From the beginning of child analysis it has been considered that the child who acted out his inner conflicts with ensuing satisfaction was not analyzable and that the conflict had to be internalized before classical analytic methods could be employed. The author suggests that in the intervening years we have come to regard the acting out as a substitute for the symptom and we now tend to interpret where once we intervened or prohibited. The differences between child and adult analyses have begun to fade. Analysis of acting out as a defense against phobic anxiety may bring about the desired coöperation of the child. The readiness of the child to use projective mechanisms in the transference can be used in the interpretation