Chosing Interventions

• Ericksonian Therapy and NLP by kendavis@erols.com, 9/3/97
  • Specifying Interventions by Stephen Lankton, 10/4/97
    • How did Erickson choose interventions? by Ken Davis, 10/24/97
      
      

Dear Ken:

You ask a big question, a really big question--one that cannot be answered simply. First, I will supply some references: For detailed information on paradox, see "Paradoxical Psychotherapy: Theory and Practice with Individuals, Couples and Families," by Gerald Weeks and Luciano L'Abate, published by Brunner/Mazel. Weeks also edited a book, "Promoting Change Through Paradoxical Therapy," published by Dow Jones - Erwin in 1985. An additional reference is "Paradoxical Strategies in Psychotherapy: A Comprehensive Overview and Guidebook," by Leon Seltzer, published by John Wiley. Of course, you could also look into the work of Mara Selvini Palazzoli and her associates, including "Paradox and Counterparadox," published by Jason Aronson.

Now to the essence of your question: It is impossible for any expert to completely codify Erickson. Similarly, it is impossible for an expert to codify the art of Monet or Dali. There are, however, a number of models that help understand Erickson, the most interesting of which are the contributions of Ernest Rossi.

Future experts will develop new frameworks to understand Erickson, thereby making his work more accessible. However, it will be impossible to completely model Erickson, who in many ways, was a singular genius. I have never met anyone with Erickson's blend of perceptiveness, creativity, and wisdom. Still and all, Erickson can be used as an asymptote: He teaches us what is possible in terms of eliciting responsiveness in effective psychotherapy.

Erickson represented a complex amalgamation of spontaneity and discipline. It is not that he was merely "intuitive." He worked hard to develop his technical skills, and his ability to really understand his patients. "Chunking" Erickson down into bite-sized bits can facilitate learning, but it does not really address the heart of the issue of how to develop oneself into an effective clinician.

As far as techniques are concerned, it is difficult to indicate when a particular technique should be applied. For example, a paradoxical intervention may be only a small part of a complex psychotherapy. I have used paradox to set up a main intervention. I have used paradox to follow through on a main intervention. Also, the variations are endless. For example, there could be hypnotic symptom prescriptions and metaphoric symptom prescriptions.

Stephen Lankton is right. Calibrating on feedback is essential to promoting change. Response is an opportunity for intervention. The therapist works to utilize unique patient responses to foster therapeutic ends. No algorithm can be written for how to use techniques such as paradox in psychotherapy. Rather, such techniques are part of the warp and woof of the therapeutic exchange.

Yes, I know, such generalizations are not helpful in teaching the novice practitioner. I apologize. As a token, I will recount a story about Erickson...

I once breathlessly queried Erickson; "You are the most perceptive observer of human behavior that I have ever met. Please help me to learn more." Erickson paused thoughtfully and hypnotically intoned, "First you learn the letters. Then you learn the words. Then you learn the grammar, and... you can't learn to swim on a piano bench." I truly believe that Erickson understood the grammar of human behavior. At times, I think I have progressed to understanding words. At other times, I am still learning my ABC's.

I wish you well in your efforts, Ken.

No Replies