and a child showing you how to play Minecraft™.” In a light-hearted and humorous exchange, Lessie reiterated the importance of therapist and child getting to know each other mutually, and her apprehension that tablet use could interfere with that.
Kevin offered that “if technology might offer a worthwhile means of treating some children’s concerns. Charlie inquired, “How do we strike a balance between the way
(Charlie) on the basis that “we don’t know what’s going to emerge, and it is always the relationship that is needed in therapy” (Garry).
Kevin proffered that technology can enhance therapeutic outcomes by asking parents to video special play times at home on their smart phones and reviewing the recording in session. This idea met with less opposition, and Linda further suggested using tablets to work with older kids 8 to 12 years of age for journaling or art journaling, so they “feel more comfortable and might give more information, be more honest, and be more transparent.” In this vein, Kevin suggested that it “is amazing what you can do with the painting app that you can’t do with actual crayons and paper, and you get to keep it, keep histories of it, and do series of things.”
Curious, Louise solicited more information about how using the app differs from using crayons. Charlie noted the large color palette; Terry added the 3-dimensional possibilities. Despite their enthusiasm, Louise wondered if “it becomes a chore [for children] or are they just happy to tell you about [their tablet creations]?” Garry echoed Louise’s
technology is taking over kids’ lives from an early age, and [encouraging] the creativity that we would like to see [them employ]?” This stimulated a thoughtful discussion about technology’s place in and between play therapy sessions.
Using Technology in and Between Play
Therapy Sessions Kevin uses online videos to do systematic desensitization, “because I couldn’t get all those situations in the playroom, and I couldn’t take them to places where the bugs that scare them are. But they can stop and start the bug on the computer, or make the image smaller” to overcome their fears. Louise conceded that in this context, using a tablet “is a form of play.” Charlie concurred, “This is where technology helps. It’s like virtual reality” (cf. Lamb, Etopio, & Lamb, 2018). When Kevin highlighted how “it’s fun,” Charlie proclaimed, “All right! We won’t banish tablets, completely, then,” to much laughter from the group!
Linda shifted the conversation to other potential uses of technology in play therapy, such as giving tablet homework between sessions. Linda and Charlie discussed apps for learning about and regulating emotions like anger, and Charlie acknowledged “it could be helpful if the assignment would carry on what we’re doing in the playroom.”
who knows what to do, knows how to build a relationship, knows how to contribute to it, knows how to communicate understanding to the child, and what the child’s dealing with.” Garry disagreed with Charlie’s proposition that this kind of work could be suggested “several sessions in, when you’ve been working with the child in the playroom, after you’ve got a relationship”
22 | PLAYTHERAPY | September 2018 |
www.a4pt.org
Buoyed by the ebullient mood, Kevin joked that he would object to “a kid texting me during a session,” to which the others laughed and nodded at the hilarity of this mental image. Kevin reported, “they are now texting me between sessions, though.” Charlie questioned the acceptability of this crisis stuff” being communicated.
In the last segment of the conversation, Linda accentuated how “critical it is to be purposeful reminded everyone of the neurological impact of using technology “with children that are too young the adolescent brain is reorganizing during this crucial developmental time. Finally, Charlie underscored the importance of following the American Academy of Pediatrics’s (AAP) guidelines on the potential for learning, the deleterious effects on development, and the need to limit the amount of time children and adolescents use television and tablets across settings (e.g., AAP, 2016a; AAP, 2016b; Reid et al., 2016).
Participants’ Reflective Comments The author solicited participants’ reflective comments on this piece and their current positions on the subject of technology use in play therapy. Linda Homeyer offered that this discussion showcased their agreements and disagreements, as well as their “concerns of the digital
concern for the necessity of therapist interaction, to which Kevin offered, “You could create a whole children’s book together, reading it together, spending time together,” positing that the true utility of the tablet creation is that “it’s permanent, it’s familiar, it’s comfortable [for kids to use], and it feels way more age appropriate if the child is a bit older.”
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36
