Having problems with message search?
Every school has its strengths and weaknesses, but PRACTITIONER differences, in my considerable experience, are far greater than SCHOOL differences.)
hear, hear! thanks to all for your responses, i want to express my concern however for the slant that many have taken. i have received most of the replies privately and almost all were from hellerworkers who have assured me that hellerwork knows what to do in this case. to me, it seems strange to propose an active system of somato-psychic process as opposed to an approach to listening/attending. for all those out there who wrote to me on the subject of hellerwork, i thank you for you time interest in what i present as a dilemma. as a practitioner of SI i have actually, belive it or not, made myself familiar with the several schools philosophies concerning our method. and while i find the hw session protocol interesting, it does not in any way constitute a receptive approach to process. (read: the protocol, not the presentation) i am always concerned that such information, when delivered to a client in a vulnerable state presents a real danger in terms of suggestion, we have not yet done the research that begs to be done concerning touch, entrainment, and the subtle trance state that combination of the above induces. i hesitiate to add information to the above recipe for suggestion without judiciously assesing the client's willingness and cooperation, structurally, much less psychically. this assessment is of course personal and cannot be fit into the rubric of psychic session protocol. im not knocking the hw workbook, as i said i find it very interesting and well put together. however, the implication that an appropriate technique for emotional process is covered by fitting pieces of the clients space into categorical session formula is absurd.
in many ways i am an individualist, and i rely on the power of two individuals deciding to be together, and the pact that is made between them to go into the stuff of self empowerment. psychologically speaking, i am somewhat read, and more, i have spent plenty of time in process, working with groups, individually, institutionally, and privately. many of my teachers have been psychotherapists, analysts, social workers, and simply psychologically sensitive beings. what i was really asking about, beyond practical concerns, was how does this relate to the practice of the body? as tom pointed out, psychology really only differentiated from philosophy and medicine about 150 years ago, and until recently, the actual process of the body was not considered truly relevant, or if anything, incidental. our special position in this field of...human potential? is to truly regard the subjective as well as the objective states of the body and to relate them specifically not only to fact but phenomena. this is new stuff we are a part of, and its big, much bigger than an 11 session protocol for psychological balancing. although ida was slightly reductive in her book (chapter one, 20th century monism and "the down to earth approach" to the phenomena of the personality) she was primarily interested in the effects of her work on the subjects psyche (my assumption). her main focus seemed to be "insecurity" (much as freud's was hysteria, jung'as schizophrenia, etc.) and yet the body provided such ripe and unexplored material that a whole world of somatic philosophers has emerged dirtectly from her line. thats us.
(o lord, this post is about to become longer)
an example, female client, forty y.o., naval engineer who is afraid of the dark, boldy decides to take a look at her body which she has put on hold for years. she is well over weight, and is concerned that no amount of structural bodywork will be of use because she is "so, well, fat." yet she has an other wise positive, lets do this attitude.
session one, in late session she recounts a dream, the subject of the dream is change in attitude altering a dark situation in to a relaxed and sunny one. when she realizes what she is saying she softens noticably, and her body shifts, she begins to breathe.
session two, mid session, she realizes that she hasnt really accepted that her sister died in dismal isolation and that she did nothing to help when she could. powerful weeping, she cant belive shes actually crying because she doesnt cry when others are around.
session three, mid session, she recalls falling off a fence and onto a plow, breaking several ribs at age eight. she begins to sweat and goes into tight clenching. she doesnt realize im simply touching with palms, she thinks im using my knee. as soon as she opens her eyes and sees what is happening, the pain leaves her body. she is relieved and says, "that wasnt as bad as i thought."
three sessions, three different but highly specific somatic responses with immediate and necessary connection to psychic experience. i defy you to put a protocol around it. if i had not followed her through this, she very well might have shut down, or noddingly agreed, or worse, have tried to fit what she was experiencing into a theoretical framework i had introduced at a vulnerable moment. it is fascinating to me, the relationship of the SI method to the process of security. i cant imagine anything better, really. (not even midnumbing pills which eradicate the lingering doubt that im not really improving the mess, just ignoring it), and yet the process of bodywork at the same time allows more to happen that the recipe doesnt account for. im currently just noting the physiological states that simultaneously occur with the psychic expressions... that alone is enough for now. i guess im writing to start a chat on such topics, address specific concerns such as the time issue (hadn't occured to me to get them in the next day for structural, duh...) , and get a general sense for what happens with others in this realm.
ok, enough ranting, thanks again for all your responses and i hope my blatant opinions dont ruffle too many of you out there.
~henry~
Send Email
