![]() ![]() Dissociation of the personality basically takes place between two prototypes of dissociative parts, that is, emotional part(s) of the personality (EP Myers, 1940) and apparently normal part(s) of the personality (ANP Myers, 1940). The goal of this article is to discuss how TSDP and the related psychology of action may guide the application of EMDR for survivors of chronic traumatization during Phase 2, Treatment of Traumatic Memories (equivalent with Phases 3–8 in the standard EMDR protocol), and Phase 3, Personality (Re)Integration and Rehabilitation.Īs described in previous works (cf., Nijenhuis, Van der Hart, & Steele, 2002 Steele et al., 2005 Van der Hart et al., 2013 Van der Hart et al., 2010 Van der Hart et al., 2006), during trauma the survivor’s personality becomes unduly divided among two or more dissociative parts, each with its own at least rudimentary first-person perspective or mental autonomy ( Nijenhuis & Van der Hart, 2011). The most basic phobia that maintains dissociation is the phobia of traumatic memories ( Janet, 1904), which cannot be the first focus of treatment in most clients with complex trauma-related disorders: hence, phase-oriented treatment. TSDP postulates overcoming specific inner- and outer-directed phobias, that maintain dissociation of the personality, as major goals for the respective treatment phases ( Steele, Van der Hart, & Nijenhuis, 2005 Van der Hart, Nijenhuis, & Solomon, 2010 Van der Hart et al., 2006). Simple actions usually are easily performed but other more complicated actions, such as the integration of traumatic memories, require a high integrative capacity (cf., Van der Hart et al., 2006). Janet’s psychology of action, integrated in TSDP ( Van der Hart et al., 2006), has a point of departure that all psychological facts observed in human beings can be understood in terms of actions-behavioral and mental. This was the subject of our previous article, using the theory of structural dissociation of the personality (TSDP) and the related psychology of action as its conceptual framework ( Van der Hart, Groenendijk, Gonzalez, Mosquera, & Solomon, 2013). ![]() Thus, the treatment of traumatic memories-the main focus of this article-should be preceded by a treatment phase in which the foundation is made for successful and safe processing. Rather, they have to be recursive over time, with the need to periodically return to a previous phase or the occasional short excursion into the next phase ( Courtois, 2010 Korn, 2009 Van der Hart, Nijenhuis, & Steele, 2006). The more complex the dissociation of the personality, the less these treatment phases are applied in a linear fashion. The standard of care ( Brown, Scheflin, & Hammond, 1998 International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation, 2011) is usually described in terms of three phases: (a) Stabilization, Symptom Reduction, and Skills Building (b) Treatment of Traumatic Memories and (c) Personality (Re)Integration and Rehabilitation. DSM-IV) dissociative disorders: Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) and Dissociative Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (DDNOS, subtype 1). As is repeatedly emphasized in the eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) literature (e.g., Forgash & Knipe, 2007 Gelinas, 2003 Hofmann & Mattheβ, 2011 Korn, 2009 Lazrove & Fine, 1996 Paulsen, 1995, 2007 Shapiro & Forrest, 1997 Shapiro & Gelinas, 1999 Twombly, 2000, 2005 Young, 1994), EMDR clinicians need to integrate their therapeutic approaches within phase-oriented treatment of complex trauma-related disorders, including the following Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |