Some thoughts on Case Study 2 that are worth mentioning:

Professional help
In some real world cases, it may be very necessary to get professional guidance. But for these case studies, that can't serve as a suggestion-it's sort of a cop-out because the task is essentially asking you, the student, to be the acting professional and provide the recommendations. If you are still uncomfortable with making a suggestion as to how to help this family, or in other case studies, because you aren't a professional, then list any questions that are nagging you whose answers may give you the information needed to feel confident in recommending a course of action.

Medical explanations and coping with frustration
Although it's possible that the younger child's problem is caused by a medical explanation, it should be ruled out a bit later as there are many psychological influences that you could focus on first. It's quite common for kids to not have been taught to deal with frustration. The trick is for you to think about how to help the parents or kids. In fact, it's common for people to focus on children as the source of the problem, rather than looking at the system (parents, family). Problems are often experienced as coming from outside of one's self. Also, it is important to think about the extent of Billy's externalizing behaviors. Do they show up in all aspects of his life? If so, I'd agree that perhaps a biological cause could be at hand. But if he is able to demonstrate some control in at least one aspect of his life, then that might rule out a neurological explanation.

On under-controlling emotions:
I know this language is used in the book, but I wonder if 'under-controlled' is a bit judgmental. It's clear that some kids are different when it comes to their experience of frustration and subsequent outbursts, but to me, this language of 'under-controlled emotions' not only devalues a child's experience, but it reifies a philosophy that emotions are something separate from ourselves that should be controlled and minimized. We don't want to be impulsive all of the time. Sometimes it's very helpful. We don't want to yell out of anger, but again, sometimes it may be necessary (like trying to stop two people from fighting). Emotions basically tell you what in the world is important. When someone is throwing a tantrum the experience is often an action against perceived unfairness. In other words, the emotions are saying 'this is so important that it's worth causing a scene.' Emotions tell us what is worth looking at or looking out for. Emotions can also be reinforced or punished like any other behavior. My point? We all go through a phase where we must learn to experience intense emotions. Some have much more intense emotions than others, in addition to some being more impulsive than others. And some have parents who are better equiped to deal with emotions than others. In the end, it's a source of diversity.

On treating siblings the same
This is a tough one. At first blush, many believe that siblings, students, and athletes should be treated the same in the name of fairness. How many parents have heard from their child: 'but that's not fair! Johnny gets to go to summer camp! Why can't I?!!!" And parents could probably list many reasons, all of them from the Expressive-Constitutive point of view-"Johnny is more mature, Johnny is more responsible, Johnny is stronger, Johnny is quicker, Johnny is more intelligent, Johnny has more experience, Johnny has been trained, Johnny has more friends there than you." The list could go on. Parents typically say 'because Johnny is older.' Or to really avoid the issue they just claim that the camp doesn't allow younger children. Even if they are true, both responses avoid communicating to the younger child that there are concrete reasons for the decision and instead simply a matter of age. Unfortunately, Johnny's younger sibling doesn't think in terms of these things on their own, at least not yet or that often, and is more interested in the Instrumental point of view of being goal oriented. In this child's mind, all they see is that Johnny get's to go, but he/she doesn't, and very logically, that isn't fair. The great "fun" for the parent is when the younger child comes of age but is no less mature than he/she was a few years ago. The child remembers full well the excuse given that they were to young. But not anymore! How do you now explain why he/she can't go?

As a coach, I treat my athletes differently. My best athletes are worked harder than the less abled athletes in absolute terms, but all athletes are worked as hard as they can handle; therein lies the fairness. In other words, my fastest athletes are expected to run lines faster, and they may end up running more lines, but it takes them more lines to get a work-out than my slower athletes. The side benefit of this method is that all of the atheletes have a reasonable chance at success. Slower atheletes tend to get blamed when the team doesn't beat a time limit, and yet they run as hard as they can. Not a lot of joy in working hard and getting blamed for some failaure. My method, though, gives people a chance for success individually and as a team. It's very hard and the students sometimes feel that I'm not fair. On the other hand, if I let the fast athletes get away with running fewer lines, how could I claim that I am doing what is best for them?

It's a complex business, raising kids, and there are no easy methods. I chuckle sometimes when I think about it: how many of you are skeptical when a salesperson claims to have a get-rich quick scheme? A scheme that if you 'just follow these steps' you will be rich. The steps may work for some, but as with *any* complex human endeavor, there are no simple schemes to navigate the ever changing waters of financing, governing, leadership, coaching, teaching, and yes, parenting.

Regarding sports.
Sports teams may be tough for the smaller child. But maybe individually oriented sports would be more appropriate. Track, long distance, martial arts, swimming, gymnastics, and golf are good examples of competitive sports that might work. All could be source for him to learn a competency. Also, sports are often given a bad rap because many coaches are poor at demonstrating how to deal with frustration and loss. Self-Esteem is earned though working through difficult projects--not because some one says we should have it. Think about it: if you have an easy project, you never really learn how to cope with failure or when to persevere. Most people feel good about themselves when they strive at improving themselves, not just because they obtained some goal, but because they stuck with it in spite of difficulty. A good coach can do wonders by focusing on these things. There is a lot of evidence, actually, that reinforcement given at the wrong time or in the wrong context can actually sabotage perserverence. If you give kids money for playing their viedo games, kids will learn to associate the playing with the money and not the game. The game becomes un-rewarding by itself.

A good motto: *there is no failure, only feedback.* Somehow as kids we really get scared of failing. But failing is simply a concept--a frame or hypothetical construct, which tends to create fear and inaction.

Defining Success.
Do you have a healthy definition of success? Where do we learn what it means to be successful? Could our society/cultural have unhealthy and unrealistic definitions of success? Does your family? What do you tell a child who wants to win a foot race but just can't? Do you tell him that she will eventually win when she gets older? Does that imply that winning a race is the most important goal? What other outcomes might be worth acknowleding?