I want to thank the journal and Dr. Esman for their interest in my paper. In response, I want to discuss Dr. Esman's specific criticisms as well as some of the general problems he points to. In that a full year has passed since I submitted the paper, three years since I wrote the paper, and six years since I first saw Miss S, I must say that hindsight is a marvelous thing.

As an advanced candidate in psychoanalysis, I frequently feel both pride in the results of my training and embarrassment at what I did only so many yesterdays ago. I thank Dr. Esman for pointing out some questionable areas in my theory and technique. Like a helpful supervisory hour, his remarks linger and will influence my views. While I feel, “If only I could do it again,” I am confident about much of my paper.

When Dr. Esman says object relations theorists feel that treatment “require(s) a more interactive stance … aimed at correcting the intrapsychic deficit … to provide, in essence, what Balint called ‘a new