When a patient indicates a specific trait creating a reaction but says ‘no’ to all the characteristics you offer, where do you go next? A simple solution is provided.
Transcript of treatment provided by therapist Emily Fennell showing the SRBC in practice to locate the Causative Incident and help the patient to reinterpret the event and correct its effects.
Third in a series of 3, transcript of treatment of one of the volunteer patients from the Spring 2010 practical course showing how a visualisation technique was utilised to understand the Cause and IMR used to locate the required information, achieve re-interpretation and disposal of symptoms commenced.
Transcript of third treatment session of ‘N’, one of the volunteer patients from the Spring 2010 practical course who was receiving treatment in front of the students for help with her anxiety and depression.
An explanation of how to simply direct your questions to gain specific information, to allow treatment to smoothly flow from Symptom to Reason to Belief and thus requesting details about the Cause is obvious and straightforward. If you have hit a brick wall, cannot see where your information is taking you; if you are gaining many different Beliefs; if you are gaining many triggers / confirmations but not information relevant to the causative incident – then following this advice may well solve the situation. The examples provided would also be useful in your checking procedures, to ensure all information is corrected and/or reinterpreted.
A patient says no to all the traits, characteristics that I suggest so I am unable to establish the Belief. The incidents I am getting are not helping us to get to The Cause, what do I do?
How can information gained through the sense of sight or touch end up causing a specific Belief within a person? Can something that was physically felt, for example, cause someone to create a Belief about their character or appearance?
A debate about other characteristics which could be added to the list of traits currently provided on the Practical Course.
Article which highlights one of the most common mistakes in the Reinterpretation process – using the comparison of age; that as an adult, the patient can now view the incident differently. The article points out when this can be used effectively and when it is misused to try to persuade the patient that their reaction is wrong, or to overlay a belief, rather than correct it.