ࡱ> [ =bjbj 8ΐΐuX X   %%%9998q<91A(iii@@@$|6%@@@@@6iiK"""@Ri%i"@""|"ipѝ<9@La0L;"|;;%$@@"@@@@@66"@@@@@@@;@@@@@@@@@X a:  Footsteps on the Moon: Using TSM Concepts with Offenders Who Have Unresolved Trauma By Clark Baim Life is like footsteps on the Moon. Each step is a mark on a blank canvas, and when you look back you can see all the steps you took. You have to be careful what steps you take, because they stay there forever. Life sentence prisoner in a psychodrama group An Opening Vignette It is the start of the first session of a new weekly psychodrama group at the therapeutic prison HMP Grendon, in Buckinghamshire, England. Four men are returning to the group after taking part in a previous psychodrama group together, and four are in their first ever psychodrama session. I am the psychodramatist. We are doing the initial check-in. The men say how they feel and what they would like to get from the group. Terence (not his real name), a man in his late twenties who is one of the returnees, starts his check-in but suddenly comes to a halt. His head bows, his eyes close and he starts to tremble and whimper. He collapses to the floor and then runs for the door. This all happens in a few seconds. Spontaneously, and without prompting, the three other men who have been working with Terence in previous psychodrama sessions hurry after him, encourage him to stay and reassure him. He is now curled in a fetal position near the door, shaking, flinching and crying out in reaction to unseen blows to his body. With some guidance, the three men, who know Terence well, offer him doubling statements that capture the functions of Containing Double, Body Double and Manager of Defences (Hudgins, 2002): Im here in the psychodrama room and no ones going to harm me. I keep breathing. I feel the panic and my heart racing but I also calm myself. I breathe slowly. I am Terence. I can hear the voices of the other men in the group. I am here in this room, today. Its not my mother hitting me over the head with a stick; its just the other men in the group. I dont have to run out of this room today like I had to run and hide before. I can breathe, and open my eyes when it feels safe. No one will harm me here. This is a safe place. I am with the other people in the group, and they can help me. I look around at the people who are with me. I see them, and they see me. I can speak with them. After about five minutes, with the three other men and the Director close by, Terence gradually sits up and is able to re-join the group. He is offered support, and we continue with the check-in. The four men who have just joined the group are understandably rather shaken by the experience, but impressed by how it was handled by their fellow group members. They know Terence from the prison wing and from other, talk-based group therapy sessions, but they have never seen him allow himself to be vulnerable like this. The group have bonded, and everyone supports Terence as he continues to explore, through psychodrama, the unresolved trauma of being brutally beaten by his mother while she shouted that she wanted him to die. We later trace how this unresolved trauma affected him in later life, and contributed to his isolation, his self-hatred, his fantasies of revenge, and his brutal attacks against women. We start with Terence taking the role of his own containing double, body double and keeper of defences, and then his strengths, and we build from there. The Therapeutic Spiral Model as A Road Map This example shows how the Therapeutic Spiral Model (TSM) assists not only in understanding the processes of trauma, but also provides essential prescriptive roles that promote safety, containment and healing. The three men who were able to help Terence on this occasion had all learned to double during the previous psychodrama sessions. This included aspects of doubling that including the Containing Double, the Body Double and the Manager of Defences, as mentioned. Some of them had been in psychodrama groups for more than a year. When the time came and Terence needed them, they were able to be available for him and to help him. Moreover, as healing as this was for Terence, it had just as much benefit for the men who helped him, because they were practising their own positives roles and self-soothing strategies while helping him to develop his. Although I do not typically work with an action trauma team and thus do not use the TSM model in its full capacity, there are a number of crucial aspects of the TSM that I incorporate into all psychodrama sessions I direct, whether this is within prisons, probation or other settings. In particular, I have found the TSMs initial emphasis on recognising and building strengths (e.g. internal, interpersonal and transpersonal strengths) to be a crucial contribution to every psychodrama that addresses trauma. Furthermore, the TSM offers a range of techniques for regulating the distance and intensity of exposure to traumatic events when using psychodrama. Again, I find these to be crucial techniques for safe and effective practice. Finally, I have seen great benefit -- as seen in the opening vignette -- in helping the people with whom I work to develop the prescribed roles as described within the TSM in the Trauma Survivors Intrasychic Role Arom (TSIRA) as described above (Hudgins & Cossa, 2000). I will focus on this latter point in more detail, after first discussing the general nature of working with offenders using psychodrama. Psychodrama with Offenders Many authors have noted that offenders commonly have the experience of being unvalued, excluded, exploited, objectified, or shamed since childhood. This applies whether or not the offender consciously understands his own background as damaging (Briggs, 1995; Burt, 1980; Marshall and Maric, 1996; Salter, 1988; Bannister, 1991). Although figures vary, studies show that the majority of people who have committed serious and repeated violent offences have experienced significant and debilitating trauma, whether it be from physical/sexual abuse, prolonged neglect or major disruptions in early attachments (Schwartz et al, 1993 & 1995; Briere, 1996; Skuse et al, 1998; Wallis, 1995; Grubin, 1998). Offending behavior may be partially understood as a projecting out onto other people ones own painful and uncontained feelings (Jefferies, 1991 & 1996; de Zulueta, 1998; Schwartz and Masters, 1993; van der Kolk, 1989). What the offender finds intolerable for example, feelings of anger, fear, need for comfort, vengeance, powerlessness, self-hatred, shame or guilt he directs towards his victims by lying, cheating, stealing, threatening, abusing or physically harming them. So his victims take on the burden of the offenders uncontained feelings of anger, fear, need for comfort, powerlessness, etc., as well as their own authentic feelings in reaction to the crime. The process brings to mind the ancient adage that misery loves company. In order to avoid the need for such behavior, an intervention is needed which allows the offender to give meaning to his own experience of negative feelings and trauma and achieve relief through catharsis, grieving, new understanding and adaptation (Winn, 1994; Goldman and Morrison, 1984; Briere, 1996; Scheff, 1979; Langs, 1999). Other authors in this volume, such as Greenberg, Hug, and Hudgins, offer evidence that TSM psychodrama and experiential psychotherapies are effective approaches for working with trauma survivors. For example, a key benefit of using psychodrama with offenders is that it provides a highly accessible, concrete, and effective method for moving back and forth through time, simultaneously addressing the individuals offending behavior as well as its origins. Psychodrama provides an opportunity for one person the protagonist to depict scenes, relationships, and perceptions from his own life (Moreno and Moreno, 1975; Blatner, 1997). In psychodrama sessions with offenders, the psychodramas often reflect extreme trauma and life threatening danger. For example: The psychodrama of the young offender who participated in a gang rape at age 17. In his fourth year of a fifteen year sentence, he looked back on his actions that day with regret. He had joined a local gang as a last resort, as a way to survive in his neighbourhood. On the night of the rape, he feared for his own life if he did not join in. This was the code of retribution in his gang for anyone who defied the leader. The victim was an adult woman, targeted because she was alone. In his psychodrama, he stands up to the rest of the gang and stops himself from being involved. He stops the others and rescues the woman, and apologizes to her, wracked with grief over the damage done to her and the waste of his own life. The psychodrama of a man who, as a boy, had been raped in the showers by an older boy in a residential care home. In the psychodrama, he testifies in court against this boy, and sees him brought to justice and imprisoned in a jail created in the corner of the room. The psychodrama of a thirty year old man who is still trying, twenty years after the event, to regain some control over the terror he felt when his father came home drunk one Christmas Eve, destroying all of the presents under the tree and beating his mother when she tried to stop him. In the psychodrama, he comes out of his bedroom and stops his father. He finally stands up to the man who terrorized the family for years. These are the psychodramas that I have come to think about as dramas where the protagonist reclaims his right and ability to say no. I have seen this common theme in countless psychodramas with offenders over the years unresolved episodes in their own lives when their own rights and feelings had been overridden, their own dignity smashed. The psychodramas allowed these men to take back the right to say no to the people who had hurt them. After being allowed the opportunity to reclaim the ability to say no, with their pain being heard and understood for the first time and in a safe and contained environment, the men then begin to practice new strategies for meeting their needs through compassion, co-operation and communication, rather than using the coercion and force they used to commit their crimes. Template for Psychodrama Encounters: The Offender, Perpetrator and Victim Sequences Taking a cue from the TSMs use of the intraspsychic role atom -- i.e. the identification and use of prescriptive roles, roles of restoration, roles of containment, trauma-based roles and transformative roles (Hudgins, 2002) -- myself and colleagues have formulated a suggested sequence of encounters for use with offenders who have experienced childhood abuse and who have unresolved trauma (see figure 1). This is a sequence of ten psychodramatic encounters or scenes. They need not be undertaken in the exact sequence shown, but can instead provide an underlying structure for psychodramatic work with offenders. In other words, at some point in his therapy, each offender should have the opportunity to have each of the conversations / encounters / scenes outlined in the model (Baim, 2000; Baim and Taylor, 2004; Baim and Leyland, 2004). The conversations are facilitated with the emphasis on allowing the offender's own best self and own best critic to emerge (in TSM terminology, this would represent strengthening the role of Manager of Healthy Functioning -- Hudgins, 2002: 89) Regardless of the sequence, the conversations must be facilitated in such a way as to allow the offender to feel that he is being heard and not judged. In each stage of the sequence, the protagonist should ordinarily first describe the roles, then observe the roles and their inter-relationships using the psychodramatic technique of mirror (e.g. from the Neutral Observer role). Then, where appropriate, the protagonist can enter the conversations first-hand. This step-by-step process acts as a means of regulating the intensity of the encounter and also allows the protagonist to stand back and gain a more objective understanding of how the various roles fit together and how they have influenced each other over time. Figure 1: The Perpetrator and the Victim: Template for a series of psychodramatic encounters and scenes (Baim and Taylor, 2004) Self As Victim The People Who Have Hurt Me Self As Perpetrator The People I Have Hurt  Suggested sequence of encounters or scenes: 1. Goal-setting: Internal dialogue between Responsible self and Strengths 2. Self as victim The people who hurt me* 3. Self as perpetrator The people who hurt me 4. Self as victim Self as perpetrator 5. Self as victim The people I have hurt 6. Self as perpetrator The people I have hurt* 7. Responsible self The people I have hurt 8. Responsible self Self as perpetrator 9. Responsible self The people who hurt me 10.Responsible self Self as victim Note: This is only a suggested sequence, and elements can be interchanged and re-visited as needed. Each of these encounters, conversations or scenes should generally include stages of description, working in mirror, working in the role, and role reversal. After each encounter the client may benefit from seeing this interaction from the mirror position, standing back and gaining a more objective understanding of how the various roles fit together and how they have influenced each other over time. The indicated role of Neutral Observer (taken from the TSM) could be utilised here. * Stages 2 and 6 may be interchanged, particularly in situations where the client does not accept any responsibility for his offending behavior. Some measure of responsibility is necessary before focusing on his own victimization, in order to lessen the likelihood that he will see himself as only a victim. Note: This model can be applied more broadly to encompass international conflicts; the roles listed can also be translated to the inter-societal level (i.e. self translates to my people or my country; Other people translates to other peoples or other countries). Questions to address with the protagonist prior to or during the process of these explorations In order to prepare the client or group members for the sequence of encounters, it is important to do preliminary work which helps to build strength and resiliency. Such foundation work also provides essential information for the therapist to help them formulate the correct aims, sequence and pace for the ensuing work. What follows in a suggested sequence of exercises and questions to address, in order to build this foundation for further work: What are his strengths? Personal strengths. Interpersonal strengths (Related to this: Who are potential advocates? Is he able to identify a positive internalised role? This may in some cases include imaginary people / pets / characters). Transpersonal strengths. Past accomplishments / achievements which give him strength. Where has he ever felt safe / protected / comforted in his life? (Emphasize here his internal working models of what a containing / safe / comforting experience feels like). Note: Pay particular attention when the person who provided the supportive caring was also the abuser. What do we need to learn about this person with regard to how he may become angry, begin to disassociate, regress, become defended, etc.? Ask the client what you could do in this situation to assist him. Note: Explore the issue of touch and what has been his experience of touch. What have been his coping strategies / defence mechanisms, when stressed or under threat in the past? (e.g. drugs, alcohol, violence, sex, self-harm, humour, isolation, intellectualisation). A Life line exercise can be useful here, where the client draws a line from birth to the present day, recording the ups and downs of his life so far. At each significant event, he can be encouraged to say what the event was, how he responded, what it meant to him then and what it means now, what his thoughts and feelings were at the time, and how any patterns or roles established then continue to this day. What are his patterns in relationships with men? With women? (This may provide important clues as to the potential pitfalls, transferences, parallel processes.) What has been his experience of primary carers? What are his general experiences and expectations about how relationships work? What gender was / were his abuser(s)? What sort of abuse was perpetrated against him? Physical, emotional, sexual abuse? Neglect? Profound disruptions in care? What was his relationship, if any, to his abuser(s)? Note: Pay particular attention to situations where the abuser was also a carer or trusted figure. What are his core beliefs about himself, other people and the world? (e.g. self as bad, unlovable, incapable, powerless, a victim, out of control, unwanted, etc. Other people as untrustworthy, dangerous, better than him, objects to be used, always to blame, provocative, gullible, etc. The world as dangerous, unpredictable, unsafe, needing to be punished for past wrongs, etc.) Establish a time out / external observer space in the room. A place of safety in the room is essential because of the danger of re-traumatising / punishing / re-abusing the client. Moving into the psychodramatic work After undertaking the preliminary work as set out above, the client may be ready to move into the psychodramatic encounters as outlined in the sequence that follows. Reminder: Each of these interactions / conversations / scenes should generally include stages of description, working in mirror, working in the role, and role reversal. After each encounter the client may benefit from seeing this interaction from the mirror position. 1. Conversation between self as protagonist and elements within the circle of strengths (i.e. What I want to achieve from this work, and why I know I can do it.) Questions to ask: What is your understanding of the purpose of this work? What strengths will you draw on to do it? What evidence do you have that you can safely take the next step? How can other people help you? 2. Conversation between self as victim and the people who hurt me. (i.e. You hurt me in these ways) Here the protagonist works towards expressions of (from the victim role) fear, distress, grief, regret, confusion, and ultimately, anger about what happened; and (from the perpetrator role) expressions of the rationale for the why of the abuse, the way that the perpetrator was objectifying them, abusing them, justifying the abuse. During the process, the protagonist works toward an understanding of who was responsible for the abuse. In order for maximum healing to occur, it is necessary that the victim of abuse have his suffering acknowledged and respected by others. Beyond acknowledgment, however, there must also be resolution, by revisiting the scene of the trauma in a structured way and providing a comforting and empowering new experience which helps to tame the terror and allow grieving and adaptations which make the memory more tolerable. Note: Stages 2 and 6 may be interchanged, particularly in situations where the protagonist does not accept any responsibility for his offending behavior. Some measure of responsibility is necessary before focusing on his own victimization, in order to lessen the likelihood that he will see himself as only a victim. Pause for reflection / integration from Protagonist / Responsible self. Encourage recording learning points, e.g. through journal writing, audio recording, artwork. 3. Conversation between self as perpetrator and the people who hurt me. (i.e. I am like you in this way) Here, the protagonist works towards understanding how his offending reflected their offending. Going back in time may serve as an opportunity for directly addressing and modifying the destructive urge to abuse. The role of the perpetrator can be tracked back to its precipitating source, its locus nascendi (Moreno, 1946/1972; Bustos, 1994), and addressed and modified at that source. Both the perpetrator and victim roles derive from the same originating event(s), which is why it is so crucial to track back the damaging role to its point of origin and promote a freeing of the log jam of emotional repression which has contributed so greatly to the offending behavior (Corsini, 1952). Note: If the protagonist colludes / agrees with his own abuser(s), use the next stage to challenge this collusion. 4. Conversation between self as victim and self as perpetrator. (i.e. These parts of me are helpful and harmful in the following ways) Here, the protagonist is encouraged to challenge his own perpetrator role. The aim is that the perpetrator part of self takes full responsibility and no longer blames his victims. Pause for reflection / integration from Protagonist / Responsible self. Encourage recording learning points, e.g. through journal writing, audio recording, artwork. 5. Conversation between self as victim and the people I have hurt. (i.e. I am like you in these ways) Here, the protagonist works towards an understanding of how his own victim experience compares with the experiences of his victims. The aim is to encourage the development of an empathic awareness of the feelings and perceptions of victims of abuse. This can be a key inhibitor to future offending. 6. Conversation between self as perpetrator and the people I have hurt. (a victim apology scene, i.e. I hurt you in this way ) Where appropriate, the offender can be encouraged to (psychodramatically) apologise to those he has harmed, and to forgive himself for his actions, in order that he may move on (Miller, 1995). The protagonist works towards taking responsibility and ownership of the offending behavior and also the effects of the abuse on his victims. If this takes the form of an apology, the apology must be delivered with no expectation of forgiveness from the victim, because this is a form of emotional coercion. 7. Conversation between responsible self and the people I have hurt. Step seven develops directly on from step six, and can serve as a step for further integration of the work done in step six. Pause for reflection / integration from Protagonist / Responsible self. Encourage recording learning points, e.g. through journal writing, audio recording, artwork. Furthermore, take time to consider all of the cumulative reflections thus far. 8. Conversation between responsible self and self as perpetrator. Here, the protagonist works towards integrating this role and taking responsibility for and ownership of the role and its consequences. This may involve a controlled psychodramatic exploration of one or more of his offences, in which case the following guidelines, based on TSM principles, are suggested: Special considerations when clients confront their own perpetrator role: When facilitating a psychodrama in which the client is in role as his perpetrator self, the director can engage with the perpetrator as with any maladaptive role. That is to say, the facilitator can allow the protagonist to feel safe in portraying this side of himself, without fear of judgment and without fear that this role will be targeted for elimination. After all, aspects of the role were once necessary for the protagonist's survival, so the threat of eliminating this role may create an understandable resistance (Metcalf, 1997). By bringing this role into the light of day, exploring its origins, and allowing safe role completion, the energy and heat are diminished, the role loses its power and ultimately dissipates (Kipper, 1998). There is, however, a real risk of re-traumatising the offender when he enacts his own perpetrator role. Many offenders are afraid that they will over-identify with their perpetrator role, and somehow get stuck again in the role. Others carry profound shame in relation to the role. Therefore a structured progression should be followed which will minimise the likelihood of such traumatisation by allowing the protagonist to control the degree of identification with the role. The following stages are a useful guide: After the protagonist identifies his personal, interpersonal and transpersonal strengths, and after he has the support of a containing double, have him describe the perpetrator role. The protagonist places the role in the space (e.g. scene of the offence) by identifying and describing his physical position and actions at the time. The protagonist anchors the role with object(s), placing the object(s) in the space. Continuing to stand out of the scene, the protagonist provides a voice-over, repeating the words he used at the time. Where appropriate, this may be done using auxiliaries. The protagonist enters the scene and takes his own role, enacting his perpetrator role and certain key moments of the offence. Through the use of role reversals with his own current self, with his victim, and with other internal and external roles, the protagonist is helped to diminish the strength of his own perpetrator role and achieve a healthier internal role balance. Pause for reflection / integration from Protagonist / Responsible self. Encourage recording learning points, e.g. through journal writing, audio recording, artwork. 9. Conversation between responsible self and the people who hurt me. Here the protagonist holds his perpetrators to account and also manages the consequences / effects of the abuse on him in a healthier way. Pause for reflection / integration from Protagonist / Responsible self. Encourage recording learning points, e.g. through journal writing, audio recording, artwork. 10. Conversation between responsible self and my self as victim. (i.e. a forgiveness scene for the clients young, hurt self). Here, the client works towards self-forgiveness and an integration of this role and any of his trauma-based roles with the rest of the self (Hudgins, 2002; Sachnoff, 1999). Pause for reflection / integration from Protagonist / Responsible self. Encourage recording learning points, e.g. through journal writing, audio recording, artwork. Furthermore, take time to consider all of the cumulative reflections in this series. These internal dialogues may encourage motivation and the sense of self-determination and choice. For example, you could ask the person to place himself along a continuum between the part that wants to offend and the part that doesnt. Which part holds more power now? What about a year ago? What about in a years time? What influences one part to get stronger or weaker? What is the offending voice saying? What needs is it trying to meet (e.g. for comfort, protection, safety)? What other ways can these needs be met? The aim, in the end, is to help the client to arrive at a coherent narrative of his own life history, with no significant errors, omissions or distortions. In telling their story, the clients thinking and feeling should, ultimately, be appropriately balanced and integrated, as should the perspective of self and others. In the end, when they recount the story of How I came to be the person I am, they will come closer to a true and accurate version of events. Conclusion Ideally, offence-focused work and post-trauma work should co-exist within a single psychodrama session. When psychodrama is conducted in this manner, the role of offender and the role of victim can be given equal credence. This strategy also addresses the general misgivings about trauma work with offenders, namely that they will be allowed to focus on their own abuse to the exclusion of work on taking responsibility for their crimes. In this format, they are asked to hold both roles in mind at the same time. Post trauma work with offenders does not differ significantly from trauma work done with any group of trauma victims. The key differences are in the context of the trauma work, the risk factors involved which impact on public protection and confidentiality, and finally, the timing of the trauma work. Bearing in mind the exigencies of working within criminal justice and, by extension, within the broader framework of public protection, it is crucial that work on the offenders own trauma history is never undertaken when there is a risk that the offender will use his traumatic experience to justify his crimes or absolve himself of culpability. Balancing these two therapeutic imperatives demands enormous resources of human tolerance and the considered application of evidence from the fields of psychobiology, psychology, trauma counselling, sociology and criminology (Baim et al, 2002; van der Kolk, 1994 a and b; Kipper, 1998; Hunter, 1995; Jenkins, 1997). This is where psychodrama in its clinical form as a method of psychotherapy - can be uniquely effective. It provides a highly accessible, concrete and effective method for moving back and forth through time, simultaneously addressing the individuals offending behavior as well as its origins (Kipper, 1986; Corsini, 1967; Yablonsky, 1976). Underpinning the work is the belief that offending is most often a learned behavior and is in most cases a symptom of the perpetrator's maladaptive thinking, feeling and behavior patterns developed largely in response to earlier trauma (Baim, 2000; Schwartz and Masters, 1993; Bowlby, 1984 and 1988; Crittenden, 1997, 2000, 2002). It is sobering but unfortunately true that the abuse committed against these individuals when they were young is often far worse than that which they later perpetrate. These horrors are committed in secret and behind closed doors against silenced children. As long as they remain unspoken, they retain their debilitating power (Greenberg and Paivio, 1998). The fact that these boys later grow into men who commit further offences makes it all the more crucial to acknowledge their pain and begin the process of healing in the hope of helping them develop and practice consciously chosen and safe behavior. But we must be willing to hear the pain, sadness and loss, and we must also have the training, the skills and the proper context in which to help these stories come into the healing light. Bibliography Baim, C. (2000). Times distorted mirror: Trauma work with adult male sex offenders. In Kellerman, P. F. and Hudgins, M. K. (Eds.) Psychodrama with trauma survivors: Acting out your pain. London: Jessica Kingsley. Baim, C., Brookes, S. and Mountford, A. (Eds.) (2002). The geese theatre handbook: Drama with offenders and people at risk. Winchester: Waterside Press. Baim, C. and Leyland, M. (2004) Moving on from the past: A therapeutic programme for offenders who have experienced abuse and trauma. Unpublished manual. Baim, C. and Taylor, C. (2004) The perpetrator and the Victim: Using psychodrama with perpetrators who are also survivors of childhood abuse. Handouts accompanying the workshop at the International Psychodrama Conference, Oxford, England, 9-15 August 2004. Bannister, A. (1991). Learning to live again: Psychodramatic techniques with sexually abused young people. In P Holmes and M Karp (Eds.) Psychodrama: Inspiration and technique. London: Tavistock/ Routledge. Blatner, A. (1997) Acting-in: Practical applications of psychodramatic methods (3rd edition). London: Free Association Books or (1996) New York: Springer. Bowlby, J. (1984). Violence in the family as a disorder of the attachment and caregiving systems. The American Journal of Psychoanalysis 44, 9-27. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure Base - Clinical applications of attachment theory. London: Routledge. Briere, J. (1996). A self-trauma model for treating adult survivors of severe child abuse. In Briere, J., Berliner, L., Bulkley, J.A., Jenny, C., and Reid, T. (eds.), The APSAC handbook on child maltreatment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. pp. 140-57. Briggs, F. (ed.). (1995). From Victim to offender: How child sexual abuse victims become offenders. St Leonards, New South Wales: Allen and Unwin. Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2), 217-230. Bustos, D. (1994). Wings and roots: locus, matrix, status nascendi and the concept of clusters. In P. Holmes, M. Karp & M. Watson (Eds.) Psychodrama Since moreno: Innovations in theory and practice. London: Routledge. Corsini, R.J. (1952). Immediate therapy. Group Psychotherapy, 4, 322-330. Corsini, R.J. (1967). Role Playing in Psychotherapy. Chicago: Aldine.  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1Crittenden, P.M. (1997). Toward an integrative theory of trauma: A dynamic-maturational approach. In D. Cicchetti and S. Toth (Eds.), The Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology, Vol. 10. Risk, Trauma, and Mental Processes (pp. 34-84). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Crittenden, P. (2000). A dynamic-maturational approach to continuity and change in patterns of attachment. In Crittenden, P. and Claussen, A. (Eds.) The organisation of attachment relationships: Maturation, culture and context. Cambridge University Press. Crittenden. P. (2002). Attachment and Psychopathology. Presentation in Broadstairs, Kent. de Zulueta, F. (1998). From pain to violence: The traumatic roots of destructiveness. London: Whurr Publishers. Goldman, E. and Morrison, D. (1984). Psychodrama: Experience and process. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt. Greenberg, L.S. and Paivio, S.C. (1998). Allowing and accepting painful emotional experiences. The International Journal of Action Methods: Psychodrama, Skill Training and Role Playing, 51 (3), 47-61. Grubin, D. (1998). Sexual offending against children: Understanding the risk. Police Research Series, Paper 99. London: Policing and Reducing Crime Unit - Research, Development and Statistics Directorate. Hudgins, M.K. (2002). Experiential treatment for PTSD: The therapeutic spiral model. New York: Springer. Hunter, M. (1995). Child survivors and perpetrators of sexual abuse - Treatment innovations. London: Sage. Jefferies, J. (1991). What we are doing here is defusing bombs. In P Holmes and M Karp (Eds.) Psychodrama: Inspiration and technique. London: Tavistock/ Routledge. Jefferies, J. (1996). A psychodrama perspective. In Cordess, C. & Cox, M. (Eds.) Forensic Psychotherapy. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Jenkins, A. (1997). Invitations to responsibility - the therapeutic engagement of men who are violent and abusive. Adelaide, S. Australia: Dulwich Centre Publications. Kellermann, P.F. and Hudgins, M.K. (Eds.) (2000) Psychodrama with trauma Survivors: Acting out your pain. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Kipper, D. (1986). Psychotherapy through clinical role playing. New York: Brunner / Mazel. Kipper, D. (1998). Psychodrama and trauma: Implications for future interventions of psychodramatic role-playing modalities. The International Journal of Action Methods: Psychodrama, Skill Training and Role Playing, 51 (3), 113-121. Langs, R. (1999). Psychotherapy and Science. London: Sage. Marshall, W.L. & Maric, A. (1996). Cognitive and emotional components of generalized empathy deficits in child molesters. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 5 (2), 101-110. Miller, A. (1995). The drama of being a child. London: Virago. Metcalf, K. (1997). Role theory and eating disorders. Psychodrama Network News, newsletter of the American Society of Group Psychotherapy and Psychodrama, January 1997. Moreno, J L (1972) Psychodrama First Volume. Ambler, Pennsylvania: Beacon Press, Inc. (First published 1946). Moreno, J. L. and Moreno, Z. T. (1975). Psychodrama Volume Two. Beacon, New York: Beacon House. Sachnoff, E. (1999). Letter to the Editor. The International Journal of Action Methods: Psychodrama, Skill Training and Role Playing, 51 (4), 165. Salter, A. (1988). Treating child sex offenders and victims. London: Sage. Scheff, T.J. (1979). Catharsis in healing, ritual and drama. London: Univ. of California Press. Schwartz, M.F., Galperin, L.D. and Masters, W.H. (1993). Dissociation and treatment of compulsive reenactment of trauma: Sexual compulsivity. In Hunter, M. (ed.). The Sexually Abused Male, Vol. 3. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Schwartz, M.F., Galperin, L.D. and Masters, W.H. (1995). Sexual trauma within the context of traumatic and inescapable stress, neglect, and poisonous Pedagogy. In Hunter, M. (Ed.) Adult Survivors of Sexual Abuse. London: Sage. Schwartz, M.F. and Masters, W.H. (1993). Integration of trauma-based, cognitive behavioral, systemic and addiction approaches for treatment of hypersexual pair-bonding disorder. In: Carnes, P.J. (ed.). Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity, Vol. 1. London: Brunner Mazel. Skuse D, Bentovim A, Hodges J, Stevenson J, Andreou C, Lanyado M, New M, Williams B, McMillan D (1998). Risk factors for development of sexually abusive behaviour in sexually victimised adolescent boys: cross sectional study. British Medical Journal, 317(7152), 175-9. van der Kolk, B. (1989) The compulsion to repeat the trauma: re-enactment, revictimisation and masochism. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 12, 389-411. van der Kolk, B. (1994a). Childhood abuse and neglect and loss of self-regulation. The Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 58 (2), 1-14. van der Kolk, B.A. (1994b). The body keeps the score - Memory and the evolving psychobiology of post traumatic stress. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 1(3), 253-65. Yablonsky, L. (1976). Psychodrama: Resolving emotional problems through role-playing. New York: Basic Books. Wallis, K. (1995). Perspectives on offenders. In Briggs, F. (ed.), From Victim to Offender: How Child Sexual Abuse Victims Become Offenders. St Leonards, New South Wales: Allen and Unwin. Winn, L. (1994). Post traumatic stress disorder and dramatherapy. London: Jessica Kingsley. Authors note Many thanks to Alyson Coupe for her help with this chapter. About the author Clark Baim, M.Ed., Dip. Psychodrama Group Psychotherapy, is a Senior Trainer in Psychodrama and Co-Director of the Birmingham Institute for Psychodrama in Birmingham, England. He specializes in work with offenders and among his other responsibilities he is a Lead National Trainer for the National Probation Service of England and Wales. He consults and trains internationally for a number of therapeutic, social care and criminal justice agencies. In 1987, he was the founder and first Director of Geese Theatre UK, a company focused on rehabilitative work with prisoners. Authors email: cbaim@hotmail.com  The protagonist is referred to as he in this chapter, although the work applies equally to women; both males and females can be perpetrators and survivors of abuse.     C Baim - Footsteps on the Moon page  PAGE 15 Draft dated  DATE \@ "dd/MM/yyyy" 23/09/2009 Protagonist/ Responsible Self Including Personal, Interpersonal and Transpersonal Strengths Neutral Observer Role VXefg= l m RKvzMhi$ % & ""##-&&&)0*0O0}0~00V2ʼꈘxjhB90JCJOJQJUhB95B*CJOJQJphhB9B*CJOJQJph *h2dhB9CJOJQJhB9OJQJhB9CJOJQJmH sH hB9OJQJmH sH hB96CJOJQJhB95OJQJhB9CJOJQJhB95CJOJQJ(WXfg) = > l m $ %dha$ %dh %dh^ %dh %dh$dha$ $ %dha$ $ %dha$ W ] QRCyJKvwMNij$ % $ %dha$ $a$$ %Ldh^`La$ $ %dha$% ##a$b$-&c'd'9*G+,,)0*0~0033]5^5778 8$dha$ |dh^`|$dha$$ & F %dha$ $ %dha$V2233^57777 8!8"81828O8S8g8i888888::; >!>&>5???KKKLL-MMMMM7N9N OOORO.QRRTTȸȘȭȭȭȘȭȭȭȋҭȭȭȭȭȭhB95>*CJOJQJ)jhB95CJOJQJUmHnHuhB95CJOJQJ *hB9B*CJOJQJphhB9CJOJQJhB95B*CJOJQJphhB9B*CJOJQJphhB96B*CJOJQJph4 8!81828G8O8P8Q8R8S8Rkd$$Ifl 0N   t 6`0644 la$dh$&`#$/Ifa$dh$&`#$/If S8g8h8i8j88888RJJ$dha$kd$$IflC0N   t 6`0644 ladh$&`#$/If$dh$&`#$/Ifa$88888888888888 969g9999:G:u:::;$TTdh]T^Ta$Tdh`T$dha$dh;<< >!>4?5???VAWApAqAAGB`BB$ & F# 8dh^a$ $ & Fdha$$dha$ $ %dha$$ %TTdh]T^Ta$ TTdh]T^T$TTdh]T^Ta$BBCCDD*G+GGGIIKKKKKKLLMM7N9N %dh $ %dha$$dha$ $ & Fdha$ $dh^a$9NOOvOwO.Q/QRRTTTT%U&UWWMXNXXXYY6Z7ZZZ $ %dha$$dha$ %dhTTTUU%UUWKXMXNXXY6Z7ZyZzZZ[\4\P\Q\]E^F^G^^ _``B`tauaaddLgTg{ggh0hhhzj!k"kfkklllmmmnprrttyy{ѱѱѱѱ *hB95CJOJQJhB96B*CJOJQJphhB95B*CJOJQJphhB9B*CJOJQJphhB95CJOJQJhB9CJOJQJhB96CJOJQJ@Z[[P\Q\F^G^^^ _ _``tauaddffkgh$ & F 8%hdh7$8$H$]h^a$$ %hhdh]h^ha$ $ %dha$$dha$hVhizj{j!k"khkikkkllmmmmsnppr %dh$dha$$ & F 8%hdh7$8$H$]h^a$"$ & F 8%hhdh7$8$H$]h^h`a$rrrrttxx%{&{A~B~O~P~'\$ %Ldh^`La$$ %Ldh^`La$ $ /p@ P !$%dha$ $ %dha$$dha$$dha${{{!{{@~A~O~~ %'^\_A}+Roeۄ$VІ%78LM Vt%eaȽhB96CJOJQJjhB9CJOJQJUhB9B*CJH*OJQJphhB96>*CJOJQJhB9>*CJOJQJhB96B*CJOJQJphhB95B*CJOJQJphhB9B*CJOJQJphhB9CJOJQJ5\_.ɂ\Tͅ7ttЉ@q?$ %Ldh^`La$($ /p@ P !$%Ldh^`La$$ %Ldh^`La$$Ldh^`La$Uq ![ YUҐvґ~#./:)Nu<U3R,UPg o7\?˛̛ڛǼǼDZhB9>*CJOJQJhB96CJOJQJhB9CJOJQJhB95B*CJOJQJphhB96B*CJOJQJphhB9B*CJOJQJphA?G~ُ[9bn}$ %Ldh^`La$($ /p@ P !$%Ldh^`La$Fo˛̛ڛ()4578:;= $ %dha$dh $ %dha$ $ %dha$ %dh$ %Ldh^`La$ڛ()g35689;<>?AD鶰xgxS'jhB90JCJOJQJUmH sH !h2d0JCJOJQJmHnHuhB90JCJOJQJjhB90JCJOJQJUhB9CJOJQJ hB9CJjhB9UhB9 hB9CJjhB90JCJUhB95CJOJQJ *h2dh2dCJOJQJhB9CJOJQJmHsHhB9CJOJQJhB95>*CJOJQJ=>@ABCDşƟǟԟ#$:;<= $ %dha$$a$ßğşǟ#$:<=ܿhB9CJOJQJhB9CJOJQJhB9CJOJQJhB95CJOJQJhB9hB9CJOJQJ%h8C0JCJOJQJmHnHsH u'jhB90JCJOJQJUmH sH hB90JCJOJQJmH sH  6P1h. A!T"n#$% Dp$$If!vh5 5 #v :V l  t 6`065 $$If!vh5 5 #v :V lC t 6`065 ^  666666666vvvvvvvvv666666>6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH L@L  Heading 1$$@&a$5\mHsHuFF  Heading 2$$@&a$ mH sH uHH  Heading 3$@&5>*\mH sH uB@B  Heading 4$@&>*mH sH uN@N  Heading 5$$@&a$5>*\mH sH uNN  Heading 6$$@&a$B*mH phsH u::  Heading 7 <@&@@  Heading 8 <@&6]X @X  Heading 9 $$ %dh@&a$5CJOJQJDA`D Default Paragraph FontVi@V 0 Table Normal :V 44 la (k ( 0No List 2>@2 Title$a$5\44 Header  9r 4 @4 Footer  9r 2)@!2  Page Number^JHJ2H Subtitle$J0]J^0a$5\DP@BD  Body Text 2 h^h B*phHRH  Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJF'aF Comment Reference CJ^JaJ<r<  Comment TextCJaJ@jqr@ Comment Subject5\2B2  Body TextxVV Brdteksth1$7$8$H$^h` mH sH uPP WP9_Header 8p !1$ mH sH u@&@@ Footnote ReferenceH*>Q>  Body Text 3xCJaJ>@>  Footnote TextCJaJ6U6  Hyperlink >*B*phPK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] =]t= ]tw=  V2T{ڛ=QU\`beg % 8S88;B9NZhr\?==RSTVWXYZ[]^_acdf7L= T[^l!8@N(  V   #  "? V  # "? B S  ?!00=F/Jt 7Gtae*/R(/3557788:;=>@Aė>)-w22P9U94=7=AAEEYG\GPPTTZZY\d\ddwwHx[x|xxx^yuyy.zzz*{o{{{|||||h~n~~~%ހ XsρЁҁ@dЂ̅Ѕ![X~هӈuӉ"#:p*Nuь68Sb&(,VPz}6nEƒ'Sa557788:;=>@AƗǗ>333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333gy557788:;=>@A>#O>\T0RP"d{v? V ` z4dR[o z4L#"V m[ PtM%ij0T'6~ '4VP ,|!2|. _f74LA8jZn/}>\ xj|CXjd-Ft{HZPIrINb,wiQ>BsNXF,|]6T`|FvIXhL)TlZ[SmdL'1sm`>Eq(2{s>D>}2 =|`h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(hhh^h`OJQJo(hHh88^8`B*OJQJo(phhHh^`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHohxx^x`OJQJo(hHhHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h88^8`B*OJQJo(phhHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHhxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHohHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h pp^p`OJQJo(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(808^8`0^Jo(.^`^J.pLp^p`L^J.@ @ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PLP^P`L^J.^`OJPJQJ^Jo(^`OJQJ^Jo(hHopp^p`OJQJo(hH@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoPP^P`OJQJo(hHh88^8`B*OJQJo(phhHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHhxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHohHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hH^`^Jo(.^`^J.pLp^p`L^J.@ @ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PLP^P`L^J.hh^h`o(. 88^8`hH. L^`LhH.   ^ `hH.   ^ `hH. xLx^x`LhH. HH^H`hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.^`^Jo(.^`^J.pLp^p`L^J.@ @ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PLP^P`L^J.h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(^`^Jo(.^`^J.pLp^p`L^J.@ @ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PLP^P`L^J.hhh^h`OJQJ^Jo(h88^8`OJQJ^Jo(oh^`OJQJ^Jo(h  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(h  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(ohxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHH^H`OJQJ^Jo(h^`OJQJ^Jo(oh^`OJQJ^Jo(hhh^h`OJQJ^Jo(h88^8`OJQJ^Jo(oh^`OJQJ^Jo(h  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(h  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(ohxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHH^H`OJQJ^Jo(h^`OJQJ^Jo(oh^`OJQJ^Jo(^`^Jo(.hh^h`^J.8L8^8`L^J.^`^J.  ^ `^J. L ^ `L^J.xx^x`^J.HH^H`^J.L^`L^J.h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h88^8`B*OJQJo(phhHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHhxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHohHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhhh^h`OJQJo(hHh88^8`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHohxx^x`OJQJo(hHhHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`.h ^`OJQJo(oh pp^p`OJQJo(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh PP^P`OJQJo(h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h^`OJQJo(hHhpp^p`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHhPP^P`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh  ^ `OJQJo(hH^`o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`^Jo(.hh^h`^J.8L8^8`L^J.^`^J.  ^ `^J. L ^ `L^J.xx^x`^J.HH^H`^J.L^`L^J.h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(hhh^h`OJQJo(hHh88^8`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHohxx^x`OJQJo(hHhHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhhh^h`OJQJo(hHh88^8`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHohxx^x`OJQJo(hHhHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h pp^p`OJQJo(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(hhh^h`OJQJo(hHh88^8`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHohxx^x`OJQJo(hHhHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h pp^p`OJQJo(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(hhh^h`OJQJo(hHh88^8`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHohxx^x`OJQJo(hHhHH^H`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hH#o[Sm>EqR[A8|]|CI`{s/}>O>\P ,T'm[ |._f7` d{ 'IXhwiQsNXzPI1smM%? L#"d-F2 =|{HTl##2dB98C@gggg=P@Unknown G* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial3* TimesK@Palatino Linotypea&  Gill Sans MTTimes New Roman5. *aTahoma?= * Courier New;WingdingsA BCambria Math"hff xLxL#T0d??2qHX $P8C2! xxAdult Attachment Interview Clark BaimClark#                           ! " Oh+'0  ( H T ` lxAdult Attachment Interview Clark BaimNormalClark3Microsoft Office Word@G@<3@h<@+Ν<x՜.+,0 hp|   L? Adult Attachment Interview Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghjklmnoprstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F@>ѝ<Data i1TableqӆWordDocument8SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q