Re:Comment on Point 4

Again, she doesn't say that now. The 89 article does not have sufficient information to conduct EMDR. She talks about this in her book, as follows (this is the 95 book I have in front of me - can't put my hand on the new one right now). In March 1990 she started training people. In that first year EMDR was born (from EMD) as she learned:

"...the application of the procedure was much more complex than I had originally thought and that in teaching the procedure I needed to address factors involving client vulnerability and timing that I had taken for granted. Second, I found that clinicians needed additional variations of the method and corresponding protocols as the types of clinical populations expanded and more resistant and difficult patients were encountered. Third, in order for the method to achieve full therapeutic effectiveness and to prevent relapse, I needed to refine some of its existing components and add new ones that paid greater attention to residual body tension. Fourth, I saw that training needed to include supervised practice since many of theaspects of using the method successfully with clients - including timing, decision points, and nonverbal feedback indicators - had to be demontrated. Finally, it was clear that clients were at risk of being retraumatized by the disturbing material if untrained clinicians attempted to use the method.

It is not logical to keep relying on an obsolete 1989 study. Rely on the current guidelines instead and the research will be much more valuable adn the criticisms more meaningful.

Replies:

Re:Comment on Point 4, by Cahill, 10/25/02

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.