Welcome to our community of massage, bodywork and reflexology practitioners. Therapists, if it's been more than two weeks, it's time for your massage.
Kathryn wrote:I have personal experience with therapy in group settings and know firsthand that people will make up experiences or feelings in order to comply with the therapist and they (the client) wil even begin to believe those things about themselves which just screws them up further. No, it doesn't make sense, but it does happen.
cstbrian wrote: If the client's body is ready to process something and it is the right time and place, and you are the right therapist to support him/her through that process, it will happen - dialogue or not.
cstbrian wrote:We all work every day with tissue memory. We talk about mind-body connection. We see clients who don't get better because of the trauma that is trapped in their cellular memory. If we as BODYworkers do not help to directly address the tissue memory while we are working with the body, I believe we are doing our clients a dis-service. I believe that no one else out there works with the tissues of the body the way that we do. So if the client needs to dialogue about his/her car accident to fully release the neck pain that has been bothering him/her for over 20 years, I think it's within my scope to follow his/her tissues through release and guide him/her along the way.
If we don't work directly with cellular/tissue memory, who will?
kathryn wrote:My issue is with the therapists who attribute a repressed emotion with every injury and try to work this belief into the session by creating a dialogue to get the client to admit that is true. Or who are fishing for an emotional response while working a restricted area of tissue.
As Maestra wrote, there is a fine line between the two and hopefully as therapists we are aware of that line and diligent not to cross it.
maestra wrote:And if there is a bigger issue that the client needs to discuss with a mental health professional... that's where our referral network would definitely come in handy!
WaltFritz wrote:A positive outcome as a result of this boundary crossing is often used as justification for the infraction, but that person exposes themselves to a huge risk of liability, not to mention the potential damage to a client if things go wrong.
Thanks for the reply and questions. You asked "When the therapist is absolutely working with the client's body how is this damaging?". I feel that little can go wrong. The big "if" is whether the therapist is working from a place of ego or thier own sense of knowing vs. what is truly shown and led by the client. I've been doing this work for 16 years and have a wide exposure to both Upledger and Barnes trained therapists. Most do not lead and do not work from a sense of what they feel. Not all follow this priniciple, though. What both teachers teach leaves a huge space for the individual "intuition" of the therapist to conduct the session and lead it along a path. I have seen therapists who think that they are following the clients body, but patterns tend to repeat during sessions with different questions that make one wonder whether it is the clients stuff or the therapists stuff that is being processed or uncovered. No finger pointing here, just observations.
WaltFritz wrote:If we are using the still point as a reference point for when a significant place is encountered, one must look at the research that was done a number of years ago regarding the inter-rater reliability of palpation of the Craniosacral rhythm.
If no valid inter-rater reliability exists for the CSR, how can one trust that a still point has any greater validity beyond what the therapists themself feels? Not a knock on CST, I use it daily. But all methods should be looked at from both sides.
WaltFritz wrote:There is a segment of the therapy community that feels that all therapists working with emotional issues such as us should be brought up on charges for inducing false memories. Google this yourself, you'll find a website that loves trashing Barnes and Upleger, as well as the therapists who do thoses works ( I do not need to give them more publicity here). I amy not agree with how they view my work, but many very vocal opponants exists.
WaltFritz wrote:What liability do we face? Practicing outside of one's professional practice act would be one huge liabilty. I don't think any of us want to go there. What damage can be done? I am assuming that you meant to the client, right? If one leads, etc, I think that great damage can be done. It is difficult to tell whether the memories or emotions that come up on the table are real, factual events or simply metaphoric representations of other problems. I am not in a position to judge this. The process needs to be one of allowance, not leading. Any more than this puts one at risk for a lawsuit and puts the client at risk for further damage. If you are practicing CST or MFR within the confines of this, you have nothing to worry about. But, please be assured that many push the envelope much further than this. And when teachers are implying that the mental health profession has it all wrong and that we can help the client through this more effectively, we have things to worry about.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest