You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Mentalization-Based Treatment for Children, by Nick Midgley and colleagues, is divided into two sections. Part 1 focuses on the theoretical
framework underlying the mentalization-based approach to treatment (MBT-C), while Part 2 provides a detailed account of the principles and conduct of the proposed treatment.
In Part 1, the authors define mentalization as the “uniquely human ability to interpret the meaning of others' behavior by considering their underlying mental states and intentions, as well as the capacity to understand the impact of one's own affects and behaviors on others” (p. 15). Drawing heavily on the work of Peter Fonagy and his colleagues, the authors describe mentalization as essential to the development of a sense of self and the capacity for self-regulation necessary for successful, emotionally nuanced engagement with others. Carefully linking their conceptualizations to findings from child developmental research, the authors provide a schema of the development of the capacity to mentalize, as well as the parents' role in promoting this capacity, through various stages of child development. The development of childhood psychopathology is linked to a mutually reinforcing series of interactive patterns between parent and child. In these patterns, or cycles, powerful emotions and poor mentalizing lead one party to a relationship to engage in frightening, undermining, frustrating, and distressing and/or coercive interactions with the other party. The behavior of the first party stimulates powerful emotions in the second, engendering further cycles of misunderstanding. Drawing on various areas of study, including the development and treatment of borderline personality disorder in adults, attachment and its disorders, the developmental difficulties of children traumatized by abuse and neglect, and the development of childhood psychopathology, the authors convincingly buttress their argument regarding the substantial contribution to child psychopatholog