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.
Play technique as applied to child analysis has been developed abroad by Anna Freud in Vienna and by Melanie Klein in London. In America there has been no recognized standard technique but each physician tries out what appeals to him personally. It is far beyond the scope of this paper to attempt to present all the differences and similarities of these two schools. I wish to consider only one major difference which seems of vital importance. This is, should the play of young children during the analytic hours always be considered and treated as adult associations are? If a child runs one train into another in the first hour, should that always be taken symbolically and should it be immediately interpreted in a general way during this first contact with the little patient ? Melanie Klein, in her book,1 presents her point of view, that it is necessary to give these early and frequent general interpretations of all play, regardless of the child's personal experiences.
The question naturally arises, In what manner will the analysis of a young child proceed if this method is not employed? Anna Freud,2 uses a very different method which is applicable to somewhat older children. Anna Freud lays emphasis upon the child's individual past and present daily experiences and conflicts. These are obtained preferably from the child but usually are enhanced by reports from the parents. Symbolic material brought in the analytic hours, is noted by the analyst and at a suitable time interpreted, however not in