[SPAM] Re: Kid who doesn't talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From David Goldstein (2009.02.17.05:56 EST)]

[About Rick Marken (2009.02.16.2230)]

Rick,

The comments I made, which you are quoting, were reasons I gave for doing a literature search.

You may not like the theories of the people, or the methods used, but the studies are the only information available on the topic.

Don’t you do literature searches any more, even if from people with ‘square wheels’?

My best guess from these studies, and observations during the session with her, is that the little girl is afraid when around new people. When she was in my office, I heard her talking to her mother in the waiting room. She was nonresponsive verbally or nonverbally in the therapy room. When I asked the mother to leave the therapy room, the little girl did not make a fuss or protest. When I asked the mother to return, the little girl did not cling to the mother. One thought is that this little girl was frozen with fear. This little girl has a younger sister, aged 3.5, who does not show selective mutism. However, the mohter reports that other children in the family have had this issue.

David

···

----- Original Message -----

From:
Richard Marken

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 1:31 AM

Subject: [SPAM] Re: Kid who doesn’t talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From Rick Marken (2009.02.16.2230)]

David Goldstein (2009.02.16.23:55 EST)--
There is no need to re-invent the wheel.

I think of PCT as precisely a reinvention of the wheel (of psychology), a round one rather than the square one that’s currently in use;-)

It also shows respect for other people, regardless of whether their theoretical viewpoint is the same as mine.

I respect people (or not) based on the content of their character; I respect a theoretical viewpoint based on it’s consistency with data. I know lots of people whose theories I disrespect but who I nevertheless respect as people. I don’t think it’s disrespectful to people to disrespect their theory; that’s too liberal even for my permissive tastes.

Best

Rick


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com

[From Dick Robertson,2009.02.17.1033CDT]

[From David Goldstein (2009.02.17.05:56 EST)]

The comments I made, which you are quoting, were reasons I gave for doing a literature search. You may not like the theories of the people, or the methods used, but the studies are the only information available on the topic.

Well, thank you very much. My case report of a better than two dozen sessions case is NO information available on the topic of relating to a kid who doesn’t talk when you would like her to?

Don’t you do literature searches any more, even if from people with ‘square wheels’?

My best guess from these studies, and observations during the session with her, is that the little girl is afraid when around new people. When she was in my office, I heard her talking to her mother in the waiting room. She was nonresponsive verbally or nonverbally in the therapy room. When I asked the mother to leave the therapy room, the little girl did not make a fuss or protest. When I asked the mother to return, the little girl did not cling to the mother. One thought is that this little girl was frozen with fear. This little girl has a younger sister, aged 3.5, who does not show selective mutism. However, the mohter reports that other children in the family have had this issue.

That might turn out to be a very good guess. If you could let her take the lead, mightn’t she not even show you whether or not it is right?

Best,

Dick R.

David,

This article may be of interest.

John W

selective mutism.doc (685 KB)

···

From: Control Systems
Group Network (CSGnet) [mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of davidmg
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009
6:28 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: Kid who
doesn’t talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From David Goldstein (2009.02.17.05:56 EST)]

[About Rick Marken (2009.02.16.2230)]

Rick,

The comments I made, which you are quoting, were reasons I gave for
doing a literature search.

You may not like the theories of the people, or the methods used,
but the studies are the only information available on the topic.

Don’t you do literature searches any more, even if from people with
‘square wheels’?

My best guess from these studies, and observations during the session
with her, is that the little girl is afraid when around new people. When
she was in my office, I heard her talking to her mother in the waiting room.
She was nonresponsive verbally or nonverbally in the therapy room. When I asked
the mother to leave the therapy room, the little girl did not make a fuss or
protest. When I asked the mother to return, the little girl did not cling to
the mother. One thought is that this little girl was frozen with fear. This
little girl has a younger sister, aged 3.5, who does not show selective mutism.
However, the mohter reports that other children in the family have had this
issue.

David

----- Original Message -----

From: Richard Marken

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Sent: Tuesday, February
17, 2009 1:31 AM

Subject: [SPAM] Re: Kid who
doesn’t talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From Rick Marken (2009.02.16.2230)]

David Goldstein (2009.02.16.23:55 EST)–

There is no need to re-invent the wheel.

I think of PCT as precisely a reinvention of the wheel (of psychology), a round
one rather than the square one that’s currently in use;-)

It also shows respect for other people, regardless of whether
their theoretical viewpoint is the same as mine.

I respect people (or not) based on the content of their character; I respect a
theoretical viewpoint based on it’s consistency with data. I know lots of
people whose theories I disrespect but who I nevertheless respect as people. I
don’t think it’s disrespectful to people to disrespect their theory; that’s too
liberal even for my permissive tastes.

Best

Rick

Richard S. Marken PhD

rsmarken@gmail.com

David,

Here is another study on selective mutism.

John

···

From: Control Systems
Group Network (CSGnet) [mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of davidmg
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009
6:28 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: Kid who
doesn’t talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From David Goldstein (2009.02.17.05:56 EST)]

[About Rick Marken (2009.02.16.2230)]

Rick,

The comments I made, which you are quoting, were reasons I gave for
doing a literature search.

You may not like the theories of the people, or the methods used,
but the studies are the only information available on the topic.

Don’t you do literature searches any more, even if from people with
‘square wheels’?

My best guess from these studies, and observations during the session
with her, is that the little girl is afraid when around new people. When
she was in my office, I heard her talking to her mother in the waiting room.
She was nonresponsive verbally or nonverbally in the therapy room. When I asked
the mother to leave the therapy room, the little girl did not make a fuss or
protest. When I asked the mother to return, the little girl did not cling to
the mother. One thought is that this little girl was frozen with fear. This
little girl has a younger sister, aged 3.5, who does not show selective mutism.
However, the mohter reports that other children in the family have had this
issue.

David

----- Original Message -----

From: Richard Marken

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Sent: Tuesday, February
17, 2009 1:31 AM

Subject: [SPAM] Re: Kid who
doesn’t talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From Rick Marken (2009.02.16.2230)]

David Goldstein (2009.02.16.23:55 EST)–

There is no need to re-invent the wheel.

I think of PCT as precisely a reinvention of the wheel (of psychology), a round
one rather than the square one that’s currently in use;-)

It also shows respect for other people, regardless of whether
their theoretical viewpoint is the same as mine.

I respect people (or not) based on the content of their character; I respect a
theoretical viewpoint based on it’s consistency with data. I know lots of
people whose theories I disrespect but who I nevertheless respect as people. I
don’t think it’s disrespectful to people to disrespect their theory; that’s too
liberal even for my permissive tastes.

Best

Rick

Richard S. Marken PhD

rsmarken@gmail.com

[From David Goldstein (2009. 02.17.21:04 EST]

[About Dick Robertson,2009.02.17.1033CDT]

Dick,

Sorry, didnt’ mean to minimize your case study. In the several review articles that I obtained, studies that used a ‘play therapy’ approach. This approach was compared to all other approaches taken and was not the strongest one.

I will be glad to send you some of the reviews if you care to look at them.

David

[From Dick Robertson,2009.02.18.0950CDT]

[From David Goldstein (2009. 02.17.21:04 EST]

[About Dick Robertson,2009.02.17.1033CDT]

Dick,

Sorry, didnt’ mean to minimize your case study. In the several review articles that I obtained, studies that used a ‘play therapy’ approach. This approach was compared to all other approaches taken and was not the strongest one.

I will be glad to send you some of the reviews if you care to look at them.

OK, but I think it is important to know what question the case histories are evaluated in reference to. That is, which of these two questions has the higher priority: 1) How one might relate to a kid (who is thought by someone else to “have a problem”) in the way that best provides the kid with an environment in which to allow her own reorganization process to work freely; or
2) Gives you material with which to make guesses as to “what is wrong with the kid.” I believe that, especially in medicine this approach is most common–we want to know what is wrong because there is a history of standard procedures for treating the condition.

In psychology we are beginning to gather “research confirmed treatment procedures” (I know that is not quite the technical name, but I can’t remember it right now) in an attempt to imitate the medical model. Standard medical procedures were based on the assumption that all bodies work the same way, and it is truer than in psychology, I guess, but even there psychosomatic medicine began to develop just because one’s personality added dimensions to the response to treatment.

I psychology, I believe the case is even more complicated. The path of trying to develop “standard procedures” for “conditions” (ie. what is “wrong” with the kid) can make helping the kid a lesser priority than asking all these experts what is “wrong” and trying to determine a treatment based on that. I believe such an approach rests upon the linear assumption, and can interfere with an individual’s reorganization by what the outside observer wants to do.

I do think that the MOL (as enlarged by Bill’s recent comments) would be a better way to proceed.

Best,

Dick R

···

[From David Goldstein (2009.02.18.20:55 EST]

[About Dick Robertson,2009.02.18.0950CDT]

Dick: I do think that the MOL (as enlarged by Bill’s recent comments) would be a better way to proceed.
David: I can’t see myself feeling comfortable doing MOL Therapy with the child. I can see myself working with the mom and letting her do it at home when and where the child is talking.

···

----- Original Message -----

From:
Robertson Richard

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 11:02 AM

Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: Kid who doesn’t talk (is selective about who, when and where she talks)

[From Dick Robertson,2009.02.18.0950CDT]

[From David Goldstein (2009. 02.17.21:04 EST]

[About Dick Robertson,2009.02.17.1033CDT]

Dick,

Sorry, didnt’ mean to minimize your case study. In the several review articles that I obtained, studies that used a ‘play therapy’ approach. This approach was compared to all other approaches taken and was not the strongest one.

I will be glad to send you some of the reviews if you care to look at them.

OK, but I think it is important to know what question the case histories are evaluated in reference to. That is, which of these two questions has the higher priority: 1) How one might relate to a kid (who is thought by someone else to “have a problem”) in the way that best provides the kid with an environment in which to allow her own reorganization process to work freely; or
2) Gives you material with which to make guesses as to “what is wrong with the kid.” I believe that, especially in medicine this approach is most common–we want to know what is wrong because there is a history of standard procedures for treating the condition.

In psychology we are beginning to gather “research confirmed treatment procedures” (I know that is not quite the technical name, but I can’t remember it right now) in an attempt to imitate the medical model. Standard medical procedures were based on the assumption that all bodies work the same way, and it is truer than in psychology, I guess, but even there psychosomatic medicine began to develop just because one’s personality added dimensions to the response to treatment.

I psychology, I believe the case is even more complicated. The path of trying to develop “standard procedures” for “conditions” (ie. what is “wrong” with the kid) can make helping the kid a lesser priority than asking all these experts what is “wrong” and trying to determine a treatment based on that. I believe such an approach rests upon the linear assumption, and can interfere with an individual’s reorganization by what the outside observer wants to do.

I do think that the MOL (as enlarged by Bill’s recent comments) would be a better way to proceed.

Best,

Dick R