SE differs from cognitive therapies in that its major interventional strategy involves bottom-up processing by directing the client's attention to internal sensations, both visceral (interoception) and musculo-skeletal (proprioception and kinesthesis), rather than primarily cognitive or emotional experiences. SE is not a form of exposure therapy; it specifically avoids direct and intense evocation of traumatic memories, instead approaching the charged memories indirectly and very gradually, as well as facilitating the generation of new corrective interoceptive experiences that physically contradict those of overwhelm and helplessness. Why this is an effective approach is the core theme of this paper.
SE shares this focus on internal awareness with traditional methods of meditative movement, such as Yoga, T'ai Chi and Qigong, as well as many forms of seated meditation (Schmalzl et al.,
2014). Less well-known Western-grown therapeutic (“Somatic”) systems such as the Alexander Technique (Stuart,
2013), the Feldenkrais method (Feldenkrais,
2005), and Continuum (Conrad-Da'oud and Hunt,
2007), also use this general approach. The explanations and suggestions in this paper apply to some extent to all of these systems.
We believe that the sophisticated and precise theories and techniques of SE offer a way of understanding the processes that occur during mindfulness meditation, both the beneficial mental, emotional and physiological effects of mindfulness meditation and the flooding or dissociation that can occur when traumatic memories surface. In addition, SE can suggest ways in which mindfulness meditation practices could be modified to enable meditators to process traumatic material, and traumatized people to use mindfulness-based techniques to help them recover.
SE avoids asking clients to relive their traumatic experiences, rather it approaches the sensations associated with trauma only after establishing bodily sensations associated with safety and comfort; these become a reservoir of innate, embodied resource to which the individual can return repeatedly as they touch, bit by bit (titration), on the stress-associated sensations. Biological completion and autonomic discharge occur in controlled and manageable steps as the therapist guides the client in attending to visceral sensation or subtle motor impulses associated with incomplete defensive responses.
Other “bodymind” systems
We believe that the mechanisms elucidated here explain the effectiveness of traditional Asian bodymind systems as well as Western Somatic disciplines and body-oriented psychotherapy. We also believe these mechanisms explain the value of the emphasis on bodily experience, breathing, posture, and balanced muscle tone in seated mindfulness meditation, and extend current theories about the mechanisms behind the long-term beneficial effects of this practice.
In the practice of mindfulness meditation, as well as other forms of contemplative practice, challenging physical and emotional experiences often arise (Kaplan et al.,
2012). At times these experiences can pose significant challenges to mental and emotional health, and may lead to the abandonment of the practice. We believe that the SE perspective offers a way of understanding and working with such issues. Although it is beyond the scope of this paper to give an exhaustive treatment, we wish to offer some reflections.
A painful or disturbing interoceptive or proprioceptive experience may be pointing to the necessity for some kind of “biological completion.” Simply maintaining a neutral awareness may not lead to resolution if movement impulses and imagined movements are unconsciously impeded; and many meditation traditions do discourage movement. The question, “what does it feel like my body wants to do?” can often reveal the obstructed impulse, the completion of which may restore comfort and ease.
During contemplative practice, a disturbing experience may arise too intensely or too quickly, resulting in overwhelm and a reactive suppression of the feeling. However, neither overwhelm nor suppression are productive strategies. Temporarily diverting awareness to a positive, safe experience, such as the support of the ground or positive imagery, can allow one to regain inner balance; then a consciously “titrated” process of returning attention to the disturbing experience one
little bit at a time may facilitate the assimilation of the experience.
The emphasis in mindfulness meditation on remaining detached from discursive thought may sometimes encourage a remote or uninvolved attitude toward arising images, feelings, and insights. We believe that such an attitude may subtly impede the opening-up, de-conditioning process intrinsic to meditation. SE encourages an active, curious exploration of arising phenomena, which is nonetheless not conceptually based. We believe that a familiarity with this form of exploration can inform the practice of mindfulness.
Finally, SE focuses especially on interoceptive and proprioceptive experiences, and puts these in a broad, meaningful framework that can enable one to understand directly the meanings, motivations and implications of such experiences. Traditional Asian practices that emphasize bodily experience, in their full forms, also provide such frameworks (for instance Qigong, Laya Yoga, Tibetan Tsa-Lung practices), but these frameworks may not be appropriate, available, or comprehensible to the Western practitioner. SE provides a broad and sensitive framework firmly rooted in Western scientific understanding, yet also in concert with the above traditional approaches, to help guide one's encounters with difficult material. Moreover it does so without diverting the practitioner into psychological analysis, which may be a significant diversion from the intent of body-focused and meditative practices.
