The
Revolutionary Function of the Primal Therapy.
Dr. Janov's Reflection about Reform and Revolution (The Difference between Reform and Revolution) inspires thoughts and
comments. After 40 years of contact with the Primal Therapy, the mix
/ solution of own experiences gradually has precipitated crystals
that I want to highlight and put in relief to your potential,
Revolutionary 6-step recipe, which the current psychotherapy paradigm
staunchly keeps at bay. I'm probably one of the patients who had the
most advantages of the therapy that you introduced 47 years ago.
Fortunate circumstances provided me with prerequisites both from
mental, physiological, social and economic point of view, long-term,
to adapt my life according to the structure of the 6 “It means...”
to apply and be guided by your innovative theory of “Evolution in
Reverse.”
During
my extensive epileptic journey, the theory behind the Primal Therapy
became a lifestyle that opened my eyes to the Evolutionary Stable
Strategies that allow the human species to continue to survive, despite
the fact that we as individuals only live during a (sometimes
unnecessarily) limited time. Our emotional denial of death like our
ambition of continued individual existence, probably, reflects the
evolutionary stable strategies, which seek to prevent depression and
anxiety.
To
me, the revolutionary part of PT consists in revealing the cognitive
“lies” in the evolution and accept / feel the pain propelled
anxiety. It is not without concern that I see my own limitations but
I'm now able, in any case, to avoid a false peace of mind with
neurotic lies. The memories into how my epilepsy previously
constantly reminded me of my birth trauma never gave me the
opportunity, for a long time, to seal my leaky gates with repressions
and a neurotic life pattern.
Your
six “It means...” is a must. None of them can be eliminated.
However, I would add an additional seventh "It means": "That the
doctor and the patient must agree / be aware of that the right
conditions for economic, social (family, close relationships, etc.)
and regular monitoring exist.” The doctor who has a crucial
responsibility, must have reasonable assurance that the conditions
are met, so that the patient can meet the conditions to undergo PT
and will not be left to drift more
vulnerable than he/she was when the treatment started, due to lack of resources.
The
revolutionary PT model is extremely costly in comparison with the
current treatment paradigm. Even now, the majority of traditional
psychologists and psychiatrists turned the 50-minute treatments to
prescription writing for 10-15 minutes. With your, justified, demands
for “unlimited” duration for patients, costs rise dramatically to
levels that only a wealthy few are able to pay for a limited time.
In a time of exploding health care costs, the “market” is forced
to prioritize the reform model. Your revolutionary PT model requires
first a political revolution of a magnitude that, in any event, no
American dare to consider.
PT
was a potential revolution when it began 47 years ago. In PT's fight
agains certain effects of evolution with its stable strategies for
the human species' survival, PT best served as proof that evolution
is functionally effective as a long term condition if we do not get our individual,
unconditional need for love, touch and appreciation met.
To
spread the word about the tremendous importance of parenting,
childbirth and Life before Birth is now the most realistic and revolutionary
task for PT. All based on the knowledge about the primal principles
and “Evolution in Reverse”.
Jan
Johnsson
I whole-heartedly agree with the principle behind your Number Seven: "That the doctor and the patient must agree / be aware of that the right conditions for economic, social (family, close relationships, etc.) and regular monitoring exist.”
ReplyDeleteIs the difficulty here that are we asking that the doctor also become social worker, financial advisor, relationship coach? Perhaps we are. Are we saying that and as long as society is not organised to adequately support individuals conducting therapeutic regimes as financially demanding, and as potentially disruptive, as Primal Therapy, we need to ask to the professional Primal practitioner to become both therapist and welfare guardian?