Psycho-Babble Psychology | about psychological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: What about Hypnotherapy? And groups?

Posted by gardenergirl on December 28, 2003, at 16:14:54

In reply to Re: What about Hypnotherapy? And groups? » gardenergirl, posted by Dinah on December 28, 2003, at 10:42:16

Dinah,
Thanks for the positive reinforcement!

> That appeals to me because unless something reaches both my brain and my gut it's unlikely to work.

I feel exactly the same way! CBT alone just doesn't seem to reach my gut. And just sitting with my therapist (or sitting with a client) experiencing emotions without engaging the cognitive system also doesn't seem to really effect change. I really think it takes both.
>

I doubt you are really missing subtle nuances. You may be just reacting to the flaws in Freud's theories. I think that practicing from a strict Freudian approach in this day and age, when we know his own biases and know more about psychology would not truly be effective. Many psychoanalysts have expanded on Freud and modified psychoanalysis to better fit clients today and to utilize the knowlege we have gained over the years.
>
> What do you think of my basic theory that most therapy orientations bring you to the same point, albeit through different learning mechanisms? If that is true, it would seem to suggest that an eclectic approach geared toward the client might be the best solution.

That's essentially my theory as well, although it drives my supervisor crazy. She talks about cognitive restructuring, and I talk about insight and reconstructing cognitive-affective schemes. I believe we are essentially talking about the same thing. We use the metaphor of backdooring or frontdooring in therapy to represent our different approaches to the same goals.

I also tend to agree with a more eclectic approach. I certainly would not attempt to explore affect and past trauma for someone with a simple phobia. CBT has been proven to work best in those cases. Now if something came up within the context of therapy which added complexity to the case, then I may be more likely to delve deeper or modify my approach...assuming the client wishes to work on that as well.

There is something we learned in school about eclectisism. It is appropriate for therapists to be eclectic in their approach as long as they understand the reasons behind using multiple approaches and interventions. The kind of eclecticism which is not effective is when the therapist is just using a technique because it exists. You need to be doing it for a theoretical reason, not just because you know the technique. That may explain some research which suggests that an eclectic approach can be less effective. The best eclectic approaches are those which integrate different aspects of theories into a more cohesive model. Process-experiential is an example in that it draws from humanistic, Gestalt, and CBT to form a new whole theory.

 

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Framed

poster:gardenergirl thread:293462
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20031221/msgs/294076.html