Prolonged Exposure Therapy (PE)

Cattack

Patron
I recently came across this form of therapy in a three part documentary called "This Emotional Life" (2010).

This is a mental procedure very similar to clearing processing that has 20 years of independent scientific validation behind it. So for anyone who has argued with certainty and conviction that the effects of clearing are just non-sense or placebo... how might you explain the success of such a similar method?


"Prolonged exposure therapy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Prolonged exposure therapy (PE) is a form of behavior therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy designed to treat posttraumatic stress disorder, characterized by re-experiencing the traumatic event through remembering it and engaging with, rather than avoiding, reminders of the trauma (triggers). Sometimes, this technique is referred to as flooding (psychology).


Prolonged Exposure Therapy (PE) is a theoretically-based and highly efficacious treatment for chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and related depression, anxiety, and anger. Based on basic behavioral principles, it is empirically validated, with more than 20 years of research supporting its use. Prolonged exposure is a flexible therapy that can be modified to fit the needs of individual clients. It is specifically designed to help clients psychologically process traumatic events and reduce trauma-induced psychological disturbances. Prolonged exposure produces clinically significant improvement in about 80% of patients with chronic PTSD.[1].
Prolonged exposure therapy was developed by Edna B Foa, Ph.D., Director of the Center for the Treatment and Study of Anxiety. Practitioners throughout the United States and many foreign countries currently use prolonged exposure to successfully treat survivors of varied traumas including rape, assault, child abuse, combat, motor vehicle accidents and disasters. Prolonged exposure has been beneficial for those suffering from co-occurring PTSD and substance abuse when combined with substance abuse treatment.[2].

Over years of testing and development, prolonged exposure has evolved into an adaptable program of intervention to address the needs of varied trauma survivors. [3].In addition to reducing symptoms of PTSD, prolonged exposure instills confidence and a sense of mastery, improves various aspects of daily functioning, increases client's ability to cope with courage rather than fearfulness when facing stress, and improves their ability to discriminate safe and unsafe situations[4].

In 2001, Prolonged Exposure for PTSD received an Exemplary Substance Abuse Prevention Program Award from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Prolonged exposure was selected by SAMHSA and the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention as a Model Program for national dissemination.
Source: Center for the Treatment and Study of Anxiety: Treatment of PTSD at the CTSA
[edit]Components

PTSD is characterized by the re-experiencing the traumatic event though intrusive and upsetting memories, nightmares, flashbacks, and strong emotional and physiological reactions triggered by reminders of the trauma. Most individuals with PTSD try to ward off the intrusive symptoms and avoid the trauma-reminders, even when those reminders are not inherently dangerous. To address the traumatic memories and triggers that are reminders of the trauma, the core components of exposure programs for the disorder are 1) imaginal exposure, revisiting the traumatic memory, repeated recounting it aloud, and processing the revisiting experience; and 2) in vivo exposure exposure, the repeated confrontation with situations and objects that cause distress but are not inherently dangerous. The goal of this treatment is to promote processing of the trauma memory and to reduce distress and avoidance evoked by the trauma reminders. Additionally, individuals with emotional numbing and depression are encouraged to engage in enjoyable activities, even if these activities do not cause fear or anxiety but have dropped out the person's life due to loss of interest.

[5]
The imaginal exposure typically occurs during the therapy session and consists of retelling the trauma to the therapist. For the in vivo exposure, the clinician works with the client to establish a fear and avoidance hierarchy and typically assigns exposures to these list items as homework progressively. Both components work by facilitating emotional processing so that the problematic traumatic memories and avoidances habituate (desensitize)."

BTW if you have a subscription to Netflix you can stream this documentary directly to your computer. The discussion of PE is on part two and shows a veitnam vet who had lost 30 years of his life to emotional instability as a result of a battlefield trauma. In reference to the effects of the treatment he received he later goes on with a big beautiful and full smile to exclaim, "I'm a happy camper now!". :bigcry:

If you have the time and accessibility, it's very much worth the watch.
 
Dianetic clearing might work if old hubtit did not burden it with his pseudo-scientific claims on *how* it works, with his story about *mental image pictures* the *time track* *past lives* and all the procedures to do with the e meter. Some of it may be right, I'm not saying it's all wrong, but hubtit had too many false ideas about the principles that would make it work or not.
Past lives is just one example. He had to include that because clearing failed to produce the result they expected, having accepted his theory. The *genius* hubby might have gotten it to work better if he really was such a genius, but no, he had to get into past lives which added a lot of stuff which could not be researched properly. So that failed too, according to many who *ran* past lives but say it was all unreal to them.

Criticising Dianetic clearing does not necessarily mean rejecting the idea that facing up to bad experiences of the past might help people. But with Dianetic clearing in the COS you have to drink the exact koolaid that Hub prescribes while you do it. Maybe he fucked up his recipe.
 
Last edited:

He-man

Hero extraordinary
That DB beat me to it! :grouch:

I agree, taking up a traumatic experience and talking about it might help, but the reactive minds thing is just too simple an explanation IMO.

Also, I don´t think keeping to a dogmatic communication process like in auditing helps.
 

Human Again

Silver Meritorious Patron
I recently came across this form of therapy in a three part documentary called "This Emotional Life" (2010).

This is a mental procedure very similar to clearing processing that has 20 years of independent scientific validation behind it. So for anyone who has argued with certainty and conviction that the effects of clearing are just non-sense or placebo... how might you explain the success of such a similar method?


If you have the time and accessibility, it's very much worth the watch.

Thannk you for posting this. I will definately try to catch this one. It has been such a relief to me to be able to study the true rokings of the miind without hubbard's "the brain is just a shock absorber" and the all encompassing "if it's mental health it's evil!".

As for your question, "...how might you explain the success of sucha similar method?" I am goingto take you at face value and answer your question honestly from my heart.

Using PE therapy, in conjunction with cognitive behavioral therapy, is successful because it takes into account the actual processes that occour when someone is suffering from PTSD and allows the person to understand it, gives them strategies to alter it and is individualised to the persons exact situation. The only agenda is to help the person overcome their unwanted condition.

Anxiety attacks suffered by people with PTSD, phobias, other anxiety conditions and in fact any uncontrolled emotional reactions are occasions where the amygdala (a formation within the brain that assigns emotional significance to current experience) orders up fight or flight chemistry for the body when it is triggered by a stimulus in the environment or the mind that has the potential to be a threat (like a reminder of trauma). From the corner of our eye we see a long serpentine image near our feet."Arghhh!" We are alarmed!

Increased heart rate, adrenaline, thickening the blood, blood sent to major limb muscles and away from extremities (including the brain! Makes it difficult to think clearly, gives us cold hands and feet) etc. are all part of the reaction and very necessary for a real threat.

Because of its position and function in the brain, all stimulus goes to the amygdala FIRST. Then it is shunted through to the neo-cortex which is active when we do our conscious, rational thinking. At this point we see the garden hose for what it is and think: "Oh, it's just a garden hose. No snake here. Phew"

Although our heart is beating hard, our breath is shallow and we have jumped back a step, normally now we realise the fear is unnecessary and we let it go, take a deep breath to slow the breathing, etc. Our thoughts, being of a calming nature, (I remember leaving the hose there, I'm in the city there are no snakes, I'm silly to think it was a snake) or distracting nature (Oh the kettle is boiling. Must finish watering the garden) , subdue the amygdala's reaction and it ceases to order the adrenaline etc and dials up some serotonin, endorphins or such to give us smile and a boost. We might well laugh at ourselves or count our self lucky.

When someone with a condition such as PTSD has his amygdala activated like this, the neo-cortex is ineffective in getting its calming message through to the amygdala for that particular stimulus (reasons why are an entire text book! LOL!) Uncontrolled, the amygdala takes the sensations in the body as further evidence of danger and a loop is begun that escalates. If the neo-cortex takes its direction from the body and backs up the fear response with reason to be fearful, the thoughts of the person can also strengthen this reaction because the amygdala will take a thought as a direct stimulus.

So, when, in a controlled environment where the person knows they are safe, can stop at any time etc and understands the process, you help a person set off the amygdala (exposure), identify the sensations in the body and understand them, and then activate their neo-cortex to switch the amygdala off alarm repetitively (prolonged), you are hardwiring in the process of turning off the alarm. The one that is supposed to be occurring.

Where clearing processing falls down is that the people doing it do not have an understanding of the science under what is happening. The PC does not become more empowered or educated. Because the auditor does not know the science under what they are doing they have to go by arbitrary rules such as “three times with no needle reaction and it is cleared”. The PC's natural authority and assessment of their condition is usurped by the e-meter, the auditor, the examiner and the CS. (PC has not had the clear cognition, keep going.) The client is part of the decision making process about what strategies to use and often will create strategies themselves withthe therapists support, which is less restrictive than set lists, grades, levels etc. The client is choosing therapy to eliminate an unanted condition that they have identified themselves as interferring with their functioning in lfe and preventing happiness. In Scientology auditing is done irrespective of the PCs life experience, interest and for the purpose of some rather suspect spiritual goals that can't be measured. The therapist will ask about the client's daily life and how the therapy is effecting it, an auditor asks "any PTP's, ARC breaks etc to eliminate them as barriers to auditing, very rarely to gain information. Therapy has an end goal - always, it is a means to an end and has no more importance than a hammer in buidling something. In Scientology auditing is everything - the goal is ephemeral and undefined) The process is addictive for the PC. The PC “needs an auditor to go clear" whereas a therapist will give the client homework, which is the client working on building the effectiveness of his rationalizing neo-cortex. This empowers the client and gives them the tools with which to switch off other anxieties as well. In auditing, every individual unwanted emotional reaction is handled in session and takes hours and money and isn’t as effective. In clear processing the PC runs whatever the CS decides, again telling the PC that he doesn't understand his own "case', whereas with therapy the idea is the therapistis the expert onthe tecnhiques, the client is the expert on their own mind/emotions/sensation etc.

One is a bit like going and re-wiring a faulty toaster for someone when you don’t understand about electricity or conductors but have been taught a procedure. The other is teaching the person why the toast is getting burnt, working with them to re-wire it and then learning how to re-wire it and any other appliance they have in the house that is causing them angst with an understanding behind you of how electricity works and how the taster works.

With CBT and PET, there are no hidden agendas of indoctrinating the client into believing they are superior to all other humans, that until they have addressed their every “aberration” they are operating at below potential, that they have particular aberrations (everyone has an engram about…) that by addressing these they can become superhumans. There are no built in systems to demand that the person acknowledges a specific gain “write a success story.. your ep should be…” “Go to exam (and pass)” and no demoralizing or demonizing of the client if the therapy doesn’t work as desired. “He was No Case Gain… clearly suppressive” “Oh you didn’t f/n after your last session?, “Who are you connected to? What overts have you committed?”. Therapists don't train their receptionists in hard sell techniques. Therapists don't think every person needs their services for ever and although they want to make a living and get rich, they don't try to disconnect you from anyone so that they have exclusive right to your soul. There is no gag on discussing what works for you and what doesn’t in CBT or PET etc. “With my last counselor I felt bored and like I wasn’t getting anywhere.” “Okay, next session is on us, let’s get Jo in here, if you’re comfortable with that, and go over what you felt wasn’t working and we’ll make sure your next session uses a different approach. Do you need another counselor or can Jo, give it another go?” Therapy usually costs under $200 an hour and sometimes comes free under your health insurance. You can sue your therapist, who carries professional indemnity insurance, if you criticize your auditor or CS, you get declared. The business where you get your therapy doesn’t pretend to hold your spiritual eternity in their hand. They pay tax, they pay their staff and usually have toilet paper in the loo.

OK, I am getting silly but the point is that clearing processing is a rote process that merely sweeps across the top of what can be done to help someone gain ascendancy over very real emotional challenges, and it comes at an horrific cost.

Natascha
Ex-auditor
 
Last edited:

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Reach and Withdraw can be very useful, despite the fact that it came from Hubbard. Hubbard used R&W on physical items that acted as restimulators (triggers), but it can just as well be done on the traumatic memories themselves.

I added R&W to the free Core part of PaulsRobot, intending it to be used occasionally (along with the regular Rub & Yawn procedure) with incidents or topics that people found traumatic. But I have had reports of people using R&W (along with R&Y) on relatively minor topics too with great success, so I learned something from that.

I haven't deeply researched standard flooding techniques, but the ones I did look at seemed to me to involve possibly too deep an immersion for the client, i.e., perhaps forcing the client into a topic he wasn't ready to face so much of at that time. R&W allows the client to get into and out of traumatic memories as lightly and quickly (or as heavily) as he wishes, entirely at his own pace.

The PaulsRobot notes that go with the Reach command say:
"Reach to your topic" means sort of mentally feel for it a bit, look at a bit of it, get a bit nearer to it or contact it in some way. Get as close to it as you can without pushing it too much. When you have done this, say something aloud, at least "Yes". Mark on your session report what is happening as it happens.

If you start shutting down, click on "Shutting Down" at once.

Continue with the Reach & Withdraw until you feel confident enough to proceed with the usual 6-direction commands that will be given to you. This might take a few times through (reach... withdraw... reach... withdraw... reach... withdraw), or it might take five hundred times through - or more - and many sessions. It is your choice. You can always run more Reach & Withdraw later whenever you want to.​
And the Withdraw notes say:
"Withdraw from your topic" means sort of mentally back away from it, put your attention on something else, get further away from it in some way. When you have done this, say something aloud, at least "Yes". Mark what is happening on your session report while it is happening as you go along. Even if you already sort of bounced off your topic after a fleeting touch on the "Reach" step, still try and get further away from it on this "Withdraw" step - don't simply go "I already did it".​
Before anyone asks, no, there is no R&X to go with the R&W and R&Y. And I use the initials only to save time in typing. In speech, "Reach and Withdraw" is quicker to say than "R and Double-U." :)

Paul
 

Cattack

Patron
Natascha

Natascha,

I really loved your post for many reasons but my response won't consist of high-fiving you on what we're in agreement about as much as it will consist of asking for clarifications or maybe slightly challenging certain points that you made.

I want to state at the outset that I have no training as an auditor so please pardon any glaring ignorance that may manifest itself below.

Also, I've only experienced processing via a metapsychology facilitator, so for me, many of the extremely negative points you raised I fortunately never had to experience and I am definitely not promoting interpersonal covert abuse disguised as "Total Freedom".

Furthermore, I am not a defender of any one particular method of therapy as being "The Best".

1)"Using PE therapy, in conjunction with cognitive behavioral therapy, is successful because it takes into account the actual processes that occour when someone is suffering from PTSD and allows the person to understand it, gives them strategies to alter it and is individualised to the persons exact situation. The only agenda is to help the person overcome their unwanted condition."

When you say "allows the person to understand it" do you mean an explanation of the relationship between the amygdala, neocortex, etc.? And when you say "gives them strategies to alter it" do you mean thought records? Or other strategies as well? Also when you say "individualised to the persons exact situation" how would running a traumatic incident not be specialized (unless you're referring to OT3 type non-sense--in which case I understand.)?

2) "Where clearing processing falls down is that the people doing it do not have an understanding of the science under what is happening. The PC does not become more empowered or educated."

This point of objection can be fixed just as quickly as you pointed it out to me. And to say that the person undergoing the processing doesn't become more empowered is a stretch, is it not? And when you say "education" what kind of education do you mean? Because surely you can gain wisdom from processing which could help you to behave in more beneficial ways in the future.

3) "Because the auditor does not know the science under what they are doing they have to go by arbitrary rules such as “three times with no needle reaction and it is cleared”.

I didn't know that. I thought that if the incident wasn't truly cleared it would just come back up again in another session and be handled then, is that not so?


4) "The PC's natural authority and assessment of their condition is usurped by the e-meter and the auditor and the examiner and the CS. (PC has not had the clear cognition, keep going." The process is addictive for the PC because they “need an auditor to do it for them” whereas a therapist will give the client homework, which is the client working on building the effectiveness of his rationalizing neo-cortex. This empowers the client and gives them the tools with which to switch off other anxieties as well. In auditing, every individual unwanted emotional reaction is handled in session and takes hours and money and isn’t as effective. In clear processing the PC runs whatever the CS decides, again telling the PC that he doesn't understand his own "case', whereas with therapy the idea is the therapistis the expert onthe tecnhiques, the client is the expert on their own mind/emotions/sensation etc."

I agree that anything that usurps the PC's natural authority should just be removed outright from application and theory and the PC's self-reliance should be promoted as opposed to promoting dependancy on the auditor. And here's where my ignorance may really show, but I thought one could train to do solo-processing? In which case they wouldn't be dependent on another and would be self-reliant.



5) "Also with CBT and PET, there are no hidden agendas of indoctrinating the client into believing they are superior to all other humans..... (“He was No Case Gain… clearly suppressive” “Oh you didn’t f/n after your last session?, “Who are you co They pay tax, they pay their staff and usually have toilet paper in the loo."

I'm in complete agreement with you on this.


6) "OK, I am getting silly but the point is that clearing processing is a rote process that merely sweeps across the top of what can be done to help someone gain ascendancy over very real emotional challenges, and it comes at an horrific cost."

Aren't PE and thought records somewhat rote as well? And couldn't ability processing augment clearing processing just as CBT augments PE?


Thanks a lot for your response!

P.S. I honestly feel that I'm somewhat out of my league in this discussion. I'm actually a musician and I don't know how I even know as much as I do concerning "clearing", "amygdala", etc.. So if I just said some really stupid shit during the course of this exchange please don't beat me up for it.

-Gabriel :)
 

Human Again

Silver Meritorious Patron
Hi Gabriel, Cool, I'm happy to delve further into this discussion. Answers in red below:

Natascha,

I really loved your post for many reasons but my response won't consist of high-fiving you on what we're in agreement about as much as it will consist of asking for clarifications or maybe slightly challenging certain points that you made.

I want to state at the outset that I have no training as an auditor so please pardon any glaring ignorance that may manifest itself below. Okey dokey

Also, I've only experienced processing via a metapsychology facilitator, so for me, many of the extremely negative points you raised I fortunately never had to experience and I am definitely not promoting interpersonal covert abuse disguised as "Total Freedom". okay. Well I am not aware of what a metaphyschology facilitator does so anything I have said was about auditors in the Scientology tradition and may not apply to the processing you have had, Gabriel. I am not about to comment on something I know nothing about :D

Furthermore, I am not a defender of any one particular method of therapy as being "The Best". No me neither, although I am rabidly anti- Scientology processing. I reckon it has a lot to do with what the client feels comfortable with, what the propblem is and what is available to them.

1)"Using PE therapy, in conjunction with cognitive behavioral therapy, is successful because it takes into account the actual processes that occour when someone is suffering from PTSD and allows the person to understand it, gives them strategies to alter it and is individualised to the persons exact situation. The only agenda is to help the person overcome their unwanted condition."

When you say "allows the person to understand it" do you mean an explanation of the relationship between the amygdala, neocortex, etc.?
Yes, the level of detail depends on what is appropriate for the client in terms of interest, age etc. For me, as an educator I tailor the explanation to fir with their current belief system also, so we don't have to build an entire subject. From my perspective there are a couple of aspects that are vital a) that the process is a normal and survival process that all creatures need and develop so the client need not feel that their reaction is bizzare or indicates they are weak etc. If there is much concern by the client about this some Acceptance and Committment therapy might be indicated also. b) the client must gain an understanding of the process they are using to correct their overactive anxiety response c) The client needs to realise that their thoughts act as a stimulous for the amgydala

And when you say "gives them strategies to alter it" do you mean thought records? This may be a portion of a strategy for the purpose of helping the client gain awareness of the current thought habits and perhaps to track changes. I would prefer it to then be linked to a process for focussing on the thoughts and behaviours, expectations etc that the client wants to create.

Or other strategies as well? Definately other strategies. For example I had a client who had extreme anxiety about her cat being run over. The strategy she cam eup with was when the image of her squashed cat came up she would use her imagnation to "rewind" the video and imagine instead that the car was a flying dragon, complete withcolors and wings and breathing fire. Over time she had this dragon eat the cat, toast him like a marshmellow and flip him up to snack on etc. Worked for her. Another one had a mother whom they trusted so when they realised they were building up worries and working themselves into panic they would intentioanlly hear their "mother" talk them out of it. We had planned to havet he mother make a recording to use as the client's panics were extreme and the Mum was very supportive, but he found that imagining it was enough. For someone else they may have needed a recording. Strategies are limited only by the imagination of the client and the fascilitator. There is a little book called "Become happy in 8 minutes" by Siimon Reynolds that has physical steps for initiating calming hormones such as thymus stimulation, there are various bio feedback techniques for those who respond well to them and can be as simple as an antidote for the persistant worry.


Also when you say "individualised to the persons exact situation" how would running a traumatic incident not be specialized (unless you're referring to OT3 type non-sense--in which case I understand.)? basically, yes i was referring to the one bridge for all method of Scientology. You can see from the examples above that strategies for any client have the potential for infinite variability. In addition it is my standard that the fascilitator work with the client to get a very clear and exact understanding of the situation. It is not good enough to hear a bit and go "Oh, yeah, that's a standard .... phenomenon. Treatment is ...." I find, in clarifying and defining the situation my clients often have significant shifts in their own insight. This is the part where the ability to ask great questions and to follow an indicator, a description an emotion down to the basics can get gain just by itself. Being understood, knowing that someone can see a way out of your situation even if you cannot is a great relief to most clients and can help them begin to take the view that they are bigger than this problem.

2) "Where clearing processing falls down is that the people doing it do not have an understanding of the science under what is happening. The PC does not become more empowered or educated."

This point of objection can be fixed just as quickly as you pointed it out to me. And to say that the person undergoing the processing doesn't become more empowered is a stretch, is it not? In Scientology it does not. I on't know about the processing you spoke of.And when you say "education" what kind of education do you mean? I mean being educated about the processes you are going through. Answering the questions like "Am I the only one to feel this way?" "Why does it feel like I am having a heart attack?" and helping them reach conclusions like, "Just because I think it, doesn't mean it is true." "It is possible to change the habits of a lifetime." Again this is so varied form client to client that it is difficult to put down in a post. I have educated people all sorts of things from the way to make a budget to what seratonin uptake inhibitors do in their brain. It depends on what they need, where their gaps are and, I guess, what the facilitator knows.

Because surely you can gain wisdom from processing which could help you to behave in more beneficial ways in the future. I guess it depends on your definition of wisdom and on more than just removing the reactionary nature of an anxiety. In my view a person becomes wise once they know what they were doing and the effects it had, WHY they were doing it (which brings about compassion for self and others who may have similar habits) and has a better way of doing it, which might mean education about what works for others, going through the process of building a new habit in thinking, behaviour etc. In my experience Scientology processing, and I suspect others, emphasises removing the old but not building the new.

3) "Because the auditor does not know the science under what they are doing they have to go by arbitrary rules such as “three times with no needle reaction and it is cleared”.

I didn't know that. I have oversimplified it here. I thought that if the incident wasn't truly cleared it would just come back up again in another session and be handled then, is that not so? yes, maybe, but in Scientology it is expected that when you handle something it stays handled, unless you are PTS and "lose your gain". If you trawl the board for people unhappy withtheir auditing, you will probably hear from people complaining that they came in to handle XYZ and never got it handled. Becuase isn Scn the purpose of handling anything the PC wants handled is so that they can GET UP THE BRIDGE. :melodramatic: Oh, it makes me mad just thinking about it.


4) "The PC's natural authority and assessment of their condition is usurped by the e-meter and the auditor and the examiner and the CS. (PC has not had the clear cognition, keep going." The process is addictive for the PC because they “need an auditor to do it for them” whereas a therapist will give the client homework, which is the client working on building the effectiveness of his rationalizing neo-cortex. This empowers the client and gives them the tools with which to switch off other anxieties as well. In auditing, every individual unwanted emotional reaction is handled in session and takes hours and money and isn’t as effective. In clear processing the PC runs whatever the CS decides, again telling the PC that he doesn't understand his own "case', whereas with therapy the idea is the therapistis the expert onthe tecnhiques, the client is the expert on their own mind/emotions/sensation etc."

I agree that anything that usurps the PC's natural authority should just be removed outright from application and theory and the PC's self-reliance should be promoted as opposed to promoting dependancy on the auditor. And here's where my ignorance may really show, but I thought one could train to do solo-processing? In which case they wouldn't be dependent on another and would be self-reliant. yes, it would appear that way wouldn't it? And on purpose too I suspect to make it more palatable from the lower end of the bridge. As a solo auditor, you rely on the e-meter to tell you when something is more or less charged. You are overseen by a C/S who can tell you to re-do something or send you to cramming if they are unhappy with your process or progress etc. You are running the exact processes the COS publishes for that level and NO OTHER LEVEL SO HELP YOU GOD! :giggle: Oops, I shouted, sorry. If you alter it on purpose, even a little bit because you feel it is better for you - :omg: You're a squirrel. :hamster: Ask some of those who spent years on OTVII or VIII if they went to Flag for 6 month checks because they felt empowered?



5) "Also with CBT and PET, there are no hidden agendas of indoctrinating the client into believing they are superior to all other humans..... (“He was No Case Gain… clearly suppressive” “Oh you didn’t f/n after your last session?, “Who are you co They pay tax, they pay their staff and usually have toilet paper in the loo."

I'm in complete agreement with you on this. :hifive::cheers: I think we are actually in agreement fundamentally, we're just exploring what each has found and sharing.

6) "OK, I am getting silly but the point is that clearing processing is a rote process that merely sweeps across the top of what can be done to help someone gain ascendancy over very real emotional challenges, and it comes at an horrific cost."

Aren't PE and thought records somewhat rote as well? I wouldn't say rote, because that is looking at the techniques the therapist uses to have the client repeatedly exposed to the stimulous, however it IS based on a a single principle: "set off the reaction - consciously change the response" and so yes, there may be therapists who use the same techniques over and over, or even a client where a standard, same every time strategy is what works best for them. I haven't seen this in my experience, but that's to say it might not be like that for some people.

And couldn't ability processing augment clearing processing just as CBT augments PE? Are you talking about Ability Processing done by Rolf Dane? Or something else? If it's Rolf's I am afraid my own bias against anything Scn based would make me argue against it and in fact, sticky beaking at it now, it looks like clearing processing rather than building. But, honestly I am sure I am looking it thorugh black colored glasses LOL! So, let me know if it's that or something else that I might be able to be sane about :D


Thanks a lot for your response! :thumbsup: Hey this is fun for me.

P.S. I honestly feel that I'm somewhat out of my league in this discussion. I'm actually a musician and I don't know how I even know as much as I do concerning "clearing", "amygdala", etc.. So if I just said some really stupid shit during the course of this exchange please don't beat me up for it. :handinhand: Nah, it seems to me we are all in this discovering process together after eyars of being in the cupboard of Scn.
I don't mean to make out that I know and you don't, :redface: There aren't that many people I discuss such things with, believe it or not :roflmao: I do get a little overexcited and tend to lecture. Not sure yet if that is the real me of some leftover meglomania from my years of "making it go right" LOL!


-Gabriel :)
If I make you feel stoopid, please smack me as it is not my intention. I will never ever beat anyone up for engaging in open discussion, after years of everyone thinking the same shit ( and it was shit) I totally value the differences in opinions and views and currently reckon our biggest responsibility is to live by our beliefs as that is the only way to find out if they work or not.

And Oh how I love those emoticons!:cheers2:
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
I think flooding is too extreme to be used in most orthodox approaches to treating phobias.

Exposure therapies are only temporary expedients IMO; they don't get to the heart of why it is that the person is experiencing (some would say creating) the intense fear and panic in the first place.

Perhaps a combination of approaches - behavioural (exposure), trauma relief such as TIR, and cognitive altering (I like that "flying dragon" !) - would work best.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
Natascha,

I really loved your post for many reasons but my response won't consist of high-fiving you on what we're in agreement about as much as it will consist of asking for clarifications or maybe slightly challenging certain points that you made.

I want to state at the outset that I have no training as an auditor so please pardon any glaring ignorance that may manifest itself below.

Also, I've only experienced processing via a metapsychology facilitator, so for me, many of the extremely negative points you raised I fortunately never had to experience and I am definitely not promoting interpersonal covert abuse disguised as "Total Freedom".

Furthermore, I am not a defender of any one particular method of therapy as being "The Best".

1)"Using PE therapy, in conjunction with cognitive behavioral therapy, is successful because it takes into account the actual processes that occour when someone is suffering from PTSD and allows the person to understand it, gives them strategies to alter it and is individualised to the persons exact situation. The only agenda is to help the person overcome their unwanted condition."

When you say "allows the person to understand it" do you mean an explanation of the relationship between the amygdala, neocortex, etc.? And when you say "gives them strategies to alter it" do you mean thought records? Or other strategies as well? Also when you say "individualised to the persons exact situation" how would running a traumatic incident not be specialized (unless you're referring to OT3 type non-sense--in which case I understand.)?

2) "Where clearing processing falls down is that the people doing it do not have an understanding of the science under what is happening. The PC does not become more empowered or educated."

This point of objection can be fixed just as quickly as you pointed it out to me. And to say that the person undergoing the processing doesn't become more empowered is a stretch, is it not? And when you say "education" what kind of education do you mean? Because surely you can gain wisdom from processing which could help you to behave in more beneficial ways in the future.

3) "Because the auditor does not know the science under what they are doing they have to go by arbitrary rules such as “three times with no needle reaction and it is cleared”.

I didn't know that. I thought that if the incident wasn't truly cleared it would just come back up again in another session and be handled then, is that not so?


4) "The PC's natural authority and assessment of their condition is usurped by the e-meter and the auditor and the examiner and the CS. (PC has not had the clear cognition, keep going." The process is addictive for the PC because they “need an auditor to do it for them” whereas a therapist will give the client homework, which is the client working on building the effectiveness of his rationalizing neo-cortex. This empowers the client and gives them the tools with which to switch off other anxieties as well. In auditing, every individual unwanted emotional reaction is handled in session and takes hours and money and isn’t as effective. In clear processing the PC runs whatever the CS decides, again telling the PC that he doesn't understand his own "case', whereas with therapy the idea is the therapistis the expert onthe tecnhiques, the client is the expert on their own mind/emotions/sensation etc."

I agree that anything that usurps the PC's natural authority should just be removed outright from application and theory and the PC's self-reliance should be promoted as opposed to promoting dependancy on the auditor. And here's where my ignorance may really show, but I thought one could train to do solo-processing? In which case they wouldn't be dependent on another and would be self-reliant.



5) "Also with CBT and PET, there are no hidden agendas of indoctrinating the client into believing they are superior to all other humans..... (“He was No Case Gain… clearly suppressive” “Oh you didn’t f/n after your last session?, “Who are you co They pay tax, they pay their staff and usually have toilet paper in the loo."

I'm in complete agreement with you on this.


6) "OK, I am getting silly but the point is that clearing processing is a rote process that merely sweeps across the top of what can be done to help someone gain ascendancy over very real emotional challenges, and it comes at an horrific cost."

Aren't PE and thought records somewhat rote as well? And couldn't ability processing augment clearing processing just as CBT augments PE?

Thanks a lot for your response!

P.S. I honestly feel that I'm somewhat out of my league in this discussion. I'm actually a musician and I don't know how I even know as much as I do concerning "clearing", "amygdala", etc.. So if I just said some really stupid shit during the course of this exchange please don't beat me up for it.

-Gabriel :)

Sorry, but I can hardly read that yellow on light blue.
 

Cattack

Patron
@ Cat's Squirrel

It may be because I have the Dark Aquamarine setting selected for esmb. If you want to make it easier to read scroll down and select it. It will make a world of difference. My computer screen is so bright that I do anything I can to dim it.

Now that you bring this up it explains why so many people post in colors that I can't see--mystery solved finally. :duh:
 

Cattack

Patron
Hi Gabriel, Cool, I'm happy to delve further into this discussion. Answers in red below:

If I make you feel stoopid, please smack me as it is not my intention. I will never ever beat anyone up for engaging in open discussion, after years of everyone thinking the same shit ( and it was shit) I totally value the differences in opinions and views and currently reckon our biggest responsibility is to live by our beliefs as that is the only way to find out if they work or not.

And Oh how I love those emoticons!:cheers2:

Thanks for your response. I love it all! :happydance:


Here's where I'm really coming from: I've had some extraordinarily powerful and fun experiences with metapsychology viewing that makes it seem very compelling to me that there is something very right about it. Although, I am no psychologist or cognitive neuroscientist and I have nothing to go on except my subjective experience to evaluate what I underwent.

And while I speak so enthusiastically and with such great verve concerning my experiences I am simultaneously uncertain if it was actually "all roses" or did it come with "camouflaged thorns" as well. I don't know.

Maybe you can provide some insight or evaluation.

First off what I liked:

1) Feelings of euphoria that practically fall into the same category as sex and drugs. In short, EP's that made me feel better than I thought it was possible to feel without ingesting a drug or having a sexual encounter or writing music that I'm really proud of (the production of good art gets you high). I had increased confidence, I felt mentally sharper, wittier, more creative, more "spiritual", more in present time, it goes on and on.... I had lower levels of anxiety and fear, feeling calm (which for me is an amazing achievement!).

2) What I didn't like:

The one most obvious backlash to all of this was that my new level of vivid imagination could turn on me and display my fears in "high-def" if I became mentally or emotionally weak or worn down. This one factor, more than any other, causes me concern.

I imagine that this maybe an inherent penalty to having a creative mind. I would imagine that when Walt Disney, for instance, became depressed or paranoid his world became a dark inversion of the beauty that we all know he was capable of conceiving and creating.

But after all this, I feel to some degree, addicted. Which concerns me. I only underwent about 80+ hours of processing. Thinking about it actually makes me salivate for some reason. Literally. Right now.

Processing was hard won though. It wasn't a hand-out. It was difficult and scary at times and I earned any EP I got. And things in my life changed for the better. And it wasn't all subjective. Work became a lot easier. I got in the best physical shape of my life. I started memorizing many very long poems and began writing them myself as well as writing music. And my mind bloomed with many exciting and creative ideas. Things improved.

But there came a day when I couldn't process anymore. I was burnt out. I had been attempting to do the "curriculum" which is sort of like the grade chart. I have since decided that I'll never do any predetermined path like that ever.

There are people who are at the bottom of the grade chart who are far more able than those at the top. I know that now, and so for me, I would only ever do processing in an as needed fashion.

But I remain uncertain if it is a healthy thing to do at all.

I've gone to psychologists' who I felt did very little for me. They definitely never induced any of the high's I had experienced with viewing. But is that a bad thing to not be "blown out of my socks" at the end of most or many sessions?

Now when I go into to see a psychologist I constantly compare what seems to be their "weak" and "random" attempt to manipulate my subjective experience without any real precision or effect.

I feel unimpressed by every therapist I've seen. I often try to act impressed when they evaluate for me and try to provide me with "deep" insight that isn't that insightful to me at all. I feel like I am giving them more than they are giving me.

And I can't help but feel like I know what they should do to help me better than they themselves even do, but then I feel that I would be directing the session and invalidating their "expertise". I feel that some of the "rote" methodology may actually be of use to psychologists. But I don't know.

I have problems in life I would like help with but I feel like I'm stuck between a therapy that doesn't do much and a therapy that may do "too much".

I'm uncertain.

And essentially, here's my problem: I became more obsessed with experiencing the high's of processing than living life-which for me meant creating art that made me feel alive that made other people feel alive too. It's such an indescribable thing to create something so beautiful that it makes life tolerable again. That it makes it liveable again.

I got lost in trying to understand life instead of just living life.

And thus I became a spectator. :bigcry:

P.S. I've gone out on a limb in posting my personal feelings here so I would appreciate compassion, or at least non-involvement, from anyone lurking here. Or put more simply, "If you can't say anything nice or constructive, don't say anything at all."

I would instinctively and automatically provide the same courtesy to anyone else on this board.

Thanks.
 

FoTi

Crusader
Thanks for your response. I love it all! :happydance:


Here's where I'm really coming from: I've had some extraordinarily powerful and fun experiences with metapsychology viewing that makes it seem very compelling to me that there is something very right about it. Although, I am no psychologist or cognitive neuroscientist and I have nothing to go on except my subjective experience to evaluate what I underwent.

And while I speak so enthusiastically and with such great verve concerning my experiences I am simultaneously uncertain if it was actually "all roses" or did it come with "camouflaged thorns" as well. I don't know.

Maybe you can provide some insight or evaluation.

First off what I liked:

1) Feelings of euphoria that practically fall into the same category as sex and drugs. In short, EP's that made me feel better than I thought it was possible to feel without ingesting a drug or having a sexual encounter or writing music that I'm really proud of (the production of good art gets you high). I had increased confidence, I felt mentally sharper, wittier, more creative, more "spiritual", more in present time, it goes on and on.... I had lower levels of anxiety and fear, feeling calm (which for me is an amazing achievement!).

2) What I didn't like:

The one most obvious backlash to all of this was that my new level of vivid imagination could turn on me and display my fears in "high-def" if I became mentally or emotionally weak or worn down. This one factor, more than any other, causes me concern.

I imagine that this maybe an inherent penalty to having a creative mind. I would imagine that when Walt Disney, for instance, became depressed or paranoid his world became a dark inversion of the beauty that we all know he was capable of conceiving and creating.

But after all this, I feel to some degree, addicted. Which concerns me. I only underwent about 80+ hours of processing. Thinking about it actually makes me salivate for some reason. Literally. Right now.

Processing was hard won though. It wasn't a hand-out. It was difficult and scary at times and I earned any EP I got. And things in my life changed for the better. And it wasn't all subjective. Work became a lot easier. I got in the best physical shape of my life. I started memorizing many very long poems and began writing them myself as well as writing music. And my mind bloomed with many exciting and creative ideas. Things improved.

But there came a day when I couldn't process anymore. I was burnt out. I had been attempting to do the "curriculum" which is sort of like the grade chart. I have since decided that I'll never do any predetermined path like that ever.

There are people who are at the bottom of the grade chart who are far more able than those at the top. I know that now, and so for me, I would only ever do processing in an as needed fashion.

But I remain uncertain if it is a healthy thing to do at all.

I've gone to psychologists' who I felt did very little for me. They definitely never induced any of the high's I had experienced with viewing. But is that a bad thing to not be "blown out of my socks" at the end of most or many sessions?

Now when I go into to see a psychologist I constantly compare what seems to be their "weak" and "random" attempt to manipulate my subjective experience without any real precision or effect.

I feel unimpressed by every therapist I've seen. I often try to act impressed when they evaluate for me and try to provide me with "deep" insight that isn't that insightful to me at all. I feel like I am giving them more than they are giving me.

And I can't help but feel like I know what they should do to help me better than they themselves even do, but then I feel that I would be directing the session and invalidating their "expertise". I feel that some of the "rote" methodology may actually be of use to psychologists. But I don't know.

I have problems in life I would like help with but I feel like I'm stuck between a therapy that doesn't do much and a therapy that may do "too much".

I'm uncertain.

And essentially, here's my problem: I became more obsessed with experiencing the high's of processing than living life-which for me meant creating art that made me feel alive that made other people feel alive too. It's such an indescribable thing to create something so beautiful that it makes life tolerable again. That it makes it liveable again.

I got lost in trying to understand life instead of just living life.

And thus I became a spectator. :bigcry:

P.S. I've gone out on a limb in posting my personal feelings here so I would appreciate compassion, or at least non-involvement, from anyone lurking here. Or put more simply, "If you can't say anything nice or constructive, don't say anything at all."

I would instinctively and automatically provide the same courtesy to anyone else on this board.

Thanks.

I'd suggest talking to Roger B about this. He's been a help to me. He posts here on ESMB.
 
Top