I feel privileged to have a chance to discuss this outstanding group of papers. What I plan to do is this. I'll outline my own view of the significance of child and adolescent analysis for clinical work with adults and, in the rest of the space available to me, raise as many questions as I can. I've been asked to stimulate the reader's thoughts and questions and I don't know any better way to do so than by raising challenging questions of my own.

I'll start with a bit of familiar history. The first reported case of analytically oriented therapy with a child is that of Little Hans. To be sure, it didn't conform with what we think of today as child analysis. The therapist was the patient's father, for one thing. He was a man who was himself never analyzed, who was soon to divorce his wife, and who gave up his interest in psychoanalysis in favor of the Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler. Regardless of these inadequacies, the case of Little Hans has retained its place among the classics of child analytic literature, and rightly so. Freud reported it to show that oedipal