[socialjustice_fsu]

The whole "Parent-Child-Adult" paradigm of the human experience in Transactional Analysis seems overly quaint, maybe even pedophillic. He seems to reduce "parenthood" and "childhood" to pathology while fetishizing them.
Did Freud theorize that the Id, Ego, SuperEgo were universal components to the psyche of all ages and "roles"? I believe so. That makes more sense to me. Perhaps it's a matter of semantics but I find the re-framing problematic.

Cyclopea, I think you are right on target with this movement. In my earlier days of psychiatry the TA movement was fading and fading fast. What I did encounter was the fall-out from some of the die-hard practitioners and their loyal believers. While this concept may serve as an etiology for what might motivate responses it hardly addresses the vital area of what we now call brief therapy. Yes, understanding the causes of responses may be good, however, one has to operate within the confines of the not so traditional psychoanalytic model that takes enormous amounts of time and questionable efficacy. (ouch)
With that said...Berne emphasized the influence of the ego states of Parent, Adult, and Child on a person's interactions with others. The Parent ego state relates to limit-setting and nurturing. The Adult ego state is concerned with reality testing and estimating probabilities in transactions with the outside world. The Child ego state comprises the feelings, wishes, and adaptations actually experienced in childhood.
Most outcomes of an exchange are decided by ulterior transactions, psychological responses that are outside the awareness of the participants. People play games, adopting the role of Persecutor, Rescuer, or Victim and using ulterior transactions in such a way that everyone loses. Treatment (?) focuses on feelings analysis, script analysis, and stroking (stimulating and recognizing other human beings). Feelings may be simple reactions, feelings from the past reactivated by a stimulus in the present, or indulgements or displaced feelings that are a backdrop in today's scene of living. I will not ramble on any more because I think this paints the landscape ot TA.

As it 'fit in' during the all about self-discovery period I find it not to be an effective model in today's arena. I have a very simple take on a model such as this and it has served me well to keep me out the court room. People generally come to a therapist because they have experienced a crisis - or, something has shook up their homeostasis...it can be the carpe diem that invokes fertile ground for change, correct? I, as an ethical therapist would never take a patient through such an ordeal to much later get to the here and now issue. Patient's generally are fragile. If the patient's ego was healthy I probably would not be seeing them. To me, it takes a well grounded therapist, a well grounded individual to reach any level of efficacy through TA. In fact, left in unseasoned therapist's hands this could be deadly. One cannot 'regress' a patient when the patient presents for help. The timing is just wrong.

I look forward to hearing AtLastHome's and Dapperbutch's take on TA. At this point in my career - which I guard defensively - I would not apply TA although some of the basic tenets can be extrapolated to build on a sensical, ethical approach that is well blended with applicable models that provide our patient's with the optimal care in a time-constrained system.

~ Socialjustice_fsu