Barry Ritzler, PhD
2013 Programs Online and Open for Registration
There will be two Beginning Programs and one Advanced/Reunion Program for 2013. We are happy to announce that the Programs are now posted online and open for registration. The first Program will be a Beginning Program held in Dallas, Texas, Wednesday-Sunday, April 3-7, 2013. The five day course will offer 35 CE credits and methodically cover administration, coding, scoring, and interpretation using the Comprehensive System.
The second Program will be another Beginning Program held Monday-Friday, June 24-28, 2013, on the campus of the University of Hartford in West Hartford, Connecticut. The University is approximately 1.5 miles from downtown Hartford and when details are worked out lodging will be available in the downtown area.
The third Program is an Advanced/Reunion Program. It will be held in Asheville, North Carolina, during the weekend of September 20-22. A major focus will be on child and adolescent cases presented by Irving Weiner. He will also be addressing issues concerning the history and future of the Comprehensive System. Don’t miss the opportunity to hear Dr. Weiner.
The Program will be hosted by MAHEC, the Mountain Area Heath Education Center, which is a private not-for-profit institution providing state of the art educational programs designed to meet the educational and training needs of health and human services professionals. A complimentary breakfast and lunch will be provided each day. Accommodations are available at the MAHEC special rate nearby at the Doubletree or Sleep Inn.
For this installment of the newsletter, I decided to mention a few unusual coding issues that may cause some consternation if you encounter them. First, a member of our most recent workshop, Julie Dauphin, received a response that contained both a reflection and a pair—something like two people looking at a reflection of another person. In the workbook, it states that “a pair is not recorded when the reflection determinant is scored.” I have always taken that to mean that a reflection should not be coded as a pair, but it may mean that if a reflection is coded, a pair should not be included even if there is a separate pair. When we have a Nature and Botany response, by the rule we code only Nature. The workbook needs to be clarified for reflections. I suggested to Julie that she code both a reflection and a pair, but she said that RIAP does not allow her to do so. At any rate, a response like Julie’s is very rare (I’ve never seen it before), so like many difficult to code responses, it may not be a major issue.
Recently, on the Rorschach Listserv, there was a long discussion about how to code Jesus (you could substitute Buddha or Mohammed or someone else). It was the longest discussion I have ever seen on the Listserv. We always code H for Jesus and Ay because He was an historical character. (H) is reserved for mythological or fictitious figures. Some psychologists (including R-PAS) bend themselves into pretzels by coding Jesus, the son of God or Jesus who turned water into wine as (H), but that is bound to offend some religious people.
Last year, when we had a beginning workshop in Hartford, we had a response of a witch. I said we always code a witch as (H). However, one participant in the workshop said she was a witch. And one of my friends calls herself a “green witch” (she is a midwife). What are you going to do? The participant in the workshop said that if she got a response of “a Christian”, she simply would code (H).
Also on Listserv a number of years ago, there was a discussion about the coding of “crushed ice”. Should it get a morbid for “crushed”? We code MOR for a “broken cookie” or “torn jeans” (even though you have to spend $200 or more in some stores for torn jeans.) Generally, what we do is say that things like “crushed ice” and “broken cookies” indicate a mild form of depression while responses like “painfully bruised flesh” indicate more severe depression, but it would be good if some research was done on this issue.
In a protocol we use for the beginning Comprehensive System Program, we have some responses that always cause problems. One is “it is a monster? (Card IV); it has a bag between its legs that has to do with him being a monster”. We have always thought of this bag as a growing part of the figure, not something from Lord and Taylor, but if you are not sure, you could always ask in the Inquiry, “What do you mean, ‘it has to do with him being a monster’?” In another response from the same protocol, the individual says, “it is a guy swinging in the breeze as they say”. We have taken this to mean that the person in the response is dead (and therefore gets a MOR), but if you are not sure, you could always ask, “What do you mean, ‘as they say’?”
With responses such as these it may pay to code them in different ways and then see if the coding differences have any effect on interpretation. If not, you probably are ok. If they make a difference, you might want to be cautious about the interpretation—giving it ample qualification or looking for more confirming evidence.
Updated RTP Website
The Rorschach Training Programs Website has been updated with a new look. Please visit and give us your feedback. Recently there were some problems with the link between “Contact Us” and our email address so if you tried sending a message and did not receive a reply please try again or call 732-690-4008.
This is a newly developed web-based system for administration, coding and interpretation for the Comprehensive System. The technology has access to local and global statistics, provides a client-specific structural summary and offers a sequence of scores. A secure server can confidentially manage your patient’s data. You might want to check out the link www.rorschachplus.com.
We wish you a very happy, safe holiday and prosperous New Year.