When "psychosomatic Tables" Do More Harm Than Good

Video: When "psychosomatic Tables" Do More Harm Than Good

Video: When "psychosomatic Tables" Do More Harm Than Good
Video: Jordan Peterson on how universities do more harm than good 2024, March
When "psychosomatic Tables" Do More Harm Than Good
When "psychosomatic Tables" Do More Harm Than Good
Anonim

Having written this note, I gave it to colleagues for "pre-moderation". Of course, a number of statements caused heated discussions, which cannot be disclosed in one article. Then I put it aside and decided to reread it when my thoughts subside. But clients and people who write to me to “just consult” didn’t let them “lie down”. Some lamented that “psychosomatics” is pure profanation, others asked to indicate the psychological cause of their ailments, without even having a diagnosis, others continued to “diagnose” themselves, instead of adhering to the planned plan), etc. my opinion about the scale of the problem was only confirmed, and after weighing some of the arguments of my colleagues, I added real examples from practice. I hope that readers will hear not only the context of “Baba Yaga against”, but also see the positive part that I highlight in “popular psychosomatics”.

Not so long ago, we admired Louise Hay's books, quoted and xeried her tables of at least 3 copies (for ourselves, friends and family), and today every second client calls and says “My legs hurt (etc.), this is exactly why that I am blocking my promotion, but will you help me? ". We will help you when we figure out how and why pivot tables and descriptions of "popular psychosomatics" mislead you. After all in fact, psychotherapy of psychosomatic diseases is quite tangible and fast enough, if the cause of the disease is correctly established and the patient has the will and resources to correct it. But it is often very difficult to establish the real cause, and the tables on "psychosomatics" are the first obstacle to doing this.

However, before writing about this, I will nevertheless say a few words in defense of the authors respected by many. L. Burbo, M. Zhikarentsev, L. Hay, V. Sinelnikov and more modern popularizers made a significant contribution to the development of psychosomatic culture among all of us, namely:

1. First and foremost, these are the very modern pioneers who were able to draw the attention of ordinary people, and not specialists, to the fact that man is a holistic and unified creation. That the mental state is closely related to the physical, and when one suffers, it will certainly affect the other.… This is true. It is thanks to their simple tables, diagrams and descriptions that more and more people can learn that there is such a thing as psychosomatic diseases in general, that many of them have their own reason, that it can and should be found, and sometimes corrected. It is important.

2. Anyone who has read other works of these authors, understands that they are not limited to "tables and diagrams." Each of them offers a certain theosophical model of the worldview, reveals the "laws of the universe" and gives alternative guidelines for finding their place in the system of the universe. By and large, these models promote the development of positive personal qualities and all kinds of human virtues … And this is also important.

3. In addition to the above, various books about "popular psychosomatics" give very productive general psychological exercises for constructive introspection, increasing self-esteem and self-confidence, working with your feelings and emotions. From these books, we can learn to get rid of fears, forgive, let go and, most importantly, accept ourselves and others as we are, which is also invaluable.

In our practice, there was also a period when we used their works as an alphabet. However, over time it turned out that the alphabet and a literary work are not the same thing.

The first to dispel the myth that our emotions, for example, resentment or anger, are the main cause of our diseases, in particular oncology. Working in several projects with somatic sick and healthy people, it became obvious to us that some of the angry people, aggressive, resentful, envious, etc. were in good health. While some of the cancer patients amazed with their friendliness, openness, positiveness, etc.

Not so long ago, a client of my colleague died (oncology). I remember this case well, because the patient called the landline telephone and I answered the phone. Having found out that her psychotherapist was not there, she said: “Nastya, you are also a psychologist, tell me what am I doing wrong? I constantly work with resentment, forgiveness, I have nowhere to come up with people and situations that I could be offended and that need to be forgiven, but cancer constantly comes back. For the third time, after complete recovery, metastases are taken from somewhere and all over again …"

I think anyone who has really had a lot of experience in dealing with cancer patients knows that resentment is not always the root cause of this disease. Indeed, in its essence, resentment, like other emotions, is just hormone cocktail, which each of us manifests in different ways, depending on the physiological and psychological characteristics, it is impossible to brush it off or get rid of it, it hits the organs, but it is present in both sick and healthy people. Always … Some hide it, others throw it out, but both of them get sick, just different diseases. Of course, everything can be disguised, because if a person is aggressive - this is visible and this is condemned, if a person feels guilty - this is not scary, although in fact, guilt is the same aggression, only directed inward (

If tuberculosis is caused by Koch's bacillus, then it always causes tuberculosis, isn't it? What full-blown guilt and resentment are we talking about when children are diagnosed with cancer? I think if the theory of the connection of emotions with specific fatal diseases had really been proven, then we would have got rid of them long ago. However, alas, this does not happen.

The second disappointment in the “techniques” that had been worked out came when we were invited to work in a scientific study on the effectiveness of a joint psycho-medical model. In the course of the work, it was found that patients with the same diagnosis, the same amount of surgical intervention and practically the same course of treatment had completely different fates and psychological problems. The percentage of those patients who really could fall under the description of different authors of the so-called. “Psychosomatics” was too small to use these materials as directional ones. Not even every story could be “pulled by the ears”. In those cases, in which the history of psychological experiences was more or less similar to the description, the question arose "what next?" These descriptions did not say anything about the alcoholic husband, about the lack of prospects to pay off debts, about sick children and about what to do when the meaning of life is lost. It was not easy to abandon this literature and start working on a new one, with adapted standardized methods. However, the result also met expectations.

We returned to the understanding that although each disease has its own psychological side, still each person continues to be an individual, unlike anyone else. Therefore, the cause and interdependence of psychological problems with the disease must be sought in each specific case in different ways. I will give two of the most recent already resolved examples from practice.

1. One client who was examined abroad and has been using antidepressants for half a year because foreign doctors confirmed the psychosomatic basis of her irritable bowel syndrome, got rid of pain not because she learned to accept and benefit from the environment (as I would have diagnosed before her according to the tables of psychosomatics). And because in the process of studying the family history it was revealed that she unconsciously "uses" exactly those diseases that are similar to those that her dad had in his youth. Thus, she attracted his attention, received support, approval, encouragement, etc. As soon as she found constructive ways of communicating with her father, the pains went away on their own, taking on another symptomatology.

2. Another client went crazy with panic attacks against the background of a hypertensive crisis. When she stopped adjusting herself to the model of a person "putting on pressure" and just started talking "what and how," it turned out that in her family usually died from heart attacks or from cancer. But from a heart attack is sudden, and from cancer is long and painful. And her attacks began soon after they discovered cancer in a neighbor. She herself remembered how then in her hearts she thought of herself "better heart attack than cancer." If we had taken the path of pressure on ourselves, then most likely we would have been marking time for a long time, sorting out her relationship with her husband, children, depravity at work, etc. But we followed the path of her relationship to oncology, etc., and at first she forgot about panic attacks, and then her pressure returned to normal.

Was it possible to tighten these cases to the description in the table? Easy. Would this description give a real answer without taking into account family history? I doubt. Would we find a solution in these books about what needs to be done? No.

What is especially interesting, I think few of those who are now reading these lines have paid attention to the fact that there really were NO DISEASES. How can they be interpreted through the prism of "experience, punishment, signal, etc." if all this is only a consequence of "self-hypnosis" (when the results of examinations and analyzes are normal, and self-feeling worse than ever)?

After all, let's talk together.

When we read that the problems of the physical plane on the left side indicate our difficulties in relations with mom, and on the right with dad, we think about the fact that each person has some difficulties and unresolved conflicts associated with both mom and with Dad? Always and for everyone … Or, on the contrary, if the relationship with your mother was always wonderful, would it mean that never and under no circumstances will anything on the left hurt us?

Name me at least one person who sometimes does not doubt his strengths and skills; who is not upset when meaningful plans do not come out; who is not irritated or angry with people who are unpleasant; who is not worried about their "project"; who does not experience the difficulties of hardship, lack, etc. Every day … We experience many different stresses every day. We all experience certain negative emotions, but not all of us are sick, in general and in a particular psychosomatic sense).

You see, we get it like at the reception of an "unscrupulous fortune-teller." We all have a liver = we are all angry = in the interpretation of the disease, we can say that we are angry, and we immediately remember the case when we were really angry. And the more we believe in this connection, the faster we will find the next time a suitable situation for a natural reason. We all have our roles (mother, wife, employee, etc.) = we all have problem experiences associated with these roles = substitute the desired disease and remember these experiences. Everything will always be found, because any mother worries about how she copes with this role, any wife has some difficulties in relations with her husband, etc. No mysticism.

When we read that problems with the ears - from unwillingness to listen, with eyes - from unwillingness to see, hands - to do, legs - to move, etc., how often do we think that any disease has its own etiology, its root cause. Decreased immunity? Chronic fatigue syndrome or just a wrong lifestyle (diet, sleep and rest, etc.)? Epidemic, poisoning, radiation? All this can be primary in any disease. And in this case, "unwillingness to listen" may well retrain into "procrastination" and this is not the same thing.

And how often, when it seems to us that our heart hurts, in fact, the problem turns out to be in the spine and vice versa? Intestines or uterus? Kidneys or loins? But it also happens that the symptoms are quite understandable and recognized, in fact, are only echoes of other diseases. This is how we treat shortness of breath, and problems with blood, stomach ache, and problems in the back, heart does not give rest, and the reason is in the kidneys … Who diagnoses us when we read "summary tables on psychosomatics"? One and the same symptom may indicate different diseases, and vice versa, the specific diseases, the description of which we are looking for, were more often preceded by certain disorders, from which it was possible and necessary to start looking for the cause? And in the aggregate, it can be completely different than in the final version.

One of the last requests was: "I got dizzy, what am I doing wrong?" I said that a variety of diseases can be the cause, including even a brain tumor, so it is worthwhile to be thoroughly examined first. To which I received the answer: “No, I know that dizziness is due to the fact that I cannot get myself together. I thought you would help me in this, it’s a pity that you prefer medicine, and do not read the disease as a message from the soul. ". Stop, guys, posing the question like that won't lead us to anything good. Even Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, in his sermon about illness, said that “getting sick in the body” should not rely on prayer and God, but go to a doctor.

Well, if the doctor made the diagnosis, and we found its "psychological significance" in the table, what next? Just stop thinking as you thought and do as you did? Do not be afraid, do not worry, do not blame, let go, accept and what? So they just took it, released it, accepted it and recovered? And most importantly, did you find the appropriate situation?

I often hear from psychologists that these tables give direction. What if the direction is wrong? Pulling the client's situation closer to the description, we stop hearing all that is really important, but did not fit the description) This is normal, this is how the brain works. Just in order to eliminate as many classical errors of perception as possible, you do not need to ask yourself initial attitudes. You need to listen a lot, for a long time, observe, consider all possible directions, and not adjust to the "given". Indeed, even among the noted authors, you can often find different causes and descriptions for the same diseases.

And even more so, how can we talk about self-diagnostics by people using "tables and charts" if the very first thing our brain will do in dealing with traumatic experiences is to mislead us and take us as far as possible, from the real causes and problems? The defense mechanisms of the psyche partly exist to prevent such retraumatizations! And sometimes, even when collecting anamnesis, only after working with a client, very important elements are accidentally discovered: “what do you think, why when I asked about the operations, you didn’t say about it - oh well, is an abortion an operation, and even more so? has nothing to do with the question!"

Yes, of course, psyche and physiology are two inseparable concepts. They are interdependent and complementary. And at the same time, each person is unique, so the pivot table is unlikely to help you find your real cause of the disease, and you risk beating around the bush for a long time, when the answer may be very close, just in a different direction … Your family history will be much more informative here., secondary benefits, communicative meanings of the symptom, personal stories and experiences. Indeed, the very concept of psychosomatics is much broader and more multifaceted than a simple classification of causes and methods. If it so happens that your problem fits the description, great, work it out with a psychologist who will take into account your personal experience and your personal history.

However, when I tell clients not to blindly listen to these tables, many breathe a sigh of relief and say that they thought there was something wrong with them. After all, they read, everything seems to be logical, but they just can't find a situation and a problem from life so that it fits the description. And even if there is something, then the proposed solution does not satisfy in any way and it is not clear what and how to do with it further. And they helped all their relatives, but they just can't do it;)

The reader may be upset and disheartened that everything is so hopeless. Do not hurry)

Not everything is hopeless. Almost every psycho-psychotherapeutic direction has its own theory of the development of psychosomatic ailments, the rules according to which you need to work with them and ideas about the result that can be achieved with the help of psychotherapy. Psychoanalysis, gestalt, psychosynthesis, behavioral and cognitive, positive and logotherapy - all have their own plan and vision to identify these causes. But none of them will tell you IN ADVANCE what your ailment is talking about, either by symptoms or by diagnosis. Moreover, there is no such practice in psychotherapy to work with psychosomatic diseases without preliminary medical diagnosis and treatment. Pay attention to this.

Believe me, I am not against esotericism, metaphysics, etc., as it might seem at first glance. However, I want to remind you that:

- when a person is looking for and working on only a psychological problem in diseases;

- when a person believes in healing with psychosomatics;

- when a person believes that it is possible to find out the cause simply by diagnosis or symptom;

- when a person refuses medical examination and treatment;

- when a person is engaged in self-diagnosis and self-improvement with the help of tables on psychosomatics;

when all this happens, there is no talk of any real "psychosomatics". Because such tables and descriptions have very little to do with what is really called psychosomatics in medicine and psychology, as a science.

Recommended: