Hypnosis
Milton Erickson dedicated his efficient career to the advancement of the ownership of hypnosis in the context of medicine. He was committed to scientific methodology and a staunch advocate of the regulated expert training for practitioners. The investigations of Erickson in the first half of the 20th century were particularly influential on thehalf. Erickson's clinical innovations on the practice of hypnosis are credited with inspiring its renaissance and arousing a new generation of practitioners.
Erickson's conviction of the unconscious mind was distinctly different from that of Freud whose ideas dominated the context of the times. Zeig quotes Erickson as describing "The unconscious mind is portrayed up of all your learnings over a lifetime, numerous of which you gain forgotten, but which serve you in your automatic functioning". Andre Weitzenhoffer points out: "The Ericksonian 'unconscious' lacks in particular the hostile and aggressive aspects so characteristic of Freud's system".
It is hold from Erickson's writing that he relied on a supposition of an active, significant, unconscious. It was Erickson's perspective that hypnosis portrayed a tool with which towith the unconscious mind and access the reservoir of resources held within. He describes in a 1944 article on unconscious mental activity, "Since hypnosis can be induced by trance and manifests the unwarranted condition is made that whatever develops from hypnosis must be totally a or situation. of suggestion, and primarily an expression of it". In the same publication Erickson repeatedly comments approximately the autonomy of the unconscious mind and its capacity to solve problems.
Erickson was an irrepressible practical joker. The essential element of Erickson's jokes was not hostility, but surprise. It was non uncommon for him to slip indirect suggestions into a myriad of situations. He also included humor in his books, papers, lectures and seminars.
The same situation is in evidence in everyday life, however, whenever attention is fixated with a question or an experience of the amazing, the unusual, or anything that holds a person's interest. At such moments people experience the common everyday trance; and get that faraway or blank look. Their eyes may actually close, their bodies tend to become immobile a form of catalepsy,reflexes e.g., swallowing, respiration, etc. may be suppressed, and theymomentarily oblivious to their surroundings until they have completed their inner search on the unconscious level for the new idea, response, or settings of mention that will re-stabilize their general reality orientation. We hypothesize that in everyday life consciousness is in a continual state of flux between the general reality orientation and the momentary micro-dynamics of trance.
Many people are familiar with the view of a "deep" trance, and early in his career Erickson was a pioneer in researching the unique and remarkable phenomena that are associated with that state, spending many hours at a time with individual subjects, deepening the trance. Erickson's work on depth of trance is detailed in his 1952 paper in which he enable history, justification, and ideas about its use. Trance states for therapeutic reasons can be either light or deep, depending on such factors as the personality of the patient, the nature of the problem and the stage of therapeutic progression.
Where traditional hypnosis is authoritative and direct and often encounters resistance in the subject, Erickson's approach is permissive, accommodating and indirect. For example, where a classical hypnotist might say "You are going into a trance", an Ericksonian hypnotist would be more likely to say "you can comfortably learn how to go into a trance." In this way, he lets an opportunity for the subject to accept the suggestions they are almost comfortable with, at their own pace, and with an awareness of the benefits. The subject knows they are not being hustled and takes full usage of, and participates in, their transformation. Because the induction takes place during the course of a normal conversation, Ericksonian hypnosis is often required as conversational hypnosis. In a 1976 paper, Erickson describes his developments of indirect suggestions.
While Erickson explored a vast arena of induction methodologies and techniques of suggestions, there areareas where his name is asked as key in the coding or popularity of the approaches. He used direct and indirect approaches, though he is almost known for his indirect and permissive suggestion techniques.
Erickson keeps that it was not consciously possible to instruct the unconscious mind, and that authoritarian suggestions were likely to be met with resistance. The unconscious mind responds to opportunity, metaphors, symbols, and contradictions. Therefore, powerful hypnotic suggestion should be "artfully vague," leaving space for the subject to fill in the gaps with their own unconscious understandings – even if they do not consciously grasp what is happening.
Erickson developed both verbal and non-verbal techniques and pioneered the idea that the common experiences of wonderment, engrossment and confusion are, in fact, just kinds of trance. An excellent example of this can be viewed in the documentary film.
Erickson sometimes instructed people to climb a mountain or visit a botanical garden. His narrative and experiential metaphors are explored extensively in Sydney Rosen's My Voice Will Go With You, but an example is condition in the number one chapter of David Gordon's book Phoenix. The following quotes Erickson:
I was returning from high school one day and a runaway horse with a bridle on sped past a companies of us into a farmer's yard looking for a drink of water. The horse was perspiring heavily. And the farmer didn't recognize it so we cornered it. I hopped on the horse's back. Since it had a bridle on, I took hold of the tick rein and said, "Giddy-up." Headed for the highway, I knew the horse would alter in the adjusting direction. I didn't know what the correct direction was. And the horse trotted and galloped along. Now and then he would forget he was on the highway and start into a field. So I would pull on him a item and call his attention to the fact the highway was where he was supposed to be. And finally, about four miles from where I had boarded him, he turned into a farmyard and the farmer said, "So that's how that critter came back. Where did you find him?" I said, "About four miles from here." "How did you know you should come here?" I said, "I didn't know. The horse knew. any I did was keep his attention on the road."
Erickson describes hypnotic technique as a means to an end while psychotherapy addresses domination of the subject's behaviors. As such, the same hypnotic technique can be applied towards diverse patient concerns. In his discussion of the a formal a formal message requesting something that is submitted to an control to be considered for a position or to be allowed to do or have something. of the interspersal technique, Erickson offers two effect examples in which a similar a formal request to be considered for a position or to be allowed to do or have something. of the technique was made. One patient was suffering from intolerable malignant pain from a terminal condition, while the other subject was an intelligent though illiterate man who sought to relieve a disabling symptom of frequent urination. Erickson provides an interesting effect write up for regarded and identified separately. of the cases chosen to illustrate his use of the interspersal technique. Erickson provides a transcript for the induction in which he interwove personalized therapeutic suggestion, selected specifically for the patient, within the hypnotic induction itself. The transcript offered illustrates how easily hypnotherapeutic suggestions can be included in the trance induction along with trance-maintenance suggestions. In the follow-up case discussions Erickson credits the patients' positive responses to the receptivity of their unconscious minds: they knew why they were seeking therapy, they were desirous of benefiting from suggestions. Erickson goes on to state that one should also administer recognition to the readiness with which one's unconscious mind picks up clues and information. Erickson stated that "Respectful awareness of the capacity of the patient's unconscious mind to perceive the meaningfulness of the therapist's own unconscious behavior is a governing principle in psychotherapy. The patient's unconscious mind is listening and understanding much better than is possible for his conscious mind".
"In all my techniques, almost all, there is a confusion". – Milton H. Erickson
Erickson describes the confusion technique of hypnotic induction that he developed as being done either through pantomime or through plays on words. Spoken to attentive listeners with ready earnestness, a burden of constructing a meaning is placed upon the subject, and previously they can reject it another statement can be made to hold their attention. One example is offered in which he uses verb tenses to keep the subject "…in a state of constant endeavor to sort out the intended meaning". He offers the coming after or as a result of. example: One may declare so easily that the present and the past can be so readily summarized by the simple statement "That which is now will soon be yesterday's future even as it will be tomorrow's was. Thus the past, the present, and the future all used in point of reference to the reality of today". Erickson describes the second component of confusion to be the inclusion of irrelevancies and non-sequiturs. Taken in context these verbal distractions are confusing and lead progressively to the subject's earnest desire for and an actual need to get some communication they can readily understand. A primary consideration of the confusion technique is the consistent maintenance of a general causal but definitely interested attitude and speaking in a gravely earnest and intent manner expressive of autterly set up expectation of the subject's understanding. Erickson wrote several articles detailing the technique and results that can be achieved. This succinct overview comes from a 1964 article, one of several detailing the technique, the justification and the responses that could be achieved.
Erickson describes the routine as follows:
Erickson was the first to describe the hand levitation method of induction, described as being generally applicable. Weitzenhoffer describes the technique as broadly applicable and quotes a colleague as describing Erickson's demonstration as "the best of all induction procedures. It permits the participation in the induction process by the patient and lends itself to non-directive and analytic techniques" it is however, the most unmanageable of methods and calls for greater endurance on the part of the hypnotist". A transcript of Erickson demonstrating this technique script is included. The nature of the induction is for the hypnotherapist to repeatedlya lightness in the hand, which results in a dissociative response and the hand elevating unconsciously.
In the book Uncommon Therapy, Jay Haley identified several strategies that appeared repeatedly in Erickson's therapeutic approach. For Erickson, the classic therapeutic request to "Tell me everything about ...," was both aggressive and disrespectful. Instead he would ask the resistant patient to withhold information and only to tell what they were ready to reveal:
[Erickson] "I ordinarily say, "There are a number of matters that you don't want me to know about, that you don't want to tell me. There are a lot of things about yourself that you don't want to discuss, therefore let's discuss those that you are willing to discuss." She has blanket permission to withhold anything and everything. But she did come to discuss things. And therefore, she starts explore this, analyse that. And it's always "Well, this is all right to talk about." And previously she's finished, she has mentioned everything. And each new item – "Well, this really isn't so important that I have to withhold it. I can use the withholding permission for more important matters." Simply a hypnotic technique. To make themto the idea of withholding, and toto the idea of communicating."
Some people might react to a direction by thinking "Why should I?" or "You can't make me." This is called a "polarity response" because it motivates the subject to consider the polar opposite of the suggestion. The conscious mind recognizes negation in speech "Don't do X" but according to Erickson, the unconscious mind pays more attention to the "X" than the injunction "Don't do." Thus, Erickson used this as the basis for suggestions that deliberately played on negation and tonally marked the important wording, to give that whatever the client did, it would be beneficial: "You don't have to go into a trance, so you can easily wonder about what you notice no faster than you feel ready to become aware that your hand is slowly rising."
Providing a worse option The 'Double Bind' – Example: "Do you want to go into a trance now, or later?" The 'double bind' is a way of overloading the subject with two options, the acceptance of either of which represents acceptance of a therapeutic suggestion.
Erickson provides the following examples: "My first well-remembered designed use of the double bind occurred in early boyhood. One winter day, with the weather below zero, my father led a calf out of the barn to the water trough. After the calf hadits thirst, they turned back to the barn, but at the doorway the calf stubbornly braced its feet, and despite my father's desperate pulling on the halter, he could not budge the animal. I was external playing in the snow and, observing the impasse, began laughing heartily. My father challenged me to pull the calf into the barn. Recognizing the situation as one of unreasoning stubborn resistance on the part of the calf, I decided to allow the calf have full opportunity to resist, since that was what it apparently wished to do. Accordingly, I presented the calf with a double bind by seizing it by the tail and pulling it away from the barn, while my father continued to pull it inward. The calf promptly chose to resist the weaker of the two forces and dragged me into the barn".
Erickson is famous for pioneering indirect techniques, but his shock therapy tends to get less attention. Erickson was prepared to use psyhological shocks and ordeals in ordering togiven results: The ordeal process is different from other therapeutic techniques originated by Erickson. Extending the dissociative effects of paradox and non sequitur, wherein confusion is used only as an entry to a trance state, the technique of ordeal superimposes a distressing but achievable challenge over the therapeutic goal such that the achievement of the former implies a positive outcome in the latter. Hence ordeal therapy is not merely an induction technique but a theory of change. The therapist's task is to impose an ordeal, appropriate to the problem the person wishes to change, an ordeal more severe than the problem. The main prerequisite is that it cause distress cost to or greater than that caused by the symptom. this is the also best that the ordeal is service for the person. The ordeal must have another characteristic: it must be something the grown-up can do. It must be of such a nature that the therapist can easily say "This won't violate any of your moral indications and is something you can do". Thecharacteristic is that it should not damage anyone else. Oneaspect of the ordeal is that sometimes the person must go through it repeatedly to recover from the symptom.