The ‘Standardised’ approach
The ‘standardised’ approach was popularised in the
U.S.A.
during the 1950’s.
Essentially this was ‘a streamlined
approach,’
brought about to suit the medical profession
at the time,
so that hypnotherapy ‘could finally be rid of
its ‘charlatan tag’
and become more widely accepted.’
Serious hypnotherapists wanted to be rid of the counterfeit
idea
of an ‘extraordinary person with exclusive powers,’
which had typecast the hypnotist
in 'an authoritarian, dominant role.'
Their desire to bring this important therapy
into the mainstream
of clinical practice
was what really drove the movement towards
‘a rationalistion of the process called hypnosis’,
and
thus to a more ‘standardised’ approach.
The ‘standardised’ approach, as the name implies,
‘relies on a fixed set of procedures
and so is easier to teach
and learn.’
This ‘uniform, homogeneous’ approach,
is now the one
most commonly used
by the vast majority of practising hypnotherapists.
It forms the foundation of training
for the abundance of ‘lay
hypnotherapists’ that we see today.
While the ‘authoritarian’ approach
‘focused
on the charismatic style and bravura of the operator’
- the
standardised approach
focuses much more on technique.
It reduces the importance of ‘the hypnotist’
and emphasises
the importance of ‘the subject’
- so much so, that:
‘an induction can be given
without the hypnotist even being
present!’
‘Trance can be brought about
via an audio tape, or CD recording,
‘containing
a standard formula for inducing the state.’
Indeed t here are a multitude of such ‘self-help’ and ‘inner
mind’
self-hypnosis tapes and CDs on the market today.
Many experimenters working within this approach,
hold the view
‘that trance is a discrete state’
and that ‘hypnotic
responsiveness
is determined by some inherent trait or ability of
the subject’.
As such, one can assess the subject’s capacity for trance
by means of a series of ‘suggestibility’ tests.
If the marks are high enough, then the subject is deemed to be,
‘a good subject.’
If low, then the subject is ‘poor’.
It is also possible to generate statistical results
using such
‘standard’ procedures.
On the basis of this kind of
evidence,
researchers have compiled
‘statistics depicting
the distribution by population
of hypnotic suggestibility.’
Typically, these results indicate that :
15% are highly suggestible
70% are suggestible to a varying degree
15% are not suggestible at all.
‘Given that ‘hypnosis’
is an age-old form of
human communication,
between two people,
these ‘tests’
discount anyone
from the lower end of the scale, outright
- which
is rather unfair and unhelpful
– especially to the individuals
seeking help.’
That ‘it works most of the time,
for most people to some
degree or other’ is enough,
and represents the limit of those
who use
the same ‘hypno-scripts’ time and time again,
with every client,
regardless of his/her individuality and personal
qualities.
So How Does It Operate?
The ‘standardised’ approach,
as reproduced in countless
textbooks,
‘essentially relies on relaxation.’
Typically, the hypnotherapist will begin
by inducing overall muscular
relaxation,
fixing the attention of the subject
(by them staring
at a spot on the wall),
and once the physical body is immobile,
will deepen the trance
through the use of standard relaxation imagery
(lifts going down, escalators, staircases,
leaves falling, ocean
waves etc.)
There are patently some drawbacks to this approach.
‘Because it relies on fixed procedures,
it can be somewhat
rigid in application.’
‘Idiosyncratic or more complicated subjects
may not respond
at all,
if the standard suggestions do not suit them
- even though
they would be highly responsive
to a more flexible approach.’
This weakness originates from a view
that trance has little to
do with ‘the subject as a person’
but everything to
do with ‘predetermined mental structures’
which can
be tapped, by a tried and tested procedure.
‘Not everyone is the same’
and this should be the true
premise
behind most genuine therapeutic encounters,
but the 'standardised'
position still predominates.
|
