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.
I feel honored and grateful for the generous and thoughtful discussions provided by Philip Ringstrom, Shelley Doctors, Jim Fisch, and Steven Knoblauch. Having one's clinical work carefully scrutinized by others is never easy, and yet the respectful approach taken by each of the discussants enabled a fruitful dialogue of the clinical issues as seen from their various perspectives.
While there are clear overlaps in perspective among the three discussants, there are also interesting and important departures underscoring their theoretical differences that, in turn, inform their respective clinical trackings. Regardless of orientation, each discussant posits his or her clinical understanding in such a way as to evoke fresh ways of considering and reconsidering my material. Given the constraints of space, I will limit myself to some brief comments on specific features of each of the discussions that seem particularly distinctive to me.
From the intersubjective and relational perspective, Philip Ringstrom offers a stimulating and extremely thoughtful account as he deftly intersperses his clinical understanding with relevant theoretical references to authors traversing the intersubjective and relational spheres. I resonate with much that he has written of his understanding of Gayle and, especially, his take on the interactional process unfolding between her and me. In his dual focus on the intersubjective and postmodern relational perspective, Philip parallels what he views as my straddling of the two schools with a lively discussion that considers the import of the various facets of the dyad on the clinical transactions. He accurately captures the affective tempo and texture of the