her hand across the child’s back (like
a back rub or massage) and then traces another shape for the child to guess.
Feeding: Therapist feeds the child several potato chips and then feeds
everyone (use whatever snack is appealing to the child). Parents take a turn
feeding child and others.
Goodbye Song: “Goodbye Johnny, Goodbye mom, Goodbye dad and Sally.
We’re glad you came today.”
(Mom and dad might then enter a playful race to see who can get
Johnny’s shoes on the fastest.)

PHASES OF TREATMENT

Introduction: The therapist introduces himself/herself in a cheerful manner

and conveys the idea by her attitude that she will be in charge, that the ses-
sion will be fun and active, that the sessions will be regularly held in a cer-
tain time and place and parents will at first be observing and later will be
participating.
Exploration: Child and therapist get to know each other in ways that em-
phasize positive features, i.e., “Did you know that you have a dimple in
your left cheek when you smile and you have another cute dimple in your
chin and gee I have a dimple in mine too! They may compare handprints
or footprints, or see who has the greatest amounts of freckles. The aim is for
the child (and parents) to see himself in a new distinctive way that is clear
and positive and that he views the therapist that way too.
Tentative Acceptance or Honeymoon: There is usually a honeymoon period
where the child is cooperative and easily engaged. The child seems inter-
ested and may even be enthusiastic.
12 Chapter 1

Negative Reaction or Resistance: A resistive phase may occur where the child
turns away, pouts, whines, or cries or may refuse to do a number of activi-
ties. The therapist reflects the child’s feelings, tries to find a way that is more
comfortable for the child, but ultimately tries to cheerfully and calmly carry
on, often using humor or surprises or the use of paradox (joining the child
in its resistance—i.e., “you turn around so well, can you turn around even
more?” (changing this resistance into a game). It is important to meet this
resistance in an upbeat, but firm manner. The child may be testing bound-
aries or testing if the therapist will still accept him if he shows his negative
side. This is especially true of children who have been rejected in the past.
Fear of further intimacy may also be a factor. If the child is genuinely fear-
ful, then the therapist should stop and find an activity that still has the
same goal, but approach it in a way that will make the child less anxious.
For example a child may not want his “hurts” to be lotioned. The therapist
may use a bandaid or colorful sticker instead, or simply may blow on the
scratch or make powder handprints. Parents may have to be helped to know
a resistant phase is to be expected, but will pass.
Growing and Trusting: This is a phase where the therapist and child really
get to know each other in a more intimate and enjoyable way. The child is
more cooperative and trusting, is more confident in taking appropriate
risks, has greater self-esteem, and feels valued and cared for. Parents are
brought in at this stage and gradually start leading the activities. The thera-
pist emphasizes the interactions between their child and themselves, pro-
moting ways to increase their attachment to each other.
Termination: When it is felt that the referring problems have disappeared
or been greatly reduced, it is time to end therapy. (Treatment of course can
be extended if needed and all parties are agreeable). This is the end phase
where strengths are emphasized and termination is put in a positive
light—“Johnny, you are doing so well at home and with your friends you
won’t need so see me anymore. We have 3 more sessions and then we will
be stopping Theraplay. We are going to celebrate with a party during our
last session. What are your favorite activities? We’ll be sure to include
them.” In the remaining sessions the therapist reminds the child that there
will be only 2 and then 1 session left. A party is planned where not only
favorite activities of both child and parents are included, but also parents
are asked to bring favorite food and drinks. Party hats are supplied and ex-
changed at the party, photos taken and theraplay souvenirs such as hand
or body outlines are given to the child, along with a small present which
acts as a souvenir of the therapist and theraplay. Activities are included that
focus on the positive attributes of the child such as making a necklace
made from short strips of colored paper on which everyone has printed
what they like about the child. The child wears this necklace as he walks
out the door.
 Family and Group Theraplay 13

Four followup sessions take place within the year after treatment is ter-
minated. An appointment should be made for the first checkup, before
everyone leaves. The therapist can give the child a warm goodbye hug say-
ing something like, “Johnny, I enjoyed being with you and I will miss you,
but I will be seeing you again in 4 week’s time and I look forward to that!”

GROUP THERAPLAY

Dr. Phyllis Rubin and Janine Tregay in the 1980s started using Theraplay
groups in the classroom hoping to create a family atmosphere and sense of
cohesion in Janine’s special education class (Rubin and Tregay, 1989). Soon
after that, the present author started her first experiences using Theraplay
through groups with troubled preschoolers (including some autistic chil-
dren) in a special class. The teachers noticed benefits such as reduced ag-
gression, more spontaneous caring among peers, more cooperation, and
the teachers themselves felt closer to the children. Other Theraplay groups
with older residential children including adolescents, groups with moth-
ers/sons, mothers/daughters, fathers/sons, high-risk pregnant teenage
mothers, and multiple dysfunctional families, were also successful. The at-
tendance was always very high with these groups, particularly with the fa-
ther/son groups no matter what the weather and even when a child might
be sick, but still insisting on coming. Plans for having a Theraplay group
with mothers having deprived, neglected, or abusive histories is still some-
thing the present author hopes to fulfill.
The four dimensions of Theraplay: structure, challenge, engagement, and
nurture are basic to all activities. A balance of active, stimulating activities
with calming, soothing ones, so the group does not escalate out of control,
is very important. This is preplanned by the leader and co-leader. If there are
a number of acting out, impulsive children, then structure is emphasized
along with calming activities which are often nurturing as well. Preschool-
ers often need structure along with rhythmic, singing activities where there
is lots of physical contact and nurturing. Adolescent groups need more
structure and challenge. The elderly need much nurturing, affectionate
physical contact, and stimulation, but not much physical movement as
their mobility is often limited.
Groups start and end with a definite beginning and end—songs, special
handshakes, or “high fives” can be used. They usually last about 45 minutes,
but with preschoolers, 20 minutes may be enough. If the group consists of
emotionally disturbed children, then 4 to 8 children is recommended. How-
ever, groups of up to 30 children in a normal kindergarten class, have been
conducted successfully. Groups are held regularly at least once a week lasting
about 3 months when an evaluation can take place (ideal is to have some pre
14 Chapter 1

and post measures contrasted with a control group). Another 3 month con-
tract may be made. It is very important that written permission is obtained
from the parents and approval from supervisors, principals, and directors, be-
fore groups are started.

Discipline Problems
The main leader leads the activities, while the co-leader keeps an eye out for
trouble spots and moves quickly to support a child that is having difficulty
managing. If a child is hurt, the leader immediately stops the activity and gives
attention to the injured child. If it is an accident, the child’s sore spot is gently
rubbed or maybe lotion, powder or a Band-aid is applied. If an aggressor has
injured the child, then the leader tries to find out what has happened and in-
structs the victim to say clearly “don’t hurt me” to the aggressor. The leader
then guides the aggressor to help make some form of restitution by gently rub-
bing the sore spot, or blowing on it, or helping to put powder or a Band-aid
on it. This may require hand over hand help on the part of the leader. Restitu-
tion is a powerful technique for helping to reduce aggression. The aggressor be-
comes very aware of the consequences of his actions, but also is a part of mak-
ing things better for the victim. (The aggressor is not shamed or made to say
“sorry”—often a useless exercise.) The victim feels cared for. This is an impor-
tant lesson for the whole group and helps to create a sense of safety.

Goals for Group Theraplay

• To enhance the ability to relate to others and to become more aware of
others and their needs.
• To promote feelings of acceptance, a sense of belonging, and increased
trust.
• To enhance self-esteem and self-confidence.
• To promote feelings of care and concern for others and for themselves.
• To promote a feeling of safety with others.
• To increase inner controls for those who are impulsive or act out.
• To increase the ability to wait and take turns and to tolerate attention
going to others.
• To experience joy, laughter, and having fun with others.

EXAMPLE OF A GROUP THERAPLAY SESSION AGENDA

At the beginning of group sessions the leader reminds the children of 3 rules:

1. no hurts (physical or verbal)

2. we stick together (we all follow the leaders directions)
3. we have fun!
 Family and Group Theraplay 15

Agenda:

Entrance: Choo-choo train (children marching one behind the other with
their hands on the waist of the child in front of them all chanting “choo-
choo, toot, toot” until desired spot is reached in the room)
Welcome Song: each child’s name is included in the song
Inventory or special welcome of each child: “Debbie you have brought your
beautiful smile!” “Tommy, you have brought your strong muscles.”
Three Rules: No hurts, Stick together, Have fun
Lotioning or powdering of hurts (by leaders or by peers)
Motor Boat: All join hands and walk in a circle chanting “Motor boat, mo-
tor boat go so slow, motor boat, motor boat go so fast, motor boat, motor
boat step on the gas, motor boat, motor boat go so slow, motor boat, mo-
tor boat go so fast, motor boat, motor boat, out of gas! Everyone falls down
and ends in a sitting position.
Duck, Duck Goose: Everyone sitting in a circle while “it” walks behind tap-
ping heads as he says “Duck,” “Duck,” but when he says “Goose” that per-
son jumps up and races in the opposite direction around the circle. When
“it” meets this person they give each other a hug or a handshake and con-
tinue running to see who first gets to the empty spot left by the person that
had been tapped as the goose. Whoever gets there last is the next “it.”
Mother May I: Everyone stands in a row facing the leader on the opposite
side of the room. Object is to see who will get to touch the leader first. Each
person in the row gets a turn to advance, but must first say “Mother may I”
If they don’t, then they will miss their turn. Example: “Mother may I take 3
giant steps forward?” Leader says “yes you may or no you can’t—you may
take 2 giant steps.”(This is a great activity for defiant children when their
parents are the leaders.)
Pass a Gentle Touch: everyone sits in a circle. Leader starts by touching a
neighbor in some gentle way. This is passed on to the next person, and so
on. A variation is for each person to imitate what others have done and then
to add on his/her unique (but gentle) touch.
Feeding: the leader feeds a potato chip to each child and makes several
rounds of doing this. The co-leader takes a turn feeding others as well.
Sometimes children can feed each other.
Goodbye Song: A simple song is sung with a goodbye associated to each
name of the people in the group. The leader gives a direct gaze and smile to
each person as their name comes up.
See appendix for more activities.
If one is conducting a parent/child group then the Theraplay session is
followed by a parent counseling session, while one of the leaders takes the
children to a separate room for quiet puzzles, reading, crafts, or play out-
side. Extra juice and cookies are given to the children and a beverage and
cookies for the adults too.
16 Chapter 1

The parental discussion sessions create a sense of companionship, that

others have similar problems, new solutions are reached, parents support
each other, and often new friendships are formed with invitations for each
others’ children to birthday parties, play times, overnights, etc.

REFERENCES

Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base, Parent–Child Attachment and Healthy Human Devel-
opment. New York: Basic Books.
DiPasquale, L. (2000). “The Marschak Interaction Method.” In Theraplay: Innovations
in Attachment Enhancing Play Theraplay, edited by Evangeline Munns. New Jersey:
Rowman & Littlefield Pub., 27–51.
Gerhardt, S. (2004). Why Love Matters: How Affection Shapes a Baby’s Brain. New York:
Brunner-Rutledge.
Field, T. (2001). Touch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Field, T. and M. Reite. (1985). The Psychobiology of Attachment and Separation. New
York: Academic Press.
Ford, C. W. (1993). Compassionate Touch: The Role of Human Touch in Healing and Re-
covery. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Jernberg, A. and P. Booth. (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children Build Bet-
ter Relationships Through Attachment-Based Play. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Pub.
Panksepp, J. (1993). “Rough and tumble play. A fundamental brain process.” In Par-
ents and Children Playing, edited by K. B. MacDonald. Albany, New York: SUNY
Press, 147–84.
Perry, B. and M. Szalavitz. (2006). The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog. New York: Ba-
sic Books.
Rubin, P. and J. Tregay. (1989). Play With Them: Theraplay Groups in the Classroom.
Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.
Rutter, M. (1994). “Clinical Implications of Attachment Concepts: Retrospect and
Prospect.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Attachment and
Psychpathology, Toronto, Ontario, October.
Schore, A. (1994). Affect Regulation and the Origins of Self: The Neurobiology of Emo-
tional Development. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sunderland, M. (2006). The Science of Parenting. New York: DK Publishing Inc.
Thayer, T. (1998). March Encounters. Psychology Today, 31–36.
van der Kolk, B. A. (2003). The Neurobiology of Childhood Trauma and Abuse.
Child Adolesce. Psychiatr. Clin. N. Am. 12(2), 293–317, ix.
Zeanah, C. and P. Zeanah. (1989). “Intergenerational Transmission of Maltreat-
ment. Insights from Attachment Theory and Research.” Psychiatry, 52, 171–196.
2
Research on Theraplay
Effectiveness
James L. Wardrop and Linda A. Meyer

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, we reprise our attempts to identify or create a research base

for assessing Theraplay®’s effectiveness as an intervention method, identify
some current trends and developments, and speculate about future direc-
tions Theraplay research might take. Our interest in doing research on the ef-
fectiveness of Theraplay began several years ago. We believed that data would
support Theraplay’s long-standing reputation for effectiveness, as claimed by
virtually every Theraplay therapist that we had come into contact with for
over five years, and we thought there would have been some advances since
Munns (2000) wrote, “The research pertaining to the direct use of Theraplay
is not extensive and clearly needs attention” (p. 14). Accordingly, we decided
to conduct a meta-analysis of research on Theraplay covering its thirty-five
year history. Toward this end, in 2003–2004 we did the following:

1. Obtained copies of all research documents that had been collected at

the Theraplay office.
2. Requested copies of all research projects from individuals on the Ther-
aplay listserve.
3. Harvested leads from bibliographies of published works about Thera-
play.
4. Combed through Sally Popper’s (Popper, Miesse, and Stephenson 2002,
Popper and Miesse 2003) research reviews prepared for ATTACh.
5. Conducted an online search using PsychINFO, covering journals,
books, and dissertations from 1967 to 2004.

17
18 Chapter 2

For a study to be included in the meta-analysis, a study had to be pub-

lished in a refereed professional journal (including Dissertation Abstracts),
and it had to incorporate each of the following:

1. Present comparison data, either from a group that did not receive
Theraplay utilizing a treatment-control experimental design, or from
a pretest of Theraplay clients before treatment began (a pretest-
posttest design). We would prefer studies that did both, using a
pretest-posttest control-group design.
2. Include a sufficient number of participants to permit detecting treat-
ment effects of a size that might reasonably be expected. (Typically, we
would expect this to require a minimum of 8–10 participants per
group.)
3. Use one or more outcome measures providing objective assessments
of treatment effects, and provide evidence supporting the quality of
the measures used.

We anticipated that after thirty-five years of Theraplay’s existence, we

would find well over the minimal number of studies (twelve) we felt we
needed to carry out a meaningful meta-analysis. Much to our surprise, at
that time we located a very small number of studies investigating the effec-
tiveness of Theraplay, even without applying the criteria specified above.
(Fortunately, as is shown in sequel, the current status of research in Thera-
play has been much improved.) Our standards for including a study in a
meta-analysis are rather rigorous, because we are convinced of the need to
base findings on research that will stand up to close scrutiny of the internal
and external validity of the results. We recognize the difficulty of conduct-
ing such research in a clinical setting, but we will continue to advocate for
it as the surest way to determine just how effective Theraplay is, with whom
and under what conditions.

LITERATURE REVIEW: UPDATE

In the years since our initial survey, more research has been done, but little
of it yet appears in refereed journals. Taking a look at the broader array of
studies dealing with the effectiveness of Theraplay, and relaxing our de-
mand for peer review as an indicator of quality, we have identified a sub-
stantial number that provide grounds for optimism that in the next couple
of years we will see a meaningful accumulation of research addressing Ther-
aplay effectiveness.1 Our primary criterion for this broader survey was that
the study must report either pre-post data or comparison group data. In ad-
dition, we looked more broadly at studies that combined Theraplay with
 Research on Theraplay Effectiveness 19

other kinds of intervention, such as Ammen’s (2000) use of Theraplay with

massage. We also considered studies that used Theraplay with special pop-
ulations, such as Bernt’s (1992) study with failure-to-thrive children and
mothers, and the studies conducted in Germany by Franke and Wettig
(2006) (Franke, 2007). Finally, we considered the recent reports from the
Third International Conference on Theraplay held in 2007, including the
research summary prepared for that conference by Lender and Lindaman
(2007).
In a very early study, Ritterfeld (1989; cited in Munns, 2000) used three
matched groups of language-disabled children, The group receiving Thera-
play scored significantly higher on measures of socio-emotional constructs
(and also language expression) than did groups receiving speech and lan-
guage therapy or arts and crafts activities.
Much more recently, in her doctoral dissertation focused on validating
the Marschak Interaction Method Rating System (O’Connor, Ammen, Back-
man, and Hitchchock, 2004), Bojanowski (2005) used the Rating System
(MIMRS) and the Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach and
Rescorla, 2000) as pre-Theraplay and post-Theraplay measures with 11 parent-
child dyads. Using a significance level of .05, she found significantly posi-
tive treatment effects on two of the five dimensions of the MIMRS: Nurture
and Challenge. Additionally, changes on the Engagement and Separation-
Reunion dimensions were in the expected direction, but not significant,
and there was only a slight difference between pretest and posttest scores on
the Structure dimension. Curiously, Bojanowski did not report sufficient
data for the CBCL to determine whether it also demonstrated significant
pre- to post-treatment changes.
Because of the lack of peer-reviewed studies located in our attempt to do
a meta-analysis of Theraplay research, we (Meyer and Wardrop, 2005) con-
ducted a pilot study in which one Certified Theraplay Therapist adminis-
tered the Kinship Questionnaire (Kappenberg and Halpern, 2004) before and
after Theraplay treatment to all families (n=10) that were referred to her
during the 2004–2005 academic year and who met the age criteria. Even
with this small sample, the statistical evidence for Theraplay’s effectiveness
was impressively strong, and the results support the clinical experiences that
many Theraplay therapists report: that Theraplay was effective with a wide
variety of children, many of whom had been adopted. In addition, these re-
sults document that changes occurred in most of these children rapidly, de-
spite the fact that many of them had been substance exposed in utero and/or
had multiple placements.
Siu (2007) carried out a controlled study of Theraplay among Chinese
children. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effective-
ness of Theraplay on reducing internalizing problems among young chil-
dren in Hong Kong. Forty-six children, who were described as at-risk for
20 Chapter 2

developing internalizing disorders (based on a standardized questionnaire

on children’s behavior), were randomly allocated to either the Theraplay
condition or the waitlist control condition. There were 14 children from
grade 2, 16 from grade 3 and 16 from grade 4. The mean age for children
in the Theraplay condition was 7.84 (SD = 1.36), and the percentage of
girls equaled 56. In the waitlist control condition, the mean age was 7.89
(SD = 1.32) and the percentage of girls was 54. All children completed the
standardized measures on internalizing symptoms and self-esteem both be-
fore and after an eight-week period. Change scores on the measures were
calculated, using pre-intervention scores as covariates. Results showed that
children from the Theraplay condition showed significantly higher self-
esteem and fewer internalizing symptoms when compared to the waitlist
group.
Cross and Howard (2007) found that Theraplay was effective with chil-
dren diagnosed with PDD or mild-to-moderate autism. A number of stud-
ies, some employing appropriate controls and focusing on effectiveness
have been conducted at Sookmyung Women’s University in Seoul, Korea.
Lacking access to English-language versions of these reports, we have cho-
sen not to comment on them here, but simply note that the interested
reader may track down the following unpublished reports: Hong, 2007;
Kim, 2007; H. Lee, 2007; J. Lee, 2007; Shin, 2007; and Yoon, 2007. These
are all referenced without description in the Lender and Lindaman (2007)
summary from the Theraplay Third International Conference. Elsewhere,
Franklin (2007) reported significant Theraplay effects for a very small sam-
ple (n=8) of children diagnosed with Pervasive Developmental Disorder or
mild to moderate autism. (This report is a product of a collaborative effort
between the Theraplay Institute and the Institute of Child Development at
Texas Christian University to study the effectiveness of Theraplay interven-
tion with autistic children.)
In Sweden, research by Makela and his colleagues has provided some re-
sults supporting Theraplay’s effectiveness. The Makela and Vierikko (2004)
study, for example, involved 20 foster children living with long-term foster
parents. Using the Child Behavior Checklist to assess outcomes, they found
significant positive change following a series of Theraplay sessions using a
two-therapist model. More recently, Lassenius-Panula and Mäkelä (2007)
have reported positive results when examining the effects of Theraplay on
changes in symptoms, parent-child relationships, and stress hormone levels
of children referred for psychiatric care at three locations in Finland.
Wettig and Franke have collaborated on a number of important studies
of the effectiveness of Theraplay. The results of a controlled longitudinal
study carried out in Germany from 1998 to 2005 are summarized in Wet-
tig, Franke, and Fjordback (2006; see also Franke and Wettig, 2003). They
reported on research in Germany using Theraplay with children referred be-
 Research on Theraplay Effectiveness 21

cause of delayed language development and behavior disorders. This study

involved 60 children aged 2.6–7.11. The children with learning disabilities
participated in an average of 15 to 16 Theraplay sessions, while those diag-
nosed with Pervasive Development Disorders required an average of 29 ses-
sions. These children receiving Theraplay were compared with a similar
sample of nonsympotmatic children, matched by age and sex. An impor-
tant set of outcome measures was scales on the German version of the Clin-
ical Assessment Scale for Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (CASCAP-
D: Doepfner et al., 1999). Theraplay was “highly effective” both clinically
and statistically in reducing symptoms of attention, activity, social behavior,
affective, and anxiety disorders. As impressive as they are, these results are
of limited generalizability because of the use of a homogeneous treatment
population and reliance on a single, highly skilled Theraplay therapist.
These deficits were overcome in another study also reported in Wettig et
al. (2006; see also Franke, 2007), a multi-center study conducted in Ger-
many and Austria. Two hundred ninety-one children received Theraplay
treatment from 14 different therapists in 9 different treatment settings.
These children were diagnosed with behavior disorders and speech lan-
guage deficits. Outcomes—specifically, reduction in symptom severity of
behavior disorders—were again assessed using scales from the CASCAP-D.
Once again, significant positive changes were reported on scales of inter-
nalizing and externalizing behavior disorders as well as neuropsychological
disorder symptoms. Importantly, this study used multiple therapists (often
using a two-therapist model), and it obtained participants from multiple
and diverse settings. It stands at this time as the strongest evidence that
Theraplay is a highly effective intervention for large numbers of children.2

STATUS AND PROGNOSIS

Based on our pilot study (Meyer and Wardrop, 2005), we concluded that
additional research is needed with a much larger group of therapists and
children, preferably using different assessment instruments from those we
employed. This broader and updated review of research on Theraplay’s ef-
fectiveness serves to reinforce that recommendation. There are any numbers
of anecdotal reports and case studies in which therapists conclude that
Theraplay is effective, alone or in combination with other approaches, with
a variety of clinical populations, and across several countries. Happily, there
are an increasing number of controlled experiments and quasi-experiments
demonstrating Theraplay’s effectiveness in several settings, with diverse na-
tionalities, age groups, and clinical diagnoses. What is not yet available is
an adequate set of refereed, peer reviewed publications (including disserta-
tions among this group) that report statistically sound, comparative studies
22 Chapter 2

utilizing objective assessments of outcomes (the sorts of studies that in-

clude several of those reviewed here) that place Theraplay in the main-
stream of validated intervention approaches. The increase in research-ori-
ented presentations across the years of the International Conferences on
Theraplay (2003-05-07) and the apparent enthusiasm with which the most
recent presentations have been received, give us grounds for optimism that
such studies will be appearing with increasing frequency in major social-sci-
ence publications.

NOTES

1. We acknowledge with gratitude several suggestions from the editor concerning

candidate studies for consideration.
2. For other reports from this pair of scholars, access the German website
www.theraplay-research.de/ (especially the sections dealing with research results
and publications).

REFERENCES

Achenbach, T. M., and Rescorla, L. A. (2000) Manual for the ASEBA Preschool Forms
& Profiles. Burlington, Vt.: University Department of Psychiatry.
Ammen, S. (2000) “A play-based parenting program to facilitate parent-child at-
tachment.” In Short-Term Play Therapy Approaches with Children, ed. H. Kaduson
and C. Schaefer. New York: Guilford Press, 345–369.
Bernt, C. (1992). Theraplay with Failure-to-Thrive Children and Their Mothers. In
The Theraplay Institute Newsletter, Fall 1992, 1–3.
Bojanowski, J. J. (2005) “Discriminating Between Pre- Versus Post-Theraplay Treat-
ment Marschak Interaction Methods Using the Marschak Interaction Method
Rating System.” Psy. D. diss., Alliant International University, Fresno, Cal.
Cross, D., and Howard, A. (2007) “An evaluation of Theraplay with children diag-
nosed with PDD or mild to moderate autism.” (Paper presented at The Third In-
ternational Theraplay Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
Doepfner, M., Berner, W., Flechtner, H., Lehmkuhl, G., and Steinhausen, H. C.
(1999) Psychopathologisches Befund-System für Kinder und Jugendliche (CASCAP-D).
(English: Clinical Assessment Scale for Child and Adolescent Psychopathology.) Goet-
tingen: Hogrefe Verlag für Psychologie.
Franke, U. (2007) “An analysis of the therapeutic treatment process using Theraplay
with oppositional, defiant children and shy, withdrawn children.” (Paper pre-
sented at The Third International Theraplay Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
Franke, U., and Wettig, H. (2003) “Evaluation of the effectiveness of Theraplay:
Changes in children with communication and behavior disorders and in parent’s
attitudes after Theraplay.” (Paper presented at The First International Theraplay
Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
 Research on Theraplay Effectiveness 23

Franklin, J. (2007) An Evaluation of Theraplay Using a Sample of Children Diag-

nosed with Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) or Mild to Moderate
Autism. (Paper presented at the 21st National Conference on Undergraduate Re-
search, San Rafael, Cal.)
Goodman, R. (1997) “The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note.”
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 38: 581–586.
Hong, J. (2004) “The effects of a family resilience promotion program applying
family Theraplay.” Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul, Korea.
Howard, A., Purvis, K., Cross, D., and Lindaman, S. (2007) “An evaluation of Ther-
aplay® using a sample of children diagnosed with a pervasive developmental dis-
order (PDD) or mild to moderate autism.” (Paper presented at the Third Interna-
tional Theraplay Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
Hughes, D. A. (Undated) Parents Questionnaire and Parenting Profile for Developing At-
tachment. (Author, 571 Vassalboro Rd., China, Me 04358)
Kappenberg, E. S., and Halpern, D. F. (2004) Kinship Center Attachment Question-
naire. Claremont, Cal.: Berger Institute for Work, Family, and Children, Clare-
mont McKenna College.
Kim, Y. (2007) “Development and evaluation of a group Theraplay program to en-
hance attachment of infants.” (Unpublished manuscript, cited in Lender and Lin-
daman)
Kwon, E. (2004) “The effect of group Theraplay on the development of preschool-
ers’ emotional Intelligence Quotient.” (Unpublished manuscript, cited in Lender
and Lindaman)
Lassenius-Panula, L., and Mäkelä, J. (2007) “Effectiveness of Theraplay with symp-
tomatic children ages 2–6: Changes in symptoms, parent-child relationships and
stress hormone levels of children referred for psychiatric care in three university
hospital districts in Finland.” (Paper presented at the Third International Thera-
play Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
Lee, H. (2007) “The effect of group Theraplay applied to Montessori kindergarten
on children’s behavior problems, self-concept and social competence.” (Unpub-
lished manuscript, cited in Lender and Lindaman)
Lee, J. (2007) “The effect of group Theraplay program for improving social compe-
tence of children in group homes.” (Unpublished manuscript, cited in Lender
and Lindaman)
Lender, C., and Lindaman, S. (2007) “Research supporting the effectiveness of Ther-
aplay and Marschak Interaction Method.” (Paper presented at the Third Interna-
tional Theraplay Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
Marschak, M. (1960) “A method for evaluating child-parent interaction under con-
trolled conditions.” Journal of Genetic Psychology 97, 3–22.
Meyer, L. A., and Wardrop, J. L. (2005) “Research on Theraplay.” (Paper presented at
the Second International Theraplay Conference, Chicago, Ill.)
Munns, E. (2000) Theraplay: Innovations in Attachment-Enhancing Play Therapy.
Northvale, N.J.: Jason Aronson.
O’Connor, K., Ammen, S., Hitchcock, D. and Backman, T. (2001). Marschak Interac-
tion Method Rating System. Unpublished manual. Alliant International University,
Fresno, Cal.
24 Chapter 2

Popper, S. D., Miesse, K., and Stephenson, M. (2002) Recent Research on Adoption, At-
tachment, and Related Fields. Association for Treatment and Training in the Attach-
ment of Children. www.attach.org/researchnotes.htm (March 19, 2005).
Popper, S. D., and Miesse, K. (2003) Recent Research on Adoption, Attachment, and Re-
lated Fields. Association for Treatment and Training in the Attachment of Chil-
dren. www.attach.org/researchnotes.htm (March 19, 2005).
Randolph, E. (2000) Randolph Attachment Disorder Questionnaire (3rd Ed.). Ever-
green, Colo.: The Attachment Center Press.
Randolph, E. (2002) Manual for the Childhood-Onset Bipolar Disorder (COBD) Screen-
ing Test. Evergreen, Colo: RFR Publications.
Ritterfeld, U. (1989) “Theraplay: Evaluation einer Psychotherapeutischen Interven-
tionsmethode bei Sprachgestörten Vorschulkindern” [Evaluation of a psychother-
apeutic intervention method, theraplay, with language disordered preschool chil-
dren]. Unpublished study for the Diploma in Psychology. Heidelberg:
Psychologisches Institut der Ruprecht-Karls-Universität.
Shin, H. (2007) “A Qualitative Study of Theraplay Interaction.” (Unpublished man-
uscript, cited in Lender and Lindaman)
Siu, Angela (2007) “Theraplay in the Chinese world: An intervention program for
Hong Kong children with internalizing problems.” (Unpublished manuscript,
cited in Lender and Lindaman)
Wettig, H., Franke, U., and Fjordback, B. (2006) “Evaluating the effectiveness of
Theraplay.” In Contemporary Play Therapy, ed. C. Shaefer and H. Kaduson. New
York: Guilford Press, 103–235.
Yoon, J (2007) “Effects of family group Theraplay to enhance interaction between
child and mother in low-income families.” (Unpublished manuscript, cited in
Lender and Lindaman)
II
THERAPLAY WITH
SPECIAL POPULATIONS
3
The Dysregulated Child
in Theraplay
Lisbeth DiPasquale

WHAT IS DYSREGULATION?

There are many different reasons an individual child may be referred for
therapy. For a therapist, some of the more challenging cases involve chil-
dren who encounter extreme difficulty regulating the way they respond to
many normal everyday situations. Problems occur when they experience
strong negative emotions like anger, worry, or fear, but may also occur in re-
sponse to positive feelings like excitement, anticipation, or joy. They often
overreact to sensory input (e.g., loud or unexpected sounds, certain textures,
or light touch), and have difficulty controlling their attention, normalizing
their activity level, or regulating their mood. Because their reactions are well
beyond what is considered to be adaptive, these children are said to exhibit
“emotional dysregulation.”
For some of these children, the problems involve externalizing or acting
out behaviors. They tend to be irritable or easily angered and have difficulty
tolerating frustration, stimulation, lack of structure, changes in routine, or
new situations. They may respond explosively, have a tantrum, race around
wildly, or possibly lash out physically by hitting, kicking, biting, or throw-
ing objects. These episodes are often unpredictable and challenging to bring
back under control. In the throes of a “meltdown” the child loses control
and is unable to respond to orders to stop, attempts to negotiate or reason,
or even attempts to soothe or calm him. The safety of the child and anyone
around him may become an issue. Although it often appears that the child
is being deliberately defiant and oppositional, his emotions are so strong
that he cannot think and problem solve in the moment. After some time

27
28 Chapter 3

has passed and he is able to calm down, he will be better able to process
what has happened and may regret his actions.
Many different diagnoses are associated with a child with externalizing
behavior problems, such as, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
(ADHD), Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), Anxiety Disorder, De-
pression, Bipolar Disorder, or Autism Spectrum Disorders. If a child has se-
vere mood dysregulation and exhibits sudden rages or explosive episodes,
the diagnosis is most likely to be either a combination of ADHD and ODD
or “narrow phenotype bipolar disorder” (Carlson, 2007).
In contrast to the children with externalizing behavior problems, there
are many others who internalize their problems and respond to strong
emotions by pulling back, becoming overly shy and withdrawn, or exhibit-
ing a high level of anxiety. These children retreat inward and try to avoid
any situation that causes heightened arousal or strong emotions. Negative
feelings like fear, anger, anxiety, or humiliation are the most obvious emo-
tional triggers, but for many of these children situations that should be pos-
itive, such as receiving individual attention or being praised or encouraged,
might cause them to freeze and become unresponsive, or to try to escape by
running away. Diagnoses that are frequently associated with the anxious,
withdrawn child are Anxiety Disorder (Generalized Anxiety, School Phobia,
Separation Anxiety), Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Selective Mutism, or
Depression.

THE EFFECT ON THE FAMILY

Having an emotionally dysregulated child in a family can be very stressful.

When a preschool child is prone to hyper-vigilance, high agitation, anxiety,
and/or meltdowns, the unpredictable nature of the episodes can result in
the family becoming increasingly isolated from the outside world. A fear of
being helpless or humiliated in public during a child’s outburst, or concern
about being judged as incompetent, will often lead parents to reduce or
even eliminate outings into the community. Opportunities for time to-
gether as a couple can also be difficult since it may be very hard to find
someone who is willing or able to care for the child in the parents’ absence.
Worries compound if the child becomes physically aggressive toward his
siblings or peers.
At school, outbursts are most often triggered by frustration, over-
stimulation, annoyance, or anger. For example, if the child is asked to do
something he finds challenging, if he experiences disappointment or hu-
miliation by losing at a game or doing something wrong in class, or if the
situation lacks structure, such as recess or gym, his emotions may accelerate
quickly and suddenly. By identifying and anticipating situations that tend
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 29

to trigger an outburst, the teacher can be pro-active and intervene before the
child loses control to help ease the situation and problem solve with the
child so he will develop better coping strategies. For many of these children,
however, the responses can be so sudden and unpredictable that it is diffi-
cult to take action in time to prevent the outburst. Safety is often a major
concern. As a result, parents may be called to come take the child home, re-
sulting in missed time at work.
A child who internalizes his worry or fear, on the other hand, may cling
to his parents when faced with a new or stressful situation and find it very
hard to separate. It can become a problem just to get the child to school or
to have him stay there for a full day. When he becomes anxious or upset, he
may react by crying uncontrollably, trying to escape by running away or hid-
ing, or simply staring blankly, becoming non-responsive and dissociating
from what is going on around him. Parents of a withdrawn, anxious child
often become overly protective and try to shield him from any stressful sit-
uation, which may unwittingly exacerbate the situation.
The cause of emotional dysregulation is not always easy to pinpoint.
Some children seem to be born with a heightened arousal system. Even as
babies, they are easily upset, fretful, and difficult to calm, perhaps due to a
genetic family pattern. Children may also learn to respond in an anxious,
frightened manner or in an angry, aggressive way by watching and model-
ing the response style of a parent. In other cases, as recent research on the
brain has revealed, regulatory problems can be triggered when a young
child is exposed to a high level of stress or trauma. Experiences such as
physical, sexual, or emotional abuse; loss of a parent figure; hospitalization
or severe injury; or even witnessing the abuse of a parent or sibling, can be
very traumatizing to a young child. Neglect and abandonment have also
been implicated in children with significant emotional regulation prob-
lems. It should be noted that if a child is very young at the time the trauma
occurs, he is more likely to develop the dissociative response, which is a
primitive reaction to fear when an individual is incapable of fighting or
fleeing the situation (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006).

THE DYSREGULATED ACTING OUT CHILD IN THERAPLAY®

When a dysregulated child with externalizing behaviors begins Theraplay it

is essential for the therapist to be vigilant and attuned to the child so that
problems can be anticipated and responded to quickly. Foreknowledge of
the child’s unique difficulties, issues, and triggers will help with the plan-
ning of the sessions to reduce unnecessary stress for the child. Does he have
problems with flexibility and transitions? Are there certain textures, smells,
tastes, or sounds that are likely to set upset him? The better a therapist
30 Chapter 3

understands the child before Theraplay begins, the better prepared he will
be to provide the kind of support required. The activities need to be care-
fully selected so that the therapist maintains a physical connection to the
child at all times, such as holding hands or keeping a hand on his shoulder.
“Row, Row, Row Your Boat” (see appendix) is a good example of a game
that is contained, but playful. It is imperative to be vigilant and prepared for
sudden moves, attempts to bolt or possible aggressive acts. Because a dys-
regulated child is easily over-stimulated and has difficulty modulating his
reactions, the first sessions should be low-key, highly structured, and con-
tained. A calm, supportive environment is key to helping him feel safe so
that he can begin to develop the adaptive skills to better handle his emo-
tions (Greene, 1998). The child may have great difficulty accepting limits or
following directions and will easily become over-excited or “wound up.” He
is likely to feel much safer when he is in control so he is likely to try to
change the rules or modify a game in some way. Resistance to doing an ac-
tivity at all is not unusual, and he may even try to run away if given the op-
portunity. Some of the typical Theraplay activities that are designed to be
engaging and stimulating may be too much for the child to handle suc-
cessfully at this point, but they may lend themselves to being modified or
adapted to a more structured format. An activity like “Cross the room in
funny ways” (see appendix) that is usually done independently by therapist
and child can be performed in a structured way by having the therapist and
child hold hands making the activity into a team effort rather than a race.
Even “Pop bubbles” (see appendix) can be played in a more structured way
by instructing the child to pop only one bubble the first time, then two, or
by having him use a body part other than his finger to pop them. While the
game is still fun, the child is less likely to get carried away and the instruc-
tions are easily adjusted to allow for more or less stimulation. It is impor-
tant to remind the child of the instructions and repeat a step if he changes
the rules or doesn’t follow the guidelines. The therapist must be mindful
that the activities still need to be playful and enticing so the child will want
to join in. As Theraplay progresses and the child is better able to exert self-
control, the sessions can be loosened up and more stimulation gradually
introduced at a pace that is manageable for the child.
Some children have sensory issues and become upset or agitated by cer-
tain smells or sensations, such as the smell or feel of the lotion or baby
powder used in some Theraplay activities. It is important to respect this, but
since nurturing touch is so integral to Theraplay, it is important to try to
find alternatives, such as using scent free products or simply substituting
gentle touch for the lotion or powder. Sometimes the child may be able to
accept these products more easily during the fun activities, e.g., “Ghost
prints” (see appendix). This might actually de-sensitize the product alto-
gether. If the child overreacts to gentle touch, saying it tickles when it is sup-
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 31

posed to be calming and nurturing, he may find it soothing if more pres-

sure is used, e.g., using a firm stroke during “Cotton ball soothe” (see ap-
pendix). Alternatively, a different kind of nurturing touch can be substi-
tuted, such as giving a back massage. The touch sensation must be pleasant
for the child or it does not serve the purpose of the activity.
For children who are upset by noise or loud voices it is important to
avoid the louder games or modify them. Sound level should be increased
slowly in a controlled way. Many Theraplay activities that might encourage
a child to “let it all out” can be done just as easily with a moderate voice
level, e.g., “Hum garden” (see appendix) could be modified to go from a
whisper to a normal voice instead of to a shout. “Silent scream” (see ap-
pendix) might be substituted since only a muffled sound is audible.
Each Theraplay session has an agenda carefully planned ahead of time to
focus on the goals established for each child and family. Every agenda in-
cludes activities designed to tap into the four main areas of focus: Nurture,
Structure, Engagement, and Challenge. The nurturing activities use gentle
touch, soothing voice, positive comments, and appreciation for the child’s
unique and special qualities, making him feel valued and cared for. The
structured tasks help him learn to listen to instructions, wait his turn, fol-
low directions, and control his impulses. Engaging activities help the child
and parent have fun together, enjoy each other’s company, and connect
with each other. Challenging tasks help build the child’s self-esteem, as well
as help encourage him to strive to improve and reach his potential.
For an acting out child, the sequence of activities during a session should
be planned so that an active, stimulating activity is followed by one that is
quiet and calming to bring his arousal level back down. His ability to cope
must be constantly monitored to ensure that he is not over-excited. The
goal is to help him be successful, so by introducing the stimulation in this
managed way, he will learn how to modulate his emotions and develop his
self-control. Because transitions are often a problem, it is important to
make sure there is a clear start and a clear stop to each activity, with warn-
ings as a game is coming to an end, A cue word signals the start or end of a
game or even when to stand up from a sitting position. It may be as simple
as saying “One, Two, Three, Go” or more playful by using a “Magic Word.”
With the “Magic Word” technique, the therapist will tell the child, “When I
say ‘Apples,’ I want you to. . . .” The therapist then lists random fruit ending
with “Apples,” at which point the child and therapist act together, hand in
hand. The child has to listen, contain his impulse to act too soon, and fol-
low the directions given. If he responds before the cue, he must try again.
Without realizing it, he is beginning to learn impulse control. It is often
very hard for a child with regulation problems to change his mindset and
stop doing something he is enjoying, but he needs to learn that the thera-
pist means what he says and that extending the game is not negotiable.
32 Chapter 3

Counting down the number of repetitions will help him get his mind ready
for a change, saying for example, “We’re going to do two more” and then,
“This will be the last one.” As the child becomes familiar with how Thera-
play works, becomes less resistant and more compliant, the tight control
can begin to ease, but the therapist must remain watchful. It is not unusual
for a child’s behavior to regress after the first few sessions and he may be-
gin to test the limits again, requiring tighter control.
Every Theraplay session is followed by a debriefing session with the par-
ents. This is an opportunity for the therapist to explain the purpose of each
of the activities, discuss the methods used to help the child be successful,
point out how the therapist dealt with any resistance, and encourage the
parents to transfer these same strategies into their everyday life at home.
Homework is also assigned where the parents choose a few of the Theraplay
activities to do between sessions. The goal is to help them incorporate these
kinds of fun or nurturing parent/child activities into their everyday life.
After a few sessions observing from behind the mirror and learning the
techniques, the parents join the therapist and child in Theraplay. Regression
in the child’s behavior is not unusual when the parents first join in, so
tighter control may be necessary. At first the parents are participants fol-
lowing the therapist’s lead, but they gradually begin to take on more of the
leadership role. When the parents first start to lead activities, the child may
ignore the instructions and fall into old habits. He will need to be guided
by the therapist to listen and follow what his parents say just as he needed
to learn to follow the therapist’s instructions. Also, even though the parents
have been observing and learning about the techniques from behind the
mirror, it is quite different when they are actually expected to take the lead
and give directions and cues to start and stop the activities. Practice and di-
rect support from the therapist improves their skills. Any kind of aggressive
act by the child toward a parent, even if the child does not appreciate his
strength and squeezes too hard in a hug or the act appears to be accidental,
needs to be addressed. The parents need to understand the importance of
not ignoring this kind of action, because the child needs to learn the limits
of his strength and when he is going too far.
Over time, the parents learn how to give clear, explicit instructions, to pro-
vide warnings before transitions and to follow through when the child does
not comply. They learn how to be playful, to acknowledge the child’s special-
ness, to praise and encourage his skills, to use nurturing gentle touch to help
calm elevated emotions, to give focused attention, and to listen to what he is
saying, all in a positive, loving way. They become increasingly attuned to his
moods, his feelings, and his reactions. As these skills are transferred to the
home environment, the relationship between parent and child is strength-
ened, the parents take back control, the child feels safe in letting them do this
and his responses become increasingly adaptive and manageable.
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 33

The effectiveness of Theraplay in helping children with behavior prob-

lems has been researched. A recent longitudinal study was conducted by Ul-
rike Franke and Herbert H. G. Wettig at the Theraplay Institute in Ofter-
sheim, Germany, running from April 1998 to January 2006. The purpose
was to measure the effectiveness of Theraplay in the treatment of opposi-
tional defiant children and shy withdrawn children when compared to a
control group of non-symptomatic peers matched for sex and age. The re-
sults were quite dramatic. With the oppositional defiant children, over the
course of treatment there was a significant decrease in oppositional defi-
ance to the same level as the children in the control group. At the same time
there was a measurable increase in frustration tolerance, attention, self-con-
fidence, empathy, trust in others, and sociability. While all these positive be-
haviors did not fully reach the levels of the control group, the improvement
was considerable and the effectiveness of the Theraplay treatment was
clearly demonstrated. Results from the study also revealed that the opposi-
tional defiant children who improved as a result of the Theraplay treatment,
maintained this level of improvement in a follow-up two years later (Franke
and Wettig, 2007).

A CASE STUDY OF A DYSREGULATED

ACTING OUT CHILD IN THERAPLAY

Jeffrey (not his real name) was almost seven when he began Theraplay. He
was a stocky boy with a sturdy build and quite strong. His parents described
him as an angry boy who challenged authority. He had problems listening
and following instructions at school and at home, would test the limits to
the extreme with any new adult, was verbally and physically aggressive to-
ward peers and sometimes adults, had very poor social skills, would often
isolate himself from others, and had no friends. When he got angry or upset
he would become extremely active, run around wildly, yell, hit, kick, and
throw things. It was very difficult to calm him down. Jeffrey was brought
into treatment because of strong recommendations from his school. The
staff felt that his behaviors were beyond what could be handled with nor-
mal behavior management techniques at school. His parents were also be-
coming increasingly concerned about Jeffrey’s aggression toward his two-
year-old brother.
When he began treatment, Jeffrey had great difficulty following the thera-
pist’s instructions and would begin running around the room or hiding in the
cupboard at every opportunity. At one point he even ran out of the room and
had to be enticed back. If he did not like a task, if he became frustrated, or
if there was a delay between activities, his behavior would quickly escalate.
Because it was difficult to bring things back under control or encourage him
34 Chapter 3

to participate when this happened, the therapist needed to be creative and

flexible to ensure that the session plan was followed, even if this meant do-
ing a nurturing activity, like caring for hurts, while Jeffrey was inside the cup-
board. From this, Jeffrey learned that the therapist was in control and would
follow through with the activities and the expectations in spite of any at-
tempts to sabotage.
Over the course of seven sessions, gains were made in Jeffrey’s coopera-
tion, and his tendency to run away decreased. His parents were sensitive
and caring to him when they joined in the sessions and were learning to be
more consistent and to follow through at home. His father, however, con-
tinued to have difficulty giving clear instructions for activities or warnings
for transitions to prepare Jeffrey. As a result, he struggled more than his wife
to get Jeffrey to comply. Although there were some improvements at home,
the messages to Jeffrey were inconsistent from one parent to the other and
they did not always support each other in their parenting decisions.
Unfortunately, summer intervened and there was an unavoidable break in
treatment, but the family planned to return in the fall to continue Theraplay.
Because of a lack of routine over the summer and the fact that no Theraplay
was done at home, Jeffrey’s behavior regressed to the pre-treatment level.
When the family returned in the fall, they decided to include the younger
brother Corey (not his real name) who had not yet turned three, since Corey
was beginning to mimic his big brother’s maladaptive behavior. Because Jef-
frey’s previous therapist no longer worked for the agency, Jeffrey had been
assigned a new therapist and a second therapist joined the group to work
with Corey. Another change in Jeffrey’s life was that he was now attending
a community classroom for children with behavior problems, which was in
a new school.
Children with regulation problems do not handle change easily and Jef-
frey had a very hard time adjusting to the new dynamics in Theraplay. He
seemed to resent his brother’s intrusion into his realm, but at the same time
could become very protective if Corey showed any kind of distress. Jeffrey
required extensive structure, very firm control, and much encouragement to
join in the activities. He would often sabotage a session from the outset by
entering the room running wildly, which would set off his little brother as
well. He would also refuse to listen and would challenge every instruction,
often becoming physically aggressive toward the two therapists.
It was decided to have the parents join the sessions earlier than planned,
because Corey had great difficulty separating from his mother. Jeffrey’s be-
havior improved with his parents present, although he resisted following in-
structions when his mother or father were “in charge.” He began to make
better eye contact, but was unaccepting of many kinds of touch. The ses-
sions needed to be highly structured and tightly controlled to help contain
his actions, with clear expectations for his participation and plenty of praise
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 35

and encouragement for anything positive that he did. The turning point
seemed to come when he totally lost control during a session and had an
explosive outburst or meltdown. Jeffrey’s therapist and one parent gave him
focused, caring support to help him through his outburst while the other
participants continued with the session. The fact that he had been given
such understanding and positive support when he was unable to control
himself may have been what helped turn things around, or maybe it was the
fact that the session continued without him. Perhaps he was reassured by
the fact that the adults in his life were there for him, to help him cope when
he needed it. Whatever triggered the change, Jeffrey became a very differ-
ent boy after this crisis. He was no longer wild, but became more relaxed
and involved. He would listen and follow directions and was able to par-
ticipate in and enjoy the remaining sessions. The change in his behavior
was quite dramatic.
Initially, Jeffrey’s parents had shown a high tolerance for his negative be-
haviors, both at home and during the sessions. However, over the course of
Theraplay they became more confident in the parenting role, began to work
more as a team, learned to take charge in a fun manner and provided clear
guidelines and expectations for his behavior. They also incorporated Thera-
play activities into their everyday lives. In a follow-up session several
months after treatment ended, it was encouraging to learn that the progress
Jeffrey made during treatment had been maintained, consistent with the
findings of Franke and Wettig, as referenced above.

SAMPLE THERAPLAY AGENDAS FOR

THE DYSREGULATED ACTING OUT CHILD

(See appendix for description of activities.)

Agenda 1: 1. Entrance: Choo-choo Train

2. Welcome Song
3. Inventory - Playdough Prints
- Caring for Hurts
4. Feather Blow
5. Hide Under the Blanket
6. Hello Ball
7. Red Light-Green Light
8. Handstack
9. Row, Row, Row Your Boat
10. Crisscross, Applesauce
11. Feeding
12. Goodbye Song
36 Chapter 3

Agenda 2: 1. Entrance - Follow the Footprints

2. Welcome Song
3. Inventory - Measuring
- Caring for Hurts
4. Silly Bones
5. Balloon Walk
6. One Potato, Two Potato
7. Barber Shop
8. Blow Over, Suck Up
9. Back massage
10. Taste Test
11. Feeding
12. Goodbye Song
Agenda 3: 1. Entrance - Dance In on Toes
2. Welcome Song
3. Inventory - What’s Special about You
- Caring for Hurts
4. Body Trace
5. If You’re Happy and You Know It
6. Ring around the Rosie
7. Blanket Rock
8. Cotton Ball Blow
9. Cotton Ball Soothe
10. Feeding
11. Goodbye Song

THE DYSREGULATED ANXIOUS OR

WITHDRAWN CHILD IN THERAPLAY

At the other end of the behavior spectrum are children who are withdrawn
or who dissociate when they feel stress. They tend to react to stimulation,
lack of structure, changes in routine, new expectations, or any kind of
threatening situation by becoming overly anxious or fearful. They try to
avoid these feelings by running away from the situation altogether or in the
extreme by retreating inward and becoming unresponsive. They may appear
extremely shy, may seem to daydream or appear inattentive. A child like this
may cling to a parent and cry if pressured to separate or participate. Where
the child has experienced severe trauma at a very young age, before he was
able to respond with a physical reaction of fight or flight, he may react to
stress by turning inward and dissociating. In effect he has learned to protect
himself from harm by separating his core being from what is going on
around him. A child like this may appear to be in a dreamlike state or, in
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 37

the extreme, may seem to be “spaced out” and disconnected from what is
going on around him (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006). Sometimes parents or
teachers may misinterpret a dissociative response as defiance since in this
state a child will be unable to comply when given direction. Instead he will
remain frozen and unresponsive until the fear or anxiety subsides.
When a withdrawn, anxious child comes into Theraplay, it is important
from the outset to help him feel calm and safe in the therapeutic environ-
ment by speaking in a gentle tone of voice and keeping the activity and
noise level down. This child may not handle surprises well, so the therapist
should give forewarning when the activities are going to change and intro-
duce new things slowly and carefully. It is also important to gauge the level
of intrusion so the child does not feel threatened by the close personal con-
tact with the therapist. At the same time, the activities need to be playful
and include some gentle surprises to engage the child’s interest and help
him discover that these kinds of interactions can actually be fun. When
working with a very young child, a game like Peek-A-Boo is ideal for entic-
ing and surprising the child in a non-threatening way. For a slightly older
child, the therapist could introduce a game like Quiet Parts/Noisy Parts (see
appendix). In this game the therapist makes quiet or funny squeaks or pops
while tweaking different parts of the child’s body (like his nose, ear, or big
toe), or makes a squeaky pump sound while raising and lowering his arm,
or makes a “whooshing” noise while moving his chin down and up. These
are all designed to delight the child, engage his curiosity, and make him
laugh. Once he begins to feel more comfortable in the environment, which
may take several sessions, the spontaneity, fun, and activity level should
slowly increase to build the child’s tolerance and help draw him out of his
shell (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).
Because one or both of the parents of an anxious child are often anxious
themselves, it will be important to work with them to help them feel more
at ease, comfortable, and matter-of-fact when doing the activities, both dur-
ing the sessions and at home. Often these parents have the knowledge and
the basic good parenting skills, but are unsure of themselves so don’t fol-
low through should they anticipate any resistance or fear from the child. Be-
cause their own fears, anxieties, and uncertainties can be transmitted, they
need to gain experience in leading activities with an air of confidence, giv-
ing clear directions, and ensuring the child follows instructions. They also
need to learn how to do these things in a fun and playful manner. Their self-
assurance as parents will grow as they practice these skills and they will be
better able to present a strong, united front at home. This in turn will help
the child feel secure and reduce his anxiety.
The results of the Franke and Wettig study (2007) pertaining to the shy
withdrawn child, revealed that over the course of Theraplay treatment, the
shyness of these children decreased while their courage and risk taking
38 Chapter 3

increased to the levels of the children in the control group. At the same
time, their sociability and willingness to make contact with others in-
creased, they had greater empathy and were more trusting. As well, their
attention improved considerably and their self-confidence grew to the
level of the controls. As was found with the oppositional defiant children,
this improvement was maintained two years after Theraplay treatment
ended.

A CASE STUDY OF A DYSREGULATED,

ANXIOUS, WITHDRAWN CHILD IN THERAPLAY

Lexie (not her real name) was a twelve-year-old girl when she began Ther-
aplay. Her parents were going through a divorce and her mother was con-
cerned about Lexie’s tendency to be withdrawn and to keep her feelings in-
side. She had always been a shy child and was very clingy as a preschooler.
Even at twelve she still found it very hard to meet new people. Although her
mother felt she and Lexie had a good relationship, she was concerned that
Lexie sometimes acted as though she were starved for affection. She said
Lexie would sometimes make “such a big deal” out of things that she ruined
everyone’s fun. Mom did not feel that either Lexie’s tendency to be emo-
tionally withdrawn or her sister’s acting out behavior had any relationship
to the impending divorce.
When the family was first observed interacting together, it was noted that
there was not much physical affection shown by either parent toward their
daughters and the sisters did not seem to have affection for each other. In
fact there was open animosity between the siblings.
During the first few sessions, Lexie was visibly uncomfortable with the
closeness and touching that is an inherent part of the nurturing activities in
Theraplay. She would pull back from the therapist when her hurts were
cared for and would cover her face whenever she received a compliment or
a personal observation about what made her unique. She also avoided mak-
ing eye contact. If an activity or game involved holding hands she would
deliberately position herself so that her sister was between her and the ther-
apist so she would not have to take the therapist’s hand. When it was her
turn to add her ideas or give a response during quiet games she would try
to relinquish her turn and pass it on to the next person. In fact, she rarely
spoke.
Through the course of Theraplay, Lexie became much more comfortable
with the nurturing and gained in self-confidence. Although she still tried to
avoid some things, her engagement in the activities improved considerably.
She grew to accept having her hurts cared for and would sometimes point
them out to the therapist. When paid a compliment, she was able to main-
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 39

tain good eye contact, smile and say thank you. Vocalizing was still hard for
her and she continued to shy away from humming or singing the welcome
or goodbye songs. Even Silent Scream, where she was to scream into a pil-
low, was resisted. If she did speak, it tended to be in a babyish voice.
When the parents joined the Theraplay sessions Lexie’s mother found it
hard to take on the therapist’s role and perform the nurturing activities. This
was clearly not part of the mother/daughter experience. She did what was
asked of her, but in an awkward fashion and needed continual guidance to
use a gentle, soothing touch. She did improve in this regard, but it did not
seem to be a natural behavior for her, and like her daughter, she never
seemed totally comfortable with it.
Other than the caring for hurts, any physical nurturing continued to be
difficult for Lexie to accept, even from her parents. If an activity was sup-
posed to end in a hug, she would stand stiffly and wait for her parents to re-
spond, never initiating, moving toward them, or hugging in return. There is
no question that the therapy was making progress with Lexie and her par-
ents, but there was still a long way to go. Unfortunately family circum-
stances, with the impending divorce, made it an untenable situation for the
parents to work together as a team. Although it was strongly recommended
that the family continue with Theraplay to build on the gains made, they
chose to end after only seven sessions.

SAMPLE THERAPLAY AGENDAS FOR THE

DYSREGULATED ANXIOUS OR WITHDRAWN CHILD

Agenda 1: 1. Entrance: Chair Ride

2. Welcome Song
3. Inventory - What’s Special about You
- Caring for Hurts
4. Feather Blow
5. Balloon Toss
6. Simon Says
7. Hum Garden
8. Ping Pong Blow
9. Cross the Room in Funny Ways
10. Crisscross, Applesauce
11. Feeding
12. Goodbye Song
Agenda 2: 1. Entrance - Follow the footprints
2. Welcome song
3. Inventory - Paint a Portrait
- Caring for hurts
40 Chapter 3

4. Balloon walk
5. Untangle Hands
6. Duck, Duck, Goose
7. A Day at the Spa - Hair Combing
- Back Massage
- Wash/Dry Feet
- Toe Polish
8. Feeding - Food Preference
9. Goodbye song
Agenda 3: 1. Entrance - Chair Ride In
2. Welcome song
3. Inventory - Ghost Prints
- Caring for hurts
4. Cross the Room in Funny Ways
5. Clap Patterns
6. Slip and Grip
7. Marshmallow Toss
8. Silent Scream
9. Blanket rock
10. Feeding
11. Goodbye song

BRAIN PLASTICITY AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR TREATMENT

Recent years have seen a growing body of research on brain development

and plasticity, particularly regarding how messages are transmitted through
neural pathways and how these pathways can be modified through life ex-
perience and training. The areas of the brain that are stimulated the most
will grow and develop more, while the parts that are less stimulated develop
less. These changes in the brain continue throughout our lives. Some cur-
rent research on very young animals has documented changes in the devel-
oping brain due to stress and trauma. Rat studies by Dr. Bruce D. Perry and
Dr. U’Prichard found that when the animals were at an early stage of devel-
opment, over-activation of stress hormones, such as cortisol, epinephrine,
and norepinephrine, led to abnormalities in many areas of the brain. Stress
hormones are released by the adrenal gland during times of perceived threat
to prepare the body for fight or flight. The heart races, pupils dilate, breath-
ing quickens, and blood sugar levels elevate, among other physiological re-
sponses. The over-activation of stress hormones when these animals were
very young actually resulted in changes in the number of brain receptors, as
well as their sensitivity and function, in many parts of the brain. Once the
brain in these rats was altered, they would overreact to even tiny amounts
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 41

of stress and forget everything they had learned. Their ability to respond
normally to stress and threat from that point on was altered (Perry and
Szalavitz, 2006).
This kind of animal research has direct implications for our understand-
ing of the human brain. Dr. Michael Merzenich, a neuroplastician and a
leader in brain plasticity research, has concentrated his studies on the hu-
man brain. He discovered that exposure to certain kinds of stimulation,
such as stress or trauma, during critical periods in the developing human
brain leads to a disruption in the way brain maps are differentiated, just as
was found in the rats (Merzenich, as cited in Doige, 2007). Children and
adolescents who exhibit aggressive, violent, and anti-social behavior have
been found to have higher levels of the stress hormone cortisol in their sys-
tems. This suggests that their bodies are responding to perceived threat. In
addition, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on the brains of children and
adolescents who have committed violent crimes reveals actual signs of
brain damage resulting from early trauma (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006).
When a child has experienced trauma, the same stress hormones that
were released during the traumatic event will be released again when some-
thing reminds the child of the experience, causing the same feelings of anx-
iety, fear, or insecurity. The child learns to be constantly wary, watchful, and
hypervigilant for signs of impending danger so as to be prepared for self-
protection. The body’s fight or flight response systems may remain on high
alert even when there is no actual danger, and the child may become inat-
tentive, impulsive, have difficulty regulating his emotions, and may respond
to seemingly minor events by lashing out or running away.
On the other hand, if the child was very young when the trauma occurred,
his reaction to stress or fear may be quite different. A baby or toddler is un-
able to escape from danger by fighting or running away. When a child is
faced with trauma at this young age, the more primitive parts of the brain be-
come engaged and he will respond by curling up, looking as small as possi-
ble and crying for help. Instead of speeding up, the heart rate slows and the
brain releases endogenous opioids (i.e., endorphins, a natural painkiller),
producing a trancelike state where he becomes withdrawn and non-respon-
sive. When he is older, he will be more likely to respond to stress or danger
in a similar way, by dissociating or mentally escaping from the situation.
Because of the brain’s continuing ability to adapt and change, the mal-
adaptive alterations that developed in the brain as a result of trauma or neg-
lect have the possibility of being modified and improved. An example of
this is a recent training program that has been developed by Merzenich and
a team of colleagues based on his neuroplasticity research. The program,
called Fast ForWord, has been designed to exercise every part of the brain
involved with language processing and has greatly improved the function-
ing of children who are language impaired, those who have difficulty with
42 Chapter 3

auditory processing and even those with autism (Merzenich, as cited in

Doige, 2007). Extrapolating from this, the brains of children who respond
to stress or anxiety in a maladaptive way can also be re-trained to react in a
more normal way. The children need to experience what they missed when
they were younger, i.e., calm, structure, consistency, and a safe and nurtur-
ing environment. The increased equilibrium experienced through therapy
helps neurotransmitter levels to become better regulated and even may
remap neural pathways, hence the child becomes calmer (Wieland, 2008).
Personal attention, communication, gentle touch, and having the physical
needs met are all vitally important to help a child feel safe and secure. Fre-
quent positive physical contact and play also help to relax the child, and
thereby reduce stress and anxiety (Foxman, 2004).

BRAIN RESEARCH AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THERAPLAY

While this brain research does not specifically address how Theraplay can
help to change the response style of children with regulation problems, it
does provide a window into the science behind the positive changes we see
during the therapeutic process. It also gives us an optimistic outlook for
children with regulation problems. We now know that we have an oppor-
tunity to alter the neural pathways by re-training the brain to respond in a
positive, normal, adaptive way. First and foremost, we need to reduce the
level of arousal and stress so the child will feel safe. In Theraplay, the child
is helped to achieve a feeling of comfort and calm through soft nurturing
touch, rocking or holding gently, making soothing, caring comments, and
providing unconditional acceptance.
In Theraplay, the child learns through gentle guidance, encouragement,
and possibly direct hand over hand modeling, the skills that he needs to
learn. All of this is done in a safe, highly structured, predictable, and very
nurturing environment to reduce the level of stress or anxiety while engag-
ing the child in a playful and enticing manner. The child experiences total
acceptance and the full attention of the therapist, is given positive esteem-
building comments, is guided in a non-critical way to perform the activities
as directed and is given unconditional praise for accomplishments, all
while playing and having fun. In addition, many of the activities in Thera-
play are designed to regress the child to an earlier stage of development
(e.g., rocking, singing a lullaby, or possibly giving a baby bottle) to help
him experience what he may have missed at that point in his life.
By observing how the therapist deals with anxiety, resistance, or aggres-
sion the parents’ skills improve, their messages to the child become clearer,
there is more consistency in the way problems are handled, and the parents
more reliably ensure that the child follows through with their requests. All
 The Dysregulated Child in Theraplay 43

of this increases the child’s feelings of safety and security, which allows him
to relax and relinquish control to his parents. According to the research,
with the experience in Theraplay each week and the incorporation of Ther-
aplay activities into the regular routine at home, the practice of these skills
may, over time, help to restructure the neural pathways in the brain so the
child is able to respond in a more normal, adaptive way and emotions are
no longer dysregulated.
Although there is no way of knowing what is actually happening from a
neurological standpoint, many therapists have had cases where a child con-
tinues to react explosively or aggressively and can’t seem to regulate his re-
sponses, even after many sessions, as was the case with Jeffrey mentioned
earlier. The parents participate faithfully, exhibit good parenting skills dur-
ing the sessions, do the homework regularly, but progress appears stalled
and only marginal improvements are noted at home. Then suddenly, seem-
ingly overnight, there is a breakthrough and the child just “gets it.” Behav-
ior problems at home and at school improve significantly and there is a
marked difference in the child’s engagement and cooperation in the Thera-
play sessions. Even after Theraplay is discontinued, the improved behavior
is maintained. This kind of sudden change is Makela’s (2003) “moment of
attunement between the child and therapist.” In light of recent brain re-
search, this breakthrough may in fact be the point at which the neural path-
ways have re-aligned.
It would be an interesting research project to actually map the brains of
children through an MRI before and after Theraplay to see if any differences
are observed. Brain plasticity research provides a thought provoking theory
as to why this innovative treatment method is so effective in helping chil-
dren overcome such significant behavior problems in such a relatively short
period of time. But whether or not neurological change is at the root of the
success, the efficacy of the Theraplay treatment method is clearly supported.

REFERENCES

Carlson, Gabrielle A. (2007). “Who are the children with severe mood dysregula-
tion, a.k.a. ‘rages’?” The American Journal of Psychiatry Editorial (164: 1140–1142,
August 2007).
Doige, Norman. (2007). The Brain That Changes Itself. New York: Penguin Group Inc.
Franke, Ulrike, and Herbert H. G. Wettig. July 2007, “Theraplay therapeutic treat-
ment process.” (Paper presented at The Third International Theraplay Conference,
Chicago, IL).
Foxman, Paul. (2004). The Worried Child. Alameda, CA: Hunter House Inc.
Greene, Ross W. (1998). The Explosive Child. New York: HarperCollins Inc.
Jernberg, Ann M., and Phyllis B. Booth. (1999). Theraplay. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass Inc.
44 Chapter 3

Makela, Jukka. (2003). “What makes Theraplay effective.” The Theraplay Institute
Newsletter (Fall/Winter, 2003).
Perry, Bruce D., and Maia Szalavitz. (2006). The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog. New
York: Basic Books.
Wieland, Sandra. (2008). “Therapy: The brain’s second chance.” The Centre for
Counselling and Therapy, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. www.sandraw-
ieland.com/centre.htm.
4
Theraplay with Overtly and
Passively Resistant Children
Shirley Eyles, Maria Boada, and Catherine Munns

Our motivation to write this chapter stems from our own experiences in
working with challenging children and their families. These families are a
mosaic of the types of resistance we faced in our clinical work and we hope
you find the information useful. We conceptualize resistance on a contin-
uum, from the impulsive, high-octane child to the immutably stoic child.
We feel it is imperative to reframe how we talk about resistance. This term
is synonymous with expressions of adult frustration, such as non-compli-
ant, uncooperative, defiant, or oppositional; however, these latter terms im-
ply the problem lies solely within the child. Traditional thought regarding
non-compliant behavior typically sees an adult giving an instruction, which
the child is expected to follow. When the child does not follow through
with adult-determined expectations she, over time, may be labeled “defi-
ant” or “oppositional” and become the focus of treatment. This does not
take into account a myriad of factors, which may have an effect on the
adult-child relationship and may influence the child’s continuous refusals.
Maag (1999) states, “. . . successfully managing resistance requires at-
tending to the behaviours of the child and adults alike” (p. 161). In this
view, resistance is not exclusively the domain of the child, but also includes
how the adult responds to the child. The main focus of the intervention
needs to be the adult-child interaction. Through Theraplay®, if adults and
children are given the opportunity to experience new ways of interacting to-
gether, then adult perceptions of the problem behaviors may change and
therefore lead to positive changes in adult-child interactions. Approaching
the interaction, activity or situation in a calm, nurturing, and respectful
manner increases the opportunities for successful outcomes for the child.
She/he needs to receive a clear message that the adult will keep her/him safe

45
46 Chapter 4

during the interaction by being finely attuned to her/his responses, and ad-
just the approach when necessary.
Knowles and Linn (2004) categorize resistance in either behavioral terms,
“the act of withstanding influence,” or motivational terms, “as an opposi-
tional force” (p. 4). They identify several faces of resistance, the most rele-
vant being reactance and distrust. “The clear core . . . is that it is a reaction
against change” (Knowles and Linn, p. 4). Reactance is initiated when in-
fluence is perceived to threaten one’s choices. Adults and children alike be-
come guarded or distrustful when faced with a message to change. This
framework allows us to view resistance as a defense mechanism, which at-
tempts to maintain homeostasis.
Adult-child interaction is a significant contributing factor to resistance;
however, there are several others. It is important to explore physiological,
developmental, and environmental factors in order to understand the func-
tion of the resistance and, ultimately, to help manage it more effectively. For
example, explore the parent’s own cognitive bias of their child. If a parent
perceives their child as “difficult,” they may anticipate that their child will
be difficult, and this bias sets the stage for a less than optimal interaction.
A negative interaction history is a perpetuating cycle. Practitioners working
with families and children may find it beneficial to increase their knowl-
edge of predictors for behavior problems in children, which have been
demonstrated in recent research articles (Shipman, Sneider, and Sims,
2005; Ronnlund and Karlsson, 2006; Pierrehumber, Miljkovitch,
Plancherel, Halfon, and Ansermet, 2000).
Theraplay focuses on the parent-child interaction. Theraplay takes into
account where the child is at and structures an environment/situation in a
way that enables the child to be successful, and feel good about herself. At
the same time, through the adult-child interaction, therapists help change
their mental representations and the parents are also able to see their child
differently. As a result, the pattern of interactions will change and therefore,
enable the internalization of a new lived experience. Jernberg and Booth
(1999) state, “. . . in Theraplay . . . we give [children] a new view of the world
and how people can respond to them. . . . We change the child’s picture of
herself and the world and therefore change the way she behaves and the
kinds of responses she evokes from others” (p. 54).

CASE STUDIES

Case 1
The two case studies in this chapter involved children displaying some of
the challenging behaviors presented to us along with interventions used to
elicit therapeutic responses. The first family (where overt resistance was
 Theraplay with Overtly and Passively Resistant Children 47

demonstrated) involved Ms. Smith and her two adopted children, 6-year-old
Rhona, and her 4-year-old brother, Leon. They were adopted at ages three
years and eighteen months respectively. Ms. Smith and her husband sepa-
rated a year after the adoption, leaving Ms. Smith as a single parent. He has
had no contact with the children. Ms. Smith reported that the children’s his-
tories involved domestic violence and deprivation of basic physical and
emotional needs. Both children were described as having the following pre-
senting problems: verbal and physical aggression, emotional and regulatory
issues, and difficulty expressing emotions.
The initial treatment plan was to work with Ms. Smith and both children
together as that was their lived experience. Ms. Smith required help to in-
crease her awareness of the exceptional needs of her children and how to
adjust her parenting approach to meet those needs. However, after several
sessions it was evident that the high needs of both children necessitated in-
dividual time with their adoptive mother. Also, as Ms. Smith became more
trusting in our relationship, she divulged more about her own attachment
history, which was interfering with her ability to form healthy attachments
with her children. Given all these factors, after several sessions together, we
separated the children and had individual sessions back to back with each
child.
Initially, while working with both children in the same session, they ar-
rived into the session highly dysregulated, bursting into the playroom, run-
ning around, often yelling and then hiding under a shelf in the room. We
discovered early on that we actually had to start our structuring practically
from the car door, because Rhona and Leon played off of each other’s ex-
cess energy and negative resistant behaviors. We coached Ms. Smith on
playing a “Follow the Leader Game” (see appendix) when they got out of
the car. We locked the playroom door, as a way of slowing down their en-
ergy. At first, Rhona responded to this new boundary effusively by banging
on the door with her hands and kicking it with her feet, wanting to enter the
playroom immediately. Her behavior spoke to her tremendous need to be
in control, and this had been challenged. We started a Morse code–like tap-
ping on the opposite side of the playroom door in response to her banging,
effectively joining with her and leading her into a reciprocal, playful com-
munication through the door. The therapist then opened the door and
praised her ability to do Morse code. This became part of the opening rou-
tine with each session. Acknowledging their previous need to hide under
the shelf, we immediately initiated joining type activities right from the door
(i.e., a magic carpet ride, a rolling chair ride) bringing them over to that spe-
cial space.
Initially we stayed with the child if there was active resistance (i.e., mov-
ing away and refusing to join), but we found this increased Rhona’s anxiety
and Leon also became dysregulated. It was apparent that we needed to give
48 Chapter 4

them time to join us. We adjusted our approach and always started the ac-
tivity with an invitation to join us. A verbal invitation worked best with Leon,
whereas with Rhona it was the challenge of the activity that would capture
her interest. Due to their difficulty with singing (singing the welcome song),
we adjusted our agenda and instead greeted them with a creative handshake.
Our flexibility grew a great deal while working with these children.
We learned that nurturing touch served to ground the children and regulate
their behaviors. Once Rhona became more comfortable with the therapists
she sought physical contact, albeit initially through rough and rather aggres-
sive means. This included bumping into the therapists purposefully and some-
times jumping on their backs. Her sensitivity to redirection made it important
that we took much care in how we dealt with the roughness. It was important
that she was aware that her actions hurt, but at the same time the focus
needed to be on the therapists’ joy of connecting with her in order not to trig-
ger her deeply rooted trust issues. It was important to be proactive and have
activities that could be pulled in, in the event of resistance, particularly ones
that had previously evoked a positive response from the child. In Rhona’s
case, it was back massage or simply sitting and rocking back and forth. The
rhythmic movement allowed her to feel connected to someone and served to
ground her. Creativity and spontaneity were key components in this work. On
one occasion, Rhona jumped on the therapist’s back unexpectedly and could
not be swayed from this position. This momentarily reduced us, two experi-
enced therapists, to feeling incompetent and uncertain. Fortunately, our cre-
ative instinct surfaced and one of the therapists spontaneously proceeded to
make exaggerated sounds and movements like a dump truck backing up and
dumping its load. This enticed Rhona to eagerly participate, allowing herself
to be dumped gently off the therapist’s back into the other therapist’s lap.
In the initial sessions, we were still getting to know the children and as-
sessing their needs and how to best respond to them. Rhona and Leon
proved to be great teachers. We quickly learned to keep any distractions,
even our supplies, hidden away. We also discovered that trying to make a
game out of cleanup after all the cotton balls were recklessly tossed about
the room, only increased resistance. The best way to refocus the children
was with individual time. We learned to tighten our transitions, and offered
more individual nurturing, and engaging activities. We learned about the
impact of past deprivation of food as the children slapped or grabbed food
from our hands on various occasions, even greedily grabbing it up off the
floor. As a result we began to include feedings throughout the session, as
well as recommending that their mother provide them with a snack on their
drive to Theraplay. Toward the end of the individual sessions each child’s
emphasis on food subsided significantly.
In one session, Rhona started running around wildly trying to entice a
chase that we knew would end up with her in charge and likely escalate her
 Theraplay with Overtly and Passively Resistant Children 49

behavior. To help contain and decrease the potential for Rhona becoming
increasingly more dysregulated, the therapist exaggerated a crouching, tip-
toeing step toward her, all the while being aware of her response to make
sure she was going to be okay with the closeness. The therapist then
wrapped her arms around Rhona as if she was caught. Rhona giggled de-
lightedly and accepted the closeness for a lengthy period as the therapist
moved into looking for wiggly parts/stiff parts, which was part of the origi-
nal agenda. Instead of backing away, Rhona smiled broadly as she accepted
the close, intimate contact she so needed, but guarded against.
Transitions were difficult for Leon in that he would often become dysreg-
ulated at those times, and ran around the room grabbing lotion and squirt-
ing it on the floor. We proactively put the lotion out of reach prior to his en-
trance into the room. We used animal movements, counting, and cue words
to help structure the transitions. We would structure the transition by saying
a combination of “okay we’re going to hop like bunnies to the center,”
“when I say rabbit we are going to hop to the center,” “on count of three we
will . . . ” We often engaged in a containing, physically close game of horse-
back ride with him, whinnying like horses as we moved to begin our next
activity. We also attempted to empower Leon’s mother in the structuring by
dialoguing with her as to what she had found helped to ground and regu-
late Leon. From this dialogue we discovered that she used to do an activity
she called “Planting a Garden” with Leon and Rhona to help settle them at
night. When we began using this activity in the sessions, Leon and Rhona’s
mother began using it at home again and felt more positive about her con-
tribution. We also used video-taped sessions to play back to their mother to
help her identify her strengths as well as how she could have responded dif-
ferently to make a more positive outcome possible.
After approximately eight sessions it was apparent that working with both
children at the same time was not a fruitful exercise due to the amount of
control that Rhona had over her younger brother and the high needs they
both had for nurturing and individual attention. In spite of significant issues
with trust, especially with Rhona, we made some connection with them in-
dividually, so we decided to hold separate sessions for the two children.
During the individual sessions with Leon things progressed quite quickly.
He no longer had his sister’s defiant example to follow, made connections
with the therapists, and trusted the adults around him. This generalized to
home with his mother and school as well. He made more friends, had them
come over after school, and in general did develop his own personality and
sense of self separate from his older sister. Rhona, on the other hand, took
longer to gain our trust, but this happened more quickly as she was the focus
of attention in individual sessions. She became gentler in her interactions and
readily accepted and began to seek out physical touch in appropriate ways.
In spite of the progress she made in her relationships in Theraplay, home, and
50 Chapter 4

school, the extent of her deep seeded trust issues again surfaced. The trigger
for this was her perception that as school ended so would Theraplay. When
she found that this was not so, she jumped to the conclusion that if she had
to come to Theraplay during the summer she would miss out on going to
overnight summer camp. She also verbalized quite clearly that she wanted to
feel like a “normal kid with a normal family” and not have to attend “therapy”
during the summer months. She felt betrayed and her trust issues resurfaced
full tilt. She hid under the shelf glaring at the therapist and her mother, and
tried to kick out at the therapist when she went over to speak to her. The ther-
apist remained physically present, but at a safe distance and empathized with
her painful feelings. Slowly Rhona decreased her ranting and swearing in the
midst of a respectful, accepting, and empathic approach. She, at last, verbal-
ized her feelings. The therapist coached her mother to approach at this point
and hold her. Rhona readily went into her mother’s arms and began to sob un-
controllably. This was a significant moment as it took a great deal of trust to
be that vulnerable, something that she had never been able to do before. Her
anger dissipated and she was able to feel what was really under all the rage:
her sense of betrayal. She talked about her perceptions, and her feeling that
she had been deceived. The progress her mother had made was truly evident
at this point, as she was fully attuned to Rhona and able to meet her need to
be nurtured. This was a turning point for her mother, who had never had the
opportunity to see Rhona as a vulnerable little child. At last she understood
Rhona’s deep need for connection and was able to see behind Rhona’s re-
jecting, defensive, and aggressive responses for the first time. We problem-
solved this issue and decided to meet every other week instead of every week
over the summer months. We also assured Rhona that she wouldn’t miss sum-
mer camp. Although this seemed to be an acceptable plan at the time, when
Rhona was to come for her next session she was very resistant. She would not
come into the room and when she finally did she was swearing, yelling “I hate
you,” and became destructive by pulling at the blinds in the room and pulling
things off the shelf. Attempts to deescalate were ineffective, and we felt her
safety, as well as that of others in the room, was at risk. We coached her
mother to hold her and as before, she sobbed and was able to more readily
verbalize her feelings. When she was calmer and released from her mother’s
hold, although she would not sit with us, she participated at a distance as she
verbalized her feelings, while the adult’s listened empathically. What she
needed at this time was to be listened to in a safe and structured environment.
In spite of our efforts to come to some kind of compromise and respect
Rhona’s wish not to attend “therapy” during the summer months, she ab-
solutely refused to return to Theraplay for her next session. We also sus-
pected that her increased positive rapport with us perhaps began to scare
her thus resulting in her need to push us away. As we felt it would be coun-
terproductive to force the issue given Rhona’s strong oppositional response,
 Theraplay with Overtly and Passively Resistant Children 51

we decided to follow up with her mother every other week by phone to sup-
port her in continuing Theraplay activities at home. We did bi-monthly
checkups with Leon and his mother emphasizing the need to continually fo-
cus on nurturing and structuring with Rhona. We coached her on ways to
continue to bring Theraplay activities into her day-to-day interactions with
both children to help decrease power struggles and increase positive inter-
actions. Rhona was much more receptive to limits set by her mother and
more responsive and accepting of nurturing touch.

Case 2
Our work with the second family illustrates dealing with passive resistance.
Jenna, seven years old, lived with her mother who was very strict and emo-
tionally unavailable to her daughter. She was a single parent and Jenna’s fa-
ther had sporadic involvement. At an early age Jenna learned to take care
of herself, because of her mother’s limited attention. Presenting problems
included concern over her emotional state due to an emotionally absent
parent, physical aggression toward people and animals including hitting
and kicking at home and at school, defiance, tantrums, and throwing ob-
jects. Although overt behaviors were displayed at home, in Theraplay we
encountered passive resistance.
Jenna demonstrated her passive resistance by shaking her head “NO,”
withdrawing, stepping back, lowering her gaze, and putting her head down,
crossing her arms or putting them behind her back. To help reduce her anx-
iety around challenging and/or new activities, we often modeled the activity
first, so she knew what to expect and then made attempts to invite her into
joining us in the activity. When she shook her head (indicating no) and re-
fused to attempt the activity, we learned the importance and power of meet-
ing her where she was, thereby joining her. For example, in “Silly Bones”
(see appendix), she initially refused attempts to participate, standing awk-
wardly and lifting and holding her foot with her hand, which appeared to be
an anxious response. After several attempts to try to engage her in the activ-
ity we realized that the solution was right before our eyes. It became clear to
us that she was not ready for the physical aspect of silly bones with touching
body parts. As she was already touching her feet, the therapist spontaneously
said “Simon Says touch your feet.” Using the posture she was presenting us
with, helped Jenna to come out of her anxious state and allowed her to en-
gage successfully in the activity. Once she felt safe enough to proceed with
that activity she could be playfully engaged in it for a lengthy period of time.
Modifying the activity into more of a “Silly Bones/Simon Says” activity made
it less intrusive and more acceptable and comfortable for Jenna. Later we
slowly increased the more intimate touching interactions using “Silly Bones”
format. Eventually she accepted even touching heads together.
52 Chapter 4

With Jenna, as with other children, seizing those spontaneous moments in

interactions required being finely attuned to the child and also listening to
one’s own therapeutic intuition. For example, during Cotton Ball Soothe
while the therapist was soothing Jenna’s arm, Jenna suddenly and abruptly
pulled down her sleeve. The therapist responded empathically by comment-
ing “oh that (the cotton ball) was too itchy for you” and then moved to sooth-
ing her hand. Immediately after that, Jenna put her hands behind her back.
The therapist then began soothing Jenna’s face. Although this may be seen as
counterintuitive, the therapist chose to do this because previously Jenna had
allowed the therapist to tuck her hair behind her ear. Fortunately Jenna ac-
cepted this, spontaneously moved her face forward toward the therapist, and
even closed her eyes indicating her comfort with this interaction.
When Jenna’s parents joined the sessions to participate, initially Jenna
wouldn’t play and instead stood at the side with her hands behind her back
watching tentatively. She resisted attempts to be engaged, so the therapists
proceeded with the first activity with her parents. While playing ball with
her parents, the therapist tried to continually include Jenna by talking to her
casually, for example, “oops your Dad missed that one! I wonder if he will
catch this one.” All the while the therapist observed her facial expressions,
and made brief eye contact with her. As the activity progressed, the thera-
pist noted Jenna’s facial expression soften and she indicated that she was
more interested in what we were doing. For example, not turning away
when the therapist spoke to her, making more sustained eye contact, over-
all more relaxed body posture. In response the therapist quietly signaled
Jenna’s mom to toss the ball to Jenna. This effectively opened the door for
Jenna to participate fully, which she did. This was an example of meeting
the child where she was at, while giving her the opportunity to join without
eliciting a power struggle. Sometimes a simple strategy worked best to en-
gage and provide opportunities for the child to join in. For example, during
the goodbye song, which Jenna did not normally sing, we either deliberately
paused in the song or whispered or mouthed a word or name in the song to
non-verbally invite Jenna to join in. This strategy effectively caught her off
guard, surprised her and enticed her to join in, which she did.
In summary, what was achieved with these families? All of the children in-
creased their emotional regulation and trust. With two of the three children
there was an increase in accepting and seeking out nurturing touch. There
were increased positive interactions within the family units as a whole, and
two of the three children increased in verbalizing their thoughts and feelings
and decreased in acting them out. All of the children increased their peer in-
teractions at school and at home. Jenna, for the first time, played with her
peers at school and at home, while Leon actually brought a friend home.
Rhona dropped her pseudomature façade, relaxed, laughed, and generally
became more spontaneous and verbal in her interactions. All of the parents
saw more positive aspects of their children and in turn responded in a more
 Theraplay with Overtly and Passively Resistant Children 53

empathic and positive manner with them. As well, there was increased flex-
ibility and spontaneity on the part of all caregivers to different degrees.
What did we learn? Firstly, we were reminded of the importance of at-
tuning to the child and particularly to work with their responses. Paradoxi-
cal responses caught these children by surprise and interrupted their usual
patterns of responding. This gave them the opportunity to identify on a phys-
iological level that it was safe to respond and allow the adult into their emo-
tional space. It took time and patience to earn the trust of these children as
their defensive walls had served to keep them safe from real or perceived
harm and they weren’t going to drop their guard easily. We learned to be
proactive when planning our sessions and to anticipate that when making
some headway with the child who seemingly had accepted us into her
physical and emotional space, the resistance might heighten, later on.
Video-taping sessions and reviewing them, particularly as a beginning
therapist, is a very good way to pick up on cues that the child gives. In the
midst of impulsive/resistant behaviors one can miss important information
about how the child responds, so reviewing a video-tape can be helpful to
both therapist and parent in ensuring success in future sessions.
Last, but by no means least, it is crucial that the therapist be aware of her
own triggers. The behaviors of overtly resistant children can very easily de-
rail the most competent therapist and interfere with being able to fully at-
tune to the child. Children, especially resistant children, have built in radar
for negative responses and will react to a therapist’s triggered emotions.
Identifying issues in our own attachment histories minimizes the risk of
transference and counter transference. The more conscious we are of that
potential, the easier it is to help parents also identify how their own triggers
from families of origin, may interfere with their ability to be more effective
parents. Of course, ongoing supervision is very important, increasing the
opportunity to process one’s own responses.

AGENDAS

Here are examples of three agendas for beginning, middle, and ending ses-
sions, as well as changes made, dependent upon responses elicited by the
child(ren) described in our previous case studies (see appendix for descrip-
tions of activities):

Beginning Sessions: These have a lot of structure, engagement, and

rapport building through fun and playfulness.
Entrance: Magic Carpet Ride
Greeting Song: “Here we are together, together” (Rhona responded nega-
tively to the singing, covered her ears, ran under a shelf.) Given her history,
54 Chapter 4

we hypothesized that this response stemmed from her need for control,
which made her feel safe. As a result, we struggled to come up with a solu-
tion by which she had some sense of control while minimizing dsyregula-
tion. Initially we had Ms. Smith and her children make up their own wel-
come song for the following week. When this failed we changed the activity
to a secret handshake, which elicited a positive response.
Inventory (special things): This activity was accepted by Jenna but not by
Rhona, as she was not able to hear positive things about herself that didn’t
fit with her internal view of herself. We kept it very brief and interspersed
noticing positive things about her throughout the session. Done in a more
spontaneous manner she was able to accept it.
Lotioning: As this was rejected initially by all of the children, decorative
children’s Band-Aids were readily accepted for their hurts.
Feather Blow; Motor Boat Motor Boat; Ping Pong Blow; Feather Guess;
Feeding
Goodbye Song: Baa Baa Baa Baa Boom. From experience with many
other children we thought that Rhona too would be engaged in the bois-
terous nature of this song, but she rejected being sung to with her usual flair
for clearly demonstrating her displeasure. She did however engage in “High
5 Goodbye.”

Middle Sessions: More nurturing activities; parents come in and

participate
Entrance: Wheelbarrow (a challenging activity which engaged them im-
mediately and began the session on a positive note); Hello Secret Hand-
shake (Hello Song with Jenna);
Inventory: more formalized and focused now as increasing level of trust
and slowly feeling more comfortable with hearing positive comments; Lo-
tion Hurts: by this session the children are accepting nurturing and actually
pointing out hurts and inviting them to be taken care of by mom; Measur-
ing Muscles;
Paper punch and Basketball; Over/Under with ball; Redlight/Greenlight;
Handstacking; Taco Roll
Cotton Ball touch (while still in blanket in mother’s lap); Cotton Ball
soothe; Feeding; Goodbye High 5

Ending Sessions: Parents leading activities and therapist coaching.

Entrance: Dancing in on mother’s feet; Hello Secret Handshake; Inven-
tory (face portrait with pretend paint and soft brush); Lotioning; Butter-
fly/elephant/Eskimo kisses; Mother May I; Peanut toss; Shapes on Back; Toe
touch under blanket (natural progression to Rocking); Rock in Blanket
 Theraplay with Overtly and Passively Resistant Children 55

–“My (child’s name) lies over the ocean” or “Rock a Bye (child’s name).” With
Leon and Jenna we sang the latter. However, for Rhona we used the former,
anticipating her need to maintain dignity coming from a pseudomature
stance; Story (Rhona)/Lullaby (Leon and Jenna) and juice (in juice box
with mother holding); Feeding; Goodbye Song

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We wish to acknowledge the assistance we received from Jamie Sherman

and John Breuer and to thank them both for all of their guidance.

REFERENCES

Jernberg, Ann M., and Phyllis B. Booth. (1999) Theraplay: Helping Parents and Chil-
dren Build Better Relationships through Attachment-Based Play. 2nd Ed. San Fran-
cisco, Cal: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Knowles, E., and Jay Linn. (2004) Resistance and Persuasion. Mahwah, N.J.: Laurence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc. knowles.socialpsychology.org. (7 Feb.2008).
Maag, John W. (1999) “Why They Say No: Foundational Precises and Techniques for
Managing Resistance,” Focus on Exceptional Children 32, no. 1 (September):
159–174.
Pierrehumbert, Blaise, Raphaele Miljkovitch, Bernard Plancherel, Oliver Halfon, and
Francois Ansermet. (2000) “Attachment and Temperament in Early Childhood;
Implications for Later Behaviour Problems.” Infant and Child Development 9,
17–32.
Ronnlund, M., and Erika Karlsson. (2006) “The Relation Between Dimensions of At-
tachment and Internalizing or Externalizing Problems during Adolescence.” The
Journal of Genetic Psychology 167, no. 1, 47–63.
Shipman, Kimberly, Renee Schneider, and Sims Chandler. (2005) “Emotion Social-
ization in Maltreating and Nonmaltreating Mother-Child Dyads: Implications for
Children’s Adjustment.” Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology 34, no.3,
590–596.
5
Theraplay with Adopted Children
Sandra Lindaman and Dafna Lender

INTRODUCTION

Theraplay®’s goal is to create a healthy connection between parent and

child, and its methods are the very kinds of interactions that promote se-
cure attachment. Therefore, Theraplay treatment is extremely useful for
preparing and assisting adoptive and foster families to connect and interact.
Even children adopted as newborns or during the first year of life may dis-
play attachment problems when they join their new families. Older chil-
dren with histories of loss, neglect, and/or abuse are even more likely to
have difficulty establishing new relationships. Parents often are surprised
that providing what had been missing in their child’s life: a safe environ-
ment, affectionate attention, stimulation, and loving provision of basic
needs are rejected by the child.
In our experience, children in new adoptive or foster relationships have
four basic social-emotional needs on their path to attachment to the pri-
mary caregivers: to feel safe; to become physically and emotionally regu-
lated; to experience attuned responsiveness; and to change the negative in-
ternal working model of self and others that formed during inadequate
care. These needs can be met by their parents through learning the Thera-
play philosophy and techniques.

The Uses of the Theraplay Model in Adoption and Foster Care

Theraplay treatment has been used successfully to facilitate new adoptive
and foster parent-child connections in many settings and cultures (Lindaman,
1998; Vierikko, 2007). In addition to the direct treatment of parent-child
57
58 Chapter 5

dyads described in this chapter, Theraplay principles have been used as the
basis for educational and experiential programs for pre-adoptive parents
(Lender and Lindaman, 2007), preventive intervention when children first
arrive in their new homes (Walton, 2007), ongoing adoptive parent coun-
seling groups (Bone, 2007), and family group activities in specialized re-
treat programs (Lindaman 2005).
Even foster children should receive Theraplay services stemming from the
belief that a child should not have to wait for permanency to experience se-
curity, attunement, co-regulation and a more positive internal working model
from a caregiver. In our experience, participation in Theraplay with a foster
parent can stabilize a child’s placement, thereby reducing relational trauma.
Infants and toddlers receiving Theraplay were found to make smoother tran-
sitions from foster to adoptive families (Fesperman and Lindaman, 1998.) A
Theraplay treatment and research project with long-term foster families in the
SOS Children’s Villages program in Finland found reduction of the children’s
internalizing and externalizing problems; parents felt more skilled and chil-
dren liked the treatment (Makela and Vierikko, 2004).

The Theraplay Treatment Model

Theraplay for all types of children and families provides four essential as-
pects of healthy parent-child relationships: Structure, Engagement, Nurture,
and Challenge. To review, Theraplay provides Structure because it is the basis
of safety and internal organization and regulation. Theraplay provides En-
gagement because it is the essential personal, focused, and attuned connec-
tion with the child. Theraplay provides Nurture because all children need it
to feel worthy, cared for, and soothed. Theraplay provides developmentally
appropriate Challenge because children need it to experience mastery and
competence. From the beginning of Theraplay in the 1960s, its intention was
to provide positive interpersonal experiences that would change the client’s
behavior because of a more positive view of the self and world. This view of
self and other is now referred to as an internal working model. Theraplay pro-
vides the child interpersonal experiences that are non-congruent with their
(insecure) internal working model. The mind is then challenged to develop
new, healthier knowledge of what it is like to be in a relationship (Lender
2006). Who needs this more than a child who spent her early years in an im-
personal orphanage, a chaotic birth family, or multiple foster placements?

Modifications of Theraplay in Adoption and Foster Care

Treatment Choice
A variety of treatment modalities will be helpful to the child and family
across the life span to deal with adoption/foster concerns. The therapist
 Theraplay with Adopted Children 59

should help families to understand treatment options and goals and to de-
cide which issues are prominent at the beginning of treatment. Theraplay is
often an appropriate first treatment to work on strengthening relationships.
It can be used in combination with or preceding other treatments such as
narrative therapy, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Therapy
(EMDR), and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy (DDP). A considera-
tion of the nature and extent of the child’s problematic behaviors will help
determine whether Theraplay alone or in combination with other methods
will be needed to help the child to deal with possible shame he or she has
and to be able to heal. Another chapter in this book describes how to com-
bine Theraplay and DDP.

Treatment Length
Theraplay is a “short term” treatment model and indeed often produces
changes in behavior patterns quickly, especially in biological families with
mild to moderate problems. Overcoming the challenges of complex adop-
tions, however, takes longer, and therefore the Theraplay treatment period
may be lengthened to six to twelve months. Even when the child and par-
ents quickly become adept at the Theraplay interactions, they need an ex-
tended period of intense focus on the playful Theraplay philosophy and
techniques in order for new healthy brain patterns to be firmly established.
In addition it is important to allow adequate time for parent discussion, re-
flection, and practice.

Inclusion of Parents
The original Theraplay model had parents observing and discussing sev-
eral sessions with an interpreting therapist before entering the treatment
room and interacting with the child. With newly adopted children (less
than 6 months), however, parents usually are present in sessions from the
start.

Discussing the Child’s History

Theraplay was originally designed to focus on the “here and now” with-
out reference to or processing of past events. In treatment sessions with
adoptive families, we verbally acknowledge the child’s early situation (of
deprivation, loss, neglect, abuse, etc.) as the opportunity arises. This fre-
quently happens during nurturing activities, but could happen during any
activity. Furthermore, a more overt explanation of the purpose of treatment
is offered right from the beginning, e.g., learning how to be part of a fam-
ily, learning to be a son to this mother.
60 Chapter 5

Working with Parents

Since parenting an adopted/foster child is very challenging, parent work
is critical. Adopted/foster children need a more therapeutic environment
than many families are aware of, or, in some cases, are able to provide. Par-
ents need to learn about attachment and brain development, the effect of
relational trauma, the importance of attunement, as well as how to under-
stand the intentions and needs of their specific child. They also need to un-
derstand that raising a child with attachment issues may trigger their own
attachment history. Time must be set aside for parents to discuss these is-
sues with the therapist outside of the child’s direct treatment sessions. Par-
ents can be referred for additional help, if necessary. The parents’ willing-
ness and ability to learn to carry out attuned, structured, and nurturing
interactions on a moment to moment basis at home is critical to the suc-
cess of treatment.

The Theraplay Dimensions Applied to the Needs of

Adoptive or Foster Families
The Need for Emotional Safety
The question: “Does the child feel safe?” should be considered by the par-
ents and the therapist during the intake interview. It may be difficult for a
parent to accept that a child who has been living in a caring adoptive home
for some time feels unsafe, but behaviors such as verbal and physical ag-
gression, tantrums, running away, hiding, unresponsiveness, and trying to
control can be related to a child’s fear. Trauma researcher Perry reminds us,
“If a child has been exposed to extreme or pervasive threat or trauma, his
stress system may become sensitized and he may respond to ordinary expe-
riences as though they are threatening”(Perry, 2007, p. 249). The child’s re-
sponses may move along a continuum in the direction of dissociation or
arousal. The more distressed or threatened the child is, the more primitive
the level of brain functioning, behaviors, and response. Trauma researchers
now recognize that “Complex Trauma,” defined as multiple traumatic
events that occur between a primary caregiver and child, cause seven pri-
mary domains of impairment: attachment, biology, affect regulation, disso-
ciation, behavioral regulation, cognition, and self-concept (NCTS, 2003).
Perry advises, “To help traumatized children these responses must be taken
into account and their stress response systems calmed so they can feel safe
enough to rely upon their higher brain functions and reduce the amount of
time they spend on the arousal continuum” (2007, p.250). Adoption expert
Purvis reminds us that “fear will bully your child into poor behavior”
(2007, p. 49). Purvis describes the appropriate intervention as “Disarming
the fear response with felt safety” ( 2007, p. 47) and the following concepts
 Theraplay with Adopted Children 61

as contributing to “felt safety”: “The parent is a kind, but firm and confident
leader; Shows emotional warmth and affection consistently; Offers positive
emotional responses and praise often; Responds attentively and kindly to
the child’s words and actions; Interacts playfully with the child; Physically
matches child’s voice and behavior; Sensitive to child’s tolerance for
sounds, touch, distance” (2007, p. 52).
The structure of the Theraplay session and Theraplay’s overall emphasis
on the adult as the leader provides the child with the experience of felt
safety. Theraplay sessions are organized, calming, and reassuring, and con-
tain the right amount of stimulation for a given child. The therapist and the
parent are the leaders in a warm, kind, and responsive way. Activities are
simple. The level of challenge is manageable and done in a cooperative
spirit, ensuring that the parent-child play is enjoyable. If a child becomes
dysregulated in a session, the incident can be dealt with on the spot. For ex-
ample, voices become louder in play and the child suddenly turns away. The
adult responds, “I think that got so loud it bothered you, let me see if I can
do it again quietly—let’s see if that is more comfortable.”
Parent education includes the stressful effect of relational trauma on
brain development and function. We teach parents to recognize that the
child’s difficult behaviors are related to triggers of stressful past experiences.
We advise adoptive/foster parents to provide younger forms of structure in
daily activities such as using simple rules, reducing choices, setting clear
limits, keeping the child physically close and monitoring behavior, recog-
nizing the difficulty of transitions, and offering interactive assistance rather
than only verbal directions.

Physical and Emotional Regulation

Theraplay meets the most basic need of an adopted child: the provision
of a self-regulating other. Children who have experienced a loss of a care-
giver and/or inadequate early caregiving require a responsive and attuned
caregiver to co-regulate their physical and emotional states. Theraplay in-
teractions provide multiple opportunities for such co-regulation. The ther-
apist co-regulates with the child and the parent, and helps the parent to es-
tablish these rhythms with the child.

What we do in Theraplay is to intervene at the appropriate physiologic level to

connect with this type of child and capture the “attention” of his right brain.
For example: grabbing a child’s hand and making a game of “ring around the
rosy” out of a child who was previously running around the room chaotically,
and then quickly placing him in your lap, facing out, and making finger prints
in play dough or feeding him something chewy, is a common Theraplay se-
quence. What happened on a regulatory level is that the therapist met the child
at his highly aroused level and helped to organize it, and then quickly provided
62 Chapter 5

both the structure and the engagement to help him calm down and focus his
attention on a more soothing level, being ever mindful that because the child’s
whole system is overstimulated and reactive, it is best not to insist on face to
face contact but use body contact, which is less intense. (It is possible that with
certain sexually or physically abused children, body contact, even with the
child facing out, can also be too interpersonally intense. This needs to be de-
termined on a case by case basis by the therapist.) (Lender, 2006, p. 2).

The Experience of Attuned Responsiveness

Theraplay’s dimension of engagement, or attuned connection with the
child, provides many opportunities for attuned responsiveness. We achieve
this attuned connection by focusing exclusively on the child and not on
toys, games, or symbolic objects; using simple preverbal, physically interac-
tive play; noticing the child’s special attributes; and reacting to feeling states
by soothing distress and amplifying pleasure. Children with inadequate
early caregiving have not had enough of these critical experiences. The re-
sponse is often just an attuned statement of having noticed, but being no-
ticed makes all the difference. For example: At the beginning of a session of
a very self-sufficient three-year-old child in foster care, the therapist begins
to check “what the child brought with her today,” finding ten warm fingers
and toes that wiggle. The child raises her hands to her own eyes and the
therapist says “oh you brought your hands for playing peek a boo” and
rounds of gentle peek a boo with the child’s hands and feet follow.
Theraplay also creates opportunities for intense interpersonal experiences
that involve many moments of surprise, For example:

You are quietly studying a child’s face in Theraplay and he reaches out to touch
your nose and you make a resounding “BEEEEEP” sound, the child is suddenly
completely alert and, looking straight into your eyes, the child giggles sponta-
neously at the surprising, funny shared event between the two of you, and you
laugh in turn. The discrepancy between what the child expected and what actu-
ally happened is surprising. This element of surprise, so important in Theraplay,
is the growing edge for a child to learn that new things can happen, but that
these new things can be both fun/exciting and safe. (Lender, 2006, p. 2)

Parents are guided to initiate simple routines using the nonverbal paths to at-
tachment: facial expression, eye contact, affect, touch, voice, and play to
demonstrate to the child that “You are no longer alone and I understand you.”

Changing a Negative Internal Working Model

Here we arrive at the change in the child that allows him to no longer rely
on his dysfunctional behaviors. Children often develop coping behaviors
 Theraplay with Adopted Children 63

such as the avoidance of intimacy or the need to control others, in order to

deal with the negative experiences they have endured before reaching their
adoptive families. Parents experience these behaviors as intentional and
manipulative on the child’s part. The Theraplay therapist helps parents em-
pathize with the child’s need for such behaviors and helps the child move
beyond them.

For example, when a child is struggling in a Theraplay session and pushes you
away with his legs, you say “Boy you’ve got strong legs! I bet you can’t push me
over with these legs on the count of three!” and then hold his two feet in the
palm of your hand, count to three, the child pushes and you rock backwards
with a big “OOOOHHHH” sound. When you come back up, you see the
child’s face has changed from defensive fear to a moment of proud delight.
What just happened? By reframing and organizing his resistance into a mo-
ment of reciprocal play, you have given the child an opportunity to experience
himself as strong, clever and most importantly still connected to the adult rather
than bad, rejected and isolated. You have given him new meaning for what it
means to be him. (Lender, 2006, p. 1)

CASE EXAMPLE

Consider how the Theraplay model met the needs of an adoptive child and
parent through a clinical vignette from the treatment of Heather and her
adoptive mother Melissa.
Heather was a five-year-old girl with a history of emotional and physical
neglect prior to placement with her adoptive mother at three years of age.
When she was first adopted, she was small and weak, and her speaking
skills were underdeveloped, suggesting significant neglect in her previous
placements. Behaviorally, she displayed severe behavioral problems. After
two years in her adoptive home, Heather’s motor and verbal skills greatly
improved, but she continued to display emotional dysregulation with fre-
quent tantrums, aggression, difficulty with transitions, and low frustration
tolerance. Heather especially resisted letting anyone touch her. When her
mother tried to cuddle her, Heather would subtly push Melissa away by
poking her eyes or pulling her hair. Heather appeared purposefully reckless,
often walking wildly and falling to the ground. At these times, she did not
cry or look to her parent for soothing or reassurance. After doing an exten-
sive intake and MIM, Heather’s therapist chose to focus on the following
goals: helping the mother engage in simple activities that would capture
Heather’s interest and lead to genuine moments of playful connection be-
tween mother and child. The simplicity and interpersonal nature of the ac-
tivities would allow the mother to attune to Heather’s reactions and regu-
64 Chapter 5

late her affect as needed. Another goal was to find ways to soothe, calm,
and nurture Heather in ways she could accept. Helping Heather feel more
relaxed while interacting with her parent, would lead to a greater sense of
comfort and trust, a sense that she was a pleasure to be with and she could
depend on mom. It was hoped that these changes would lead to a lessen-
ing of Heather’s problematic behaviors. Furthermore, the therapist would
work with the mother on understanding Heather’s younger needs and man-
aging daily routines to accommodate those needs.
With a big smile on her face, Heather bounded into the therapist’s wait-
ing room. She ran up to the therapist, looked into her eyes very intently and
followed her down the hall without hesitation, while mom followed behind.
At the treatment room entrance, the therapist pointed to the seat she had
prepared and said, “Okay Heather, hold your mom’s hand and I’ll count
how many big steps it takes you to get to that pillow.” At the pillow the ther-
apist took their hands and declared, “On the count of three we’re going to
sit down, one-two-three!” Heather sat down before she realized she had
complied. Sitting across from Heather, with her mom sitting to her side on
another pillow, the therapist said, “Heather, you’ve come here to play with
Mom and me so that you can learn how to have fun and let your mom take
care of you. I’m going to be playing these games with you too. But just be-
cause I play these games with you, doesn’t mean that I’m going to be your
Mom. This (pointing) is your Mom.” Heather looked quizzically at the ther-
apist and nodded her head. The therapist proceeded to engage Heather in
some typical first-session Theraplay games: she counted her fingers, found
a “beep” when she touched her nose, cared for small hurts on Heather’s
hands, blew a cotton ball back and forth, and shaped aluminum foil around
her hands and feet to make special prints.
Just as the session was about to end, Heather jumped up and off her pil-
low seat and opened the therapist’s supply cabinet. Heather’s mom, still sit-
ting on her pillow, shouted across the room “No Heather, that’s not our stuff,
don’t touch that!” She then got up and walked over to Heather and gave her
a long explanation about other people’s personal belongings and asking
permission to do things. Heather pouted momentarily, and then melted into
a crying tantrum. These were the kinds of dysregulated behaviors she typi-
cally displayed at home. The therapist got up, put her hand on mom’s shoul-
der and said gently “Heather can’t be reasoned with right now, because
she’s so upset. Can you try just scooping her up and holding her without
saying anything?” Melissa gave the therapist a worried look and responded
“I’ve tried doing that, but she kicks and punches me so hard that I get hurt.
It seems to make things worse.” With Heather’s screaming continuing, the
therapist quickly pulled out some play dough and bent down to Heather’s
level. “LOOK!” she said, pushing Heather’s thumb into it, making a print.
Heather stopped for a brief second to inspect the thumbprint, and then con-
 Theraplay with Adopted Children 65

tinued wailing. The therapist pulled out a juice box from her bag and
slipped in the straw, then handed it to Heather. Heather pushed it away with
a frown, but looked interested. The therapist set the juice box down in front
of Heather and moved away. Heather then tentatively picked it up and be-
gan drinking, sniffling and rubbing her eyes. With a heavy sigh, Heather be-
gan to calm down from her tantrum. The therapist then said “Heather, I
think you wanted to know what was in my closet. I think it’s good to check
things out when you’re in a new place. I’m sorry I didn’t tell you what was
in my closet.” The therapist proceeded to open the closet door and gener-
ally described some items inside. Heather nodded and looked weary.
Heather’s therapist then suggested a special way to end the session by do-
ing a “Sock and Shoe Race.” The therapist instructed Heather, “You get to
say ‘READY, SET, GO!” Heather hesitated and then said the signal words,
and the race began. The therapist let mom win and Heather seemed mildly
amused by the process. The session now over, Heather’s therapist arranged
a phone appointment with Melissa to talk about the session.
Later that day on the phone, the therapist explored Melissa’s assumptions
about why Heather ran and opened up the supply closet. The therapist
guessed that Heather wanted to know what was behind the closed doors so
she could know what to expect would happen in the sessions. In other
words, to increase her sense of control. The therapist discussed the impor-
tant idea that children with Heather’s background typically feel very unsafe
when they do not know what is going to happen, and will try to do anything
to increase their ability to predict their uncertain world. Furthermore, the
therapist explained that children with Heather’s profile feel a lot of shame
when they are given the slightest reprimand, and become very dysregulated
in response. This explained why Heather became so uncooperative and
miserable after Mom gave her the long lecture about not touching other
people’s stuff. They then discussed more developmentally appropriate
strategies such as prevention, distraction, or a mild reprimand with an op-
portunity for a quick repair of the relationship, after the incident occurred.
These types of debriefing conversations occurred frequently over the
course of treatment and were instrumental in helping Melissa learn to un-
derstand, deeply, the underlying motivations for Heather’s troubling behav-
iors. Over the course of time, Melissa became much more empathic to
Heather’s need for safety and found many ways to meet them, before
Heather’s anxiety prompted her to engage in inappropriate behavior.
Over the course of treatment, the therapist modeled these kinds of repar-
ative interactions for Melissa in the Theraplay sessions. For instance, the first
time the therapist placed a bean bag on her own head and told Heather to
hold out her hands and catch it on the count of three, Heather did not suc-
ceed in catching the bean bag, so she grabbed it and threw it across the
room. The therapist said, “I think you weren’t sure what was going to hap-
66 Chapter 5

pen, I’ll show you.” The therapist slowed her pace and repeated the activ-
ity in an easier way, until Heather was successful.
In the Nurture dimension, there was much work to do to get Heather to
accept care from her mother. Lotioning hurts was an activity that was initi-
ated from the first session onwards. At first the therapist demonstrated the
activity, but from the second session onwards, Heather’s mother was always
the one to look for and put lotion on Heather’s hurts. Heather tried to deny
that she had any hurts at the beginning of treatment, saying, “That’s not a
scratch, that’s marker.” The therapist instructed Mom not to argue about
Heather’s statements, but simply to say, “I’m going to put some lotion on it
anyway.” After several sessions, Heather no longer denied having “owwies”
and let her Mom lotion them.
Because it was so hard for Heather to accept care and comfort from her
mother in the form of food, a special ritual was developed to initiate the
feeding at the end of the session. The therapist made a “special delivery” of
Heather to her mother’s lap. She scooped her up in a cradled position and
swung her to her mom while singing, “I have a little Heather, and she’s go-
ing to her Mommy, one-two-three.” The therapist would place Heather gen-
tly in her Mom’s lap. Feeding, juice, and the Twinkle song (“Twinkle, Twin-
kle, little star, What a special girl you are”—see appendix) would take place
in this position. While Heather was not pressured to look at her mom or
even face her, Mom fed Heather the animal crackers and gave her the juice.
At first Heather protested, wanting to hold the bag. But the therapist matter-
of-factly reassured her: “We know that you can feed yourself, but in here
Heather, remember that you’re practicing how to be a daughter to your
mom.” Heather would look at the therapist as though she was letting this
message sink in. The therapist would continue: “Because when you were a
baby, you didn’t get to be fed a lot by your first mom.” The therapist waited
and watched Heather’s face to gauge the effect of this statement on Heather.
Heather looked focused and interested. “See Heather, your first mom was
so young that she didn’t know how to take care of you so well. That’s why
we practice in here, so you know what it feels like to be taken care of.”
Heather looked at her Mom, who looked tenderly back. Melissa held up a
cracker to Heather’s mouth and Heather opened her mouth and ate it. From
then on, Heather accepted Melissa’s feeding her crackers.
Heather and Melissa participated in 26 sessions over 6 months of treat-
ment. Throughout, Melissa and the therapist communicated to Heather
through their leadership of the session activities and their pleasant facial ex-
pressions, warm voice, and calm touch, that they enjoyed being with
Heather, they had ideas for pleasant things they could do together, and they
were confident that they could help Heather calm down if she was upset.
The Theraplay sessions taught Melissa how to stay connected with
Heather and provide nurturing, soothing experiences. In turn, Heather be-
 Theraplay with Adopted Children 67

came much more accepting of her mother’s physical contact and began to
turn to her for comfort and support. Melissa told of one triumphal moment
when Heather turned six and got a bike without training wheels. Heather
had almost completely mastered riding the bike and Melissa was no longer
running beside her. Melissa looked down for a second as Heather was sev-
eral yards away and heard Heather fall. Melissa ran to Heather and saw her
knee had been mildly scraped. Heather looked up at Melissa and started to
cry, reached her arms up and let Melissa pick her up. Heather put her head
on her mom’s shoulder and rubbed her nose, and then became quiet.
Melissa described this as “a moment in heaven.”

SUMMARY/CONCLUSION

Theraplay is uniquely suited to meet the relationship-building needs of

families created through adoption and fostering. These needs can be sub-
stantially met by the parents through Theraplay-guided awareness and in-
teractions: to feel safe, to experience attuned responsiveness, to become
physically and emotionally regulated, and to change the negative internal
working model of self and others that formed during inadequate care. Ad-
ditionally, parents need to understand and empathize with the child’s un-
derlying emotional needs and have ways to therapeutically respond to
those needs. Theraplay therapy provides adoptive parents with these expe-
riential and educational opportunities to master these parenting skills.

REFERENCES

Bone, A. (2007). SAFE: Strengthening Adoptive Families-England. Poster session at

the 3rd Annual International Theraplay Conference, Chicago, IL, July 2007.
Booth, P. B. and Lindaman, S. L. (2000). Theraplay as a Short Term Treatment for
Enhancing Attachment in Adopted Children. In H. G. Kaduson and C. E. Schae-
fer (Eds.) Short Term Play Therapy for Children. New York: The Guilford Press.
Complex Trauma in Children and Adolescents. White paper from the National
Child Traumatic Stress Network. www.NCTSNet.org.
Fesperman, L. and Lindaman, S. L. (December 1998/January 1999). Theraplay
Reaches Difficult to Engage Children in Foster Care. In Bulletin of Zero to Three:
National Center for Infants, Toddlers, and Families, 19, 3, 34–35.
Makela, J. and Vierikko, I. (2004). From Heart to Heart: Theraplay Research at SOS
Children’s Villages Finland. Espoo, Finland: SOS Children’s Village Association.
Perry, B. D. (2006). Applying Principles of Neurodevelopment to Clinical Work with
Maltreated and Traumatized Children: The Neurosequential Model of Therapeu-
tics. In N. B. Webb (Ed.), Working with Traumatized Youth in Child Welfare. NY:
Guiford, p. 27–52.
68 Chapter 5

Lender, D. (2006). What’s Behind These Theraplay Activities: A Window into At-
tachment.” TTI Newsletter. Summer 2006.
Lender, D. and Lindaman, S. (2007). Attachment-Based Parenting Skills for Newly
Adoptive Parents. Curriculum developed for Presentation August 25, 2007, The
Theraplay Institute, Wilmette, IL.
Lindaman, S. (1999). Theraplay for Children Who Have Been Adopted or in Foster
Care in Jernberg, A. M. and Booth, P. B. Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children
Build Better Relationships Through Attachment Based Play, Second Edition. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass. p. 291–334.
Lindaman, S. (2005). Theraplay Goes to Family Camp. Article in TTI Newsletter
Summer 2005, pp. 4 and 11.
Vierikko, I. (2007). Theraplay as an International Intervention; Training Theraplay
Tutors in Botswana, Africa. Presentation at the 3rd Annual International Thera-
play Conference, Chicago, IL July 2007.
Walton, L. (2007). Proactive Use of Theraplay with Adoptive Families. Presentation
at the 3rd Annual International Theraplay Conference, Chicago, IL, July 2007.
6
Theraplay Approaches for Children
with Autism Spectrum Disorders
Paris Goodyear-Brown

A nine-year-old boy with Asperger’s Syndrome bemoans his difficulty mak-

ing friends and sums up his resulting self-perception with the statement “I
guess I’m a jerk.” A four-year-old boy with Pervasive Development Disorder
NOS is days away from being moved to a more restrictive learning environ-
ment for extremely destructive behaviors. The mother of a 7-year-old boy
diagnosed with autism cries in my office, grieving the lack of connectedness
she has with her own son. All of these children have Autism Spectrum Dis-
orders (ASDs) and all of them can be helped through Theraplay®.
The Autism Spectrum Disorders are neuro-developmental disorders char-
acterized by deficits in three main areas: impairment in social interaction,
impairment in communication abilities, and unusually restricted interests,
behaviors, and play patterns. These clients may also have some rigidity in
their need for routines and some perseveration on topics that they care
about. These clients are usually social outliers in their peer groups, because
of their differences from typically developing peers. While the specific
causes of ASDs are unknown, the incidence of these disorders is 10 times
what it was 10 years ago. Although the onset is usually within the first two
years of life, the average age of diagnosis is between 3 and 4 years of age.
Autism is 4 times more common in males than in females. A new case of
autism is diagnosed every 20 minutes and 24,000 new cases are diagnosed
each year (Stats from the Center for Disease Control and Autism Speaks
websites, September, 2007).
When autism first began to be diagnosed, the cause was often and regret-
tably ascribed to lack of nurture in the parent. As the knowledge base for
these disorders has grown, this damaging assumption has been dismantled.

69
70 Chapter 6

However, the pain that a parent feels at the lack of connectedness she may
have with her child cannot be over-estimated.
One of the hallmarks of all ASDs is impairment in areas of social relat-
edness. Children with these diagnoses face many challenges in building re-
lationships, first with their parents and later with the expanding micro-
cosms of childhood. Early social development is reliant on the interplay
between the “self” and the “other.” Typically, developing infants come
equipped with neurologically pre-determined preference for human inter-
action. For example, a newborn baby is able to focus his eyesight between
8 and 12 inches away from his face. This is the distance between the crook
of a caregiver’s arm and the caregiver’s face. Infants are generally fascinated
by faces and begin reacting to emotional changes in a caregiver’s face very
early in life. The baby coos and the mother responds with her own
“babytalk.” The baby learns that he can impact his world. Babies at 6 weeks
old begin practicing social smiles.
Imagine a mother who comes into her baby’s room in the morning,
leans over the crib rail, and says “Good morning, sweet boy!” while smil-
ing warmly at him. Her baby (whose mirror neurons are being activated)
smiles back at her with a sweet drooly grin and begins to kick his legs
gleefully. The baby’s response is gratifying for the mom who experiences
spontaneous delight in her ability to engender joy in her baby. The baby
too is delighted with his newfound abilities and may experiment by initi-
ating a smile and lifting up his arms to be held. This signal is quickly and
correctly read by mom who picks the baby up and holds him close while
nuzzling his head and murmuring sweet baby talk in his ear. These circles
of communication are opened and closed by baby and caregiver alike. It
is the thousands upon thousands of repetitions of these early interactions
that set the developing person on a path toward social proficiency. The
success of this cycling is reliant, at least in part, on the neuro-develop-
mental platforms in the developing infant that make him hungry for so-
cial interaction.
In contrast, consider the baby who may later be diagnosed with an ASD.
Mom comes into the room, leans over the crib rail and says “Good morn-
ing, sweet boy!” with a big grin on her face. The baby may turn toward the
noise, but stares at a particular facial feature instead of making eye contact.
The baby may have almost no change in affect or may even become agitated
by the interruption and may quickly return to staring at his mobile. The
mother may feel inadequate and puzzled. She may even internalize the
baby’s response as rejection. Although her own desire may be to reach for
her baby and pull him close, he appears to be most soothed by remaining
in his crib and watching his mobile. By leaving the child to self-soothe, the
parent is accurately reading the child’s cue and giving the child what he
wants, but not necessarily what he needs.
 Theraplay Approaches for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders 71

Whereas typically developing children are soothed and restored through

the physical touch and nuture of a caregiver, children with ASDs may find
touch to be overstimulating or even aversive. Since they may not have the
neurological scaffolding to encode touch positively, children with ASDs may
become dysregulated, arching away from parents who attempt to physically
connect with them. A parent whose efforts to lovingly connect with her child
are met with screams may understandably choose the path of least resistance
and pull back from physical overtures of affection. When a child is underre-
sponsive to the social bids of a parent, the treatment plan is counterintuitive.
The child needs more intense dosing of relationally connecting experiences
in order to compensate for his natural tendency toward isolation. The neu-
rological differences of the child with an ASD sets up a scenario in which the
“dose” of relational experiences provided by the parent is not satisfactorily
absorbed. Theraplay allows for a more intense and focused “dosing” of
health-promoting dimensions of the parent/child relationship.
The mnemonic device “Every Child Needs Something” is useful in re-
membering the four dimensions of Theraplay.1 The “E” stands for Engage-
ment, the ability that the parent has to catch and extend the attention of a
child through fun. The “C” stands for Challenge, the ability of the parent to
gauge the child’s current level of mastery and encourage him or her toward
activities that allow for growth and result in a sense of success, competence
and increased self-esteem. The “N” stands for Nurture, the Theraplay di-
mension aimed at helping parents provide safe, positive, contingently re-
sponsive caretaking experiences for the child. The “S” stands for Structure,
the ability of the parent to order the environment, set clear expectations
and boundaries and enforce appropriate limits with the child. The
mnemonic device “Every Child Needs Something” begs the question “What
does the child with an ASD need?” Of course there is no single definitive
answer, but treatment often begins in the context of activities that heighten
engagement between parent and child.
While more research is needed on the effectiveness of Theraplay with
children with ASDs, some preliminary data exists. Wettig, Franke, and
Fjordbak (2006) conducted two separate studies evaluating the effective-
ness of Theraplay interventions. Fifty-six children who evidenced “autistic
like lack of social mutuality” on the German validated CASCAP-D showed
a reduction in symptoms and an increase in social mutuality after 26 thirty-
minute sessions of Theraplay. It is important to note that significantly more
sessions were needed to affect this social mutuality deficit than were needed
for many other externalizing or internalizing behavior disorders.
The DIR/Floortime model created by Stanley Greenspan and explicated
in the book Engaging Autism (2006), utilizes an approach with aspects that
are very similar to Theraplay. DIR/Floortime interventions begin by follow-
ing the child’s lead, but then move into a series of games and activities
72 Chapter 6

aimed at promoting engagement in much the same way as the directive in-
terventions prescribed in Theraplay. The book reviews Greenspan and Wei-
der’s research on 200 cases of children with ASDs who received two or more
years of Floortime Intervention. In their outcome summary, 58 percent of
patients moved into the “good to outstanding” range as evidenced by their
shift into the nonautistic range on the Childhood Autism Rating Scale.
These childrens’ abilities to engage, reciprocate social bids and solve social
problems all improved dramatically. Another 25 percent made moderate
gains in these same areas. Based on this preliminary data, it can be hypoth-
esized that the pleasurable engagements with caregivers that occur during
Theraplay and Floortime activities provide the scaffolding for successful
growth in areas of social relatedness.

Case 1
By selectively using the Theraplay activities that promote engagement, chil-
dren with ASDs can access their parents more effectively and learn to find
basic social interactions pleasurable. The case of Ethan, a 4-year-old with
Pervasive Developmental Disorder NOS illustrates this point. When Ethan
came to treatment, his mother was desperate for any kind of help. Ethan was
having extreme acting out behavior in his classroom, consisting of hitting
other children, biting, pulling off all his clothes and running around the
classroom in circles. On a number of occasions Ethan had actually run out
of the classroom. In one such instance, he was halfway across the parking
lot before a teacher caught him! He had severe speech and language delays,
and was receiving Speech Therapy, but mom reported little improvement.
During our initial session together, the client merely grunted and avoided
any of my attempts to engage him. He would let mom touch him, but did
not respond affectively or gesturally to her attempts at engagement. He was
not yet potty trained, and his interest in the toys was restricted to carefully
arranging them. He was not able to engage in joint attention tasks with mom
and ignored all attempts on her part to set limits.
The parent was originally given skills for reflecting and describing the
child’s play. Ethan began to play in the dollhouse and Mom consistently re-
flected his play behaviors. Ethan proceeded to organize the toys in the doll-
house without sharing his attention with Mom in any way. Typically devel-
oping children will elaborate verbally on behavioral descriptions made by
the parent. The parent says, “You put the baby in the bed.” The child gives
more information by saying, “She’s taking a nap.” The child might draw the
parent’s attention to a toy by pointing and saying “Look mommy, a pretend
potty!” Ethan did none of these things. He seemed to be completely unaf-
fected by Mom’s attempts to verbally connect with him. Mom persevered
for several minutes and then turned to me with a helpless countenance and
 Theraplay Approaches for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders 73

a resigned shrug of her shoulders. Mom needed intervention that would

heighten engagement with Ethan.
Ethan shifted his focus to the sandtray and began burying his hands. Chil-
dren with ASDs often have sensory integration issues, and can be calmed
and grounded by the kinesthetic sensations of running their hands through
sand. I said to mom, “Let’s try something different. The next time that he
buries his hands in the sand, you ask “Where are Ethan’s hands?” and move
your own hands through the sand until they find his.” Mom followed my di-
rections and exclaimed with delight as she touched his fingers under the
sand, “There is Ethan’s hand! I found it!” Ethan’s demeanor did not change,
he did not look up and make eye contact with Mom, and he made no ver-
balizations. However, he stuck his hands deliberately back under the sand
again in a way that communicated, “Do it again!” Mom and Ethan played
this game several more times and the engagement became more pro-
nounced each time. Ethan would tense his body as she searched for his fin-
gers and then giggle when she found them. After several rounds of this hide-
and-seek hand game, Mom turned to look at me and said “You know, we
used to play count the piggies before bed every night when he was little.”
Ethan climbed up into the sandtray and buried his feet. I said to mom,
“Oh, look, Ethan’s feet want to play, too.” Mom played the game with
Ethan’s feet several times. I asked mom to take a little longer to find the toes
the next time in order to build the client’s anticipation. Mom slid her hand
under the sand and right up to his toes while asking the same question
“Where are Ethan’s TO-OOO-oooes?” and in the pause between her asking
and her finding, Ethan looked at her and smiled. This was the first sponta-
neously connected moment in treatment for mother and child. The quick
delight in playing one of his “baby games” was clear. For homework, Mom
and client were instructed to play “count the piggies” and have some rock-
ing and singing time each morning.
At their second session, I began by having Mom and Ethan play the
“Slippery, Slippery, Slip” game (see appendix). I had Mom rub lotion on
the child’s arm, hold it firmly while saying “Slippery, Slippery, Slip” and
pull her hands down Ethan’s arm. Ethan slipped away and Mom fell back
in an exaggerated way. It was once again in the moments of anticipation
that Ethan looked at Mom intently, and when he pulled free he squealed
in a high pitch tone and giggled. After each round of the game, he would
thrust his arm out again, sending the non-verbal message, “I want more
please.’” I gave voice to his non-verbal gesture by saying, “Looks like his
arm is saying ‘More, please,’” and I highlighted for Mom how much Ethan
was enjoying playing with her. My conscientious attempt to pair words
with the client’s gestures was aimed at stimulating his expressive language
abilities.
74 Chapter 6

Later in the session, mom held Ethan on her lap and fed him a lollipop
while telling him a story about when he was a baby. Although Ethan clearly
enjoyed the lollipop, he showed no sign of attending to the story. He stared
off to the side of mom’s head and seemed not to hear her. After telling part
of her story (a very sweet story about how he put his whole face in his birth-
day cake and had an icing beard) and getting no noticeable feedback from
him, Mom turned to me bleakly and said, “Well, I tried.” What struck me
most about this was Mom’s clear sense of inadequacy and rejection in the
face of Ethan’s apparent indifference. One of the unique dynamics involved
in Theraplay is the support and nurture that the Theraplay therapist can pro-
vide to the parent at a time like this. The Theraplay therapist can help the
parent press in to relationship even in the face of unresponsiveness in the
child.
Once again I said, “Let’s try something different.” I then instructed Mom
to sit on the floor with the client facing her on her lap. I showed her a high
intensity, high movement version of “Row, Row, Row Your Boat.” Mom be-
gan to rock Ethan almost all the way to the ground and back up onto her lap
in time to the rhythm of the song. As I was continuing to test my hypothesis
that Ethan’s engagement was most intense when he was anticipating what
came next, I asked Mom to pause in the rocking and singing at an unex-
pected interval. Mom and child rocked as mom sang, “Row, Row, Row your
boat, gently down the—.” She paused in both her words and her rocking
and was instantly rewarded with eye contact from Ethan. His eyes stayed
glued to hers with an ever-widening smile as she grinned with anticipation
and finally said “stream.” He squealed with delight and the process began
again. For Ethan, the power of the pause was his hook into engagement with
his mother. This revelation informed the rest of our sessions. Whichever
Theraplay activities I chose, I would help mother and son into a comfort-
able rhythm and then interrupt it to catch Ethan’s full attention.
During the third session, Ethan spontaneously began to repeat words that
mom was saying. Mom said “Do you want to color?” Ethan said “color.”
Mom made a simple shape and Ethan copied it. I suggested that mom draw
his hands. Ethan looked at mom and said, “I . . . want . . . hands.” Mom and
I both celebrated Ethan’s communication success, saying, “You did such a
good job using your words. Your mom knows exactly what you want, and
she’s going to give it to you.” Ethan kept his hands still and his eyes focused
on the paper as I structured the intervention by making comments like,
“Now mom’s moving the marker around your thumb; she knows just how
to draw your hands!” At the end of the activity, the client lifted his hands
and smiled. Mom and Ethan were both on their tummies with their heads
close together. After seeing his hands drawn, he suddenly moved his face in
toward Mom’s and, much to Mom’s amazement, Ethan rubbed his nose
against hers. This was the first spontaneous gesture of affection that Ethan
 Theraplay Approaches for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders 75

had initiated since the start of treatment. Mom was in tears later as she
talked about how unexpected and touching his gesture had been. Mother
and son were sent home with more Theraplay activities that were high in
engagement and nurture.
By the fifth session, Ethan looked significantly different. He and Mom
played an attunement game. Ethan played in the sandtray with his back to-
ward mom. He would make a sound and Mom would respond with a
matching sound. Then Mom would make a sound and he would repeat it.
Frequently he glanced over toward her and smiled. At one point Mom com-
mented on his play in the sandtray, and he surprised us both by saying, “You
can play, too, mommy.” The rapid expressive language gains were aston-
ishing.
The connectedness to Mom and the suprisingly pleasurable rewards of in-
terpersonal interaction triggered an explosion in his verbal communication
abilities. In essence, Theraplay helped to activate Ethan’s non-verbal com-
munication which provided the foundation for expressive language. His for-
ays into one-word articulations were rewarded with more engagement and
fun with Mom, creating a positive feedback loop that led to the quick ex-
pansion of his speech. Theraplay increased mom’s awareness of her child’s
non-verbal cues and taught her how to extend the moments of connection,
while the intrinsic delight that Ethan experienced, sparked his spoken com-
munication.
The social deficits of children with ASDs manifest themselves in many dif-
ferent ways as children age: lack of eye contact, lack of reciprocity and turn
taking, difficulty understanding and responding to the social bids of others,
difficulty in accurately perceiving non-verbal cues, and difficulty under-
standing and utilizing social conventions. Structuring interventions in which
the cues are based on eye contact and other non-verbal communications
have been extremely effective in helping clients with ASDs to make treat-
ment gains in the social arena. The magic of Theraplay is that the challenge
and engagement of the dyadic game play induces high motivation for at-
tending to social cues. Another case example will illustrate the use of Struc-
turing/Challenging interventions.

Case 2
John, age 9, presented with all of the impairments listed above and perse-
veration on the subject of the Titanic and how it sank. Many children with
ASDs have a restricted range of interests (in John’s case, books about the Ti-
tanic) combined with limited awareness that their fascination is not shared
by peers. I did an experiment during John’s first session to see if he could
accurately perceive or respond to my non-verbal cues. He began talking
about the Titanic and after 15 minutes of perseveration on this topic, I be-
gan to look at my watch in an obvious way. John kept on talking. I yawned
76 Chapter 6

and stretched my arms over my head. John kept on talking. I got up from my
seat and went to look out the window. John kept on talking.
The treatment plan for John was heavy on interventions that required ac-
curate cue reading. Successive approximation was used to shape the games
from word-based cues to non-verbal cues. We began with the Bean Bag
Drop, but instead of a bean bag we used an object that fit within his re-
stricted range of interests (a toy boat that we called the Titanic). After I mod-
eled the game, mom put the boat on her head and chose a cue word: Ti-
tanic. Mom looked at John, who had his hands outstretched to catch the
boat. Mom said two or three other words that started with similar sounds,
requiring John to employ self-control until the correct word was given. Mom
said, “Tickle . . . tiny . . . Titanic!” and let the boat slide off her head and
into John’s eager hands. John caught it and smiled widely. I reinforced both
mom and John for working so well together and highlighted how patiently
John waited for the right cue word.
John asked to play again. This time we shifted from a verbal cue to a non-
verbal cue. Mom chose a wink as her cue, requiring John to make eye con-
tact with her. Mom wiggled her nose, puckered her mouth, and then
winked. John again caught the boat and was reinforced for his close atten-
tion to Mom’s non-verbal cues. Parent and child then switched roles and
John got to choose the cue word and later a non-verbal signal. Interestingly,
John wanted his non-verbal signal to be one of his stereotypic movements.
Repetitive movements or stereotypy is another symptom that a child with an
ASD may manifest.
John’s sterotypic behavior was the rapid movement of his eyes from side
to side instead of making eye contact with people. He could move his eyes
so quickly that it looked as if they were jiggling. We helped John come up
with a non-verbal signal that approximated a longer gaze. John jiggled his
eyes for a moment, then forced himself to gaze at mom solidly for one sec-
ond to communicate that he was dropping the boat. Mom successfully
caught the boat and was thrilled to have several experiences of prolonged
connectedness through John’s extended gazes. The other activities for the
session included a “bubble popping game,” the “Newspaper Punch” activ-
ity, and the “Dyadic Dance” (see appendix), all of which we played first
with word cues and then with more and more subtle non-verbal cues. As
John’s finesse in accurately reading mom’s cues increased, so did the size of
his smile. After one iteration of the Dyadic Dance, I commented on how
well they moved together and how much they seemed to be a real team.
John spontaneously hugged Mom tightly and said, “I love you Mom.”
Often, I will intensify the non-verbal cue even more by structuring it with
a verbal count. If John is currently making eye contact for 1/2 a second with
Mom before dropping the boat, I might say “O.K. Mom, we’re going to sur-
prise you this time, so watch carefully.” I then whisper to the client, “I’m
 Theraplay Approaches for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders 77

gonna count to three and then you drop it.” Slowly increasing the challenge
by increasing the length of time the gaze is held prior to the release of the
object can help shape a child’s tolerance for and enjoyment of eye contact.
Another activity I created to help with non-verbal cueing is the “Eyeball
Toss.” John sat at one corner of an invisible triangle while Mom and I sat at
the other points. I gave John a squashy, gooey ball that resembled an eye-
ball. His job was to make eye contact with the person to whom he was go-
ing to roll the ball. The game continued with everyone signaling through
eye contact. The speed of play and the distance between people can be var-
ied to make the game more challenging. John asked to play this game re-
peatedly and his eye contact increased significantly over the course of treat-
ment.

A child’s impairments in reciprocity and turn taking can be helped by all

of the above mentioned activities and several specific activities listed below.
In the game “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall” the parent and child face each
other. The parent slowly moves her body and the child moves his body with
hers so that each looks like a reflection of the other. The parent and child
can later switch roles. This game requires the child to become aware of his
body in space and in relationship to his caregiver. Moreover, he must use
his peripheral vision and try to take in the overall movement of the parent’s
body instead of hyperfocusing on one attribute of the non-verbal commu-
nication, which is their natural tendency.
Another useful game is called “Instrument Attunement.” For this game,
both the child and parent have a maraca or other musical instrument. The
parent plays a simple rhythm and the child copies it. The rhythms can in-
crease in complexity as long as the child remains successful in his recipro-
cation of the rhythm. The parent can also vary the speed or the loudness of
the instrument. This game requires the child to pay attention to the com-
munication being sent by the parent and replicate it. Then the child can set
the rhythm and have the parent repeat it.
Typically developing children intuitively internalize the unspoken rules
that apply to physical proximity and appropriate physical boundaries. Chil-
dren with ASDs, however, often have to be taught appropriate boundaries
didactically. I use Twizzlers and long ropes of licorice as measuring tools
when assisting children with Asperger’s Syndrome to grasp these concepts.
The child sits on the parent’s lap and we see how much licorice fits in be-
tween them. The parent then gets to feed it to the child. Next the parents
and I line up with the child as if we are in the child’s classroom, an envi-
ronment in which social difficulties are often exacerbated.
We let the child play with the distance between people while measuring
the space with the treats. Once the child is able to accurately assess appro-
priate distances from others in various settings, we practice recognizing
78 Chapter 6

when someone is saying with his body, “That’s close enough.” We do this
while playing a version of Red Light, Green Light. We generate a list of non-
verbal communications. Gestures such as raising a hand in front of one’s
body are included as well as movements like someone scooting sideways af-
ter being bumped. The client then stands several feet away from the parent
and begins to walk slowly toward them. Each of the non-verbal gestures
that usually mean “That’s close enough” function as the Red Light. When
the child accurately reads the cue and self-monitors by stopping, the parent
and I cheer.
Finally, the sensory integration issues that children with ASDs grapple
with can be addressed through Theraplay. Theraplay activities can be mod-
ified to give the sensory seeking child and the sensory defensive child the
kinds of experiences that promote health and a positive relationship with
the parent. Each client must have his or her sensory needs individually as-
sessed so that the “dose” of sensory exposure is titrated accurately for each
child. Clients who are sensory seeking may respond best to more intense
pressure in the lotioning tasks, whereas sensory defensive children may re-
spond better to the use of baby powder, or hand tracing.
For children who need more experiences of pressure or containment in
their physical bodies, games like (see appendix) “Tunneling” and “The Toi-
let Paper Bust Out” can be helpful. Games like “Push Me Over,” “Pull Me
Up” and the “Pillow Push” can be customized to provide extra stimulation
for sensory seeking children. Conversely, the “Cotton Ball Touch” or a gen-
tle game of “Pass the Touch” might be most appropriate for a sensory de-
fensive child. “The Blanket Swing” can be a gentle containment experience
or a boisterous exciting game depending on the child’s needs. Feeding
games that allow for the client to experience the slow melting of an M&M
in his mouth or the intense crunching of a carrot can be handpicked based
on a child’s sensory needs.
In closing, the use of Theraplay techniques with children with ASDs is
based on a careful dyadic assessment with an aim toward using each of the
four dimensions to stimulate a child’s desire for interpersonal connection.
The child’s current developmental level, his interests and the areas of social
interaction that need shaping should be considered when customizing
Theraplay activities to successively approximate healthy social interactions.
For children with ASDs, Theraplay can become a vehicle for breaking out of
isolation and into the world of social connectedness.
Below is an agenda for each phase of Theraplay with Ethan. In most ac-
tivities the therapist models the game once with the child and then facili-
tates the child and parent playing it together, increasing the challenge level
from verbal to facial cues as they play. “Peek-a-Boo,” feeding, and the “I Re-
member When” stories are parent led, with elaborations facilitated by the
therapist if necessary.
 Theraplay Approaches for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders 79

Theraplay activities (see appendix) used in Session 1:

1. Check in and Helping Hurts (Therapist/Parent/Child)

2. Measuring with Fruit Roll-Ups (Therapist/Parent/Child)
3. Peek-a-Boo games (in the sand) (Parent/Child)
4. Bean Bag Game (Therapist/Parent/Child)
5. Pop the Bubbles (Therapist/Parent/Child)
6. Finding Powder Shapes in Hands, (Therapist/Parent/Child)
7. The Blanket Swing, (Therapist/Parent/Child)
8. Feeding (Hide and Seek) and “I Remember When” Story (Therapist/
Parent/Child)

Homework included lotioning and rocking at night time, as well as

“Peek-a-Boo” with the covers at bedtime. In the mornings, mom spent ex-
tra time doing the “This Little Piggy” game with client’s toes before putting
on his socks and shoes. Mom was instructed to check-in every morning at
wake-up time and to make a game out of seeing if all his freckles, fingers,
etc., were still there.
Theraplay activities used in a middle session:

1. Check in and Helping Hurts (Therapist/Parent/Child)

2. Stack of Hands (Therapist/Parent/Child)
3. Tracing Hands (Therapist/Parent/Child)
4. Row Row Row Your Boat (Parent/Child)
5. Push Me Over-Pull Me Up (Therapist/Parent/Child)
6. Slippery, Slippery, Slip game (Therapist/Parent/Child)
7. The Blanket Swing (Therapist/Parent/Child)
8. The Doughnut/Pretzel Challenge (Therapist/Parent/Child)
9. More Feeding and an “I Remember When” story (Therapist/Parent/
Child)

Homework included lotioning and singing before bed every night and
simple reinforcements of reciprocal interactions through turn-taking games.
Theraplay activities used in a final Session:

1. Check in and Helping Hurts (Therapist/Parent/Child)

2. Final Measuring (to see how much he’d grown) (Therapist/Parent/
Child)
3. Cotton Ball Touch (Therapist/Parent/Child)
4. Instrument Attunement (Therapist/Parent/Child)
5. Mirror, Mirror on the Wall (Therapist/Parent/Child)
6. Slippery, Slippery, Slip (Therapist/Parent/Child)
7. Row Your Boat (Therapist/Parent/Child)
80 Chapter 6

8. The Blanket Swing (Therapist/Parent/Child)

9. Feeding Celebration with an “I Remember When” story (Therapist/
Parent/Child)

Children feel safer when they have rituals and routines that remain con-
sistent over time. Theraplay sessions can be structured with beginning and
ending rituals that remain the same across sessions. In this case, Check-In
and Handling Hurts marked the predictable start of each Theraplay session.
The end of each session was signaled by the Blanket Swing and the parent
feeding the child while telling an “I Remember When” story. The repetitive
beginning and ending activities serve as book-ends that provide pre-
dictability for the child and parent, while the middle activities of each ses-
sion can change to match the growing edge (structure/nurture/engage-
ment/challenge) for each dyad. The role of the therapist is mainly to model
each new activity and then to undergird the parent/child dyad as they ex-
perience the intervention together. The therapist makes many comments to
both child and parent that affirm their together identity and the way they
complement each other in their individual roles. In the final session, the “I
Remember When” story time can be expanded. The remembering focuses
on the most important moments from the Theraplay process and all three
participants (parent, child, and therapist) can all tell stories, helping them
build a coherent narrative of treatment that will continue past termination.

NOTE

1. The mnemonic device “Every Child Needs Something” was created by Dr.
Linda Ashford, assistant professor of pediatrics at Monro Carell Jr. Children’s Hos-
pital at Vanderbilt.

REFERENCES

Greenspan, Stanley I., and Weider, Serena. (2006). Engaging Autism: Using the Floor-
time Approach to Help Children Relate, Communicate, and Think. Cambridge, MA: Da
Capo Lifelong Books.
Wettig, H., Franke, U., and Fjordbak, B. S. (2006). “Evaluating the Effectiveness of
Theraplay.” In C. E. Schaefer and H. Kaduson (Eds.), Contemporary Play Therapy
(pp. 103–135). New York: The Guilford Press.

WEBSITES

www.autismspeaks.org
www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/
7
Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in
Residential Treatment
Karen Doyle Buckwalter and Annette L. Finlay

One of the most powerful applications of Theraplay® may also be one of

the most overlooked; the highly successful use of Theraplay to treat adoles-
cents in Chaddock’s residential setting demonstrates that this therapeutic
intervention is full of potential benefits. The benefits are seen in the qual-
ity of the therapeutic relationships between the children and staff and the
children and their families. They are also seen in the confidence and level
of satisfaction staff gain from their work, as evidenced through interviews
with direct care staff who have worked in both behavior modification or
level system residential milieus and within Chaddock’s therapeutic model.
The confidence gained by staff in the use of Theraplay has also been noted
in families who are preparing for the return of their children to their care.
Families who struggled to understand what their troubled children needed
from them were able to find confidence in their ability to effectively parent
their children.
This chapter will first explore the benefits of Theraplay in establishing
therapeutic rapport early in treatment. Second, it will discuss the benefits
of Chaddock’s program structure and treatment phases, which are based
upon the typical progression of treatment when utilizing Theraplay (Jern-
berg and Booth, 1999). Finally, it will explore the impact of its use upon
the confidence and attitudes of direct care staff and families. To illustrate
this therapeutic process, we will follow a typical client named Josie Pe-
tersen (not her real name) and her family as they journey through treat-
ment at Chaddock.

81
82 Chapter 7

BUILDING INITIAL RAPPORT

Mr. and Mrs. Petersen sought treatment for their fourteen-year-old adoptive
daughter, Josie, when they were no longer able to manage her escalating be-
haviors in the home. Josie had been diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder, and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. She
exhibited physical and verbal aggression toward her parents and a sibling,
who continued to reside in the home. Mr. and Mrs. Petersen also reported
Josie’s refusal to allow her parents to touch her, as well as excessively con-
trolling behaviors, poor impulse and anger control, and poor self-esteem.
Her parents reported Josie did not have friends at school or in the neigh-
borhood, and she had a history of hurting the family pets.
Prior to being admitted to Chaddock, Josie had been receiving outpatient
therapy services through her local mental health center, but was not re-
sponding to treatment in that setting. Although Josie had previously been
placed in a psychiatric unit for out-of-control behavior and physical aggres-
sion, Chaddock was her first residential placement. Mr. and Mrs. Petersen
voiced anxiety about their decision to place Josie in a residential treatment
program so far from home. Yet they stated they were no longer able to safely
parent Josie in their home and knew she needed specialized care.
Josie appeared angry and defiant throughout her admission into Chaddock
and refused to speak with staff. Chaddock’s first priority for Josie, as with all
clients, was to establish a therapeutic rapport with her. In order to accomplish
that goal, Chaddock utilizes Theraplay in the program structure and in the in-
teractions between Josie and her individual counselor and therapist.
Chaddock’s treatment model utilizes direct care staff with Theraplay
training called individual counselors who work closely with an assigned
child. Their role is to act as the child’s “practice” attachment figure while
they are in treatment. The role of individual counselor was developed be-
cause many families live too far away to participate in weekly family ther-
apy. Clearly, the preference would be to have the parent present in therapy
sessions, but distance and the responsibilities of home represent difficult
barriers. The individual counselor assigned to Josie was Maria, who worked
closely with Josie’s assigned therapist, Sarah. Maria also attended therapy
sessions with Josie. As Sarah worked with Josie and Maria, a relationship be-
gan to grow, enabling Maria to be more effective in her work with Josie in
the milieu. The fun, enjoyable experiences they shared in therapy sessions
using Theraplay provided a foundation for Maria and Josie. From that foun-
dation, Maria was able to support Josie through difficult situations in the
milieu with empathy and compassion. As Josie’s individual counselor,
Maria shared experiences with Josie that were engaging, structured yet bal-
anced with accepting nurture and, as Josie was able, challenging, to enable
her developmental and emotional growth. Maria did not wait for Sarah, the
 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 83

therapist, to establish a therapeutic rapport with Josie before she began en-
gaging her, as so much of her critical work occurred within the milieu be-
tween therapy sessions. Bruce Perry noted in his book, The Boy Who Was
Raised as a Dog (Perry and Szalavitz 2006):

. . . my experience as well as the research suggests that the most important heal-
ing experiences in the lives of traumatized children do not occur in therapy it-
self. (p. 231)

Although Josie’s interactions with her therapist, Sarah, were critical, her
daily interactions with Maria and the other staff provided the consistent
emotional and physical safety Josie needed as a catalyst in her treatment.
A part of Maria’s training had been to teach her to utilize the four dimen-
sions of Theraplay to create that emotional and physical safety for Josie.
Maria focused on interventions designed to help her engage Josie in telling
her about her home, school, and what she liked to do. Structure was wo-
ven into the fabric of Josie’s day through routines and Maria’s directions to
accomplish tasks. Maria received extensive training focused upon thera-
peutic boundaries in order to allow her to define appropriate nurturing
touch to be utilized with Josie. Tiffany Field noted in her book, Touch
(Field 2001):

. . . children need touch for survival. Their growth and development thrive on
touch. And how will they learn about affection if not through touch? (p. 5)

A pat on the back, a high five, or holding Josie’s hand were all appropri-
ate nurturing touches that Josie began to accept. Maria provided challeng-
ing moments for Josie that were fun and in the context of games, which
made it easier for Josie to accept them.
Theraplay’s four dimensions are powerful tools in parenting, treating,
and educating children and adolescents. Children like Josie often feel afraid
and alone when they arrive in treatment centers. Establishing therapeutic
rapport quickly provides a springboard for treatment by allowing them to
feel safe and cared for as quickly as possible. Rapport is defined in
Wikipedia as “. . . one of the most important features or characteristics of
unconscious human interaction. It is commonality of perspective, being in
‘sync,’ being on the same ‘wavelength’ as the person with whom you are
talking.” Maria’s primary focus in her work with Josie initially was to strive
to be in sync and on the same wavelength with her. Maria was also Josie’s
special staff during the evenings she was assigned to work. Once Josie be-
gan to demonstrate basic reciprocal behaviors with Maria she was encour-
aged and challenged to generalize those same behaviors to her family.
Maria spent a lot of time with Josie in those first days of her placement
talking about the expectations of the program, some of the activities she
84 Chapter 7

might participate in and what she could expect from staff. When it was time
for Josie to do her daily chore of sweeping and mopping the kitchen floor,
Maria worked with her to complete it. By working side by side with Josie,
Maria was able to provide structure and support to her. As expected, Josie
responded alternately with openness and anger throughout her chores.
When Maria asked Josie to sweep crumbs she had missed under the table,
Josie responded by throwing the mop on the floor and using profanity.
Maria encouraged Josie to use her words to articulate her feelings. Josie re-
sponded initially with expletives then was able to talk about feeling sad she
wasn’t at home and angry Maria was telling her what to do. Maria’s re-
sponse was to acknowledge how difficult it must be for her to be in a resi-
dential placement (nurture) while calmly restating what was being asked of
Josie (structure). Josie was tearful, but able to complete her chore with
Maria’s help.
Through structured moments such as this one, children are given limits,
parameters, and boundaries within which they are expected to live. As chil-
dren grow to trust that the adults in their lives will consistently maintain
those boundaries, they can begin to trust.
Josie was not willing or able to explore her feelings of fear and sadness
nor her traumatic experiences until she felt emotionally safe. As Bruce Perry
noted in The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog (Perry and Szalavitz 2006):

One of the few things I knew for sure by then about traumatized children was
that they need predictablility, routine, a sense of control and stable relation-
ships with supportive people. (p. 61)

Emotional safety stems from a strong, healthy, therapeutic rapport with an

adult who has the resources to manage the verbal or emotional outbursts
that may occur. Historically, therapists and direct care staff would tell the
child they were safe, but utilizing Theraplay activities allowed the child to
experience that safety rather than simply accepting a statement as fact. Ther-
apeutic rapport was achieved more rapidly because Maria was engaging and
nurturing in her interactions with Josie, while providing her the consistent
daily structure she needed.
Critical to the successful use of structure is an equal balance of nurture
that allows the child to know she is accepted, respected, and cared for.
Structure and nurture must be perfectly balanced to be effective. Many fa-
cilities err on the side of focusing on structure exclusively. Theraplay’s em-
phasis on both structure and nurture is a constant reminder of the impor-
tance both dimensions play in the overall health and well-being of children
(Jernberg and Booth, 1999). During Josie’s first therapy sessions her thera-
pist and individual counselor used gentle humor and unexpectedly fun
activities to engage her in interacting with them (engagement). They
 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 85

incorporated safe touches into the activities they chose (nurture) while en-
suring the adults were responsible for the focus and direction of the session
(structure). Those early sessions did not focus on trauma resolution, but
rather on building relationships and establishing a therapeutic rapport that
allowed them to later process the grief, loss, trauma, and anger that existed.
Josie did not know it, but blowing bubbles (structure, challenge, and en-
gagement), cotton ball races (structure, challenge, and engagement), and
row, row, row your boat (structure, engagement, and nurture) led to a rap-
port that yielded a level of trust that allowed her to find healing.
The use of Theraplay provides the fertile soil in which therapeutic rapport
may grow and accelerates the child’s progress through treatment. The use of
the four dimensions works as a road map to allow the individual counselor
and therapist to confidently engage the child while being attentive to his
other needs of structure, nurture, and challenge.

TREATMENT PROGRAM PHASES

Chaddock utilizes five distinct phases of treatment through which children

and their families pass. These phases represent the entirety of the child’s
treatment at Chaddock, which typically lasts twelve to eighteen months.
These phases of treatment are Invitation, Tentative Acceptance, Resistance,
Growing and Trusting, and Separation/Transition and are based upon the
typical progression of Theraplay treatment (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).

Although it is not invariable, most children go through a predictable sequence

of phases in their response to treatment. (p.141)

The Invitation Phase

When Josie and her family entered treatment at Chaddock they entered
the Invitation Phase of treatment. Both Josie and her parents were invited
to enter the treatment process and begin working on their lives, both indi-
vidually and as a family. This was a time of anxiety and fear for both Josie
and her parents. They sought assurances that this was the best decision for
Josie and their family. While Mr. and Mrs. Petersen expressed hope when
speaking of Josie’s future, they also voiced concerns about her prognosis.
The therapeutic milieu is often overwhelming for both the parents and
their child when they arrive. As previously noted, Maria’s focus was upon
establishing therapeutic rapport with Josie to engage her in the treatment
process. At the same time, the family service coordinator, Helen, began es-
tablishing a therapeutic rapport with Josie’s family. Helen had received
Theraplay training in working with both children and their families. Helen’s
86 Chapter 7

focus with Mr. and Mrs. Petersen was to provide both counseling and edu-
cation in order to help them understand the treatment process and what
was needed and expected of them. Helen established at least weekly contact
with Mr. and Mrs. Petersen in order to communicate Josie’s progress and
struggles in treatment as well as information about her treatment plan. He-
len sought information from Mr. and Mrs. Petersen in order to provide
more effective interventions for their family and establish their role as part
of the treatment team. Sarah, Josie’s therapist, asked Josie and her family to
participate in a Marschak Interaction Method (MIM). The MIM was an im-
portant tool in understanding Josie’s relationship with her parents and pre-
dicting how she would likely interact with staff, at least initially in her treat-
ment. So often, children reenact their parent/child relationships with
particular staff and reenact sibling relationships with other children placed
in the residential treatment program. Watching the interactions between
Josie and her parents also allowed the therapist to gain information that
was helpful in supporting them to modify their approaches with her. The
family service coordinator also worked with Mr. and Mrs. Petersen to eval-
uate their interactions with Josie and help build upon their strengths as well
as explore any weaknesses noted in each of the areas of structure, engage-
ment, nurture, and challenge.

The Tentative Acceptance Phase

The second phase of treatment is the Tentative Acceptance Phase. In this
phase of treatment, both Josie and her parents expressed anxiety and tenta-
tiveness regarding the treatment program. While there appeared to be an
outer acceptance of the program and the expectations therein, the trust that
would eventually develop was not yet present. As Ann Jernberg and Phyllis
Booth noted:

There is a period of tentative acceptance in which the child seems to be say-

ing, “This is interesting, a bit strange, but it could be fun.” (p.141)

Helen worked closely with Mr. and Mrs. Petersen during this time provid-
ing education about the program. Mr. and Mrs. Petersen were encouraged to
allow staff to provide the structure Josie needed, while they were to focus on
interacting with her in ways that were engaging and nurturing. Frequently, by
the time children require placement out of their homes in a residential treat-
ment center, the parents struggle to feel enjoyment when spending time with
them. The focus of therapeutic interventions with Josie and her family dur-
ing this phase of treatment was to allow them to once again have positive ex-
periences with one another. Josie’s first visit with her family after placement
consisted of blowing bubbles into the wind and watching them float away
 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 87

then running to catch them. They put lotion on each other’s hands; played
row, row, row your boat while holding hands, and had cotton ball races with
straws and cotton balls. Her mother wrapped her arms around Josie and
sang a familiar lullaby to her. Each smile, hug, and moment of pleasurable
acceptance between Josie and her parents marked a step forward in building
a trusting, reciprocal relationship. Josie’s parents were asked to call her often,
visit a minimum of every six to eight weeks, or more frequently if possible,
and send frequent cards and letters to her. They were also asked to send spe-
cial items that helped provide an emotional connection between themselves
and Josie. Mrs. Petersen sent a small photo album with family pictures and
an envelope full of hearts with handwritten messages to Josie, which were
hidden in her bedroom to be found over time. These nurturing connections
with their child continued throughout treatment.

The Resistance Phase

The Resistance Phase of treatment is often stormy and characterized by
outbursts and tremendous amounts of emotion for both the children and
their families.

Following this (tentative acceptance) comes a period of resistance (the negative

reaction phase) . . . . At this point the child may pull out all the stops in his ef-
forts to resist becoming involved with the therapist. It is as though he were say-
ing, “I never trusted anyone before, so why should I trust you?” (Jernberg and
Booth, 1999, p. 141)

In this phase of treatment Josie began to grasp that Maria was committed
to developing a real relationship with her. It was important that Maria com-
municated to Josie that she would remain invested and involved in her life
even when she wasn’t “being good” or compliant. Parents have often stated
that this phase of treatment seems endless as they watch helplessly and won-
der if their child will ever improve. Children with attachment and trauma is-
sues in treatment have stated they are afraid to open their hearts to someone
else. It is as though they are afraid that what is in their heart is too horrible or
too scary for anyone to accept. Due to Josie’s life experiences, she needed to
be assured that Maria and her colleagues were able to physically manage the
behaviors she exhibited, no matter how extreme or severe. She also needed to
trust that Maria would not ridicule her or reject her for the thoughts and feel-
ings she held within her heart. The fear of being rejected often leads clients to
push everyone away in order to protect themselves emotionally.
In therapy and in the milieu, the entire staff consistently utilized the four
dimensions of Theraplay by providing structure, engagement, nurture, and
challenge with Josie. Visits and family therapy sessions also focused on
88 Chapter 7

Theraplay activities to provide additional enjoyable experiences for Josie

and her parents. During this phase of treatment, it was important for Maria,
Sarah, and the other staff to provide the structure Josie needed rather than
placing her parents in that difficult role. Helen continued to provide coun-
seling and education to Josie’s parents and guided them as they interacted
with Josie. In this way Theraplay activities were a consistent part of therapy,
the milieu, and visits between Josie and her parents.

The Growing and Trusting Phase

The fourth phase of treatment is the Growing and Trusting Phase. In this
phase of treatment, the child begins to report feelings of enjoyment when
interacting with others. The child begins to demonstrate confidence in daily
living experiences and in interactions with others.

. . . this is a phase of increasing trust in which the child seems to be saying,

“Well I guess you really are all right. I think I can trust you.” (Jernberg and
Booth, 1999, p. 141)

During this phase of treatment Josie began to look at many of the deeper
issues that were beneath the surface. Josie was challenged to explore her feel-
ings of sadness, loneliness, grief, despair, shame, resentment, and anger. Dur-
ing the Growing and Trusting Phase of treatment Josie began to demonstrate
reciprocal behaviors with Maria. Mr. and Mrs. Petersen voiced frustration
and resentment during this process as they stated they felt hurt and pushed
aside by Josie. They worked with Helen and Sarah to address those feelings.
During this time, Helen provided both nurture (encouragement and empa-
thy) and structure (suggestions about what they could do) to Josie’s parents
in order to guide them. Josie had been practicing reciprocal behaviors with
Maria for many months, and her parents were practicing those same behav-
iors with her during visits with the support of the treatment team. Over time,
Josie’s focus shifted to her parents and that focus led to an attachment.
Josie’s parents were guided to provide greater levels of structure for Josie
during this phase of treatment. Maria began fading into the background of
the visits with Josie and her parents, allowing them to find their rhythm in
providing structure, nurture, challenge, and engagement. Helen worked with
the family prior to their visits to help them plan activities within each of the
four dimensions to provide Josie balanced interactions that met her needs.

The Separation/Transition Phase

The last phase of treatment is the Separation/Transition Phase (referred
to as termination by Ann Jernberg and Phyllis Booth), and is characterized
in Theraplay (Jernberg and Booth, 1999) as:
 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 89

When this phase (Growing and Trusting) is well established and the parents
have become part of the playful interaction of treatment sessions and are able
to carry on at home, it is time to plan for termination. (p. 141)

In this final phase of Josie’s treatment, both she and her parents at times
questioned if they were ready to live together. At the same time they voiced
confidence and hope about the future. Josie talked about her sadness of
leaving Maria, Sarah, and the other staff who had worked with her. The staff
supported her through her grief and challenged her to strengthen her rela-
tionship with her parents. Mr. and Mrs. Petersen worked with Helen to pre-
pare the framework of daily life that enabled Josie to successfully transition
home. Helen helped the family identify daily activities and routines that
met Josie’s needs within all four Theraplay dimensions. Helen challenged
Josie’s parents to establish consistent times and routines for sleeping, awak-
ing, meals, homework, physical activity, and fun activities (structure).
Within the framework of this structure, Josie’s parents were also challenged
to identify times and methods of providing Josie the nurture she needed on
a daily basis. They identified activities that would challenge Josie and help
her grow and develop. Her parents also worked closely with Josie’s treat-
ment team to identify methods of engaging her when she would attempt to
isolate herself from them or push them away in the home setting. Helen
also worked with Josie’s parents to identify plans for them to care for them-
selves and one another, thus providing the parents the nurturing moments
they might need. A plan was developed to maintain contact with Mr. and
Mrs. Petersen after Josie was discharged from treatment in order to provide
them support, guidance, and encouragement. Josie was successfully dis-
charged to the home of her parents and has remained there with support
from their hometown treatment team.

THERAPLAY IMPACT UPON DIRECT CARE STAFF

Theraplay has had a significant impact upon Chaddock’s residential treat-

ment program. That impact has been noted upon the program framework
and with the attitudes and skills of the staff and families. Staff receive Ther-
aplay training and advanced opportunities to develop skills in their chal-
lenging work with children and their families. Yet, one of the major chal-
lenges of any residential treatment center is burnout and turnover among
direct care staff. Typically, as in most of the child care field, they receive low
wages and also must work evenings, weekends, and holidays. When coupled
with working long shifts with children and adolescents that are challenging,
aggressive, and typically do not reciprocate the positive emotions that care
staff extend to them, maintaining a team of professional and committed
staff can be challenging. Few people would deny the work is emotionally
90 Chapter 7

exhausting and it is imperative to find ways to help staff find enjoyment in

their work and know they are making a difference. Incorporating the play-
fulness of Theraplay into the environment improves the satisfaction and en-
joyment of staff as evidenced through interviews with staff. One staff noted,
“Theraplay gives me the opportunity to play simple games with the child
while making a true connection with them.” Bruce Perry noted in The Boy
Who Was Raised as a Dog (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006):

. . . in normal childhood . . . nurturing human interactions become intimately

and powerfully connected with pleasure. It is through the thousands of times
we respond to our crying infant that we help create her healthy capacity to get
pleasure from future human connection. (p. 89)

This same response could be expected in the interactions between staff and
child. As staff experience positive feelings in their work, they can be ex-
pected to remain in that work over a longer period of time. One staff noted,
“As adults, we can forget to play, and many of our clients never learned how
to play. As a result, they missed out on the sense of accomplishment and
connection that healthy play can inspire.”
When staff at Chaddock were asked how Theraplay has changed the way
they work with children, the benefits they noted fell into four categories.
First, the staff expressed that the use of Theraplay increased their level of
empathy and understanding of the children, their needs, and issues. One
staff noted, “If we can see the pain, fear, and loneliness in our clients’ eyes,
hopefully they will see the care, compassion and empathy in ours.” Another
staff reported, “Theraplay training opened my eyes to the importance and
value of touch. Sometimes even the slightest touch can calm and soothe a
client who is struggling.”
Second, the staff expressed increased confidence that they were able to
meet the children’s needs. “Theraplay has the amazing power of helping
children build trust and accept care from adults which in the end, brings
healing and makes the difference between despair and hope,” shared one
staff.
Third, many staff stated they were encouraged by the development of
new skills. When focusing on how Theraplay has changed the way she
works with children, one staff member commented, “Overall it is much eas-
ier to work through their resistance and do the unexpected, which allows
you to connect with them.”
Finally, many staff reported feeling a connection with the children they
had not previously experienced when utilizing more traditional methods of
interacting with children in a residential treatment center. “The most sig-
nificant impact that Theraplay has had on me is it lets me be myself and not
have to be the residential staff that all of these kids have had to deal with
 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 91

most of their lives,” noted one experienced staff person. “Knowing what I
now know after the training, I would never go back to more ‘traditional’
therapeutic approaches.”

SUMMARY

Theraplay has radically changed the face of residential treatment services at

Chaddock. The dimensions of Theraplay have provided a framework and
the tools not only for the staff, but also for parents who enter the treatment
process. Staff who have worked in traditional residential programs have
voiced increased confidence in their work and their ability to make a dif-
ference in the lives of severely traumatized children as a result of utilizing
Theraplay. The power of Theraplay to change interactions and develop pos-
itive relationships where none previously existed is inspiring to witness. For
those who have experienced compliance based treatment programs, the use
of Theraplay in treatment has led to a passionate belief that its use is the
best hope for these children and their families.

AGENDAS

Theraplay Session 1: (This session would use a great deal of challenge and
structure and less nurture until the child knows the staff better)

• Check up (Done by using pieces of string to measure arms, legs, etc. If child
is comfortable something as intimate as a smile could be measured)
• Jump the river (Take pieces of string that were used for measuring and
put them on the floor at various intervals for the child to jump across)
• Tic Tac Spit (Similar to seed spit except using tic tac mints. One person
spits a tic tac and then the other person sees how closely they can spit
a tic tac to the first one that was spit. This makes it more cooperative
than competitive by seeing how far each person can spit.)
• Newspaper punch that becomes newspaper basketball (Take pieces of news-
paper that are ripped up from newspaper punch and crumble it into
balls to shoot baskets through a “basket” that the therapist makes by
putting their arms in a ring for balls to be thrown through)
• Sharing of a drink and snack (Therapist would attempt to feed the child
the snack and drink while sitting across from them adding some sort
of challenge to it such as taking a bite of a cookie ring while trying not
to break it.)
• Goodbye Secret Handshake (Child will be given the lead in making up
that hand shake. The hand shake will become a ritual to end each
92 Chapter 7

session so the therapist may need to write it down so they do not for-
get it!)

Theraplay Session 25: (At this point in treatment the therapist would be
incorporating more nurture and engagement with the child since the child
will now feel more comfortable with closeness having known the therapist
and milieu staff for more than two months and experiencing many im-
promptu Theraplay activities in the milieu environment.)

• Check up and Lotioning hurts (Typical check up as described in appen-

dix . . . noticing eyes, hair, smile, lotion any hurts)
• Lotion Handprints
• Cotton Ball and Feather touches (Child closes eyes if willing, if not can
do with eyes open and guess if therapist is touching them with a cot-
ton ball or feather)
• Balloon Volleyball (structured by only being able to hit balloon with
body parts the therapist specifies)
• Balancing Bean Bags on Head while crossing the room
• Pretend face painting
• Feed snack and drink (the hope would be that by this point in treatment
the adolescent could accept this)
• Twinkle song
• Goodbye secret handshake

Theraplay Session 50: (Parents would now be actively involved in Thera-

play session so this session would occur when there is a parent visit.)

• Foil prints/mold (Therapist makes foil prints of child while parent hides
their eyes. Parent then guesses what parts of child the molds are by
feeling them.)
• Hand stack
• Peanut butter and jelly (Parent in the lead so the client is following the
structure the parent sets with the game)
• Marshmallow fight (Chaddock therapist and individual counselor on
one team and parent and child together on other team to build rela-
tionship between them.)
• Progressive Touch Pass
• Feed snack and drink while cradled in parents arms (If the child feels safe
and comfortable to do this, otherwise they can just sit close beside
each other)
• Goodbye secret handshake (Chaddock staff and child would teach the
hand shake to the parent to include them in this ritual.)
 Theraplay: The Powerful Catalyst in Residential Treatment 93

REFERENCES

Field, T. M. (2001). Touch. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Finlay, A. (2005). Parent Guide. Quincy, IL: Chaddock.
Jernberg, A., and Booth, P. (1999). Theraplay. Helping Parents and Children Build Bet-
ter Relationships through Attachment-based Play, 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jernberg, A. M., Booth, P., Koller, T., and Allert, A. (1991). Manual for the Adminis-
tration and the Clinical Interpretation of the Marschak Interaction Method (MIM):
Preschool and School Age (revised). Chicago, IL: Theraplay Institute.
Marschak, M. (1960). “A Method for Evaluating Child-Parent Interaction under
Controlled Conditions.” Journal of Genetic Psychology 97:3–22.
Perry, B., and Szalavitz, M. (2006). The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog: And Other Sto-
ries from a Child Psychiatrist’s Notebook: What Traumatized Children Can Teach Us
about Loss, Love, and Healing. New York: Basic Books.
III
THERAPLAY AND
CULTURAL DIVERSITY
8
Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples
Linda Perry and Patti Sutherland

INTRODUCTION

Attachment theory and subsequent methodologies have had an impact on

the way many clinicians assess and intervene with families. Bowlby (1969)
believed that all humans have a biological drive to form attachment rela-
tionships and these relationships have evolved because they enhance our
potential for survival. The application of Ainsworth’s (1978) strange situa-
tion and the categorization of attachment classifications (secure; insecure
ambivalent/resistant; insecure avoidant; and disorganized) provided a way
of describing the reciprocal relationship between a parent and child dyad.
However, recent research indicates that a homogeneous approach to under-
standing attachment and parent-child relationships often negates the diver-
sity of families based on variables such as history, culture, and socio-demo-
graphics (Haight, Kagle, and Black, 2003; Letourneau, Hungler, and Fisher,
2005; Neckoway, Brownlee, and Castellan, 2007).
Attachment theory has been influential in informing our work with Abo-
riginal families. However, the applicability of attachment theory to Aborig-
inal culture and parenting practices has not been addressed (Neckoway et
al., 2007). In the absence of research, clinicians have had to forge ahead and
work with Aboriginal families using models of intervention that they be-
lieve, based on their clinical experience, will be beneficial to the families. It
is our experience that models of intervention based on attachment theory,
such as Theraplay®, have to be adapted to take into consideration historical
and cultural factors relating to Aboriginal people.
In this paper we first provide a brief description of the history of colo-
nization of Aboriginal people and the profound impact this has had on
97
98 Chapter 8

family life and parenting practices. Then we discuss considerations related

to clinical work with Aboriginal families and the implications for Thera-
play. Finally, we present a case study that illustrates how these considera-
tions influence Theraplay practice.
It should be noted that both writers are non-Aboriginal and therefore ac-
knowledge a bias based on their own history, culture, and socio-economic
contexts as Caucasian social workers.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

In an attempt to understand the nature of attachment interventions with

Aboriginal parents and children it is crucial that we consider the historical
context of colonization and its impact on Aboriginal families in Canada.
One of the greatest losses experienced by Aboriginal people, the loss of
childhood, was perpetuated through the installation of reserves, residential
schools, and the apprehension and adoption of First Nation children into
non–First Nations homes. Residential schools first appeared in Western
Canada in 1883–1884. The last one closed about 100 years later (Heritage
Community Foundation, 2002).
Residential schools resulted in the separation of many Aboriginal children
from their homes and families, often at an early age. They were forbidden to
speak their language or to observe their cultural practices (Bruce, 1998; Haig-
Brown, 1998). They grew up in an institution, far from the love and care of
family and community (English-Currie, 1990; Dumont-Smith, 1995). As a
result, they did not experience cultural integration, and family life was de-
stroyed (English-Currie, 1990; Miller, 1997b). Not only was family life de-
stroyed, but it was replaced with an institutionalized, and often abusive, al-
ternative. The children in residential schools were not allowed to be playful
or spontaneous, and they were not allowed to explore their world. For most
students, daily life meant hard work, rigid structure, and physical abuse
(Miller, 1997b). Further, children living in residence were often physically,
sexually, and emotionally abused (Bruce, 1998; Dumont-Smith, 1995;
Hughs, 1999; Miller, 1997b; O’Hara and Treble, 2000; Ross, 1992)
Another major historical event that contributed to the loss of family was
the apprehension of Aboriginal children by the child welfare system. During
the “sixties scoop,” an enormous number of children were apprehended and
placed in foster care or adopted into non-Aboriginal Canadian and Ameri-
can families. These children usually had no further contact with their birth
family (Green, 1997). According to York (1990), the child welfare system es-
sentially replaced the residential school system. As the residential schools be-
gan to close in the 1950s, more and more Aboriginal children were appre-
hended. A review of foster care and adoption in Canada (McKenzie and
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 99

Hudson, 1985) indicates that in 1980 Aboriginal people accounted for 12

percent of the population of Manitoba, but Aboriginal children represented
approximately 60 percent of the population in care or adopted. More recent
data indicate that during the fiscal year 2005–2006, of the 6,629 children in
care in Manitoba, 85 percent were Aboriginal (Manitoba Family Services and
Housing, 2005–2006). These statistics suggest that the legacy of colonization
continues to have a profound impact on Aboriginal families.

INTERGENERATIONAL TRANSMISSION OF TRAUMA

The historical trauma experienced by Aboriginal people is an important

consideration in understanding the challenges faced by Aboriginal parents
today. Lane, Bopp, and Bopp (2003) state that historical trauma has led to
intergenerational trauma, which has been passed on for as many as seven
generations through Aboriginal family and community systems. They de-
scribe this trauma as physical and sexual abuse, abandonment, alcohol and
drug dependency, suicide and loss, the withholding of intimacy and affec-
tion, persistent fear, violence, and racism and prejudice. The result is the
transmission from one generation to the next of a pattern of thinking and
human interaction that reflects symptoms of post-traumatic stress and co-
dependency. Included in this is a culture of violence in which family vio-
lence and abuse have become the norm.
In their discussion of a framework for interventions aimed at eliminating
intergenerational trauma, Lane et al. (2003, p. 92) suggest, “The most po-
tent force for attracting Aboriginal families to involve themselves in long-
term programs may be the love they feel for their own children.”

CLINICAL PRACTICE WITH ABORIGINAL FAMILIES

Our experience suggests that it is important not to generalize or make as-

sumptions about the impact of historical trauma when working with a partic-
ular Aboriginal family. Aboriginal cultures in Canada are not homogeneous,
but rather have characteristics specific to their geographic regions and social
networks (Neckoway et al., 2007). However, our experience working with Abo-
riginal families in Manitoba has identified some factors that are important to
consider when assessing and developing a treatment plan for a family.

Referral Source
There is no typical story or typical response from families when they come
to their first meeting with therapists. However, some of the Aboriginal
100 Chapter 8

families who participate in Theraplay have been referred by a child welfare

agency. Participating in Theraplay is sometimes a condition of their family
reunification contract. Feelings of powerlessness and frustration, together
with experiences of trauma, racism, and internalized shame can sometimes
lead a parent to present as hostile or non-communicative. We recognize the
context of their response and move slowly and respectfully toward building
a therapeutic relationship.
Not all families are referred for clinical intervention by a child welfare
agency. Many voluntarily seek out our services and are eager to participate
in an intervention that will improve their relationship with their child.
Sometimes parents, after they have had the opportunity to understand and
heal from their own traumatic experiences, are encouraged by staff in com-
munity agencies, including Aboriginal agencies, to participate in Theraplay.

Culture and Parenting

Although there is relatively little research looking at parenting practices
that has been conducted with Aboriginal Peoples, there is some evidence
that parenting practices in Aboriginal culture differ from Western norms (Le-
tourneau et al., 2005; Neckoway et al., 2007). Neckoway et al. (2007) iden-
tify three core patterns of parenting that are evident in different cultures.
They are hypersensitive parenting, where the parent is very involved and in-
tensive in meeting the infant’s needs, selective parenting, which is less in-
tensive in meeting infant’s needs, and shared parenting, where there are mul-
tiple caregivers in a significant role in caring for the infant. They suggest that
Aboriginal parenting is often characterized by shared parenting and selective
parenting. They further note the importance that Western culture, and at-
tachment theory, place on the parent-child relationship is not relevant for
Aboriginal culture, which is based on a broad definition of family that could
involve extended family, clan, and community, all of whom share responsi-
bility for caring and nurturing the child. As a result, the bond between the
child and the parent and other caregivers in Aboriginal culture is multi-lay-
ered rather than dyadic, and creates a dense network of relationships.
A distinction sometimes made between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal
parents is that Aboriginal parents tend to be less hurried parents, to observe
their child rather than participate, and to prefer child initiated learning (Le-
tourneau et al., 2005). The communication patterns include prolonged pe-
riods of silence and non-directive communication. Aboriginal parents be-
lieve that their role is not to shape and create behavior, but rather to provide
a context for its expression. As such, children are allowed to make many de-
cisions and are free to explore their own environment. Hamilton and Sin-
clair (1991) state that in comparison to Canadian mainstream parenting
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 101

practices, Aboriginal values and parenting practices would be wrongly in-

terpreted as passive, permissive, and lacking control of children’s behavior.

Socio-economics
In a recent study that compared Canadian Aboriginal parent-child inter-
actions and Canadian non-Aboriginal parent-child interactions within low
income families, Letourneau et al. (2005) found that parent-child interac-
tion scores did not differ between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal families.
While Aboriginal parents were less verbal with their children and used
fewer instances of praise and encouragement in teaching, the overall qual-
ity of their interactions with their children did not differ from that of non-
Aboriginal parents. An important finding of this study is that both groups
of parents scored low (i.e., below the 10th percentile) on the Nursing Child
Assessment Teaching Scales and had what were considered to be “worri-
some scores.” The researchers suggest that the low scores by both groups
were more likely related to low socio-economic status than to ethnicity.
That is, poverty may have as much impact on the nature of the parent-child
relationship as does culture. We know that 52 percent of Aboriginal chil-
dren in Canada live in poverty and that children in poverty have more than
twice as many physical, social, and emotional health disabilities than chil-
dren who do not live in poverty (Letourneau et al., 2005; Dumont-Smith,
1995). Haight et al. (2003, p. 201) suggest that factors related to socio-eco-
nomic stress, such as lack of food and housing, and living in violent com-
munities may “over-ride maternal sensitivity” to their children. They further
suggest that sometimes a parent’s insecure attachment with a child living in
these conditions is adaptive and provides the child with the vigilance he or
she may need to survive in a violent community.

Separation and Loss

It is important to consider the context of separation and loss when we are
observing interactions between parents and children. The impact of in-
volvement with child welfare and out-of-home placements often results in
multiple losses and sometimes trauma for the children. James (1994) sug-
gests that because children experience their primary attachment figure as
necessary for survival, the loss of this person “represents a loss of everything
to a child—loss of love, safety, protection, even life itself”(pg 7). These sep-
arations are painful, and behavior that on the surface looks like rejection,
may be indicative of multiple experiences of loss.
In her work with Native Americans, Brave Heart and Wakiksuypi (2000) dis-
cusses that one of the outcomes of historical trauma is “historical unresolved
grief.” She suggests that this complicated bereavement may be passed down
102 Chapter 8

through generations of children carrying on the legacy of pain. This contention

is supported by research that suggests that attachment patterns tend to be per-
petuated across generations (Benoit, 2002a; Zeanah, Danis, Hirshberg, Benoit,
Miller, and Heller, 1999; Fonagy, Steele, and Steele, 1991).

Trauma and Attachment

Increasingly researchers are focusing on the connection between trauma
and attachment (Busch and Lieberman, 2007; Perry, 2001). There is evi-
dence that trauma impacts on the attachment relationship (Kaufman and
Henrich, 2000), and the quality of the attachment relationship influences a
child’s ability to recover from traumatic experiences (Busch and Lieberman,
2007; James, 1994). A child who has a secure attachment relationship is
more likely to trust that adults will be available to him or her in a time of
need, and seek out assistance. Conversely, a child with an insecure attach-
ment may lack the inner resources and emotional support to cope with the
trauma, and therefore is more vulnerable to the impact of trauma (Belsky
and Fearon, 2002). The link between attachment and trauma is further il-
lustrated in the case of domestic violence (Busch and Lieberman, 2007).
Domestic violence is a strong risk factor for disorganized attachment
(Zeanah, Danis, Hirshberg, Benoit, Miller, and Heller, 1999). Based on at-
tachment theory, Busch and Lieberman (2007) hypothesize that witnessing
domestic violence shatters the child’s trust that the parent will not physi-
cally hurt them and will protect them. Further, a child who sees their care-
giver hurt or injured may be overwhelmingly terrified, and that fear may
then disorganize the attachment relationship.
The connection of trauma and attachment is an important consideration
in our clinical work with Aboriginal people. Benoit (2002b) indicates that
the most significant factors predicting the development of a disorganized
attachment pattern are family violence, unresolved mourning, and unre-
solved trauma. Unfortunately, historical circumstances suggest these experi-
ences are all too common for many Aboriginal people, and have been for
the last several generations. The experience of traumatic events can impact
on a parent’s ability to recognize or respond adequately to their child’s
needs, or on a child’s ability to express needs or respond to the adult (Lev-
endosky and Graham-Berman, 1998; Radke-Yarrow et al., 1994; Slade,
2007; Spacarelli et al., 1994).

THERAPLAY AND ABORIGINAL FAMILIES

There are several factors that give credence to Theraplay as an appropriate

intervention with Aboriginal families. First, Aboriginal culture values a cir-
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 103

cular, rather than a linear, approach to life (Bopp et al., 1985). According to
Manery (2000) the ebb and flow of reciprocity between the parent and
child in Theraplay is a nonlinear process. Second, Theraplay focuses on fa-
cilitating attunement between parents and children, and attunement is uni-
versal regardless of culture (Hall, 1976). Third, Theraplay is play-based and
does not involve processing trauma. Benoit (2002b) suggests that when
there are attachment difficulties, children cannot wait for their parent to
process trauma. Theraplay works in the here and now and is experiential in
nature, allowing for shifts in the parent-child relationship without resolu-
tion of trauma (although trauma resolution might be recommended fol-
lowing Theraplay therapy). Provided therapists are sensitive to cultural and
historical factors, Theraplay can be a respectful intervention to assist Abo-
riginal parents to develop healthier interaction patterns with their children.

MICHELLE AND TYLER: A CASE STUDY

Family History

Michelle, a 26-year-old single Aboriginal mother of three boys (8, 6, and 4

years old), was referred for treatment by her child welfare worker. Each of
her children had a different father, none of whom were involved with the
children.
Michelle’s childhood involved frequent moves back and forth between
the city and her First Nations Community. She was the oldest of five chil-
dren. Her mother was alcoholic. Her father also drank and was abusive to
her mother. Michelle and her siblings witnessed family violence and drink-
ing parties, and she and her younger sister were sexually abused by an ex-
tended family member. Michelle was often left to care for her siblings.
Michelle and her siblings were apprehended when Michelle was 12 years
old. The children were placed in different foster homes and saw each other
infrequently. Over the years Michelle was moved to about six different fos-
ter homes and group homes, and she lost contact with her family. When she
was 18 years old she found her parents. They were still drinking and were
not able to be a support to her, and in fact demanded money from her. For
some Aboriginal people, there are cultural expectations regarding helping
others and sharing that can place large demands on their time and financial
resources.
Michelle became involved with the father of her first child when she was
18 years old. He became abusive to her after the birth of their son, and left
her when the baby was less than a year old. Her subsequent relationships
with men also were abusive. At the age of 19 she was diagnosed with Bipo-
lar Disorder and had been taking medication on and off since then.
104 Chapter 8

Michelle reports that she did some heavy drinking after the father of her
four-year-old left her, but stopped when a child welfare agency threatened
to apprehend her children. She started attending a community agency for
Aboriginal women and children and she and her children participated in
their healing circles. This agency referred Michelle and her son specifically
for Theraplay.

Presenting Problem

Michelle’s middle child, Tyler, was having difficulties at school (i.e., poor at-
tendance, not listening to the teacher, non-attentive, poor social skills, and
aggressive with peers).
Michelle reported having little control over her children at home. She in-
dicated that they did not listen to her. They refused to go to bed when told,
there was a high level of aggression between the children, they were de-
structive and left the house without permission (i.e., left the house through
an upstairs window and on one occasion were brought home by the police
at midnight). Staff in the Aboriginal agency who had referred the family for
Theraplay described Tyler as a little boy “who did not know where his belly
button was,” suggesting he had difficulty being grounded in the moment,
seemed disconnected from relationships (peer or adult), and would move
from task to task quickly with little affect or interest.

Assessment

On intake Michelle presented with symptoms of depression. She spoke with

little affect, reported that she slept a lot, but often felt tired and lethargic. She
talked about the violence she experienced from her partners. The stories
were short, but demonstrated the magnitude of the trauma. She had an un-
derstanding of the impact of the traumatic events on her children, and on
her own depression.
Aboriginal parenting practices have implications for how we interpret the
parent and child interaction observed in a Marschak Interaction Method
(MIM) assessment (Jernberg, Booth, Koller, and Allert, 1991). In the MIM
Michelle presented as tired, uninterested, and perhaps dissociative. Mothers
who are depressed often demonstrate anxiety, sadness, irritability, and a
sense of helplessness that can lead to being self-absorbed and emotionally
unavailable to their children (Radke-Yarrow, Zahn-Waxler, Richardson, Sus-
man, and Martinez, 1994; Maughan, Cicchetti, Toth, and Rogosch, 2007).
Tyler attempted to take charge and engage his mother in activities, but she
seemed to simply be going through the motions rather than enjoying the in-
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 105

teraction with him. Tyler began to escalate and run around the room.
Michelle made some ineffectual attempts to get him to sit down.
The research relating to Aborginal parenting suggests that Aboriginal par-
ents are more likely to observe their children rather than to lead, and that
this may appear, according to Western standards, to be passive parenting
(Hamilton and Sinclair, 1991). However, Tyler’s behavior suggested that his
mother’s response made him uncomfortable and anxious. While Michelle
appeared to be observing Tyler, she did not respond to his attempts to in-
volve her and he clearly did not feel that she was present or able to respond
to his needs.
In the nurturing activities it was observed that Tyler was comfortable be-
ing nurtured by his mother, but Michelle rushed through these activities and
was task oriented.
An important consideration following the assessment is to determine
what approach would work best for a family. Given that Aboriginal parents
are often quiet observers and guides for their children’s exploration and
learning, it is important that the therapist be sensitive to this parenting style.

Theraplay

Based on the assessment information, the goals of intervention were to en-

hance Michelle’s ability to engage in playful activities with Tyler, to provide
him with more structure and guidance, and to be more attuned to his need
for nurture (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).

Engagement
Two key factors were taken into consideration in our attempt to address
this goal. First, the idea of engagement for Aboriginal parents may be some-
what less intrusive and include observation and curiosity, rather than ver-
balizations of praise and heightened energy. Second, Michelle’s symptoms
of depression and dissociation relating to her history of trauma necessitated
that we proceed slowly and assist her to be more effectively attuned to
Tyler’s need for stimulation and attention.
Intervention involved helping Michelle to understand that Tyler was not
an inherently difficult child, but rather that he was attempting through his
behavior to have her respond to his needs. Over time, Michelle was able to
find her own way of engaging Tyler, one that was gentle and encouraging.
Booth (2005, p. 35) indicates that the “emphasis on attunement to the
child’s feelings and emotional needs has shifted our focus from the playful
activities themselves to a focus on reading the child’s responses.”
106 Chapter 8

Nurture
Discussion with Michelle about her own childhood indicated that she
had been forced to be independent at a young age, and had received little
nurture from her own parents. She said that her mother grew up in a resi-
dential school, and was unlikely to have experienced nurturing. Miller
(1997b, p. 423) states, “Overwork, harsh punishment, and abuse were
merely the tip of the iceberg of inadequate care that included poor food,
lack of nurturing, shoddy clothes and cold formality.” Michelle acknowl-
edged her discomfort with nurturing, and she wanted to change this legacy
for her children.
In Theraplay, Tyler presented as being worried about his mother, and it
was difficult for him to relax and accept nurturing from her. However, with
gentle reminders that his mother was able to care for him, and therapists’
support for Michelle to be persistent in her attempts to nurture him, he grad-
ually became more accepting of the nurturing she offered. This coincided
with noticeable decreases in Tyler’s level of anxiety.

Structure
There is evidence that in traditional Aboriginal communities, parenting
took the form of shared parenting and children often had multiple care-
givers. This form of parenting does not require that a parent be solely re-
sponsible for supervising and guiding their children, but rather these tasks
are shared by all the caregivers of a given child (Neckoway et al., 2007).
However, colonization has left communities with widespread family vio-
lence and abuse, and consequently without a healthy infrastructure to sup-
port this cultural approach to shared parenting (Lane et al., 2003). As a re-
sult, Aboriginal parents today need to be supported to learn a different
approach to parenting that will ensure the safety and healthy development
of their children.
One of the primary concerns of the referring agency was that Michelle
struggled in her attempts to supervise her children. This concern related to
the lack of supervision in the home, as well as in the community. Inade-
quate supervision had sometimes placed Michelle’s children at risk. Part of
the intervention included modeling for Michelle strategies for setting
boundaries for the children, and when they tested the boundaries, to use
distraction, engagement, reminders about the rules, and praise for positive
behavior. When these strategies were not effective, she was encouraged to
use more directive strategies, such as holding them on her lap or taking
away of a toy.
It was particularly helpful for Michelle to learn about the ebb and flow of
Tyler’s energy and excitement level. Video tapes of sessions were reviewed
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 107

with Michelle to help her to understand that when Tyler became excited and
active, she could guide him by first matching his level of excitement, then
bringing the activity level down, thereby assisting Tyler to learn to calm him-
self and improve his ability to self-regulate. Makela (2003) suggests that this
interaction represents a resonant hum of emotions which provides a cor-
rective experience that supports the child’s ability to regulate, and enhances
the quality of the parent-child relationship.

Challenge
Tyler presented as an anxious child who tended to avoid taking risks
within Theraplay. New activities and activities that were more challenging
intimidated him and he sometimes refused to participate or his problematic
behaviors escalated. Intervention involved assisting Michelle to understand
Tyler’s reaction, and that it was rooted in his fears and anxiety. Within Ther-
aplay sessions the therapists reduced the element of surprise, and increased
predictability by repeating activities and ensuring he was successful when
he did take risks. Michelle also reported that she now understood Tyler’s be-
havior as rooted in the violence he witnessed and his insecurity about her
safety and ability to care for him, and she was able to develop strategies to
help him to feel more secure during times he was separated from her. While
some improvement in his ability to take risks was noted, overall this con-
tinued to be difficult for him.
As we were ending Theraplay, Michelle said she had gained confidence
in her ability to have a healthy, enjoyable relationship with her son. She rec-
ognized that her depression was directly related to her trauma experiences
and in consultation with her doctor stopped taking medication related to the
bi-polar diagnosis. She continued to struggle with depression, and there
were still times when she struggled to meet Tyler’s physical and emotional
needs. However, overall she was more awake and attuned to his unique
spirit. He was now able to attend for longer periods, seemed to experience
more “now moments” in his relationship with his mother, and, as per the re-
ferring agency, demonstrated an ability to form reciprocal relationships.
These changes suggested that he had “found his belly button.”

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This paper has highlighted the importance of working within a framework

that takes into consideration the interplay between culture, trauma, and at-
tachment and has suggested some necessary modifications when using
Theraplay with Aboriginal people. Theraplay can be an effective and re-
spectful intervention to enhance attachment and assist Aboriginal parents
108 Chapter 8

to have health-promoting interactions with their children. However, it is es-

sential that clinicians working with this population have a thorough un-
derstanding of the historical context of colonization and its impact on Abo-
riginal families, as well as knowledge of Aboriginal parenting practices.
Perhaps the most significant adaptation required is in relation to the inter-
pretation of parent and child interaction and our expectations of parents. It
is crucial to be mindful of assumptions about healthy parenting practices
and attachment that may be based on a Western perspective. It is the multi-
layered lens of culture, trauma, and attachment that will assist Theraplay to
remain a vital and evolving intervention that supports Aboriginal families.

AGENDAS: MICHELLE AND TYLER (6 YEARS OLD)

First Session
Opening song
Inventory. Check to see what the child brought with them, such as a smile,
warm or cold fingers or toes, bright eyes, curly hair, Superman t-shirt; count
fingers and toes.
Measuring. Using a measuring tape, measure the child’s height, length of
arms, legs, feet, hands, and so forth. Also measure surprising things, such as
the child’s smile, muscles, length of ears, and how high he can jump. You
can write down the measurements and keep them for later comparisons.
Balloon tennis. Hit a balloon back and forth, trying to keep it in the air.
You can make this more challenging by seeing if you can hit it back and
forth a specified number of times, increasing the number on further trials if
you are successful.
Balloon between two bodies. Hold a balloon between you and the child
(such as between hips, legs, foreheads, elbows) and move across the room
without dropping or popping the balloon. You can make this more chal-
lenging by returning to your start position by going backwards.
The Grand Ol’ Duke of York. Hold hands standing in a circle:

The Grand Ol’ Duke of York.

He had ten thousand men.
(As you sing this, walk in a circle.)
He marched them up to the top of the hill,
(Holding hands, everyone walks toward the center of the circle, moving your
hands up in the air.)
And he marched them down again.
(Everyone steps back and lowers their arms.)
And when they were up they were up,
(Everyone moves back to the center of the circle and raises their arms.)
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 109

And when they were down they were down.

(Everyone steps back and lowers their arms.)
And when they were only half way up, they were neither up nor down.
(Everyone raises their arms half up, then fully up, then fully down.)
He marched them to the left.(Everyone moves to the left.)
He marched them to the right. (Everyone moves to the right.)
He marched them all around the town, and he marched them out of sight.
(Let go of each others hands and turn around. Clap at the end.)

Push me over, pull me up. Sit on the floor in front of the child. Place the
child’s palms against yours. On a signal, such as a word or eye blink, have
the child push you over. Fall back in an exaggerated way. Stretch out your
hands so that the child can pull you back up.
Foil prints. Using aluminum foil, shape a piece of foil around the child’s
elbow, hand, foot, face, ear, and so forth. It helps to place a pillow under
the foil and have the child press her hand or foot into the soft surface to get
impressions of the fingers and toes.
Caring for hurts. Check the child’s hands, arms, legs, feet, and so forth for
scratches, bruises, “hurts,” or “boo-boos.” Apply lotion or salve to or
around each hurt. Ask the child if they have any more hurts. Check for heal-
ing in the next session.
Feeding. Have a small snack and drink available. Have the child sitting
comfortably against pillows, facing you, or take the child on your lap. Feed
the child, listening for crunches, noticing whether the child likes the snack
and when the child is ready for more. Encourage eye contact.
Closing song

Middle Session Agenda

Opening song
Inventory
Measuring
Peanut butter and jelly. Say “peanut butter” and have child say “jelly” in
just the same way. Repeat five to ten times, varying loudness and intona-
tion. For young children it might work better to have them repeat say
“peanut butter” back to you.
Hokey Pokey. Sing and act out the motions:
You put your (right hand in),
You take your (right hand out),
You put your (right hand in),
And you shake it all about.
You do the hokey (Action: shake your hands in the air)
And you turn yourself about (Action: turn around)
That’s what it’s all about. (Action: clap hands).
110 Chapter 8

Repeat with different body parts, such as foot, head, butt, whole self.
Pop the bubbles. Blow a bubble and have the child pop it with a particular
body part, such as finger, elbow, toe, or by clapping.
Mountain of bubbles. Use a large plastic bowl or basin. Fill the bowl about
two-thirds full with water. Add several squirts of dish soap. Give each par-
ticipant a straw. On a signal challenge them to make a “mountain of bub-
bles.” They can also “blow the mountain down” after by gently blowing air
at the suds.
Zoom-erk. Sitting in a circle, the word “zoom” is passed around the circle
quickly. When one person stops the action by saying “erk,” the “zoom” re-
verses and is sent back the way it came.
Shaving. Sit the child on a stool or chair facing a mirror. Pretend you are
a barber and are giving the child his first shave. Place a towel around the
child’s shoulders. Apply shaving cream to the child’s cheeks and chin and
pretend to shave it off with a popsicle stick. At the end, admire the smooth-
ness of the child’s face.
Straw Wars. Use milk shake straws and Q tips. Give each participant one
straw and several Q tips. You “load the straw” by inserting the Q tip in the
end closest to the mouth. Give a signal for everyone to shoot the Q tip
across the room. You can make it more interesting by challenging them to
hit a target, such as a door or mirror. (This activity was invented by Jennifer
Curtis, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.)
Blanket swing. Spread a blanket on the floor and have the child lie down
in the middle. The adults gather up the corners and gently swing the child
while singing a song. Position the parents so they can see the child’s face. At
the end, bring him down gently. (We then direct the parent to sit down so
they are comfortable. The therapists wrap the child in the blanket and swing
the child into his mother’s arms.)
Ring pop and lullaby. Parent feeds the child a ring pop (candy sucker
shaped like an infant’s soother) while singing a lullaby.
Closing song

End Agenda (second last session)

Opening song
Inventory
Measuring with fruit tape. Use Fruit by the Foot to measure parts of the
child’s body. As you measure, tear off the fruit tape and feed it to the
child.
Free throw. Divide into two teams (the child and parent are always a
team). Using masking tape, make a line on the floor and have each team
facing each other across the line. Place small piles of cotton balls on each
side of the line. When you give the “go” signal, each team throws the balls
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 111

at the other team, trying to get rid of all the balls on their side. When you
give the “stop” signal, direct players to freeze in position.
Musical pillows. Have each participant sit on a pillow in a circle. As the
music plays (or you sing a song) everyone stands up and walks around the
circle. When the music stops, everyone stands on a pillow. Remove one pil-
low each time you stop. Inform participants that there can be more than
one person on a pillow. At the end there is one pillow and everyone must
try to stand on it for a group hug.
Head and Shoulders, Knees and Toes. Sing this song while pointing to the
body parts while you name them:
Head and shoulders, knees and toes
Knees and toes, knees and toes.
Head and shoulders, knees and toes
Knees and toes, knees and toes,
Eyes, ears, mouth and nose.
Head and shoulders, knees and toes
Knees and toes, knees and toes.

Hide notes. Write questions about the child on small pieces of paper. Ex-
amples of questions are: “What is your child’s favorite color,” “What is your
child’s favorite food,” “What is your child’s favorite movie/tv show/book.”
Lay the child down on his back on pillows. Ask the parent to hide his or her
eyes. Hide the notes on the child and direct the parent to find them and an-
swer the questions as they find the notes.
Soft and floppy. Have the child lie on the floor and help him get “all soft
and floppy,” like spaghetti. Gently juggle each arm and leg and let it flop
to the floor. If the child has difficulty getting floppy, have him get “stiff like
a board” and then let go. Once the child is relaxed, ask him to wiggle just
one part of his body, such as his tongue, big toe, baby finger, and so forth.
Pass a silly face. Everyone sits in a circle. The first person makes a funny
face and “passes” it to the person sitting next to them, who passes it to the
next person, and so on until it comes back to the first person. Participants
can take turns starting off and passing the funny face.
Blanket swing. Spread a blanket on the floor and have the child lie down
in the middle. The adults gather up the corners and gently swing the child
while singing a song. Position the parents so they can see the child’s face. At
the end, bring him down gently. (We then direct the parent to sit down so
they are comfortable. The therapists wrap the child in the blanket and swing
the child into his mother’s arms.)
Ring pop and lullaby. Parent feeds the child a ring pop (candy sucker
shaped like an infant’s soother) while singing a lullaby.
Plan closing session. Ask the child and his parent to name their favorite ac-
tivities and choose party food for the last session.
Closing song
112 Chapter 8

REFERENCES

Ainsworth, M., M. C. Blehar, E. Waters, and S. Wall. (1978) Patterns of Attachment.

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaun Associates
Belsky, J. R., and M. P. Fearon. (2002) “Infant-Mother Attachment Security, Contex-
tual Risk, and Early Development: A Moderational Analysis.” Development and Psy-
chopathology, vol. 14, 293–310.
Benoit, Diane. (2002a) “Transmission of Attachment Across Three Generations.” At-
tachment. Contributions to Infant Mental Health, special issue (January 2002a): 16–17.
Benoit, Diane. (2002b) “The Importance of Nurturing Babies.” Conference in Win-
nipeg, Canada, March 11–13.
Booth, P. (2005) “Current Theraplay Best Practice: Focussing on Attunement and
Regulation in Play.” The Theraplay Institute Newsletter (June).
Bopp, J., M. Bopp, L. Brown, and D. Lane. (1985) The Sacred Tree. Alberta: Four
Worlds Development Press
Bowlby, J. (1969) “Attachment and Loss.” Attachment, vol.1. New York: Basic Books.
Brave Heart, M., and Y. H. Wakiksuypi. (2000) “Carrying the Historical Trauma of
the Lakota.” In Disaster and Traumatic Stress Research and Intervention, ed. M. J. Za-
kour, pp. 245–266. New Orleans, LA: Tulane University, School of Social Work.
Bruce, L. (1998). “A Culturally Sensitive Approach to Working with Aboriginal
Women.” Manitoba Social Worker, vol. 30, no. 2, (Summer): 7–10.
Busch, A., and A. Lieberman. (2007) “Attachment and Trauma: An Integrated Ap-
proach to Treating Young Children Exposed to Family Violence.” In Attachment
Theory in Clinical Work with Children. Bridging the Gap Between Research and Prac-
tice, eds. David Oppenheim and Douglas F. Goldsmith, pp. 139–171. New York:
The Guilford Press.
Dumont-Smith, C. (1995) “Aboriginal Canadian Children Who Witness and Live
with Violence.” In Ending the Cycle of Violence, ed. E. Peled, P. Jaffe, and J. Edelson,
pp. 275–283. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
English-Currie, V. (1990) “Vickie English-Currie.” In Writing the Circle, ed. J. Perrault
and S. Vance, pp. 47–60. Alberta: NeWest Publishers Ltd.
Fonagy, P., H. Steele, and M. Steele. (1991) “Maternal Representations of Attach-
ment During Pregnancy Predict the Organization of Infant-Mother Attachment at
One Year of Age.” Child Development, vol. 62, 891–905.
Green, H. (1997) “May I Walk in Beauty.” Guidance and Counselling, vol.12, 22–27.
Haig-Brown. (1998) “Warrior Mothers.” Journal for Just and Caring Education, vol. 4,
no. 1, 96–109.
Haight, W. L., J. D. Kagle, and J. E. Black. (April 2003) “Understanding and Sup-
porting Parent-Child Relationships During Foster Care Visits: Attachment Theory
and Research.” Social Work, vol. 48, no. 2, 195–207.
Hall, E. T. (1976) Beyond Culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday,
Hamilton, A. C., and C. M. Sinclair. (1991) Report of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry of
Manitoba: The Justice System and Aboriginal People.
Heritage Community Foundation. (Nov. 5, 2007). Residential Schools: The Back-
ground. 2002. www.albertasource.ca/treaty8/eng/1899_and_After/Implications
_and_Contentions/residential_schools.html.
Hughs, A. (1999) “Disturbing Revelations.” New Internationalist, vol. 309, 6–8.
 Theraplay and Aboriginal Peoples 113

James, B. (1994) Handbook for Treatment of Attachment-Trauma Problems in Children.

New York: The Free Press.
Jernberg, A., and P. Booth. (1999). Theraplay. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Jernberg, A., P. Booth, T. Koller, and A. Allert. (1991) Manual for the Administration
and the Clinical Interpretation of the Marschak Interaction Method (MIM) Preschool
and School Age. Chicago, IL: The Theraplay Institute.
Kaufman, J., and C. Henrich. (2000) “Exposure to Violence and Early Childhood
Trauma.” In Handbook of Infant Mental Health, ed. C. H. Zeanah, pp. 195–208.
New York: Guilford Press.
Lane, Phil, Jr., J. Bopp, and M. Bopp. (2003) Aboriginal Domestic Violence in Canada.
Ottawa, Canada: Aboriginal Healing Foundation.
Letourneau, N. L., K. M. Hungler, and K. Fisher. (2005) “Low-income Canadian
Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Parent-child Interactions.” Child: Care, Health and
Development, vol. 31, no. 5, 545–554.
Levendosky, A., and S. Graham-Berman. (1998) “The Moderating Effects of Parent-
ing Stress on Children’s Adjustment in Woman-Abusing Families.” Journal of Fam-
ily Violence, vol. 13, no. 3, 383–397.
Makela, Jukka. (2003). “What Makes Theraplay Effective: Insights from Develop-
mental Sciences.” The Theraplay Institute Newsletter (Fall/Winter).
Manery, G. (2000) “Dual Family Therapy with Withdrawn Children in a Cross-Cul-
tural Context.” In Theraplay: Innovations in Attachment-Enhancing Play Therapy, ed.
Evangeline Munns, pp. 151–194. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson Inc.
Manitoba Family Services and Housing. (2005–2006) Annual Report.
Maughan, A., D. Cicchetti, S. L. Toth, and F. A. Rogosch. (2007) “Early-occurring Ma-
ternal Depression and Maternal Negativity in Predicting Young Children’s Emo-
tion Regulation and Socioemotional Difficulties.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psy-
chology, vol. 35, no. 5 (Oct 2007), 685–703.
McKenzie, B., and P. Hudson. (1985) “Native Children, Child Welfare, and the Col-
onization of Native People.” In The Challenge of Child Welfare, eds. K. Levitt and
B. Wharf, pp. 125–141. Vancouver, Canada: University of British Columbia.
Miller, J. R. (1997b) “Shinwauk’s Vision/Aboriginal Nightmare: An Assessment.” In
Shinwauk’s Vision: A History of Native Residential Schools, ed. J. R. Miller, pp.
406–438. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press,
Neckoway, Raymond, K. Brownlee, and B. Castellan. (2007) “Is Attachment Theory
Consistent with Aboriginal Parenting Realities.” First Peoples Child & Family Re-
view, vol. 3, no. 2, 65–74.
O’Hara, J., and P. Treble (2000) “Abuse of Trust.” McLean’s, vol. 113, no. 26, 16–22.
Perry, B. (2001) “Bonding and Attachment in Maltreated Children.” The Child
Trauma Academy. www.ChildTrauma.org.html. (5 Nov., 2007).
Radke-Yarrow, M., C. Zahn-Waxler, D. Richardson, A. Susman, and P. Martinez.
(1994) “Caring Behaviour in Children of Clinically Depressed and Well Moth-
ers.” Child Development, vol. 65, 1405–1414.
Ross, R. (1992) Dancing with a Ghost. Markham, Ontario: Webcom Ltd.
Slade, A. (2007) “Disorganized Mother, Disorganized Child: The Mentalization of
Affective Dysregulation and Therapeutic Change.” In Attachment Theory in Clinical
Work with Children. Bridging the Gap between Research and Practice, ed. David Op-
penheim and Douglas F. Goldsmith, pp. 226–250. New York: The Guilford Press.
114 Chapter 8

Spaccarelli, S., N. Sandler, and M. Roosa. (1994) “History of Spouse Violence

Against Mother: Correlated Risks and Unique Effects in Child Mental Health.”
Journal of Family Violence, vol. 9, no. 1, 79–99.
York, G. (1990) From Manitoba to Massachusetts: The Dispossessed. Life and Death in
Native Canada. London, England: Vintage, United Kingdom Publishers.
Zeanah, C. H., D. Benoit, M. Barton, C. Regan, L. M. Hirshberg, and P. Lipsitt.
(1993) “Representations of Attachment in Mothers and Their One-Year-Old In-
fants.” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 32,
278–286.
Zeanah, C. H., B. Danis, L. Hirshberg, D. Benoit, D. Miller, and S. S. Heller. (1999)
“Disorganized Attachment Associated with Partner Violence: A Research Note.”
Infant Mental Health Journal, v. 20, 77–86.
9
Theraplay for Chinese Children
Angela Siu

Cultural sensitivity has always been acknowledged in therapeutic work. The

greater the extent to which a therapist knows the meaning of a child’s cul-
ture, the better the therapist’s ability to achieve cross-cultural identification
(Glover, 2001). When applying Western approaches in working with Chi-
nese clients, caution must be taken since Western psychology and values
might be rather different from those held by the Chinese people. As Bond
(1991) put it, the psychotherapeutic process as practiced in the West is ver-
bal, focused on the self and on the disclosure of personal information,
change oriented, and non-directive. This may not be compatible with Chi-
nese culture as Chinese people are less willing to disclose personal prob-
lems. Hence, efforts need to be devoted to selecting and modifying differ-
ent Western therapeutic approaches to best serve clients from the Chinese
culture. The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate the potential of Theraplay®
in working with Chinese children. Modifications of Theraplay activities,
aiming at enhancing its effectiveness for working with Chinese children and
their families, are discussed.

CHINESE CULTURE AND THERAPLAY

In a review of counseling with the Chinese population, Leong (1986) high-

lights that Chinese clients tend to have less tolerance for ambiguity, and
prefer structured counseling sessions with practical, concrete, and immedi-
ate solutions to their problems. Different counseling approaches are mak-
ing adaptations to meet the needs of Chinese people. The following is a dis-
cussion on some of the characteristics of Chinese people and how

115
116 Chapter 9

Theraplay can address those characteristics as an intervention approach for

Chinese children and their families.

Relationships with People

Interpersonal harmony is an important characteristic of Chinese com-
munication. Emotional restraint and indirect communication as opposed
to confrontation are often preferred (Huang, 1994; Smith and Wang,
1996). Chinese people are more reluctant to express themselves verbally or
emotionally. They see family problems as “secrets” and one will make the
family lose face if family problems are brought up to a third party for help.
As Theraplay is an action-based type of therapy and its focus is more on ac-
tivities versus talk, Chinese people may find this approach less “intrusive.”
In addition, the collectivist cultural values of the Chinese coincide with
Theraplay’s core element on attachment and interdependence. To the Chi-
nese, the nuclear family, as well as the extended family, is often valued more
highly (Homma-True, 1990). In Theraplay, the core element is to enhance
relationships among different family members (Jernberg, 1979).

Warmth
Most of the Chinese families nowadays are dual earners’ families. Babies
experience a lot of parental warmth, including physical affection, in the
family when they are born. However, very soon after that, babies are moved
from their parents to other caregivers (probably nannies) in the family or
in the day care center where it’s likely that there is a strong demand for obe-
dience, control, and restraints, rather than affectionate cuddling. The so-
called parental warmth has changed its component. Some research (e.g.,
Patrick, Synder, Schrepferman, and Synder, 2005; Siu, in press) suggested
that parental warmth maybe an important factor relating to the develop-
ment of children’s behavior problems in later life. As Theraplay activities in-
clude a lot of positive physical contact, such as cradling and touching, this
may provide children with one of the important factors in creating a sense
of security that is needed as a protective factor for their psychological de-
velopment.

Control
For Chinese children, control of movement is exercised physically all
along their childhood years. Due to parents’ beliefs that young children
might get hurt if they are allowed to move around freely, babies are com-
monly put in physically restricted areas and preschoolers are often discour-
aged from exploring and manipulating their accessible environment. Apart
 Theraplay for Chinese Children 117

from physical restriction, Chinese children are also taught to restrict them-
selves verbally, especially outside the family circle. As suggested by Ho,
Spinks, and Yeung (1989), Chinese infants are less vocal, less active, and
more apprehensive in social and separation situations; they are quieter, stay
closer to the mother, and play less when they are with unfamiliar children.
For the “control” of expression, Chinese parents discourage fights among
their children by putting pressure on the older children to concede to their
younger siblings, and demonstrating what’s called “responsibility of the
senior.” Children’s problematic behavior might stem partly from these
kinds of “restrictions” and suppression from parents. The freedom of liter-
ally moving around as well as the freedom to “be themselves” can be ad-
dressed in the various components of Theraplay activities.

Emphasis on Achievements
Chinese parents, in general, place high pressure on academic achieve-
ment for their children and put socio-emotional development as a second-
ary concern. There is strong pressure for obtaining a high academic per-
formance and more pressure to work hard. Achievement is seen as the
benefit of a group rather than the individual (Yang, 1988). This kind of
pressure may lead to problems for children, including constant self-criti-
cism as well as lowered self-esteem, even if they attain relatively high levels
of success, and shame and alienation if they fail to achieve as expected
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Some parents, may interpret their children’s aca-
demic failure, especially in homework, as their failure in parenting. Issues
on school achievement are often a common source of problems leading to
poor parent-child relationships. Theraplay provides a means for parents
and children to put school work aside and be “playful” and have fun to-
gether. In Theraplay, especially in nurturing activities, children are uncon-
ditionally accepted and are made to feel valued and loved. This is impor-
tant for building up a child’s self-esteem. When he/she feels accepted just
for being who he/she is, the sense of self is less dependent on achievements.

MODIFICATIONS OF THERAPLAY FOR CHINESE CHILDREN

Theraplay focuses on fostering healthy attachment, relationships, and trust.

The main emphasis is on playful, physical interactions between, first, the
therapist and the child while the parents observe, and later, parents partici-
pate directly with their child under the guidance of the therapist. There is a
strong focus on the positive attributes of both child and parent so the ther-
apy sessions are very rewarding and self-esteem building. The therapist con-
veys feelings of unconditional acceptance to the child and helps the child
118 Chapter 9

to view himself/herself as worthy and important. Parents are guided not

only to see and accept their child in a new, positive light, but also to be at-
tuned and responsive to their child’s needs. Although these Theraplay char-
acteristics are seen as universal across cultures, some techniques and proce-
dures have to be modified to better meet the needs and characteristics of
Chinese families (Manery, 2000). The following is a list of issues that the
writer has adapted while practicing Theraplay in Hong Kong.

Building a Cooperative Working Relationship

Many parents are eager to look for “instant” methods to help their chil-
dren deal with their problems in a direct way. Frequently, children’s pre-
senting problems are related to school and achievements. Theraplay, to
these parents, may look irrelevant to the context of the problem(s) and
seems to take up a long time to “note” the progress relevant to their chil-
dren’s difficulties. Hence, the therapist needs to be patient with the parents,
be attentive to nonverbal cues and gestures from them and be ready to in-
volve parents in the discussion for clarifying concerns and queries regard-
ing this approach. A Theraplay session, just with the parents at the begin-
ning of the intervention process, may enable parents to get a feel of what
Theraplay activities are like and may also help parents understand these ac-
tivities better. Also, more time has to be spent with parents in teasing out
the elements of Theraplay (such as playfulness and fun) in relation to chil-
dren’s problems (especially relating to academic issues).

Clarifying the Importance of Nurturing and Touching

With reference to the different elements in Theraplay, Chinese children
and parents find it easier to adapt to structuring, challenging, as well as en-
gaging activities. At times, nurturing (feeding and touching) activities are
difficult for them to accept. To the Chinese, activities like holding hands
with the child, looking into the child’s eyes are acceptable; however, activi-
ties of feeding and combing, especially of older children, are seen by both
parents and children as “babyish.” Parents need more understanding on the
rationale behind these activities before these activities can be effectively car-
ried out both during the session and at home.

Getting Fathers’ Involvement

In the Chinese culture, the father is usually seen as an authority figure in
the family. The father is the final decision maker for major issues, while the
mother is the key person looking after the children and doing most of the
parenting work. Although fathers also care about their children very much,
 Theraplay for Chinese Children 119

they usually take a less active role in parenting and are sometimes reluctant
to join in the intervention process, because of many reasons. From the au-
thor’s experience in working with families, it has been easier to have the fa-
ther come for the MIM assessment and the follow-up discussion. Session
work with mother and child are videotaped. Mothers are encouraged to
view the videotapes at home with the fathers and to discuss observations
and progress made. Some fathers eventually come at later sessions.

Modifications of Theraplay Activities

Most of the Theraplay activities can be used directly for working with
Chinese people. Games like “ three-legged walk,” “stack of hands,” and
“tangle-untangle” (Munns, 2000) are very familiar to Chinese children and
families. Songs such as “Ring around the rosy,” “Row, row, row your boat,”
“Hokey Pokey” and “This is the way the baby rides” are familiar tunes to
them as well. Other activities such as “Red light, green light,” “Mother may
I” and “Patty cake” have the traditional Chinese version for the lyrics and
hence can be well adapted for use. Names of some of the activities can be
modified to meet cultural needs. For example, “Cotton Ball Hockey” can be
renamed as “Cotton Ball Ping Pong.” The melody of a traditional song “You
are my sunshine” is used to replace “Twinkle, twinkle little star” for singing
out the special (physical) characteristics of the child.
Some of the adaptations discussed above can be illustrated in the fol-
lowing case example.

CASE STUDY:
A 7-YEAR-OLD CHILD WITH IMPULSIVE TENDENCY

Background

Felix was a grade-two student. His school performance was, in general, very
poor. His motivation to study was low and he often underachieved in aca-
demic subjects. Psychological assessments indicated that he had no major
problem in his learning abilities. Teachers described Felix as a child “who
was always on the go.” It was really hard for others to calm him down. He
did not relate well to others. He went easily into arguments when interact-
ing with his peers. He was described as having poor coping skills in han-
dling frustrating situations. In the family, Felix’s parents put strong emphasis
on his academic learning. The poorer results Felix got, the more frustrated the
parents were, as they worried that Felix would not be able to finish his school-
ing. Hence, there was a lot of tension in relating to Felix. In the daily interac-
tion, mother was very caring toward him and he enjoyed the accompaniment
120 Chapter 9

of his mother. However, when Felix had temper tantrums, mother, in trying
to stop him from anger outbursts, would often give in to his demands.
Mother was eager to explore different ways, including this Theraplay ap-
proach, to help Felix in reducing his problematic behavior.

Assessment

Felix’s problem behavior was assessed using a number of tools including the
Child Behavior Checklist—Chinese version (CBCL, Achenbach, 1991; Le-
ung, Ho, Hung, Lee, and Tang, 1998). Felix also completed a self-reported
measure on self-esteem—Culture Free Self-Esteem Inventory-III (CFSEI-III;
Battle, 2002). The results before intervention were as follows: the CBCL ex-
ternalizing score, as reported by mother, was at the borderline range (total
score = 17). He scored particularly high in items like Argues, Fights,
Screams, Temper, and Loud. The score on General Self-esteem, as measured
by the CFSEI-III, was 16. This score was at the 70th percentile when com-
pared to his peers. Upon interview, Felix complained that parents and
teachers felt that he was not good enough and that he was often “picked on
by adults.”
The relationship between Felix and his mother was assessed using the
MIM, a standardized method used in assessing adult-child interactions by
the underlying dimensions of Theraplay: structure, challenge, engagement,
and nurture (Jernberg and Booth, 1999). Overall, the dyad seemed to have
some fun together. Mother tried hard to be in charge of the session and fre-
quently gave a message to child that he had to work diligently on school-
work or else he would be left alone. Limited physical touch was noted. Fo-
cus was given to completing tasks and educating the child on the proper
ways to behave, instead of acknowledging the child’s effort in completing
the tasks. In fact, Felix needed more external support from adults to negoti-
ate tasks, because he had difficulty experiencing a calm, focused state of op-
timal arousal necessary for learning. In addition to his difficulty in “con-
necting” to his mother, he also had unmet attachment needs that were
necessary to soothe him. Finally, Felix’s difficulty in adjusting to his learn-
ing requirements was understandable as his significant others (including
parents and teachers) expected more from him than he was capable of per-
forming and handling.
It was felt that Theraplay could play a role in helping children like Felix to
increase their adaptive control of behavior. It can help children regulate their
excitement and activity level (Jernberg and Booth, 1999) and to alternate be-
tween appropriate stimulation and a state of calmness. As the child moves
his body through different activity levels, he is learning self-regulation by be-
ing in charge of his own sensory and motor experiences. Specifically for Fe-
 Theraplay for Chinese Children 121

lix, strategies in Theraplay could be applied to regulate self across situations.

(i) Structuring—offer a predictable and safe environment with clear guide-
lines; (ii) Engagement— provide optimal stimulating and exciting interactions
between the dyad; (iii) Nurturing—able to calm the child when he/she is be-
coming too excited as well as providing warmth, acceptance, and caring;
and (iv) Challenging—help the child practice self-regulation by controlling
frustration, as well as building self-confidence and self-esteem.
Felix attended 10 Theraplay sessions, 2 MIMs, and a follow-up session. Be-
low is a brief overview of different sessions at various stages of the intervention.

Selected Theraplay Sessions

Session 2
In Felix’s early Theraplay sessions, he could be distracted very easily. There
was excessive running and fidgeting throughout. He reacted very positively
to some challenging tasks such as “balancing on pillows.” He could occa-
sionally be calmed down by nurturing tasks like “lotioning” and “powder-
ing.” He seemed very interested in being powdered and would try to pre-
tend to be a “flour-man.” He reacted in a surprising manner when the
special song was sung to him. He laughed and giggled a lot. Overall, he at-
tended well to the therapist’s instructions, but needed frequent reminders.

Session 6
By the middle sessions, Felix entered the “working through” stage. He en-
joyed games like “motor boat” and was particularly excited with the accel-
eration on “going faster and faster.” The therapist helped Felix to experience
a calm and focused state before he accelerated again. He was learning to
self-regulate. He started to work well on slow movements such as “motor
boat goes so slow” and “mirroring” (i.e., copying of slow movements of the
therapist). He was experiencing a calm physiological state within an emo-
tionally calm context. Soothing activities were followed by a big hug and
some nurturing activities like feeding. Felix began to be more interactive in
the sessions and was more willing to participate and to follow instructions.

Session 10
As the sessions continued, Felix reacted better in structuring, nurturing, and en-
gaging tasks. He reacted in a more normal way and could follow instructions
better (i.e., fewer reminders needed). He particularly enjoyed the special
time together for calming down and hugs. The sessions continued to involve
parents for conducting activities that helped Felix calm down, stay focused,
122 Chapter 9

learn to modulate his emotional and physical responses, and to enjoy the
new nurturance and engagement he found with his parents. He was partic-
ularly interested in the “cotton ball blow” and the “cotton ball touch.” He
could follow rules easier and could initiate in more planned activities. His
impulsivity decreased.

Post-intervention Assessment

The MIM done in the post-intervention showed that Felix was in better con-
trol of “himself”—less running and fidgeting in the session and more coop-
eration in following mother’s instructions. Mother seemed to enjoy the
games more with Felix and she was less focused on “educating” him during
play. Although the CBCL-externalizing score (as measured by the mother)
and the self-esteem score of CFSEI (as reported by the child) did not differ
significantly between pre- and post-intervention, qualitative feedback from
both mother and child reported that they enjoyed each other and there were
many gains. The element of affectionate nurturing (e.g., spontaneous touch-
ing, hugging between mother and child) was noted throughout the post-as-
sessment. Mother was observed to be more relaxed when being with Felix.
She became more confident in her ability to “manage” Felix’s situation de-
spite Felix’s hyperactivity. She described her relationship with Felix as “im-
proving” and that she found some good directions to follow in managing Fe-
lix’s impulsive behavior. Most importantly, the mother started to accept Felix
as a person in his own right.

CONCLUSION

Theraplay promotes family ties and reciprocal interaction between people. The
nature of Theraplay meets the characteristics of the Chinese as a collectivistic
group which puts high emphasis on interpersonal relationships. With modifi-
cations in techniques and some of the procedures, it can be used successfully,
from a clinical perspective, as an alternative approach for working with Chi-
nese children and their families, not only in enhancing healthy attachments,
but also in increasing self-esteem, self-regulation, and parental confidence.

AGENDAS OF THE SESSIONS DESCRIBED IN THE CHAPTER

Session 2
Key purposes: have fun; follow instructions, start forming a trusting rela-
tionship with adult
 Theraplay for Chinese Children 123

Opening:

• clear message of acceptance

• greeting song

Inventory:

• body part sound—touch different body parts, making a funny sound

for each
• check things where child sees growth—i.e., height

Activities:

• imitate hand clapping

• powdering handprints
• lotioning hurts
• row, row, row your boat
• balancing on pillows
• guess number/letter traced on back
• funny way to cross the room
• stop and freeze

Closing:

• say some nice things about the child

• feeding activity—food share
• goodbye song—connect with mother

Session 6
Key purpose: mom takes a more leading role in structuring, engaging,
and nurturing her child and enjoys playing with her child
Opening:

• clear message of acceptance

• greeting song

Inventory:

• check-ups: describe facial features in a positive way

• measure height
• What I remember when you were a baby . . .
• Caring for hurts
124 Chapter 9

Activities:
• silly bone says . . .
• keep feather in the air
• mirroring
• motor boat
• trace shapes/numbers on back (body massage)
• imitate clap patterns
• thumb wrestling
• partner pull-up
Closing:
• say some nice things about the child
• feeding activity—food share
• goodbye

Session 10
Key purpose: termination leaving child with an increased positive self-
image, greater self-regulation, and stronger connection with a parent at-
tuned to his needs
Opening:
• clear message of acceptance
• greeting song
Inventory:
• describe positive special features of child
• caring for hurts
Activities:
• imitate hand clapping game
• cotton ball blow
• cotton ball touch
• balloon between two bodies walk
• mirroring each other
• drawing around body with positive comments
• tangle and untangle
Closing:
• feeding activity—food share of special party food
• what I most liked about Theraplay and why
• big hug and goodbye song
 Theraplay for Chinese Children 125

REFERENCES

Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist 4–18. Burlington:
University of Vermont, Dept. of Psychiatry.
Battle, J. (2002). Culture-free Self-esteem Inventories Examiner’s Manual. 3rd ed. Texas:
Pro-ed.
Bond, M. H. (1991). Beyond the Chinese face: Insights from psychology. Hong Kong: Ox-
ford University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Every-
day Life. New York: Basic Books.
Glover, G. (2001). “Cultural Considerations in Play Therapy.” In G. Landreth (ed.)
Innovations in Play Therapy: Issues, Process, and Special Populations, pp. 34–42.
Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.
Ho, D. Y. F., Spinks, J. A., and Yeung, C. S. H. (1989). Chinese Patterns of Behavior: A
Sourcebook of Psychological and Psychiatric Studies. New York: Praeger.
Homma-True, R. (1990). “Psychotherapeutic Issues with Asian American Women.”
Sex Roles, 22, no. 7, 477–486.
Huang, L. (1994). “An Integrative Approach to Clinical Assessment and Intervention
with Asian-American Adolescents.” Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 23, no. 1,
21–31.
Jernberg, A. M. (1979). Theraplay: A New Treatment Using Structured Play for Problem
Children and Their Families. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Jernberg, A. M., and Booth, P. B. (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children Build
Better Relationships through Attachment-Based Play. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Leong, F. T. (1986). “Counseling and Psychotherapy with Asian-Americans: Review
of the Literature.” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 196–206.
Leung, W. L., Ho, T. P., Hung, S. F., Lee, C. C., and Tang, C. P. (1998). Child Behav-
iour Checklist—CBCL—Hong Kong norm. Unpublished manuscript. The Chinese
University of Hong Kong.
Manery, G. (2000). Theraplay with Asian-Canadian Families: Practical and Theoret-
ical Considerations. Theraplay Newsletter.
Munns, E. (ed.) (2000). Theraplay: Innovations in Attachment Enhancing Play Therapy.
New York: Jason Aronson Ltd.
Patrick, M. R., Synder, J., Schrepferman, L. M., and Synder, J. (2005). “The Joint Con-
tribution of Early Parental Warmth, Communication and Tracking, and Early
Childhood Conduct Problems on Monitoring in Late Childhood.” Child Develop-
ment 76, (5), 999–1014.
Siu, A. F. Y. (in press). “A Prevalence Study on Internalizing Problems among Pri-
mary School Children in Hong Kong.” Journal of Child and Family Studies.
Smith, P. B., and Wang, Z. (1996). “Chinese Leadership and Organizational Struc-
tures.” In M. H. Bond (ed.) Chinese Psychology, pp. 106–170. Hong Kong: Oxford
University Press.
Yang, K. S. (ed.) (1988). Chinese People’s Psychology. Taipei: Gwei Gwan Tu Shu. (In
Chinese).
10
Theraplay in Germany
Ulrike Franke

INTRODUCTION:
HOW THERAPLAY WAS INTRODUCED IN GERMANY

In the summer of 1983, when I began my 2-month practical work at the Re-
habilitation Institute of Chicago, I had never heard of Theraplay®. I had been
working as a speech and language pathologist for five years and I dreamt that
I might find something new and fascinating for my profession in the “big
America.” I learned about Theraplay from one of my colleagues and a book
called Theraplay by Ann Jernberg in one of the libraries in Chicago.
What I read excited me, so, after a few months, I flew back to Chicago and
watched Theraplay films at the Theraplay Institute at 444 N. Michigan Ave.
What I saw in the films shown by the therapist Ernestine Thomas, differed
from what I had read in the books on client-centred nondirective play ther-
apy by V. Axline (Axline, 1980). It was livelier, leading, and more cheerful
in a positive atmosphere. Ernestine’s procedure was familiar to me, but I
lacked an explicable structure and theory. I became more and more at-
tracted by the ideas of Theraplay.
In order to internalize the contents of the book, I decided to translate it
into German and was fortunate to find my publisher having an open mind
to this still unknown project. At the same time, I tested what I had seen in
the films and read in the books and articles while working with children
with communication disorders. To my great surprise, I was very quickly suc-
cessful, and fortunately my supervisor was prepared to offer me the free-
dom to experiment.
After receiving training at the Theraplay Institute in Chicago and under-
going supervision from Ann Jernberg, I began to share my experiences with
127
128 Chapter 10

my colleagues and widened my practical experiences with more and very

different children—and again and again I had surprising successes.
In 1987, my translation of Ann Jernberg’s book was published. In 1994,
the German edition of the Marschak Interaction Method—the Heidelberger
Marschak Interaktion Methode—was published.
Between 1997 and 2006, I conducted two large Theraplay evaluation
studies with Dr. Herbert Wettig: a longitudinal study with 60 children and
a multi-center study with 317 children. The positive, significant results of
these studies helped to further establish Theraplay as an effective, evidence-
based intervention method (see www.therapieforschung.de and Wettig,
Franke, and Fjordbak, 2006).
At present, in German-speaking countries, more than 30-licensed Thera-
play therapists are continuing their education in a Further Education Insti-
tute and through a Theraplay Newspaper (Schwierige Kinder), both serving
as resources to therapists in helping many emotionally and behaviorally
disordered children and their parents.

WHAT IS MY WORK SITUATION? WHO ARE MY CLIENTS?

When I first came across Theraplay, I worked in the phoniatric-logopedic

outpatient department of a rehabilitation center in Heidelberg. My du-
ties were to examine patients with speech, language, voice, hearing, and
swallowing disorders and to treat them, including difficult children with
complex disorders. My clients were mostly children with all kinds of
learning and communication disorders (including mutism and stutter-
ing), cognitive deficits, pervasive developmental disorders, and attention
deficit disorders. Now, in my own speech therapy practice, I am treating
approximately 20 children with Theraplay each week. Some, mainly
autistic children, receive intensive treatment—twice daily for five days a
week.

ADAPTATION OF THERAPLAY TO THE GERMAN CULTURE

In order to learn more about the principles of Theraplay, I made many ob-
servations of mothers with their young children, much as Ann Jernberg did
in the sixties (Jernberg, 1979). Different cultures, which are shaped by their
history, environment, and social customs, produce varying parental prac-
tices. My observations, which focused more on the west European mothers
(mostly German) and less on the American mothers, led me to formulate a
number of distinct conceptual and practical differences between them
(Franke, 1993). They are the following:
 Theraplay in Germany 129

Challenge. Since our German society is very competitive and children eas-
ily get into enormous achievement stress, we value the intra-individual
challenge more than the inter-individual challenge—except with small or
older children toward the end of Theraplay. This means that the child does
not need to compare herself/himself with another person, but only with
themselves. The therapist refers to the child’s internal progress and process:
Hence, wow! Little Sandro does not only find the blue, but also the red su-
per-soft mouse in his sleeve.
Sitting position. When we treat the children alone, we sit them onto a
beanbag chair, since this enables better eye- and body-contact and the
therapist’s hands are free to move. When the parents are present they sit
on a floor mat while leaning on a cushion next to the wall holding the
child, who sits on a specially shaped floor cushion in their arms. Hence
the child feels protected, and while she/he is held, hopefully will be less
tempted to stand up and walk around the room. This could easily turn
into a “catch me” game where the child “calls the shots.” This is not en-
couraged. When the parents are actively engaged, the therapist takes the
child onto his/her lap.
Generally key things to keep in mind are: a) the child has good stability
in her/his body and can feel safe and protected; b) parent, child, and ther-
apist can sit comfortably and relaxed; and c) the therapist can maintain
good eye and body contact.
Use of verses, songs, and poems. Many of these are known in the German
language and are used extensively by parents and in nurseries. Finger, toes,
and movement verses of all kinds have proved to be very useful. They have
an effect like rituals that help children to calm down and facilitate the
process of language acquisition (Franke, 1999). They occur in all German
Theraplay sessions and often use up to a majority of the time, especially
with handicapped children.
Dealing with parents. We dispense with giving homework to parents. Many
children and parents spontaneously adopt the verses and games from Ther-
aplay. Because children and parents choose them, they are happy with their
choices and incorporate them more often into their daily lives.
Focus on language. Naturally, as an SLP, I pay a great deal of attention to
the children’s language-speech development. German research (Amorosa,
von Benda, and Wagner, 1986) has found that 48 percent of all language
disturbed/delayed children show behavioral and emotional disorders. Be-
fore traditional speech-language therapy can be done, these children need a
different kind of therapy—like Theraplay. Theraplay opens them up to so-
cial interaction and communication and enhances their attention, eye con-
tact, and cooperation (Franke, 1998). Not only this, I try to engage them so
intensely, that they begin to speak and improve their understanding. Re-
search shows that this combination is effective (see below).
130 Chapter 10

Scientific knowledge on language acquisition mainly based on social the-

ories, indicates that without a relationship, language is not learned (Bruner,
1987, Papoucek, 1994). That idea influences my thinking and doing in
Theraplay. Important general factors, which are helpful for language devel-
opment within Theraplay, have materialized:

• The Structure, for example, a well-defined outer frame (eye contact,

closeness), which gets the child’s attention and calms the child.
• Children with receptive language disorder and speech development
disorder need to hear simple words, short sentences, and repetitions,
and need to see complementary and explanatory signs, so that they can
be more attentive and understand more easily.
• Children need interactive play, so that they realize how important
speech is in having fun together.
• Awareness as an input may be more valuable than speech (output).
• At times, the therapist/co-therapist or the mother may take on the
child’s role in speaking to enable the child to learn what one says in
that situation.
• Short, simple rhyming verses can be much easier remembered than
normal sentences, and promote the memory and the feel for language.
• The short, simple games (e.g., I hide a freckle under the lotion and the
child rediscovers it by wiping it off) offer the developmentally chal-
lenged child a certain play-repertoire, which she/he can easily imitate
and use with other individuals. The child becomes active and internal-
izes communication.

HOW THOMAS BEGAN TO TALK—A CASE STUDY

The following is an account about a little boy called Thomas and his Ther-
aplay therapy (Franke, 2007).
Thomas is 27 months old when I first meet him. His mother describes him
as friendly, curious, and alert. He likes music—but he utters only a few
words. He communicates through gestures and noises with the family.
Other people do not understand what he means. His mother is concerned.
I introduce Theraplay as an intervention and she agrees.
Thomas agrees evidently as well. He is sitting in front of his mother, so
that he feels very safe and the mother can assist and help when necessary.
At first, he is rather reserved, but is prepared to let some of the games and
activities happen to him. When I pull hard at his shoes to take them off and
I don’t succeed, a little smile appears on his face. He lightens up when his
socks sit on his toes like a hat, and then fly off while being moved to and
fro. That gives me a first indication that he needs clear proprioceptive stim-
 Theraplay in Germany 131

uli and is open to surprises. I continue to experiment with what he likes and
what pleases him.” Peek-a-boo” does not engage him, but he is fascinated
by the caring of bruises and a little scratch. At the start of Theraplay, rituals
are often more accepted from young children than games. They take place
in a thoughtful environment and are calming and inspire confidence. Tod-
dlers need the experience of self-efficacy. When they can pull their foot or
their hand out of my large (lotion-covered) hands, they feel pride and are
delighted. Just like Thomas. “Noma” (once more), he says. I ask him, “are
you saying you want to pull once more?” He nods. The second time, I hold
on a little tighter and realize that Thomas himself pulls his hand out of mine.
He babbles something. I answer, “you’re saying you would like to pull once
more?” Thomas replies “aa!” These are the beginnings of a short dialogue
which in time will be internalized and be constantly extended. Here speech
is integrated in a game; Thomas takes pleasure in expressing himself and no-
tices the need to do so.
Thomas likes the song of the train which carries all the people Thomas
wants to include, and which involves rhythmically stretching and bending
his legs. Naturally, he does not realize now that his brain is fed with many
different sense stimuli which will be integrated eventually—a facilitation of
perception, which is fun.
Today, I offer him a game called “hide and seek mice.” At the beginning,
he observes how I hide a blue plush mouse in his sleeve. “Where is the
mouse?” I ask him with surprise. Thomas looks at his sleeve and looks at me
hesitantly in anticipation. “Do you think it is there?” I ask, while slightly lift-
ing his sleeve, and then he understands. He tries to pull it out, but the mouse
is stuck. “Mouse come out! Out mouse!” I call again and again until he has
got hold of it and pulled it out. (Through play Thomas receives new and
simple ideas and learns how and when to use language). More mice are in-
troduced and even when his mother covers his eyes Thomas manages to
find them and pull them out. We know as well that children love guessing
games in which they can succeed and this makes us resort to the use of
guessing games for all senses.
Just like all children, Thomas has to test my boundaries. After he has
found the yellow mouse, he smiles impishly at me and then throws it away
in a high sweep. I see that Thomas knows that he provokes others and that
most adults usually get angry and reprimand him. He is surprised when I do
not react at all, but get another mouse and hide it. Thomas has new experi-
ences with Theraplay; through new experiences he can learn and improve
his development. During the following sessions, it becomes clear that what
Thomas’s mother describes as “curious and alert” is actually his distractibil-
ity and his aim is to be in control.
Until now the goal was “language acquisition” but now it is expanded to
increase attention, focusing, and cooperation, all of which will provide a
132 Chapter 10

good input to this child. The directive procedure of Theraplay offers many
possibilities to reach these goals.
One of the ways of lessening a child’s verbal interruptions is by ignoring
them. If he averts his gaze or notices something in his surroundings, it is
possible to gain his attention again through a change in voice or a physical
stimulus. He should not receive any reinforcement for his distractibility. Fur-
thermore, it is important that the therapist is a role model for him in how to
stay focused.
By the tenth session, Thomas has given up on trying to be in control. This
means, he does not put so much thinking into what he should say or do
(output), but is more prepared to accept and receive input from the thera-
pist. He still loves self-efficacy, being able to make an impact on others.
Above all he loves the food that is offered. At the end of the session the plate
is always empty.
He has problems in blowing a cotton wool ball. However, this is a play
therapy session, so practicing blowing is not required, as it would be in a
speech therapy session. Meanwhile, he participates actively in lotioning
small hurts, during therapy and at home.
It is noticed that he reacts hesitantly to what is said to him. Delayed lan-
guage processing (Franke, 2007a) is postulated, which might be one expla-
nation for the gap in his speech development. Meanwhile, his mother re-
ports that he is striving to express himself verbally more often.
After 30 sessions, a decision is made with the mother, to end the Thera-
play therapy. He is starting Nursery school where he will receive further
stimulus. For his language development, he will receive traditional speech-
language therapy on site.
During the last sessions, Thomas is able to carry on a normal conversa-
tion. He reports, he notices, he asks questions—his speech pattern has
reached a near enough normal state. Meanwhile, he has learned many
verses, loves our Theraplay games and invites his brother and mother to
play all the games at home. However, for his speech comprehension, and
receptive language, he still needs some special input: slow speech, little dis-
traction, and many repetitions.
Which factors are recognized in Theraplay with Thomas, as important
components for therapeutic success?

• The structure frame in which the therapist leads.

• Short, simple games and many repetitions of verses and games with
movement.
• A great deal of eye contact and physical contact, which improve at-
tention and perception.
• Emphasis on input until he has absorbed enough speech patterns
which he can repeat.
 Theraplay in Germany 133

• Proposals at his linguistic level (verses, songs, simple sentences,

rhymes), which he can easily assimilate.
• No pressure to perform, but to experience fun, affirmation, and admi-
ration.

Nine months after the end of Theraplay therapy, Thomas receives Speech-
Language Therapy and makes an effort in improving his phonetic and
phonological abilities. The mother, who was very concerned at the begin-
ning, tells me that she can see his enormous progress.

THERAPLAY RESEARCH IN RELATION TO CHILDREN

WITH LANGUAGE ACQUISITION DISORDERS

In 1987 and 1988, Ute Ritterfeld conducted a study with preschool chil-
dren whose language development was delayed or impaired (Ritterfeld,
1989). Her aim was to find out if Theraplay influences the speech-lan-
guage development of children. A random sample comprised 21 children,
who were diagnosed with language acquisition disorders, had no organic
handicaps, and whose mother tongue was German. Her research was pub-
lished in 1989.
Ritterfeld collected socio-demographic data, analyzed the state of the
speech development of the children using the Heidelberger Sprachentwick-
lungstest (HSET) (a language development test by Grimm and Schoeler).
Children, parents, and teachers were given the TOESD questionnaire (Test
of Early Socio-emotional Development by Hresko and Brown, 1984). This
test gives information about the child’s socio-emotional behavior and his
or her self-image. The tests and questionnaire were given at the beginning
of the therapy and after twelve sessions or twelve weeks’ waiting time. The
children were graded into three groups: one group received Theraplay, an-
other received speech-language therapy, and the control group received no
intervention.
Her summary concluded: The Theraplay intervention method is signif-
icantly effective for children with language acquisition problems, even
though no direct verbal training takes place. Theraplay seems to have the
edge over traditional therapies as well in the area of linguistics and com-
munication. At the beginning, the children treated with Theraplay showed
definite inferior performances, but after receiving Theraplay, they signifi-
cantly progressed more than those in the other two groups. Ritterfeld’s hy-
pothesis is that Theraplay does not directly train expressive and linguistic
structures as with speech-language therapy, but “instead extracts the rules
of language with the help of speech reception and so is able to improve
language.”
134 Chapter 10

The self-image, according to the TOESD, only improved significantly in

children who received Theraplay therapy. However, the parents didn’t
change their view on the behavior and the mood of the child; they stayed
with their first assessment. This tendency was also found in Wettig’s re-
search (Wettig, 2002). Nevertheless, the nursery teacher’s assessments show
definite changes in the direction of improvement; the factor “mood” seems
to be the most important factor for them. In the nursery, the child was per-
ceived as friendlier and less sad.
In two of our own research studies, we focused on receptive language
disorders. These studies were a) the controlled longitudinal study (Wettig,
Franke, and Fjordbak, 2006) with a two-year follow-up, which was carried
out with a sample of N=60 clinically symptomatic toddlers and preschool
children aged 2 years and 6 months to 6 years and eleven months suffer-
ing dual diagnoses of social interactive and developmental language dis-
orders and a matched sample of N=30 clinically non-symptomatic chil-
dren as a control group; b) The multi-center study (Wettig, 2008) was
carried out continuously within the framework of quality control of the
patients treated with Theraplay. Nine different therapeutic institutions in
Germany and Austria collected basic data at the beginning and after the
end of treating the indicated children with Theraplay. The diagnosed
symptoms were measured repeatedly by CASCAP-D, the German version
of the Clinical Assessment Scale for Child and Adolescent Pathology
(Doepfner et al., 1999). The presented results were based on a sample of
N=319 children, who suffered dual diagnoses of social interactive and de-
velopmental language disorders. We found receptive language disorders in
shy children, autistic children, and in oppositional defiant children. All
three groups made significant increases in their ability to understand lan-
guage during Theraplay intervention. As well, the children receiving Ther-
aplay in both studies showed significant positive improvement in their so-
cial emotional behavior. (For more information about these results in
English see www.Theraplay-Therapieforschung.de.)
The German University of Regensburg is replicating the described Wet-
tig/Franke Theraplay Longitudinal Research project called “Regensburger
Langzeitstudie 2003–2012 zur Evaluation der Wirkung von Theraplay.”
In their degree dissertations Anne Kasten (2000), Evelyn Rudolph
(2000), Dominique Veith (2000), Florence Reichert (2001), and Maren
Nolte (2001) worked on the subject language disordered or delayed chil-
dren and Theraplay inclusive case studies. All five authors agreed that Ther-
aplay seems to be an effective intervention when children with communi-
cation disorders also suffer behavioral and emotional disorders. Veith
explained that a child can put more energy and strength in his language de-
velopment, suffering no behavioral disorder. But all authors stated, that
there must be more extensive research to support their results.
 Theraplay in Germany 135

REFERENCES

Amorosa, Hedwig, Delia von Benda and Edith Wagner (1986). “Die Häufigkeit psy-
chiatrischer Auffälligkeiten bei 4- bis 8jährigen mit unverständlicher Spon-
tansprache.“ Zeitschrift für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie 14, 289–295.
Axline, Virginia (1980). Spieltherapie. München: Reinhardt Verlag.
Bruner, Jerome (1987). Wie das Kind sprechen lernt. Bern: Hans Huber.
Doepfner, Manfred, Walter Berner, Henning Flechtner and Gerd Lehmkuhl (1999).
Psychopathologisches Befund-System für Kinder und Jugendliche (CASCAP-D) Göttin-
gen: Hogrefe Verlag für Psychologie.
Franke, Ulrike (1993). “Unterschiede zwischen us-amerikanischem Theraplay und
deutschem Theraplay“ (Differences between US-American Theraplay and German
Theraplay). Theraplay Journal 7, 4–8.
———, (1998). “Theraplay als Vorbereitung für die Logopädische Therapie” (Thera-
play as a preparation for the speech-language therapy). Forum Logopaedie 6, 13–17.
———, (1999). “Inhalt und Struktur in der Theraplay-Stunde.” Schwierige Kinder—
verstehen und helfen 18, 14–18.
———, (2007). “Thomas findet zur Sprache” (Thomas finds his language). Schwierige
Kinder—verstehen und helfen 41, 4–10.
———, (2007a). “Über das Sprachverständnis, seine Untersuchung und Behand-
lung—mit Theraplay” (About language comprehension, its assessment and treat-
ment through Theraplay). Schwierige Kinder—verstehen und helfen 41, 17–22.
Grimm, Hannelore and Herrmann Schoeler (1991): Heidelberger Sprachentwicklung-
stest. Goettingen: Hogrefe.
Hresko, Wayne and Louis Brown (1984). “Test of Early Socioemotional Development.”
Austin: Pro-ed.
Jernberg, Ann M. (1979). Theraplay. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
———, (1987). Theraplay—eine direktive Spieltherapie. Stuttgart: G. Fischer.
Kasten, Anne (2000). Theraplay—Spieltherapeutische Behandlung eines spracher-
werbsgestörten Vorschulkindes (Theraplay—Playtherapy of a language desor-
dered preschool child). Degree Dissertation, Aachen University.
Nolte, Maren (2001). “Sprachheilpaedagogische Intervention bei Kindern mit
Spracherwerbsstörungen am Beispiel der Arbeit mit Theraplay“ (Logopedic Inter-
vention with Language Disordered Children—Working with Theraplay). Degree
Dissertation, Marburg University.
Papoucek, Mechthild (1994). Vom ersten Schrei zum ersten Wort. Anfänge der
Sprachentwicklung in der vorsprachlichen Kommunikation. (From the first cry to the
first word). Bern: Hans Huber.
Reichert, Florence (2001). “Theraplay—eine direktive Spieltherapie mit sprachauf-
fälligen Kindern” (Theraplay—a directive Playtherapy with language disordered
Children). Degree Dissertation, Pädagogische Hochschule Ludwigsburg.
Ritterfeld, Ute (1989). “Evaluation einer psychotherapeutischen Interventionsmeth-
ode—Theraplay bei sprachentwicklungsgestörten Vorschulkindern” (Evaluation
of a psychotherapeutic intervention approach—Theraplay—regarding language
disordered preschool children). Degree Dissertation, Heidelberg University.
Ritterfeld, U. and Ulrike Franke (1994). Die Heidelberger Marschak Interaktionsmeth-
ode. Stuttgart: G. Fischer.
136 Chapter 10

Rudolph, Evelyn (2000). “Möglichkeiten, Voraussetzungen und Grenzen für den

Einsatz von Theraplay bei sprachentwicklungsverzögerten Kindern“ (Possibilities,
prerequisites and limits of the application of Theraplay with language delayed
children). Degree Dissertation, Dortmund University.
Veith, Dominique (2000). “Spieltherapie mit Kindern mit (sprachlicher) Beein-
trächtigungen mit besonderem Schwerpunkt auf der Methode Theraplay” (Play
Therapy with communication disordered children—with emphasis on Thera-
play). Degree Dissertation, University of Landau.
Wettig, Herbert H. G. (2002). “Veränderung der Einstellung von Eltern zu ihren ver-
haltensauffälligen Kindern nach Theraplay” (Changes of the parental attitude to-
ward their behavioral disordered children). Degree Dissertation, University of
Heidelberg.
———, (2008). “Die Wirkung von Theraplay. Die Wirkung von Theraplay auf Klein-
und Vorschulkinder mit klinisch bedeutsamen Verhaltensstörungen, Aufmerk-
samkeitsdefiziten mit und ohne Hyperaktivität und mit rezeptiven Sprachstörun-
gen.” Dissertation, University of Heidelberg.
Wettig, Herbert, Ulrike Franke and Bess Sirmon Fjordbak. (2006). “Evaluating the
Effectiveness of Theraplay,” in: Contemporary Play Therapy: Theory Research and
Practice, ed. Charles Schaefer and Heidi Kaduson. New York: Guilford Press.
103–135.
11
Theraplay Used in a
Multi-Cultural Environment
Nancy J. Atkinson

Theraplay® was started with preschool children in Chicago in 1967 at a

Head Start Preschool Program by Phyllis Booth and Dr. Ann Jernberg.
Theraplay is a lively, fun, engaging treatment method that produces
changes in the lives of children, families, and preschool teachers in a rela-
tively short time (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).
The four components of Theraplay are modeled on the normal interac-
tion between parents and a child, or therapist and child, or teacher and chil-
dren. Most importantly, a healthy relationship is developed between the
child and adults based on four underlying dimensions.

• Structuring: The adult sets boundaries to ensure the child’s safety and
well-being, as well as making the environment predictable and organ-
ized.
• Engaging: The adult interacts with the child in a variety of enjoyable ac-
tivities that engages the child’s attention and participation. Sometimes
surprise and paradox are used.
• Nurturing: The adult, especially the parent, is warm, tender, calming,
and comforting, leading the child to feel valued, important, and loved.
• Challenging: The adult encourages the child to strive to try new activi-
ties, take appropriate risks, master new skills, and become more inde-
pendent and self-confident (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).

Theraplay works very well in a multi-cultural environment. Theraplay ac-

tivities can be adapted to any culture. The YWCA of Contra Costa/Sacramento
uses Theraplay in a variety of settings; all of which have improved children’s

137
138 Chapter 11

behavior and built children’s self-esteem. Theraplay takes place in the fol-
lowing areas:

• Group Theraplay: Offered by all preschool teachers for ten or more

weeks for children ages two to ten years old.
• Parenting Classes: Theraplay is taught once a week for seven weeks by
a parent educator to parents and their children who are part of YWCA
programs.
• Parent/Child Theraplay: All mental health therapists use Theraplay
when working with families who have recently adopted a child or are
going through reunification services with the Department of Social Ser-
vices.

All YWCA staff responsible for providing Theraplay have attended an in-
tro Theraplay course led by a certified trainer and have been trained in
group Theraplay.
The YWCA serves many different cultures with the current ethnic break-
down of families being the following: 65 percent Latino, 20 percent African
American, 10 percent Euro-American, and 5 percent Asian American and
American Indian. The cultural diversity of the organization includes fami-
lies from India who practice the Hindu religion, Jewish families, and many
Middle Eastern religions. At least 50 percent of the families are bilingual,
speaking Spanish or another language with many families only speaking
Spanish. A small percentage of the families being served are gay and les-
bian. At least 60 percent of the families have a single head of household,
which is female.
The mission of the YWCA is the Elimination of Racism, meaning that all
programs place an emphasis on ensuring activities are culturally diverse, in-
cluding Theraplay activities.
Theraplay will be discussed when used by preschool teachers leading
group Theraplay, when being taught by a parent educator working with
Latino parents, and when used by a therapist using Theraplay when work-
ing with an African American client who was going through reunification
services with a child through the Department of Social Services.

GROUP THERAPLAY

Group Theraplay was started at the YWCA because many children had be-
havioral problems and poor self-esteem. Frequently these children were
unable to play with other children in the classroom without fighting.
Over 80 percent of the children in preschool programs came from low in-
come or very low income families. At least 10 percent of the children were
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 139

foster children who had special mental health needs. A sample preschool
class might be children aged three and four, 50 percent female and 50 per-
cent male, 65 percent Latino, 20 percent African American, 10 percent
Euro-American, and 5 percent Asian American or American Indian. In
each classroom, at least 20 percent of the children were seeing a therapist,
many children had a learning disability, and 25 percent of the Latino chil-
dren were learning English for the first time. Behavioral problems were a
challenge daily with children being aggressive by hitting others or the
teacher. At least 50 percent of the children had very low self-esteem.
Teachers complained about having to work with children having behav-
ioral problems and sent the child home if the child was being aggressive
toward others.
Generally, Theraplay groups are for children who have emotional needs,
children who are withdrawn, aggressive or overactive, frightened, compul-
sive, or rigid. Theraplay groups are adult-directed, structured play groups in
which all participants are actively involved together in fun activities. Activ-
ities foster self-esteem, a sense of belonging, an awareness of the needs of
others, and the ability to care for others and self, and help develop in-
creased trust in others. The group provides participants nurturing, atten-
tion, recognition, and appreciation, which many children aren’t getting at
home (Rubin, 1989). This was true for the children in our groups as well.

ASSESSMENT

Before Theraplay sessions are held, each child in the classroom has an as-
sessment completed by the Head Teacher. The assessment tool used and rec-
ommended by the California Department of Education is called the DRDP
(Desired Results Development Profile). This profile is completed within the
first sixty days in which the child starts a preschool program. The assess-
ment gives a profile of a child in areas such as self-concept, self-regulation,
social interaction skills, language development, problem solving, awareness
of health and safety, and a variety of other skills (California Department of
Education, 2006).
The profile is then used by the Head Teacher to develop lesson plans for
the classroom and also to provide individualized activities for each child in
order for the child to improve their assessment results before the year-end
assessment is completed. The initial assessment done within the first sixty
days is also shared with the child’s parents so the child and parent can work
on areas that need improvement. At least 50 percent of the profiles done in
YWCA classrooms showed that the children weren’t socially competent and
that children were being aggressive toward their classmates by hitting each
other when they wanted a toy or the attention of the teacher.
140 Chapter 11

Theraplay provided structure and taught children to wait and ask for a toy
or to wait for the teacher to respond to the child. Children in the classrooms
weren’t challenged and didn’t want to participate in classroom activities.
Theraplay challenged children and increased a child’s self-esteem. Appro-
priate touch and nurturing behavior between children was poor with chil-
dren yelling and hitting each other, as mentioned before. Nurturing was a
major component of Theraplay and taught children appropriate touch,
along with how to communicate a need or feeling to another child or adult.
Once nurturing behavior was learned, it carried over to nurturing behavior
at home with their siblings and parents. Because the goals of Theraplay and
the classroom teacher were compatible, Theraplay was started in each class-
room for ten weeks. Each preschool classroom had 24 children and three
teaching staff, with one person who was considered the Head Teacher, who
led the Theraplay activities.

GOALS OF THERAPLAY

Below are Theraplay goals in a preschool classroom of three- to four-year-

old children as they relate to the above assessment tool (DRDP) and to the
Theraplay Model.

Structure:

• Children will learn impulse control when relating to other children

and teaching staff, reducing aggressive behavior by 75 percent.
• Children will respond to a teacher’s instructions on the first request,
making transitions from one activity to another without showing any
resistance.

Engagement:

• Children will develop positive interactions with the teaching staff by

participating in a variety of enjoyable Theraplay activities.
• Children will engage in new and fun Theraplay activities with children
from a different culture, sharing toys or other objects of interest.

Challenge:

• Children will learn one new Theraplay activity each session in order to
build their self-esteem.
• Children will learn a new cultural activity each session in order to un-
derstand another culture.
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 141

Nurture:

• Children will learn to express feelings of concern when another child

is hurt or sad. Children will receive nurturing activities in each group
session.

Reviewing the DRDP assessment tool and Theraplay concepts as they re-
late to the above goals can be seen in the following example of a Theraplay
session used during a ten-week period. The Theraplay session was con-
ducted by a classroom Head Teacher. There were three staff with a class-
room of 24 children age three or four years old with the Theraplay session
being 45 minutes in length. Each staff member was assigned eight children
to work with when doing small group work. Each small group had at least
one or two children labeled as difficult, most likely being seen by a mental
health therapist. All Theraplay activities were culturally diverse, remember-
ing at the YWCA, 65 percent of the children being served in a preschool
classroom were Latino, many who spoke very little English. Activities were
done in both English and Spanish so the Latino children learned English
and English-speaking children learned Spanish.

THERAPLAY SESSION

Below is a sample Theraplay session with an explanation on how to do the

activities. The goal of a beginning session would be engagement since chil-
dren had not experienced Theraplay before and they would need to adapt
to Theraplay activities. The activities would also be challenging to keep the
children engaged in Theraplay.

Hello Song
This song is sung in English and then in Spanish to let the children know
Theraplay is starting. The song can be any song about friendship or sing the
“Hello song.” The words are, “Hello Everyone, Hello Everyone, Hello Every-
one, We’re glad you’re here to play.” This activity is done as an entire group
of 24 children.

Music Movement/Follow the Leader

A CD is put on and the children participate in some form of movement.
Tapes should reflect the diversity of the cultures being served. For example,
an African-American singer, Linda Tillery, sings traditional African-American
songs. Tony Chestnut is a CD used by many preschool teachers to teach
142 Chapter 11

younger children movement. Movement songs are also done in Spanish. The
Head Teacher leads the class in movement and the children follow her. This
activity engages the children in movement and challenges the children to
follow the teacher’s movements exactly the way she does them. The teacher
can also appoint another child to be the leader, which the children enjoy.

Skin Color Prints

The next activity is a sit-down activity with each staff member working
with a group of eight children. Different types of paper are given to each
group, which represent the skin color of the children in the group. The chil-
dren select the paper that matches their skin color. The group does hand-
prints and foot prints by drawing their hand and then drawing the hand of
another child. They also draw each other’s foot. After the prints are com-
pleted, the children talk about the different skin colors that exist in the
group. Some groups work slower than others, hence, the need for flexibil-
ity—children may draw both hands and feet. This project takes 15 minutes
with groups working to ensure each child has drawn her hand and a hand
of another child. This activity engages and challenges the children to work
together as they make prints of each other’s hands and feet. The children
learn nurturing behavior because they are touching each other’s hands ap-
propriately and learning skin differences.

Fortune Cookie Feed

This activity is done in small groups with the children feeding each other
a fortune cookie that has been hidden on their body. Again, the children
work in pairs, hiding one fortune cookie on another child’s shoulder, knee,
or near a hand while the child has his or her eyes closed. This activity
teaches patience, because the child who is looking for the fortune cookie
must keep his or her eyes closed, which isn’t easy for a young child. The
child hiding the cookie must hide the item in an appropriate place, which
teaches the child appropriate touch. Both Theraplay concepts of structure
and nurturing are part of this activity. The children really like this activity
and reading the fortune is an exciting activity which teaches the children
about the Asian culture.

Duck, Duck, Goose—A Hug

This activity is now done when the entire groups gets back together. The
game is played like the traditional game of Duck, Duck, Goose, except when
the child chases another child and catches the child, the child is given a
hug. This encourages nurturing. It is important that each child get the op-
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 143

portunity to participate in this activity. The activity is sometimes done in

Spanish which teaches the children Spanish as well as English.

Balloon Volleyball
This activity is done by using a balloon which serves as a volleyball. The
children are divided into two teams and the balloon is volleyed between the
teams. The goal is to keep the balloon in the air and for it not to touch the
ground. This activity is a challenging activity if you keep score, and the
game teaches structure because the children have to stay behind a line and
wait for the balloon to come near them. Learning the rules of the game
teaches children to follow instructions.

Nurturing Each Others’ Hurts

This activity is done in pairs as part of the large group. A small bottle of
lotion or powder is used. Each child is paired with another child and a child
is instructed to put lotion or powder on the other child’s hand or arm where
there is a hurt or a “boo-boo.” The teacher instructs the children where to
put the lotion or powder. This teaches the children to nurture each other
and to be gentle when touching each other. Staff monitor the children to be
sure they are gentle with each other.

Choo-Choo Train
This activity is done as an entire group and is the ending activity. The
group forms a train with a staff member being the leader. The group moves
through the room doing different activities such as bending, going back-
wards, going fast or slow, and singing “Choo-choo-choo.” This is a great
way to end Theraplay and the children enjoy being part of a train and do-
ing a variety of activities. This teaches the children structure by following in-
structions and challenges the children to follow the leader.

The above activities are a sample of activities that can be done during a
group Theraplay session, with a group of 24 children, with some of the activi-
ties being done as an entire group and some activities being done in smaller
groups of eight children. Small groups should be no larger than eight children.

PARENTING CLASSES

Parenting classes are held for seven weeks. The classes are based on the Ther-
aplay model. The entire family is invited to participate in the class providing
144 Chapter 11

they are a member of the YWCA and have a child enrolled in a preschool
program. Children who participate in the program are usually three to eight
years old. Many of the families taking part have been referred by their pre-
school teacher because their child has difficulty adjusting to the preschool.
Usually, the child has some sort of behavioral problem like hitting another
child. Many of the children have low self-esteem. Because at least 60 per-
cent of the families are Latino, the parenting classes described below are
based on activities that are from the Latino culture. The class is held in
Spanish because this is the first language of the majority of the participants.
English-speaking-only participants have an interpreter or attend a class
where English is spoken. Understanding the Latino culture is important to
the types of activities that take place during Theraplay, and parenting skills
taught are based on Latino values. Research shows that permissiveness char-
acterizes Latino parenting; however, traditional parenting by Latino parents
values authoritarian structures when child-rearing with a patriarchal au-
thoritarian structure that respects males and the elderly. Latino parents are
very nurturing, affectionate, and warm with their children. Latino parents
overall are more interactive and engaged with their children during play.
Parents demonstrate significantly higher levels of connectedness and affili-
ation than either European American or mixed ethnicity child-parent pairs
during play (Gil, 2005).
Latino parents and their children were very willing to participate in Ther-
aplay and thoroughly enjoyed interacting with each other during the seven-
week parenting course.

ASSESSMENT

No official assessment was done with the parents and their children before
enrolling in the Parenting Class. Parents and children involved with the
YWCA preschool program were told that the DRDP would be used to un-
derstand their child’s needs, especially in the area of social interaction with
other children and their ability to respond to instructions given by the
teacher. Parents were also given the opportunity to participate in the
Marschak Interaction Method (MIM), a technique developed to provide a
structured way of measuring various aspects of the parent-child relationship
(Munns, 2000). The majority of the parents decided not to participate in
the MIM, because they were afraid they would be judged as being poor par-
ents. However, once they became involved in Theraplay, they had no hesi-
tation and were very willing to take part in the MIM. It was important to be
sensitive to other cultures and their fears about being tested, because par-
ents didn’t want to be judged as being poor parents by a member of the
dominant culture.
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 145

GOALS OF PARENTING CLASS

The parenting class lasted a total of seven weeks meeting for two hours
weekly. The class started with a meal so everyone could become acquainted
with each other. The YWCA provided the meal, but after the third session,
the families became engaged with each other and many families brought a
dish to share from their culture. Families from the Latino culture feel it is
important to break bread together at an event, which means sharing food
with each other that was cooked by a family member. This helped families
feel closer to each other, and parents were more willing to talk about the
problems they were having with their children. Meal time was a very festive
event and lasted for a half-hour. After dinner, a topic for discussion was se-
lected by the parent educator. Topics were based around Theraplay con-
cepts. Below are goals of the parenting classes, which was based on topics
that were discussed weekly.

• Understanding your birth family, how you were raised, how family val-
ues and discipline techniques carry forward from one generation to an-
other.
• Developmental milestones your child achieves from age three to eight
years old using the DRDP assessment tool to discuss what your child
should achieve throughout the school year.
• Learning the importance of engaging with your child on a daily basis,
spending quality time with your child daily.
• Learning the importance of providing your child with a structured en-
vironment and how to set limits for your child.
• Building your child’s self-esteem by challenging your child and ac-
knowledging his or her efforts when completing a task.
• Providing your child a nurturing environment and spending time daily
nurturing your child.
• Understanding how Theraplay can be implemented in your home
daily by spending quality time with your child.

The above goals were completed in a seven-week time frame. After the
meal was completed, the parents and children were divided into two
groups. The parent educator presented the topic for discussion to the par-
ents and then held a group discussion answering all parent questions. The
children spent time with another teacher learning different Theraplay activ-
ities that would take place later when they worked with their parents. After
the parents and children were done meeting separately for 45 minutes, they
met together as a group and participated in a Theraplay session for the re-
maining 45 minutes. Each parent interacted with their own children. If a
parent had more than one child, a staff member would assist the parent.
146 Chapter 11

The goal was for the parent and child to have a positive experience working
on Theraplay skills through structuring, nurturing, challenging activities
and being able to engage the child for 45 minutes of Theraplay activities.
The majority of the parents had one child age three to eight years old. Be-
low were some of the activities done during Theraplay sessions.

Hola (Hello Song)

The group sings the song, but each parent faces her child and sings. The
parent sings the following song. “Hola (name of child), Hola (name of
child), Hola (name of child), Soy feliz que usted está aquí (I am happy you
are here).” This song establishes the start of the Theraplay session and al-
lows the parent to engage the children immediately in Theraplay, providing
the child with nurturing by holding the child’s hand and looking into the
child’s eyes.

Positive Comments
Next, the parents tell the child something positive about herself. This com-
ment is to be about the child, not something the child did today at school
or at home. Comments such as, “What beautiful eyes you have,” or “Your
hair is really curly.” A parent could say, “I love you. You are a beautiful child.”
The comments help build the child’s self-esteem and then the child usually
willingly wants to participate in the other activities that will take place.

Nurturing Hurts
The parent then spends time nurturing any hurts a child could have, a
bruise, cut, anything they notice on the child’s arm, face, or hand. Usually,
the parent uses lotion, but they could use powder if they didn’t want to use
lotion. This gives the parent the opportunity to express concern for hurts
the child has, nurturing the child and letting the child know that the parent
really cares for her child. Again, eye contact between the parent and child is
very important.

Pase la Botella (Pass the Bottle)

Next the group comes together and participates in group activities. When
the music starts, you pass the bottle as you would when playing Hot Potato.
When the music stops, the person enters the circle to dance with the bottle
by placing it on their head as you turn the music on for a few seconds. You
then repeat a dance. The plastic bottle is decorated with glued-on gems.
One Spanish song used is called “Pass the Bottle,” with a calypso beat.
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 147

Uno, Dos, Tres (One, Two, Three)

Place three hula hoops in a line. As the people walk around, clapping
and chanting, “A la uno, a la dos, a la tres, zass, zass, zass, todo, todo, en-
tra la circulo, rapido, rapido, ra, ra, ra.” Hula hoops are then taken away
one at a time until there are none left and the people must form their
own circle.

Cultural Musical Chairs

Musical Chairs for two-person teams. Chairs are placed in a circle. The
parent and the child must be ‘glued’ to each other by holding each other.
When the Spanish music starts, the parent and child walk around the chairs.
When the music stops, the parent and the child must sit together in one
chair with the child on the parent’s lap. Continue until there is one team re-
maining.

Dancing with the Broom

Make a large circle with one person in the middle holding the broom.
When the Spanish music plays, the person holding the broom spins around
with her eyes closed. At the same time, the people in the circle hold hands
and walk around in a circle. When the music stops, the person holding the
broom points to the person in front of her, who will then have to dance
with the broom for a minute inside the circle. This person will then spin
around with her eyes closed while the rest of the group walks around in a
circle. Repeat. All music is Latino music sung in Spanish.

CASE STUDY: REUNIFICATION SERVICES WITH

AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PARENT AND HER DAUGHTER

The YWCA works very closely with Child Protective Services, who are re-
sponsible for protecting children who have been abused or neglected by a
parent. Many of the children seen by therapists at the YWCA have been
away from their parents for more than a year. In the majority of the cases,
the child has been placed in a foster home and in some cases many foster
homes. The parent must work toward reunification with their child or the
parent risks the child being adopted or placed in long-term foster care.
Most parents want reunification services to take place, but are afraid of
how the child will react to coming home. They are unsure of their parent-
ing skills and want their child to have a positive experience when return-
ing home. The child is also afraid of going home, because she doesn’t
148 Chapter 11

know if her parent has changed. The child is often angry with her parent,
because she had to leave home and be placed in a foster home. If the child
was removed because her parent had a substance abuse problem, the child
is afraid the parent will have a relapse and they will have to remain in the
foster care system.
Before a parent is ready for reunification services, they must accomplish
the following goals with the Department of Social Services: 1) have a place
to live; 2) have a job or income to support the child; 3) if they had a sub-
stance abuse problem they must be drug-free and test drug-free for several
months; 4) have an individual therapist to work through issues that caused
her to lose her child, and 5) take a parenting class in order to understand
how to work with her child. It should be noted that each case is different.
Some parents have goals that are different than the above goals. After they
have accomplished the above goals, the judge usually grants supervised vis-
its with their child and recommends the parent and child attend family ther-
apy to work on the reunification process before the child is placed back in
the home.
Theraplay fosters attachment and helps the parent develop a secure at-
tachment relationship with the child. A secure attachment relationship is a
relationship that is caring, reciprocal, and develops over time. It is a loving
relationship between the parent and the child (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).
This relationship is very important and must start to be developed before
the child moves back in with the parent. In most of the families being seen,
the mother is the person working toward reunification. The father has no
contact, is in jail for domestic violence or substance abuse issues, is un-
known, or the mother doesn’t want the father involved. The mother is now
totally responsible for the household including providing for all expenses.
The mother wants the Department of Social Services to return her child,
and must attend family therapy for this to occur. YWCA Therapists use
Theraplay for over 75 percent of the families being seen. Families seen are
from many different cultures and it is important to understand the culture
and family value system when working on reunification with the family.
Some cultures don’t believe touch is important after a certain age, other
cultures feel discipline is very important and respect is the number-one
goal for the child. The therapist must understand the culture, the family
value system, and how the parent was raised for Theraplay to be a positive
experience. The therapist must know what structure the parent provides
her child, how the parent sets limits, and what type of nurturing the parent
provides the child daily. In order for Theraplay to be effective, the therapist
must engage both the parent and child in the process. The parent usually
has resistance to Theraplay, because of feeling forced to seek treatment, be-
ing mandated by the court system to attend family therapy before the child
is returned home.
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 149

The following Theraplay concepts were considered when doing reunifi-

cation work with an African-American mother who had a four year old child
and wanted the court to return her child.

Legal/Ethical Issues

The mother was required to attend therapy for six months in order for her child
to be returned. Theraplay was conducted for 15 sessions. The parent was con-
cerned about having the sessions videotaped which is usually done in order to
help the parent see the progress she has made during a session and help her
understand areas she needs to work on with her child. She was afraid the
videotape would be used against her in court. We agreed that Theraplay ses-
sions done with her child and the therapist would be taped and any sessions
done with her and her child would be erased after being reviewed. Taping ses-
sions were done to protect the therapist in case the parent was hesitant about
leaving the child with the therapist alone, especially when nurturing was tak-
ing place by the therapist. The tapes were also used to show the parent what
took place in therapy and explained the four dimensions of Theraplay: struc-
ture, nurture, engagement, and challenge. Most therapy sessions were done
with a two-way mirror, so the parent could observe what the therapist was do-
ing during the session. In some cases, another therapist (an interpreting thera-
pist) was available to explain what was taking place in therapy. However, tap-
ing sessions when the parent was involved in the court system was very scary
to the parent, and many parents refused to allow taping to occur.

Marschak Assessment

Before Theraplay sessions are started with the parent, a Marschak assess-
ment takes place. This assessment helps the therapist understand how the
parent and child interact with each other and their relationship. In this case,
the parent participated in seven activities, which took a half hour to com-
plete. She did the following activities:

• She played with her daughter using two squeaky toy ducks.
• She put lotion on her child and had her child put lotion on her.
• She taught her child something she didn’t know.
• She left the room for one minute.
• She taught her child a game.
• She told her child about being born and her first memories of her
daughter.
• She fed her child a snack.
• She and her daughter put hats on each other.
150 Chapter 11

The MIM helped to determine the type of Theraplay activities that would
be planned for future Theraplay sessions. The MIM gave the following in-
formation:
Engagement: Did the mother and child engage easily in a variety of ac-
tivities? In the above MIM, the child was hesitant to participate in some of
the activities. The mother had a very hard time engaging her in playing with
the ducks. However, as the MIM progressed, the child was more willing to
participate in the activities.
Structure/Setting Limits: This was a challenge for the mother. The child
wanted to control the entire session. She wanted to read the instruction
cards. She would take over the activities and her mother would allow her to
decide when an activity would end. The mother attempted to lead, but had
very little control over her daughter when participating in an activity.
Challenging: She rarely gave her daughter any positive reinforcement.
When they were drawing a picture and playing a game, the mother was more
interested in completing the project than giving positive feedback to her
daughter. In fact, no feedback was given to her daughter at all. The daughter
told her mom that she drew a great picture, however, the daughter did not
draw a picture of herself, which the mother had asked the daughter to do.
Nurturing: Mom had her daughter nurture her first by putting the lotion on
her as opposed to the mother putting lotion on her daughter. Mom had a
very hard time touching her daughter or giving her any nurturing or positive
feedback.
The MIM showed that mom needed to work on structure and setting lim-
its with her child in a positive way. They both needed to work on partici-
pating in Theraplay activities because in the beginning of the MIM, the
daughter didn’t really care if she participated in any activities with her
mother. The mother needed to give her daughter more positive feedback
when she completed an activity, especially an activity where she chal-
lenged her to participate. Most importantly, the mother needed to provide
nurturing to her daughter. She had great difficulty with hugging her daugh-
ter or telling her daughter that she loved her. When asking the mother how
she felt about the MIM session, she said her daughter needed to listen to her
and show respect. Showing respect was very important to her.
A complete Theraplay assessment takes at least three sessions. During the
first session the therapist meets with the parent alone and gets a history of the
parent’s life as a child. The greatest predictor of an infant’s attachment pat-
terns are the attachment patterns of her primary care giver. Parents need to
explore their own attachment histories and associated attachment behavioral
patterns. Comparisons need to be made between the parent’s patterns in their
families of origin and those manifested by their child (Hughes, 2007). The
mother stated that when she was bad, she got whipped with a tree branch or
the belt. She was told that she was to listen to her parents, no questions
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 151

asked. She was also told that she was to respect her parents and all elders.
Her parents weren’t overly nurturing to her and they told her education was
important in order to be successful. She was raised by both parents and both
parents worked. Church was an important part of her upbringing and she was
required to attend church three times a week and for five hours on Sundays.
During the second session of Theraplay the MIM takes place. After the
MIM is completed, the therapist asks both the mother and daughter how
they felt about the experience. A tape is usually done so that the therapist
can review the tape the following week with the parents. The mother al-
lowed the session to be taped, providing the tape was erased at the end of
the session, which was done.
During the third session, the therapist and the mother met to talk about
the MIM sessions. By reviewing the tape, the mother was able to discuss ac-
tivities that she felt comfortable doing and those with which she felt un-
comfortable. Again, Theraplay concepts were reviewed—engaging, chal-
lenging, structure, and nurturing. She agreed that she and her daughter were
nervous in the beginning, but as the activities continued, she became more
relaxed. She stated that she had a hard time teaching her daughter an ac-
tivity and wasn’t used to giving her daughter any type of positive feedback
or encouragement to complete a task. She also stated that hugging her
daughter was difficult and wasn’t something she experienced as a child,
which was discussed during session one. She stated that her daughter
wouldn’t listen to her and she wanted her daughter to show her respect. It
was decided the therapist would work with her daughter for five to six ses-
sions and the mother would join the sessions. At first she would watch the
session through a see-through mirror. It was also agreed that we would have
a debriefing time after each session to discuss what was taking place and for
her to ask questions about the session.

Cultural Understanding

The therapist was a Euro-American woman age 55+ and the mother was an
African-American single parent in her 40s who was considered low-
income. Religion was important to her and raising her daughter in the
church was a high priority. It was imperative to understand her value system
and how she wanted to raise her daughter.
African-American parents have to overcome adversity, develop mobility
paths for their families, and socialize their children for devalued positions
in our society. African-American churches often serve as a major part of
family life. Churches have special strengths for the family, because members
of the church support one another and the church serves as a way to cope
with the daily struggles in life (Webb, 2001).
152 Chapter 11

Understanding that discipline was very important to mom and that her
daughter needed to show respect was repeated on several different occa-
sions. Talking back wasn’t acceptable. Her mother also expected her daugh-
ter to do well in school by listening to the teacher. Attending church was
also important, even though her daughter wasn’t involved in church in her
foster home.
This mother’s values were typical of many African-American families who
feel discipline is very important and put an emphasis on structure when talk-
ing about Theraplay activities and what they want to accomplish. In fact,
structure is their number-one priority when doing Theraplay and Theraplay
isn’t considered successful if the child is not obedient to their directions.
Many African-American parents have stated that they want their child to be-
have and they want the therapist to talk to their children about behaving.
Because Theraplay has fun, engaging activities and is well-liked by the chil-
dren, there is resistance from some parents to participate in Theraplay. Time
must be spent explaining how Theraplay will accomplish structure and
teach respect, along with providing nurturing to the child, and engaging and
challenging activities.

DSM-IV Information

Both the mother and her daughter were being seen by a therapist. Contact
with the mother’s therapist stated she had a substance abuse issue and also
suffered from depression. She had just left a six-month substance abuse cen-
ter and, to date, had not experienced a relapse. At the time of Theraplay
treatment, she was not taking any medication for her depression, but this
option was being explored for the future.
Contact with the child’s therapist stated that the child had attachment is-
sues and was experiencing trauma from being removed from her home.
Since her mother had a long history of substance abuse problems, her
daughter had very little attachment to her mother. She was caught lying in
school and at home, and stealing food and other items at home. She had
been in several fights with other children in her foster home. She refused to
talk to her therapist about her birth mom or other foster home placements.
The concern her therapist had was her staying in her current foster home
which was questionable, because she had been in so much trouble with her
foster parents.
Both of the above clients are typical clients seen at the YWCA and it was
felt that both clients would benefit from Theraplay. Theraplay was the se-
lected model for therapy with the intent of helping both the mother and
daughter develop a positive relationship with each other again, strengthen-
ing their bond and teaching mom how to develop a structured environment
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 153

for her daughter that would help her daughter become more obedient.
Teaching mom the importance of nurturing her daughter and giving her pos-
itive reinforcement was also stressed.

Theraplay Goals

The following are specific Theraplay goals discussed by mother and thera-
pist for 15 weeks with an evaluation taking place after the 15th week. Week
four through eight would be done with the Therapist and the daughter with
mom watching the activities taking place and the therapist explaining what
took place after each session. In the remaining sessions, mother would di-
rectly participate in the sessions with her daughter.

1. Mom and daughter will engage in a variety of Theraplay activities,

learning to have fun with each other and to enjoy being together.
2. Mom will challenge her daughter to complete a Theraplay activity,
giving her positive reinforcement, and ensuring her daughter wins at
whatever activity is taking place.
3. Mom will learn to set limits with her daughter, helping her to complete
an activity by following her instructions.
4. Mom will be encouraged to show affection and warmth toward her
daughter, touching and nurturing her during the Theraplay session.

All the above goals were agreed upon by the mother with some resistance
being shown to participating in nurturing activities, but being very enthusi-
astic about giving her daughter instructions and setting limits.

Sample Therapy Sessions

Three Theraplay sessions will be described. All sessions were done by the
therapist first with the four-year-old daughter with mom observing what
would take place when she participated in Theraplay.

Agenda for Beginning Treatment Phase

This session was one of the first sessions done with both mother and her
daughter, with the therapist observing the activities taking place and assist-
ing when needed with the activities.

• Hello Song (described earlier)

• Positive Comments (described earlier)
154 Chapter 11

• Nurturing Hurts (described earlier)

• Play Dough Hand Prints (Make handprints out of play dough, both
hands and foot prints if there is time, both mom and daughter)
• Cotton Ball Throw (Throw cotton balls at each other on cue, aiming for
certain body parts such as the knee. This is a structured activity and
throwing one cotton ball, then two, and then three at the same time are
done on cue, when mom says a specific word)
• Build a Cotton Ball Snowman (Build a snowman together with cotton
balls engages participants in a fun activity together and helps clean up
the cotton balls)
• Hiding Potato Chips on Her Body (Explained earlier using a fortune
cookie. Should only hide about three potato chips. Mom hides chips
and then feeds them to her daughter)
• Mommy May I (This activity is a structured activity where her daughter
asks permission to take so many steps with the goal being to get to her
Mom by asking permission saying, “Mommy may I . . . take 3 steps?”)
• Paper Basketball (Mom and daughter play basketball by throwing a
ball or newspaper balls made from newspaper in a wastebasket and
keep score, which serves as a challenging activity, which the daughter
is to win)
• Back Massage/Tell a Story (Mom gives her daughter a back massage
while making up a story in order to do different types of massage on
her daughter’s back, which serves as a beginning nurturing activity)
• Feeding a Cookie or other food (Mom feeds daughter a cookie or other
form of food, which serves as a nurturing activity)
• Goodbye Song (Mom and daughter sing a goodbye song that states
they will see each other next week)
This session was one of the first sessions done with mom and nurturing was
kept to a minimum in order to get mom to engage in the activities. Mom stated
she liked the structured activities and enjoyed the challenging activities. She
needed to be reminded before the session that it was important to let her
daughter win when doing challenging activities and give her lots of positive
reinforcement. Mom liked the session and felt her daughter also enjoyed the
activities. Mom felt uncomfortable feeding her daughter and felt her daughter
could feed herself. Mom was somewhat egocentric in feeling that her daugh-
ter should give her a massage which again was explained to her that she
needed to nurture her daughter first to begin the bonding process.

Agenda for Middle Treatment Phase

This was a session done in the middle of treatment with her daughter. The
goal of this session was to get mom to provide more nurturing toward her
daughter.
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 155

• Hello Song (described earlier)

• Positive Comments (described earlier)
• Nurturing Hurts (described earlier)
• Slip and Slide (Lotion is placed on her daughter’s arms and hands. The
daughter then tries to pull her hand out from the grip of her mother’s
hands when her mom gives her a cue by saying a word)
• Measuring Smile (Measuring her daughter’s smile with a fruit roll-up
and feeding it to her is always a positive experience for her daughter
and is a nurturing activity)
• Tin Foil Mask (making a face mask out of tin foil, also can do hand-
prints)
• Cotton Ball/Feather Paper Blow (Mom and daughter blow a feather or
cotton ball from one piece of paper to another which serves as a chal-
lenging activity)
• Cotton Ball/Feather Touch (Her daughter closes her eyes and her mom
touches her with a cotton ball or a feather and she guesses which object
she is touched with. This activity is done with mom also closing her eyes)
• M&M Hide (This is a nurturing activity where instead of hiding a po-
tato chip, mom hides about 5 M&Ms on her child, then finds the
M&Ms and feeds them to her daughter)
• Squirt Bottle at Target (Water is placed in two squirt bottles and mom
and daughter aim at a target on cue given by mom with the goal being
to hit the target, which serves as a challenging activity with lots of pos-
itive reinforcement being given to her daughter)
• Red Light, Green Light (Her daughter stands at one end of the room
and tries to walk to her mom who has her back turned at the other end
of the room. Mom uses “red light” to stop and “green light” to go.
When her daughter reaches her mom, they hug each other)
• Lollipop Feed (Mom cradles her daughter and sings a special song
about her as she feeds her a lollipop giving her lots of hugs and nur-
turing her)
• Goodbye Song (discussed previously)

This session had a lot of nurturing with mom actually holding and
cradling her daughter at the end of the session for at least five minutes. Mom
was feeling more comfortable with Theraplay activities now, but was still
showing some resistance to feeding her daughter the lollipop. However, she
was beginning to see that her daughter loved the nurturing given to her by
her mom and really enjoyed the Theraplay activities. Mom had made sig-
nificant progress with nurturing activities and was showing less resistance to
feeding her daughter. She continued to like the structured activities and saw
how her daughter was now responding to her when she set limits and pro-
vided structure.
156 Chapter 11

Agenda for Ending Treatment Phase

This was one of the last sessions done with mom with the majority of the
session being based around nurturing activities and bonding.

• Hello Song (described earlier)

• Positive Comments (described earlier)
• Nurturing Hurts (described earlier)
• Slip and Slide (described earlier)
• Measuring Smile with fruit roll-up and feeding (described earlier with
the understanding that other parts of her body can be measured with
the goal being that mom feeds her daughter and nurtures her as she is
measuring her hands, ears, or other body parts)
• Powder Prints (Mom and daughter do powder prints together which is
done by putting lotion on her hands and then putting powder over the
lotion and making a print on black paper. Prints were done with hands
and also feet. Mom also washed her daughter’s hands and feet to get
the powder and lotion off, which was very nurturing)
• Cotton Ball/Feather Paper Massage (Mom gives daughter a massage us-
ing a feather and then the cotton ball. She can also have her daughter
guess which item is being used which is a challenging activity along
with a nurturing activity)
• Licorice Pull and Eating (Two very long pieces of licorice are put to-
gether and mom and daughter start eating from their end of the licorice
to the middle, where they end up giving each other a hug and kiss)
• Karate Paper Chop (Mom holds newspaper, and her daughter attempts to
use her hand like a karate master to chop the paper in half. This is a chal-
lenging activity because the paper gets smaller. Her daughter does the
karate chop when given the cue by her mom, which teaches her daugh-
ter structure and also expressing aggression in a safe, controlled way.
• Candy Bottle Pop Feed (Mom feeds her daughter a candy bottle pop
which is shaped like a bottle and holds her in her arms while singing
a song to her about how wonderful she is which is a very nurturing ac-
tivity. This activity took place for about ten minutes)
• Goodbye Song (discussed previously)

This session included almost all nurturing activities with some structured
activities taking place, but the goal was for mom to nurture her daughter as
much as possible. Mom had finally accepted that nurturing her daughter
was important and that her daughter really enjoyed being held. Because her
mother was spending time nurturing her daughter and being more attuned
to her needs, her daughter became more receptive to listening to her and
following her instructions when asked to do a task.
 Theraplay Used in a Multi-Cultural Environment 157

Mom was successful in finishing fifteen sessions of Theraplay and finally

understood the importance of nurturing her daughter and being more re-
sponsive to her needs. Theraplay brought mom and her daughter back to-
gether again and they became much more attached to each other. Eventu-
ally, mom finished the reunification process and her daughter was returned
to her by the court system.
It has been our experience that Theraplay is a very successful form of
therapy to use when working on the reunification of family members.

Note

A special thank-you for Theraplay activities included in the Parenting section which
were planned by Monica Garcia, the parent educator who has been very successful
in providing Theraplay for Latino families at the YWCA.

REFERENCES

California Department of Education. (2008) Desired Results Developmental Profile-Re-

vised User’s Guide. 45.
Jernberg, A. and Booth, P. (1999) Theraplay. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gil, E. (2005) Cultural Issues in Play Therapy. New York: The Guilford Press.
Hughes, D. (2007) Attachment-focused Family Therapy. New York: W. W. Norton and
Company.
Marschak, M. (1960) A method for evaluating child-parent interaction under con-
trolled conditions. Journal of Genetic Psychology. 97:3–22.
Munns, E. (2000) Theraplay: Innovations in Attachment-Enhancing Play Therapy.
Northvale: Jason Aronson, Inc.
N.A. (2006) Infant/Toddler Learning and Development Program Guidelines. Sacramento:
California Department of Education.
Rubin, R. (1989) Play with Them: Theraplay Groups in the Classroom. Springfield:
Charles C. Thomas.
Webb, N. (2001) Culturally Diverse Parent—Child and Family Relationships. New York:
Columbia University Press Publishers.
IV
THERAPLAY INTEGRATED WITH
OTHER THERAPIES
12
In Sync
Gail Smillie

In Sync is a program designed with the fundamentals of Theraplay® in

mind: a multi-sensory program for parents and children age birth to six
with a focus on building, enhancing, and strengthening parent-child at-
tachment. The program uses the Marschak Interaction Method (MIM), a
video assisted family assessment approach, followed by Theraplay and par-
ent counseling. The program is informed by attachment theory, interper-
sonal neurobiology, child development research, as well as concepts from
Circle of Security (Marvin, Cooper, Hoffman, and Powell, 2002, pp. 1–17).
The program’s goal is to weave together pleasure and human connection.
Bruce Perry explains that “the association of pleasure and human interac-
tion is the important neurobiological “glue” that bonds and creates healthy
relationships” (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006, p. 85).
Formal Theraplay training begins an adventure, but the art of Theraplay
is learned later from the children and parents who join with us in the search
for greater comfort and joy in their lives. Often moving frantically, clinging
and pinching, head butting and laughing, tantruming and bolting, collaps-
ing and hiding, Haley was the little girl who taught me how Theraplay
helps. Comforting Haley was like trying to grasp water or corral the wind.
Living with Haley left the adults responsible for her care emotionally
drained and remarkably insecure. Remembering that Daniel Siegel said,
“Negative emotions can be seen as an opportunity to deepen a child’s ca-
pacity for self-regulation and self-understanding” (Solomon and Siegel,
2003, p. 39), I knew why, but not exactly how. Haley had learned how to sur-
vive, but not how to trust adults—to care and nurture, sooth and warm, pro-
vide and protect. Haley was living out her nightmare and we were a witness
to her history as I stepped into her life and began the process of engagement.

161
162 Chapter 12

Through many difficult sessions, I recall reminding myself of how Bruce

Perry describes the process: “These children need patterned, repetitive ex-
periences appropriate to their developmental needs, needs that reflect the
age at which they’d missed important stimuli or had been traumatized, not
their current chronological age” (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006, p. 138). Haley
gradually learned to rely on adults, accept love and caring touch, and to
play with joy. Although Haley did “not speak the language of love without
an accent” (Perry and Szalavitz, 2006, p. 98), as Bruce Perry describes chil-
dren who are traumatized during critical periods of development, it was ev-
ident that some repair had taken place, as Haley was connected to safe oth-
ers who could care for her.
Early in 2002, a remarkable movement spread across Canada. Brain re-
search and attachment theory hammered its way into the hearts and minds
of Government funding, which shed light on the importance of the early
years. Money was being directed into programs that worked with parents
and children ages zero to three years old. In Sync’s proposal followed sim-
ple guidelines: the first is that traveling with babies/toddlers is hard and the
program must go to the client, and the second is that we must always re-
member that the parent-child dyad is the customer, not one or the other.
We had learned that approaches that inherently separate the parent and
child must be replaced with approaches that promote connection; ap-
proaches that promote parenting as a “learn-in-the-classroom” subject must
be replaced by experiential learn-by-doing—emotionally reciprocal, play-
filled approaches. Theraplay fits this framework. The parent-child-dyadic
work of Theraplay viewed the mind and body as working together, followed
by parent coaching where the pull for self-reflection and empathy was as-
sisted.
During the 5 years of operation, while more attachment informed thera-
peutic parenting has been assisted by neurobiological research (Siegel and
Hartzell, 2003), and while science has taken a more prominent role in the
art of parenting (Sunderland, 2006), In Sync has been enriched, but the
foundation remains “Theraplay-in-action.”
What helped in gaining acceptance in a traditionally informed agency? It
was decided to cast a wide net. Psychologists, social workers, counselors
and early childhood specialists, working in all aspects of the helping pro-
fession, joined together in an Introductory Theraplay course. This created a
synergy around the new program and provided the program with a large,
well-informed referral source. Bringing together the latest information on
child development, attachment literature, play, interpersonal neurobiology,
and parenting was interesting to all.
Play is a serious strategy in the program—a platform on which emotional
reciprocity, the give and take of relationships, and the natural hierarchy in
the parent-child relationship can unfold. Counselors are often heard re-
 In Sync 163

peating to parents, “All the toys get in the way,” or “You’re the biggest toy in
the room!” as the concept of play is introduced to a generation of parents
who have been heavily exposed to the kidnapping of play by computeriza-
tion and big business. As Jaak Pansepp (Third International Theraplay Con-
ference, July 2007, Chicago, Keynote Address) the neuroscience of play re-
searcher, describes, play is safe medicine. Play accesses the most wonderful
pharmacy in the world—the one inside the human brain. To release “joy
juice”(Sunderland, 2006, p. 90), to turn on “the big light switch” (Sunder-
land, 2006 p. 95), to activate the seeking system (Sunderland, 2006, p.
101), or to prevent “hormonal hell” (Sunderland, 2006, p. 187), we need
to know how to access the right chemistry, and play is a wonderful mecha-
nism to do this. (For a more detailed description of this playful way of ex-
plaining the brain and the chemical dance in the brain read Margo Sunder-
land’s, The Science of Parenting 2006.)
Theraplay looks for open, uncluttered spaces. Although almost any natu-
ral medium can be incorporated into Theraplay, everything selected has the
purpose of promoting the interaction at a deeper level and pulling for in-
creased parental ability to engage, structure, and nurture the child, while the
child learns to trust, rely, and explore with confidence.
At the beginning of treatment, the parents in the program had the op-
portunity to complete an Adult Attachment Interview. Daniel Siegel and
Mary Hartzell in their book Parenting from the Inside out state, “coherent nar-
ratives are the best predictor of a child’s having a secure attachment to us”
(Siegel and Hartzell, 2003, p. 48). Changing parental perceptions, body
sensations, and emotions, what Daniel Siegel calls implicit memory (Siegel,
1999, p. 22–23), is an enormous task—one that the In Sync program knew
required an experiential approach aided by the parent’s review of and re-
flection on their own narrative. Introducing the concept of earned secure at-
tachment (Siegel, 1999, p. 123–124) to parents and providing the oppor-
tunity for the parent to experience the Adult Attachment Interview opened
new possibilities to promote parental understanding, insight, and empathy
for themselves and subsequently for their child.

CASE STUDIES

Case 1
Before coming to In Sync, Marlene, a family worker, had worked with chil-
dren diagnosed with autism. The approach in which Marlene was trained
was patient, planned, practical—one which required “on the spot” imagi-
nation and creativity. “You learn to take risks and not to take surprises per-
sonally,” said Marlene, “Everything a child does, everything a parent does is
rich data—important information—and that’s where you start.” Marlene was
164 Chapter 12

well versed in teaching parent’s to do start-up requests rather than stop-re-

quests and in re-phrasing, working with tactile sensitivities, and breaking
down activities into tiny steps. Working with children with autism taught
Marlene to see the world the way the child sees it. The step into Theraplay
was a natural one for Marlene.
An energetic, organized, insightful, and diminutive therapist, Marlene ar-
rives early each morning at a shared office packed with Theraplay supplies,
where she starts her day by checking her case supply lists. The supply list is
created quickly at the end of each previous session. Most of the day is spent
in homes. “Doing in-home Theraplay is the best,” she explains, “because
families build it into their lives easily—but staying organized is important!”
Each In Sync therapist is provided with an over the shoulder, large mono-
grammed bag in which plastic containers hold lotion, powder, scarves, bal-
loons, and bubbles. In addition, a camcorder, and portable DVD player al-
low for easy feedback; while videos, such as: The Simple Gift (Wolpert and
Benoit, 2005) and books on Theraplay and parenting (Jernberg and Booth
1999) are always on hand.
Marlene’s Theraplay-in-the-van case revealed the philosophy of starting
with whatever the parent presents. After viewing the MIM and having an in-
troductory Theraplay session, the mother described during the parent coun-
seling time, that her main complaint was the explosion, anger, tears, and
power struggles that resulted whenever she and her husband attempted to
take the children in the family vehicle. Because the father had suffered a
life-changing stroke the previous year, the family had many on-going ad-
justments and certainly very real losses. Of the two young children in the
family, the eldest seemed to be coping while the three year old, Sara, was
in constant distress as the mother had returned to work and the father’s pres-
entation to the children had changed dramatically.
To assist with putting the father’s stroke in context for the child, Marlene
started by writing a social story. “A little story to help Sara understand her
daddy’s slow and awkward movements and to help dampen Sara’s over
arousal pattern,” she explained. The book was all about Jocelyn and incor-
porated one message that Marlene wanted Sara to understand. “Sometimes
his brain is really busy and it takes a long time for him to smile.” “Some-
times I wave at Daddy and it takes a long time for him to wave back . . . be-
cause it takes a long time for his brain to figure out how to wave.” This laid
the ground work for the following Theraplay session—Theraplay in a van!
Little Sara protested vehemently at Dad putting her in her car seat; Dad,
then, became more determined; Sara resisted and it went from mess to dis-
aster. While en route Sara screamed for hugs and kisses, “right now!” “It’s
not safe and it’s definitely not bringing out my hug-and-kisses-side,”
protested her mother. “We’ve become so discouraged that we just avoid go-
ing anywhere.”
 In Sync 165

To tackle the power struggles and dampen Sara’s fears, Marlene designed
a van Theraplay session and co-opted the parent’s involvement. The “hello
song,” “lotioning of hurts” and “inventory” (see appendix) took place in the
yard on a colorful quilt. A trail of chalk footprints led the way to the van,
where Dad was challenged to put on Sara’s seat belt without opening his
eyes. “Watch that he doesn’t peek, Sara,” said Marlene in an upbeat voice.
As they drove around the neighborhood, Marlene led the family in “the
peanut butter jelly game,” “guess the sound game,” and “the wheels on the
bus hand motions,” which kept Sara engaged. A special handshake oc-
curred during all stops. Kisses that could be blown and magically caught
were a big hit. “We only had to do it once,” Marlene said in amazement, “it
switched the dad’s way of thinking” (that he should automatically be
obeyed) “and the mom’s way of responding” (that she felt she needed to in-
tervene between her daughter and husband). It strengthened the bond and
they had fun. Marlene explained, “I wasn’t sure if I could make it strong
enough to spill over into the van, so I decided to do it in the van.”
In Theraplay, there are activities that we think of as down-activities and
ones that we think of as up-activities; then we choose combinations of al-
ternating up and down in an effort to co-regulate, using the relationship as
the vehicle for the delivery of the experience. We also think of activities as
sensory activities and combine these in interesting ways. “Sound effects go
so far with young children—almost like the effect music has on gaining co-
operation.” Marlene has incorporated sound effects into almost everything
she does. In helping gain cooperation she simply adds “boom, boom,
boom” to putting objects in a basket or “swoosh, swoosh” to rolling up
sleeves to get ready for a game.
At the final In Sync session, each child is left with a goodie bag, filled with
the materials needed to carry on with the Theraplay activities. Simple brown
bags with their names written on them make the goodbye ceremony a spe-
cial one.

Case 2
Leanne joined the program after working in an intensive day program for “at
risk children with behavioural difficulties.” Leanne’s first In Sync family
gave her insight into the Theraplay process: In Angelica’s short two years of
life she had lived in three different homes. Born to parents who were de-
scribed as somewhat lower functioning and who used alcohol to excess,
Angelica was removed from her parents care at 11 months of age. The
young parents had been following through on attending mandated pro-
grams identified by the courts. When In Sync became involved the Perma-
nent Guardianship Order trial was imminent and the social worker indi-
cated that her recommendation was that little Angelica be permanently
removed from her parent’s care. The parents were hostile, suspicious, and
166 Chapter 12

untrusting upon Leanne’s first encounter. Although they had stopped drink-
ing, the parent education courses were virtually useless as they could not
apply the parenting strategies when Angelica was in their care. The MIM re-
vealed that they were afraid of making mistakes and completely unsure of
how to engage or structure activities. There were periods of disrupted com-
munication, but there was also appropriate nurturing and underutilized
strengths noticed by Leanne. During the MIM feedback session, Leanne fo-
cused on their strengths and the delightful nature of little Angelica. Hoping
to begin the process of creating high intensity moments, Leanne watched
the parents’ eyes fill with joy and loving intention. The decision was made
to have the parents watch part of each session and be involved in replicat-
ing immediately after. It worked: their gaze softened and both parents be-
came more intentional; they were more purposeful and confident in their
engagement; they learned to follow and lead; they became aware of them-
selves in the parenting of their child. Keeping in mind that “The child does
not experience the parent directly—the child experiences the parenting”
(Mate, 1999, p. 56), Theraplay allowed little Angelica to have an experience
of her parent’s parenting immediately. “By the third session, they had found
their wings,” said Leanne. “Highlighting strengths is so important—it is the
building block for all skills.” Being with their child in planned ways was im-
mediately followed by parent counseling, which helped these parents to be
active and appropriate with their child.
“This was my first introduction to Theraplay and I could really see the dif-
ference between Theraplay and the parent education courses that I was fa-
miliar with—it is the deep emotional connection created, it is the turning on
of the right chemicals, it is the nurturing of the parents” said Leanne with a
smile.

Case 3
The following describes one of the saddest cases encountered by the pro-
gram. The referral call arrived from a grief counseling agency, asking for
“that play based therapy that helps attachment.” A family, decimated by the
murder suicide of the mother and father, left two-year-old Loreen and 6-
year-old Karen, yearning for their mother and confused about what had hap-
pened. The anger, guilt, and sadness were palpable when I first met the aunt
and these two extraordinarily quiet little girls. A history of domestic violence
had put the family in a shelter once; and the extended family was aware of
the father’s excessive drinking and gambling, but no one would have imag-
ined this outcome. The maternal aunt, who had been looking after the chil-
dren when the father killed the mother and then himself three days later, had
stepped into being the caregiver for the children. Along with the deceased
mother’s parents and a recent immigrant nanny, Auntie Anna was doing her
best. During the history taking and current functioning assessment, it was re-
 In Sync 167

vealed that the pregnancies were healthy, the children wanted; earlier
happy times may have provided some degree of pre-trauma health—how
much was unclear.
Karen’s reaction to the loss was to become the replacement mommy for
little Loreen: an exhausting and virtually impossible task. Between the ex-
tended family support and a good response to grief counseling and trauma
therapy, Karen was able to continue with school and have friends. All of the
health markers of sleeping, eating, eliminating, and playing indicated that
her recovery was underway. Loreen, on the other hand, was frozen. Large
dark eyes stared ahead as she clung to her auntie. The aunt described how
Loreen was passed around at the funeral and subsequent gatherings, pas-
sively without making a sound. Any words she had previously spoken had
vanished. Most skills, like feeding herself and playing with toys, had stopped.
The family grimaced as they told me how Loreen cried without making a
sound. English was a second language for the family and using an interpreter
was not wanted by the family, as they felt shamed and exposed in their cul-
tural community. Loreen’s symptoms were largely ones that were observed,
as her internal world was unexpressed and her personal story untold. A di-
agnosis of PTSD was complicated due to the predisposition of less well-de-
veloped verbal capacity, lack of parental report, and an ESL caregiver. It was
evident, however, that there had been a significant loss, exposure to domes-
tic violence, behavioral indicators of regression, and an overdeveloped star-
tle reflex. Loreen smiled at nothing and showed fear toward many things
(toys, taking her arms from her side, holding hands in a circle, and especially
at having food put in her mouth). Loreen was in a perpetual state of protec-
tion or defense; this would compromise her development as emotional
growth and protection are thought to be somewhat mutually exclusive (Lip-
ton, 2000, Videotape). Various relatives requested to care for Loreen and in-
deed competed for her attendance at public functions. A guilt-driven family
was trying to sooth and comfort, but was having an unintended destabilizing
effect. A number of structural interventions were put into place: no overnight
visits, consistency in bedtime routine, and consistency in daytime child ori-
entated activities. Grief counseling was prescribed for all adults. With this,
some of Loreen’s symptoms began to subside. Now trauma recovery and at-
tachment based interventions were required. Because Loreen had lost all ca-
pacity to explore her world or show interest in toys or objects of any kind,
traditional play therapy, usually a good option for trauma recovery, was un-
successful and taking too long. Theraplay was selected to establish and
strengthen the secure base (Marvin, Cooper, Hoffman, and Powell, 2002) to
re-introduce nurturing, to engage and provide challenge in gentle ways, and
to hopefully put play back into Loreen’s heart.
The MIM was difficult: Loreen clung to her auntie; no activities were
completed. The modifications to Theraplay involved breaking all activities
168 Chapter 12

into smaller steps. Loreen was not separated from the caregiver for any ses-
sions. During the first session, the ”hello song” took place with Loreen sit-
ting on her aunt’s lap, while the adults held hands, smiled, and sang softly.
Her hands recoiled when the lotion was introduced. “That’s not what you
want,” I said softly, “maybe you want to put lotion on us?” That was a hit
and Loreen worked hard at getting the lotion onto each of the adult’s hands.
(Guessing at the child’s inter-subjective experience was a Daniel Hughes
[Hughes and Booth, 2007] concept that blended well with Theraplay and
helped pull for greater reflective capacity in the parent while increasing at-
tunement in the relationship.) At the end of the session, we sang the “good-
bye song” while I cradled Loreen in my arms—she fell asleep immediately.
As Gordon Neufelt explains the orientation instinct: “getting our bearings
will command all of our attention and consume most of our energy”
(Neufelt and Mate, 2004, p. 18). That first session was hard work for little
Loreen and we all knew how well she had done: small steps in the right di-
rection.
Theraplay continued for twelve sessions; during four of the sessions we
welcomed the participation of older sister, Karen. Both of the sister’s loved
it. Little Loreen showed her sister all of the games and Karen relaxed as the
adults naturally assumed the parental role. Near the end of treatment, an In-
troductory Theraplay course was being offered locally and I was asked if I
had a family who could participate. Because the progress had been so re-
markable, and because the family wanted to “give back,” the family agreed
to participate. At an agreed upon time and place, the newly constituted fam-
ily arrived. Tears welled in many eyes as little Loreen entered the room,
looked around, excitedly ran ahead, then stopped to see if her secure base
(Marvin, Cooper, Hoffman, and Powell, 2002) was following. A MIM was
completed with all activities, including feeding, accomplished. The auntie
and nanny laughed and smiled frequently and some hints of trust appeared
in Loreen’s large dark eyes.
Joseph LeDoux, neuroscientist and author of The Synaptic Self, explains,
“People don’t come preassembled, but are glued together by life” (LeDoux,
2002). Helping parents understand the building blocks that promote attach-
ment, and explaining interpersonal neurobiology is an excellent goal, but
one that can be “hit or miss.” Having parents learn to understand them-
selves and their child through Theraplay is an easier, more practical way to
build the most important relationship of all—that of child and caregiver.

Theraplay activities (see appendix) included in some of the sessions:

Case 1 Theraplay in the Van: hello song, baby oil hand prints, care for
hurt and lotion, chalk footprints to the van, seatbelt do up with eyes closed,
peanut butter jelly, guess the song, blow kisses, special hand shake, feeding
pretzels off the fingers, goodbye song.
 In Sync 169

Case 2 Theraplay to reunify family: Mirror special inventory, lotion car-

ing for hurts, band aids, slippery slippery slip, bubbles, blocks, pat-a-cake,
ring-around-the-rosie, story time, feeding cheerios, cotton ball feather, row-
row-row-your-boat, peek-a-boo, piggy-back ride, hide-and-seek, freeze
dance, paint toenails, hand trace, bean bag toss, tunnel, blanket wrap and
cuddle.
Case 3 Theraplay following parental death: soft hello song, lotion caring
for hurts, powder puff, bubbles-break with various parts of the body sup-
ported by caregiver, two feeding activities in each session, cotton ball
feather, peek-a-boo, piggy-back ride, climbing onto pillows and falling into
waiting arms, hand prints, blanket swing, blanket wrap-surprise, rocking
and singing, tunnel crawl, smartie hide, paper punch and snowball toss,
good bye song.

REFERENCES

Jernberg, A. M. and Booth, P. (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents Build Better Rela-
tionships through Attachment-Based Play. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Hughes, D. and Booth, P. (2007). In Pursuit of Regulation and Attunement: Examples
from Theraplay and DDP. Paper presented at the 3rd International Theraplay Con-
ference. Chicago, Ill. July 2007.
Les Doux, J. (2002). The Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are. New
York: Viking.
Lipton, B. (2000). The Biology of Belief. Murfreesboro, TN: Spirit 2000 Inc.
Marvin, R., Cooper, G., Hoffman, K. and Powell, B. “Circle of Security Project: At-
tachment-based Intervention with Caregiver–pre-school Child Dyads,” in Attach-
ment and Human Development, vol. 4, no. 1, 107–124.
Mate, G. (1999). Scattered Minds: A New Look at the Origins and Healing of Attention
Deficit Disorder. Toronto, Canada: Random House.
Neufeld, G., and Mate, G. (2005). Hold on to Your Kids: Why Parents Need to Matter
More Than Peers. Toronto: Vintage Canada.
Perry, B. and Szalavitz, M. (2006). The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog. New York: Ba-
sic Books.
Siegel, D. (1999). The Developing Mind. New York: The Guilford Press.
Siegel, D. and Hartzell, M. (2003). Parenting from the Inside Out: How a Deeper Self-
Understanding Can Help Raise Children Who Thrive. New York: Penguin Group Inc.
Solomon, M. and Siegel, D. (2003). Healing Trauma: Attachment, Mind, Body and
Brain. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc.
Sunderland, M. (2006). The Science of Parenting: How Today’s Brain Research Can Help
You Raise Happy, Emotionally Balanced Children. New York: Penguin Group.
Wolpert, R. and Benoit, D. (2005). A Simple Gift: Ending the Cycle of Hurt. Infant
Mental Health Promotion, Department of Psychiatry, Hospital for Sick Children,
Toronto, Ontario: Dreams & Realities.
13
Theraplay and Dyadic
Developmental Psychotherapy
Phyllis B. Rubin, Dafna Lender, and Jessica Mroz

When we three Theraplay® therapists began working with adopted children

with challenging histories, we became faced with what we felt were Thera-
play’s limitations with this population. Theraplay was highly effective in
helping clients to emotionally connect with parents, to learn to trust them,
and for the family to learn to have fun together. Once that was accom-
plished, however, some of these children were still troubled by past experi-
ences. Family relationships were better and life had settled down, but other
problems remained. Theraplay could not help these children understand
what had happened to them, nor could it adequately heal their pasts that
were filled with neglect, rejection, and intense emotional pain. Dyadic De-
velopmental Psychotherapy (DDP) seemed to offer a way to connect with
children in the same highly interpersonal and highly attuned way that Ther-
aplay does, yet it goes deeper to help the child verbally and affectively
process past trauma. As Dafna Lender has stated, we have found Theraplay
and DDP to be like twins separated at birth, now reunited (Lender, Mroz,
and Rubin, 2005), offering us compatible models with which to address
more fully the needs of our children and families that would not exist with
Theraplay alone.

DYADIC DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOTHERAPY

DDP is an integrative, humanistic, highly interpersonal, and affective form

of therapy. Rather than focusing on a child’s compliance and getting a child
to “behave,” DDP focuses on what is underneath the problematic behav-
ior—within the child’s inner life—that is providing the motivation for its

171
172 Chapter 13

persistence. These children come to us feeling worthless, unwanted, unde-

serving, and unlovable. As in Theraplay, the DDP therapist strives to change
the child’s inner working model so that the child takes on a self that is pos-
itive and worthy and comes to interact with others in ways that reflect this
more positive inner perspective. We also help parents understand that the
negative way the child feels about himself colors how he feels about others
and drives the problematic behavior. For this behavior, however undesir-
able, the DDP therapist and parent give the child acceptance and empathy.
The essence of DDP is found in the attitude of PLACE that both therapist
and parents use, and also in DDP’s form of exploratory dialogue, termed Af-
fective/Reflective (A/R) Dialogue.

“The Attitude” of PLACE

Playfulness: Familiar to the Theraplay community, this is the quality that
draws a client into relationship and into the therapeutic process. By ex-
panding positive affect, play reduces anxiety and can help increase comfort
level. In DDP, the therapist jokes, is silly, gently teases the child and maybe
even the parent, or laughs at herself to lighten the mood at the beginning,
during, or at the end of a session. As in Theraplay, playfulness strengthens
the therapeutic and parent-child bond.
Love: The therapist encourages spontaneous demonstrations of love be-
tween parent and child and facilitates it when necessary.
Acceptance: The therapist accepts a client’s behavior, thoughts, and emo-
tions, whether positive or negative, and treats these as communication,
something from which to make meaning.
Curiosity: The therapist enters into explorations of painful topics without
an agenda or preconceived right answer, but with a curious attitude demon-
strated by adopting a curious facial expression and vocal tone. In so doing,
the shame that might be triggered when discussion becomes difficult is re-
duced. Shame feels threatening, halts therapy, and causes the child to de-
fensively self-protect. The DDP therapist is highly attuned to the shame re-
action in children so that she can quickly repair it with a healing, empathic
response.
Empathy: The therapist is always ready to communicate that the therapist
knows how hard it is for the child to remember, feel, and talk about past
and current pain.

Affective-Reflective Dialogue
DDP focuses on the in-the-moment connections between child, parent,
and therapist, the inter-subjective moments that generate change (Hughes,
2007). By accepting what the child is feeling and experiencing, and by re-
 Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy 173

flecting—and helping the child reflect—upon the positive and negative as-
pects of his inner life, the DDP therapist aims to help the child make sense
of his own experiences. Through this process, therapist, parent, and child
co-create new and potentially healthier meanings.
A/R dialogue contains several crucial characteristics that make DDP a
unique therapeutic approach. Connection-break-repair refers to the ebb and
flow of emotional connectedness we feel with others. Replicating this pat-
tern, the DDP therapist makes a positive connection with the child at the
start of a session. Then, the therapist brings up a difficult subject (i.e., the
child’s behavior at home; the child’s past traumas). This usually causes the
child to experience uncomfortable feelings such as disapproval, self-doubt,
or self-hate, which breaks the attuned connection he had been feeling with
his adults. The DDP therapist does not avoid these breaks, but rather ac-
cepts them, is curious about them, and initiates attempts to repair the rela-
tionship. A break in connection and the repair that follows are used as op-
portunities for personal growth and the development of new meanings.
Follow-lead-follow refers to the pattern of interaction that is similar to the
rhythm of the parent-infant relationship. The DDP therapist sometimes fol-
lows the child’s lead, and at other times leads him into discussions that he
may be avoiding. As in Theraplay, non-verbal communication is a vital part of
DDP. The therapist uses her whole self and communicates clearly through
tone of voice, eye contact, facial expressions, touch, gesture, and body pos-
ture. Affective/reflective balance and integration means that the dialogue
should contain both affect as well as cognitive reflection. We can see here
the striking similarities and also the differences between Theraplay and
DDP.

Typical Sequence of A/R Dialogue

When the DDP therapist begins to discuss an event that elicits shame or
other negative intense emotions in the child, she does not change her tone,
but rather uses the same tone of acceptance and curiosity as used for dis-
cussing more positive content. The therapist begins to explore with the
child how he feels and thinks about the particular event, and works to dis-
cover the motives the child attributes to himself and others regarding the
event. As the child and therapist uncover together the child’s inner life ex-
perience of the event, the therapist allows this to have an emotional impact
on her and responds with genuine empathy for the child’s experience. The
therapist’s response, in turn, has an impact on the child and enhances his
ability to consider new meanings about his experience. The DDP therapist
normalizes the child’s actions based on his underlying beliefs, communi-
cating that, given how the child was thinking and feeling, his actions cer-
tainly make sense. The DDP therapist helps the child communicate these
174 Chapter 13

underlying beliefs to his parent. By sharing this new meaning with his par-
ent, the child is more likely to integrate the experience. The parent then ex-
presses her understanding and empathy for the child’s experience. You will
see this sequence in the vignettes that follow.

How Theraplay and DDP Are Integrated

Theraplay and DDP can be integrated in a variety of ways based on the
specific needs of each child and family. With young children, with children
who have not built an attachment with their parents, or with families who
do not play very well, we will start with some Theraplay sessions. Sessions
are planned in the typical way with a check-up, relevant activities, and a
song and feeding at the end (Jernberg and Booth, 1999). When we are suc-
cessful in increasing playfulness, structure, and nurturing in the parent-
child relationship, we are likely to begin to talk with the child about be-
haviors and the past. We tend to find that children need the foundation of
being emotionally connected with and nurtured by parents in order to en-
gage in DDP’s exploration of current problem behaviors and the painful
past. In the following examples, Susie is such a case. In other cases, we start
with DDP, particularly with older children who are more familiar with talk-
ing about problems and less familiar with play. With these children, we are
likely to interweave playful Theraplay activities into sessions to lighten or
calm the atmosphere and help the child maintain a positive sense of self
and other. Another time we use Theraplay is when a situation occurs in a
session that increases the child’s anxiety. In the following vignettes, Tommy
is such an example. In Grace’s case, Theraplay was being used, but her neg-
ative reaction to having fun prompted some DDP processing of why she
had this feeling. Sometimes the switch from one therapy to the other within
one session is planned, but often it occurs spontaneously. The advantage of
being able to switch from one modality that involves processing experi-
ences and thoughts to an experiential modality is invaluable.

INTEGRATIVE CASE EXAMPLE: TOMMY

Tommy was a very anxious and insecure four year old, adopted from Ro-
mania at age three after having lived in an orphanage since one week of
age. Tommy’s parents brought him for treatment because they were con-
cerned about his anger and oppositional behavior in the home as well as his
sadness and fearfulness. Tommy would often demand angrily that his par-
ents meet his needs and would say “no” to most of their directions. He
would wake during the night crying out and would often be inconsolable,
convinced that his parents were going to die or that he would be taken from
 Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy 175

them by a stranger. This session describes how the use of PLACE and A/R di-
alogue helped Tommy with a frightening experience.
This was Tommy’s fifth Theraplay session with the therapist. The session
was planned in the typical format, beginning with a check up, then focus-
ing on Theraplay activities that address separation and reunion, as well as
fun and nurturing activities for Tommy and his mother. The session was
planned to end with Tommy’s father joining in to sing the “Twinkle song”
and for a sock and shoe race. Tommy arrived for the session with his father,
and his mother was to meet them there. Just before the session was to start,
Mom called Dad to say she would be late. Since, at that time, the therapy
was focused primarily on the mother-child relationship and Dad was ob-
serving for most of the session, Dad and the therapist decided to wait the
anticipated ten minutes for Mom to arrive to start the session. Not only did
it take much longer than ten minutes, but phone contact with Mom was lost.
In the waiting room Tommy became highly dysregulated, flopping his body
around, smashing toys into one another and throwing them around, laugh-
ing frantically, and making loud demands of Dad. He became hypervigilant,
startling when doors opened and when sirens and sounds of traffic were
heard from the street below. When Mom arrived 30 minutes late, the thera-
pist attempted to get the family quickly engaged in the Theraplay session in
the treatment room. The therapist began gently piling large pillows on
Tommy, which had calmed him in past sessions, and, this time, helped him
relax a bit. When Tommy appeared more regulated, the therapist then
helped Tommy move to Mom’s lap (the way sessions normally began).
Tommy wrapped his arms and legs around his mother and began squeezing
her tightly and arching his back. He repeatedly called “Mommy, Mommy,”
twisting his body and flailing his limbs. To help Tommy get more physically
regulated and have a more organized way to express deep feelings, the ther-
apist helped him lean back on pillows so that he was facing Mom with his
legs gently over her legs and with a pillow over his torso to avoid his tactile
sensitivities. The dialogue proceeds:

Therapist: (accepts Tommy’s behavior and speaks in a tone that matches

Tommy’s intensity) It seems you have SO much you want to say to Mommy . . .
Your fists are so tight, you probably feel so tight inside . . .
Tommy: Mommy, Mommy (speaking more softly now.)
Therapist: (joins Tommy speaking softly) Mommy, Mommy . . . I bet it’s hard to
find the words to say all those feelings to Mommy.
Tommy: Yes! (teeth clenched) . . . Mommy, Mommy!
Therapist: How about I help you find some words to say to Mommy?
Tommy: Yes!
176 Chapter 13

Therapist: Okay, I’ll do the talking you can relax.

Tommy: (making an exaggerated sigh and visibly relaxing his body)
Therapist: Okay. You can hold hands with Mommy and just look at her and I
will talk. I’ll pretend I’m you when I talk. Is that okay?
Tommy: Uh huh. (nodding emphatically)
Therapist: (leans down so her head is even with Tommy’s so therapist and child
are facing up toward mother) Mommy, that was kinda scary waiting for you. I
was worried. Daddy said you were going to be here in a little while, and I
thought it was going to be ten minutes, but it was forever. I was worried and
scared.
Mom: (in a soft empathic tone) You were scared, Tommy?
Tommy: (nods while quietly watching his mother.)
Mom: I’m sorry you were scared. I don’t want you to feel scared.
Tommy: I was scared like seeing a big monster!
Therapist: (looking at Tommy) It was that kind of scary? Like the seeing a big
monster scary? Oh that’s really scary!
Mother: Wow, Tommy that is really scary. That must have been hard.
There is a quiet moment. Mom and Tommy are gazing at each other and hold-
ing hands. Mom’s face expresses her empathy for Tommy’s experience and they
both begin to look sad.
Therapist: I’m going to say some more. (as Tommy continues to gaze at his
mother, the therapist speaks again in Tommy’s voice, this time using a sad tone)
Mommy it’s hard for me sometimes when I’m away from you . . . I haven’t al-
ways had you in my life . . . I didn’t have you when I was a little baby. Some-
times I worry I will lose you.
Tommy: (makes an exaggerated baby cry, points to therapist, and then speaks
in an age appropriate voice) Mom, I’m saying that.
Mom: (soft and empathic) You’re saying that? You get worried?
Tommy: (grabs mother’s finger) I got your finger. I’m gonna bend it and hurt
you.
Therapist: (gently moves Tommy’s hand away from Mom’s hand) Sometimes I
get so scared, I think I could hurt you.
Tommy: Yeah! (exaggerated cries, banging hands on the pillows)
Therapist: (following Tommy’s affect, the therapist matches his intensity and ex-
presses the anger he only knows how to express through aggression toward his
mother) Mommy, when you go away I get scared, and when you come back I
get mad at you for leaving me. I don’t like to be scared.
 Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy 177

Tommy: (on his own moves to mother’s lap, nuzzling into her)
Mom: (cradles Tommy and feeds him juice and some crackers, and gently
strokes Tommy’s face) I wish you had always been with me since you were a
baby so you would know that I will always come back. I want to help you learn
that I will always come back when I’m away from you . . . I know it’s hard . . .
I know . . . I will always come back.

After several minutes of nurturing, the therapist then transitions to leading

Tommy and Mom through some engaging Theraplay activities that focus on
separation and reunion (Peekaboo, Cotton Ball Hide) and nurturing and en-
gaging activities (Lotion-Powder Hand-Print, Swinging, Feeding, and the
Twinkle song). With his feelings articulated and validated by the therapist
and his mother, Tommy was now able to engage in Theraplay activities.

INTEGRATIVE CASE EXAMPLE: SUSIE

Susie’s adoptive mother brought her to therapy when she was 4 years old.
Before coming to this home, her life had been marked repeatedly by
tragedy, disruption, and loss. She was moved from family member to family
member from very early on and never had a chance to experience stability.
Susie’s school had given her enough time at home to adjust, so they
thought, and she soon was to start preschool for special education services.
Mom asked for help with the separation issues that were clearly evident to
her. This session shows how the interweaving of Theraplay and DDP helped
Mom understand what upsets Susie and both verbally and non-verbally fa-
cilitated the process of healing her fears of abandonment and loss.
The therapist first focuses on a problematic behavior that Mom saw the day
before the session. Mom tells the therapist that Susie had been upset at the
playground when Mom went home and left her with Dad and her siblings.
The therapist starts the session assuming that to be the triggering event—that
she still cannot tolerate Mom leaving her. Mom also says that at home, they
do not have one-on-one time to play together in a Theraplay way. This is hy-
pothesized to be contributing to Susie’s clinging behavior with Mom. More
emotionally connected and intense play would help Susie have a stronger in-
ternal sense of her mom and, eventually, allow her to separate more easily.
With this hypothesis, the therapist starts the session with Theraplay. The
first game is for Susie to somersault from therapist to her mom and back
again. She would experience getting close to Mom and also leaving her to
somersault to the therapist, paralleling the experiences of reunion with
Mom and separating for school. As we begin, Susie protests by not somer-
saulting to Mom, but standing by the therapist and wiggling with eyes low-
ered. As typical in Theraplay, the therapist says, “Mom, don’t say ‘go’ until
178 Chapter 13

you see Susie’s eyes.” Susie actually is at quite a young emotional age and
is not ready for separation. Instead, she wants to be found by Mom.
Susie starts to look around the room instead of at Mom. Again, as in stan-
dard Theraplay practice, the therapist says, “Is she hiding herself?” and re-
names what Susie is doing as “The Look Away Game.” Susie just does not
want to somersault to Mom, and continues to avoid this more advanced in-
teraction. At this point, the therapist notices that Susie’s jeans are slipping.
The therapist uses a DDP intervention, based on Susie’s past loss and recent
playground experience, to verbalize Susie’s concerns to Mom. While Mom
helps with the jeans, the therapist speaks for Susie in a more childlike tone
of voice: “You never know when you’re going to need your mommy.” This
comment evokes Susie’s experience of needing her Mom to be present and
available to assuage any feeling of abandonment or loss.
But Susie stays mad. The therapist has not yet hit the mark. Continuing
with DDP and the exploration of the child’s inner life, the therapist verbal-
izes for her, using a lot of empathy and emotion: “See, Mommy, I may need
you. And when you go away, I just feel a little bit alone. What would I do if
I needed my mommy? I really, really miss you. Even though I’m 5, I still miss
you a lot.” Susie begins to wiggle. Mom is facing Susie and holding her arms,
but Susie averts her face, trying to avoid the intense feeling that comes with
needing her mom. The therapist continues with DDP to help figure out and
express what Susie is showing by her anxious and somewhat avoidant be-
havior. The therapist says how hard it is for Susie to talk about missing and
needing Mommy and that it’s hard to look at Mom when she talks about it.
The therapist says for her: “It’s hard for me.” (Susie repeats exactly.) Ther-
apist: “I’m trying . . .” and Susie adds, “my best. I’m trying my best.” She has
heard this apparently, and seems angry about having to try her best. The
therapist helps her say: “It’s hard for me to feel safe.”
Then the therapist gives her to Mommy to comfort her because of how
unsafe she feels. At this point, Susie becomes more baby-like. Sponta-
neously, she says, “Never let go” and “Don’t let me go.” She is stating her
intense need on her own, signaling that the “mark” has been hit.
While therapist and Mom continue to explore Susie’s feelings, Mom cud-
dles her, strokes her hair, and looks into her eyes. The therapist gives time
for comforting and non-verbal repairing. With the feeling they now have
had a good amount of nurturing, the therapist decides to return to the initial
Theraplay activity: somersaults. Now Susie is able to look at Mom and som-
ersault to her knowing, for now, that Mom understands how much Susie
needs her to hold on and stay close. This suggests that the words the thera-
pist gave Susie and the opportunity she had to tell Mom “Don’t let me go!”
was, indeed, just what she needed.
After the somersault, the therapist responds to Susie’s need to be found by
setting up a “Find me” game so that Susie can look away from and come
 Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy 179

back to Mom and get nurtured no matter what. Therapist: “Mom, when
Susie looks at you, give her a smile and a squeeze. When she looks away,
give her kisses!” They begin to engage in a highly reciprocal, intensely pos-
itive interaction. And Susie laughs. Not like a five-year-old, but like a little
baby, delighted at the novelty of highly charged and pleasurable engage-
ment with another that is meeting her deep need for the security that comes
with intense emotional attunement and engagement.
Then the therapist asks Mom if they can play this game at home. Mom
says that a good time is the morning when Susie comes into Mommy’s bed.
Very observant, Mom notices that Susie’s face clouds over. Here is another
opportunity for some DDP-style exploring. Quickly, Mom responds, stating
what Susie is feeling and showing empathy for and curiosity about it:

Mom (to Susie): “Are you mad all of a sudden? Are you mad that I said that you
like to come into our bed in the morning?”
Susie: “NO.”
Mom: “Then why are you upset?”
Susie: “Because you leave me all alone! And I thought I’d never see you ever
again!”
Susie is verbalizing the motive and fears behind her anger. To explore Susie’s
feelings more deeply before “fixing” them, the therapist stops Mom from reas-
suring Susie that she always comes back, and helps Susie to elaborate on her
thoughts and feelings.
Therapist: “That’s scary, Mom.”
Taking the therapist’s lead, Mom (with curiosity) asks Susie: “Were you afraid
for a long time?” Susie nods her head.
Then Susie angrily says that Mommy went shopping for a gift for her teacher.
So the therapist guesses about what is bothering her—that she’s mad that
Mom’s not keeping her in her mind while Susie is feeling scared and alone. In
formal terms, the experience of inter-subjectivity has been lost. Again Susie
says, “And she left me all alone.”
Mom: “Do you think I wanted you to feel alone and scared?” Mom is accept-
ing Susie’s thoughts and feelings and verbalizing Susie’s negative experience of
her.
Susie: “Yes.”
Mom: “Oh no, Susie! I didn’t want you to feel alone or scared. I thought I could
go shop before you woke up. But you woke up!”
Susie: “And you were GONE!”
Mom: “I’m sorry you were scared.” (Using empathy, Mom is healing Susie’s ex-
perience of an abandoning and scary mom.)
180 Chapter 13

Therapist: (Speaking for Susie) “Mommy, it’s hard for me when you’re not there.
It may be hard for a while. Just stay close.” And Susie gets into Mom’s lap for
a cuddle, which provides more healing and a repair of the relationship. Some-
times, Theraplay cannot proceed until a child’s inner experience and fears are
known, expressed, and accepted.

INTEGRATIVE CASE EXAMPLE: GRACE

Grace, a three-year-old girl adopted from Guatemala at age two, was be-
coming increasingly more of a behavior problem at home. When her mother,
Beth, came into Grace’s room to wake her in the morning, Grace would
scream, “Go away! Leave me alone!” and this angry, belligerent attitude con-
tinued throughout the day. She would vacillate between being unhappy and
dissatisfied to being superficially cheery, and would always ruin any fun that
the other family members were having. She would walk by one of her sib-
lings and smack them or knock down their blocks. Her seemingly calculated
aggressiveness angered Grace’s parents and brought them to seek treatment.
Beth and Mark were at their wits’ end because in their home, treating people
unkindly was simply unacceptable. Beth prided herself on being even-keeled
and not losing her cool with her children, but Grace’s victimization of the
other children caused Beth to feel incompetent as a protector and also to feel
hateful toward Grace, which were horrible feelings for Beth.
Theraplay sessions were planned to include games such as Caring for
Hurts, Popcorn Toes, Beep Honk, Peekaboo, Cotton Ball Hockey, Beanie
Drop, Lotion-Powder Handprints, Swinging, Special Delivery, Feeding,
Twinkle, and Sock/Shoe Race. But as Grace began to experience the fun of
Theraplay, it was clear that she felt bad about herself. Within the first few
sessions, Grace stated that she was “sad” and that the activities were hard,
despite the fact that the level of challenge was minimal. The therapist was
able to use DDP to help her to expand upon and understand these feelings
that were triggered simply by the fun of Theraplay.
In one example, Grace and her mom were playing “Cotton Ball Hockey.”
They blew the cotton ball back and forth a few times on a pillow between
them, and Grace seemed to be engaged. Mom, upbeat and lively, had a big
smile on her face, and both Mom and the therapist said, “This is fun!” Sud-
denly, a look of sadness or anger clouded Grace’s face, and she crossed her
arms and pouted. Mom stopped and asked “Why are you mad? Did I hurt
your feelings?” Grace folded her hands even tighter across her chest,
frowned more, and threw the cotton ball aside. The therapist hypothesized
that Mom’s level of happiness and excitement did not match Grace’s. Rather
than agreeing that Grace was mad, the therapist asked a more open-ended,
curious question.
 Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy 181

Therapist: I wonder what made Grace upset?

Grace kept pouting, but was looking at the therapist.
Therapist: I wonder if it’s hard to have fun?
Now, Grace looked more curious, and the furrow in her brow unknotted a bit.
(This is a sign that the therapist is on the right path).
Therapist: (speaking to Mom for Grace) Mom, it’s hard to have fun sometimes,
Mom: That’s too bad Grace, because I want you to enjoy yourself and be
happy.
Therapist: (to Mom) I know you do, Mom, but sometimes it’s hard for Grace to
feel happy, and maybe when she sees you and me having fun, maybe she just
feels bad that she can’t have fun and be happy like every one else.
Grace: Yeah!
Therapist: Wow, thank you for telling us that! You feel bad when everybody’s
having fun and you can’t do it!
Grace: Yeah! (then immediately) Can we blow the cotton ball or something?

With Grace looking visibly lighter and eager to move on, Mom and Grace
played a few more rounds of Hockey before going to the next activity. Ac-
knowledging Grace’s difficulty feeling happy allowed her to be happy and
re-engage in Theraplay.
Later, the therapist explained to Beth her guesses about why Grace got
uneasy when everyone around her was having a good time. Grace did not
have a lot of happy feelings to draw or expand upon, so both observing oth-
ers feeling joyful, as well as sensing that she too was supposed to behave
that way, may have made her feel lonely and deficient. Knowing this, Mom
was able to have more empathy for Grace when she “ruined” the other fam-
ily members’ happy moments. She also toned down enthusiasm when she
interacted with Grace. When Mom wished Grace to be happy, she was in-
advertently telling her that something was wrong with her. In subsequent
sessions, the therapist coached Mom to accept Grace’s negative feelings
rather than try to wish them away. As Theraplay therapists, we, like Beth,
may inadvertently wish to intensify positive affect during our activities. This
example alerts us to the need to be sensitive to the meanings under the
child’s behaviors and to modify our focus to resonate with the child’s needs.

ENDING THOUGHTS

The more challenging the child’s history, the more need there is for therapy
to articulate and help to discover the inner feelings, fears, needs, and wishes
182 Chapter 13

that motivate problematic behaviors. There is also a pressing need to help

parents accept and feel empathy toward their confused and distressed child.
Without acceptance and empathy, attachment may continue stunted, dis-
torted, or absent. These examples show how Dyadic Developmental Psy-
chotherapy can facilitate our Theraplay work as well as touch the child’s in-
ner world in ways that Theraplay’s here-and-now emphasis, alone, cannot.
Using DDP allows the child’s past to inform us about the reasons underly-
ing the “resistance” to structure, nurture, engagement, or challenge. DDP is
an asset to the Theraplay therapist and, we feel, an added gift to our fami-
lies.

REFERENCES

Hughes, Daniel A. (2007). Attachment-Focused Family Therapy. New York: W. W. Nor-

ton & Company.
Jernberg A. and Booth, P. (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children Build Bet-
ter Relationships through Attachment-Based Play. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lender, D., Mroz, J., and Rubin, P. (2005). Integrating Theraplay and Dyadic Develop-
mental Psychotherapy. Paper presented at the Second International Theraplay Con-
ference, Chicago, IL.
14
Parent Session in Theraplay: A Way
to Consolidate Therapeutic
Alliance and Joint Focus
Minna Laakso

In the past few years, the incorporation of a parent session in Theraplay®,

before the beginning of the child’s sessions, has been tested in Finland.
During the session, the parent is given an opportunity to realize how the
child will experience the therapy as he or she can reflect on their own child-
hood events and anticipate their child’s experiences. The session often
evokes memories of the parent’s own childhood, which facilitates reflective
work during the therapeutic process. Therapists’ experiences from the par-
ent’s own session have been positive. The aim of this article is to discuss the
therapeutic work done together with parents and to handle the session’s po-
tential to facilitate changes. My object is also to describe the course of a par-
ent session and delineate what kind of roles therapists can have in it. This
article has originated from the experiences and discussions of Theraplay
therapists who work in Finland.

THERAPEUTIC ALLIANCE

Studies have revealed that the therapeutic alliance is a crucial factor in the
success of a therapy. In child-parent therapies, the therapeutic alliance
should be developed not only with the child, but also with the parent. The
establishment of a therapeutic alliance presumes that clients feel safe in a
relationship that provides for the examination of their acts, thoughts, and
feelings on both verbal and emotional levels. In his introduction about
early preventive interventions, Daniel Stern (2006) points out two essential
factors that affect the relationship between a therapist and a client: the
client’s need for safe attachment and the significance of Winnicott’s holding

183
184 Chapter 14

environment. Also Mitchell stresses the importance of attachment by writ-

ing, “secure attachment provides the safety to explore not just the external
world, but the internal world of personal preferences, desires, and im-
pulses” (Mitchell, 2000). Thus, the therapist’s role could, at its best, be de-
scribed as a role of a good-enough grandparent that fulfills the client’s need
for safe attachment and offers a holding environment. The image of a
grandparent refers to safety, wisdom, and attitudes that imply respect for
other people and trust in their capabilities. A wise grandparent has time to
focus on another person and can put things in perspective with the help of
life experience. A wise grandparent also knows that change can happen by
creating a feeling of safety and by promoting non-intrusive attitudes. The
process of change requires safe interaction, which consists of shared explo-
ration instead of a situation where the therapist gives pat answers. In fact, a
wise grandparent utilizes Theraplay elements by signaling: “I can see you; I
am interested in you; I will take care of you; the world is a safe place; I will
help you through the change; you are skillful and adept.” A wise grandpar-
ent also wants to share experiences with you on both informational and
emotional levels. When working with parents, their session is a feasible in-
strument to enable them to experience Theraplay elements and start to de-
velop a therapeutic alliance. During the session, the therapist enters into a
playful and empathetic state of mind together with a parent, in order to cre-
ate a shared experience. The experience binds them both to a shared process
and the session can be a way to create moments of shared awareness that
promote change. As Sander (1998) writes about the importance of shared
moments of awareness, “these shifts in consciousness are brought about
through moments of shared awareness between patient and therapist as
they experience ‘moments of meeting’ within their ‘intersubjective environ-
ment.’”

PARENT’S REFLECTIVE WORK

It has been noted in several studies that the parents’ ability to reflect is re-
lated to the quality of attachment and the sensitivity of caregiving (Slade,
Grienenberger, Bernbach, and Locker, 2005a; Grienenberger, Kelly, and
Slade 2005; Slade, 2002). Therapy research and child-parent therapies have
increasingly emphasized the development of parents’ mentalization and re-
flection abilities as a catalyst for change. “An important aim of psychother-
apy, then, if not its central aim, is the extension of mentalisation” (Fonagy
et al., 2002). Studies have shown that a therapeutic intervention can be used
to improve a mother’s reflective capabilities (Slade, Sadler, DeDios-Kenn,
Webb, Currier-Ezepchick, and Mayes 2005; Schechter, Kaminer, Grienen-
berger, and Amat, 2003). Parents, who observe themselves and others in a
 Parent Session in Theraplay 185

reflective manner, observe also their own and their child’s actions, so that
they think over the feelings, thoughts, and intentions that underlie the ac-
tions. As Fonagy et al. (2002) put it, “Reflective function, or mentalization,
enables one to ‘read’ other peoples minds.” The ability to read other peo-
ple’s behavior helps to realize the purposes of their actions and to predict
them. In Theraplay, the reflective work also helps parents to think about
how their own experiences of attachment are manifested through the child-
parent interaction. An adequate ability to reflect enables parents to create
more versatile and flexible images of their own child that take into account
the child’s individuality. The ability to reflect also gives parents an oppor-
tunity to form a more realistic picture of their parenthood. Furthermore, the
ability to reflect assists them to make choices in real life. Thus, in relation
to the child, parents can act instead of react; respond to the child as a whole
instead of its external behavior. Child-parent interactional problems often
bewilder parents. A child’s reactions cause them to easily react only to ex-
ternal actions, e.g., to scold a child that is throwing a tantrum. Thus, parents
often are unable to understand the underlying causes, such as the child’s
need for attention. In Theraplay, the reflective work has already begun dur-
ing the planning of treatment. At an MIM (Marschak, 1960) feedback dis-
cussion, the parent can reflect together with the therapist on the hopes,
wishes, needs, and emotions that are behind the child’s, as well as the par-
ent’s, behavior. Reflective work continues as the parent watches the child
from behind the one-way mirror. The parents’ therapists’ purpose is to cre-
ate a secure base for them to practice reflection. The parents’ pre-treatment
session gives them referential information on which to found the reflection
of their child’s actions. The theraplay session evokes emotional experiences
in parents, which makes it easier for them to think over their child’s experi-
ences and feelings during Theraplay. In the course of the session, parents
may take a break to think about the different meanings of Theraplay ele-
ments with the help of the therapists. Through their own experiences, par-
ents become acquainted with the underlying messages of activities. The par-
ent session can also be used to model the forthcoming work done behind
the one-way mirror and to derive implications for their child’s behavior, as
well as to think about the emotions that are related to it. According to Fon-
agy, “the caregiver’s capacity to observe the moment-to-moment changes in
the child’s mental state is critical in the development of mentalizing capac-
ity. The caregiver’s perception of the child as an intentional being lies at the
root of sensitive caregiving, which attachment theorists view as the corner-
stone of secure attachment” (Fonagy et al., 2002). The ability to reflect
can develop only in interaction with other people. During the session, par-
ents are encouraged to interact, because it enables safe exploration of their
own experiences and feelings in immediate interaction. The session can
also consolidate the parents’ ability to be emotionally present during therapy
186 Chapter 14

sessions, both behind the one-way mirror and with the child. “After all, life
is lived in the present moment, which, in turn, is the temporal stage on
which memories and future anticipations play” (Stern, 1985).

FAILED PARENTHOOD

Many of our clients feel that they have failed as parents and feel themselves
inept and helpless in terms of the possibility for change. It has been noted
that a parent’s feeling of ability is related to child-parent interaction and the
sensitivity of caregiving (Coleman and Karraker, 2003). Parental sense of
failure hurts and may affect a parent’s self-image. The feeling of failure may
prove to be so hurtful that it causes some parents to build up defenses by
pushing disappointment and painful feelings away from themselves by, for
example, laying the blame of difficult feelings on the child. It may be hard
to change feelings and thoughts only by an effort of will, because change re-
quires new experiences that can compensate for the old ones. The parent
session is one way to provide these compensatory experiences. During a ses-
sion, the therapist signals to parents, his or her willingness to make eye con-
tact and stop for a shared experience, which in itself can be a nurturing
event for the parents. Basic human needs include the need to be seen, and
this applies also to parents, even if their child’s problems are the primary
reason for therapy. In child-parent therapies that strive for an interactional
change, it is equally important to pay attention to both the child and the
parents. Parents need to feel indispensable to the treatment in order to be
able to commit to it. In the parent session, the therapist uses playfulness to
help parents to believe in the possibility of change. By taking charge of the
situation, the therapist signals to the parents that he or she is willing to con-
tain the parents’ difficult thoughts and feelings as well. As John Bowlby
states: “The first is to provide the patient with a secure base from which he
can explore the various unhappy and painful aspects of his life, past and
present . . . impossible to think about and reconsider without a trusted
companion, to provide support, encouragement, sympathy, and, on occa-
sion, guidance” (Bowlby, 1988). To touch a parent during the session im-
plies a willingness to establish shared therapy sessions with the parent as a
whole other.
The parents’ own session can give the parents a sense of being active par-
ticipants in the therapy process from the very beginning and help them to
feel that their thoughts and feelings are important. “Interpersonal interac-
tion that permits the registration of perceptions, thoughts, and emotions as
causes and consequences of action and the contemplation of these mental
states without fear must constitute an important part of the foundation of
self-agency” (Fonagy et al., 2002). During the session, the therapist can
 Parent Session in Theraplay 187

show trust in the parent’s role as a co-therapist, and the parent has an op-
portunity to feel respected and be seen as the one and only parent of this
child in particular. The parent should have a feeling of being an active par-
ticipant in the therapy process, because the treatment’s target is, after all, in-
teraction. To experience oneself as active and capable encourages the parent
to launch into the process of change. The session can be helpful also when
therapists try to create a therapeutic and soothing atmosphere, where the
parent can be sure of being seen as a person with individual needs. This
makes it easier for the parent to concede to the child all the positive things
that result from Theraplay sessions.

BUILDING A NEW NARRATIVE OF INTERACTION

In his book The Interpersonal World of the Infant, Daniel Stern asks, “How
might a therapist and a patient reconstruct a therapeutically effective narra-
tive about the past?” Often the essential focus in working with parents is in
the building of a more coherent narrative about the parents’ and the child’s
joint past or history of interaction. The narrative may give one explanation
as to why the interaction is not working well between the child and the par-
ents. The new narrative may include parents’ own problems and/or prob-
lems that stem from the child’s actions. It is important that therapists and
parents can build a narrative of interaction that includes both the child and
the parents as intentional human beings, who are trying to build a good re-
lationship with each other with their weaknesses and strengths. The thera-
pist should listen to the parents’ stories carefully, give space, and respect the
parents’ pace. The therapist should show empathetic curiosity and “make
the task of reconstruction more of a true adventure for both patient and
therapist” (Stern, 1985). Having a coherent narrative of interaction gives
agency to parenthood, which facilitates the change. When you have a “nar-
rative point of origin” of problems, you can reflect about it and make deci-
sions about the actions you want to make. The building of a narrative of the
child-parent history and their present interaction is related with the parents’
own attachment history. The present interactions are influenced by our ex-
periences of other significant people in the past. The parent session often
evokes memories of the parent’s own childhood experiences, for example,
if the parent received little physical nurturing. The parent may then realize
how significant physical nurture is and how important it is. During the ses-
sion, the parent can reflect on his/her own childhood events and visualize
what kinds of experiences to give to the child. The parent session can con-
tribute to the composition of a story that covers problems and includes the
parents’ narratives of their own childhood and parenthood. The session can
help them to see and remember things: it is a means to awaken parents on
188 Chapter 14

an emotional level that is based on experience, but also on a cognitive level.

The session’s aim is to make parents reflect on parenthood and its basic
tasks. The parents’ session can be useful in the beginning of the formulation
of a new, more realistic and positive interactional story that could make
change possible.

PARENT SESSION

Secure Base
Parent sessions can evoke difficult memories and emotions, in which
case the protection from the therapist becomes an important safety ele-
ment. If a parent feels that the therapist does not see, appreciate, or sup-
port his or her feelings, the parent may have to strongly defend him/her-
self from feelings that have been evoked during the session. Prior to the
session, the therapist should examine which level the parent is ready to
work on, at that moment. Parents should not be forced to work in such a
manner that ignores the level of readiness. Before the session, we have
used assessments such as the Adult Attachment Interview, AAI (Main, Ka-
plan, and Cassidy, 1985) and The Working Model of the Child Interview,
WMCI (Zeanah, Benoit, Hirshberg, Barton, and Regan, 1994) to investi-
gate parents’ own attachment backgrounds and interactional representa-
tions. During sessions and when working with parents, the therapist
should ensure that the therapy is focused on the child-parent interaction
instead of encouraging a parent to participate too much in his/her own
therapy process if the therapist cannot follow through with individual
therapy for the parent. It is advisable to talk with each parent separately,
immediately after the session, because it enables discussions about the
thoughts and emotions he or she has had during the session. Afterwards,
Finnish therapists have also performed an attachment interview developed
by Dan Hughes (The Theraplay Institute) in which the parent is asked
about interactional experiences with significant others in both his/her own
childhood family and the current family. After their own session, parents
often begin to think about their childhood events in a new, more experi-
ential way. A mother of a 7-year-old boy answered as follows when we
asked about her childhood family:
”Before the session I would’ve said that my childhood was normal and
secure, but now I can remember that my mother probably didn’t have much
time to hold me in her arms. I have many siblings, and I don’t really recall
that either of my parents would ever have held me in their arms. I guess that
situation hasn’t changed much, since I have too little time to be with my
own kids and hold them. It feels good that I can now think about this more,
 Parent Session in Theraplay 189

even though it also makes me sad. Anyhow, I might be able decide that I
want to give more care to my children than what I got from my parents. You
just don’t always realize its importance in everyday life.”

Helping Reflection
Reflective work with a parent presumes that the therapist interrogates
rather than claims to know. Empathetic questioning is important because
too much knowledge by the therapist can deprive the parent of the ability
to share his or her thoughts. An empathetic attitude toward questioning
leaves room for interaction that can develop reflective capabilities. As Win-
nicott (1965) says, talking about the good enough mother, “It could be said
that if now she knows too well what the infant needs, this is magic and
forms no basis for an object relationship.” During the session, therapists
ponder together with parents about how the child presumably will experi-
ence the therapy process. Together they can think over thoughts, emotions,
and intentions that can be deduced from the child’s behavior. Relating
them to the child-parent interaction and child’s everyday behavior can fur-
ther process answers. It is important to maintain a secure and ruminative
approach, so that parents feel they are in such a state of mind that they can
go through with the session and play with ideas. “If too much certainty is
employed by the therapist, this offers a patient what appears to be a short-
cut to ‘knowing’” (Casement, 1985), intellectualized without insight.
A mother whose 4-year-old daughter suffered from ambivalent attach-
ment said, in the beginning of a session, that her child will probably start
to cry and bawl for mom. We discussed what feelings and thoughts might
be the source of the child’s behavior, and the mother stated that she also
was bewildered and even scared sometimes, because she did not know what
was going to happen next. She reflected that the child must feel likewise
and continued by saying that the everyday tantrums might be the result of
a sense of insecurity. Together we came to a conclusion that Theraplay sig-
nals to the child that she is not alone with difficult emotions. The mother
thought about her childhood experiences with a depressed mother, but also
about her own post-natal depression after she had given birth to her daugh-
ter. After this, therapists told her that they were going to be sensitive toward
both of their fears about being left alone in an excessively difficult situation.

Levels of Working and the Choice of “Language”

During a session, therapists should “speak the same language” as the
parents do. Parents’ abilities to reflect and express themselves can be evalu-
ated before the session by, for instance, interviewing and especially during
the MIM feedback, which can be used to establish a joint language and
190 Chapter 14

pace. With some parents, therapy work begins with activities, with others
from the handling of feelings or cognitive factors. Parents get to define the
level on which they want work, but the therapist can lead or encourage par-
ents to pass to new ones, to next levels of the therapy process. This must
not, however, happen by force. Using force to speak a language that is not
familiar to the parent is intrusive treatment and may result in increasing the
parent’s defenses. The session should take into account the rhythm and use
of the language of both parents. For example, the parents of a restless and
defiant 6-year-old boy reflected, both in their own ways, on how the child
would probably show resistance in the sessions. The mother began from the
child’s sense of insecurity and thought that her son might be afraid of a new
and strange situation, because she felt the same way in new situations. She
hoped that her son would gain courage and believe in himself. Afterwards,
the mother stated she had been exhausted before the session, but she now
had new faith and strength in her own abilities as the child’s supporter.
Meanwhile, the father started to challenge therapists by, for example, mis-
chievously blowing cotton balls (see appendix) away from them over and
over again. The father stated that this was exactly what he thought his son
would do. He recognized the same feature also in himself, a difficulty in co-
operating without challenging others to compete. The father and therapists
began to reflect together on the situations where challenging could be a
source of shared joy and where it was inappropriate to challenge. The father
was able to recognize situations when he would start challenging the child,
but instead of having a good time together, the boy would end up crying or
behaving aggressively. The cotton ball task was repeated after the discus-
sion, and as the father blew the ball to the therapist, he said: “Well, this
does feel different now.”

Joint Focus
It is important to find a joint focus for the treatment together with par-
ents, because it strengthens their commitment and enhances therapy. When
the therapist tells parents about their own session, they can be told that the
purpose of the session is to better understand their child’s problems, which
helps parents and therapists to plan the treatment together. Parents’ diffi-
culties are usually related to the child’s behavior, and the therapists’ task is
to help them to understand how a child’s behavior is linked to their com-
mon interactional history, as well as to their own past. The therapist can use
questions and discussion to handle the problem by linking it to the parents’
experiences of the on-going therapy session. A parent may in his or her own
session identify with the child. However, the session must also encourage
the parent to take over an adult’s role. A shared therapy focus comprises
also a support of parenthood.
 Parent Session in Theraplay 191

The parents of an 8-year-old boy had doubts about the usefulness of

Theraplay in helping their ill-mannered son. They found it hard to believe
that praises and unconditional acceptance could actually help. In an activ-
ity where parents dropped down small beanbags from their heads to the
hands of their therapists, (see appendix) each successful drop was met with
cheers and the parent was told how skillful he or she was. During discus-
sion, the parents realized how important it was to engage with others and
that they often tended to order the child to do or act without any connec-
tion to him. They could understand through their own experiences how
good it felt to have common activities if one could be sure of getting atten-
tion. Parents also began to think about why it was so hard to give positive
feedback about small things in everyday life. The mother said during dis-
cussion: “As a mother I should pay more attention to positive things so that
my son would not have to act so aggressively in order to be seen.”

Rhythm and Structure

Activities and discussions alternate during the parent session. The thera-
pist should remain sensitive toward parents’ experiences and allow them to
keep their distance if, for example, closeness feels too intimate. Therapist’s
questions and explanations about treatment methods create natural pauses
between intensive periods of interaction. Parents need pauses during which
they can reflect on the new experiences. The number of activities and dis-
cussion breaks depend on the parents’ progress. The therapist must be sen-
sitive to the parents’ needs and notice if either of them wants to return to
the role of an adult after an intensive experience. On the other hand, the
therapist can also encourage experimentation. With some parents, the ther-
apist may want to increase the amount of experiential activities, with oth-
ers it may be essential to emphasize discussion. For example, a mother of a
3-year-old girl found it difficult to launch into a shared experience with a
cheerful attitude with her own daughter. In the session, her task was to burst
soap bubbles (see appendix). At first, she was unsure, as if she was ashamed
of something and looked confused when she was met with delight and pos-
itive feedback. She needed to digest this for a moment, but then she began
to reflect on how it was difficult for her to receive positive feedback from
others and to believe in what was said to her. She stated how confusing it
was to be together in such an intensive manner and to receive praise when
she succeeded in small things. The soap bubble task was repeated, now at a
slower pace, which made the shared experience more intensive. Mother re-
sponded to praises by saying: “I might actually participate in this therapy. It
is good for me to learn how to be more playful and how to enjoy the little
moments of shared happiness. And of course, I like it when people com-
pliment me.”
192 Chapter 14

Building a Session
Both parents participate in the session at the same time. Parents’ and
child’s therapists take part in the session so that the therapists can perform
activities simultaneously with both parents. Therapists can change places
during the session so that parents can work with both of them. The parent’s
session is built similarly to the child’s session and begins much in the same
way. The session includes activities from each Theraplay dimension and the
atmosphere is positive. The therapist is in charge of the course of the ses-
sion and leads parents to their beanbag chairs. Parents can now be told
about the adult-led nature of the session and how it affects the therapy. The
session advances through activities, and parents get an opportunity to learn
what surprises and positive feedback really mean. Therapists and parents
also reflect on the understanding of different Theraplay elements. In gen-
eral, the functions of activities are not explained to parents before the ses-
sion. Instead, therapists first create an experience and then give parents time
to stop and think about the emotions that the experience has evoked. Dis-
cussion revolves around these experiences, if possible. Calm and nurturing
moments alternate during the session, and finally, everybody plays to-
gether. After the session, parents often state that they find it easier to grasp
what Theraplay actually means. As one mother said: “I found it a bit diffi-
cult to understand how the blowing of soap bubbles could help us. Now I
realize that this is all about accepting other people as they are; you don’t al-
ways have to perform. You just need to be yourself and have the courage to
spend time with someone else.”

CASE STUDY: WORKING WITH LEENA’S MOTHER

Leena was a 4-year-old girl living with her mother. Leena’s mother had been
depressed and lonely long after Leena´s birth. In the MIM assessment, Leena
paid hardly any attention to her mother at first. Then she protested loudly
when her mother was to leave the room. The mother felt disappointed about
herself as a parent and said she felt timid with her own child. She also de-
scribed how she had difficulties in trusting other people.
Below is a description of how we began the work with Leena´s mother by
trying to build up trust, security, and respectfulness in a surprising and em-
phatic way and by inviting the mother to start a joint journey to new ways
of being together.
We led the mother to a beanbag chair and invited her to sit down at the
same time with us.

Mother: “Oh no, there is a video camera. I hate to see myself on videotape.”
 Parent Session in Theraplay 193

Mother’s therapist: “Yes, I know, one looks and sounds so different, but we use
the video because it helps us all to see better how to help Leena. Is it ok?”
Mother: “Yes. Should I take my shoes off?”
Child’s therapist: “I’ll take them off. (Therapist takes shoes off, making contact
with the mother and counting to three. Mother looks surprised, and a little em-
barrassed). We will do the same with Leena. We will show her that adults take
care of children in sessions and in everyday life. What do you think? How will
Leena react?”
Mother: “She will start shouting at me.”
Child’s therapist: “That’s good to know. You know your child best. Why do you
think she does that? What does she feel and think? What do you feel?”
Mother: “Maybe she is afraid. I suppose she won’t trust you. Maybe it is some-
thing like that . . . I feel a little embarrassed about being so near . . . I am not
used to do this.”
Mothers’ therapist: “Yes, this may be a totally new situation and you have to
think about how you experience it.”
Child’s therapist: “We hope that we could offer Leena these new situations and
ways of being together. It is good if you, as a mother, can help us to know what
is too much for Leena when it comes to new things. Do you think that this, to
be so near now, will be too much for her?”
Mother: “No, I think this is good for her. Now, it is OK for me, too. I was just
so surprised at first.”
Mother’s therapist: “Yes, it is something new. We don’t want to do anything that
you feel is not OK.”
Child’s therapist: “If Leena is too afraid, I can try to help her with soap bub-
bles . . . Look at these bubbles. I am sure you can burst them with your finger.
(Mother bursts the bubble and smiles.) Wow, you are good at this! Do you think
Leena will do the same?”
Mother: “No, I think she will refuse to do it.”
Child’s therapist: “I’ll show you what I might do then. (Therapist blows a bubble
and takes it to the mother’s toe.) You really are special; you know how to burst
bubbles with you toes. What special toes you have.”(Mother starts to laugh.)
Mother: “I see. It is strange to hear how good you are even if you have decided
not to co-operate. I don’t know why, but for a second, I really felt I am good.”
Child’s therapist: “You are good, and we also want Leena to think that she is
good and special and can do many wonderful things and have fun with you
and others. Let’s try once again.” (Mother bursts bubbles with fingers.)
Child’s therapist: “You have really skilled fingers. How many of them do you
have? Let’s count them. (Therapist counts the fingers and finds a little wound
194 Chapter 14

while doing it.) You have a little wound here. Let’s take care of it and put some
lotion on it.”
Child’s therapist: “In Theraplay, we want Leena to know that we are interested
in her and that we want to know her well. We will also take care of hurts. How
do you feel about it?”
Mother: “I noticed that I was looking at my fingers when you were counting
them, and I saw the little wound you found.”
Child’s therapist: “Yes, this is exactly what we hope that Leena also would no-
tice. There are so many interesting and wonderful things about her, and we
wish to know her well, take care of her, and enjoy being with her.”

The following are three typical Theraplay agendas used in this case. Note
that after the first session with the mother, the child’s session begins with
only the child and therapist present in the room while the mother observes.
Later, the mother enters the room to interact with her child under the guid-
ance of the therapists.

FIRST AGENDA, MOTHERS’ SESSION

Sitting together after counting 1-2-3, taking mothers shoes off playfully,
popping the bubbles with fingers and toes, counting fingers, lotioning
mothers hands, caring for hurts, blowing cotton balls to each other, News-
paper punch, putting mothers shoes on playfully

MIDDLE AGENDA, SIXTH SESSION,

MOTHER IN SESSION 10 MINUTES

Leena hides with the therapist under a blanket and mother finds Leena,
mother counts and admires Leena fingers and toes, mother gives special
kisses; butterfly and elephant kisses, mother lotions Leena’s feet, mother
and Leena press each other’s noses and supply different noises, mother
feeds Leena holding her in her arms

END AGENDA, LAST SESSION BEFORE PARTY

AND FOLLOW UPS, MOTHER IN SESSION 20 MINUTES

Mother finds Leena under a blanket, mother feeds Leena and admires the
sounds, mother lotions Leena’s hands and feet and takes care of hurts,
mother gives special kisses, mother blows bubbles and Leena pops them,
 Parent Session in Theraplay 195

mother asks Leena to come to her in different ways while therapist helps
Leena, Mother and Leena and therapists throw balloons to each other,
Leena flies to mother’s arms in blanket swing, mother touches different
parts of Leena’s body with a cotton ball and Leena indicates where
mother touches her, mother and Leena press each other’s noses and sup-
ply different noises, mother feeds Leena in her arms, mother and Leena
leave the room holding each others hands and watching each others
eyes.

REFERENCES

Bowlby, J. (1988) A Secure Base: Clinical Applications of Attachment Theory. Hove and
New York: Brunner-Routledge.
Casement, P. (1985) On Learning from the Patient. London and New York: Routledge.
Coleman, P. K., and Karraker, K. H. (2003) Maternal self-efficacy beliefs, compe-
tence in parenting, and toddlers’ behaviour and developmental status. Infant Men-
tal Health Journal 24(2), 126–148.
Fonagy, P., Gergely, G., Jurist, E., Target, M. (2002) Affect Regulation, Mentalization,
and the Development of the Self. New York: Other Press.
Grienenberger, J., Kelly, K., and Slade, A. (2005) Maternal reflective functioning,
mother-infant affective communication, and infant attachment: Exploring the link
between mental states and observed care giving behaviour in the intergenerational
transmission of attachment. Attachment & Human Development, September 7(3):
299–311.
Jernberg, A., and Booth P. (1999) Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children Build Bet-
ter Relationships Through Attachment-based Play. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Main M., Kaplan N., and Cassidy J. (1985) Security in infancy, childhood and adult-
hood: A move to the level of representation. In Bretherton I. and Waters E. (eds.)
Growing Points of Attachment: Theory and Research, Monographs of the Society for Re-
search in Child Development, 50, Serial No. 209, 66–106.
Marschak, M. (1960) A method for evaluating child-parent interaction under con-
trolled conditions. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 97, 3–22.
Mitchell, S. A. (2000) Relationality from Attachment to Intersubjectivity. London: The
Analytic Press.
Sander, L. (1998) Interventions that effect change in psychotherapy: A model based
on infant research. Infant Mental Health Journal. 19(3), 280–281.
Schechter, D. S., Kaminer, T., Grienenberger, J. F., and Amat, J. (2003) Fits and
starts: A mother-infant case-study involving intergenerational violent trauma
and pseudoseizures across three generations. Infant Mental Health Journal 24(5):
510–528.
Slade, A. (2002) Keeping the baby in mind: Critical factor in perinatal mental
health. Zero to Three 22: 10–16.
Slade, A., Grienenberger, J., Bernbach, D. L., and Locker, A. (2005) Maternal reflec-
tive functioning, attachment and the transmission gap: A preliminary study. At-
tachment & Human Development, September 7(3): 283–298.
196 Chapter 14

Slade A., Sadler L., DeDios-Kenn C., Webb, D., Currier-Ezepchick J., and Mayes L.
(2005) Minding the baby: A reflective parenting program. Psychoanalytic Study of
the Child 60: 74–100.
Stern, D. (2006) Introduction to the special issue on early preventive intervention
and home visiting. Infant Mental Health Journal 27(1): 1–4.
Stern, D. (1985) The Interpersonal World of the Infant: A View from Psychoanalysis and
Developmental Psychology. New York: Basic Books.
The Theraplay Institute (2006) Introductory Workshop; Theraplay and Marschak In-
teraction Method (MIM). Umeå, Sweden.
Winnicott, D. W. (1965) Maturational Processes and Facilitating Environment. London:
Hogarth Press.
Zeanah, C., Benoit, D., Hirshberg, L., Barton, M., and Regan, C. (1994) Mothers’
representations of their infants are concordant with infant attachment classifica-
tions. Developmental Issues in Psychiatry and Psychology, 1: 9–18.
15
Theraplay in Combination with
Sensory and Handling Techniques:
The Body/Mind Connection in
Pediatrics
Anita Johanson Maddox and Carol R. Bettendorf

INTRODUCTION

It has long been known that there is a connection between our physical
bodies and our emotional states. For instance, a massage can alleviate ten-
sion in the body and improve the person’s overall feelings of pleasure and
comfort (Field, 2001). Infant massage, the receiving of touch in a loving
manner, can be very important to the well-being of an infant (McClure,
2000). Tension held in the tissues is often secondary to stress, either physi-
cal or emotional (Upledger, 1987). During an unexpected fall or accident
you tighten your body for protection and in emotional alarm. This tightness
in your tissue may stay in your tissue until released with assistance. Infants
and young children often carry stress and tension in their bodies that has
been gained during the birthing process (Upledger, 1987). The body of
knowledge concerned with releasing held tissue tension available to thera-
pists and the public in general is growing rapidly (Oz, 1999; Hunt, 1989;
Smith, 1986; Upledger and Vredevoogd, 1983; Feldenkrais, 1981). Com-
bining physical handling techniques with Theraplay® can be a very effective
way of treating the young child.

THERAPLAY IN CO-TREATMENT

The co-treatment used was an interweaving of two different types of thera-

pies with significant improvements in the child’s overall development. The
co-treatment concept began in an effort to address and enhance the body’s

197
198 Chapter 15

ability to calm, organize, and receive structure from hands-on therapy given
as the Theraplay session unfolded.
The physical therapist sat either behind the child or at the child’s side. Of-
ten seated activities were used as initial activities since they lent themselves
well to this method of co-treatment. During the Theraplay session the ther-
apist, who was directing and providing the Theraplay activities, was facing
the child and was usually the person most aware of the child’s eye contact
as well as facial and body expression. The Theraplay therapist might have
occasionally commented on the child’s facial feedback or asked the physi-
cal therapist providing the sensory and handling techniques about the tim-
ing for beginning gross motor activities.
Co-treatment did not compromise the integrity of either the Theraplay
work or the sensory and handling protocols used. Theraplay was carried out
as it was designed to be administered. Sensory Processing, Feldenkreis
Method®, and Craniosacral Therapy were also given using accepted proce-
dures. These methods will be discussed further.

SENSORY INTEGRATION/PROCESSING THERAPY

The theory of Sensory Integration and Sensory Integration Dysfunction was

first presented by Dr. A. Jean Ayres (Ayres, 1979). Dr. Ayres conducted ex-
tensive research of literature for studies of sensory function. She used these
studies, along with her clinical observations to formulate the Theory of Sen-
sory Integration. In 1972 she defined the sensory integration process as “the
ability to organize sensory information for use.” Sensory integration or pro-
cessing is a neurological process occurring in the brain. The person receives
sensory input from the environment through sensory nerve receptors. Envi-
ronmental sensory input is received through touch, joint (proprioceptive),
vestibular (the sense of movement and balance), hearing, vision, taste, and
smell nerve receptors. The information from sensory nerve receptors is con-
ducted to the brain for processing. After the brain processes or integrates the
sensory information, a course of action or behavior is decided on (Fisher et
al., 1991). The sensory input results usually in appropriate behaviors. For
instance, if touch is unpleasant, we move away from it. If a radio is too loud,
we turn it down. If movement on a swing is making us uneasy, we stop
swinging. We are taking appropriate actions to keep ourselves comfortable.
Sensory Processing Disorder occurs when the brain is not interpreting
sensory input correctly. The brain is either too sensitive to sensory input or
it is not sensitive enough to sensory input. If it is too sensitive to the sen-
sory input, we can get a stressed or a fight or flight response. If the brain is
not sensitive enough to the input, the individual does not react (Wilbarger
and Wilbarger, 1991; Kranowitz, 1998; Frick and Hacker, 2001; Miller, 2006).
 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling Techniques 199

For example, an adult with sensory processing difficulties might comment

that her skin felt like she had sunburn. She needed to avoid being touched
unexpectedly. A young adult with vestibular dysfunction felt like the ground
moved under her feet as she walked. She needed to walk slowly and care-
fully. A child who is underresponsive to sensory input might not cry when
she fell down.
Therapies are available which can be effective in improving Sensory Inte-
gration/Processing Dysfunction. There are times when a therapy technique
can make changes in the behavior of a child in a short length of time such
as four weeks (Frick and Hacker, 2001). Other changes in behavior can take
longer, but, in general, Sensory Processing treatment techniques produce
relatively rapid results (Wilbarger and Wilbarger, 1991).
Deep pressure can help the brain integrate sensory input (Fisher et al.,
1991, Wilbarger and Wilbarger, 1991; Miller, 2006). Deep pressure can be
given by making a sandwich with the child between two cushions and the
therapist giving pressure through the top cushion or by having the child lie
down and rolling a large ball over him with deep pressure. Deep pressure
can also be given using a brushing program taught by a physical or occupa-
tional therapist (Wilbarger and Wilbarger, 1991).
Therapeutic Listening can have a profound effect on a child’s sensory pro-
cessing. It has been based on the ideas and technology created by Alfred
Tomatis (Tomatis, 1991), Guy Bernard (Stehli, 1991), and Ingo Steinbach
(Steinbach, 1998). Shiela Frick, OTR (Frick and Hacker, 2001), is the pri-
mary author of the course on Therapeutic Listening in the United States.
Therapists must take a five-day course before they can access the head
phones and compact discs for Therapeutic Listening. Therapeutic listening
impacts the vestibular and the auditory portions of the inner ear. It is not
uncommon to see immediate changes in components of movement such as
righting reactions, equilibrium, and stability. Changes are typically ob-
served in attention; organization of behavior; self-regulation; development;
refinement and mastery of postural and motor skills; bilateral motor pat-
terns; articulation; emergence of praxis; and fine motor skills (Frick and
Hacker, 2001).
There can be chemical imbalances, diet intolerances, and/or allergies
which are impacting the function of the brain (Bock and Stauth, 2007; Pang-
born and Baker, 2005) and may be impacting sensory processing in the
brain. Common diet intolerances are the inability to process gluten and ca-
sein products correctly. Improvements in behaviors have been observed
when these foods have been taken out of the child’s diet (Lewis, 1998). Also,
there may be enzyme imbalances that affect the child’s ability to digest food
and get the necessary nutrients to the brain (DeFelice, 2006; DeFelice, 2002).
Some children, especially after using antibiotics, develop yeast infections
which can move into the blood stream and subsequently into the brain,
200 Chapter 15

impacting the brain’s ability to process sensory input (Bock and Stauth,
2007; Pangborn and Baker, 2005).

Feldenkrais Method®
Moshe Feldenkrais, D.Sc. (1904–1984), was an engineer, physicist, and
martial arts expert. Drawing on his extensive knowledge of these fields as
well as linguistics, biology, perinatal development, and athletics, Dr.
Feldenkrais avoided surgery and taught himself to walk without pain after
a severe knee injury. This event resulted in the development of the
Feldenkrais Method®.
The Feldenkrais Method is a form of somatic education that uses gentle
movement and directed attention to improve movement and enhance hu-
man functioning. With this Method, range of motion, flexibility, coordina-
tion, and graceful, efficient movement can be increased. By expanding the
self-image through movement, the Method enables adults and children to
become aware of their habitual neuromuscular patterns and rigidities and
learn to move in new ways (Feldenkrais, 1990) with less effort and less mus-
cle tension. Dr. Feldenkrais considered his treatments to be lessons for the
body and nervous system and his clients to be his students.
There are two forms of Feldenkrais Method. One is called Awareness
Through Movement (ATM). ATM’s are often done in a class, like yoga, with
the students lying on the floor or in other positions, following verbal di-
rections of the instructor. The movements are very gentle and comfortable
and are in non-habitual patterns. ATM lessons result in relaxation, relief of
pain, improved movement patterns, and organization of movement, sen-
sory, and cognitive functions. The other form of Feldenkrais Method is
called Functional Integration (FI). This form is given in one-on-one situa-
tions, with the therapist handling the client or “student,” the term used by
Moshe Feldenkrais. FI has therapeutic effects similar to ATM. More specific
individual issues can be addressed in FI lessons.
The form of Feldenkrais Method used in this case study was Functional
Integration. FI is a hands-on therapy that uses touch on the skeleton or
bones of the person receiving the therapy or “lesson.” The touch is gen-
tle and explores movement of the skeleton in a nondirective way. The
Feldenkrais practitioner shows the client, in this case study a child, how
he can move easily and effortlessly. The practitioner’s intent is to explore
just how and where the child can move without causing any discomfort
or effort. When touched and moved in this manner, the child can relax
deeply and in this relaxed state, his nervous system registers the move-
ment.
We all have habitual ways of moving, including children. These habitual
ways of moving can contain tension patterns. When the nervous system
 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling Techniques 201

learns that there are new ways of moving that are easier and do not contain
stress or tension, it seeks these preferred movement patterns. The child then
learns to move and function with less tension in his movements.
Tension, or tightness, in the tissues is often secondary to stress, either
physical or emotional. For example, during an unexpected fall or accident,
it is common to tighten the body for protection and in emotional alarm.
This tightness in the tissue may stay in the tissue until released with assis-
tance. It can become part of the child’s movement patterns (Upledger, 1990;
Feldenkrais, 1981). The Feldenkrais Method is one way of helping the body
release this trapped tension or tightness and the accompanying physical or
emotional stress.
FI lessons are given over clothing and can be provided in lying down, sit-
ting, or standing positions. Working over clothing provides an environment
which is comfortable for the child. When combining Feldenkrais Method
with Theraplay, the ability to work in many different positions of the child’s
body, enables the Feldenkrais therapist to provide lessons during most of
the Theraplay session.

CRANIOSACRAL THERAPY

Craniosacral Therapy as we know it today has been developed by Dr. John

Upledger, DO, FAAO, founder and medical director of The Upledger In-
stitute, Inc.® Dr. Upledger has published numerous articles in journals
and has written many books including: Cell Talk, A Brain Is Born (Explor-
ing the Birth and Development of the Central Nervous System), and Craniosacral
Therapy.
Dr. Upledger first came in contact with the Craniosacral System when he
was assisting in surgery to remove a calcium plaque from the posterior as-
pect of the Dura Mater at the third cervical vertebra level. His job was to re-
tract tissue so the other surgeon could remove the plaque. He noticed a
rhythm of pulsing under the Dura Mater as he held the retractor. The
rhythm was about seven pulses per minute and was not synchronous with
either the heart beat or respiration. He asked other physicians what the
rhythm was and no one knew. He began his study and research of the Cran-
iosacral System (Upledger, 2003).
The Craniosacral System is a semi-closed hydraulic system contained
within a tough waterproof membrane (the Dura Mater) which envelops the
brain and the spinal cord. An important function of this system is the pro-
duction, circulation, and reabsorption of the Cerebrospinal Fluid. Cere-
brospinal Fluid is produced in the Arachnoid Granulatons, primarily in the
Sagital Suture of the brain and reabsorbed in the Choroid Plexus primarily in
the ventricles of the brain. Cerebrospinal Fluid maintains the physiological
202 Chapter 15

environment in which the brain and nervous system develop, live, and func-
tion. As Cerebrospinal Fluid is produced and reabsorbed, the Craniosacral
Rhythm is produced. The rhythm is the change in pressure in the Dura Mater
as the Cerebral Spinal fluid increases with production until it reaches a pres-
sure where it begins to be reabsorbed. Then pressure decreases until more
production is triggered. This rhythm is about six or seven cycles per minute
and is independent of pulse or respiration. The rhythm can be palpated
through the skin and connective tissue (Upledger and Vredevoogd, 1983).
Craniosacral Therapy is accomplished using very light touch (about the
weight of a nickel). Light touch is required in order to palpate the Cran-
iosacral System and follow it to where it needs assistance. When there is a
restriction in the Craniosacral System, caused by physical or emotional
trauma, the restriction can be relieved using Craniosacral Therapy. The ther-
apist learns to detect a restriction and to stop the rhythm until enough pres-
sure builds up behind the restriction to cause it to release. Physical or emo-
tional traumas, which have become stored in the tissues as restrictions, can
be released. When the restrictions are released, function can improve, in
both physical and emotional areas (Upledger, 1987).

CASE STUDY OF WILLIAM

William, a three year old, was referred for Theraplay (Jernberg, 1979; Jernberg
and Booth, 1999) in co-treatment with handling techniques by his occupa-
tional therapist. He had characteristics of a child with autism in the severe
range (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). He was unable to accept
adult, directed structure, had a very high activity level, and was unable to re-
late to others using typical social interactions (Sameroff et al., 2004). He had
a sweet disposition as long as he could control his environment. He was not
speaking and did not appear to understand what was said to him. He seemed
to be in his own world and not relating to his environment.

History

William was the three-year-old middle child of three boys. Neither of his
siblings had characteristics of autism. William’s birth history was unevent-
ful. His health in general had been good. William had occupational therapy
and speech therapy for one year before beginning Theraplay. Mother/child
interactions were first assessed using the Marschak Interaction Method
(Jernberg, 1991a) (Marschak,1960) a method for evaluating child-parent in-
teractions under controlled conditions.
 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling Techniques 203

Pretreatment Marschak Interaction

Method with William and His Mother

It was clear during the Marschak Interaction Method (MIM) (Jernberg,

1991a) that William’s mother worked hard to engage him, but William be-
came overwhelmed, frustrated, and upset when he couldn’t communicate
his desires. He spent most of the MIM either standing by the door or laying
down on the floor. During the feeding task his mother made a few
“yummy!” sounds, asking him how many pretzels were in her hand, be-
cause she believed counting might be of interest to him. However, William
continued to scream during this task and mother chose to move on to the
next activity.
When William accidentally bumped his head on a doorknob his mother
attempted to console him by talking to him and rubbing his head. However,
he eventually appeared to stop crying, because he became interested in the
next task item she brought out. The task with the doll interested William
enough to do some of the actions himself. He didn’t repeat the actions that
his mother showed him or respond to her instructions, but when she asked,
“Should we give the dolly a bath?” He said, “ba,” and she responded, “Bath.
Good.”
The MIM that was conducted appeared to verify mother’s description of
William as a sweet-natured, smart boy who had a bond with his family
members. During the MIM he became upset when his brother needed to
leave the room. While he was crying he called out sounds that resembled
his brother’s name as well as “Let me out!”
William showed contentment when he built a block structure by himself.
But, after his mother praised him regarding the structure, he scattered the
blocks, shrieked and didn’t build again. It appeared as if William was con-
tent to play on his own, but had difficulty when he felt intruded upon. When
mother played Peek-a-Boo with William he shrieked, and when she sang to
him he attempted to scratch at her face in an effort to make her stop.
It was pleasing to see mother’s non-judgmental perseverance throughout
the MIM. She calmly attempted to help William move along at his devel-
opmental and emotional level as the tasks were performed.

Treatment: Sessions 1 to 6, Involving One Therapist

William’s first six sessions were Theraplay sessions with one therapist. For
the first session, the room was small and empty of toys except for a closed
Theraplay box. However, there were a few videos on a high shelf with a TV
set. William entered the room and immediately spotted the TV and the
videos, went to them and refused to be directed to the bean chair. His
204 Chapter 15

mother had no control over him at the time and he was very fast and very
strong. The session consisted of unsuccessfully trying to structure William.
For William’s next two or three sessions, the therapist removed the heavy TV
and stand. The room was empty except for a couch, a beanbag chair, and a
Theraplay box. William was able to sit in the beanbag chair or on his
mother’s lap for Theraplay. As long as he had no distractions and his mother
and therapist structured him physically, William was happy and able to at-
tend to the Theraplay activities. If the therapist presented objects of special
interest to him, such as crayons, he would group them and refuse to transi-
tion to another activity. Transitioning from a favorite activity was extremely
difficult for William. By session four, William was enjoying Theraplay, par-
ticipating in activities with smiles, and especially enjoying lotion and the lo-
tion song. His mother expressed how pleased she was to be in sessions with
William and be able to participate in his enjoyment. In sessions five and six,
William began to talk in therapy, repeating the name of an object after the
therapist had named it.
Activities in these first sessions were selected because they were simple and
easy for the child to understand. The child could experience success and en-
joyment in a directive learning experience. Activities used were popping bub-
bles with a specific finger while verbally and physically assisted by the thera-
pist, placing beanbags in a tube as a game, putting lotion on specific body
parts by verbally and physically indicating the body part first, nurturing by
feeding the child, and using the child’s hands and feet to squeeze play dough.
Initially activities were presented in the same order so that the child be-
came familiar and comfortable with the routine, the playful intrusion, and
the adult-directed structure. Words were kept simple and physical prompts
were used to improve William’s comprehension of the activities.

Treatment Sessions 7 plus, Involving Two Therapists

The decision to combine Theraplay and Sensory and Handling Tech-
niques was precipitated by availability of both therapists and our belief that
this could provide optimal opportunities for William’s developmental and
emotional needs. Therapy sessions were conducted with the Licensed Clin-
ical Professional Counselor (LCPC) presenting and directing the Theraplay
activities and the physical therapist sitting either behind or to William’s side
using handling techniques (described above) to help him organize, increase
body awareness, and decrease tissue tightness resulting from either physical
or emotional causes. The physical therapist was also a certified Theraplay
therapist and participated in Theraplay when appropriate. Occasionally in-
cluding another person he was familiar with allowed William to expand his
ability to interact with others and to accept changes in the dynamics of the
session.
 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling Techniques 205

The room set-up consisted of the TV on a stand, a beanbag chair, Thera-

play box, and a couch. The therapists brought William and his mother into
the room and he went to the couch or beanbag chair and sat with smiles,
showing his enjoyment, and anticipating activities. His mother commented
that all she had to say was, “We’re going to see Carol and Anita” and he im-
mediately stopped what he was doing and got ready to go.
Activities were now varied in content and in order of presentation during
each session. It was no longer necessary to keep the routine the same in or-
der to maintain William’s comfort level. Activities included play dough ac-
tivities, feeding, Ring Around the Rosy, directive ball game with an accom-
panying interactive song, catch with a ball, squeeze game between
cushions with deep pressure, and recognizing self in mirror. While she pre-
sented activities, the LCPC verbalized what was happening in the moment
and labeled possible emotions involved for William.
Using Theraplay and sensory and handling techniques, William made sig-
nificant progress in his ability to enjoy social interactions and his ability to
transition easily both at home and in session. He could easily shift his at-
tention from a highly desired object to one presented by the therapist. In the
past, letting go of a highly desired object was impossible without temper
tantrums and strong resistance. He was able to attend to adult-structured ac-
tivities for extended periods of time. He displayed empathy for others, for
example, when his brother was crying he said, “I love.” His self-esteem and
sense of himself as a person had emerged. He demonstrated pride in his ac-
complishments with smiles and pleasure. When William displayed emo-
tions the LCPC verbalized possible emotions or feeling states and William
was able to show recognition when she correctly defined the emotion he
was feeling. Speech and language progressed from about five words to ap-
proximately two hundred words.
Following these significant improvements, William began to take supple-
ments prescribed by a naturopath to enhance his body’s biochemical bal-
ance. Subsequent to taking the supplements, his mother and therapists no-
ticed significant improvements in his expressive language, and in his overall
ability to organize and calm himself. William was speaking in sentences and
was answering questions in a nearly age appropriate manner. It can be
noted that these improvements probably would not have occurred without
the base of social interactions and language learned during Theraplay with
sensory and handling techniques.

ACTIVITIES

Artful pacing and an animated voice should always be considered essential

elements in Theraplay activities. Where therapist is written, parent can also
206 Chapter 15

be inserted after the parent had been instructed and/or had seen a demon-
stration.
Deep Pressure with Cushions: The child was laid down on a cushion or pillow.
Another pillow was placed on him to hide his tummy, arms, and legs. Care was
taken to have a cushion or pillow be placed not higher than the child’s collar-
bone so that the child’s face was carefully observed for an indication of dis-
comfort as well as the establishment of eye contact. The therapist then played
a game of “Squeeze,” and firm, even pressure was applied to the top pillow.
The pressure could be varied by applying pressure from top to bottom or bot-
tom to top of the cushion. This activity is an engaging activity, but the child
may perceive this as challenging as it involves the risk of being partially hid-
den. This activity also involves sensory play when deep pressure is applied. The
child was “hidden” between the two pillows which could be placed on the
floor or propped up against the wall. The child could also be “hidden” for a
parent to happily discover. The goal of this activity is the establishing and
maintaining of eye contact, calming and organizing of the body, as well as of-
fering the child to trust the therapist’s ability to keep the child safe. A variation
of squeezing deep pressure was to have the child made into a pizza, sandwich,
or hot dog. The therapist and parent put imaginary toppings such as cheese,
mustard, ketchup, tomato sauce, etc., on the cushion. Different speeds and
amounts of pressure were applied as the imaginary toppings were added.
Stretchy Tube: This activity used a plastic accordion like tube that made
noise when pulled or pushed back together. This is an engaging activity
with structure. The goal of this activity is maintaining eye contact, enjoyable
teamwork, and following of directives on the part of the child. The tube was
placed in both of the child’s hands, with therapist assist if necessary. The
therapist exaggerated the stretching of the tube by leaning back as far as
possible. While the tube was stretched the therapist commented with an an-
imated tone of voice about the length of the tube and the child’s strength
and skill. Variations on this game included signaling the child (either with
words or facial signals such as blinking) when the tube should be stretched.
The child and the therapist also pushed the tube together as a joint activity.
The tube was made into a circle and played with as a hat.
Lotion with Dots: The lotion bottle is held by the adult and the lotion is
put on the child. One of the most successful activities can be applying lo-
tion. Often lotion is the activity that seems to become central in the treat-
ment and becomes the “ice breaker” when the child maintains some eye
contact and is delighted and relaxed. Smiles and laughter are elicited. The
lotion is often tolerated and the activity can be sustained because of the
deep, firm pressure applied. For some children the lotion is enjoyed if it is
dotted on the hands, arm, and legs. The dots can be counted as each dot of
lotion is applied. The routine and familiarity of counting is pleasing to the
child. Younger children or those who appear more sensitive to big move-
 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling Techniques 207

ment have relished having the lotion applied in dots on each finger while
the therapist expressed delight in the child’s fingers, arms, toes, and legs.
Older children or children of a higher developmental level also enjoy the
application of stripes or their names written in lotion. Once trust is estab-
lished with the child, lotion putting dots of lotion on the face with gentle
circles can be very nurturing.
Zip with Lotion: After lotion is applied, the therapist (or parent after learn-
ing the activity) held one hand on the top of the child’s arm and one hand
on the underside of the child’s arm. With firm pressure, the therapist’s
hands glided over the child’s arm while counting, “1-2-3-Zip!.” The 1-2-3
was done only after eye contact was established and “zip” was said while
the therapist’s hands quickly glided over the child’s arm. This activity can
also be done on a child’s leg in the same way.
Ball with Holes: Using approximately five multi-colored chiffon scarves:
Balls with holes that are designed to be caught easily became a unique and
fun activity when scarves were used. The ball was held by both the child and
the therapist so this became an engaging activity that afforded eye contact
between the child and therapist or parent. Scarves were presented to the
child one by one with the therapist showing the child how the scarf could
be inserted in the holes in the ball. Each time the scarf was presented to the
child, the therapist was playful in the presentation of the scarf. Options in-
cluded playing peek-a-boo with the scarf, putting the scarf on the therapist’s
head so that it could be taken off while maintaining eye contact, or bring-
ing the scarf up to the therapist’s face. These placements on the part of the
therapist ensured that the child didn’t simply take the scarf from the thera-
pist, but instead played an engaging game with another person. The scarves
were put in the holes by the child or therapist and child together. The ther-
apist commented on the beauty of the child’s hands and fingers while do-
ing the activity and also on the beauty of the ball with the scarves clearly
visible inside. The action of pulling the scarves out of the ball became a fun
activity as well as they were drawn out of the holes.
Scarves on the Head Become a Hat: The scarves used in the above activity
were placed on the child’s head. The child often commented that this is a
hat. He enjoyed feeling the scarves on his heads as scarves were placed there
by the therapist. The child also liked the feeling of the scarf on his face
while the therapist directed a peek-a-boo game. The scarves were placed by
one person or together on the head. A variation included the therapist as-
sisting the child with placing the scarves on the therapist’s and parent’s
head. A group activity developed as each person felt the scarf on their head
and face and looked at and commented on the other person’s scarf.
Tube with Beanbags: The tube was made of poster board thickness paper
rolled and taped into a tube. The therapist held the tube and put the child’s
hands on the bottom of the tube to receive the beanbags inserted one by
208 Chapter 15

one. The therapist held the beanbags at eye level, and eye contact was es-
tablished with the child as the beanbag was put in the tube. The element
was often surprising to the child, as the beanbag was felt by the child as it
dropped in his hands.

REFERENCES

American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders DSM-TR Fourth Edition (Text Revision). Washington D.C. pp. 70–75.
Ayres, J. (1979). Sensory Integration and the Child. Los Angeles: Western Psychologi-
cal Services.
Bock, K., and Stauth, C. (2007). Healing the New Childhood Epidemics: Autism,
ADHD, Asthma, and Allergies: The Groundbreaking Program for the 4-A Disorders.
New York: Ballantine Books.
DeFelice, K. (2006). Enzymes: Go with Your Gut: More Practical Guidelines for Digestive
Enzymes. Johnston, Iowa: Thundersnow Interactive.
———. (2002). Enzymes for Autism and Other Neurological Conditions: Practical Guide
to Bio-Medical Therapy. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Feldenkrais, M. (1990). Awareness Through Movement. New York: HarperCollins,
Publishers.
———. (1981). The Elusive Obvious. Capitola, Calif.: Meta Publications.
Field, T. (2001). Touch. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Fisher, A., Murray, E., and Bundy, A. (1991). Sensory Integration: Theory and Practice.
Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company.
Frick, S., and Hacker, C. (2001). Listening with the Whole Body. Madison, Wisc.: Vital
Links.
Hunt, V. (1989). The Infinite Mind: Science of the Human Vibrations of Consciousness.
Malibu, Calif.: Malibu Publishing Co.
Jernberg A. M., and Booth, P. B., (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children Build
Better Relationships Through Attachment Based Play. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jernberg, A. M. (1991a). “Assessing parent child interaction with the Marschak In-
teraction Method” (MIM). In C. E. Shaefer, K. Gitlin, and A. Sandgrund (eds.) Play
Diagnoses and Assessment. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Jernberg, A. M., et al. (1991b). Reciprocity in Parent-Infant Relationships. Wilmette, Ill.:
The Theraplay Institute.
Jernberg, A. M. (1979). Theraplay. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kranowitz, C. (1998). The Out-of-Sync Child: Recognizing and Coping with Sensory In-
tegration Dysfunction. New York: Penguin Putnam Inc.
Lewis, L. (1998). Special Diets for Special Kids. Arlington, Texas: Future Horizons.
McClure, V. (2000). Infant Massage: A Handbook for Loving Parents (3rd revised edi-
tion). New York: Bantam.
Marschak, M. (1960). “A method for evaluation of child-parent interactions under
controlled conditions.” Journal of Genetic Psychology. (97): 3–22.
Miller, L. J. (2006). Sensational Kids: Hope and Help for Children with Sensory Process-
ing Disorder (SPD). New York: Penguin Group.
 Theraplay in Combination with Sensory and Handling Techniques 209

Oz, M. (1999). Healing from the Heart. New York: Penguin Group.
Pangborn, J., and Baker, M. (2005). Autism: Effective Biomedical Treatments. Boston:
DAN!
Sameroff, A. J., McDonough, S. C., and Rosenblum, K. L. (2004). Treating Parent-In-
fant Relationship Problems: Strategies for Intervention. New York: The Guilford Press.
Smith, F. (1986). Inner Bridges: A Guide to Energy Movement and Body Structure. At-
lanta: Humanics Limited.
Stehli, A. (1991). The Sound of a Miracle. New York: Avon.
Steinbach, I. (1998). 3rd Ed., revised. SAMONAS Sound Therapy: The Way to Health
Through Sound. Kellinghusen, Germany: Techau Verlag. (Original work published
in German, 1994).
Tomatis, A. A. (1991). The Conscious Ear: My Life of Transformation Through Listening.
Barrytown, New York. Station Hill Press.
Upledger, J., and Vredevoogd, J. (1983). Craniosacral Therapy. Seattle: Eastland Press.
Upledger, J. (1987). Craniosacral Therapy II: Beyond the Dura. Seattle: Eastland Press.
———. (2003). Cell Talk: Talking to Your Cells. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.
Wilbarger, P. and Wilbarger, J. (1991). Sensory Defensiveness in Children Aged 2–12.
Denver: Avanti Educational Programs.
16
Relinquishment Visits: Saying
Goodbye Is an Unnatural Process
Terra Bovingdon and Karen Fabian

A sobbing child, confused, anxious, scared; an angry, grief-stricken parent

coming together in a sterile environment, under the watchful eyes of the
same system that has deemed their relationship unhealthy, a risk to the wel-
fare of the child. The “final visit” is memorable for its finality, tension, and
stoicism. All too often this is the scene that plays itself out for children in
foster care, when parental rights are terminated and they are court-ordered
to have a final visit with their biological parents. Rather than providing a
springboard for future thinking, this final visit has the “stickiness” of a neg-
ative memory that endures through time (Perry, 2006).
No process may ever exist that makes the “final visit” healthy and “okay.”
However, by using a more therapeutic approach the scars may be less dam-
aging, resulting in fewer barriers as the child moves forward to adoption. At
Calgary Family Services, an approach has been designed to help all parties
through these unnatural visits, and to move children along the path of per-
manence. It is not a process that mitigates the sadness, loss, and grief that
accompanies such a significant loss, but it is a process that guides birth par-
ents toward success during this important moment with their children. This
process has seen powerful outcomes as birth parents have stated, “I didn’t
think I could do it, but I did a good job for [my child].”
Seven years ago, the Adoption Counselling Program at Calgary Family Ser-
vices was asked to undertake a “relinquishment visit” in an active case in the
program. Knowing the typical scenario of how these visits go and the lingering
fallout, the Child Welfare worker succinctly stated, “You can do the visit or
clean up the mess after we do it.” Thus began the process of developing an ap-
proach which would combine the learning from several fields, and be under-
pinned by the program’s mainstay of Theraplay® (Jernberg and Booth, 1999).

211
212 Chapter 16

By combining the current research on child development, Dyadic Devel-

opmental Psychotherapy, attachment, trauma, neuroscience, grief, and loss,
the “Therapeutic Relinquishment Visit” was born. The framework empow-
ers the parents to play a positive role in moving children forward and allows
parents to walk away with a sense of having “done a good job” at the diffi-
cult and extraordinary task of saying a final goodbye to their child.
In keeping with the parameters of Theraplay, all parties are prepared for
the final visit and are brought together through the use of anxiety-reduc-
ing play. It is through the positive aspects of structured play that anxiety
is reduced, allowing children to ask their toughest questions and adults to
answer these questions in a health-promoting manner, one final gift to
their children. The play-based visit gives the children an opportunity to
relax and receive the goodness to which they are entitled and which the
adult provides without expecting anything in return (Jernberg and Booth,
1999).

TIMELINE

When a request comes in for a relinquishment visit, a therapeutic team is

assembled. One counselor will undertake the preparation of the biological
parent(s), one will prepare the child, and a third team member is identified
to support the foster/adoptive family. Whenever possible, the workload is
based on who already has a working relationship with the child, as this is
the relationship that will carry forward, supporting the child in their place-
ment following the relinquishment visit.
The initial work begins with the biological family identified for the visit.
Making contact and getting the parent(s) engaged is often the first hurdle—
this process will be discussed in length later in the chapter. Once the fam-
ily is engaged in the process, three to four sessions are scheduled with their
identified counselor to begin preparations.
The parents’ level of commitment, stability, and focus are assessed in
these initial sessions and a date is established for the actual visit, usually
two weeks following the initial parent session. In scheduling the date of the
final visit several things need to be considered: visits typically occur near the
end of the week to allow all parties some time before returning to their reg-
ular routine and they are never scheduled close to important holidays; or
near the child’s birthday.
The child is not prepared for the visit until there is a strong sense of
parental engagement and “child-focused” follow through. Even then, the
child is only informed of the impending visit a few days prior to the estab-
lished date. This is to allow the information to resonate for the child, but
not to linger for a lengthy period unresolved and heightening their anxiety.
 Relinquishment Visits 213

The child’s counselor meets with the child at least twice prior to the final
visit, with the focus being on informing the child, explaining the structure of
the visit, helping the child to create a gift to give during the visit, discussing
questions they may want to ask, and answering questions the child has
about the process. Foster and/or adoptive parents are included in this prepa-
ration as they will be the individuals supporting the child emotionally on a
more constant basis, following the final encounter with birth parents.

PREPARATION FOR BIRTH PARENT(S)

The work with the birth parents initially focuses on getting them into the
counselor’s office. Frequently, these parents are angry, hurt, and defensive.
They usually come to the first session angry at the system that has removed
their children, suspicious that the counselor is “part of the system,” and pre-
senting as non-compliant. The most important part of this stage for the
counselor is to validate the individual’s emotions and experiences, as well
as joining in an inter-subjective process characterized by non-verbal at-
tunement, reflective dialogue, acceptance, curiosity, and empathy without
the presence of judgment or criticism (Hughes, 2006). Through the use of
validation and a focus on being child-centered, many parents have been
able to successfully engage in the process and leave their anger “at the
door.” It is made very clear to families that the visit must stay child-focused
or it will be canceled or stopped if deemed necessary by any member of the
therapeutic team.
During the initial 3 to 4 sessions with the parents, they are encouraged to
bring in pictures and meaningful gifts to present to the child. Parents are in-
formed that any gifts, pictures, or cards they intend to bring into the room
for the child, must be in the counselor’s possession prior to the visit. Par-
ents are aware that this is to ensure that there are no messages, addresses, or
identifying information being passed on to the child that will place the
child in dual loyalties, conflict, or at risk.
Parents are also prepared in the initial phase to plan a snack to share dur-
ing the visit. This is a nurturing act in which the birth parent can bring the
child’s favorite treats to share. In one case, the mother insisted on bringing
sushi for her four year-old daughter. Initially the team was skeptical, but
when asked, the little girl stated that it was exactly what she wanted to share
with her Mom.
A crucial part of the preparation stage for parents is helping them to iden-
tify the “tough questions” they may be asked by the child during the visit.
One mother made it very clear that she would not give the reasons as laid
out by “the system” as she deemed these “lies.” She was encouraged to stay
truth-based and at a developmentally appropriate age level for the child,
214 Chapter 16

and always to remain child-focused. This mother was able to answer her
daughter’s question about why she could not parent her with “I was unable
to protect you in the way you needed.”
System bashing is discussed with parents in order to help them to un-
derstand that such a stance could have negative implications for their child
who will be still part of the system. Parents are guided to refrain from using
such language as “I’m fighting to get you back,” “I’ll find you,” “You know
where to find me,” as these messages do not support the moving forward
process of the child.
Parents are supported in assuming personal responsibility for the cir-
cumstances that have resulted in the apprehension of their child. Parents
understand that children will hold themselves responsible, especially if no
one else assumes responsibility. We have witnessed parents, who are drug
addicted, explain to their children that they have problems that need pro-
fessional help. One mother explained that she was wrong to burn her chil-
dren’s hands on the stove, adding that it was not their fault and she did not
know how to be a “day to day” mom.
Preparation also includes helping parents verbalize three messages that
seem to be universal, into their own words. The messages include: they will
love their children forever, nothing that has happened is the child’s fault,
and that they want the child to grow up to be happy and healthy. The third
message is often expanded by parents encouraging their child to let others
into their heart and reminding them that they can hold everyone (birth, fos-
ter, and adoptive families) in their hearts simultaneously.
Parents often want the children to know that they will be working hard
to get themselves healthy for when they may meet in the future. Dr. Gordon
Neufeld (2007) speaks to the importance of bridging children to the re-
union. Thus in relinquishments it is openly discussed that in Alberta at the
age of 18, individuals can put their names on an adoption registry to be re-
connected with birth family. Research indicates that the vast majority of fos-
ter and adoptive children will seek out their birth family. Many answers to
the “tough questions” focus on the drive to reconnect.

PREPARATION FOR CHILDREN

In the preparation stage, the child has fewer sessions. Theraplay is a key
component to engaging with the children. Often a session of Theraplay is
planned to engage with the child, bolster the connection to the foster/adop-
tive parents, and reduce the child’s anxiety. Part of the preparation session
is used to explain the structure of the visit and what to expect of the visit.
Time is also spent helping the child prepare a gift to give to their parent. Of-
ten this gift is a very simple, but meaningful handprint of the child. Usually
 Relinquishment Visits 215

children will bring a current photo of themselves to give as well. Both may
be placed in a frame by the child’s therapist or foster parent.
In planning the final visit, the children are asked which of the Theraplay
activities they enjoyed and would like to share with their parents. These ac-
tivities are used in the room on the final visit to re-anchor all parties. Keep-
ing balloons aloft and other activities that are arousing, have been utilized
to re-engage the dyad at the beginning of the visit and are then followed
with a settling activity, such as “trace a message” or “caring for hurts.” (See
appendix for activities.)
An important piece in preparing the child for the court-ordered visit, is
the opportunity to ask the “why” questions. While these questions stimu-
late the drive to reconnect, they also play a powerful role in the develop-
ment of the child’s future narrative and their future relationship to their
own children. As Dr. Daniel Siegel (1999) states, “A profound finding from
attachment research is that the most robust predictor of a child’s attach-
ment to parents is the way in which the parents narrate their own recollec-
tions of their childhood experiences” (p. 6).
Often hearing the questions other kids have asked can be helpful in aid-
ing the child to generate their list of questions. Some of the “tough ques-
tions” children will ask include: “Why is this happening?,” “Will I see you
again?,” “What about my siblings?,” “Will you remember me?,” “How will
you remember me?,” and specific questions about abuse or selecting a part-
ner over the kids.
Children are encouraged to think about and ask their “tough questions”
so they can begin to make sense of events and feel the futility associated
with the loss. As Dr. Neufeld and Dr. Gabor Mate (2005) state, “Registering
futility is the essence of adaptive learning. When our emotions are too hard-
ened to permit sadness or disappointment about something that didn’t suc-
ceed, we respond not by learning from our mistake, but by venting frustra-
tion” (p.170).

PREPARATION FOR FOSTER/ADOPTIVE PARENTS

Preparation with foster and adoptive parents initially involves discussing

logistical concerns. If they are driving, where to park, bringing a camera for
pictures, bringing a current photo, and what to expect leading up to and fol-
lowing the visit. By including these caregivers in the preparation stage with
the child, they can become familiar with the affect modulation of Theraplay
and specific activities that they may employ with the child to help with self-
soothing and regulation during this emotionally stressful time.
On the day of the final visit, a third counselor will sit behind the one-way
mirror supporting the foster/adoptive parent and helping them to understand
216 Chapter 16

their role in emotionally supporting the child. Families are encouraged to

observe from behind the one-way mirror, as they are the ones that carry for-
ward with the child and are in the best position to stay present with their
child’s pain and offer comfort. Consistent with Dr. Neufeld’s view of futil-
ity, Dr. Alan Wolfelt (2005) wisely notes, “Companioning is about being
present to another person’s pain; it is not about taking away the pain” (p.
33). When caregivers experience the pain and suffering of their child, they
instinctively want to take the pain away. Yet, to truly companion another
human being through grief requires that we sit with the pain and overcome
the instinct to “fix.” This requires caregivers to be the agents of futility as
well as the angels of comfort (Neufeld and Mate, 2005).
We have seen foster/adoptive parents brought to tears behind the mirror,
but it has offered them a deeper understanding of the child’s inner subjec-
tivity, and the bond between the parent and child. One adoptive father
stated through tears that the process “made me love her more.”

STRUCTURE OF THE VISIT

The structure of the visit is important in anchoring all parties in the unnat-
ural process of saying a final goodbye to family. The visit is structured in a
manner that is child-focused. The child enters and leaves the room first.
This is to reduce the feeling of “being left” or abandoned by the parent leav-
ing first. The parent is asked to arrive at least a half-hour before the visit, to
review the process with their therapist and to reduce the chance of a
crossover with the child and foster/adoptive family arriving. Once the child
has arrived and claimed the room for the visit, and the foster/adoptive par-
ents are set up behind the observation mirror, the interpreting therapist be-
hind the mirror alerts the therapist and parent. The biological parents are
aware that foster/adoptive parents are viewing from the observation room.
The room for the visit is colorful and child-friendly with very little furni-
ture and no toys to cause distraction. The intent is for engagement to occur
in the context of the relationship. Several therapist-directed activities are
available if necessary. A blanket is usually set out on the floor to anchor the
dyad in space and to provide a place for sharing the snack.
One therapist will remain connected to the child in the room, in an un-
obtrusive way, flowing in and out of interaction based on need. For safety
reasons, usually the therapist that is present to support the parent will re-
main close to the door. Although relinquishment visits do not go ahead if
the therapist does not feel the parent can remain child-focused, these are
emotionally laden visits, and precautions are taken to ensure the child’s
safety. These precautions include: alerting reception staff of the visit occur-
ring, keeping one therapist close to the door, having foster/adoptive family
 Relinquishment Visits 217

leave immediately following the visit, and having the biological parent re-
main until the family has left the vicinity. In one particular case, the grand-
father had a restraining order against him for previous incidents of “stalk-
ing” the foster family. As the visit was ending he attempted to leave the
building simultaneously, adding that he needed to get “some air.” This was
averted by the therapist stating he would have to wait.
The visits often begin with an emotional reunion of hugs, kisses, and an
informal inventory similar to Theraplay. The inventory usually consists of
exclamations over physical changes, and talking about how the foster/adop-
tive family is doing a good job looking after the child. It has also been a
time where parents will collect their child, sitting down to rock them, even
with older children.
Dr. Neufeld stresses the importance of emphasizing “sameness” between
children and their estranged parents, highlighting that what the two share,
connects them. When one six year-old boy asked his mother how she would
remember him, the dyad each created a paper heart and wrote down things
they shared in common with one another. This activity lead to great moments
of meeting, as they both ended up laughing about their hair, printing, noses,
and laugh being the same. During relinquishments laughter and tears are wel-
come, as they both have an integrative capacity in the brain (Neufeld, 2007).
Following the reunion, the flow of the visit naturally moves toward the
sharing of gifts and looking through the photo album parents have pre-
pared for the child. This is an intense time of engagement; usually children
sit on their parent’s laps to go through the album. Several parents have in-
cluded blank pages at the end of the album for the child to add their future
pictures. This time of connection naturally leads into playful activities, as a
release for the emotionality of the engagement.
Theraplay activities such as “catching bubbles” or “keeping a balloon
aloft,” are often among the favorite activities chosen for the final visit. With
the “nervous energy” released, the flow proceeds to the sharing of the snack.
It is often during this intimate, nurturing activity that the children will be-
gin to broach the “tough questions.” The children, with encouragement
from their therapist, will often have their questions written down, which of-
fers support during this highly anxious time.
The parents are prepared in their individual sessions to answer the tough
questions. Responses have included, “I am not able to be your growing up
mom,” “I need to get myself healthy” and “I shouldn’t have hurt you, that
was wrong of Mommy.” If a question is asked that stumps the parent, they
are encouraged to say “That’s a mystery” or “I’m not sure,” rather than feel
obligated to give a quick answer. Occasionally the therapist will help field
such questions.
Once the tough questions have been answered, the visit starts to draw to
a close. Typically visits will last no more than about an hour, due to the
218 Chapter 16

amount of emotional energy needed by both parties to remain in a healthy

interaction. By sensing the tone of the room and the emotionality, a thera-
pist will usually structure the last few minutes of the visit by announcing
that it is time to say goodbye, getting the dyad together for a final photo and
goodbye hugs. In this moment a Theraplay activity such as “blanket
wrap/drag” has been extremely useful in transitioning the child without fu-
eling their anxiety.
In anecdotal experience following the visit, birth parents have expressed
pride in themselves for “the gift” they just gave their child in moving for-
ward. Parents express their amazement at doing “a good job” in an unnat-
ural process. One father stated that he appreciated the “process” and wished
he had a similar opportunity with his three older children.

LEARNING

From experience we have honed and improved the process with the focus
always being on the child and the relationship with the birth parent, even
though this relationship is ending. We have learned to keep the numbers in
the room down, so that the child and parent can be the focus. This has
meant doing separate visits with grandparents.
On occasion we have had requests for Child Protection Workers to observe
from behind the one-way mirror. Generally speaking this has not been fea-
sible, as the parents’ association with the investigative nature of the “system”
can act as a barrier to the therapeutic stance that is necessary during the visit.
Most importantly, we have learned that the emotionality of the prepara-
tion work and the actual visit take a toll on staff. Thus, we ensure a team ap-
proach and team support to discuss and debrief the visit when it is complete.
With limited time frames available to work within and an exceeding
amount of pressure being placed on staff to provide these visits for children,
we have established program parameters to reduce the strain. For example,
we will provide relinquishment visits for children that are already in our
programs in our center. Furthermore, we will spend no more than two
weeks in preparing for and completing the visit, and we will not accept too
many referrals for this specific service in a short time period.
Staff has also learned that working either or both sides of the dyad can be
difficult work. Some team members are more comfortable working with the
parents, while others prefer to prepare the children. It is important to sup-
port these preferences and play to the individual team member’s strengths
in facilitating the process.

The staff at Calgary Family Services is privileged to be involved with families

during this significant time of loss and new beginnings. We would like to
 Relinquishment Visits 219

thank all of the participants who work hard to give children the experience of
a healthy goodbye. As Dr. Wolfelt (2005) advises:
The essence of finding meaning in the future is not to forget the past, as I
have been told, but instead to embrace my past. For it is in listening to the mu-
sic of the past that I can sing in the present and dance into the future. (p. 44)

CASE STUDY: RELINQUISHMENT

Background information: Susan’s two children were taken into custody of

Child Protection Services due to issues of neglect, maternal drug use, and
failure to protect. The children were both toddlers at the time of relinquish-
ment visits that were court-ordered when the children became permanent
wards of the court.

Date: November 14, 2007

Telephone contact with Susan
Susan agreed to come in for an initial session to discuss the court-ordered
relinquishment visits with her children. Susan was sad and resigned in her
presentation, but did not become angry or hostile toward the therapist. (It is
not uncommon for the parents to target their anger at the therapist initiating
discussion about the relinquishment visit.)

Date: November 21, 2007

Session with Susan
Susan brought her cousin, who had also experienced the loss of her chil-
dren to Child Protection Services to the initial visit. The cousin was assessed
for whether or not she would be supportive and helpful to the process, or if
she would be a detriment to the process by not supporting Susan or the
process. The cousin was very supportive, and able to manage her own loss
while being present for Susan.
In the initial session, Susan was receptive to the plan for the relinquish-
ment visits with her children. Susan reported having recently left a physically
abusive relationship and acknowledged that she was unable to be the day-
to-day parent her children needed. Susan readily assumed responsibility and
was focused on using the visit, as outlined by the therapist, to move her chil-
dren forward under the difficult circumstances. Susan and her cousin, were
guided in ensuring a strong support system was in place for Susan during the
emotional process. Thus, when the visit was over, Susan would not return to
work for the day, and would have someone supportive to be with her.
Susan expressed concern for her two-and-a-half-year-old daughter’s reac-
tion and being able to manage her daughter’s anger in the visit, as previous
220 Chapter 16

visits had been characterized by her daughter’s explosive anger vented at

Susan, and avoidance. It was determined that separate visits for each of the
children would be best to keep the anxiety low, and enable Susan to focus
her complete attention on the child present in the room. Due to Susan’s own
anxiety around her daughter’s potential reaction, she decided that it would
be best to do the visit with her daughter first. Susan was made aware that
the foster mother would be behind a two-way mirror to support the children
in the home following the difficult and emotional process.
A discussion was held in detail about how the visit would be structured
around playful games that were selected to enable the dyad to interact play-
fully, keeping their anxiety and emotionality in check during the relinquish-
ment visit. It was explained to Susan that she could bring a snack to share
in each of the visits, a photo album to give each of the children, and a gift
that would not be distracting from the dyadic interactions of the visit. It was
stressed with Susan that any gifts and photos had to be brought to the next
preparation session for the therapist to review. She was also encouraged to
have an idea of what the snack would be in advance, to enable this to be
shared with the foster parent to ensure the children would like such a snack.
Susan was encouraged to bring in a camera, which the therapists would use
to capture pictures of the dyad.
In the first session, it was stressed to Susan the importance of staying
child-focused in the visit, and the need for adults to assume responsibility
for what is happening to the child. Susan was directed to think of what
“tough questions” her daughter might ask regarding the circumstances and
her final visit with her mother. A tentative schedule for further parent prepa-
ration sessions and the two relinquishment visits was established at the end
of the first session.

Date: November 23, 2007

Parent Preparation Session #2
Susan and her cousin in attendance

Susan brought in a letter she had written and the pictures she wanted to
give to the children in each of their visits. The letter was well written and
child-focused, Susan agreed to remove one statement that told her daughter
to come looking for her when she was older. It was discussed that this could
cause her daughter to feel pressured and increase her sense of conflicted
loyalties. Susan was in agreement to taking it out and staying child-focused.
Susan shared the pictures she wanted to leave with each of the children.
They were reviewed to ensure the appropriateness of the pictures, and that
no identifying information existed in the photos or was written on the back
of the photo. Susan was awaiting her paycheck to buy a gift for each of the
children. She agreed to bringing the gifts to the relinquishment unwrapped
 Relinquishment Visits 221

or in a gift bag that would allow them to be checked before going into the
room. Susan shared her plan of support for after each of the visits, and veri-
fied that she would not be alone. There was a concern about being able to get
money to purchase a gift and snacks for each child. A plan was made to in-
form the therapist the day before the visits if this was going to be a problem.
Susan identified several possible “tough questions” her daughter would
ask in the visit. Given the age of her son (1 year old) and his developing lan-
guage skills that would not permit him to ask questions, Susan covered sev-
eral of the issues in the letter. Susan acknowledged that her daughter would
want to know why she is not able to live with Susan any longer. To which
Susan verbalized her response that she had made mistakes and was unable
to care for the children properly. She was going to follow up the statement
with the three things mothers want their children to know: that they love
their children, nothing that has happened is the child’s fault, and that she
wants the children to grow up happy and healthy, and that means letting a
day to day mommy into their hearts. She also wanted to inform her daugh-
ter that she was going to look after herself and get herself help.

Date: November 27, 2007

Child Preparation Session #1

The purpose of the preparation visit with Susan’s two children was to pro-
vide them with the opportunity to get familiar with not only the sights and
sounds of the room in which they would be having their final goodbye with
their birth mother, but also to build a relationship with the therapist who
would be the support person for them during this experience. The children
were accompanied by their foster mother, Linda, who also participated in
the preparation session.
The session consisted of a number of Theraplay activities. These activities
were used in order to communicate safety and trust within the relationship,
but also to diffuse the presence of anxiety and insecurity that might surface
for the children. On the way to the playroom, a simple scavenger hunt, con-
sisting of finding puzzle pieces to put together, was set up for the children.
Once in the room, the children engaged in several games, which included:
powder clouds, balloons aloft, popcorn blanket, bean bag balance, bubble
catch, smooth ride, blanket swing and blanket drag ride (see appendix).
Within the session, using pictures of homes and people (“tummy mom-
mies,” “growing up mommies”), it was explained by the therapist that the
children were going to be having a “goodbye celebration” with their birth
mother. Neither of the children had any specific questions for their birth-
mother. However, the therapist did tell a story to the older child about how
most children are curious about why their moms can’t be their growing up
moms, and that it is ok to ask those questions. Toward the end of the session,
222 Chapter 16

each child had one of their hands painted and then pressed onto a piece of
paper, to give to their birth mother as a parting gift.
Following the session, a meeting with the foster parent took place in or-
der to review the underlying philosophy of relinquishment visits and pro-
vide an opportunity for any questions or concerns to be raised. During this
meeting, Linda expressed her reluctance in observing this visit, as she felt it
would be very hard to see a mother saying goodbye to her children. This re-
luctance was validated and the importance of Linda’s role in this process
was highlighted. Linda understood that by observing she would be better
able to respond to naturally occurring reactions from the children, follow-
ing the visit. She also came to understand that the children would experi-
ence a loss, however, we were hoping that by having a goodbye time and
having caring adults to support them, they would “make sense” of this and
integrate it into their life in a way that was not self-harming. It was explained
that a counselor would be with Linda during the observation and that on-
going supports were available for her and the children following this
process.

Date: November 29, 2007

Relinquishment visit with Susan and her daughter (foster mother observing
behind the mirror)
Susan and the therapist met for half an hour before her daughter arrived
for the relinquishment visit. This time was used to ensure the snack was
ready, the gift was appropriate, and to review the “tough questions” that Su-
san may have to answer in the session. Susan and her daughter engaged in
several activities led by the child’s therapist. The activities were Theraplay
based and included: powder clouds, bubble catch, popcorn blanket, blan-
ket swing and blanket drag ride. During the activities, Susan delighted in her
daughter’s developing speech and mobility. Susan was visibly sad at the end
of the visit and saying goodbye to her daughter, however, she did a good job
in helping her daughter move forward at the time. Susan remained in the
play room as her daughter left and was reconnected to her foster mother.
Susan thanked the therapist for the process and support she received during
such an emotional time. Susan asked to see her daughter’s therapist to ex-
tend her gratitude to her as well.

Date: November 30, 2007

Relinquishment visit between Susan and her son
Susan brought a beautiful letter of appreciation for the foster mother, the
letter thanked the foster mother for looking after the children so well and
spoke to their health and happiness. Susan was expecting the visit with her
son to be less of an unknown given the young age of her son. She was more
 Relinquishment Visits 223

skeptical of the first visit with her daughter and how she might be angry and
rejecting of Susan. However, the final visit proved to be very hard for Susan
as her son was apprehensive, wary in his interactions, and not readily en-
gaged with Susan. Susan had been prepared for possible rejection and was
able to take this initial response in stride, not pushing him and letting him
approach at his own pace. The child’s therapist was able to engage the dyad
in playful interactions. The Theraplay activities included: powder clouds,
smooth ride, bubble catch, and blanket swing.
Susan did a commendable job in the final visit and stayed child-focused
in moving her son forward on his current journey. Susan expressed appre-
ciation for the process that guided her in such a difficult task. Susan’s
cousin, who had lost three children from her care, stated that she wished
the process had been available to her and her children when they had a fi-
nal visit.

REFERENCES

Hughes, D. (2006) “The Double-Helix: Attachment and Intersubjectivity.” Paper

presented at the annual meeting of ATTACH Network, St. Louis, Mo., October.
———. (2007) “Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy.” Paper presented at the an-
nual meeting of the International Theraplay Institute. Chicago, Ill., July.
Jernberg, A. M., and Booth, P. (1999) Theraplay: Helping Parents Build Better Rela-
tionships through Attachment-Based Play. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Neufeld, G. (2007) “Working with Aggressive and Violent Children and Youth.” Pa-
per presented at the conference on Aggressive Children and Youth. Calgary, Alb.
April.
Neufeld, G., and Mate, G. (2005) Hold On to Your Kids: Why Parents Need to Matter
More Than Peers. Toronto: Vintage Canada.
Perry, B. (2006) “Attachment Issues in Daycare Centres.” Discussion presented at the
workshop on Childcare Issues. Calgary, Alb. December.
Siegel, D. (1999) The Developing Mind. New York: The Guilford Press.
Wolfelt, A. (2005) Companioning the Bereaved: A Soulful Guide for Counselors and Care-
givers. Laguna Hills, California: Companion Press.
17
Equine Assisted Therapy
and Theraplay
Deborah Weiss

Four horses were led into the arena one by one. The horses did not know
each other and they had never been together. These four horses had one
thing in common; their owners and handlers had brought them here as a
last-ditch attempt to cure them of the pains of their upbringings and to help
them learn how to interact comfortably with other horses and with hu-
mans. This was to be accomplished by the horse trainer who was running
the weekend clinic, and if the horses could not be helped by this trainer, the
owners were likely to give up on what they considered to be dangerous
horses, and send them to their death.
The dynamics were dramatic as the horses bucked and reared and made
lots of noise. Their personalities emerged in the drama of the arena. One
horse was clearly the bully and was chasing and snapping at the others re-
lentlessly. One of the horses moved wherever the bully moved, staying close
enough to mimic the bully, but far enough away to avoid getting kicked her-
self. One horse in the arena was repeatedly being kicked by the bully and
seemed to come back for more. One horse remained disengaged from the
drama, moving away from the noisy display throughout the entire per-
formance. I didn’t know these horses, but I knew the characters well. I grew
up with these characters; the bully, the bully’s sidekick, the perpetual victim,
and the observer. Watching these horses now, the arena became a stage for
the equine drama, as well as a stage for a metaphorical group of individu-
als trying to learn how to coexist. I knew that the role of spectator was a way
to keep out of the direct line of fire whenever possible, and that this safe ob-
servational position provided the opportunity to develop a keen sense of
awareness. I noticed that the “observer horse” was taking in every detail of
the others with what seemed like hypervigilance. This heightened state of

225
226 Chapter 17

awareness is important for the horses’ survival, just as it is for a hypervigi-

lant child. In both cases, extreme attention to environment is necessary for
survival. In the way that an abused child knows that a particular look on a
perpetrator’s face, or a nuance in the sound of the perpetrator’s approach-
ing footsteps is an indication of whether there is imminent danger, the
horse also knows the nuances of its environment so that it can move itself
away from harm. Chris Irwin, the Canadian horse trainer who was running
the clinic that weekend, describes horses as “constantly aware of everything
that goes on; the rustling of the trees, the movement of a nearby animal, an
unfamiliar sound. They’re evaluating and interpreting all 360 degrees of the
environment around them all the time. Because they know, their DNA tells
them that a predator can come hurtling toward them out of those bushes
or from behind that rock at any time” (Irwin, 1998).
I had begun to study Theraplay® (Jernberg and Booth, 1999) around the
same time as this clinic took place, and as I watched the trainer working
with the horses to help them learn how to have trust and respect for a hu-
man, I could see the therapeutic possibilities for people. I went into my next
Theraplay session as an extern, and noticed that the structure we set at the
beginning of the session had the same importance as the boundaries the
trainer set with the horses at the beginning of his session. The way we en-
gaged the child in the Theraplay session reminded me of the way the trainer
was engaged and present with the horses every moment. And the way he
challenged the steeds and they rose to the challenge, as well as the honor
and reward he gave them at the appropriate times, closely paralleled the ac-
tivities we were doing in the Theraplay session in our challenge and nur-
turing activities. I knew there was a way to integrate the two, and I began to
delve into the world of Animal Assisted Therapy.
People who enjoy being with animals know the healing bond which
can develop between humans and their pets. And though humans have
innately known the therapeutic qualities of animals for centuries, it is
only recently that Animal Assisted Therapy has been developed as a viable
therapeutic method with its own theories, practices and research. Because
the very presence of animals is considered to be therapeutic, they are be-
ing brought into a variety of settings including schools, hospitals, nursing
homes, treatment centers, private practice, and business corporations.
Even when animals are brought in simply as visitors, positive results have
been documented. The integration of animal-assisted therapy into clini-
cal psychology was first credited to child psychologist Boris Levinson,
who published a paper titled “The Dog as a Co-Therapist” (Levinson and
Mallon, 1969). Levinson accidentally discovered he could make signifi-
cant progress with a child with whom he was working, when his dog “Jin-
gles” attended the therapy sessions. He went on to find that many chil-
dren who were withdrawn and uncommunicative would interact
 Equine Assisted Therapy and Theraplay 227

positively with the dog, and his results from those sessions were notice-
ably different from the ones where the dog was not present.
In the 70s, horses began to take the role of “co-therapist” and the horses’
special talents are now being written about. New methods are developing all
over North America and Europe. “Equine Assisted Therapy” has become a vi-
able subgroup of Animal Assisted Therapy. Horses provide a powerful paradox.
They are large, strong, fast animals that can quickly become dangerous and
they are also vulnerable prey animals. Being carried on the back of a 1,200
pound vulnerable giant can certainly provide access to core personal issues.
Partnering Theraplay with Irwin’s horse training methods creates a pow-
erful therapeutic tool. I developed the program “Horse Friends” to encom-
pass these two modalities and it has since expanded to include activities
from a number of equine trainers. With the encouragement of Dr. Evange-
line Munns, who was director of Play Therapy Services at Blue Hills Child
and Family Centre in Aurora at the time, I contacted the Ontario Trillium
Foundation to see if they would be interested in funding such a venture.
They were—and two years later the provincial funding agency had sup-
ported 35 children to participate in this pilot project. They continue to sup-
port our work and research to this day. The original program still exists un-
der the name “Horse Play” and it is run by Horses At Heart Equestrian
Adventures Inc. in conjunction with a number of regional child and family
health service agencies.
The program consists of 12 sessions, all taking place at a horse farm with
a charming farmhouse for therapy sessions. The first session consists of in-
take consultation and goal setting. In the second session, we conduct the
Marschak Interaction Method (Marschak, 1960) for assessing family rela-
tionships, and then the family is invited over to the barn to meet the horses.
In order to evoke all the senses, and to gain rapport with the child in this
initial orientation session, I ask the children what smells they expect to ex-
perience before they enter the barn. This always leads to an early opportu-
nity for engagement, because nearly each and every child takes great plea-
sure in looking me square in the eye and answering “Poo!” “Yes! You are
definitely going to smell horse poo in there—let’s go in and see what other
smells we find.” And the game is on; the children know at this point that
things are different here from their schoolroom or the therapy experiences
they might have had to date and even the most oppositional children are
eager to go in to the barn and discover this new world.
Our third to eleventh sessions consist of an equine session in the barn
followed by a traditional Theraplay session in the farmhouse. The work
with the horses always has clues and messages about what is really going on
for the child and parent and we pay attention to what themes emerge while
working with the horses. We can then tailor the Theraplay activities to ad-
dress those themes. Monty Roberts, who was the inspiration for the title
228 Chapter 17

role of the movie The Horse Whisperer, says that “The biggest difference be-
tween horses and humans is that horses live honestly within an order based
on mutual concern” (Roberts, 1996). Linda Kohanov, a pioneer in the field
of Equine Assisted Therapy, says that horses have “an extraordinary ability
to awaken intuition in humans, while mirroring the authentic feelings peo-
ple try to hide” (Kohanov, 2001). Chris Irwin’s first book is entitled Horses
Don’t Lie. Horseman Mark Rashid’s first book is entitled “Horses Never Lie.”
The blatant honesty that is part of the horses’ world is the most evident part
of working with horses as “co-therapists.” They are able to mirror behaviors
and emotions without judgment or hidden agenda.
The sessions that take place at the barn start with lessons on body lan-
guage of the horse in order to ensure that the participants are interacting re-
spectfully each time they come to be with the horse. Along with traditional
barn safety rules, the respectful body language also ensures that the horse
does not feel threatened or imposed on, and this ensures an additional level
of safety for all the participants. Always maintaining a high level of aware-
ness is intrinsic to this program. When the participants practice this en-
hanced awareness with the horses, it gives them the experience of how their
own actions and reactions affect the world around them. The participants
are encouraged to always be aware of what the horses’ posture and body
language are saying to them as well as what their own body language is say-
ing to the horse. This new awareness usually offers surprise, sometimes de-
light, and sometimes dismay as the participants discover that if they are
feeling nervous, the horse becomes nervous too. If they are feeling fright-
ened, the horse in turn will display signs of anxiety. However, if they are
feeling frightened and are willing to admit it, either by saying out loud that
they are frightened or consciously thinking about their fear while standing
by the horse, the horse does not display these signs of anxiety. To the horse,
a predator (as humans innately are) who is nervous or frightened around
them is a dangerous thing. Physiologically, our nervous state results in a re-
lease of adrenaline, and to a prey animal, a predator with an elevated level
of adrenaline is likely to be a predator that is about to attack. Once we as
humans own our emotions, whatever they might be, the adrenaline level re-
duces, and we cease being as great of a threat to our friend the non-preda-
tor horse. When the participants begin to see this pattern, whether they be
adults or children, they have 1,200 pounds of proof standing beside them
in the barn that shows them that aligning oneself with an honest state of
being is a safe option.
All the sessions include grooming the horses. The participants learn that
grooming is a way to take care of the horse and to “check for hurts” (simi-
lar to what is done in Theraplay). The children will always let us know when
they find a wound on the horse and they participate in caring for the
wound. The parents are guided to use a hand-over-hand motion with the
 Equine Assisted Therapy and Theraplay 229

children when the child takes the grooming brush. This complements the
nurturing element of Theraplay and in this case, the child and parent are to-
gether nurturing the horse.
Even grooming a horse can access deep-rooted issues. One of our partic-
ipants was a mother who allowed the horse to fuss and move about while
being groomed. The safety rules and one of our horsemanship lessons dic-
tate that the horse must stand still during grooming. A fussing horse is an
anxious horse, and it is our responsibility to bring the horse into a relaxed
posture while grooming, which in turn becomes a safer horse for us to be
near. Recognizing the discomfort of the horse, tailoring our actions in such
a way that alleviates any discomfort, and taking the leadership role in set-
ting boundaries during grooming, are all important. Exasperated by work-
ing with a “difficult” horse, this mother finally admitted that it was easier
for her to work with all the fussing than to figure out how to set the bound-
aries. It wasn’t a leap for her to realize that this was a perfect mirror for her
relationship with her teenage child. The teenager disrupted the household
and had a difficult time with boundaries around the home, and the mother
found it easier to reactively fix the problems that arose from this, than to
proactively take charge, calm the child, and create a safer emotional envi-
ronment for all. This was a cathartic moment for this familial relationship.
The paradigm shift the mother made that day changed the way she worked
with the horse while grooming as well as hand-walking the horse. She be-
came more assertive and began to demand more respect from the horse.
This shift in her self-awareness allowed the horse to respect her more and
also allowed the horse to relax in her presence, as her new-found strength
was reassuring to the horse, not threatening. The mother-child relationship
improved subsequently, which reduced the tension in the household as the
child came to respect her mother as well.
As the participants become comfortable around the horses, they begin to
focus on walking the horse and understanding the horses’ body language
while moving the horse on a lead line. The Irwin method for hand-walking
a horse involves connecting with the horse in a very specific way. The horse
is not pulled by the head and no chains are wrapped around the horse’s
nose to intimidate or inflict pain in order to gain control. Instead, the per-
son leading the horse is taught to walk alongside the horse, and to move the
horse forward into contact with the leaders’ hand. The method imitates the
way horses move each other in a herd. The alpha, or leader horse is at the
side or back of the herd, propelling the herd forward. This is quite different
from a human “herd” where the leader is in front and the followers follow.
It’s easy to demonstrate to a child which of these ways feels better. Most
children have experienced a leader or authority figure taking hold of their
hand and pulling them forward as a way of leading. However, when the
leader stands behind the child, puts their hand on the child’s back and
230 Chapter 17

moves forward together, the leader can gently guide forward movement.
There is no concurrence in the first way, and when leading the horse in the
Horse Play program, even the youngest child is taught to gain concurrence
with the horse so that horse and child can willingly move forward together.
By the twelfth session, the child will attempt to experience “join up.”
This is a term coined by Monty Roberts to mean the point where a horse
will willingly follow a human without being led or coerced by any lead line,
rope, or halters. The horse has to have trust and respect in the human to do
this. All of the children and parents in the Horse Play program are taught to
do this. It takes several weeks of hand-walking the horse, learning how to
read the horses’ body language, becoming aware of our own body language,
and developing a mutually respectful relationship with the horse, before it
will follow based on its own free will. This activity demonstrates to both
parent and child that it is understanding, trust, and awareness that causes
the horse to follow, not force or coercion.

CASE STUDY

A ten-year-old boy came to our program with his mother, who had identi-
fied the boy as a troubled child on medication for ADD, who had consis-
tently disruptive behavior at school. The boy indeed was a handful in the
barn and in the Theraplay sessions as he raced around and had to be con-
stantly encouraged to stay focused. Nonetheless, over the weeks he learned
that his ability to stay calm and focused was necessary to keep the horses
calm and focused on him. The mother however, was less attentive as she
preferred to chat and find distractions throughout all the grooming activities.
We found that we constantly had to refocus her back on her son throughout
the session. When it came time to teach them how to hand-walk the horse
and work toward “join up,” we decided to have just the boy working on
these activities and that the interpreting therapist would stay with the
mother to explain the process of how her son was integrating the lessons.
The boy discovered that when he lost focus while walking the horse, the
horse lost focus as well, and when he moved forward purposefully, eyes
fixed on his goal, the horse relaxed in his hand and moved with him. Still,
mom spent a lot of time chatting and diverting attention from her son. When
it came time for “join up,” the boy did beautifully. The little black horse he
had been working with followed him along like a puppy dog. There was
great satisfaction for this boy as the horse chose him as the leader and
stayed close beside him with no lead lines or implements to keep him there.
In one moment however, the boy lost focus and the horse began to wander
off. Surprisingly, this was when mom decided to bring her attention fully to
the boy and the activity. She pointed and laughed at the horse and boy and
 Equine Assisted Therapy and Theraplay 231

joked about how it was all falling apart. Instantly I began to talk the boy
through the steps he needed to take in order to regain the horses attention
and to resume the “join up.” The boy listened and reacted quickly to follow
the instructions and the horse did indeed move back toward the boy and
continued to follow. The boy was able to experience that he could move
past external ridicule to find his own success. He was able to stay present
with the horse despite what must have been a hurtful moment as his mother
laughed at him from the side of the corral. The experience also helped pro-
vide the mother with a larger-than-life example of some of the dynamics of
her relationship with her son.
The mother did a lot of work after that point to try to understand how her
support and encouragement of that boy could make a difference, and when
we followed the barn session with a Theraplay session, we made sure to in-
clude activities that would reinforce her positive engagement with her son.
We made sure that she “took care of his hurts” through hand and foot lo-
tioning sessions. We included long and leisurely “inventory” sessions where
she could verbalize to her son all the wonderful things he brought with him
that day; his shining eyes, his wide grin and dimples, and the cute and lively
cowlick in his hair. The boy was delighted to lay down on a giant piece of
Kraft paper and have his mother carefully trace his outline on the page.
Then mom would sit behind her son and comb his hair while telling him
stories about when he was a baby. Because mom had the opportunity to
watch the Theraplay externs do these activities with her son before she be-
gan participating directly in the sessions, she had a clear model of engaging
without spiking the session with verbal “ouches” and insensitivities. The
work with the horses helped her to understand that body language could
communicate support or disinterest just as loudly as verbal language.
The barn has become the new clinic. “For a lot of people who come from
a clinical setting, when you get into a barn, it’s very normalizing,” says
Michael Kaufmann, director of education for the North American Riding for
the Handicapped Association (NARHA) and founding board member of the
Equine Facilitated Mental Health Association (EFMHA). “That can be a
mental shift that allows you to feel differently, act differently, think differ-
ently” (www.greatstrides.org). When a person observes “The horse is diffi-
cult” or “The horse doesn’t listen to me,” they discover that when they
change their own beliefs and behaviors, the horse’s response changes.
The final Marschak tests that end the twelve sessions show great im-
provement in most of the families who go through the Horse Play program.
There is generally greater comfort in the nurturing activities, with both chil-
dren and parents who resisted nurturing in the initial Marschak. Many of the
parents report that their children have greater ability to stay focused and to
follow through with projects. Many of the families report that dinner-time
talk often revolves around what the horse or pony did that day, or how the
 232 Chapter 17

Theraplay Agendas
First Theraplay Session Fifth Theraplay Session Twelfth Theraplay Session
Mother Observing Session Mother Entering for the First Time Mother Leading Activities
Choo Choo Train Entrance Funny Walk Entrance Follow the Leader
Hello Song Hello Song Hello Song
Inventory Inventory Inventory
Lotion Hands Lotion Hands and Feet Lotion Hands and Feet
Powder Prints Cotton Ball Guess Paper Outlines
Peanut Butter Motor Boat, Motor Boat Mirroring
Tower of Hands Tower of Hands Hair Combing
Blanket Rock Blanket Rock Blanket Rock
Feeding Feeding Feeding
Goodbye Song Goodbye Song Goodbye Song

child and parent worked with the horse. The common language they now
share becomes a tool for engagement at home.
The pairing of Equine Assisted Therapy with Theraplay allows us to inter-
act with the family in an arena that provides hard to ignore metaphors that
can help bring core issues to the forefront quickly. The Theraplay sessions
become enriched with the information gleaned from the barn and the abil-
ity to reference some of the lessons learned from the horses, is valuable to
the parents. In many cases, the work with the horses is so positive that the
family continues to come visit the horses, or the children take up horse-back
riding lessons. One of our teenage clients is pursuing a college Equine Sci-
ence diploma.
The families are encouraged to continue the Theraplay activities at
home. In 6-month follow-up sessions, families have often reported that
some of these activities have become family favorites. The pairing of Ther-
aplay with Equine Assisted Therapy offers a full sensory experience, and
the families leave the farm each week with the sounds, the sights, the
smell, and the feel of what an attached, mutually respectful relationship
can feel like.

REFERENCES

Irwin, C. (1998). Horses Don’t Lie: What Horses Teach Us about Our Natural Capacity
for Awareness, Confidence, Courage and Trust, Winnipeg, Manitoba: Marlowe and
Company.
Jernberg, A., and Booth, P. (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children Build Bet-
ter Relationships Through Attachment-based Play, 2nd ed., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kaufmann, M. (2005). www.greatstrides.org. (April) retrieved December 2006.
 Equine Assisted Therapy and Theraplay 233

Kohanov, L. (2001). The Tao of Equus: A Woman’s Journey of Healing and Transforma-
tion Through the Way of the Horse, Novro, California: New World Library.
Levinson, B. M., and Mallon, G. P. (1969). The Dog as Co-therapist. Mental Hygiene,
46, 59–65.
Marschak, M. (1960). A Method for Evaluating Child-Parent Interactions Under
Controlled Conditions. Journal of Genetic Psychology 97: 3–22.
Roberts, M. (1996). The Man Who Listens to Horses, New York: Random House.
V
GROUP THERAPLAY
18
Father-Son Group Theraplay
Jamie Sherman

Theraplay® is embedded in attachment theory and object-relations theory

as characterized by the works of John Bowlby and Anna Freud, respectively.
Attachment theory proposes that children make significant and early at-
tachments to main caregivers, and failure to secure these attachments has
long-lasting and deleterious effects on the individual and his future rela-
tionships (Bowlby, 1969). Object-relations theory views an infant’s first re-
lationship with his mother as the prototypical relationship in a child’s life
(Freud and Burlingham, 1973). This prototype can be a positive or negative
experience for the child depending upon the ensuing dynamic.
Bowlby describes this as an inner-working model in which the infant cre-
ates a representation of the primary caregiver and which is critical for the
development of the self. When things go well in the relationship, the infant
develops a sense of himself as lovable, of others as loving, and of the world
as a safe place to explore. The opposite develops when the parent-child re-
lationship doesn’t go well. This inner representation, or schemata, occurs
during what Siegel (2003) calls the “brain-to-brain” interactions of the par-
ent and child. The child feels joined with the parent because he sees his
mind as existing inside his parent’s mind. Early communication occurs in
the form of non-verbal language, paralanguage, and gestures, and is re-
flected to the child through emotional dialogue. It is through this process
that the child is able to develop a “mind’s eye,” which is the ability to think
and feel what goes on in the mind of his caregiver and leads to the devel-
opment of pro-social skills such as empathy, awareness of others, and com-
promise (Siegel, 2003).
In healthy relationships a positive loop is created in which infant and
parent establish a symbiotic relationship. Both parent and child are acutely

237
238 Chapter 18

attuned to the signals and responses of the other. Conversely, negative

bonding between the mother and infant could be the result of a physical,
emotional, or intellectual insult to the child or parent. If a parent is emo-
tionally unavailable to the child due to previous life experiences, she may
be unable to interpret the child’s cues. Additionally, a mismatch between
infant temperament and parenting style could negatively affect the parent-
child attachment. A child who has a difficult temperament may be disen-
gaged from a parent with a laissez-faire or authoritarian style of parenting.
A negative bond interrupts the positive loop resulting in a breakdown in the
relationship. Theraplay aims to improve this bond by providing the struc-
ture and nurturing the child lacked due to the breakdown during the early
attachment process (Jernberg, 1979).
These theories are, in part, derived from the works of ethologist Konrad
Lorenz and psychologist Harry Harlow. Lorenz’s (1961) concept of im-
printing provided support for the notion of “hard-wired” processes influ-
encing survival behavior. Infant survival mechanism utilized attachment
forming responses of signal (i.e., crying, smiling, babbling) and approach
(i.e., clinging, following, reaching) in order to bring adults into close prox-
imity (Bowlby, 1969). Similarly, Harlow’s work (1958) with rhesus mon-
keys established the importance of touch in attachment. Harlow observed
that monkeys chose the relative warmth and comfort of the terry cloth sur-
rogate mothers over the cold, harsh metal of the wire-mesh surrogate moth-
ers, even when the latter provided the only source of nutrition.
Research indicates that physical touch has positive outcomes in both bi-
ology and psychoneuroimmunology. Hugging and touching release hor-
mones into the bloodstream to help suppress viruses and depression
(Cousins, 1989). Infants of depressed mothers experience biochemical
changes to brain matter after daily massage therapy (Jones and Field, 1998)
and significantly increase their body weight when given daily body massage
(Field, 1995). A primary outcome of touch is the fostering of positive at-
tachments between parent and child. Touch, which is processed by the right
hemisphere of the brain, may prime the regulatory system for learning be-
cause the neural circuitry of the stress system is located in the early devel-
oping right brain. Infants under the age of two demonstrate higher right-
brained hemispheric volumes. Attachment experiences during the first 2
years of life directly influence the experience-dependent maturation of the
right brain (Schore, 2001).
Theraplay strives to replicate the healthy attachments found in positive
parent-child relationships. This is accomplished by alternating between
fun, engaging activities and calm, soothing ones. The therapist establishes a
bond with the child through the five dimensions of parenting identified by
Jernberg (1979): structure, challenge, engagement, nurturing, and playful-
ness. In healthy relationships parents provide unconditional nurturing in
 Father-Son Group Theraplay 239

order to create an atmosphere of caring and trust. Trust enables the child to
see his world as safe and secure and to explore his environment with con-
fidence. Engagement elicits responses from the infant, encourages curiosity,
and enables the child to differentiate himself from others, as well as creat-
ing a sense of connection with another. Structure creates boundaries and
sets external limits, which eventually allows the child to regulate his own
behavior. Challenge provides the child with a sense of fulfillment, compe-
tence, pride, and the development of a positive self-image. Playfulness cre-
ates an inviting, exciting, and positive atmosphere, and signals to the child
that he can simultaneously give and receive positive experiences.
Do mothers and fathers differ along these dimensions, in particular the
dimension of playfulness? Mothers and fathers are generally more similar
than different during parent-child interactions (Hughes, 1999). However,
differences in play tendencies between mothers and fathers may exist. Fa-
thers are more physical and active, use rough and tumble play, bouncing,
tickling, chasing, and tossing-in-the-air games; whereas mothers are less
abrupt, use more toys, and more verbal forms of interactions (Hughes,
1999). Mothers seem more closely attuned to their infants and are more
likely to provide for their child’s needs (Hughes, 1999).
It appears these differences may be more attributable to experience than
to biology (Schaffer and Emerson, 1964). Field (1978) studied the parent-
child interactions of three groups of parents: mothers as primary caregivers,
fathers as primary caregivers, and fathers as secondary caregivers. Differ-
ences in the quality of the interaction were found mainly between the pri-
mary and secondary caretakers, regardless of gender. Similarly, fathers were
noted as equally competent and confident as mothers during observations
of feeding (Parke, 1981), and physiological measures assessing child re-
sponsiveness (Berman, 1980). This suggests that fathers may be equally ca-
pable as mothers at meeting their children’s needs.
Schaffer investigated the concept of monotropism; that infants attach to
one caregiver at a time. He studied the attachment levels of a group of sixty
infants and noted that one-third had formed attachments to more than 1
person, and by 18 months of age all had formed several healthy attach-
ments with varying degrees of intensity. At six months the most intense at-
tachments were to the mother, and were significantly greater than to any
other individual. At eighteen months the intensity of the attachment to the
father was only slightly less than to the mother (Schaffer and Emerson,
1964). Mothers carry and feed their infants and therefore have more op-
portunity to develop highly intense relationships. Given time and opportu-
nity fathers may also be able to develop equally intense relationships.
Fathers play an important role in the social and emotional development
of their children. A growing body of evidence suggests that the father-son
relationship, in particular, is greatly influenced by positive attachments.
240 Chapter 18

Fathers of securely attached infants tend to be more extroverted and agree-

able than fathers of insecurely attached infants (Belsky, 1996). Attachment
to the father is generally a good predictor of social competence, which, in
turn, significantly predicts emotional adjustment (Rice et al., 1997). A feel-
ing of well-being in adolescent boys is associated with positive attachment
to the father (Kenny et al., 1998). Additionally, the warmth of the father
makes positive contributions to the preschool child’s intellectual develop-
ment (Liang and Sugawara, 1996).
What is responsible for the disconnection between fathers and sons who
struggle with their relationship? Western culture is filled with father-son re-
lationship archetypes. Literature and mythology promote the notion of the
overbearing, emotionally absent father and the usurping son. In William
Pollack’s 1998 book Real Boys, he describes 20 years of research which he
feels informs the myth of boyhood. Dr. Pollack identifies the “boy code”
where feelings of vulnerability, powerlessness, and isolation lead to fear,
uncertainty, and loneliness. These feelings turn to shame, whereby boys pre-
fer to be alone with the pain of humiliation and embarrassment. They then
suffer through the trauma of disconnectedness as they are ripped away from
their homes and placed in a school environment.
Pollack puts forth the notion of the gender straightjacket, whereby male
infants are initially more expressive than infant females as they tend to
demonstrate greater startle behavior, are more excitable, and tend to fuss
and cry more. However, parents use more vivid facial expressions and emo-
tion-laden language with girls, which may be a factor in boys’ developing a
more limited emotional range. Dr. Pollack states that the emotional range
of pre-latency boys is far greater prior to the premature separation of going
to school. As a result, boys may develop an “outward mask” which acts as
a barrier to communication and intimacy. This may contribute to problems
in the classroom as boys are more likely to receive lower grades, be held
back, transfer to special education, receive suspensions, and be identified as
hyperactive. Another contributing factor may be that a greater percentage of
boys’ physiological development may require them to be more active and
energetic, and in greater need of more gross motor movements and tension
releasing activities. Most school systems do not accommodate students in
this manner, and instead require them to sit quietly at their desks for long
periods of time.
This chapter recounts the journey made by a Theraplay group of fathers
and their troubled sons. The purpose of this group was to promote the de-
velopment of responsiveness and attunement of the fathers toward their
sons through the dimensions of Theraplay in an attempt to create deeper
and stronger attachments. It was our belief that the fathers could adopt
more playful and nurturing interactions with their sons, and their sons
would, in turn, develop more positive relationships with their fathers.
 Father-Son Group Theraplay 241

Counseling sessions with the fathers also provided opportunities to discuss

some of Dr. Pollack’s strategies for getting behind the mask. In particular,
strategies such as connecting through actions in an attempt to engage with
the child, and sharing personal experiences as a way of reducing shame
were included. Additionally, we wondered if the enhanced positive attach-
ments would affect the children’s social/emotional interactions at school.
This group was conducted at Blue Hills Child and Family Centre in Au-
rora, Ontario, under the supervision of Dr. Evangeline Munns. The group
consisted of 6 father-son dyads and was lead by three male Theraplay ther-
apists. All fathers joined the group voluntarily and provided a family his-
tory which included describing the reasons for referral and the parent-child
relationship. They also completed, along with their child’s mother, the
Child Behaviour Checklist and individual parent rating forms before and
after treatment (Achenbach and Edelbrock, 1983). Theraplay goals were
identified based on family history and rating scales.
The boys ranged in ages from 6 to 9 years. Four of the dyads were from
intact families, one included a new stepfather, and one father was sepa-
rated, but held an equal and shared custody arrangement. The presenting
problems for this group of children included aggression, non-compliance,
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (predominantly hyperactive-im-
pulsive type), poor self-esteem, depression, low frustration tolerance, severe
sibling rivalry, frequent temper tantrums and other negative attention seek-
ing behaviors, learning challenges, and poor school performance. Three
common characteristics emerged from the presenting issues: 1) poor self-
regulation, 2) low self-esteem, and 3) anti-social behaviors.
The fathers experienced great difficulty in positively attaching to their
children at home. They felt rejected by their sons, and were uncomfortable
with nurturing and playful activities. During the initial intakes the fathers
admitted to discipline styles that were either punitive and authoritarian or
laissez-faire. Some fathers revealed traumatic experiences from their child-
hood, citing examples of abuse, neglect, and feelings of betrayal from their
own parents. Some of the fathers were experiencing personal afflictions in
the form of depression, substance abuse, and uncontrollable rage. The fa-
thers hoped the group would enable them to feel closer to their sons, and
would help their children to make friends, develop empathy, reduce violent
tendencies, and become less defiant.
The group goals established by the therapeutic team were 1) To increase
the fathers’ comfort and competence in giving affection and thus to en-
hance father/son attachments, 2) For the children to show affection toward
their fathers, 3) For the fathers to provide external structure for their chil-
dren and for the children to cooperate with adult directions, 4) To increase
the children’s self-esteem by promoting feelings of self-worth and affirma-
tion. The sessions took place one night per week over a ten-week period.
242 Chapter 18

Each session lasted 45 minutes, and was followed by a brief counseling ses-
sion with the fathers. Fathers were encouraged, as well, to practice Thera-
play activities at home. Three independent observers rated each session us-
ing a numeric rating scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high). The characteristics
observed were affection, eye contact, smiles/laughter, reciprocal attention,
cooperation, and physical proximity. Additionally, the therapists discussed
each dyad after every session and recorded anecdotal comments.
A menu of 12–14 activities was prepared prior to each session accentuat-
ing the various Theraplay dimensions. A typical session began with fathers,
sons, and therapists huddled in the foyer for a grand entrance into the 200-
square-foot room (for example, “follow the leader,” “wall ball,” or “choo-
choo” train) (see appendix). This high energy activity released tension and
started the session in a playful manner. The group then sat in a circle in the
middle of the room and sang a welcome song to reacquaint with each other
and to create an atmosphere of belongingness. This was followed by a
group game that promoted enjoyment, relaxation, and connection (i.e.,
“zip, zap, zop”—see appendix). Children then sat down forming an inner
circle facing outwards, while their fathers sat in front of them. Fathers per-
formed a check-up on their sons by taking an inventory of physical features
(i.e., counting freckles and teeth, noticing something positive such as shiny
hair or sparkling eyes). They then looked for hurts on their son’s hands and
carefully applied lotion to them. These tender and nurturing moments were
intentionally regressive to reflect the initial physical intimacy between in-
fant and parent, because as a newborn child his predominant contact with
the world was through the sense of touch. The “check-up” always ended
with each father gazing into his child’s eyes while identifying one positive
attribute. An engaging dyadic activity designed to increase intimacy always
followed the “check-up.” All group members then participated in large
group activities which alternated by dimension, physical proximity, and en-
ergy level. In this way, moments of direct intimacy between father and son,
such as “nose cluck” (see appendix), were alternated with opportunities to
develop a sense of community as all fathers provided nurturing to all chil-
dren collectively through activities such as “cookie machine” (see appen-
dix), where the children felt safe and protected despite the high level of
physical interaction. (These moments replicated and were reminiscent of
typical games of parents tossing their young child in the air whereby the
child develops a deep sense of trust that, despite the physical discrepancy in
size and playful risk taking, his parent would never harm him.) Each ses-
sion ended with the therapists feeding chips to all participants, and some-
times fathers fed their sons. The final session ended with a party of the chil-
dren’s favorite activities and snacks prepared by the participants.
In order for any significant gains to be made in this group, the fathers
needed permission to play with their children in engaging ways and to
 Father-Son Group Theraplay 243

show them the efficacy of affection and nurturing. They required the expe-
rience of being with their children in qualitatively positive ways. The most
effective strategy employed was for the therapists to model the activities for
the group prior to asking the participants to engage in the activity. After all,
once they witnessed a grown man being fed while sitting in the lap of an-
other man, what could the fathers and sons possibly object to? The sight of
the therapists engaging in the activities with each other was often met with
uproarious laughter, but acted as an icebreaker. It allowed the fathers to in-
teract with their children without fear of ridicule from their peers. The fa-
thers were boys once as well and the group was surely revising their “old
boy” code.
The fathers, whose many interactions with their sons were previously met
with hostility and rejection, were now feeding their children by hand, gen-
tly caressing their faces with cotton, and enjoying engaging interactions. In-
difference was replaced with warmth; rejection with connectedness; and
hostility with playfulness. One prominent moment occurred during session
5 when the dyads engaged in a mirroring activity. The fathers and sons held
their hands toward each other (but not touching), with the fathers leading
the activity and the sons instructed to mirror their fathers. (This activity was
an excellent one for increasing attunement between the dyads). The thera-
pists allowed the activity to continue longer than anticipated, because the
effect was mesmerizing. The children were completely engaged with their
fathers, following their every move. The silence in the room betrayed the
fact that it was filled with 15 bodies. It was hard to imagine that these 6
children were previously diagnosed with an overwhelming array of exter-
nalizing behaviors, because at that very moment they were one-hundred
percent compliant, engaged, and regulated.
After the dyads (and the therapists to some degree) got past their dis-
comfort during the early sessions, the therapists became group facilitators.
Rather than providing direct instructions, or replacing the father for the pur-
pose of demonstration, they guided the dyad through the process and then
moved away. The therapists were cognizant of empowering the fathers to
grow into their new roles with their children. This group became a very co-
hesive unit quite quickly. They all seemed to be craving what the group of-
fered. The aspect of community played a large role in the success of this
group as the fathers supported each other during difficult times, and offered
praise and comfort. The fathers greatly enjoyed the opportunity to connect
with one another and discussed their shared values and philosophy on par-
enting. During one session a parent posed the question, “My son gets very
upset when he loses. How do I strike a balance between showing him its ok
to lose, but also allow him to have success?” Each father had a similar story
to share, and by the end of the session came to appreciate his shared expe-
riences. The group offered all of its members an opportunity to participate
244 Chapter 18

in fun and engaging activities in a safe, caring, and supportive atmosphere.

In addition, the group offered an opportunity for the children and their fa-
thers to create a social network outside the Theraplay sessions. The children
would often show up to group discussing their shared experiences with
each other during play dates and birthday parties that occurred during the
previous week. This encouraged the therapeutic team as all of the children
experienced peer socialization difficulties prior to the onset of treatment.
Data for this group was collected and interpreted from several sources:
the pre and post parent personality ratings, observer numeric ratings scales,
therapist anecdotal reporting, and a post treatment counseling session with
each father. The children’s behavior was coded using internalized and ex-
ternalized categories (Achenbach and Edelbrock, 1983). Examples of inter-
nalizing behaviors were depression, anxiety, and stress. Examples of exter-
nalizing behaviors were hyperactivity, aggression, and non-compliance.
Results from the pre and post reports indicted a significant decrease in ex-
ternalizing behaviors as was expected, but also surprisingly, a slight increase
in internalizing behaviors (Munns, Jensen, and Berger, 1997). Numeric
scales, coded from observer’s ratings, indicated high increases in reciprocal
attention and physical attention, some increase in cooperation, eye contact
and smiles/laughter, and no increase in affection. Raters indicated gains for
all 6 dyads, with four noted as gaining sharply. The anecdotal reports of the
therapists indicated that the fathers demonstrated uncertainty and were
slow to react during the first few sessions, but by the end of treatment were
noted as being more intimate and self-assured in their interactions. In con-
trast to the observer reports, the therapists noted that the children displayed
more spontaneous affection toward their fathers and were more compliant.
During follow-up interviews, all 6 fathers reported sharing a closer rela-
tionship with their own sons. They reported feeling more confident in their
abilities to reach out to their children and were less fearful of having their
demonstrations of affection rejected. Two comments in particular stand
out. Regarding “lotioning hurts” one father said, “I never looked at my son
for this long before.” A second father reported that he understood how his
own attitude affected his son’s behavior. However, only one father reported
a positive change in his son’s school environment.
Attunement and responsiveness are vital components in the attachment
process, and are reflected in the ability to provide undivided and sustained
attention to one’s partner. Reciprocal attention and physical proximity are
reflective of this process and were perhaps rated higher because of the 5–7
minute inventory period. An increase in these interactions might also reflect
an improvement in the attachment process, which is consistent with the
therapists reports of more intimacy and more spontaneous affection from
the sons to the fathers, as well as the parent’s self reporting of a closer at-
tachment to their sons.
 Father-Son Group Theraplay 245

Why didn’t raters observe a change in affection? One possible explana-

tion is that the characteristics of eye-contact, smiles, laughter, cooperation
and physical proximity were easier to detect than signs of affection, because
the latter involved tone of voice, facial expressions, and body language in
addition to physical forms of hugs, kisses, and ruffling hair. The raters may
have focused on the physical demonstrations of affection. Additionally, the
observers sat behind a one-way mirror where the subtle cues may have been
difficult to assess. A second explanation may be that observers were looking
for signs of affection from the fathers to their sons exclusively, whereas the
therapists reported increased affection on the part of the children. More af-
fection from the sons to the fathers may have been indicative of enhanced
attachment.
The decrease in externalizing behaviors may have reflected an increase in
self-control on the part of the children due to more effective parenting
strategies by the fathers. Why was self-control not generalized to the school
setting? Perhaps the children were adjusting to the new dynamic created in
their homes and not enough time had elapsed to incorporate this change in
the school. Or, perhaps the teachers’ behavior and attitude toward the chil-
dren remained constant despite the change in the children’s behavior. How-
ever, if a stronger attachment was observed between the fathers and sons,
why were internalizing behaviors reported as increased? A plausible expla-
nation is that the personality scales were subjective parent reports of their
children’s behavior, meaning parents were reporting on inferences of their
children’s behavior.
Additionally, a decrease in externalizing behaviors likely indicated a more
trusting relationship due to more consistent expectations and stronger at-
tachments. Strong attachments reflect increased responsiveness and attune-
ment. Since the fathers were more sophisticated at reading their sons’ emo-
tions and non-verbal language, they more likely noticed internalized
emotional states such as depression and anxiety. The fathers’ awareness of
the behaviors may have increased rather than the actual behaviors. Perhaps
no change was observed at school, regarding these behaviors, because there
was no actual change in the anxiety levels of the children. Awareness, how-
ever, is the first step to therapeutic change. Since the fathers were more
aware they were better equipped to help their children cope in the future.
The therapeutic goals of increased affection from the children, an in-
crease in the fathers’ comfort and competence in providing affection (as ob-
served by the therapists), and greater parental structure were observed. An
increase in the children’s self-esteem in the school setting was not indicated,
although a greater attachment was observed between all father-son dyads.
The Theraplay treatment was successful as it aided in the improvement of
the attachment within the father-son relationship in both treatment and
home settings. It was hoped that continued attunement and responsiveness
246 Chapter 18

would lead to greater feelings of well-being for the children both at home
and at school. A subsequent father-son group was conducted with 6 new
dyads of fathers and sons with similar outcomes to the original group.
Note: I wish to thank the therapeutic team with whom I worked. To Dr.
Munns for your supervision, guidance, and patience. To my co-leaders
Doug Loweth and Andrew Legatto. You are both dynamic colleagues, but
more importantly you are incredibly attuned and responsive fathers.

AGENDAS

First Session (#1)

Entrance-walking in to circle
Welcome song
Hello whip/name whip
Hello/Thank you
Check in
• inventory
• powder hurts
Lap sit tag
Hum garden
Feeding
Goodbye song

Beginning Session (#2)

Entrance-wall ball
Welcome song
Create a new handshake
Hand tangle
Check in
• Inventory/measure body parts
• Lotion/powder hurts
• Hello . . . goodbye
• Say one nice thing
Piggy back red light, green light
Cotton ball fight
Cotton ball soothe
Feeding chips
Goodbye song
 Father-Son Group Theraplay 247

Middle Session (#5)

Entrance-elephant walk in
Welcome song
Silly bones
Check in

• Inventory
• Lotion/powder hurts
• Mirroring
• Say one nice thing

Cookie machine
Simon says
Row your boat
Feather blow
Feather touch
Feeding chips
Goodbye

Ending Session (#9)

Entrance-wheelbarrow
Welcome song
Pass a secret message
Check in

• Inventory
• Lotion hurts
• Cradle child and feed pudding
• Tell child one nice thing

Elbow tag
Ping pong ball blow
Barber shop
Feed chips
Goodbye

REFERENCES

Achenbach, T. E., and Edelbrock, C. (1983). Manual for the Child Behavior Check-
list and Revised Behavior Profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Depart-
ment of Psychiatry.
248 Chapter 18

Belsky, J. (1996). Parent, infant and social-contextual antecedents of father-son at-

tachment security. Developmental Psychology, 32, 905–913.
Berman, P. W. (1980). Are women more responsive than men to the young? A review
of developmental and situational variables. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 668–695.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. Volume I, Attachment. London: Hogarth Press.
Cousins, R. (1989). Head First: The Biology of Hope and the Healing Power of the Hu-
man Spirit. New York: Penguin Books.
Field, T. (1978). Interaction behaviors of primary versus secondary caretaker fathers.
Developmental Psychology, 14, 183–184.
Field, T. (1995). Touch in Early Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Freud, A., and Burlingham, D. (1973). Infants without families: Reports on the
Hampstead Nurseries. In A. Freud, The Writings of Anna Freud. Volume III. New
York: International University Press.
Harlow, H. (1958). The nature of love. American Psychologist, 13, 573–685.
Hughes, F. (1999). Children, Play, and Development. Boston, Mass.: Allyn and Bacon.
Jernberg, A. (1979). Theraplay: A New Treatment Using Structured Play for Problem
Children and Their Families. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jones, N., and Field, T. (1998). Newborns of mothers with depressive symptoms are
physiologically less developed. Infant Behaviour and Development, vol. 21,
537–541.
Jones, N., Field, T., and Davalos, M. (1998). Massage therapy attenuates right frontal
asymmetry in 1-month-old infants of depressed mothers. Infant Behaviour and De-
velopment, vol. 21, 527–530.
Kenny, M., Lomax, R., Brabeck, M., and Fife, J. (1998). Longitudinal pathways link-
ing adolescent reports of maternal and paternal attachments to psychological
well-being. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 221–243.
Liang, S., and Sugawara, A. (1996). Family size, birth order, socioeconomic status,
ethnicity, parent-child relationship, and preschool children’s intellectual devel-
opment. Early Child Development and Care, 124, 69–79.
Lorenz, K. (1961) King Solomon’s Ring. Translated by Marjorie Kerr Wilson. London:
Methuen.
Munns, E., Jensen, D., and Berger, L. (1997). Theraplay and the reduction of aggres-
sion. Unpublished research, Blue Hills Child and Family Centre. Aurora, Ontario.
Parke, R. D. (1981). Fathering. London: Collins; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univer-
sity Press.
Pollack, W. (1998). Real Boys. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Rice, K., Cunningham, T., and Young, M. (1997). Attachment to parents, social com-
petence, and emotional well-being: A comparison of black and white late adoles-
cents. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 44, 89–101.
Schaffer, H. R., and Emerson, P. E. (1964). The development of social attachments
in infancy. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 29, 3.
Schore, A. (2001). Effects of secure attachment relationship on right brain develop-
ment, affect regulation, and infant mental health. Infant Mental Health Journal,
22(1–2), 7–66.
Siegel, D. (2003). An interpersonal neurobiology of psychotherapy: The developing
mind and the resolution of trauma. pp. 1–56. In M. F. Solomon, and D. J. Siegel
(Eds), Healing Trauma: Attachment, Mind, Body, Brain. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
19
Working with Adolescents
Brijin Gardner and Mary Spickelmier

This chapter is a product of our work with troubled adolescents and juve-
nile offenders. After experiencing the benefits of using Theraplay® in ele-
mentary classrooms and with families and children in private practice, we
took a chance and applied it to our most problematic and difficult popula-
tion: adolescents. The trial of becoming a teenager is a rite of passage that
bears numerous struggles ranging from seeking independence from parents,
craving intimate relationships with peers (Kindlon and Thompson, 1999),
creating a personal identity, grasping at self-acceptance and body image
(Pipher, 1994), all the while coping with daily life stressors such as home
and school.
Working with adolescents is often a challenge for many mental health
professionals. Developmentally, adolescents are transitioning from child-
hood into adulthood (Garbarino, 1999). Adolescents need to feel their
ideas are being heard. This can be accomplished by allowing them to
make choices and have input in the therapeutic process. The therapist
maintains control of the sessions by setting boundaries around suitable
choices (Munns, 2000; Rubin and Tregay 1989); this requires a great deal
of flexibility on the part of the therapist, as there is not a one-size-fits-all
formula.

TIPS FOR WORKING WITH ADOLESCENTS

1. Keep it fresh, be a little daring and do not be afraid to mix things up.
Use teen culture to enhance traditional techniques.

249
250 Chapter 19

2. Use their terminology and lingo when possible. Take time to ask
teens for “definitions” when you hear unfamiliar terms during con-
versation. Learning slang used by adolescents will help you to un-
derstand and relate to your clients better. It also empowers the client,
as they know you are listening to them.
3. Have clear rules. Go over the rules at the beginning of each session;
this can help with redirecting behaviors during group sessions. Ther-
apists may go over the rules during the intake and have the client ini-
tial each rule individually.
4. Be conscious of heightened sexual awareness. You may want to con-
sider having gender specific groups to lessen the effects of this. In ad-
dition, be prepared to address sexual innuendos that may come up.
For example, in the Juvenile Offender Program, Mary once had a
male client say, “Did you get all dressed up just for me”? She re-
sponded with humor and invited the group to feel free to wear ties,
to “dress up for her.” It became an inside joke and a few weeks later
all of the boys wore ties to the group.
5. Let their ideas be heard and incorporate them into the group. Brijin
encourages her groups to take turns making up creative welcomes or
handshakes to start the group. Allow them to have choices and in-
put, but do not let them take control of the group.
6. Establishing a solid relationship is imperative. Adolescents must trust
and respect you before they will fully partake in the activities. There is
no influence without a relationship, and meaningful connections can
be established quickly when using Theraplay as a group modality.
7. Be honest and straightforward. In order for adolescents to trust, they
must believe in the relationship; be genuine. They don’t want to feel
they are being judged, so it is important to keep an open mind and
accept them for who they are as an individual.
8. Never let them see you sweat. You must stay confident and sell the
product before they will buy into it. Often times they will reject ac-
tivities up front, especially if they are new to treatment, however, if
you stay upbeat and positive they will usually try the activity and en-
joy it.
9. Be patient with yourself and the adolescent. Stick with an activity;
don’t give up on it just because they reject it. It is their job to be re-
sistive and reject the things they may need the most. However, if they
trust you and you give them a chance, they will participate.
10. Use humor. Groups with adolescents can be enjoyable and enter-
taining because they like to have fun. They love to laugh and have in-
side jokes.
11. Keep structure within sessions. Have a clear beginning, middle, and
end to every session.
 Working with Adolescents 251

12. Be prepared to talk more. Developmentally, adolescents are abstract

thinkers, at times processing therapeutic experiences in a more cog-
nitive and verbal way.
13. Incorporate plenty of challenge activities into each session; provid-
ing a place for healthy competition is important.

CONSIDERATIONS AND EXPLANATIONS

Theraplay offers a different message and method than types of talk-thera-

pies; as there is no need to muscle a point across or force conversation.
Theraplay addresses problems without directly mentioning the cause for re-
ferral and does not threaten the feelings, beliefs, or opinions of the adoles-
cent. Rather, Theraplay can help resuscitate a sense of hope and revive rela-
tionships with peers and adults in their lives.
There are several considerations when using Theraplay with adoles-
cents. In our experience, this population tends to be very self-conscious
about what their peers think, as well as being pre-occupied with creating
their own identity. A therapist must have confidence and a good under-
standing of attachment theory and Theraplay techniques. Along with this,
therapists must carefully plan activities that are catered toward the group
dynamic and needs. Adolescents must believe that you know and trust
what you are doing, as they will question most everything you do in the
first few sessions.
Another factor to acknowledge is adolescent physical development; is-
sues of sexuality heighten the therapist’s awareness (Munns, 2000). Games
must be modified to eliminate contact that could be construed as sexual. It
is highly recommended to have another therapist or adult to assist with
adolescent groups. Ideally, it is best to have both a male and a female pres-
ent. However, if this is impossible consider videotaping the sessions.
Check-ins and addressing hurts may look different with teens; however,
they maintain the same level of importance and need with this age group.
Instead of counting freckles, we may specifically check out scars or body
piercing (nose, ear, and tongue) as a check in or just make the observations
throughout the group session. A serious clinical concern we have noticed
more frequently with this population, is the infliction of self-harm or self-
mutilation. It is important to take time to notice this when it might be hid-
den from other adults in their lives. We have become aware of the necessity
to “sneak” in the nurturing piece, especially with adolescents. Teens are of-
ten more receptive to nurture when it is concealed within other activities.
This may be the result of their striving to become adults; some nurturing ac-
tivities may seem to be too regressive from their viewpoint, at least in the
beginning of the group sessions.
252 Chapter 19

Adapting and modifying the activities to fit the troubled adolescent and
juvenile offender populations takes thought, creativity, and going out on
an edge (that might not feel as safe as the tried-and-true techniques). We
have found that tapping into teen culture can enhance traditional tech-
niques and inspire the creation of new ones. Today’s adolescent is very
technologically advanced and highly influenced by media and the inter-
net; determining what your client is listening, watching, and download-
ing, can give you hints as to where to go. Another common denominator
for teens is music; regardless of the genre, they all like to download, lis-
ten to, and lose themselves in their favorite music. Most of our teens use
music as a self-soothing mechanism and it can be a validating experience
to have an adult listen and respond, by creating a game using their tune.
Be aware that some of the adolescents are selecting explicit and graphic
music; although we may not agree with what they are listening to, it is
formative and speaks volumes in relation to the adolescent and their ex-
periences or current situation.
Throughout our work with juvenile offenders and adolescents, we have
noticed there are several differences when using Theraplay with teens as
compared to younger children. One difference we have found is that there
are more conversations throughout sessions. In some instances with the ju-
venile offender group, the processing is part of the activity. Another sugges-
tion for working with teens is using language that maintains sensitivity to
the adolescent (who is one part-child and one part-adult). We can be play-
ful and nurturing to them, as long as we don’t use language that seems too
babyish or condescending. Finally, we have found the use of certain non-
conventional props helpful in attracting and engaging the adolescent’s in-
terest. Many of the activities we draw on combine several Theraplay com-
ponents at the same time.
Developmentally, adolescents are transitioning from childhood into
adulthood, a time where they separate from their parents and seek to find
their own identities. Taking this into consideration it is important for ado-
lescents to feel their ideas are being heard. This can be accomplished by al-
lowing them to make choices and have input into the therapeutic process,
while the therapist maintains control of the sessions by setting boundaries
around those choices. This requires a great deal of flexibility on the part of
the therapist, because what works for one group, may not work for another.
It has become clear throughout our work with adolescents; keeping
things contemporary and innovative helps maintain their interest and can
enhance relationships within the groups. Keeping things fresh takes time
and a personal investment in determining with what adolescents are filling
their time: music, activities, television, etc. We have also discovered that the
cleverly named activities are more marketable and enticing to the group.
Some days, it is all in how you market the idea.
 Working with Adolescents 253

Below are two individual programs that utilize Theraplay groups with
adolescents; both demonstrate ways to modify and adapt the technique to
fit this difficult population.
The Theraplay groups in the schools use strictly Theraplay structure while
the juvenile offender program uses Theraplay techniques infused with some
cognitive behavioral components.

BRIJIN GARDNER’S ADOLESCENT

THERAPLAY GROUPS IN SCHOOLS

Clients
Group size was typically between three and seven students from a public
high school or middle school; age range 12–17 years old. Groups were all
male at both levels. The high school students were referred via the behavior
disorder classroom and a computer-based school completion program. Stu-
dents referred to the middle school group had Individualized Education
Plans (IEP) or received Special Education Services for learning or behavioral
difficulties.

Presenting Problem and Treatment Goals

Overall, group members chronically struggled with peer and adult inter-
actions. Most had a history of suspension or expulsion from school due to
aggressive behavior toward peers, non-compliance and aggression toward
authority figures, and involvement with the justice system. Each student
had a DSM-IV TR Axis I and/or II diagnoses, along with a learning disabil-
ity and speech or language concern. Individual goals varied based on the
student’s IEP, but overall the group focus was on increasing positive rela-
tionships with peers and adults in school, complying with adult directions,
decreasing aggressive behaviors, enhancing self-esteem, and experiencing
success while working with peers.

Setting
Theraplay groups were led by the school social worker, typically without
a co-therapist: whenever possible paraprofessionals provided support in the
group. Individuals received four sessions alone with the social worker be-
fore joining the closed 10-week group. During these 4 individual sessions,
the social worker assessed the student for eligibility for the group, as well as
establishing rapport and gaining insight into current issues in their lives.
Sessions were weekly and lasted 45 minutes.
254 Chapter 19

Considerations
Using Theraplay in the school required adaptations and implications that
must be mentioned. First, in the adolescent groups, there was not a direct
parent component. Parents or guardians were initially contacted and inter-
viewed by the social worker for a family history and assessment, but were
not a part of the group. Also, due to restrictions and school guidelines, the
use of highly regressive techniques was omitted (such as using a bottle or
holding the child).
Below are examples of activities used during various stages of group ses-
sions employed with an adolescent boy’s Theraplay group in the high
school/middle school setting. Descriptions of original and modified games
are included in the session models. Note that a feeding (nurturing activity)
was always included within each session.

Beginning Session
1. Rules: Zip it, Stick it, Give ‘Em Props . . . Awww Snap: A group of 14-year
old-boys created this version of the group rules: “Zip it” implies being
quiet, listening to the adult; “Stick it” means sitting together in the
group, not leaving, following the rules, participating in the games; and
“Give them props” suggests that only positive language is used and
no put-downs are allowed. Loosely translated, they maintained the
rules, but created their own spin and identity.
2. Welcome: High Five with an H-to-the-ELLO: Group members give a
high-five to their neighbor and say “H-to-the-ELLO, Mrs. Gardner.”
This goes all around the group circle. The group session would con-
clude by passing “G-to-the-OOD-BYE” at the end.
3. Inventory: Scab, Scar, and Piercing check
4. Measure hand-span with fruit roll-up—then therapist feeds it to them
5. Drop It like It’s Hot to music: This is the teen version of hot-potato.
I use a song by the rapper, Snoop Dogg, called Drop It Like It’s Hot
(I edit and play the most appropriate parts of the song). The leader
plays the music. Teens pass the hot-potato around the circle until
the music stops. The person holding the object gets a high five or
fist bump from their neighbors. Music is turned back on and play
is resumed. Not all music and lyrics are conducive to all groups; be
careful and plan ahead to have music that is fun, but appropriate
for your setting.
6. Shake and Stop
7. Building Blocks: Using blocks or large Legos, group members get 6–8
pieces each. In silence, taking turns, and not touching a block set by
another person, they build a structure together.
 Working with Adolescents 255

8. Fist Stack: This is a variation of the game hand-stack or ketchup/mus-

tard. Teens pair up and build up a tower of fists. Although there is
physical contact, it seems more “masculine” than a game of hand-
stack to teenage boys.
9. Cotton Ball Fight
10. M & M Balance
11. G-to-the-OOD-BYE

Middle Session
1. Welcome: Add It Up Handshake: Teens make up a handshake to pass
around the circle with a greeting; each student adds a “move” to the
handshake. What begins as a high-five goes around the group, with
each member adding to the sequence. It could be a high-five, thumb-
wrestle, knuckle bump, and a snap by the time the handshake makes
it completely around the circle.
2. TAG, you’re it: This nurturing activity is named after a men’s body spray
(found at drug stores). The leader lets group members sniff each scent
and select one. Then the leader sprays and pats the scent into place
(neck or wrist).
3. Mad Skills: In this check-in activity, “mad” is not an emotion, rather it
means cool, different, or unique. We go around the group demon-
strating or telling about a “mad skill” that we have, for example,
touching your tongue to your nose, moving one eyeball at a time, or
finishing all your math homework would be considered “mad skills.”
4. K.C. Ink: This nurturing technique taps the interests of teens. A few
teen clients were interested in a genre of reality television shows called
L.A. Ink and Miami Ink (both about tattoo parlors); many adolescents
are intrigued by the taboo of body art and piercing. One can create
fake tattoos using paint brushes or finger tips or one can purchase
fake, but cool tattoos to apply to their skin. The students pick where
they want the “tattoo” along with the design they want. This is a great
way to give a mini massage on a back, arm, and neck.
5. Chop Stick Stack: Collect several dozen unused chopsticks for this
game. Start by distributing the chop sticks to group members. Place a
ceramic coffee cup in the center of the group/circle. The goal is to stack
all the chopsticks on top without any sticks falling off. Talking during
the game or touching another member’s chop stick is not allowed.
Once the group masters a large cup, you can reduce the size to in-
crease the challenge in future sessions. This technique can help assess
where the group is in the therapeutic process based on the verbaliza-
tions and outcome.
6. Loudest Crunch with chips
256 Chapter 19

7. No Fear Challenge: Group Twister with 6–12 colored foam squares.

Give directions to each player individually, using one foot or hand at
a time; eventually all players will have all 4 (hands/feet) on the floor.
The leader acts as the “spinner,” calling out directions to create the
challenge. Once all members are in their spot with “4 on the floor,”
the leader counts 15 seconds without anyone falling over or losing
their balance—in order to “win” the challenge.
8. London Bridge: This is one of those times the leader dances (literally)
on the edge. Find some music your adolescents appreciate and have
it ready to play. Group members stand up and pair off, raising their
hands above their heads and connecting with their partners, they
make a bridge. Each pair does a hand-dance with their neighbor
while the leader scoots underneath the bridges facilitating the activ-
ity. For more resistant clients, the therapist can engage each client in
a “hand-dance” (pushing palms of client and therapist together) sep-
arately rather than through pairing off group members.
9. Balloon Bag Bop—Level I: Fill a large trash bag with several blown-up
balloons. Tie the bag off with rubber bands. If you have an aggressive
group, use two trash bags, so the balloons do not burst out. Group
members stand in a circle. The goal is for group members to only use
their hands to keep the balloon bag up in the air without it touching
the ground. The leader may sit in the center to assist. You can have
the teens shout their name as they hit the bag for an added level of
involvement.
10. Psychic Skittles or M&Ms: Leader presents group with the colors of
candy held in hand. Group members must close their eyes and guess
the color of candy the leader placed in their mouth. For added chal-
lenge, have the group members take turns feeding one another;
guessing both the color of the candy and the person who fed them.
11. Add It Up Handshake Goodbye: Teens try to replicate the original wel-
come handshake as they pass the goodbye around the circle.

Final Session
1. Welcome: Thumb Wrestling
2. Group Noodle Doodle: Using Magic Nuudles (a brand name biodegrad-
able building block), allow group members to take turns becoming
the “doodle.” Each member selects the location (face, arm, leg) of
the group’s noodle doodle. Members are given several Magic Nuudles
and take turns making a design on the selected individual. Leaders
may take a photograph of the final design.
3. Taco-Schmaco or Burly Burrito: This is an updated version of making a
sandwich or rolling the child up in a blanket. Instead, the leader pre-
 Working with Adolescents 257

tends to order food from a Mexican fast-food chain and the client be-
comes the food. Have the adolescent stand in the center of the circle
and select a taco or burrito from the “menu.” The leader proceeds to
“make” the main course by wrapping the adolescent up in a blanket;
have the adolescent hold onto the corner of the blanket near their
shoulder. The leader winds the blanket around the adolescent and
then adds extras (lettuce, salsa, cheese) by playfully ruffling hair ex-
posed. To “eat” the burrito, the individual spins or unrolls out of the
blanket.
4. Balloon Bag Bop—Level II: Using the large trash bag filled with bal-
loons, the group divides into two sections. One group lies on their
backs with feet in the air; they try to push the balloon bag using only
their feet back to the group that is standing; depending on the group
size, this can be done in rows or a circle. The second group stands
above the group on the ground, using only hands to push the bal-
loon bag past the other group. Groups rotate standing and lying on
the ground. (Rhonke and Butler, 1995)
5. Can You Hear Me Now?: This game is the enhanced version of tele-
phone or secret message. In a circle, the leader sends a message by
whispering in one person’s ear; the message is passed around the cir-
cle. If you re-name it, teens will play it! You can also play this game
using a cell phone (not turned on!) as a prop; having the teens say
“It’s for you,” and then adding on who is calling them. The phone is
passed around the circle and goes something like this, starting with
the leader: “Tyler, it’s for you. The President is calling.” “Thanks, Mrs.
Gardner,” passing the phone to the next group member, “Actually,
it’s for you, Kevin. It’s American Idol calling.” Use this game with
clients who are cognitively able to think quickly, it can be too much
pressure for some people to create this on the spot. Ideally this is
used later on in sessions as clients feel more comfortable and have
shared some personal information.
6. Loudest crunch or pretzel challenge
7. Walk the Plank: This is a trust walk that meets an obstacle course. An
obstacle course is created within the room or hallway using desks,
pillows, people, etc. At the end of the obstacle course is a long,
squishy “plank” made from a bathtub safety-liner. This activity takes
some time as members take turns “walking the plank.” One at a
time, members take off their shoes/socks and are blind-folded. The
leader gently spins them around and the individual is guided by the
words and hands of other group members and the leader. Once the
student reaches “the plank,” group members spritz their feet with
water in spray bottles. The obstacle course is changed multiple times
to maintain challenge.
258 Chapter 19

8. Snowboard or Skateboard Face: This is the cotton-ball-soothe with ado-

lescent modifications. Using a cotton ball or blush brush, the leader
sits in front of the teenager whose eyes are closed. The leader uses
current terminology and/or names idols from the snowboarding/
skateboarding sport. The leader narrates what the boarder or skater
is doing as it coasts around the client’s face.
9. Magic 8 Ball: This is a prop-based activity that can be used at any
point in treatment. If used in the final session, the leader makes pos-
itive projections and predictions for each group member. Using a
Magic 8 Ball (sold in toy departments) the leader has the adolescent
hold the ball in their hands; the client asks a question about their
life/future/etc. The leader places their hands on top of the client’s
hands; they shake the ball and turn it over to read the answer. This
can be done several times until the “right” answer is received.
10. Celebration Smorgasbord: Therapist provides various snacks (chips,
candies, fruit, etc.) used within the feeding activities of the group ses-
sions. This acts as a final celebration of the group experience to-
gether.
11. Thumb Wrestle Goodbye

OUTCOMES AND RESULTS FROM

THERAPLAY SESSIONS IN SCHOOL

The measurements utilized to assess outcomes for the Theraplay groups in

school were: social worker observations, teacher report and grade card com-
ments, behavioral goals from student Individual Education Plans, discipline
referrals to the office, and self-report. The observations and reflections of the
social worker and teacher over time indicated that the peers were interacting
in a more positive way with one another. We also noticed an increase in stu-
dent’s trust level during group sessions with both the peers and the therapist.
The initial group sessions were met with some resistance and mistrust from
the group; however, over the sessions all the boys demonstrated a greater
willingness to participate and engaged actively with each other.
The classroom teacher’s data showed a large reduction in the account of
verbal arguments and physical aggression between peers that participated in
the group. Student grade cards also demonstrated that teachers noticed
changes such as: an increase in positive student behaviors in class, fewer dis-
ruptions, getting along with peers, and enhanced self-esteem. Several teach-
ers commented on increased participation in the class discussions and
homework being turned in; thus increasing the several students’ grades.
Discipline referrals were also tracked and there was a marked difference
from the beginning of the school year to when the Theraplay group was
 Working with Adolescents 259

completed. Administrative data was calculated over the course of eight

months and found there was a 40 percent decrease in office referrals or out-
of-school suspensions for the students participating in the Theraplay
groups. Overall, the quantitative results demonstrate the positive impact
that Theraplay groups can have with adolescent clients.

MARY SPICKELMIER’S JUVENILE OFFENDER PROGRAM

Clients
Approximately 4 to 8 adolescents participate in the Juvenile Offender Pro-
gram at any given time. They range in ages from 13 to 19 years old. Referrals
for the group come from local diversion and probation officers after clients
have been charged with a variety of criminal acts ranging from theft to battery.

Setting
The group meets in a private practice office with a couch and several
beanbag chairs that form a circle for participants to sit in. I divide the group
by gender and we meet one hour weekly for 12 to 20 sessions based on the
clients’ needs. It is an open-ended group, so group members begin and end
at different times. Sessions are led without a co-therapist.

Rationale for Theraplay

Theraplay focuses on positive relationships with others, increasing self-
esteem, and building trust in others, all of which are important factors to
address when working with juvenile offenders. The activities are fun and en-
gaging, while the sessions are structured, with the therapist clearly being in
charge.

Innovations
Adolescents are developmentally at a very cognitive stage. They like to
talk and process things. Although typically Theraplay is a non-verbal form
of treatment, my program incorporates Theraplay activities with cognitive
behavioral strategies. Other modifications made are: rather than doing in-
ventory at the beginning of group, it is done throughout the session. It was
found that if the leader goes around the circle, noticing something special
about each adolescent, they consider it “cheesy” and not sincere. Therefore,
the leader notices things throughout the session so it appears more sponta-
neous and genuine.
260 Chapter 19

Treatment Goals
The focus of the Juvenile Offender Program is to help juvenile offenders
identify and cope with life challenges in healthy and positive ways. Sessions
focus on: expressing feelings, anger management, stress management, so-
cial skills, self-control, problem-solving, improving relationships, improv-
ing communication, increasing self esteem, positive self-talk, and taking re-
sponsibility.

Beginning and Ending Sessions

The first session is always an intake session completed with the adoles-
cent and at least one parent in which a typical assessment is completed. The
adolescent is required to initial that they understand and agree to all pro-
gram rules and expectations which include: 1) The number of sessions they
will be required to attend, 2) What day and time they will start the program,
3) They are not allowed to miss more than two sessions without having to
restart, 4) They may only restart the program one time, 5) They cannot be
more than 10 minutes late to group or they will not be able to attend and
it will count as an absent, 6) They cannot use alcohol or drugs while they
are in the program, 7) They cannot be physically or verbally abusive or
threaten violence. Final sessions are always done individually with the
client, rather than in the group. Due to the group being an open one rather
than closed, the sequence of sessions varies from client to client.

Examples of Group Sessions for Juvenile Offenders

Session on Anger Management
Welcome: Say our names
Rules: Go over rules: “nobody gets hurt, tell the truth, no smoking outside
the building, what we talk about in group stays in group” (and so forth—it
varies from group to group).
Inventory: Do throughout the session.
Highs and Lows: Clients tell about the best and worst thing that happened
over the week.
Clay Splat: I like to compare this technique to the paper punch activity for
younger kids. Each client takes a piece of clay and throws it as hard as they
can at a table cloth that is spread out on the ground. While throwing the
clay, clients identify things that make them angry.
Clay Soothe: Clients hold clay in their hands and close their eyes while
feeling the clay in their hands. Many of the Juvenile Offenders struggle with
closing their eyes because they have issues around trusting others.
Clay Creation: Clients are asked to make something out of the clay.
 Working with Adolescents 261

Nurture: After clients wash the clay off of their hands (or if time allows
the therapist can wash the clay off of their hands), lotion their hands while
you are discussing the activity. For hard-core kids, simply put the lotion
from your hand onto the palm of their hand making a nurturing contact.
Discussion Points: 1) Feeling angry is a normal emotion, 2) Anger is energy
and individuals can choose to use that energy in a positive or negative way,
3) Discuss positive ways people use energy such as writing music, motiva-
tion, writing poems or speeches, dancing, art, etc.
Goodbyes

Session on Stress Management for Girls

Welcome: Say our names
Rules: Go over group rules
Inventory: Notice a scar or tattoo on someone and compare it to others in
the group. I may rub my hand or finger over it as we talk about it.
Highs and Lows: Clients tell about the best and worst thing that happened
over the week.
Spa Day: Put girls in groups of two or three. Have teens put blindfolds or
cucumber slices over their eyes and play soft music in the background. They
rub lotion on each other’s arms from the elbow down. The therapist mas-
sages the girl’s head and or face. Everyone gets a turn.
Feeding Activity: If you use cucumber slices to cover the eyes, there is usu-
ally a chunk of cucumber left over. Slice the remainder of the cucumber and
feed it to the group members.
Discussion Points: 1) Identify triggers for stress, 2) Identify physical and
mental responses to stress, 3) Identify positive ways to manage stress
Goodbyes

Session on Stress Management for Boys

Welcome: Say our names
Rules: Go over group rules
Inventory: Notice the energy level of group members.
Highs and Lows: Clients tell about the best and worst thing that happened
over the week.
Balloon Up
Cotton Ball Fight
Zoom Eek
Feed Chips off of Different Body Parts
Discussion Points: 1) Identify triggers for stress, 2) Identify physical and
mental responses to stress, 3) Identify positive ways to manage stress
Goodbyes
262 Chapter 19

Session on Making Change

Welcome: Say our names
Rules: Go over group rules
Inventory: Do throughout the group
Highs and Lows: Clients tell about the best and worst thing that happened
over the week.
Tarp Challenge: Have clients write three problems they are working on
onto three separate pieces of masking tape. Then have them write three
goals they have for themselves on three separate pieces of masking tape. Put
a tarp on the floor. Have participants put the pieces of tape with the prob-
lems on one side of the tarp and their goals on the other side of the tarp.
Flip the tarp with the problem side up. Have everyone stand on the tarp and
flip it over without anyone touching the floor or other objects in the room.
They will usually start off on the tarp very far apart, but need to touch each
other and work together to get the tarp flipped over. If someone steps off
the tarp you start over (Lowenstein, 1999).
Discussion Points: 1) Turning over a new leaf and how difficult it is to
make changes in our lives, 2) Who is on their team, as they try to accom-
plish their personal goals, 3) What would happen if someone on their team
sabotaged their efforts?
Goodbyes

Session on Setting Goals

Welcome: Say our names
Rules: Go over group rules
Inventory: Throughout group
Highs and Lows: Clients tell about the best and worst thing that happened
over the week.
Cup Stacking Challenge: Tie four 5- to 6-foot-long pieces of string onto a
rubber band. You should have eight shorter strings when you are done.
Each group member is given a string that is attached to the rubber band so
they are all connected. Then you place 16 oz. paper cups around the room
and tell the group they have to work together to stack the cups into each
other to form one stack. They cannot touch the cups with anything but the
strings or rubber band and they cannot touch anyone else’s string besides
their own.
Discussion Points: 1) Many steps toward one goal. The stack represents
the overall goal and each cup represents a sub-goal that needs to be ac-
complished to reach their larger goal, 2) Identify personal goals and sub-
goals.
Goodbyes
 Working with Adolescents 263

OUTCOMES AND RESULTS OF

JUVENILE OFFENDER PROGRAM

Most of the juvenile offenders that I work with have already been treated
by a multitude of therapists, many of whom they feel are incompetent and
worthless. This is definitely a strike against me. Then, strike two comes in
the common consensus that they do not like being told what to do. So
when the judge or probation officer informs them they have to participate
in the program as a condition of their diversion or probation, they are ex-
tremely resistant to the idea that this program may actually help them.
Strike three is the fact, that in their eyes, this is a total waste of their time.
Time they could be spending with their friends or having fun. It is difficult
to measure the effectiveness of treatment when it seems as though I have
struck out before I even started.
Although I do not have any research based evidence to support the effec-
tiveness of the Juvenile Offender Program, I do give the kids surveys to com-
plete at the end of the program as a method to make improvements for fu-
ture clients. On the survey clients are asked to rank several questions on a
scale from one to ten, with one being not at all and ten being very helpful.
Two questions on the survey are as follows: 1) When you first found out
that you had to come to group how helpful did you think it would be? A
majority of the juveniles responded with a 3 or 4. 2) Now that you have
completed the program how helpful was it for you? A majority of the juve-
niles responded to this question with an 8, 9, or 10. The feedback from the
kids I work with clearly shows that they feel the program has helped them.
After conducting the Juvenile Offender Program for almost three years, I
realized while writing this chapter that I really had no idea how my pro-
gram compared to other community programs in effectiveness. I asked a lo-
cal probation officer for feedback and this is how she replied, “I wanted to
tell you that I really appreciate the work you do with the juvenile offenders
in our community. We have a few introductory programs that we offer for
first-time offenders, but your program definitely offers more in the way of
therapeutic help for offenders. I have had such positive feedback from the
offenders (and their families) that have attended your Juvenile Offender
Program. You have a special way of connecting with youth where they can
grasp the concepts and learn the tools needed to be successful. You know
you are doing a good job when offenders tell other youth about your pro-
gram and suggest to their friends that they contact you. I have even had par-
ents of youth who have completed your program call me years later to ask
for your phone number, because they know someone who would benefit
from your program. I am looking forward to many more years of working
with you to help the youth in our community. Sincerely, Linda Huggins.”
264 Chapter 19

FINAL THOUGHTS ON THERAPLAY WITH ADOLESCENTS

Theraplay provides remarkable possibility for tough clients, especially for re-
luctant teens with complex and difficult backgrounds. Teens crave authen-
ticity and connections; being “real” with them is a proficiency therapists
must have, when working with adolescents. The adolescent’s reluctance to
engage can make for an arduous beginning for treatment. Our motto when
working with teenagers is to “never let them see you sweat!” When the ther-
apist approaches the adolescent with patience, humor, creativity, and confi-
dence the outcomes can be inspiring.

REFERENCES

Garbarino, James. (1999). Lost Boys: Why Our Sons Turn Violent and How We Can Save
Them. New York: The Free Press.
Jernberg, Ann, and Phyllis Booth. (1999). Theraplay: Helping Parents and Children
Build Better Relationships Through Attachment-Based Play, 2nd ed. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Kindlon, Dan, and Michael Thompson. (1999). Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional
Life of Boys. New York: Ballantine.
Lowenstein, Liana. (1999). Creative Interventions for Troubled Children and Youth.
Toronto: Champion Press.
Munns, Evangeline, ed. (2000). Theraplay: Innovations in Attachment-Enhancing Play
Therapy. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson Inc.
Pipher, Mary. (1994). Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls. New York:
Grosset Putnam.
Rhonke, Karl, and Steve Butler. (1995). Quicksilver. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt
Publishers.
Rubin, Phyllis, and Jeanine Tregay. (1989). Play with Them: Theraplay Groups in the
Classroom. Spring field, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas.
Appendix
Theraplay Activities

TYPICAL STRUCTURE OF THERAPLAY® SESSION

Entrance—Opening Song or Handshake—Inventory/checkup—Lotioning/

Powdering of Hurts—Activities from the 4 dimensions: Structure, Chal-
lenge, Engagement, Nurturing—Feeding—Goodbye Song.

Entrance Ideas
Backwards Walk: Participants line up single file and enter the room back-
wards.
Piggy Back: Parent places child on his back and enters the room by walking
or galloping. Child may direct parent.
Choo choo train: All participants single file with hands on shoulders of per-
son in front. Stick together and move around the room as a locomotive,
varying speed.
Follow the Leader: Therapist, parents, or children take turns leading the rest
of the family into and about the room in fun and interesting ways, imitat-
ing the leader, one behind the other.
Leap Frog: Group lines up in single file with leader crouching down making
himself small while next person leaps over him and crouches down so the
next person can leap over, etc.
Over and Under: Therapist has participants get in a line behind him/her and
initiates passing a ball over her head to the person behind and that person

265
266 Appendix

passes the ball under to next person. Continue to alternate until person at
end of line has it and runs to the front to proceed with the same pattern of
over/under. Different speeds increase the challenge.
Stepping Stones: Pieces of paper (stepping stones) are laid on the floor from
door into the room leading to the pillow where child is to sit. M&Ms are
hidden (on top of a Kleenex) under some of the stepping stones. The child
steps on the stones after peeking under the paper to discover an M&M. If
finding one then can eat it and proceeds to the next stepping stone.
Tunnel: First person on hands and knees as next person crawls underneath
and becomes the next part of tunnel. Continue entering the room in this
fashion.
Wall Ball: Group members form a circle and hold hands. They enter the
room in circular fashion with everyone touching their backs to wall as they
move around the perimeter of the room.

Opening Ideas
Song: “Hello Sally, hello mom, hello dad and Evangeline—we’re glad you
came to play.”
Create a Handshake: Group members sit in circle. Group leader shakes hand
of person sitting next to him and instructs person to shake hands with next
person and to add an element. This continues until a group handshake is
created.
Hello Secret Handshake: Therapist or parent initiates making up a secret
handshake and have child make up his /her own as well. Handshakes are
shared around the circle and can be part of the ritual of meeting each week.

Inventory or Checkup Ideas

Check-In: Therapist and parent notice specific physical characteristics of the
child that make him/her unique. At the beginning of each session, the ther-
apist enlists the parents help the make sure the child has brought all those
special parts. For example, the therapist might count the freckles on the
child’s cheeks during the first session and then check to make sure all the
freckles came back the second time.
Check to see what the child brought with them such as a smile, warm or
cold fingers or toes, bright eyes, curly hair, number of fingers or toes, etc.
Measuring: Using a measuring tape measure the child’s height, length of
arms, legs, feet, hands, ears, etc. Also measure surprising things such as the
child’s smile, muscles, and how high he can jump. Write down the mea-
 Theraplay Activities 267

surements and keep them for later comparisons. Note that paper streamers,
yarn, ribbon, or fruit roll ups can all be used as measuring tools.
Measuring with Fruit Tape: Use “Fruit by the Foot” to measure parts of the
child’s body—(i.e., smile) and as you measure, tear off the fruit tape and
feed it to the child.
Wiggly Parts/Stiff Parts: An inventory activity as parent or therapist finds
which body parts are wiggly or stiff. “I wonder if your nose wiggles, what
about your ears, your tongue,” etc.

Caring of Hurts
Helping Hurts: Therapist and parent look over the child to see if there are
any scratches, scrapes, bruises, hang nails, etc., that may need lotioning,
powdering, or band-aids. The child may point out places where there is no
noticeable “boo-boo.” It is very important that we attend to those places
just as if there were a visible hurt. In this way, we communicate the message
that we understand that the child has hurts we can’t see and that we will
help to heal these too. If there are no visible hurts, then the therapist makes
one up such as lotioning a freckle or a red spot. If the child resists lotion-
ing or powdering then try a band-aid or simply blowing on the hurt.

DIMENSIONS

1. Structure
This dimension reflects the importance of rules and limits for the child’s
behavior in order to make his world safe, secure, and predictable. The ac-
tivities are led by the therapist or parent in a clear, consistent, and firm way
that the child can easily understand. This dimension is often needed with
dysregulated, impulsive, acting out children or those who have become
tyrants or those whose inner world is in chaos.
Beanbag Game: This is a great activity for augmenting structure and engage-
ment in a fun way. The therapist places a beanbag on the child’s head and
then picks a cue word, for example, “wiggle” that is shared with the child.
The therapist may say a couple of other words beginning with “w” while
making eye contact with the child. When the therapist says the cue word,
the child drops his head and the therapist catches the beanbag in her hands.
The parent and child then play the game. The child’s ability to wait, listen
carefully, and drop the beanbag at exactly the right time is celebrated. Cues
can move from verbal to non-verbal as the child’s skills in reading caregivers
improve.
268 Appendix

Clap Patterns: Therapist or parent makes different clapping sounds with hands
starting with a simple sequence of claps, and others copy it. The sequence can
include touching safe body parts of neighbors in group. Everyone can take a
turn leading the clap patterns.
Freeze and Thaw: Child is told a secret spot on body, above the waist. Child
stands as a frozen statue, and thaws out when parent is able to touch the se-
cret spot.
The Grand Ol’ Duke of York: Hold hands standing in a circle: “The grand ol’
Duke of York, He had ten thousand men (sing and walk in a circle) He
marched them up to the top of the hill (move toward the center of the cir-
cle raising arms) and he marched them down again (step back while low-
ering arms). And when they were up, they were up (move toward center of
circle raising arms). And when they were down, they were down (step back
and lower arms). And when they were only half way up, they were neither
up nor down (raise arms half way up, then fully up, then fully down). He
marched them to the left (move to the left). He marched them to the right
(move to the right). He marched them all around the town and he marched
them out of sight” (Let go of hands, turn around and clap hands).
Hand Stacking: In circle formation facing inwards, on knees, leader puts his
hand palm down near the floor. His neighbor places his hand on top of the
leader’s hand. The next person places his hand on top and this continues un-
til all have stacked their hands on top of one another. Then the leader takes his
bottom hand and puts it on top of the last person’s hand and this continues
with the stack of hands rising until everyone is on tiptoe. Then the reverse or-
der of hands comes down to the floor again. For younger children call out each
person’s name to signal their turn—this also helps if attention is an issue.
Hand, Foot, or Body Outline: Child lies on back on large piece of paper, while
therapist or parent outline his body with a felt pen. Later everyone fills out
physical features while commenting positively—i.e., “black shiny hair, rosy
cheeks, strong arms, etc.”
Head and Shoulders, Knees and Toes: Sing this song while pointing to the
body parts when they are named:

Head and shoulders, knees and toes

Knees and toes, knees and toes
Head and shoulders, knees and toes
Eyes, ears, mouth and nose.

Hokey Pokey: Sing and act out the motions:

You put your right hand in

You put your right hand out
 Theraplay Activities 269

You put your right hand in

And you shake it all about
You do the hokey pokey (wiggle body)
And you turn yourself about (turn around)
And that’s what it’s all about (clap hands)

Repeat with left hand and different body parts such as foot, head, butt,
whole self.
Instrument Attunement: Child and parent are each given the same instru-
ment. The parent is encouraged to create a simple rhythm and the child is
encouraged to mirror this. Parent, child, and therapist can take turns lead-
ing and following.
Mirroring: Parent and child sit or stand facing each other, hands raised in
front with palms facing, but not touching, each other. Parent begins to
move hands slowly and child must shadow (mirror) movements.
Mother May I: Leader stands at one end of the room while all others stand
in a row at the opposite end of the room facing the leader. First person asks
the leader, “Mother may I take 2 giant steps forward?” (or something equiv-
alent). Leader answers, “Yes you may” (or not). Each person makes a re-
quest starting with “Mother may I” and if they don’t, they miss their turn.
If anyone tries to sneak forward when it is not their turn, the leader can
send them back to the starting point. First person to reach “Mother” is the
leader of the next round.
Motor Boat: Group stands in circle holding hands. They move in circular
fashion slowly in clockwise manner while singing “motor boat, motor boat
go so slow.” Group speeds up as they sing, “motor boat, motor boat go so
fast.” They speed up again as they sing, “motor boat, motor boat, step on
the gas.” Group slows down and speeds up again while singing appropriate
phrase. On the final stanza, “motor boat, motor boat, out of gas,” the group
collapses to the ground.
Pass a Gentle Squeeze: Group sits in circle, holding hands. Leader gently
squeezes hand of person beside him in Morse code fashion and tells him to
send it on, until it returns to leader.
“Peanut Butter” . . . “Jelly”: Leader says “peanut butter” and group responds
“jelly,” while copying vocal inflection (loud, soft, fast, slow, etc.).
Red Light, Green Light: Group lines up against wall facing leader, who is at
opposite wall with back to group. Leader says “green light” and the group
advances (holding hands with impulsive children). Leader says, “red
light” and turns around as group stops. If leader catches anyone moving,
he returns to wall and starts again. Objective is to reach and gently touch
leader.
270 Appendix

Row, Row, Row Your Boat: The parent sits cross-legged with the child on her
lap facing her. The therapist sits behind the child, facing the mother. To-
gether the therapist and parent sing “Row, Row, Row Your Boat” while the
parent rocks the child. The therapist can help catch the child on the fall
away from the parent if this provides additional safety for the child.
Simon Says: Played in traditional way where leader calls out “Simon says put
your hand up” and the group does this. The group obeys leader’s commands
as long as they are prefaced with “Simon says.” If this is not done then the
group does not obey. If someone obeys a command not preceded with “Simon
says” then that person is “it” and becomes the next leader. This can be varied
with commands such as “Simon says give your neighbor a hug (or a hand-
shake),” or “Simon says say one nice thing you like about your neighbor.”
Soft and Floppy: Have the child lie on the floor and help him get “all soft and
floppy like spaghetti.” Gently jiggle each arm and let it flop to the floor—
then each leg. If a child has difficulty getting floppy, have him get “stiff like
a board” and then let it go and relax. Once the child is relaxed, ask him to
wiggle just one part of his body, such as his tongue, big toe, baby finger,
ears, and so forth.
The Dyadic Dance: The parent and child stand up facing each other holding
hands. The parent uses facial gestures and body movements (a wink of the
right eye, a nod of the head) to tell child to move one step to the right or to
the left. Parent and child must make good eye contact for this game to be
successful and the roles of leader and follower can switch throughout.
The Eyeball Toss: Therapist, parent, and child all sit on the floor in a wide tri-
angle. Whoever has the ball (which looks like an eyeball) must make eye
contact with the person that is going to get the ball next. The game can be
played with simple eye contact, or with facial gestures.
Tracing Hands: The therapist provides paper and markers and helps the par-
ent place the child’s hand flat on the paper. As the parent traces the child’s
hand, the therapist can give a running commentary, “Now your mom is
tracing right around your thumb . . . and down in the valley,” etc.
Yarn Web: Group sits in a circle. Leader holds onto the end of a ball of yarn
and passes it to another group member. That person holds the string as he
passes it to someone else. Continue until everyone is holding a piece of
string. Last person then reverses ball of yarn until it returns to leader.

2. Challenge

This dimension relates to a child’s need to explore and to take age ap-
propriate risks, which when mastered, gives him/her a feeling of mastery
 Theraplay Activities 271

and self-confidence. Challenging activities are often done cooperatively

with parent or therapist, or the child may compete with himself.
Balloon between Two Bodies: Hold a balloon between you and the child (such
as between hips, legs, foreheads, elbows) and move across the room with-
out dropping or popping the balloon. You can make this more challenging
by returning to your start position by going backwards.
Balloon Tennis: Hit a balloon back and forth, trying to keep it in the air. You
can make this more challenging by seeing if you can hit it back and forth a
specified number of times, increasing the number on further trials if you are
successful.
Blanket Hug: Group sits in a circle. Leader asks 1 child to sit in middle and
covers him with blanket. Leader prompts everyone to stand and walk in cir-
cle around the child, stomping loudly. Leader designates one person to hug
child as the group stomps around, and then signals everyone to sit down.
Child under blanket then tries to guess who hugged him.
Bubble Catch: Have the child try and catch as many bubbles as they can be-
fore they reach the floor. For an added challenge they can use only one
body part, or they need to be “linked” (holding hands, linked elbows) to
another person to catch the bubbles.
Cotton Ball Hockey: Therapist/parent and child lie on tummies facing each
other or sit at opposite sides of a large, preferably firm, pillow. Adult places
a cotton ball in the middle of the pillow. On the cue of 1-2-3-Go, adult and
child try to blow the cotton ball off the other person’s side of the pillow.
You can increase the complexity by saying how many blows can be used to
get the ball across the pillow, or by both trying to blow at the same time to
keep the ball in the middle. Let the child win!
Elbow Tag: Group is divided into sets of three, with one runner and one tag-
ger. Sets form a circle with space to allow runners in between each set. Run-
ner tries to escape tagger by moving in between sets, or locking elbows with
person at either end of the set. The person on the opposite end of the set
then becomes the runner.
Feather Blow: Child and therapist or parent each hold a piece of construc-
tion paper (or a pillow) in front of them. Blow a feather from adult’s paper
(pillow) to the child’s. Child must catch the feather on her paper (pillow)
and then blow it back. For more challenge for an older child more than one
feather can be used.
Feather Blow: Group forms a circle. Each person holds a piece of construc-
tion paper. Group leader places a feather on his paper and blows it to the
person beside him. Each person blows the feather to the next person.
272 Appendix

Feather Guess/Cotton Ball Guess: Child closes eyes. Therapist or parent lightly
touches different parts of child’s body and child tells the therapist what part
of body he is touching.
Finding Powder Shapes in Hands: The therapist puts powder on the palms of
both parent and child. The therapist helps the child find shapes, lines and
letters in his own hand that are also found in the parent’s hand. The parent
then gets to do the same.
Free Throw: Divide into two teams (the child and parent are always a team).
Using masking tape, make a line on the floor and have each team facing
each other across the line. Place small piles of cotton balls on each side of
the line. When you give the “go” signal, each team throws the balls at the
other team, trying to get rid of all the balls on their side. When you give the
“stop” signal, direct players to freeze in position.
Lap Sit Tag: Group moves around room as leader sings. When singing stops
1 person must act as chair for second person. Whoever does not have a chair
becomes leader.
Magic Carpet Ride: Child sits on a blanket on the floor while parent or ther-
apist pulls him/her around the room at different speeds, alternating going
in circles, zig zags, or straight.
Mountain of Bubbles: Use a large plastic bowl or basin. Fill the bowl about two-
thirds full with water. Add several squirts of dish soap. Give each participant
a straw. On a signal challenge them to make a “mountain of bubbles.” They
can also “blow the mountain down” after by gently blowing air at the suds.
Paper Punch and Basketball: The therapist or parent holds a newspaper sheet
tautly so the child can break it easily in half as he/she punches through the
paper with his/her fist. Then the child punches through the half sheet so it
becomes two quarter sheets. For older, stronger children, the newspaper can
be a double thickness (two sheets). The child punches through a number of
newspapers and then tightly squeezes each piece into a ball that is used to
toss into a basket holder made by the therapist’s or parent’s arms joined in
a circle like a hoop.
Peanut Toss: Have child pick up a peanut (or pasta noodle) with his toes and
see how far child can toss it across the room with his feet.
Ping Pong Ball Blow: Everyone gets down on the floor on their stomachs fac-
ing inwards in a circle or facing each other if only two people. A ping-pong
ball is placed in the center and each person tries to blow it away from him-
self and toward the other person. Holding hands helps to form boundaries
for the ping-pong ball.
 Theraplay Activities 273

Ping Pong Ball Blow: Group lay on stomach on floor, facing each other and
holding hands. Leader blows ping pong ball to another person, who then
does the same until everyone has a chance. Try adding several balls, or try
to blow one ball completely around the circle.
Pop the Bubbles: Blow a bubble and have the child pop it with a particular
body part, such as finger, elbow, toe, or by clapping.
Push Me over-Pull Me up: Therapist and child sit facing each other. Hands out
in front of them, with their palms touching. When the therapist gives the
cue word, the child gets to push the therapist over and pull her back up. Af-
ter the therapist has modeled the intervention, the parent and child can
take turns together.
Silly Bones/People to People: All group members pair up. Leader says, “silly,
bones, silly bones, touch (body part),” and partners touch those parts to
each other. After 2 or 3 attempts, leader calls “people to people” and mem-
bers rush to the center to get a new partner. The last person without a part-
ner, or the last couple to form a partnership, becomes the new “leader.”
Slippery, Slippery, Slip: The therapist puts lots of lotion on the child’s arm and
hand and then invites the child to pull his arm away as the therapist tries to
hold onto it. Of course, the arm is so slippery that the child wins every time.
Therapist can delight in the child’s strength, making statements like, “You’re
so strong, you keep getting away!” After the game is modeled, parent and
child can play.
Sock and Shoe Race: This is a great activity for ending sessions. Therapist and
parent each take one of child’s shoes. Either the adults together or the child
can give the cue (Ready, Set, Go), and the adults try to see who can get the
shoe on the child’s foot the fastest. Of course, the parent always wins. If
both parents do the race, then they tie!
Straw Wars: Use milk shake straws and Q-tips. Give each participant one
straw and several Q-tips. You “load the straw” by inserting the Q-tip in the
end closest to the mouth. Give a signal for everyone to shoot the Q-tip
across the room. You can make it more interesting by challenging them to
hit a target, such as a door or mirror. (This activity was invented by Jennifer
Curtis, Winnipeg MB, Canada.)
Stretchy Tube (plastic accordion-like tube): If the therapist felt as if the sound
produced by the tube when stretched might be too adversive the therapist
would demonstrate stretching the tube so that the child could acclimate to
the sound and stretch of the tube. The tube was placed in both of the child’s
hands. If it appeared as if the child’s hands might slip or not grip strongly
enough at first the therapist had one hand over the child’s and one hand to
274 Appendix

stretch the tube. The stretching out of the tube was exaggerated by the ther-
apist by leaning back as far as possible. While the tube was stretched the
therapist commented with an animated tone of voice about the length of
the tube and the child’s strength and skill. This is an engaging activity that
had variations. The variations included pulling the tube between the thera-
pist and child when eye contact was established, and signaling the child (ei-
ther with words or facial signals such as blinking) when the tube should be
stretched. The child and therapist also pushed the tube together as a joint
activity so that it was small. The tube was also made into a circle so that the
therapist and child played peek-a-boo with each other. The tube in the cir-
cle shape could be made into a “hat.”
Toilet Paper Bust-Out: The therapist and parent wrap toilet paper around the
child’s arms and body several times and then delight in the child’s strength
as he busts free from the wrapping, when a cue word is given.
Tube (poster board thickness paper rolled and taped into a tube) with four
to five beanbags: The therapist holds the paper tube and puts the child’s
hands on the bottom of the tube to receive the bean bags inserted one by
one. The therapist holds the beanbags at eye level and when eye contact is
established with the child the beanbag is put in the tube. The element is of-
ten one of surprise as the beanbag is felt by the child as it is dropped in
his/her hands. Some children have said that this activity is like a magic trick.
Wheelbarrow: Parent or therapist lifts and holds up child’s legs while child
braces herself on her arms with head up. Child moves forward by “walking”
with her hands.

3. Engagement

This dimension relates to connecting with the child in a playful, positive,

joyful way that entices the child to interact with the adult. The therapist will
often use activities that include surprise, novelty, and warmth that get the
child’s attention and create a sense of delight. Engagement is emphasized
with withdrawn children such as those that are depressed or autistic.
Ball with Holes: uses approximately five multi-colored chiffon scarves- Balls
with holes are designed to be caught easily and become a unique and fun
activity when scarves are used. The ball should be held by both the child
and the therapist so that this becomes an engaging activity that affords eye
contact between the child and therapist or parent. Scarves are presented to
the child one by one with the therapist showing the child how the scarf
could be inserted in the holes in the ball. Each time the scarf is presented
to the child the therapist is playful in the presentation of the scarf. Options
include playing peek-a-boo with the scarf, putting the scarf on the thera-
 Theraplay Activities 275

pist’s head so that it can be taken off while maintaining eye contact or
bringing the scarf up to the therapist’s face. These placements on the part of
the therapist ensure that the child doesn’t simply take the scarf from the
therapist, but plays an engaging game with another person. The scarves are
put in the holes by the child or therapist together. The therapist comments
on the beauty of the child’s hands and fingers while doing this activity and
also on the beauty of the ball with the scarves clearly visible inside. The ac-
tion of pulling the scarves out of the ball becomes a fun activity as well.
Beep Honk: Adult takes child’s hand and gently guides child to touch adult’s
nose. Adult says, “Beep!” when child touches. Do this a few times. Then have
child touch adult’s ear (or chin) and say, “Honk!” (with a lower voice). You
can go between noses, ears, and chins for fun. Then adult gently touches
child’s nose, then ears and chin. If child makes the noise, that’s great. If not,
the adult makes the sound for him so he gets the idea of how to do it.
Cotton Ball Fight: Sitting in circle, every member is given a pile of cotton
balls. Instructed to throw 1 cotton ball at someone when code word an-
nounced, and then stop. Process repeated for handful of balls. Then told to
throw cotton balls continuously at everybody until instructed to stop.
Cookie Machine: Adults form two lines facing each other, sitting on knees. Child
is hoisted in air and body surfed along the machine, adding pieces to cookie.
Dancing In: Have child stand on adult’s feet while adult supports child there
with one arm around her back and holding her other hand in dancing
form, singing a song, i.e., “The more we dance together, together, together,
the more we dance together, the happier we’ll be, dance this way and that
way, now this way and that way, the more we dance together the happier
we’ll be.” Or make up a song with the child’s name in it.
Foil prints: Using aluminum foil, shape a piece of foil around the child’s el-
bow, hand, foot, face, ear, and so forth. It helps to place a pillow under the
foil and have the child press her hand or foot into the soft surface to get im-
pressions of the fingers and toes.
Hand Tangle: Group members stand in a circle. Group leader reaches out to
shake hands with person opposite him while introducing himself and tells
that person to do the same with someone else. Continue in this manner un-
til everyone is holding hands and the group is entangled. Then, work col-
laboratively to untangle arms without letting go of hands.
Hello . . . Goodbye: Child sits in parent’s lap, facing each other. Parent
places hands behind child to support him. Parent says ‘hello’, and then
dips child backwards and says “goodbye.” Parent brings child back up and
says “hello.”
276 Appendix

Hello . . . Thank you: Group stands in circle. Leader says “hello . . . ” to some-
one calling out his/her name and tosses beanbag to him. Receiver says “thank
you . . . ” using thrower’s name and tosses beanbag to another person and
says “hello. . . . ” Continue until everyone has said hello and thank you only
once. Leader starts again and continues to toss several more beanbags, re-
peating the exact same pattern only going faster.
Hello Whip/Name: Group stands in circle. Leader turns his head and says
“hello” to person beside him. Continue until hello returns to leader. Repeat
process several times, speeding up each time. Repeat by substituting own
name for “hello.”
Hide Notes: Write questions about the child on small pieces of paper. Ex-
amples of questions are: “What is your child’s favorite color,” “What is your
child’s favorite food,” “What is your child’s favorite movie/TV show/book.”
Lay the child down on his back on pillows. Ask the parent to hide his or her
eyes. Hide the notes on the child and direct the parent to find them and an-
swer the questions as they find the notes.
Hiding with Deep Pressure (using a deep pressure, playful squeeze): A varia-
tion on the Theraplay activity of hiding the child consisted of hiding the
child behind or between two couch sized cushions or medium to large size
pillows. Care was taken to have a cushion or pillow be placed not higher
than the child’s collarbone so that the child’s face is carefully observed for
an indication of discomfort as well as establishment of eye contact. The
child is “hidden” between the two pillows which can be placed on the floor
or propped up on the wall. Firm, even pressure is applied when the child is
between the pillows. The therapist often says: “squeeze!” to accompany
each application of pressure. The child can also be “hidden” for a parent to
happily discover or made into a pizza, sandwich, or hot dog. The therapist
and parent can put imaginary toppings such as cheese, mustard, ketchup,
tomato sauce, etc. on the cushion. Different speeds and amounts of pres-
sure are applied as the imaginary toppings are applied.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Child and parent stand facing each other. The par-
ent moves her arms slowly and the child copies this movement as if they are
mirror images of each other. This is an especially fun activity to do with fa-
cial gestures.
Musical Pillows: Have each participant sit on a pillow or a piece of paper in
a circle. As the music plays (or you sing a song) everyone stands up and
walks around the circle. When the music stops, everyone stands on a pillow.
Remove one pillow each time you stop. Inform participants that there can
be more than one person on a pillow. At the end there is one pillow and
everyone must try to stand on it for a group hug.
 Theraplay Activities 277

Nose Cluck: Parent and child sit facing each other with child’s eyes closed.
Parent makes clucking noise with tongue as child attempts to gently touch
his nose to parents nose while keeping his eyes closed.
One Potato, Two Potato: Group sits in circle, making fists. Turn fists sideways,
thumbs facing up and hold them out in front. Leader touches fists as he
moves around circle saying, “one potato, two potato, three potato, four.
Five potato, six potato, seven potato, more.” Whoever is touched at “more”
receives a hug from the people on either side of him.
Pass a Silly Face: Everyone sits in a circle. The first person makes a funny face
and “passes” it to the person sitting next to them, who passes it to the next
person and so on until it comes back to the first person. Participants can
take turns starting off and passing the funny face.
Peekaboo: Therapist or parent sits in front of the child, puts their hands over
their eyes, and then peeks out, saying, “Peekaboo!” The first time, parent
can hold child’s hands over hers while she hides her eyes and peeks out.
Gently, the parent can hide child’s eyes and then move her hands for child
to peek out. The child can also hide his own eyes.
Play-Doh Trophies: Child sits facing adult. Adult uses Play-Doh as mold, and
takes an imprint of child’s body part (i.e, ear, chin, thumb), and shows it to
child as they investigate the Play-Doh.
Popcorn Blanket: Place a small blanket on the floor and tell the child it is a
pan to make popcorn. Then add several “popcorns” (pom-poms or cotton
balls) to the pan. Have the child hold onto two corners of the blanket while
you hold onto the other corners. As the pan “heats up,” using the blanket,
make the popcorn “pop.”
Popcorn Toes: After taking off socks, parent holds up child’s foot and checks
between each toe, blowing between toes to blow out the sock fluff.
Push Me over, Pull Me up: Sit on the floor in front of the child. Place the
child’s palms against yours. On a signal, such as a word or eye blink, have
the child push you over. Fall back in an exaggerated way. Stretch out your
hands so that the child can pull you back up.
Row Your Boat: Two people sit facing each other, and holding hands. Rest of
group each take up a position directly behind one of them, placing hands
on shoulders of person in front, until there are two equal lines. Lines then
move in unison singing song “Row your boat.” Vary speed and movements.
Scarves on Head Became a Hat: Scarves are placed on the child’s head. The
children often comment that this is a hat. They enjoy feeling the scarves on
their head as they are placed there by the therapist. The child also likes the
278 Appendix

feeling of the scarf on the face while the therapist directs a peek-a-boo
game. The scarves are placed one by one or together on the head. A varia-
tion includes the therapist assisting the child with placing the scarves on the
therapist and parent’s head. A group activity develops as each person feels
the scarf on their head and face and looks at and comments on the other
person’s scarf.
Silly Bones: Two people face each other or can be done by a whole group.
Therapist calls out “Silly Bones says touch our hands.” Child and therapist
then touch hands. Leader calls another body part, and so on.
Smooth Ride: Have the child sit on your lap, bounce the child gently while
saying “It’s a smooth road, a smooth road, a smooth road.” Bounce with a
little more vigor and say “It’s a bumpy road, a bumpy road, a bumpy road.”
After the “bumpy road,” while holding the child, say “It’s a hole” and have
the child drop through your legs.
Somersaults: Child stands with therapist across the mat or rug from the par-
ent. Parent gives the cue for child to somersault to parent. On cue, child
(with help from therapist if needed) somersaults, and parent takes hold and
pulls child close to welcome him/her. Then child stands near parent and
therapist cues the child to somersault back. This can also be done with two
parents.
Special Delivery: For child who is small enough to be picked up, parent sits
in a designated comfortable place (couch, seat on floor supported by pil-
lows), and therapist scoops up child in cradle hold and rocks child back
and forth toward parent while singing “I’ve got a little Janie, and she’s go-
ing to her mommy, a one, and a two, and a threeeeeee!” On three, place
child in parent’s lap.
The Twizzler Test: This is a game in which the parent, child, and therapist all
explore physical boundaries using Twizzlers as a unit of measurement.
Therapist gives the parent and child several Twizzlers and they decide how
many Twizzler lengths they like to have between them. Parent and therapist
can take the role of teachers, students, or friends of the child and play
around with appropriate distances and physical proximity issues for differ-
ent kinds of relationships.
Toe Touch under Blanket: Sit in a circle with feet under a blanket. Each per-
son takes a turn touching another’s feet with their feet and tries to guess
whose foot they are touching by looking at their facial expressions.
Wiggly Parts/Stiff Parts: An inventory activity as parent or therapist find
which body parts are wiggly and which parts are stiff—“I wonder if your
nose wiggles, what about your ears, your tongue . . . .”
 Theraplay Activities 279

“Yes” . . . ”No”: Whenever child says “yes,” parent says “no,” and vice versa.
Zip, Zap, Zop: Participants form an inward facing circle. The leader rubs her
hands each time as she says, “zip, zap, zop.” On “zop,” she points her hand
at another group member who then repeats the phrase and action to an-
other member of the group.
Zoom-erk: Sitting in a circle, the word “zoom” is passed around the circle
quickly. When one person stops the action by saying “erk,” the “zoom” re-
verses and is sent back the way it came.
4. Nurture

This is the most important dimension of all and is needed by every hu-
man being, but particularly children who have been neglected or abused.
All children need loving care, affection, warm appropriate touch, a feeling
of unconditional acceptance, and a feeling that they are valued and loved.
Barber Shop: Child sits in chair in front of mirror. Parent acts as barber and
pretends to cut hair, applies shaving cream and removes it with popsicle
stick, and applies after shave lotion.
Blanket Swing: Spread a blanket on the floor and have the child lie down in
the middle. The adults gather up the corners and gently swing the child
while singing a song with his/her name in it (ie “Rock-a-bye Sally in the tree
top” . . . . Position the parents so they can see the child’s face. At the end,
bring him down gently. (We then direct the parent to sit down so they are
comfortable. The therapists wrap the child in the blanket and swing the
child into his mother’s arms.)
Butterfly/Elephant/Eskimo Kisses: Do a combination of different kinds of
kisses—butterfly is with adult’s eye lashes fluttering against child’s cheek; ele-
phant is putting one fist on top of the other and put against mouth and make
sucking noises and circular motions with the fists held together as adult
moves toward the child and touches top fist to child’s cheek to give an ele-
phant kiss; Eskimo—touching noses with child and rubbing back and forth.
Caring for Hurts: At the start of sessions, caring for hurts is often part of
Check-ups. But caring for hurts can occur at any time. When the adult sees
a hurt occur or sees or learns about a past one, she explicitly cares for it by:
(1) rubbing lotion around (so as not to sting) the hurt; (2) blowing on the
hurt; (3) or stroking it with a cotton ball or feather.
Cotton Ball Soothe: Have child lie down with head on pillow or on adult’s
lap, closing his eyes while therapist or parent gently but firmly touches
child with cotton ball around facial features. Adult can do this quietly or
280 Appendix

verbalize process while emphasizing uniqueness —“round little face, soft

rosy cheeks, rosebud lips, curvy ears, gently sloped nose,” etc.
Cradle in Arms and Feed Pudding: Child cradles in parent’s lap and is fed pud-
ding by spoon.
Feather Touch: Child closes eyes. Parent touches part of face with feather and
asks child to guess where he was touched, or, child rolls up sleeve and closes
eyes. Parent tells child to say “stop” when feather reaches crook of arm, and
then proceeds to slowly move feather along child’s arm.
Feeding: Have a small snack and drink available. Have the child sitting com-
fortably against pillows, facing you, or take the child on your lap. Feed the
child, listening for crunches, noticing whether the child likes the snack and
when the child is ready for more. Encourage eye contact.
Feeding Hide and Seek: The therapist hides special treats on the child (like
M&Ms) and the parent has to find them. When the parent finds a treat, he
or she feeds it to the child.
Helping Hurts: Therapist and parent look over the child to see if there are
any scratches, scrapes, bruises, hang nails, etc. that may need lotioning,
powdering, or band-aids. The child may point out places where there is no
noticeable “boo-boo.” It is very important that we attend to those places
just as if there were a visible hurt. In this way, we communicate the message
that we understand that the child has hurts we can’t see and that we will
help to heal these too.
Hum Garden: Sitting in circle on knees holding hands. Everyone touches
forehead to the ground and very quietly begins to hum. Humming crescen-
dos as the group members begin to rise, until everyone is on tiptoes, hands
raised yelling full voice. Then reverse by returning slowly to original posi-
tion in decrescendo. Repeat, but replace humming with phrase ‘we are
great’.
Lotioning Hurts: Therapist or parent find “hurts” (scratches, bruises, old
scars, etc.) on child’s hands, arms, feet or legs, face/neck and gently applies
lotion or powder around the “hurt.”
Lotion-Powder Handprints: Have ready lotion, powder, dark construction pa-
per, an extra sheet of paper (newspaper is fine), and optional hair spray.
Therapist/parent puts lotion generously on child’s hand (feet are OK, too)
and helps child press hands, one at a time, onto the construction paper.
Then shake powder over the handprints. On cue, therapist shakes powder
off the handprints and onto the extra paper, and all can delight over the
handprint. Hair spray fixes the prints.
 Theraplay Activities 281

Lotion with Dots: The lotion bottle is held by the adult and the lotion put on
the child. One of the most successful activities can be lotioning. Often lotion
is the activity that seems to become central in the treatment and becomes the
“ice breaker” when the child maintains some eye contact and is delighted,
and relaxed. Smiles and laughter are elicited. The lotion is often tolerated
and the activity can be sustained because of the deep, firm pressure applied.
For some children the lotion is enjoyed if it is dotted on the hands, arms,
and legs. The dots can be counted as each dot of lotion is applied. The rou-
tine and familiarity of counting is pleasing to the child. Younger children or
those who appear more sensitive to big movement have relished having the
lotion applied in dots on each finger while the therapist expressed delight in
the child’s fingers, arms, toes, and legs. Older children or children of a higher
developmental level also enjoy the application of stripes or their names writ-
ten in lotion. Once trust is established with the child dotting lotion on the
face with gentle circles can be very nurturing.
Plant a Garden: Child lies on the floor or across adult’s lap face down while
the adult uses her hands to prepare the ground (child’s back) for planting
seeds. Adult gently massages child’s back as she works the soil; then adult
makes furrows on child’s back for the seeds; adult puts pretend seeds into
the furrows so child can feel adult’s finger as each one (seed) is being
placed. Adult smoothes her hands over the child’s back as if pushing soil
into the furrows and smoothing the soil. Adult gently taps all fingers onto
child’s back as she waters the seeds. Adult puts hands on child’s back to
warm it saying, “The sun is shining down to make the seeds grow.” Adult
puts words to the motions as she goes along.
Ring Pop and Lullaby: Parent feeds the child a ring pop (candy sucker shaped
like an infant’s soother) or a lollipop or a baby bottle with juice or pop,
while singing a lullaby.
Rock in a Blanket: Child lies quietly on the floor in the center of a sturdy
blanket. Therapist and parents hold corners and sides of the blanket, raise
it gently off the floor and softly swing it back and forth while singing a song
about the child, such as “Rock a Bye (child’s name).” At the end of the song
sing, “When the bough breaks the cradle won’t fall and up will come
(child’s name), cradle and all” as the group swings the child into the par-
ent’s arms. For older child can sing, “(Child’s name) lies over the ocean,
(child’s name) lies over the sea, (child’s name) lies over the ocean, oh bring
back (child’s name) to me. Bring back, bring back, oh bring back (child’s
name) to me,” as child is swung up into parent’s arms.
Say One Nice Thing: Parent looks directly into child’s eyes and states one
positive attribute about child.
282 Appendix

Shaving: Sit the child on a stool or chair facing a mirror. Pretend you are a
barber and are giving the child his first shave. Place a towel around the
child’s shoulders. Apply shaving cream to the child’s cheeks and chin and
pretend to shave it off with a popsicle stick. At the end, admire the smooth-
ness of the child’s face.
Special Features in Mirror: Parent and child look in mirror as parent points
out child’s special features to him.
Story/ Lullaby and Juice: While parent holds child in his arms and gives child
juice box or bottle, he sings a favorite lullaby or makes up a story about the
child.
Taco Roll (or Hotdog Roll): While child lies on a blanket on his/her back the
therapist or parent puts the child’s favorite things on her as if she is a taco
(hotdog); can also include therapist or parent’s favorite things. Wrap the
blanket around the child and have parent or therapist gather the child into
their arms and pretend to eat up their favorite taco (hotdog).
The Doughnut/Pretzel Challenge: The therapist places a mini-doughnut or a
pretzel on the parent’s finger. The child is then challenged to see how many
bites they can take before the doughnut falls apart. The therapist and par-
ent count out loud with each bite. The game can be played multiple times
over several sessions, while the child works to increase the number of bites
he can take before the doughnut crumbles.
The “I Remember When” Story: This usually accompanies a feeding activity
and allows the child to listen while eating. The parent tells a story about the
child. The content can be funny or poignant, but is often most effective if it
describes a time when the child accomplished some new developmental
milestone, or a time when the parent helped the child or met a need in the
child. The therapist can encourage close physical proximity between parent
and child during the telling of this story.
Zip: After lotion is applied the therapist (or parent after learning the activ-
ity) holds one hand on the top of the child’s arm and one hand on the un-
derside of the child’s arm. With firm pressure the therapist’s hands glides
over the child’s arm while counting, “1-2-3 zip!” The “1-2-3” is only done
after eye contact is established and “zip” is said while the therapist’s hands
quickly glide over the child’s arm. This activity can also be done on a child’s
leg in the same way.
Index

Aboriginal peoples: case study with, Chinese child, 122–24; for

103–7; clinical practice with, dysregulated child, 35–36; for
99–102; history of, 98–99; equine assisted therapy, 232;
Theraplay and, 97–114 example of, 10–11; for father-son
acceptance, in DDP, 172 Theraplay, 246–47; for group
Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist, Theraplay, 14–16; for In Sync,
research on, 19 168–69; for multi-cultural
achievement, emphasis on, Chinese environment, 141–43; for parent
culture and, 117 counseling sessions, 192, 194–95;
acting out. See externalizing behaviors for parenting classes, 145–47; for
Add It Up Handshake, 255–56, 266 residential treatment, 91–92; for
adolescents: in residential treatment, resistance, 53–55; for reunification
81–93; Theraplay with, 249–64; tips services, 153–57; for sensory
for working with, 249–51 techniques, 205–8; typical structure
adopted children: Aboriginal, 98; case of, 265
study with, 63–67; DDP and, aggression: dysregulated child and, 32;
171–82; relinquishment visits and, lack of touch and, 5–6; and
211, 214–15; in residential setting, resistance, 48; in Theraplay, 14
82; Theraplay with, 57–68 allergies, 199
Adult Attachment Interview, 163, 188 anger management, group Theraplay
Affective/Reflective (A/R) Dialogue, for, 260–61
172–73; typical sequence of, animal assisted therapy, 225–33
173–74 anxiety. See internalizing behaviors
African American parents, reunification A/R. See Affective/Reflective Dialogue
with children, 147–57 ASDs. See Autism Spectrum Disorders
Agendas/Sessions: for Aboriginal Ashford, Linda, 80n1
peoples, 108–11; for autism assessment: with Chinese child, 122;
spectrum disorders, 78–80; for and group Theraplay, 139–40; in

283
284 Index

parent sessions, 144, 188. See also brain research: and dysregulated child,
Marschak Interaction Method 40–42; and In Sync, 162; and
Atkinson, Nancy J., 137–57 Theraplay, 42–43
attachment: in autism spectrum Bubble Catch, 217, 271
disorders, 70–71; classification of, Buckwalter, Karen Doyle, 81–93
97; fathers and, 238–40; normal, 70; Building Blocks, 254
therapeutic alliance and, 183; Burly Burrito, 256–57
trauma and, 102 Butterfly Kisses, 279
attachment theory, 4, 97, 162
attuned responsiveness, and adopted Canada: Aboriginal peoples in,
child, 62 Theraplay with, 97–114;
Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs): relinquishment visits in, 211–23
case studies with, 72–77; Can You Hear Me Now?, 257
characteristics of, 69; research on Caring for Hurts. See Helping Hurts
Theraplay and, 20; sensory case studies: with Aboriginal peoples,
techniques with, 202–5; Theraplay 103–7; with adopted children,
and, 69–80 63–67; with ASDs, 72–77; with
Awareness Through Movement, 200 Chinese children, 119–22; with
Ayres, A. Jean, 198 DDP, 174–81; with dysregulated
child, 33–35; with equine assisted
Back Rubs, 11, 154 therapy, 230–32; with externalizing
Backwards Walk, 265 behaviors, 33–35; in Germany,
Balloon Bag Bop, 256–57 130–33; with In Sync, 163–69; with
Balloon Between Two Bodies, 108, internalizing behaviors, 36–38; with
271 parent counseling sessions, 192–94;
Balloon Bounce, 217 with relinquishment visits, 219–23;
Balloon Tennis, 108, 271 with resistant child, 46–53; with
Balloon Toss, 11 reunification services, 147–57; with
Balloon Volleyball, 92, 143 sensory techniques, 202–5
Ball with Holes, 207, 274–75 cerebrospinal fluid, 201–2
Barber Shop (Shaving), 110, 279, 281 Chaddock residential setting, 81–93;
Bean Bag Drop, 76 phases of treatment in, 85–89
Bean Bag Game, 267 Challenge: with Aboriginal peoples,
Beep Honk, 275 107; activities for, 270–74; with
behavior disorders, Theraplay and, adolescents, 251; with adopted
research on, 21 child, 58; with German child, 129;
Bettendorf, Carol R., 197–209 in multi-cultural environment, 140;
Blanket Hug, 271 in Theraplay, 8–9
Blanket Swing, 78, 110–11, 279 change, making, group Theraplay for,
Boada, Maria, 45–55 262
Booth, Phyllis, xvi, 86, 88–89 Check-In, 266. See also Inventory
boundary setting: with autism spectrum chemical imbalances, 199
disorders, 77–78; with German Chinese children, Theraplay and,
child, 131 115–25; case study with, 119–22;
Bovingdon, Terra, 211–23 research on, 19–20
Bowlby, John, 186 Choo-Choo Train, 143, 265
boys, fathers and, 237–48 Chop Stick Stack, 255
 Index 285

Circle of Security, 161 Desired Results Development Profile

Clap Patterns, 267–68 (DRDP), 139
Clay Creation, 260 diet intolerances, 199
Clay Soothe, 260 DiPasquale, Lisbeth, 27–44
Clay Splat, 260 DIR/Floortime model, 71–72
client selection: in Germany, 128; for discipline: African American culture
Theraplay, 4 and, 152; in Theraplay, 14
communication: Aboriginal peoples domestic violence: and attachment, 102;
and, 100. See also language; and trauma, In Sync and, 166–67
nonverbal communication Doughnut Challenge, 282
companioning, 216 DRDP (Desired Results Development
connection-break-repair, in DDP, 173 Profile), 139
control: Chinese culture and, 116–17; Drop It Like It’s Hot, 254
German child and, 131–32 Duck, Duck, Goose, 15, 142–43
Cookie Machine, 242, 275 dura mater, 201–2
Cotton Ball Blow, 122, 155 Dyadic Dance, 76, 270
Cotton Ball Fight, 275 Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy
Cotton Ball Guess, 271 (DDP), 171–82; case study with,
Cotton Ball Hockey, 271 174–81; characteristics of, 171–74
Cotton Ball Snowman, 154 dysregulation: and autism spectrum
Cotton Ball Soothe, 10, 31, 52, 156, disorders, 71; case study of
279 Theraplay with, 33–35; causes of,
Cotton Ball Throw, 154 29; definition of, 27–28; Theraplay
Cotton Ball Touch, 78, 92, 122, 155 and, 27–44
Cradle in Arms and Feed Pudding, 279
craniosacral therapy, 201–2 Elbow Tag, 271
Cross the Room in Funny Ways, 30 Elephant Kisses, 279
cue reading, in autism spectrum emotional regulation, 6–7; and
disorders, 75–76 adopted child, 61–62. See also
cue word, for dysregulated child, 31 dysregulation
cultural adaptations: adolescents and, emotional safety: and adopted child,
249, 252; Chinese, 116–18; 60–61; in residential treatment, 84
German, 128–30 empathy, in DDP, 172
culture: multi-cultural environment, Engagement: with Aboriginal peoples,
Theraplay in, 137–57; and 105; activities for, 274–79; with
parenting, 100–101; and Theraplay, adopted child, 58; in multi-cultural
102–3 environment, 140; in Theraplay, 9
Cup Stacking Challenge, 262 Entrance, 10; activities for, 265–66; in
curiousity, in DDP, 172 group Theraplay, 15; with resistant
Curtis, Jennifer, 110, 273 child, 54
equine assisted therapy, and Theraplay,
Dancing in, 275 225–33; case study with, 230–32
Dancing with the Broom, 147 Eskimo Kisses, 279
DDP. See Dyadic Developmental ethical issues, and reunification
Psychotherapy services, 149
deep pressure, 199, 206; hiding with, Every Child Needs Something,
276 mnemonic, 71
286 Index

Exploration, 11 foster care, children in: and

externalizing behaviors, 27–28; relinquishment visits, 215–16;
agendas for Theraplay with, 35–36; reunification with parents, 147–57;
case study of Theraplay with, 33–35; Theraplay and, 57–68
father-son Theraplay and, 244–45; Franke, Ulrike, 127–36
Theraplay and, 29–33 Free Throw, 110–11, 272
Eyeball Toss, 77, 270 Freeze and Thaw, 268
Eyles, Shirley, 45–55 Fruit Tape, Measuring with, 110,
155–56, 267
Fabian, Karen, 211–23 Functional Integration, 200
failure, feelings of, parents and, 186–87 futility, and relinquishment, 215
family: dysregulation and, 28–29.
See also parent(s) Garcia, Monica, 157
family Theraplay, 3–16 Gardner, Brijin, 249–64
Fast ForWord, 41–42 gender straightjacket, 240
fathers: characteristics of, 239; and Germany, Theraplay in, 127–36; case
Chinese child, 118–19; and group study with, 130–33; research on,
Theraplay, 237–48. 20–21; resources on, 24n2
See also parent(s) goals: for group Theraplay, 14, 140–41;
Feather Blow, 155, 271 for parenting classes, 145; for
Feather Guess, 271 reunification services, 153; setting,
Feather Massage, 156 group Theraplay for, 262; of
Feather Touch, 92, 155, 280 Theraplay, xv–xvi
Feeding, 10–11, 279–80; and Goodbye Secret Handshake, 91–92
Aboriginal peoples, 109–10; with Goodbye Song, 11, 15, 54, 154
adolescents, 261; with adopted Goodyear-Brown, Paris, 69–80
child, 66; with autism spectrum The Grand Ol’ Duke of York, 108–9,
disorders, 74; in group Theraplay, 268
15, 142; Hide and Seek, 280; with Greenspan, Stanley, 71
residential treatment, 91–92; with Greeting Song. See Welcome Song
reunification services, 154–56; with group Theraplay, 13–14, 235–64;
traumatized child, 168 adolescents and, 249–64; fathers
Feldenkrais Method, 200–201 and, 237–48; goals for, 14, 140–41;
felt safety, 60–61 in YWCA program, 138–43
Field, Tiffany, 83 Growing and Trusting phase, 12; in
final visits. See relinquishment visits residential treatment, 88
Finding Powder Shapes in Hands, 272 guessing games, with German child,
Find Me, 178–79 131
Finland, Theraplay in, 58, 183–96
Finlay, Annette L., 81–93 Hand, Foot or Body Outline, 268
First Nations. See Aboriginal peoples handling techniques, Theraplay and,
Fist Stack, with adolescents, 255 197–209
Foil Prints/Mold, 92, 109, 275 Hand Stacking, 268
follow-lead-follow, in DDP, 173 Hand Tangle, 275
Follow the Leader, 141–42, 265 Harlow, Harry, 238
followup sessions, 13 Head and Shoulders, Knees and Toes,
Fortune Cookie Feed, 142 111, 268
 Index 287

Hello...Goodbye, 275 Inventory, 10; with Aboriginal peoples,

Hello Secret Handshake, 266 108; activities for, 266–67; with
Hello Song. See Welcome Song adolescents, 251, 261; in equine
Hello...Thank You, 275–76 assisted therapy, 231; fathers and,
Hello Whip/Name, 276 242; in group Theraplay, 15; in
Helping Hurts, 10, 279–80; with relinquishment visits, 217; in
Aboriginal peoples, 109; with residential treatment, 91–92; with
adolescents, 251; with Chinese resistant child, 54
child, 121; with German child, 131; Invitation Phase, 85–86
in group Theraplay, 15, 143; in I Remember When stories, 74, 282
parenting classes, 146; with Irwin, Chris, 226, 228
residential treatment, 92; with
resistant child, 54; in sensory Jernberg, Ann, xv, xvi, 86, 88–89,
techniques, 206–7; with traumatized 127–28
child, 168 joint focus, in parent counseling
Hide Notes, 111, 276 sessions, 190–91
Hiding with Deep Pressure, 276 join up, term, 230
High Five, 254 Jump the River, 91
history taking, and adopted child, 59 juvenile offender program, group
Hokey Pokey, 109–10, 268–69 Theraplay for, 259–63
Hola. See Welcome Song
holding environment, therapeutic Karate Paper Chop, 156
alliance and, 184 Kaufmann, Michael, 231
honesty: adolescents and, 250; horses K.C. Ink, 255
and, 228 Kohanov, Linda, 228
Honeymoon, 11
horses: honesty of, 228; therapy with, Laakso, Minna, 183–96
225–33 language: adolescents and, 250, 252;
Hotdog Roll, 282 with parents, choice of, 189–90
Hughes, Daniel, 168, 188 language disabilities, Theraplay and: in
Hum Garden, 31, 280 autism spectrum disorders, 69; and
hurts: on horses, 229. See also Helping dysregulation, 41–42; in Germany,
Hurts 129–34; research on, 19, 21
hypersensitive parenting, 100 Lap Sit Tag, 272
Leap Frog, 265
Instrument Attunement, 77, 269 LeDoux, Joseph, 168
In Sync, 161–69; case studies with, legal issues, and reunification services,
163–69; supplies for, 164 149
interaction, new narrative of, for Lender, Dafna, 57–68, 171–82
parents, 187–88 Levinson, Boris, 226
internalizing behaviors, 28; agendas for Licorice Pull and Eating, 156
Theraplay with, 38–39; case study of Lindaman, Sandra, 57–68
Theraplay with, 36–38; father-son literature review, on Theraplay, 18–21
Theraplay and, 244 London Bridge, 256
internal working model, changing, and Look Away, 178
adopted child, 62–63 Lorenz, Konrad, 238
Introduction, 11 loss, Aboriginal peoples and, 101–2
288 Index

Lotioning Hurts. See Helping Hurts My Bonnie Lies Over the Ocean, 55
Lotion-Powder Handprints, 156, 280
Lotion with Dots, 280–81 Native Americans. See Aboriginal peoples
love, in DDP, 172 Neufeld, Gordon, 168, 214–15, 217
lower brain centers, Theraplay and, xvii, neurosequential programming, 5–6
4 No Fear Challenge, 256
Lullaby and Juice, 282 nonverbal communication, xvii; and
autism spectrum disorders, 74–75;
Maddox, Anita Johanson, 197–209 in DDP, 173; in Theraplay, 4
Mad Skills, 255 Noodle Doodle, 256
Magic 8 Ball, 258 Nose Cluck, 242, 276
Magic Carpet Ride, 272 Nurture, 5; with Aboriginal peoples,
Marschak Interaction Method (MIM), 106; activities for, 279–82; with
4; culture and interpretation of, 104; adolescents, 251, 261; with adopted
and equine assisted therapy, 227; child, 58, 66; and Chinese child,
German edition of, 128; in 118; in DDP, 177; fathers and, 242;
parenting classes, 144; research on, in multi-cultural environment, 141;
19; in residential treatment, 86; in in residential treatment, 84–85; in
reunification services, 149–51; and reunification services, 155; in
In Sync, 161 Theraplay, 9–10
Marshmallow Fight, 92
massage, 197 One, Two, Three, 147
Mate, Gabor, 215 One Potato, Two Potato, 277
Measuring, 108, 110, 155–56, 266–67 Over and Under, 265–66
mentalization, parents and, 184–86
Merzenich, Michael, 41 Pansepp, Jaak, 163
Meyer, Linda A., 17–24 Paper Basketball, 91, 154, 272
MIM. See Marschak Interaction Method Paper Punch, 91, 272
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, 276 parent(s): and adopted child, 59–60;
Mirroring, 10, 77, 243, 269 assessment of, 188; and autism
M&M Hide, 155 spectrum disorders, 69–71, 74–75;
monotropism, 239 and Chinese child, 116–18; culture
Mother May I, 15, 154, 269 and, 100–101; death of, In Sync and,
Motor Boat, 15, 121, 269 166–67, 169; and dysregulated child,
Mountain of Bubbles, 110, 272 28–29, 37; and equine assisted
Mroz, Jessica, 171–82 therapy, 229–31; and feelings of
multi-cultural environment, Theraplay failure, 186–87; and German child,
in, 137–57 129; and group Theraplay, 237–48;
Munns, Catherine, 45–55 and In Sync, 162–63; new narrative
Munns, Evangeline, ix–xi, xv–xvii, of interaction for, 187–88; and
3–16, 241 reflective work, 184–86, 189; and
music: adolescents and, 252; for multi- relinquishment visits, 211–23; and
cultural environment, 141 resistance, 45–46; and reunification
Musical Chairs, 147 visits, 147–57
Musical Pillows, 111, 276 parent counseling sessions, 10,
Music Movement, 141–42 183–96; with adopted child, 65;
 Index 289

case study with, 192–94; with Psychic Skittles/M&Ms, 256

dysregulated child, 32; elements of, Push Me Over, Pull Me Up, 78, 109,
188–92 273, 277
parenting classes, 165–66; goals of,
145; in multi-cultural environment, Quiet Parts/Noisy Parts, 37
143–47
Pass a Gentle Touch, 15, 78, 269 racism, elimination of, Theraplay and,
Pass a Silly Face, 11, 111, 277 137–57
Pass the Bottle, 146 rapport, definition of, 83
Peanut-butter Jelly, 11, 92, 109, 269 Rashid, Mark, 228
Peanut Toss, 272 Red Light, Green Light, 78, 155,
Peek-A-Boo, 37, 277 269–70
People to People, 273 reflective work: helping, 189; parents
Perry, Bruce: on healing, 83, 162; on and, 184–86. See also
neurosequential programming, 5–6; Affective/Reflective Dialogue
on pleasure, 90, 161; on trauma, 60, regression, dysregulated child and, 32
84 relinquishment visits, 211–23; case
Perry, Linda, 97–114 study with, 219–23; lessons learned
perseveration, in autism spectrum in, 218–19; structure of, 216–18;
disorders, 69, 75–76 timeline for, 212–13
personal relationships, Chinese culture repetitive movements, in autism
and, 116 spectrum disorders, 76
physical regulation, and adopted child, research on Theraplay effectiveness, 7,
61–62 17–24; with autism spectrum
physical therapy, and Theraplay, disorders, 71–72; with dysregulated
197–209 child, 33, 37–38; future topics for, 7,
Piggy Back, 265 21–22, 43, 97; with language
Pillow Balance, 121 acquisition disorders, 133–34
Pillow Push, 78 residential treatment: phases of, 85–89;
Ping Pong Ball Blow, 272–73 Theraplay and, 81–93
PLACE, 172 resilience, 7
Plant a Garden, 281 resistance: adopted child and, 63; case
play: in DDP, 172; in In Sync, 162–63 studies with, 46–53; classification
Play-Doh Trophies, 277 of, 46; factors affecting, 46; as phase
Play Dough Hand Prints, 154 of treatment, 12, 87–88; term, 45;
pleasure, and interactions, 90, 161 and Theraplay, 45–55
Pollack, William, 240 restitution, 14
Pop Bubbles, 30, 110, 191, 193, 273 reunification services: case study with,
Popcorn Blanket, 277 147–57; goals for, 153; In Sync and,
Popcorn Toes, 277 165–66, 169
Positive Comments, 146 rhythm, 6; with autism spectrum
Potato Chip Hide, 154 disorders, 74; in parent counseling
poverty, and Aboriginal peoples, 101 sessions, 191
Powdering Hurts. See Helping Hurts Ring Pop and Lullaby, 110–11, 281
Powder Prints, 156, 280 rituals, with German child, 131
Pretzel Challenge, 282 Roberts, Monty, 227–28, 230
290 Index

Rock-A-Bye, 55 Smillie, Gail, 161–69

Rock in a Blanket, 281 Smooth Ride, 278
Rossborough, Peter, xvi Snowboard Face, 258
Row, Row, Row Your Boat, 30, 74, 270, social skills, in autism spectrum
277 disorders, 69
Rubin, Phyllis, 13, 171–82 socio-economics, Aboriginal peoples
Rules: adolescents and, 250, 254; in and, 101
group Theraplay, 15 Sock and Shoe Race, 273
Soft and Floppy, 111, 270
safety, emotional: and adopted child, Somersaults, 278
60–61; in residential treatment, 84 sound effects, 165
sandtray play, 73 Spa Day, 261
Say One Nice Thing, 281 Special Delivery, 278
Scarves on Head Become Hat, 207, Special Features in Mirror, 282
277–78 Spickelmier, Mary, 249–64
schools, group Theraplay in, 253–59 Squirt Bottle at Target, 155
secure base, in parent counseling staff: and relinquishment visits,
sessions, 188–89 218–19; in residential setting,
selective parenting, 100 Theraplay and, 89–91
sensory integration: and autism Stepping Stones, 266
spectrum disorders, 73, 78; stereotypy, in autism spectrum
definition of, 198; disorder of, disorders, 76
198–99; and dysregulated child, Stern, Daniel, 183
30–31; therapy with, 198–201 stimulation, and development, 6–7
sensory techniques: case study with, Story and Juice, 282
202–5; Theraplay and, 197–209 Straw Wars, 110, 273
separation, Aboriginal peoples and, stress hormones, and dysregulation,
101–2 40–41
Separation/Transition Phase, 88–89 stress management, group Theraplay
Sessions. See Agendas/Sessions for, 261
sexual awareness, adolescents and, Stretchy Tube, 206, 273–74
250–51 Structure: with Aboriginal peoples,
shared parenting, 100 106–7; activities for, 267–70; with
Shaving (Barber Shop), 110, 279, 281 adolescents, 250; with adopted
Sherman, Jamie, 237–48 child, 58; with African Americans,
siblings: dysregulated child and, 38; 151–52; In Sync and, 167; in multi-
resistant child and, 46–49; and cultural environment, 140; in parent
Theraplay, 10 counseling sessions, 191; in
Siegel, Daniel, 161, 215 relinquishment visits, 216–18; in
Silent Scream, 31 residential treatment, 83–84; in
Silly Bones, 51, 273, 278 Theraplay, 8
Simon Says, 11, 51, 270 Sutherland, Patti, 97–114
sitting position, 129 Sweden, Theraplay in, research on, 20
Siu, Angela, 115–25
Skateboard Face, 258 Taco Roll, 282
Skin Color Prints, 142 Taco-Schmaco, 256–57
Slippery, Slippery, Slip, 73, 155, 273 TAG, You’re It, 255
 Index 291

Tarp Challenge, 262 166–67, 169; intergenerational

Tentative Acceptance phase, 11; in transmission of, 99
residential treatment, 86–87 Tregay, Janine, 13
Termination, 12; in residential Tube with Beanbags, 207–8, 274
treatment, 88–89 Tunnel, 78, 266
therapeutic alliance, 183–84 Twinkle Song, 66
therapeutic listening, 199 Twizzler Test, 278
Theraplay, ix–xi, 3–16; with Aboriginal
peoples, 97–114; activities in, Uno, Dos, Tres, 147
265–82; with adolescents, 249–64; Upledger, John, 201
with adopted child, 57–68; with
autism spectrum disorders, 69–80; van, Theraplay session for, 164–65
characteristics of, 3–4; with Chinese violence: domestic, 102, 166–67; lack
children, 115–25; and DDP, of touch and, 5–6
171–82; definition of, 3;
dimensions of, 8–10; with Walk the Plank, 257
dysregulated child, 27–44; and Wall Ball, 266
equine assisted therapy, 225–33; in Wardrop, James L., 17–24
Germany, 127–36; goals of, xv–xvi; warmth, Chinese culture and, 116
and In Sync, 161–69; in residential Weiss, Deborah, 225–33
treatment, 81–93; with resistant Welcome Song, 10, 266; in group
child, 45–55; and sensory and Theraplay, 15; in multi-cultural
handling techniques, 197–209; environment, 141; in parenting
supplies for, 164; theory on, 4–7. classes, 146; with resistant child,
See also research 53–54; with traumatized child, 168
Tic Tac Spit, 91 Wetting, Herbert, 128
Tillery, Linda, 141 Wheelbarrow, 274
Tin Foil Mask, 155 Where Are Hands, 73
Toe Touch Under Blanket, 278 Wiggly Parts/Stiff Parts, 267, 278
Toilet Paper Bust Out, 78, 274 withdrawal. See internalizing
touch, xvii, 5–6; and attachment, 238; behaviors
and autism spectrum disorders, 71; Wolfelt, Alan, 216
and Chinese child, 118; and Working Model of the Child Interview
dysregulated child, 30–31; with (WMCI), 188
residential treatment, 83; and working relationship, with Chinese
resistance, 48; and sensory parents, 118
techniques, 197–209
tough questions, in relinquishment Yarn Web, 270
visits, 213, 215, 217, 220–21 yeast infections, 199
Tracing Hands, 270 Yes...No, 278
Tracing Shapes, 11 YWCA, Theraplay program in, 137–57
trauma: and adopted child, 60; and
attachment, 102; DDP and, 171; Zip, Zap, Zop, 278–79
and emotional dysregulation, 29, Zip with Lotion, 207, 282
41; historical, 101–2; In Sync and, Zoom-Erk, 110, 279
About the Contributors

ABOUT THE EDITOR

Evangeline Munns PhD, CPsych, RPT/S, CTT/S, is a certified clinical psy-

chologist who recently retired as the director of Blue Hills Play Therapy
Services, which she founded and which now has the largest training school
in Theraplay in Canada. She is a certified Theraplay® trainer/supervisor
with the Theraplay Institute in Chicago, the Association for Play Therapy
in the United States (APT), and the Canadian Association for Child and
Play Therapy (CACPT). (On the latter she serves as a consultant on the ed-
ucation committee.) She is a popular presenter and has given numerous
workshops on play therapy across Canada, the United States, and interna-
tionally. In recent years, much of her time has been spent in training and
supervising therapists in Theraplay and /or non-directive play therapy in-
cluding teaching as a guest lecturer at Western University in London, On-
tario, and Sir Wilfred Laurier University in Kitchener, Ontario. She has
served as a consultant to many agencies. Dr. Munns has written numerous
chapters in other books on Theraplay and has edited a book entitled Ther-
aplay: Innovations in Attachment-Enhancing Play Therapy. In the past, she re-
ceived the Monica Herbert award from the Canadian Association for Child
and Play Therapy (CACPT) for “an outstanding contribution to the field of
play therapy in Canada.” Recently she was the first therapist described in a
list by CACPT of the 5 top play therapists in Canada.

293
294 About the Contributors

CONTRIBUTORS

Nancy Atkinson, MA, MFCC, RP, has been the CEO Clinical Supervisor for
the YWCA of Contra Costa/Sacramento for over five years. She supervises
interns who are responsible for providing individual and family therapy for
many children and families who are part of the Child Protective Service sys-
tem. Theraplay is used for reunification of children with their parents and
75 percent of all clients are introduced to Theraplay. Nancy is a registered
play therapist and an attachment specialist. She has an MA in
Agency/School Counseling Psychology from Michigan State University and
an MA in Counseling Psychology from National University. She is a li-
censed MFCC in the State of California.

Maria Boada, BS, has worked in the adult mental health field for over 16
years, but has found a new passion in working with children and their fam-
ilies in Theraplay. She graduated with her Bachelors of Social Work in the
summer of 2008 and at that time looked forward to continuing her work in
Theraplay. Each and every family she has worked with inspires her about
the possibilities and resiliency of the human spirit.

Carol R. Bettendorf, PT, MS, PCS, has a master’s degree in pediatric physi-
cal therapy. She is a Partner in Birth to Three & Beyond Pediatric Therapies,
LLC. She is a certified Theraplay therapist who has studied and worked for
over twenty years with children on the Autism Spectrum as a subspecialty
of her pediatric practice. She has taught pediatric physical therapy at what
is now Rosalyn Franklin University. She is a Feldenkrais Method® practi-
tioner, is certified in the Sensory Integration and Praxis Test (SIPT), and has
extensive experience using craniosacral therapy.

Terra Bovingdon, BSW, MSW, RSW, completed her Masters of Social Work
in 1999 from the University of Calgary and is presently employed at Cal-
gary Family Services since 1999 in the Adoptions Counselling Program.
Terra is the clinical supervisor for the adoption program and the In Sync
program. Terra’s clinical practice focuses on stabilizing children in foster
families, addressing attachment and adoption issues, and enhancing family
cohesion. Clinical work in the program has expanded to include relin-
quishment visits and therapeutic supervised visits with birth families.

Karen Doyle Buckwalter, MSW, LCSW, is Director of Treatment Services at

Chaddock, an innovative residential program for adolescents, ages 8–16,
with Reactive Attachment Disorder and Complex Trauma. Karen is a Certi-
fied Theraplay® therapist, trainer, and supervisor, and her energetic and in-
 About the Contributors 295

teractive style make her a sought-after speaker and trainer, having presented
at numerous national and international conferences. Karen has published
in the Journal of Child and Adolescent Social Work and is a contributor to Cre-
ating Capacity for Attachment. Karen received her MSW from Temple Univer-
sity and trained at the Menninger Clinic in their Family Therapy Training
Program.

Lisbeth DiPasquale, Dip. CS, C. Psych. Assoc., CTT, is a psychological as-

sociate registered with the College of Psychologists of Ontario. She worked
for the Psychology Department of the York Region District School Board,
Ontario, Canada, for fourteen years and now has a private practice in psy-
chological assessment and counseling for children, adolescents, and fami-
lies. She is a certified Theraplay therapist on staff at Blue Hills Child and
Family Centre, Aurora, Ontario, where she has been doing Theraplay with
individual families and groups for over twelve years. She is also a published
author with a chapter entitled “The Marschak Interaction Method” in the
book Theraplay Innovations in Attachment-Enhancing Play Therapy, edited by
Evangeline Munns.

Shirley Eyles, RN, BA, CTT, has a private practice in Aurora, Ontario, and
also works as a mental health nurse in a hospital setting. She is a certified
Theraplay therapist and is in process of becoming a certified supervisor. She
became passionately interested in the emotional well-being of children and
families in the midst of her own journey as a mother of three children. She
believes that the primary motivating force in human behavior is a drive to-
ward connectedness and strives to facilitate this process through Theraplay.

Karen Fabian, BA, BSc, MS Ed, has worked in supporting children and fam-
ilies for over a decade and has two undergraduate degrees from the Univer-
sity of Victoria (BSc in Psychology, BA in Child and Youth Care). Karen has
her master’s degree in applied psychology from the University of Calgary
with a specialization in parent-child attachment theory, early child develop-
ment, narrative therapy, and cultural competency. Her clinical focus is on at-
tachment-disruption, anxiety, and grief, and her primary interventions are
Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy. Karen presently works
in the Adoption Counselling Program, in Calgary, Alberta, specifically ad-
dressing the attachment-related issues of children and supporting parents as
a therapeutic influence in their child’s life.

Anita Finlay, MS Ed, is associate director of Family Services at Chaddock, a

multi-service agency providing a range of residential, educational, and com-
munity-based services for youth, birth through age 21, and their families.
She has worked in direct care in the residential program, supervised case
296 About the Contributors

management in the foster care/adoption programs, and played a key role in

developing the parent liaison role in the agency’s innovative residential pro-
gram for youth with attachment and complex trauma issues, including de-
velopment of a parent education curriculum to further involve parents in
their child’s treatment.

Ulrike Franke, SLP, CTT/S, was born in 1946 in a little German village. Af-
ter kindergarten and school, Gymnasium, she had eight years at home rais-
ing children, worked in a rehabilitation hospital, then trained as a speech-
and language pathologist at the University of Mainz. Later she had addi-
tional training as a teacher for SLP at the universities of Frankfurt/M. and
Osnabrück. She conducted therapy, assessments, and teaching in a phoni-
atric-logopedic Department of the Heidelberg Rehabilitation Center for
many years. Since then (2006) she has worked in her private practice. Ul-
rike is a certified therapist, supervisor, and trainer in Theraplay and an edi-
tor of a Theraplay journal.

Brijin Johnson Gardner, LSCSW, LCSW, RPT/S, has worked with children
and adolescents for over twelve years in public schools, private practice, and
youth ministry. Ms. Gardner provides play therapy training and supervi-
sion; she has also presented at the Theraplay International Conference and
the Association for Play Therapy regarding her work with adolescents. Bri-
jin has written and received several grants to fund her Theraplay work in the
school setting. She received her BA from Bethany College in Lindsborg, KS,
and her MSW from the University of Kansas.

Paris Goodyear-Brown, MSW, RPT/S, is a licensed clinical social worker

and registered play therapist-supervisor specializing in clinical work with
children and families. She currently serves as guest lecturer and adjunct fac-
ulty for several universities in middle Tennessee while maintaining a private
practice. She has recently won the Association for Play Therapy’s award for
Public Education and Promotion and has an international reputation as an
innovative speaker and author. In addition to conducting research with
Vanderbilt University and contributing several chapters to play therapy
texts, her publications include Digging for Buried Treasure (volumes 1 & 2),
Gabby the Gecko, and a training DVD entitled Peas in a Pod.

Minna Laakso, MA, CTT, is a psychologist and Theraplay therapist. She is

also a qualified teacher of psychology. She has been working at a child psy-
chiatric out-patient department for 15 years. Currently she is participating
in a Theraplay Supervisor practicum organized by the Finnish Theraplay As-
sociation. She is also a postgraduate student in Helsinki University study-
ing to be an integrative psychotherapist.
 About the Contributors 297

Dafna Lender, MSW, is a licensed clinical social worker and is a certified

Theraplay therapist and trainer. She is the training director for the Theraplay
Institute in Chicago. She worked as a policy analyst in the Illinois State Sen-
ate and earned her MSW from Yeshiva University in New York. In the past
Dafna was a foster care case worker for specialized children and a therapist
for Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and orphanage neglect. She wrote the chapter,
“Therapeutic Use of Self in Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy” in the
book Creating Capacity for Attachment.

Sandra Lindaman, MA, CCC-SLP, MSW, LCSW, is a licensed speech-lan-

guage pathologist and clinical social worker. She is a certified Theraplay®
therapist, supervisor, and trainer and training advisor at The Theraplay In-
stitute in Wilmette, Illinois, USA. Sandra joined The Theraplay Institute
in1990. She wrote the chapter, “Theraplay for Children Who Are Adopted
or in Foster Care” in the second edition of Theraplay: Helping Parents and
Children Build Better Relationships Through Attachment-Based Play. Sandra has
been involved in the training and supervision of professionals in the Ther-
aplay® model internationally. She is the 2004 recipient of the Ann M. Jern-
berg award for outstanding contributions to Theraplay.

Anita Johanson Maddox, MA, LCPC, RPT, CTT, is a licensed clinical profes-
sional counselor in Illinois and a licensed counselor in Wisconsin. Anita has
over twenty years experience in pediatrics. She is a certified Theraplay therapist
who has a private practice and is also a therapist at the Theraplay Institute.
Anita has worked individually and in groups with children who have charac-
teristics of autism as well as with a variety of parent-child difficulties. Anita is
grateful to her family for their influence, support, and encouragement.

Linda Meyer, PhD, is a certified Theraplay therapist in private practice in

Champaign, Illinois. She is the author of numerous articles, book chapters,
and three books. She is also trained in Dyadic Developmental Psychother-
apy (DDP) as well as play therapy.

Jessica Mroz Miller, MSW, CTT/S, is a licensed clinical social worker. She is
a certified Theraplay therapist and trainer with The Theraplay Institute. Jes-
sica provides treatment to families and children at The Theraplay Institute
in Wilmette, Illinois, and at Personal Solutions Counseling in Frankfort,
Illinois. Jessica trained for six years in Dyadic Developmental Psychother-
apy (DDP) with Dan Hughes and co-authored a chapter about DDP in Cre-
ating Capacity for Attachment by Becker-Weidman and Shell. She has pre-
sented on Theraplay, attachment and trauma, and the integration of
Theraplay and DDP at national and international conferences.
298 About the Contributors

Catherine Munns, MA, DPsych grad student, is at present pursuing her doc-
toral studies at James Madison University. She has had extensive experience
working with troubled children including autistic children and their par-
ents using a variety of treatment methods such as Theraplay, non-directive
playtherapy, intensive behavioral analysis, etc. Catherine is working on
completing her certification in Theraplay and formerly was an extern in the
play therapy training program at Blue Hills Child and Family Centre in Au-
rora, Ontario. She has made presentations at a number of international
conferences.

Linda Perry, MA, MSW, CPT/S, is employed at the Elizabeth Hill Coun-
selling Centre, University of Manitoba, as the program manager of the
Strengthening Families Program. In partnership with a residential center for
Aboriginal women and their children, she was lead clinician of a Child
Therapy Program where Theraplay was one of the primary interventions.
Her role includes training of students from the Faculty of Social Work, Uni-
versity of Manitoba, and staff of Aboriginal agencies, in child therapy and
attachment-based interventions.

Phyllis Rubin, CCC, SLP, PsyD,CTT/S, is a licensed clinical psychologist

and speech and language pathologist with a private practice in Oak Park, IL.
She is a certified Theraplay® therapist and trainer with The Theraplay Insti-
tute and trained for six years in Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy
(DDP) with Dan Hughes. Phyllis is co-author of Play with Them: Theraplay
Groups in the Classroom, wrote the “Group Theraplay” chapter in Theraplay
by Jernberg and Booth, a chapter in Theraplay: Innovations in Attachment
Therapy by Munns, and co-authored, with Jess Mroz Miller, a chapter on
DDP in Creating Capacity for Attachment by Becker-Weidman and Shell. She
has presented on Theraplay and Group Theraplay nationally and interna-
tionally and has also presented on integrating Theraplay and DDP.

Jamie Sherman, MS Ed, CTT/S, is a special education teacher and certified

Theraplay therapist and supervisor. He has extensive experience working
with children with special needs, including autism spectrum disorder. He
works in the York Region District School Board and is the Theraplay clini-
cal supervisor at Blue Hills Child and Family Centre. Jamie lives in Toronto,
Canada, with his wife, Karen, their three boys, Jonah, Elijah, and Ezra, and
their pug, Gomez.

Gail Smillie, MA, has a masters degree in counseling psychology and has
worked in the field of children’s mental health for over 30 years. As a regis-
tered clinical counsellor, certified Canadian counselor, and board certified
expert in traumatic stress, Gail is currently a manager with Calgary Family
 About the Contributors 299

Services, where she specializes in the area of trauma and attachment doing
program development, training, supervision, and clinical work with fami-
lies.

Mary Spickelmier, MSW, LSCSW, RPT/S, Theraplay Practitioner Level, is a

licensed specialist clinical social worker and registered play therapist-
supervisor with 12 years of experience. She specializes in helping children
and adolescents and their families deal with such issues as domestic vio-
lence, grief and trauma, anxiety disorders, divorce, behavioral problems, at-
tachment disorders, and pervasive developmental disorders. Mary has pro-
vided trainings at the local and international level: for both the Theraplay
Institute and Association for Play Therapy. She currently is a board member
for the Kansas Association for Play Therapy. Mary received her BSW and
MSW from the University of Missouri.

Angela Siu, PhD, CTT, is a certified Theraplay therapist. She is also a regis-
tered clinical psychologist who has experience working with children and
families in Hong Kong and in Canada. Currently, she is an assistant profes-
sor in the Department of Educational Psychology of the Chinese University
of Hong Kong.

Patti Sutherland, MSW, CPT, is employed at the Elizabeth Hill Counselling

Centre, University of Manitoba, as a therapist in the Strengthening Families
Program. Patti’s job includes training and supervision of students from the
Faculty of Social Work, University of Manitoba, and staff of Aboriginal
agencies. She has worked in Aboriginal agencies, particularly with children
exposed to family violence, and has adapted Theraplay for use in multi-
family groups, the school system, and traditional parent-child sessions.

Jim Wardrop, PhD, after receiving his PhD in psychology from Washington
University in St. Louis, spent a year as a postdoctoral fellow at the Research
and Developmental Center for Cognitive Learning, University of Wisconsin
at Madison. In 1967, he joined the faculty of the Educational Psychology
Department at the University of Illinois, Urbana, where he served in a vari-
ety of roles: research professor, department chairperson, and teaching fac-
ulty. His research and teaching activities have spanned the areas of research
methods, educational program evaluation, statistical analysis, and mea-
surement and assessment. He retired in 2003, but continues to be active in
both teaching and research.

Deborah Weiss, BMusEd, has combined her passion for working outdoors,
with her love of working with children, and with horses. She has attained
certifications as an Epona approved instructor, Irwin EAPD facilitator, and
300 About the Contributors

EAGALA (Equine Assisted Growth and Learning Association) level one in-
structor. She is a member of the Ontario Therapeutic Riding Association,
the North American Riding for the Handicapped Association, and The Ther-
aplay Institute. Deborah is currently completing her master’s degree in
counseling psychology.