The house as a grammatical form

5The house as a grammatical form


Valerie was a middle-aged woman with a lifelong history of alcohol and drug abuse. Her adult years had been marked by multiple acute and long-term hospitalizations, repeated episodes of extreme violence, and removal from supervised residential homes in several different cities. She had been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. After running away from a group care home and assaulting customers at a gas station, she was committed again to a locked facility for evaluation and treatment.


For eight months, Valerie screamed through the night. She kicked staff members and patients who approached her and scratched the aides who attempted bathing and hygiene assistance. She stripped off clothing, knocked over furniture, “painted” windows with feces and soap, and spent many nights in a special safety room separated from the general patient sleeping area. Placed on close monitoring for her own protection as well as that of others, she grew increasingly socially isolated as a discouraged staff began avoiding serious engagement with her. She was transferred to a unit specializing in neurodegenerative disorders, where programming and milieu structure centered on sensory support. But even in the new setting, Valerie made no progress. Episodically, she refrained from screaming while allowing one or two staff to shower her, wash her hair, or help her put on her clothes. Outside these brief interactions, she remained hostile and regressed; attempts to initiate conversation were met with aggression or silence.


At one point, Valerie was transferred to a general medical hospital following an infection and an acute medication reaction. Ripping out intravenous lines and breaking a staff member’s fingers, she was deemed to be unmanageable and soon returned for psychiatric care. Our clinical team brainstormed what might be done while her medical and lab status stabilized. Other than the violence reported in her medical chart, we knew little about her life, and since she didn’t speak in whole sentences, she remained, for a long time, a mystery. One evening, however, she forced her way out of the supervision of a nursing assistant, ran down a hallway, and grabbed a small doll belonging to another patient.


This was the first time we’d seen Valerie show interest in any specific object external to herself. Doll play, as is widely known, has a long history in child psychotherapy, where it enables children to project thoughts and feelings too complex for their limited vocabularies. Observers have noted that doll play can provide sensory stimulation and comfort for older adults in dementia-care settings. We found no reports about the use of doll play with adult psychiatric inpatients. But we embraced the possibility that Valerie’s behavior might be key to some kind of activity which finally could engage her. After much deliberation, the team came to an agreement, and nurses mobilized. One of us bought in one of our children’s old dollhouses and a set of wooden furniture pieces. Another donated a miniature plastic “family” and an assortment of tiny household objects such as lamps, pillows, and blankets. We added a few small plush puppies and kittens and set up a table in an activity room.


In light of Valerie’s history of anxiety related to staff-initiated verbal communications, we opted for a non-directive approach – bringing her to the activity room a few times a week, presenting the materials one by one, silently, with no direction or guidance, and seeing what might happen. We wanted to give Valerie maximal freedom to create her own themes and modulate in her own way the relational experience with supervising staff. Working closely with us to develop a monitoring protocol for tracking Valerie’s progress, the unit psychiatrist initiated new medication trials as the nursing team launched yet another attempt to make contact.1


Two staff members flanked Valerie on the first day – ready to respond if she bolted. But it turned out that we didn’t need to worry. From the moment she entered the activity room and noticed the play materials on the table, Valerie was hooked. Her interest was intense. In the first play sessions, she accepted only the plush animals and a few pieces of the furniture, pushing away any offers of the human figurines. She took chairs, tables, sinks, and stoves and piled them, one after the other, in bizarre, chaotic mounds in the corners of several rooms. But her grasp on the plush animals was tender and deliberate – with the tips of her fingers – as she placed each one on the shelves. In stunningly clearly articulated sentences, she assigned each one a name. “This is Anthony’s dog,” she said. “This is Raymond’s brown puppy.” We were shocked.


Few staff on the unit had previously heard Valerie speak in whole sentences, and none of us knew who Anthony and Raymond were, as their names appeared nowhere in her chart history. Nonetheless, the names and identities which Valerie assigned in these early sessions remained intact throughout the subsequent months, and Valerie referenced them repeatedly in the story lines which unfolded as the intervention progressed.


The second week, rather than merely naming and identifying characters, Valerie started arranging plausible activity scenes in which characters were depicted as active agents. She organized the animals in a circle around a table, for example, and said “this is my birthday party.” She began accepting the human figurines and adding them to the arrangements. In the third and fourth weeks, her originally bizarre, seemingly haphazard piles of furniture gave way to increasingly visually orderly and logically coherent compositions. She aligned all the chairs in neat rows along the wall edges, for example, and separated out functionally plausible two- and three-item settings of tables with objects such as flowerpots, food bowls, and lamps. Her story lines expanded to include more than one sentence and more complex narrative structures. She saw a box of yellow plastic blocks in a corner of the activity room, for example, and stood up to fetch it. Arranging the blocks delicately in a yellow pile on one of the shelves, she described an ambulance rescue in which a puppy disappeared while she and her mother were saved from a house fire. (“The puppy dog sleeps when Anthony sleeps…The doggy got lost in a fire. I don’t know what happened to him”). She also identified a purported future husband (“This is Rocky. I am going to marry him”) and referenced a character, Susan, not represented by any object, who “drives the ambulance that saves mommy’s life and my life.” One day, after painstakingly sorting the furniture collection by size – large objects in one pile and small ones in another – she neatly balanced all the smaller pieces on top of the larger ones, forming a double-decker row. “I am old enough to take care of my own kids,” she said.


In the fourth week, Valerie had an aggressive outburst. After all the furniture was arranged, she took in her hand a small bookcase and began slamming it, first on one shelf and then on the next, screaming repeatedly, “I do not want Daddy here!” She then grabbed other furniture pieces off the shelves and threw them across the room. Following this, in the fifth week, she began, for the first time, organizing multiple simultaneous narrative scenes in different parts of the house. One play session, she arranged all the “children” and “infants” together in one room with the bed and the armchairs (a scene she called “babysitting”) while, in the adjacent space, she seated all the “adults” in chairs lining the back wall, explaining “this is me in group.” Just before the two-month mark, Valerie arranged what she called “group home” scenes and scenes of mothers and children. In one session, she spent many minutes tenderly arranging a plush bear’s clothing as she tucked the bear into “bed” and adjusted its blanket. She talked about her mother and some shopping trips they had taken together.


As the visual coherence and narrative complexity of her doll play increased over time, Valerie’s behavior on the unit also evolved. She no longer needed sedating medication or close staff monitoring; her physical and verbal aggression slowed and then stopped. Staff reported Valerie was attending most unit programming, sleeping in her regular bedroom, and joining other patients at mealtimes. She had begun initiating conversations, asking comprehensible questions about scheduling and snacks. She agreed to showers and began cooperating with phlebotomy and clinic appointments such as podiatry. She even gave one of us a “gift” of a small stuffed animal she had stored in her bedroom. “I want you to have this,” she said, revealing what seemed to us to be a new awareness of the feelings of others. “I think you might like it.” Valerie was stabilized on a new medication regimen at this time as well, and we marveled, as an interdisciplinary team, at the transformations which accompanied this convergence of pharmacological and non-medication-based therapeutic interventions. There was a brightness, an optimism, about the Valerie who had awakened before our eyes, and all of us were enjoying it, and enjoying her.


Around the eighth week, something changed abruptly. Valerie came to the activity room eagerly, as before. But one morning, she didn’t talk about the figurine arrangements or tell any of their stories. Rather, her configurations were purely decorative – ornamental rather than narrative: “That looks pretty,” she said, placing teddy bears in each corner of the dollhouse. “Nice.” Valerie had not described anything previously in this way, and we took it as a signal: I told Valerie I was going to put the dollhouse away for a while, and she agreed. Her schedule was full by then of other, more conventional group programs and therapies. For the first time since her admission, Valerie was permitted to leave the locked unit independently to visit the snack shop and go to the gym without staff supervision. It was not long afterward that she was finally able to leave the locked facility with confidence, dignity, and some measure of restored capacity for self-determination and self-care.


Structure as a bridge toward grammar


On the surface, our dollhouse game was ordinary play – something fun for the patient to do, something that might keep her busy. Like most good nursing interventions, it involved creating a safe and empathic interactional milieu, a relational environment characterized by consistency, reliability, predictability, and structured routine. It called for sensitivity and patience, and so on, on the part of the nurse. It had, in other words, many of the typical characteristics of good nursing communication. But in its deeper logical structure, the game contained something else which was equally important. Embedded inside it was a metaphorical reference to the congruence between inside space and outside space – a suggestion about ideas held inside receiving form and expressive structure from an external physical source. Taking up the analogy, enacting it through play, Valerie moved a step toward rediscovering her own capacity for narrativity.


A century ago, the linguist Roman Jakobson noted links between geometry and grammar – between external shape structures and visual compositional forms, on one hand, and, on the other hand, the internal structures of speech and thought (Jakobson, 1987). It can be said that our nursing intervention exemplified this principle. Establishing a venue in which Valerie could assert control and decision-making, but with materials of interest to her, doll play provided an open-ended “dialect” by which she could disentangle, quite literally, some of the story elements of her life – assemble and arrange them, stand apart, observe, and consider them. The dollhouse, we might say, became an external grammar as its concrete shape offered an ad hoc structure for calling up and organizing meanings from the background noise of experience.


Our doll activity did not emerge from a manual of nursing interventions or list of formal objectives read off from a diagnostic chart. But it activated the patient’s capacity for observational and narrative agency during a period when conventional words were not available to her, even though, quite clearly, she had something significant to say. Doll play offered a transitional configuration which linked a complex internal mental experience to a simpler, more externally share-able structure for representing and exchanging meaning. Moreover, it illustrated the success which can result from intensive interdisciplinary collaboration. We hoped, as Valerie left, that she would be able to access consistent and reliable community supports and sustain a life for herself free from confinement and institutionalization, and that she would continue, when the feeling moved her, to play.



Note


1Some of the material in this section has appeared previously, in different form, in Birnbaum, S., Hanchuk, H., & Nelson, M. (2015). Therapeutic doll play in the treatment of a severely impaired psychiatric inpatient: dramatic clinical improvement with a non-traditional nursing intervention. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services 53 (5), 22–27. Reprinted with permission from SLACK Inc.

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

May 22, 2017 | Posted by in NURSING | Comments Off on The house as a grammatical form

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access