Some of this sounds familiar- I wonder if John picked up a magazine and decided some of these techniques make sense to apply to mms girls
Be Wary of Attachment Therapy
Shannon-Bridget Maloney
An epidemic of unfounded, untested, and unregulated therapies is being foisted on the youngest members of our society. Children, most of them adopted, are being subjected to a form of "therapy" that several state licensing boards have deemed grossly negligent. Some states have had cases in criminal and civil courts against the practitioners. Therapists have been fined, sanctioned, and even sent to prison for their treatment of children. "Attachment therapy" (AT), as the practitioners call their trade, has a frightening history, a devastating present, and, if legislatures and mental health licensing boards don't get more involved, a deadly future.
Attachment Therapy
Attachment therapy has four core characteristics that clash with generally accepted principles of psychological practice.
The belief that the child must express rage that is within himself in order to improve. AT holds that the negative emotions of a child must be "released" in order for a child to function "normally." Gail Trenberth, founder of a national support group says, "They [children with RAD] won't learn to love until they can release that anger and helplessness and hopelessness that came from their early experiences." (Crowder, 2000) Interestingly, these same practitioners do not caution their patients against excessive happiness in fear that they may "run out" of joy. (Mercer, 2003)
Informed consent, as used in AT, is a mockery of the term as used elsewhere. Ordinarily, when patients consent to treatment they can stop it if they change their minds. But in AT circles, if the patient asks for the treatment to stop, the therapists interpret this as resistance for which the level of intervention must be increased.
While one could argue very persuasively that touch (such a hand on a shoulder, a brief hug) may be therapeutic, AT practitioners take the use of touch to new levels. In one case outlined in his book, Ken Magid tells of a young child being forced to undergo a three-and-one-half-hour session which included six "experienced body holders." (Magid, 1987)
AT practitioners regularly tell children what they are feeling, based on the therapist's beliefs rather than those of the child. Indeed, a parent whose child was treated at the Evergreen clinic of Foster Cline reported: "What we saw with Tina is they went to the rage, telling her why she was feeling the rage." (Oprah Winfrey, 1988)
AT practices have not varied much during the past 25 years. Its practitioners routinely use restraint and physical and psychological abuse to seek their desired results. Sessions of Z-process, holding therapy, and rage reduction have been noted to last as long as 12 hours per session. (Magid, 1987, State of California, 1973) In its most basic form, the child is placed lying across a couch on the therapist's lap with his right arm pinned behind the therapist and left arm held by a "holder." Additional holders restrict the child's legs. The child is then asked, "Who is the boss?" This is supposed to encourage the child to understand that he or she is not in control. The therapist then goes on to provoke the child to rage by using "rib cage stimulation" (e.g. tickling, pinching, knuckling). (Magid, 1987 and Cline, 1992) The child invariably demands and/or pleads for the treatment to end, which is interpreted as resistance. In one case, the therapist began by telling the client to resist and then harassed the client until the resistance stops. (Magid, 1987) The child is in a "catch 22," facing physical and/or mental pain no matter what he does.
The therapist continues the session by bringing up behavioral issues of the child. The therapist may refer to behavior the child denies, such as fire-setting. However, the child in these settings is always considered to be deceptive and manipulative. If the child denies the behavior, the therapist applies more physical and emotional stimuli, such as such as swearing, screaming in child's face, and grabbing child's jaw. (State of Colorado, 1995, State of California 1973, Lowe, 2001 a) If the child agrees to the behavior, he or she must do so in a way that "convinces" the therapist that the responses are honest. If the therapist is not convinced, the "stimulation" continues.
Ironically, the session ends with the therapist hugging the client and congratulating him or her on their "good work." (Magid, 1987, Cline, 1992) It is easy to see how such treatment could lead a child to develop not a healthy bond built on love and respect, but rather a fearful one built on pain and a desire to survive.
In addition to these practices, AT has rarely, if ever, been subjected to pure scientific evaluation and peer review. What little "research" is available on the subject is usually done "in house" and is scientifically questionable. (Mercer, 2003)
[ This Message was edited by: katfish on 2006-01-21 13:32 ]
