Hi, My problem with the protocol is that every time I tried to do the installations of the those two "parts" it was like I was being told to take one piece of Sally, Ralphie and Miss Frizz (lol) and smush them together... and to turn out the "lights" on the parts of them that weren't wanted... using the house analogy. So basically, my preexisting parts were being told they were "organized" wrong... that new parts needed to be created. Yeah, I think abusive is the word for it, although I'm sure that wasn't the intent... just a side effect. Of course, the problem of DNMS is that it is taught as a rigid protocol that one should not deviate from. Every time I calmed down and stabilized we'd try to "connect" to the resources again... parts would be mushed together, I'd flood, etc. And in the end, my therapist told me I had too many crises, and that crisis work was not where she wanted to "invest herself professionally". Uh, ok... that's ironic given that the protocol created a great deal of the crises. Actually, I had the pleasant experience recently of speaking to That made me feel good. I have felt as if I am speaking to the wind about all this. I mean, I think DNMS is cool in lots of ways... but so is standard EMDR, so is imaginal nurturing, so is Twombly's stuff. And none of that stuff is taught as rigidly as DNMS. I really want professionals to see the dangers in zealously promoting DNMS as a "cureall". especially among dissociatives.
Replies:
There are no replies to this message.
![]() |
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.