I'm a newcomer to the online case conference, and just read for the first time the vignette about Laura and the discussion this has generated. After reading the vignette I arrived at a different hypothesis about the nature of Laura's problems, than the ones I believe have been suggested so far.
One reason why Laura was apparently traumatized by her mother's reaction to hearing about the molest may be that the reaction ("Your father would have killed him!") may have suggested to her that what had happened was truly terrible (worth killing for). In a seven year old's mind this would not be interpreted as a criticism of the molester (a sophisticated adult view), but rather as a general condemnation, implying blame for, or at least disgust with, the victim. In other words, her mother's response may have confirmed, in a terrifying and traumatic manner, a developmentally normal interpretation of events: "this was terrible; ergo, I am terrible and can cause terrible things to happen..."
This reading of a central traumatic incident in Laura's childhood suggests an alternative way of understanding why Laura dropped a relationship after insisting that it not be sexual. When her boyfriend agreed to this request, it may have confirmed her fear that she alone has power in relationships, perhaps especially in relalationships with men. A possible unconscious inference might be: " If I can so easily cause men not to have sex with me, then I can also cause them to have sex with me." In other words, her boyfriend's easy compliance may have confirmed her worst fear that she is powerful and that she is responsible for everything in relationships.
The idea that Laura unconsciously fears her power over men (and unconsciously blames herself in relationships) suggests that she threw up during the argument with her boyfriend because he became defensive or compliant or worried with her; the fear this triggered caused intolerable anxiety. Put simply, throwing up may help her feel less omnipotent. I believe Laura's anger over the dog-walking incident is, by any common standards, strange and unreasonable. Hence, I believe that what she really wants (unconsciously) is for men to stand up to her and be less worried about her feelings or her needs; that is, she hopes to disconfirm her terrible guilty ideas regarding her own power and culpability.
I think one of the truly fundamental contributions of Control Mastery Theory is the emphasis on how children blame themselves for events. When a parent, like Laura's mother, reacts in a catastrophic manner, it can greatly confirm a child's normal tendency to accept blame, even when (or especially when) such an interpretation of causality would seem absurd to an adult. (I'm not suggesting that this one event in Laura's life explains everything, but rather, that it may suggest a more enduring pattern or trauma.) Whereas traditional psychoanalytic theories often view omnipotence as a defense againt helplessness or other kinds of deficits in self-image, CM theory views it as a fearful belief about the self.
In Laura's case, I predict that interpretations or attitudes that tend to disconfirm this fear will lead to a decrease in Sxs; for example, it may help her to point out her boyfriend's defensiveness or worrying, and to explore her reaction to it. I believe an exploration of this kind may lead to fairly explicit statements regarding her power (about how she can cause him to be hurt, defensive, abstinent, etc.). Along the same lines, I also predict that interpretations or attitudes that treat Laura's feelings, desires and discontents as terribly important and worrisome will cause her to be more anxious, and will be unhelpful to her.