25 January 2012

Bye Bye Chandos House

"Chandos’s approach to treatment is holistic, in this context Chandos encourages the meeting of the needs of the whole person rather than those which the nightmare of addiction dictates."

Over a month has passed since my last session at Chandos House Treatment Centre in Bristol. A colleague of mine was attending on a placement to gain hours towards qualifying as a counsellor. I had already qualified, but wished to gain more direct experience of working with addictions so asked if I could go along weekly for 10 weeks.

Right from the first day I felt welcome and accepted. The centre is run passionately and professionally by James Dickson (therapy manager), Ian Loatson (business manager) and Joyce Dickinson (the founder). The atmosphere in the house, residence for up to 10 men recovering from addiction, is palpably warm and generous.

I have worked with addictions in the past and, as many therapists interested in the field, have had direct experience of the effects of addiction in childhood. My stance is that addiction comes from a deep-rooted place of low self-esteem. If somebody does not intrinsically like themselves, then they may be prone to engage in self-destructive and escapist behaviour. I have never tried heroin, but from the descriptions from users, I imagine it to be the ultimate safe place, in a world full of chaos, uncertainty and excruciating agony.

I was given an opiate, Tramadol, after surgery once and it was, quite frankly, gorgeous. I was quite upset when I wasn't allowed to take any home with me after taking it for a few days in hopsital! Small fry compared to somebody who has been using for years, but I do "get" addiction; I understand that for some people, the lure of the substance supercedes the lure of being on the straight and narrow. The key, for me, is to help the person find the world a less chaotic and painful place and to provide feedback that leads to the client seeing themselves through a fresh perspective, not through the painful, childhood perspective of assuming that they they are fundamentally unlovable. There are, of course, other aspects to addiction such as the chemical dependency. I am referring to the psychological dependency in this post and with reference to my work.

Whilst at Chandos House I was part of the group work in the mornings, charismatically led by James. After lunch (cooked by the residents on a rota basis - and absolutely delicious every week...thanks lads), I would see a couple of residents who had requested 1:1 therapy.

I thoroughly enjoyed the work and made some great connections. I have total admiration for the establishment and for those men that I was fortunate enough to get to know, and who trusted me enough to show me a vulnerable part of themselves. It made my soul sing to hear feedback describing me as "authentic"and "one of us", for it my belief that we are all in this together, this drama known as the human condition. There but for the grace of the cosmos go I...

I'll never forget you.

16 January 2012

Myers Briggs Type Indicator - Personality Testing

It was when I first started social networking, in 2006, that I came across the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Two months into using the now almost defunct MySpace, I was in correspondence with an American man who asked what type I was. I did not, at the time, have a clue what he meant but since doing my first psychometric test I haven't looked back.

Broadly speaking, the MBTI was developed by Isabel Briggs Myers and her mother. Katharine Cook Briggs, over a period of 40 years, based on Carl Jung's work. Click here for a detailed history of Isabel Briggs Myers. 

The test itself is a series of psychometric questions which one should answer with whichever answer is the closest fit. Depending on how you answer these questions you are then given 4 letters which indicate your personality type. These letters represent "preferences" or a preferred way of thinking or acting. The four areas ("preferences" or "dichotomies") are spectrums and we can fall anywhere on the scale. This does not define us, or try and predict how we will act in any particular circumstance, it is, as it is named, an indicator.

The first letter will be either I (for Introversion) or E (for Extraversion), followed by S (for Sensing) or N (for iNtuition), then T (for Thinking) or F (for Feeling) and finally J (for Judgment) or P (for Perception).

The terms used are particular to Myers Briggs and not to be taken literally, For example, we generally use the word extroverted to describe a person who is gregarious, but in this case, the actual word used is extraverted, and for MBTI it refers to somebody as preferring to focus on the world outside the self.

We can be both introverted and extraverted at different times and the indicator simply reflects our preferred, or more distinct way of being.

There are 16 personality types in all, some more common than others.

You can do a free MBTI online test here and there are some good pages on explaining the different types here.

Something that I have found very interesting - the first few times I did the test I came up with the same four letters. Then after training to be a counsellor, which required a lot of soul searching, personal therapy and attaining greater self awareness, my MBTI changed, by 2 letters. The most significant one for me was that I was E (extraverted) and now am I (introverted)  admittedly, my E scoring was quite low (you will be given a number after the letter which indicates how far up the scale you are). During my studies, I had a conversation with a peer who regarded himself as introverted and we mused on whether, as we develop our selves, we would slide along the MBTI preference scales to be somewhere in the middle. It would be an interesting experiment and I may just look into doing a little bit of research.

9 January 2012

REBT versus CBT

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." 
- Albert Einstein

I have a bit of a thing about CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy). I expect it's to do with a longstanding aspect of my personality - the more popular something is and the more I am told what to like, the more likely I am to question it and challenge the status quo. The status quo of CBT in therapy today seems to be as a result of it's ease of measurement. This jars with my humanistic philosophy and approach; people are way more complex than empirical research allows - science has a long way to catch up with the sophistication of our organismic selves. I wrote a post about my struggles with CBT here.

That said, I do know a lot of people who say that CBT has helped them enormously and I would not argue with their experience of it. I would say, however, that it is not the panacea it is touted as, and just because it is a fashionable approach, does not deem it better than other approaches.

This post is not only about my dissatisfaction with the reductionist CBT but also to inform and educate on what I believe is an overlooked and yet decent alternative - REBT - Albert Ellis' Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy - predating Aaron Beck's CBT by around a decade.

Albert Ellis had a "...crumbling faith in psychoanalysis" and has been attributed to saying "Freud was full of horseshit!". Strong words indeed, and Ellis has been criticised for being aggressive and foul-mouthed. Of his many infleunces he includes the early Stoic philosophers, most notably Epictetus:

"Man is not disturbed by things but by the views he takes of them"

Here follows a description of REBT (snagged from one of my diploma essays):

It is a comprehensive theory of human behaviour that proposes that a combination of biological, psychological and social factors are involved in the way human beings feel and behave (1). The principal thesis is that sustained emotional reactions are caused by internal sentences, in the form of dogmatics "musts", "shoulds" or "oughts" that people repeat to themselves. These reflect their unspoken assumptions, or irrational beliefs, about what is necessary to lead a meaningful life. It is what people believe about the situations they face, not the situations themselves, that determines how they feel and behave. Furthermore it is the presence of extreme philosophies that can make the difference between healthy negative emotions (such as sadness, regret or concern) and unhealthy negative emotions (such as depression, guilt or anxiety).

In REBT the goal is to modify the underlying core belief or philosophy of the client as opposed to modifying their behaviour, as is the case in CBT which approach Ellis refers to as "inelegant". According to Ellis, CBT does not tend to help the client to effect a philosophical shift at the most elegant level possible. (2)

The emphasis is placed on actively-directively teaching the client a system for self-help, known as the A-B-C model. A - the activating event is followed by C - an emotional consequence. However it is not correct to say that A causes C, which is how the client may perceive it. The therapist teaches the client to see that C occurs as a result of their belief system (B). In order to understand the emotional consequence at C, the therapist helps the client to focus on B, the irrational beliefs about A, and not A itself. D refers to the disputing of irrational beliefs and E to a new and effective rational outlook.

In common with CBT it places little emphasis on exploring the past, instead focusing on changing the client's current evaluations and philosophical thinking-emoting and behaving."

I have been scouring the internet for a synopsis of the differences between REBT and CBT and stumbled across a forum with a posting by Clinical Psychologist based in San Francisco  - Dr Michael R Edelstein, author of Three Minute Therapy. Here is what I found:

Question: What is the difference between Ellis REBT/Burns CBT? Which approach is easier to understand?

I favor REBT to CBT for many reasons, the most significant of which are:

1. REBT addresses the philosophic core of emotional disturbance as well as the distorted cognitions (the focus of CBT) which derive from this core. Consequently, it is more powerful than CBT in this way. As you change your basic philosophy, the cognitive distortions are eliminated as a byproduct.

2. REBT highlights the significance of secondary disturbance (SD) which is often the largest factor in life-long (endogenous) depression, severe anxiety, and panic attacks. As far as I can tell, CBT completely ignores SD.

3. REBT maintains that all anger is destructive and teaches individuals appropriate, yet unangry, effective assertiveness. CBT views some anger as healthy and, although it teaches assertiveness, fails to address uprooting the philosophic core of anger.

4. REBT presents an elegant solution to the self-esteem problem. It teaches unconditional self-acceptance (USA), rather than any kind of self-rating, "authentic" or otherwise. Most CBT therapists focus on bolstering their clients' self-esteem.

5. As a consequence of these powerful differences and others, REBT is easier to understand.

6. The average duration of my REBT therapy consists of 8 - 10 sessions, shorter than most CBT.

Dr Michael R Edelstein

(The above has been copied with the kind consent of Dr Edelstein. 

Secondary disturbance, or secondary emotional disturbance is when somebody has a negative emotional response to their emotional responses. For example, somebody who suffers from panic attacks may feel ashamed of their perceived weakness. So the secondary emotion here is shame. I often find with clients that the presenting issues are usually wrapped up in secondary emotional disturbance which makes the whole package bigger, more powerful and harder to manage. Get rid of that wrapper and then we can look at what's underneath.

In conclusion, although I, as a person-centred counsellor, would not normally utilise a technique such as CBT or REBT, there are elements of the philosophy behind REBT which correlate with my personal approach. Indirectly, secondary emotional disturbances are addressed through the therapeutic process, and through striving to acquire a truly empathic and non-judgmental connection with the client, questions are naturally asked which challenge underlying core beliefs which may no longer serve the client.

One last point, I like Albert Ellis and respect his challenging demeanour. 


  1. http://www.rational.org.nz/prof-docs/Intro-REBT.pdf
  2. http://www.mentalhealthce.com/courses/contentRET/secRET21.html#Bottom (this link no longer exists as of Jan 2024)

Total Pageviews

Ebuzzing - Top Blogs - Health