EMDR Forum Archive, 1999
Re: Lying--An common EMDR problem?
Brian G · 4/29/00 at 1:43 am ET
I think you are making assumptions that were not stated. I simply provided the reference to Suzanne because the issue came up with her friend. However, these issues typically come up with those who focus on trauma work. I find that trauma clinicians tend to paint with too broad a brush and start overinterpreting most problems as coming from definitions of traumas that are broadly based. It also has been noted recently that a certain subgroup of these clinicians are destroying peoples lives by helping clients to find memories that don't exist. Your comments about Beck's overapplication of cognitive theory to psychopathology contains some valid but also some incorrect comparison to EMDR. EMDR is based on the assumption that a trauma causes a disturbance in some sort of imformation processing system which bilateral stimulation can correct. First, there is no evidence for this theory. Second, EMDR was created and presented as a treatment for traumatic memories. Not all disorders are associated with the primacy of traumatic memories and therefore it often puzzles me why one would think it would work in such cases. In addition, studies have been performed that attest to the efficacy of cognitive therapy for a wide range of problems. EMDR lacks these efficacy studies in most of the areas, other than PTSD, however Sandra recommends using EMDR in these cases too. Also, the reason the treatment was created and the theory behind how it works does not make sense in applying it to many disorders. However, Sandra keeps recommending it for these disorders and attempts to find ways to find traumatic experiences to work on in session. I think that it is obvious that this could potentially lead to problems. In sum, I believe that both yourself and Sandra try your best not to fall prey to producing false memories in your clients. However, I do not share your optimism that there are not a significant number of clinicians out there, and that includes those that use EMDR, that are not as careful. If fact, many of the recent posts seem to point to this evidence. This is a serious issue and one that would be the reason that such a discussion list for professionals would be created. I am perplexed why, you do not seem to enourage people (and I'm not necessarily including myself) to discuss this issue and potential problems that could arise using EMDR. Instead, I always see attempts at "damage control" when info that could be negative to EMDR in some way is presented. Again, this is because even though this discussion list is stated to be for clinicans to discuss issues regarding EMDR, it has become, and is promoted to be, a place for customers to be sold on EMDR treatment. For example, I have never seen anyone who has presented a problem for over 2 years who has not been suggested to seek EMDR therapy in some form. It just doesn't make any sense. It would be refreshing to see someone who has not tied their clinical identity with EMDR and who can look at it skeptically, as well as positively. I would say that most have been so busy defending it, that they have any time to look critically on it.
With this broad group of people, who are now being called traumatologists, power therapies are all the rage. EMDR is one of them and the most prominent. I understand (and would hope!) that most of the clinicians here, including Francine, would be mindful of this issue of false memories. However, EMDR is, I would wager, used more by many therapists who share quite different views on the subject and this can cause problems. Therefore, the public should know what evidence there is and is not for repressed memories. There are many therapists who work with trauma clients and who lean toward a range of "alternative" therapies, including EMDR.
You are correct that cognitive theory is a rather oversimplistic theory to explain psychopathology. I don't know any responsible clinicians, including Beck, who believe that cognitions are the basis of all psychopathology. However, there is some evidence that supports Beck's theoretical assumptions (while there is also some contradictory evidence). However, many people become confused when discussing cognitive theory. It is not theorized that cognitions necessarily cause the disorder. Everyone knows that these things are multi-causal. However, research has supported the theory that changing cognitions (through multiple methods) produces changes in the disorder.
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
