An additional post, between clients:

I’m surprised and sorry to hear that Ms Steele interpreted my tone to be hostile. I try hard to keep the focus on the content, and avoid ad hominem (about the person) comments. The readers can decide for themselves if I have done that.

Rather, my emphasis all along has been on safety for DID clients. Although Ms Steele has said that she hasn’t made statements advocating IN for DID clients, she has said things that give that impression, as I pointed out in my immediately prior post. She said she was puzzled why I persist, presumably she means in my emphasizing ego state work and DID when her treatment approach doesn’t deal with those matters.

My point is precisely that the concept of dissociation must be considered in any approach that uses EMDR/BLS because it is unavoidably associative. Whenever BLS is done, in IN or anything else, we must consider the fact that some clients are DID in teaching that approach. Ms Steele has said that she “trusts that clinicians working with highly dissociative clients have the training and support to do so,” but that assumption is not warranted in my experience. That’s my point.

In the early 90s, the EMDR trainings assumed that therapists would know to not use EMDR for DID without proper training; it was not emphasized in the training. Because of the vulnerability of the client population of DID, this deficit was rectified from 1992 forward because the assumption was not warranted. However, even in 2005 many EMDR practitioners continue to make errors of these types: 1) failing to screen for DID and proceeding with an EMDR/BLS procedure, resulting in destabilization at worst or aborted processing at best; 2) thinking they can treat DID with EMDR without training in dissociation. I’m full of cautions about ANY training, including a good one like Ms. Steele’s IN workshop, that doesn’t explicitly address the problem.

Ms Steele has said that in all these years she has heard of no examples where IN had resulted in destabilization. I have. (I do an average of 4-6 consultation sessions a week, usually about complex cases and ego state work). I use nurturing with ego state work daily and help others to do so. I hear with what procedures they’ve had trouble. I have seen repeatedly that cruel maternal introjects act to block efforts at internal nurturing and at times become punitive when there are attempts at IN.

Finally, I continue to find that Internal Nurturing is a valuable procedure and workshop, and commend Ms Steele for her considerable contribution to the field. I mention her and her work to people all the time, including in my workshops, as important and helpful.

Respectfully submitted,
Sandra Paulsen PhD
Bainbridge Island WA