Re:New EMDR meta-analysis in JCCP

New information on EMDR is something I like to see. However, comments such as "How much more time do we have to waste on EMDR" and " Hope this reference is not removed from this website, since it might balance the hype." are, in my opinion, unnecesary and unprofessional.

I don't know if the information given by the anon poster (not the student) is exact and direct wording from journal abstract. I do know that the eye movements are not necessary, but, rather that it is bilateral stimulation (not confined to eye movements) which, at this point, are considered an important part of EMDR. So, the fact that eye movements are not integral to EMDR is already known - this information has been noted on this forum and in other places already.

I do not believe that time is being wasted on EMDR. There are many therapeutic approaches, each has something to offer and each contributes to and expands our present knowledge. Each school of thought, each therapeutic approach is one more tool that is available to us. As my therapist said when I asked "What if EMDR doesn't work for me?" - "Then, we will find something that does." I think it is wonderful to have an array of options to choose from, it gives me hope and courage. Has EMDR been the answer for me - not totally, but nothing else has been either.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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