{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03750721292556261, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0051933064050779, 'mean_word_length': 4.666666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Young child observation: a development in the theory and method of infant observation

therapy in being able to symbolically, and in language, represent her sense of separateness and of self. She demonstrated this when she pointed to herself, saying: ‘No mamma, no dadda, ... SARA!’ (p. 258) A summary of the principles of the RCH IMPH approach by the editors follows and concludes the book. The fundamental aims, theoretical underpinnings and techniques are reiterated. There are warning words from Morgan: ‘We all miss the baby and have to keep working on it’ (p. 272). There is also clear space made for thinking about the role and exploration of love and hate in this therapeutic work and its special place in infant–parent relationships. Paul then contributes a final chapter that brings his considerable clinical experience to bear on thoughts to do with gaze behaviour: looking/seeing, eye gaze and aversion. As a parent–infant psychotherapist, I found this exploration particularly fascinating. As in our work, eye gaze and the initiation, avoidance or reciprocity of looking become diagnostically important elements for the therapist’s understanding of the baby’s developing attachment difficulties. Clinical work with parents who can experience their babies as full of hate (such as Sara above) and the babies that are gaze avoidant, are discussed in terms of the work that needs to be done to shift these projections. In a summarising statement which could be the rallying cry of this book, Paul states, ‘I believe that the baby must be included since only in doing so can we acknowledge that the baby does have a mind, [...] this mind [...] lies somewhat within each, and in the space between mother and infant’ (p. 286).