WHERE REGRESSION THERAPY STANDS: TOWARDS A BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
Based on an analysis of the First World Congress of Regression Therapists, 2003 in TheNetherlands
Hans TenDam & Fons Van den Heuvel
CONTENTS Press here for the full version of the article.
1 Towards a professional body of knowledge
2 Practitioner workshops
3 Research workshops
4 Differences between practitioners
5 Proposed research
This analysis is based on the work of Fons Van den Heuvel, who was responsible for recording the congress and, in the framework of his graduation thesis, listened to all the recordings, read
all the handouts and summarized and commented them. His work, which includes copies of the handouts of the workshops, can be ordered on CD-ROM at a.l.m.vdheuvel@chello.nl.
Diversity in regression therapy V1.2
Fons van den Heuvel 27-7-2008 page 2 of 32 pages
1. TOWARDS A PROFESSIONAL BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
How does a profession develop a Body of Knowledge? First, by professionals exchanging views. Second, by professionals exchanging experiences. Third, by research.
About what should we exchange views? We should start with the issues in which we differ.
We analysed the workshops and panels of WCRT 1 on the following eleven issues:
• Do we concentrate on symptoms or do we go straight to the underlying issues?
• Is therapy about understanding and insight, or about emotional and physical release?
• Is reality of apparent memories important or not?
• Do we evoke spiritual help or do we avoid that?
• Should we enter old agonies or avoid them? Do we first go into the Shadow or do we go straight into the Light?
• Do we seek to establish boundaries or do we seek to dissolve them?
• Is trance induced, and if so, how? Or is the trance used that is implicitly present in the symptoms (bridge techniques)?
• Is regression sufficient, or are personifications (like in inner child work) and energy work (like in body work) either desirable or necessary?
• Is entity releasement an important part of our work, a side show or a distraction (either irrelevant or a fantasy)?
• Do we integrate subpersonalities like inner children and past lifetimes or do we send them to the Light?
• Does the therapist become personally and actively involved in the process or not?
For clarity’s sake we have formulated the issues as either-or statements. But it could be that both positions are valid and the position chosen is a question of personal choice of the therapist. Assuming that clients will automatically find a therapist with the right approach for them. Or it possible that sometimes one position is indicated and sometimes the other position. If so, under what circumstances is each position valid? Or is one position simply right and the other wrong? The present writers have strong opinions on most of these issues, but refrain fom stating them,as they do not belong in this article.
What is driving these differences? Many different factors, presumably:
• Particular professional training and academic background
• Particular regression therapy training; exposure to different teachers
• Knowledge and experience in related psychotherapeutic fields
• Particular religious or esoteric beliefs
• Trust or distrust in the paranormal; personal paranormal abilities or experiences
• Personal experiences and discoveries in the therapy practice
• Knowledge or lack of knowledge of relevant books and studies
If the discussion doesn’t lead to clear answers, we need to exchange cases and see if they confirm or deny points of view or find in them explanations for the differences. This will
also lead to clarifying criteria: how do we decide that a therapy has been successful?
When analyzing the contents of the workshops, we found the issues that were mentioned most often were:
• Is therapy about understanding and insight, or about emotional and physical release?
• Do we evoke spiritual help or do we avoid that?
• Is trance induced, and if so, how? Or is the trance used that is implicitly present in the symptoms (bridge techniques)?
• Is regression sufficient, or are personifications (like in inner child work) and energy work (like in body work) either desirable or necessary?
Issues mentioned less were:
• Should we enter old agonies or avoid them? Do we first go into the Shadow or do we go straight into the Light?
• Is entity releasement an important part of our work, a side show or a distraction (either irrelevant or a fantasy)?
• Does the therapist become personally and actively involved in the process or not?
Issues mentioned hardly or not at all:
• Do we concentrate on symptoms or do we go straight to the underlying issues?
• Is reality of apparent memories important or not?
• Do we seek to establish boundaries or do we seek to dissolve them?
• Do we integrate subpersonalities like inner children and past lifetimes or do we send them to the Light?
Ultimately, we will need research. Some research has been presented at the First World Congress. What does it say about the issues above? There has been other published
research. What does that say about those issues? And what kind of research would be most fruitful to make our work and effective and credible profession?
In general, we see two kinds of research immediately relevant to the profession:
1. Research into the effectiveness and efficiency of regression therapy
• Professional vs. spiritual approaches
• Mental vs cathartic approaches
• Indications and counter-indications
2. Research into the mechanisms of regression therapy
• What is happening in the body and why?
• What is happening in the mind and why?
• What is the energetic reality of problems, processes and solutions? (this involves
parapsychology, if we like it or not)
Press here for the full version of the article.
