A good PC has to be possible. Whenever a client says, "I'm safe" as a PC we have to assess if it is possible to be safe in the circumstance. Often it has to be modified to be reasonable, so "I can keep myself safe," or "I'm learning to be safe," or other qualified ones are appropriate if a client's situation really isn't safe. EMDR won't take anyone to a place that is ecologically invalid.

Sometimes people have to choose between an unsafe family contact and cutting ties. Sometimes people limit the contact with an unsafe family member. With anyone with a VOC-1 I'd explore all these types of things to see what the real goal should be of the work. Certainly its not to feel safe with an unsafe person.

As to "I'm defective" and "I'm not acknowledge" as NC and "I can express my feelings" as PC, I have some comments.

1. When there are two NC's I'd ask which of the two themseves, namely defectiveness and invisibility, have more of a charge on it. Have the client pick one, so the laser is pointed at only one cogitive "tumor."

2. Are the NC and PC parallel? Here they are not. Working backwards from the PC, it sounds like the pair might be NC: I shouldn't having feelings and needs, and the PC: Its okay to have feelings and needs. Just a hunch.

When the NC and PC pairs are aligned, parallel, and the PC is possible and ecologically valid, the results are far better in the EMDR.

Keep us posted, thanks --Sandra