The Dark Intruder

"The Dark Intruder"

I saw it out of the corner of my eye
The inch long, dark intruder
Moving along the floor of my office

I am distracted
But not because my instinctive response is to scream
Or seek higher ground
(Such as a chair or tabletop)
When confronted by an intruder such as this one or its kin
Nah
My instinct is to squash it like the bug it is

This time, however, the intruder is allowed to live to crawl another day
Because its invasion occurs during a therapy session
And I am pretty sure there is no way springing from my chair
And squashing a bug while my client is in mid-word
Can be considered a therapeutic response

Psychiatry by the Dumpster: One Man’s Struggle with OCD

Editor's Note: The following article was adapted from Compulsive Acts: A Psychiatrist’s Tales of Ritual and Obsession, published by University of California Press, Berkeley (2008).

Three Feet

In a way, George was special from day one. I can still remember Dawn, my clinic clerk, paging me at 1:45 PM, three quarters of an hour after his first scheduled appointment, to warn me: “Oh, Dr A., you’re gonna love this one!”

“Please don’t tell me the patient just showed up,” I said. “How am I supposed to do a full intake in the remaining fifteen minutes?”

“I know,” Dawn answered, “but I couldn’t just let him go. I don’t know what to say, but he’s—how should I put it—he has his reasons for being late…. He’s different, even by our standards in this clinic, and even after nine years of doing this! I had to go out into the parking lot to check him in. That should give you an idea…”

“You went to the parking lot to check him in?” I asked. “Outside?”

“Yes, outside,” Dawn answered. “He can’t come in, he says. Our door isn’t wide enough for him.”

“Our door isn’t wide enough?” I asked, questioning whether I was the right doctor for this patient. “Did he mistake us for the gastric bypass clinic? How heavy is he?”

“Oh, he’s not heavy at all,” Dawn answered. “In fact, his wife tells me he hasn’t eaten in a few days. He’s just… I don’t know…Something about his nose… He won’t let anyone or anything close to it… He was so worried about his nose, he wouldn’t even get into the car this morning.”

“How did he make it to our clinic, then?” I asked. “I thought he lived in Belmont. That’s fifteen miles away.”

“He does,” Dawn said. “He walked here. His wife drove, but George walked.”

“He walked?” I asked again. “All the way from Belmont?”

“All the way from Belmont,” Dawn repeated. “That’s why I can’t simply send him back and ask him to reschedule. Anyway, he is checked in now and waiting for you over in the far corner of the parking lot, exactly three feet from the dumpster, where, I might add, his wife spotted your old, squeaky filing cabinet and asked me to help her pull it out and put it in her trunk. I’m no doctor, but she’s not right, either… What use could she possibly have for that cabinet? Anyway, what would you like me to do now?”

“Well, I guess my only choice is to come right down,” I said. “Meet me by the dumpster.”

“OK, just remember not to get too close!” Dawn warned. “You might frighten him. And, by the way, your two o’clock is here, too.”

“Great! Is my two o’clock at least waiting in the waiting room?” I asked.

“Yes, she is,” Dawn answered. “And I told her it was going to be a long wait…”

As I approached Dawn, who was standing in the distant corner of our parking lot, I noticed George in a vacant handicap spot by our recycling dumpster. In the adjacent spot, and having managed with Dawn’s help to squeeze my old filing cabinet into her trunk, stood his wife, now trying unsuccessfully to push the trunk door shut.

George was a lean twenty-something, with wide green eyes and a sunburned face and neck, probably from having walked a very long distance in the midday sun to come see me. His grooming and hygiene left something to be desired, and his dirty fingernails and caked hair indicated more that just the wear and tear of that day’s walkathon.

His wife started the conversation off. “Dr. A., thank you for coming out here to see us,” she said, still intent on shutting her trunk door, despite one of my old filing cabinet’s legs clearly sticking out. “I know this is not standard practice, but it’s very difficult to get him through doors anymore. I read up on obsessive compulsive disorder, so I know how to diagnose it. Heck, I may even have a touch of it myself… We’re here because we were told you were a specialist in OCD. It’s urgent, Doctor! Things have gotten completely out of control since it’s grown to three feet. Three whole feet!”

I was intrigued by the three feet, but realized that I had not yet introduced myself to George. However, before I could formally do that, George apologetically preempted my handshake.

“I don’t mean to be rude, Doctor,” he said, “but please don’t stick your hand out. I can’t do handshakes.”

“That’s OK, I understand,” I said. “I’m pleased to meet you anyway. Your wife just said that ‘it’s grown to three feet.’ What is it that has grown to three feet, George?”

“The radius around his nose,” his wife answered, her quivering voice betraying her anxiety. “He needs that much clear space around his nose at all times. In the good old days, it used to be that nothing could come within a foot of his nose, and we used to be able to joke about it. But when the radius grew to two feet, it was anything but funny, and we started needing to make lifestyle modifications: the having to sit alone in the back seat of the car, the trying to sleep standing up like a horse, not to mention—if I may go there in your parking lot—the challenging sex….”

I could see Dawn’s face clearly tense up at the idea of “going there.” George’s wife’s sexual comment was clearly in poor taste for Dawn and went against her deeply ingrained prohibitions about discussing private sexual matters even in clinical conversations—that is, if you can really call a parking lot discussion about symptoms a “clinical conversation.” Dawn’s anxiety, however, found immediate release when she abruptly broke off the filing cabinet’s leg that was protruding from the trunk, then threw it inside the car, which finally enabled her to close the trunk door shut.

The sound of the trunk door shutting, and the thought of securing the old cabinet for her home, caused George’s wife’s anxiety to subside as well, and a relieved smile made its way to her face.

“However,” she continued, more at ease, “even two feet weren’t enough. It had to grow to three feet, and, at three feet, it has been, well, impossible to accommodate!”

Steering the conversation back to the principal patient, I asked, “How long has this been a problem for you, George?”

“Oh ever since… I don’t know… It sort of crept up on me,” he answered.

“Ever since his brother died,” his wife continued.

“When did that happen?” I asked.

“Two years ago,” George answered. “He died in a skiing accident.”

“I’m very sorry to hear that,” I replied.

If sex had been a difficult subject to discuss in the parking lot, death would have been even more so, so I had to ask George, “I know this is hard for you, but can you try once more to come up to my office so we can continue this important conversation in private?”

“I can’t. I’m sorry,” George answered, cautiously shaking his head. “Doorways are difficult for me. Hallways are challenging. And elevators are out of the question.”

“Nothing personal, Doctor,” George’s wife continued. “His father was visiting from Europe where he lives last month. We hadn’t seen him in two years. Well, George wouldn’t even give him a hug! All he could do was wave hi from a safe distance when he arrived at our house and wave goodbye when we dropped him off at the airport…”

Seeing that the entire first meeting would probably have to be conducted outside, I wanted to make myself more comfortable. I approached his wife’s car to try to lean against the door, only slightly moving in George’s direction in the process. George responded briskly, first stretching his arms out, then turning on his feet in a 360-degree circle, his arms fully extended. The move resembled a disc rotating on its axis, and its purpose, I surmised, was to make sure that the required radius of safety was not violated by my sudden movement, and that I did not put his nose in any danger.

Sensing that I may have inadvertently increased George’s anxiety, I tried to give him a little break and addressed my next question to his wife instead.

“You said you might have a touch of OCD, too,” I said. “Tell me about it.”

“Well, it’s really just a touch,” she said. “Nothing like this! I don’t worry about injuring my nose, although I should! I broke it twice already, once in a car accident, and once in a diving injury. My OCD, if we may call it that, actually makes some sense… It’s about making sure that I don’t run out of important things. ‘What if I need it one day?’ I always ask myself when I consider, or George makes me consider, throwing something out. And this simple question is usually enough to make me want to save the item, whatever it is. You can understand, then, how I built up my collection of pots and pans and cooking magazines and the cabinets where I eventually hope to store them all. Did I mention cooking magazines? This is probably my biggest weakness!”

“Indeed,” George agreed, gently nodding his head in agreement. “She has so many cooking magazines all over the kitchen, she can’t make it to the stove to cook!” he added, smiling at the irony.

“That’s right,” his wife agreed. “I honestly don’t remember the last time I cooked a meal for this poor man.”

“But despite the mess in the kitchen,” she added, “we still eat well—or ate well—I should say, until his symptoms began. When he was at one foot, he already couldn’t use utensils, so I would buy him pizza which he would eat alone in his office. We lived on pizza for months because it didn’t require a fork and a knife to eat. I would ask him, ‘George, how come the pointy end of a pizza wedge is OK, but you can’t use a knife and fork?’ and he would say that something about metal approaching his nose was much scarier than the pointy end of the pizza wedge. Well, I thought it was kind of tragic, especially for someone who loved to eat and appreciated food so much. But oh how I miss those days now! You see, when the radius grew to two feet, he couldn’t even eat pizza, so he started insisting on soups and fluids, served in plastic bowls without a spoon. Later, when the radius grew to three feet, he started avoiding coming home altogether. He thought it was too much of a hazard, with all my stacks of cooking magazines and other stuff strewn all over the house. He didn’t want to trip and fall and hurt his nose, he said. So he now rents a studio nearby and eats, oh, I don’t know what he eats, or if he eats… Look at how thin he’s gotten!”

George did appear thin, but more than his low weight, it was his disheveled appearance that marked him as unhealthy, so I asked him, “What about basic activities of daily living besides eating? Toileting and hygiene, for instance?”

“This is really embarrassing, Doctor,” George answered, looking down and away from me.

“I can’t shower anymore. I feel the showerhead is about to attack me. We even had a plumber come in to replace it. He said he would have to install the showerhead in our neighbors’ kitchen next door if he had to adhere to my specifications of how far it should be from my head when I’m standing in the tub! I know it’s crazy, Doctor, but I really can’t help worrying about it.”

“Worrying about things that don’t make sense, and constantly checking to make sure one is safe, are common symptoms in OCD,” I said. “It doesn’t mean you’re crazy. It means you have OCD and that is only a small part of who you are. The good news is that for many patients OCD is very responsive to treatment, so I’m glad you made the decision to come here today.”

It is important during a first psychiatric meeting to try to get a fuller sense of the patient than his symptoms alone, so I tried to enquire about George’s hobbies and work experience next. Unfortunately, the conversation would always come back to OCD. “What do you enjoy doing in your free time?” I asked. “Tell me more about the part of you that doesn’t have OCD.”

“Well, I used to sing in church,” George answered, “but I’ve had to give that up, too. The idea of standing in front of a microphone is enough to make me mute with anxiety!”

“How about work, George?” I asked.

“I used to work in a large advertising firm,” he answered. “I had to give that up, too. My cubicle got too small for my nose…”

George smiled at the visual—an expanding nose in a shrinking cubicle—and I smiled, too, appreciating this young man’s stubborn sense of humor, still evident despite the obvious stress he was under.

But many pieces of George’s life and history were still unknown to me, and I could feel a hundred questions racing through my mind, competing for my attention and begging to be asked. By that point, though, I was very late for my two o’clock appointment, still patiently waiting for me, so I had to leave George and his wife in the parking lot after getting a promise that they would return the following day so we could continue our “first meeting.”

I did not leave them alone, though. I left them with Dawn, hoping that she would use her powers of conviction to get George inside the car.

“If I can get that old oversized filing cabinet into your wife’s trunk and manage to shut the door, I think I can get you into the car, too,” she said to George as I walked away. I then cringed at what she might have in mind for George’s trip back home as I overheard her ordering George’s wife to open the sunroof…

"Other than this preoccupation with my nose…"

For our second meeting the following day, George still walked from his apartment to my clinic. With much encouragement from his wife and Dawn, George was able to enter through the building’s doors and climb the stairs to the clinic area, after performing a checking regimen that took a whole hour to complete: With each step he took from the building’s main door to my office, George would make a 360-degree turn on his feet, his arms fully stretched out to clear the space around him. Dawn led his wife to the waiting room so I could meet with George privately.

Once inside my office, George used one hand to move a heavy wooden armchair from one corner of the room to the center, using the other hand as protective shield for his nose in case he moved the chair too close to his face. He then very cautiously sat in the chair. As he did that, I found myself rolling my chair back into the corner to give him additional security.

“Why me?” was his first question.

“I wish I had a satisfactory answer for you,” I said, “but, like so many other psychiatric and medical illnesses we see, we are much better at treating them than at knowing exactly why a particular person develops a particular symptom.”

“Did I somehow catch it from her?” he asked, referring to his wife, but appearing suspicious about the premise of his question as though he knew beforehand that the answer would be “no.” “But I don’t hoard,” he quickly added. “In fact, I’m the anti-hoarder.”

“You cannot ‘catch’ OCD this way, George,” I said. “You would, however, have a genetic vulnerability to developing OCD if you had a close blood relative with it. However, even when OCD does cluster in families, its symptoms can vary greatly among family members.”

“Well, I don’t have any biological relatives with it, as far as I know,” George quickly said.

“Speaking of ‘catching’ things,” I said, “do you spend a lot of time worrying about contamination or pollution? How about frequent checking that doesn’t involve your nose? Any excessive cleaning, counting, touching, arranging, or worrying about other body parts besides your nose, now or in the past?”

“Never,” George answered. “Other than this preoccupation with my nose, I’ve always been a pretty laid back, relaxed guy.”

“Do you worry that your nose may be weak or somehow deformed and in need of protection?” I asked. “Do you think it looks abnormal?”

“No, I think my nose looks just fine as it is now,” George replied. “I’m very happy with it. I just want to keep it that way!”

“Do you have any reason to worry that it might not stay that way?” I asked. “Are you prone to accidents, for example? Have you ever seriously injured your nose or any other body part before?”

“Not really,” George answered. “I’ve always been the cautious choirboy and high school debater kind of guy rather than the contact sports type.”

Seeing that it was not the memory of some old physical trauma that was making George worried today about hurting himself, I wondered about a trauma he may have witnessed involving someone else, or even an emotional trauma. Thinking back to our first meeting when his wife related the onset of George’s OCD symptoms to losing his brother in a skiing accident two years ago, I said, “Tell me about your brother, George. Were you close?”

“Yes, very,” George answered, his eyes looking down and away. “I was supposed to go with him on his skiing trip, but a choir event kept me back.”

“I’m sorry to hear about what happened to him,” I said. “Is it true that your OCD symptoms began shortly thereafter?”

“As I said, it sort of crept up on me,” he answered, “but I would say sometime around then is when I started frequently checking my nose in the mirror to make sure that it was OK.”

The striking coincidence between the onset of George’s OCD symptoms and the loss of his brother is rich in meaning and symbolism. It is relatively common for patients with OCD to experience their first symptoms, or to relapse after a symptom-free period, as a function of external stress. But, beyond that, were George’s specific symptoms somehow determined by the nature of the stress? Could the unexpected loss of a young, healthy brother to a fatal accident have made George overly vigilant about his own environment and in desperate need to try to control it to prevent a similar sudden tragedy from happening to him?

However, before I could expound further on this hypothesis with George, we heard a light knock on the door. George’s wife then gently walked in, careful not to swing the door fully open in a way that might disturb George, who was still sitting in a chair in the center of the room. She was carrying an oversized bag which she carefully deposited on the floor against the wall. She then stood practically stuck to the wall.

“I thought I had given you enough time alone and was burning to ask you some questions about my role in George’s treatment,” she said. “For example, I feel sometimes like I’m colluding with him and making things worse, as when I agreed to unhinge and remove the French doors between the dining room and the living room to make the passageway safer for his nose. Should I have just said ‘no’ and expected George to deal with the anxiety of navigating the doorway? Did I do more harm than good by giving in to his OCD?”

“I think you raise a very good question,” I said. “It’s a difficult balance that you’re being asked to strike. On the one hand, it’s your natural instinct to help your husband when he asks for it, but, on the other hand, you know that giving in to his OCD can perpetuate his symptoms and allow him not to address them. In my opinion, the best way to handle this is to try to accommodate the severe OCD fears which, if not allayed, would paralyze him. However, you should try to avoid giving in to those lesser fears that you think he can handle on his own. There’s a way to do this that teaches him how to work through his anxiety and be more independent.”

As I tried to explain to George’s wife her role in treating her husband’s OCD symptoms, I couldn’t help but think of a possible indirect role she may have played in causing them. From my previous conversations with George about his wife, and from what I witnessed in the parking lot when she rescued a useless filing cabinet from the dumpster and took it home, it was relatively clear that George’s wife suffered from a form of OCD, too, manifesting primarily in hoarding behavior. Could it be that her collections of useless objects and magazines that are cluttering the house were even more obstructive to George than the French doors in the example she gave? Would another way to understand George’s specific symptom and his need for space be that it’s an unconscious attack against his wife for the hoarding that had severely cluttered their lives? By being so debilitated by objects that stick out, and by eventually needing to leave the house because of it, was George signaling to his wife his strong objection to the state of the house and her inability to fully acknowledge the extent of her own illness and get treatment for it? “A Freudian psychiatrist might read in George’s symptoms—and expose to him in the course of therapy—the following unconscious message towards his wife: It’s time for you to give the house an overdue cleaning, and it’s time for you to admit that you have OCD yourself and to do something about it.”

It was, of course, a delicate dance. While I wanted to try to point out features of George’s wife’s behavior that might have promoted and contributed to her husband’s symptoms, I could not afford to forget that George, not his wife, was my patient. It wasn’t my role to diagnose or treat her, especially since all that she was willing to accept was that she had only a “touch” of OCD. Still, I would have liked to gently explain to her the possible interplay between her “touch” of OCD and her husband’s full-blown condition, but another knock on my door followed by Dawn making her entry interrupted me.

Dawn was very careful not to swing the door fully open. Once inside, she positioned herself right along the wall, close to George’s wife, adding to the drama of the “set.” As it now stood, the configuration of bodies and furniture in my office was as follows: George in his chair in the exact center of the room, me in mine tucked in the far corner opposite the door, George’s wife standing completely vertically against the wall, and Dawn adopting the same position on the other side of the door from her. Between the two women, and also stuck to the wall, was George’s wife’s oversized bag.

“I’m not being unreasonable because I haven’t eaten all day,” Dawn said, referring to her annual Lent fast which she had just begun, “but we have a problem on our hands, and we better address this now.” Then, looking alternately at George’s wife and at the bag on the floor, she added, “You cannot do that. I saw you. You cannot take the cooking magazines from our waiting room. What’s in the dumpster outside is fair game, but not what’s inside the building! We can help you if you need help, but you cannot be taking our magazines, especially since we work hard to keep our reading material up to date compared to other clinics!”

An uncomfortable silence descended on the room which George finally tried to break with an attempt at humor. “I guess you have kleptomania on top of hoarding, my dear,” he said, gently shaking his head and chuckling briefly.

But there was nothing humorous in any of this for his wife. Her face turned deep red and her eyes tried hard to avoid the other three sets of eyes in the room. Seeing how much embarrassment she had caused, Dawn quickly sought to assuage her guilt. “But I promise to save any old issues for you if you want!” she quickly added.

"I cannot even hug my wife"

George did not wish to approach his OCD as a novel with villains and victims. He didn’t see a very convincing connection between his brother’s untimely death or his wife’s hoarding problem on the one hand, and the onset of his OCD symptoms or the nature of these symptoms on the other. The most he would agree to was that the overall level of stress that his brother’s death and his wife’s condition had caused him somehow made his vulnerability to OCD finally express itself.

And I basically agreed. I felt that pursuing these impossible-to-prove associations too forcefully against George’s stated preference could, paradoxically, lead him to attribute meaning to symptoms that he saw as essentially meaningless and indefensible. Following a psychoanalytic therapy approach that imbued symptoms with a rational dimension through cause and effect linkages ran the risk of making them “meaningful” and, hence, perhaps worthy of holding on to.

Rather, the idea of OCD as a chemical imbalance that happens for reasons that we do not fully understand is what resonated with George, in part because it took the blame away: It was no longer a personal failing on his part, nor was it his brother’s or wife’s fault. He had researched the serotonin hypothesis for OCD and was much more in favor of a chemical solution to what he viewed as essentially a chemical problem.

“So what SSRI are you starting me on?” George asked at the beginning of our third meeting, before I had fully discussed pharmacological treatments with him.

“I’m very impressed,” I said. “It looks like you’ve done your homework. Do you know how these medications work?”

“Something about serotonin,” George answered.

“Indeed,” I said. “Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs, work by increasing levels of serotonin in the brain.”

“What’s the likelihood of them working?” he asked.

“The response rate is around 50 to 60 percent, and it seems similar across all SSRIs,” I said.

“So how do you decide which one to give, then?” he asked.

“Well, I decide in part based on any previous medication trials you may have had,” I answered. “It’s also important to consider what else you may be taking currently, because drugs can interact which each other. If you have family members with OCD, we should look at what medications they responded to, since there seems to be a genetic component to response like there’s a genetic component to having OCD.”

“Well, I’ve never been treated for OCD before,” George said. “I don’t take any other meds, and I have no blood relatives with OCD to help guide us. So, it’s a clean slate!”

“Well, this leaves us with side effect profiles to help us decide,” I said. “The most likely side effect to this class of medications in a healthy young man would probably be sexual.”

“I cannot even hug my wife, let alone think of having sex,” George answered, smiling slightly at the irony. “Sexual side effects are simply not an issue for me right now.”

“Well, let’s start Zoloft, then,” I said. “It’s relatively clean and well tolerated. As with all SSRIs, though, when you’re taking them for OCD, you have to wait up to ten weeks for a response. The starting dose is usually 50 mg daily, and our target will be 100 to 200 mgs, if we’re not limited by side effects.”

"I feel fresh for a change"

Along with being his prescribing doctor, I also wanted to serve as George’s therapist, and, in many ways, George would have been the ideal candidate for therapy. A responsible and inquisitive young man, he seemed to have the youth and mental flexibility needed to make change possible and the creativity and faith it takes to see how the talking process can alter brain chemistry enough to effect this change. In the cognitive behavioral model, I imagined myself assigning him homework and him reporting back to me on his progress every week. I imagined focusing first on the basic tasks needed to meet some vital functions, such as food and hygiene. For instance, I would start by helping increase his comfort level with using utensils to eat normally again, while working on his fear of the showerhead. We could then move toward getting him back to work, perhaps part time initially, and maybe in an expanded cubicle. I would also try to help him gradually feel comfortable being intimate with his wife again: Maybe have him move back into the house at first but sleep in a different room, then in the same room but on the floor, then in the same bed, then have him hold her hand, then hug her, then….—unfortunately, though, it was impossible to get George to come in for the regular sessions needed for successful therapy. The length of time it took him to work through his anxiety enough to be able to make it to his appointments caused him to miss several sessions and made for an almost impossible therapy relationship.

On the other hand, George was very committed to taking his medication. So, instead of face-to-face weekly clinic meetings, I made the decision to treat him with the medication alone at first, and I monitored his progress and any side effects through phone contact every other week.

By our second phone contact after starting Zoloft (his fifth week on the medication), George’s voice over the phone sounded somehow more resonant and more self-assured.

“You sound clearer today, George,” I commented. “Are you feeling better?”

“I am,” George said. Then, sounding almost euphoric, he added: “But there’s also a technical reason for why I sound better.”

“A ‘technical’ reason?” I asked. “What is it?”

“Well, I’m calling from home, which helps,” he answered, “and I’m actually able to use the handset today! When I spoke with you before, I had to be on the speaker phone. I couldn’t tolerate the handset so close to my nose.”

“This is great, George,” I said. “Did you have to push yourself to use the handset for our phone call today? How much of a struggle was it?”

“It really wasn’t a struggle at all,” George answered. “I just didn’t think about it. It somehow didn’t occur to me today that the handset would hurt my nose. I only realized after dialing your number that, oh my God, I’m actually holding the phone! My only explanation is that the Zoloft must be doing its thing already…”

“I think you’re right,” I said. “I think we’re seeing an early response. That’s wonderful news that…”

“And I have more wonderful news for you,” George interrupted. “I also had a real shower this morning for the first time in a long while. I feel fresh for a change.”

“I’m sure that helps, too,” I said. “How about another basic function, eating? Are you still afraid of utensils and solid foods and can only drink fluids?”

“I certainly can’t handle pizza yet,” George answered. “The wedge thing still bothers me, so do knives and forks, but the good news on that front is that I can tolerate spoons now! For some reason, I’m more comfortable with round forms approaching my nose than pointy edges. That’s how I could eat a hamburger yesterday… A fat juicy one that tasted like the best burger I ever had!”

“It’s so nice to see you come out of this, George,” I said. “We’re only at week five, so we can still expect more improvement over the next couple of weeks. As I told you, many patients don’t get better until week ten or so.”

“Let’s up the dose anyway, Doc!” George said.

“Well, you’re tolerating 50 mg pretty well, so let’s go up to 100 mg and stay there for a while,” I concurred. “Call me at the same time in two weeks, and we’ll reassess.”

But before I could let George go, I had to enquire about his wife’s hoarding… We had decided that her behavior was contributing to my patient’s symptoms by increasing the ambient stress in the household, so I felt justified enquiring into it.

“Before you go,” I said, “can I ask you how your wife is doing with her hoarding these days? You said you moved back in, so I want to be optimistic and think that the house feels more hospitable to you. I realize it’s not my place to treat her, but…”

“Funny you should ask!” George interrupted. “You know, her mother who’s a neat freak, her father who’s a perfectionist in his own right and I who worry about hurting my nose,all have, for years, been telling her to clean the house up, but to no avail. Until, that is, your Dawn caught her in the act of stocking up! Well, I’m glad to report that your clerk’s intervention is working where nothing else ever has! Maybe out of embarrassment over what happened, my wife has, for the first time, decided to confront her problem. She has finally agreed to hire a professional declutterer that her mom recommended: a very methodical woman with a stern old nun quality to her who will not take no for an answer when my wife refuses to let her throw something—exactly what my wife needs! Well, ‘Mother Superior’ as we started calling her has already begun her journey into the heart of darkness that is our kitchen. The output so far, in case you’re wondering? Fifteen boxes of cooking magazines, yellowed with age, not extra virgin olive oil stains!”

Pizza: The Final Frontier

Exactly two weeks after our last phone contact, at the time of the scheduled call, instead of my phone ringing, I heard an assertive knock on my door. It was George, only much cleaner than at our last face-to-face meeting some two months before. His wife stood right next to him, her svelte frame curving slightly in George’s direction under pressure from his arm which he had wrapped tightly around her waist. Sight of the intimate-looking couple clearly indicated to me that the three-, two- or even one-foot rule was no longer in effect. And that George was probably not having sexual side effects!

“What a nice surprise!” I said, addressing George. “You look great.”

“Doesn’t he now?” his wife answered. “I have my husband back. He even drove us here!”

“And we have a gift for you,” George said, handing me a wedge-shaped present wrapped in aluminum foil and smelling of pepperoni.

“You brought me pizza?!” I asked, surprised and moved by this gesture.

“Yes,” George answered. “I bet no patient has ever given you pizza before!”

“No, no patient ever has,” I concurred. “This is a first, indeed. Thank you.”

“Well, pizza has been a recurring theme in our conversations,” George said, “and, in a way, it’s the best measure of how both silly and disabling my OCD was. All this makes it a fitting final thank you gift for you.”

“Well, I’m very touched, George,” I said. “Thank you again.”

“Wait!” his wife interjected, “It gets even better…”

“How much better can it get?” I asked, wondering what other pleasant surprises the couple had in store for me.

“It’s home-made!” George said, elated at the concept of a home-cooked meal.

“You’re able to use your stove again?!” I almost gasped as I addressed George’s wife.

“I can, indeed!” she said, “and we have our declutterer, or ‘Mother Superior,’ to thank for it! I just have to make sure I maintain now. ‘For each item that makes it into the sanctum of your home, an equal or larger item has to exit,’ she ceremoniously warned me at our last meeting.”

“In my experience, this is probably the best advice for hoarders and more likely to help than any medication or even therapy intervention,” I said. “Your approach of having someone do the throwing for you while you deal with the anxiety that this generates, and while you work on maintaining the result, is probably the way to go.” Then, turning toward George, I said, “What you have to maintain, and probably for a while, is your medication…”

“Oh, don’t worry, Doc,” George said. “I don’t plan to stop it anytime soon.” Later, watching George walk away from my office, his arm wrapped around his wife’s waist, all I could think of was how satisfying my cold pizza was going to be. With anticipation, I reached for the carefully wrapped wedge, slowly undoing the aluminum foil as I comfortably sat myself in the oversized patient chair in my office, turning it around so I could face the window. I raised my feet, resting them on the window sill, and prepared to take my fist bite. But as I was about to do so, an interesting scene unfolding in the parking lot outside my window caught my eye. I saw Dawn, all in black in observance of Good Friday, trying to catch up with George’s wife, carrying what looked like a high stack of magazines she had saved for her. I then saw George’s wife give her a big hug but decline the apparent gift, as suggested by Dawn energetically tossing the entire stack into the dumpster. The three then conversed briefly before George opened his car trunk, and all joined forces to pull a familiar-looking filing cabinet out of the trunk and throw it into the dumpster.

Pizza never tasted so good…

 

Talk is Cheap. Really.

A few days ago, I read yet another article comparing the costs and effectiveness of psychotherapy and medication. While both have benefits, the article stated, medication is cheaper. Hmm. I wondered. My insurance company has a handy calculator that allows me to estimate the costs of various types of care, so I figured I’d check it out.

Well, as it turns out, generic antidepressants are pretty inexpensive—definitely cheaper than psychotherapy for insured and insurer. But let’s consider my modal client. You’ve all worked with someone very much like her. She is a midlife woman with trauma, a history of addiction and/or an eating disorder, and a lifetime collection of upwards of a dozen other psychiatric diagnoses. She occupies that portion of the diagnostic map variously labeled as bipolar, borderline, or PTSD. She has had several therapists and hospitalizations, and has had numerous trials of medications. She is rarely just taking an inexpensive generic antidepressant.

Suppose, like many, she found that a brand name antidepressant was more effective for her than the generic? Or that she had already tried just about everything and needed something “new”” Ahh. Let us ask the expense calculator. Twenty dollars for a month’s supply quickly jumps into the $150-200 per month range for a newer drug such as Pristiq, or even for a brand medication that has been around for decades such as Effexor. And suppose that little black rain cloud is still following her around? Suppose she needs a little dash of Abilify to amplify the effects of her antidepressant? Well, now we’re talking. Adding the lowest dose of this medication would add just under $700 per month (sometimes used similarly, Geodon is about half this cost, Seroquel less than a quarter). So now the cost of her medication is up to $800-850 per month. If we create a pharmaceutical cocktail that is far from uncommon by throwing in a mood stabilizer, or maybe a benzodiazepine or sleep medication (Ambien and Lunesta are impressive at over $200 per month), the price tag soars even higher.

Granted, assuming you are fortunate enough to have insurance, this is not the out-of-pocket cost. A client with insurance will pay a co-pay that is generally tiered, with generics and “preferred” medications costing less than brand products. Brand products can easily cost $50 per month, often more. So let’s see, with a brand antidepressant tweaked with Abilify we get $100 per month for the client, and, so the insurance company tells us, $750 ($850 minus co-pays) for the insurance company, or $1200 per year for the client, and a whopping $9,000 per year cost for the insurance company. If I were an insurance company and I were telling the truth about my costs, I’d really be thinking about talking up talk therapy.

Now let’s look at the costs of psychotherapy and imagine that a therapist might be paid by an insurer at a “reasonable and customary” rate of $100 for an individual session (and for many areas of the country, this would be a very sweet dream indeed). Say you see your client once weekly. Perhaps your client’s co-pay is $40 per session, or $160 per month. The insurance company pays a balance of $240. Say, though, just for kicks, the insurance company has set its rates just a tad lower. Suppose they set their R&C at $65 per session. Let’s give our client a $25 co-pay, leaving the insurer responsible for the $40 balance. Anybody seen this? Checked out Medicare rates lately? At 44 sessions a year (the number of annual visits I estimate for a weekly client, given illnesses, vacations, etc.) the $100 session costs the client $1760 per year; the insurer $2640. The $65 session costs the client $1100; the insurer $1760. Now return to Paragraph Four and review the annual costs of a newer or brand antidepressant and Abilify.

You will say, fairly, that I’m comparing an expensive medication option to a typical psychotherapy option. Yes, I am. But this happens every day in my practice—I am providing a typical psychotherapy protocol to clients on complex and expensive psychiatric medications. You will also say that no one would treat this modal client with only medication or only talk therapy, and you would probably be right. It should not be an either/or issue. We could wonder, however, for the sake of argument, which option offers your client or their insurer the most bang for their buck? Is it one year of Abilify for $8400, or one year of weekly individual sessions at $100 for $4400, or one year of individual sessions at $65 for $2860, or, heaven forfend, one year of twice weekly sessions for $8800 (at $100) or $5720 (at $65)?

Co-pays of course increase the cost of psychotherapy to the client. Twice weekly sessions for our $40 co-pay client add up to a hefty $320 per month. This reality is probably partly where we get the idea that therapy costs more. But in the total dollars that someone is paying—insured and/or insurer—it is not always quite so clear. If the total cost is roughly the same, how do we assess the relative value of 365 pills vs. 88 sessions of psychotherapy for a complex client? A year of Pristiq and Ambien or a year of psychotherapy? What is their relative potential for healing? How do we measure their respective long term effectiveness? How do we compare potential side effects? Who is benefitting from the argument that medication is cheaper than psychotherapy? Who funds outcome research for medications? Who funds outcome research for psychotherapy? Who is framing our discourse? Let’s talk about it.

Clocked

I once took an informal survey of clinicians to find out a) where in their office they keep their clocks and b) how they ended their sessions. I found out we are a crafty lot indeed. Clever too.
Some of us keep a big round clock somewhere behind where the client sits, so it can be seen either directly or with peripheral vision at all times. Some of us rely on our wrist watches. Some of us sport large analogues and others digital, depending on our vision. This enables seemingly nonchalant glancing at the time without being too obvious. And some of us try to glance at the watches of our patients if they are wearing one.

Others have clocks that are in the direct line of vision of the patient, and others have a clock (some digital and some analogue) that can be seen easily by both patient and therapist.

Some of us have patients who lie down on the couch, thus giving us carte blanche to not only look at the time as many times as we’d like, but stare at it the whole session. (Not that many of us do that.)
Some of us admit to looking at the clock not just for time keeping, but as an action of sorts. And we might be well served to study why, at any given point in a session, we are prompted to check the time. What feeling are we avoiding? What feeling are we having? What is or is not happening in the session that prompts us to look at the clock? And moreover, do we feel glad if there is a lot of session time remaining, or disappointed?

You are just keeping time, you say.

Not so fast.

I am always interested in what prompts my clients to check the time in session. When they check their watch (or my clock, which is irritatingly difficult for both me and them to see) I ask “too much time left or too little?” Some folks shrug. Others give credence to the question and we explore it a bit. What are they not saying with words that they said by checking the time? (Why have I not, in all my years in practice, gotten a better clock, I don’t yet want to understand.)

And then there’s how we end our sessions. My own analyst simply gets up from her chair. I could be right in the middle of the most amazing insight, the most painful memory, and all the sudden she is lurking somewhere in my peripheral vision. Her clock is not where I can see it, nor do I wear a watch. And I lie down on the couch for my sessions, so if she did not make herself visible in this way, I would just keep talking.

By the way, I dislike this practice. For a while, she switched, at my behest, to saying some version of “well, it’s that time now.” Subtle? Gentle? Not so much. But what are the options? Some of us say, “It’s time to stop.” Or “Our time is up now.” Other possibilities: “We have to stop.” “The session is over.” Or “Time to wrap up for now.” Or “We will have to pick right up with this next time” or “Okay, then,” accompanied by a nod of sorts. Some of us start fidgeting in our chairs, reach for our appointment books, or make an obvious glance at the clock (wherever it happens to be).

One colleague friend of mine who has been practicing for many years tells me that even though she herself does a good bit of clock watching, when she sees her own therapist checking the time she feels wounded. She assumes that her therapist is anxious to end the session and get rid of her. They’ve unpacked it of course, and agree that it’s quite similar to her experiencing her mother as always having been in a hurry to rush off somewhere, leaving her to her own devices. And no matter how her therapist ends the session she always seems to feel a rush of rejection.

I suppose I’m given to wondering how much it matters really. How we keep time and how we close our hours. But I think there is meaning to it. Like everything else we do in session, how we run things can leave a quiet emotional hand print, and it may be good to study it a bit. All in good time of course.

The Power of Custom in Psychotherapy

It’s the kind of telephone call that every therapist gets and every therapist hates to get.

“I’m sorry to disappoint you on such short notice, but I can’t come in today.”

It was a patient who had come only once before, the week prior, and though he was articulate about what troubled him, one could discern that he was deeply conflicted about whether he even wanted help at all to solve his problems or even ease his difficulties. So it was no surprise to me when he attempted to cancel.

But here he was, live on the phone, the morning of his appointment, his words saying one thing, I’m not coming—but his voice full of conflict and ambivalence. One could sense the pulse of life in him, fragile and quivering.

Patients cancel with painfully short notice or sometimes with no notice at all. That is the way of the world. It’s a loss for them, for you, a loss of money and time. Most often there is little to be done. You put the receiver down and regrettably, you write them off. People will be people, you tell yourself. But every once in a while, you get a feeling that someone who ordinarily might cancel, ought to be encouraged, encouraged that is to keep the appointment. Was this one of those people, I wondered.

“Is there anything keeping you from making your appointment today?” I asked.

“Well, it’s just that as I explained last week, I wasn’t sure if I wanted to come at all…”

“Yes, you are in conflict, that’s true. But you know it is customary, usual and customary that is, to keep appointments unless they were canceled with 24 hours notice. You’re aware of that custom, aren’t you?"

“Hmm…it’s a custom? I suppose it is,” he said haltingly, sparingly. Okay, I will keep the appointment.” And so it was.

What is it about customs that seem to excite less resistance while “laws” and commandments appear to excite more resistance?

From my own experience it would seem that "customs" act in some sense seem to lubricate the traumatized psyche to negotiate the torturous demands of id and superego while "laws" further tighten an already overloaded, cramped psyche.

***
In my neighborhood of Orthodox Jews there are many families with young children. One mother once came to me a couple of years ago. “My 8-year-old daughter, she refuses to take a bath or shower, even on Fridays before the Sabbath.”

“What do you tell her?” I ask.

“I tell her that she has to do it; that she smells or will smell very badly and no one will want to be near her or even come to play with her.”

“And what is her response?”

“It seems to make her even more stubborn. She won’t do it. She says she doesn’t care. She just won’t.”

“Consider telling her that it is the custom in Passaic, New Jersey that girls take a bath before the Sabbath—emphasize that she doesn’t have to, but that is the custom. Say this and no more.”
The mother followed through with the suggestion and reported back to me with pleasure and satisfaction: “My daughter said, ‘if it’s the custom, then I will do it’ and she went into the bath just like that.”

Our Hungry Selves: Women, Eating and Identity

The Tyranny of Slenderness

In the early eighties I wrote several books about eating disorders; one of them became a national best seller. In the first book: The Obsession, Reflections on the Tyranny of Slenderness, I researched the way our culture's fear of women was directed against women's bodies and, in particular, against a large woman's body. I felt that the cultural preference for very slender women revealed a wish to see women reduce themselves as women and relinquish their power.

Here’s how I reasoned back then: “The body holds meaning. A woman obsessed with the size of her body, wishing to make her breasts and thighs and hips and belly smaller and less apparent, may be expressing the fact that she feels uncomfortable being female in this culture. A woman obsessed with the size of her appetite, wishing to control her hungers and urges, may be expressing the fact that she has been taught to regard her emotional life, her passions and 'appetites,' as dangerous, requiring control and careful monitoring. “A woman obsessed with the reduction of her flesh may be revealing the fact that she is alienated from a natural source of female power and has not been allowed to develop a reverential feeling for her body.””

The second book, The Hungry Self: Women, Eating and Identity, studied the way a woman's hunger for self-development, creative expression and liberation might express itself if it was not recognized as a hunger for food. I was curious about the emotion and conflict and turbulence that might be disguised as a craving for food, and especially “forbidden” foods like carbohydrates and sweets. “In [this] book I extend [my] analysis to include the mother/daughter bond and the issue of failed female development….We cannot heal ourselves until we understand the hidden struggle for self-development that eating disorders bring to expression in a covert way. We cannot indeed even begin to think of self-healing until we stop using the words “eating disorders” to hide from ourselves the formidable struggle for a self in which every woman suffering in her relationship to food is secretly engaged.”

In the third book, Reinventing Eve: Modern Woman in Search of a Self, I issued a call to women to step up and re-invent ourselves, freeing ourselves from the pressures and constraints of a society that feared women. I saw Eve as a radical, the first woman who was forbidden to eat food and who broke the taboo. “Women speaking intimately about their lives are usually, whether they know it or name it, on the far side of outworn ideas…We [have had] to start with the assumption that we knew little, had been lied to a great deal, that secrets had been kept from us, we were setting out as pioneers together, groping to find a suitable language for our experience….”

The Tyranny of Obesity

Thirty years later these ideas are still meaningful to me but my vision of possibility has been checked. “Fat is Beautiful,” a movement I greatly admired, has now become, thirty years later, a group of aging, obese women with serious health problems. I used to refer women who wanted to lose weight to other clinicians; I explained that my work offered them a chance to make peace with their body, not to change it. I now look back and think that I was rather close-minded, as if I knew what should matter to every woman who came to me for help.

Over these thirty years I've counseled countless women, discussed these issues with them, found them open to these ideas, yet progressively we have realized that it was no easy task to overcome the predominant dislike for big, fat or obese women. This overcoming of cultural dictates is a task suitable for some of us, not for everyone, and why should it be? Many women would rather work towards the body our culture admires than analyze the reasons they dislike their body as it is.

When I began to speak these ideas publicly, women who had read my earlier books were shocked; they felt that I had abandoned them in their quest to accept their body and their appetites. This new orientation seemed a betrayal, a renunciation of my earlier thinking with its cultural and psychological understandings. But I myself had begun to feel that my earlier ideas were hardening into an absolute, as if what was right for some women had to be right for all women, another once-size-fits-all approach to women and food.

I’ve had to explain that these days more and more women have to lose weight for the sake of their health, and that my clients and I had found a way to transform dieting from a self-defeating, frustrating, futile exercise into a useful therapeutic tool. A diet is—or can be—a way of becoming conscious of why one eats or feels driven to eat. Paradoxically, limiting what we eat is often the most direct way to uncover the feelings that drive us into self-destructive eating. Earlier, I had been opposed to the very idea of dieting, now I was willing to offer women help if they chose to diet. I left the decision to them, offering them both possibilities of work—towards body acceptance, weight loss, or sometimes the two together.

But there is more. There are other changes during the last thirty years that I have come to take very seriously. Following Michael Pollan, I began to study the food we are given to eat, so much of which has been degraded. The additives in it actively cause weight gain, and it is offered up in mega portions we tend to accept because there they are on the plate in front of us. As Michael Pollan writes: "Researchers have found that people (and animals) presented with large portions will eat up to 30 percent more than they would otherwise." Some of the weight we unhappily carry around with us is not really ours, it isn't natural, we haven't chosen it. Much of it has come upon us in surreptitious ways, through mysteriously named presences in our food, like high fructose corn syrup and its near-relations—aspartamine, glucose, dextrose, maltodextrin, maltose—which most people do not recognize as sweeteners. Even when reading a label and consciously hoping to avoid sugar, we end up with sweetening agents we don't want.

The Tyranny of American Culture

Thirty years ago I was asked to help people suffering from anorexia, bulimia and compulsive eating; these days women are calling me because, over the years, they have gained so much weight their doctors are alarmed for them. It was short-sighted to send them to someone else when I was a person who had dieted on and off for most of my life, at times winning, at times losing, the battle against our culture’s standards. And wasn’t I now, just as then, responding to a cry for help from our culture? After all, three of every five Americans are overweight. Obesity is an epidemic.

And so too is a woman's unhappy preoccupation with the size and shape of her body, or some part of her body, or some new diet that promises to change her body. I know this, not only from my clients, but far more intimately from myself. “I am a feminist, I care about women's self-development and the cultural and psychological obstacles that inhibit it, yet I have struggled, since the age of seventeen, to be at home in a body that has never been overweight but still has not been acceptable to me.” In spite of my three books about women and food, and all the lectures I have given, and the deep conversations in which I've been engaged; even in spite of the fact that I never any longer eat compulsively, a preoccupation with food and body size is still hanging around in my life. As a result, I can no longer underestimate the power of this conflict, as I observe it listing towards a feminist understanding about a woman's right to make decisions about her body, free of cultural pressures, and then spinning off in the opposite direction towards the next miracle diet that comes along, promising a body that conforms to our culture's punishing ideals. Weight and body size present us with a problem for which we don’t have an adequate solution.

Taken together, these are good reasons to change one’s point of view. I have changed mine in an effort to supplement—not replace—my earlier work. I intend to help people find the right diet and support them while they are losing weight, an emotionally demanding task whatever the nature of the diet. But losing weight is only part of it; we have to learn to eat in a way that often contradicts everything we’ve been taught about healthy nutrition. Not three meals a day but a small meal every couple of hours; not avoiding water because it may produce weight gain but drinking quarts of it; eating at night, before bed, because the body even in sleep requires 500 calories to keep itself going. Eating fat because we feel nourished by it, learning what are desirable portions, eating local produce because the food contains more of what food should contain and will therefore nourish us in smaller amounts. There is no one diet that is suitable for everyone—creating the right diet has elements of a quest for identity, a coming to know and be able to choose what is good for one. If this isn’t meaningful therapeutic work I don’t know what is.

Catherine's Story

A client of many years returned to work with me. Her doctor had just told her she had to lose between 25 and 40 pounds because her medical condition was severe. She came full of despair, wondering how we could approach this assignment since we had always discussed body-acceptance and appreciation for big and voluptuous women, which she was. Beautiful, certainly; but perhaps not healthy?

I began to work with Catherine in 1995. She was 26 at the time, a graduate from an Ivy League school, a women’s studies major who sought me out because she had read my books. She came from a small town on the East Coast, from a family active in their Episcopal church. For her to leave home, move to the West Coast, live with a man to whom she was not married, give up all religious affiliation and develop an interest in feminism while her two sisters and one brother remained close to home, was daring. She had graduated with honors and gone out into the world eager to make the most of herself. But this promising development had stalled. She was working as a secretary at a job she hated, was preoccupied with compulsive eating and her body’s size, found life meaningless and disappointing, described herself as depressed and despairing and at times suicidal. I was then in training with Otto Will, who had trained with Harry Stack Sullivan, who had worked with Freda Fromm Reichman. I was following their interpersonal approach with a dose of object relations mixed in, supplemented by an analytic interest in childhood memories.

Catherine found it almost impossible to cook for herself, although she had no trouble cooking on the night assigned to her by her collective. She didn’t plan for her meals but grazed throughout the day, almost entirely on cookies, candies and anything sweet. She ate in secret, disliked herself for doing so, was afraid that I was judging her, and suffered from guilt and remorse. Together, we observed the nuances of our relationship as it developed over many years, curious about the fact that she always stopped for food before her session and immediately went out afterwards for a piece of cake. She suggested that she was filling herself up so as not to bring a ferocious desire to eat into the room with me, evidently afraid that she would gobble me up. The cake that came after the session was to restore the energy that she felt had been depleted in thinking about these issues. She discovered that she refused to cook for herself because she wanted her mother to cook for her and would rather not eat than have to provide food for herself. Although she had voluntarily left the family for a larger life, she missed the closeness and safety of the small town, their church and especially her mother’s devotion to feeding the family. She was brilliant and analytic and good at interpreting symptoms; her childhood memories grew richer and more plentiful over the years, as did her ability to piece together a plausible narrative of her childhood. “Catherine ate in secret, disliked herself for doing so, was afraid that I was judging her, and suffered from guilt and remorse.”

She was the youngest in her family, and by the time she arrived her mother was exhausted and depleted. She hadn’t wanted another child, her milk dried up when Catherine was a few weeks old, and the care of the infant was largely handed over to her elder sister. Nevertheless, on the surface they were a happy, close-knit family, admired in their church and appreciated for their good works. Mother spent the day cooking for them, trying out new menus and culinary ideas, seemingly satisfied with her life but with an undercurrent of bitterness only Catherine seemed to recognize. Although well fed by her mother as she was growing up, Catherine began to wonder if she’d ever been nourished. Even her desire to have mother cook for her now that she was an adult began to seem a poignant wish that mother’s care and even her cooking had contained more authentic nourishment. The family dinners, which she’d always remembered as happy occasions, began to reveal their seams of stress—her older sister resenting her for the care she’d given her, her brother, two years older, in fierce competition for attention, her father absent, the second sister gentle and meek, as if she’d early decided that life was not going to offer her much, mother tyrannical when it came to the family’s enjoyment of her cooking. Dinner table conversation was lively but largely restricted to comments and conversation about food.

Catherine’s life changed dramatically through our work. She left her job, started a not-for-profit organization that became very successful, developed a strong interest in psychology, got an M.A. in counseling, worked out an honest and passionate relationship with her boyfriend, bought a house with several friends and lived collectively. When she got pregnant she decided to stop her work with me, owing both to financial concerns and to a general feeling that we had accomplished much and that she wasn’t capable at that time of going further. She still ate compulsively, giving us both the impression there was a lot more to understand.

I present this story in order to muse about the fact that excellent psychological work can be done that nevertheless does not reach a troubling emotional core. This did not surprise me. In my decades of work with eating disorders I have found that the underlying reasons a person eats compulsively, or eats more than they want, or far less than they ought, are hard to experience as direct, unmediated emotional events. The symptoms of a troubled relationship to food are so powerful and so deeply ingrained in the way one soothes and rewards oneself, hides from loneliness, expresses outrage and sorrow and in general shuts off consciousness, that it is hard to get beneath symptom into the raw emotion that is giving rise to it. She sensed that there was more to her emotional life than we'd yet explored; nevertheless, that is where we left it until, six years later, she came to speak with me about her doctor’s insistence that she lose weight.

Catherine's Diary

I have permission to quote from the diary she kept during the first three weeks of the diet. My comments follow her diary entries. This is not a description of the way Catherine and I worked together but an account of her process of uncovering meaning in what earlier had been unconscious, compulsive acts.

Catherine: I have a strange sensation—I am not really that hungry, though I can feel an underlying pull in my stomach now that's it's been a few hours since my breakfast. I am sad and irritable. My mind brightly goes to "treat" several times an hour, for myself, and socially ("like, oh I should take the girls out for burritos for lunch!" "I want a latte and a scone!"). Then I am disappointed in some deep way when I remember, but it's not exactly about being hungry. Fascinating. What is it about?

I am interested in the fact that from the first day of dieting hunger is put under suspicion. It can’t be taken at face value. This is an insight Catherine has not had before.

Catherine: Today, the glutton, the sensualist in me rebels. I can feel a sense of victimization mounting. "I hate restriction, I don't want to do this."

Here, as we can see, the issue has now become one of dislike for restriction. Insight is developing: this is a character trait, not an eating behavior. Catherine has not previously named in herself this rebellion against limitation. Indeed, it would be hard to recognize when there is a lifetime pattern of instant self-gratification.

Catherine: “OK, this is bearable, I am OK. But the sense of comfort I am missing—I am working so hard, I am so tired and worn out from childcare. How will I replace food as comfort? How? How? So far there is no replacement and I’m not sure there ever could be one. I am working so hard.

An additional meaning has been attributed to food. It is now recognized not only as a comfort but also as a reward for having had a hard time. This is a steady growth in the capacity to think symbolically. Hunger is no longer simply hunger and food is no longer simply food.

Catherine: It’s not hunger that’s hard. What I have to know about myself is what’s hard. I’d rather not know.

The progression of self-awareness has moved on into the striking discovery that the struggle with food has been a drama about self-knowledge. Or rather, about refusing self-knowledge. This is a lot of insight to achieve in a week.

Catherine: Last night at the party someone said I seemed like a happy person and I felt so embarrassed I almost cried. "I am having a terrible time, I'm filled with jealousy and poison," I thought. "Why does she think I'm happy?

Catherine has always had the capacity to seem happy, well-adjusted and cheerful, traits that were required by her family. They’ve been a second skin and only now are being viewed as alien. Although these traits have served as a protective covering, they have also been misleading as to who she really is. As she comes to know herself authentically, a wish to be authentically known begins to emerge.

Catherine: The depressive, dark, roiling, murky, angry, resentful, revengeful part of me is so present now when I am alone and I never show it in public—Who is this? I can see why she’s been out of sight. I don’t want her. I feel suffocated by these feelings and their bare truth. I can't push this part of me away and "think positive." I must integrate, integrate, integrate. I wish I could cry, but I feel so bottled up. Maybe I will cry today. Would crying be more satisfying than a burrito?

I thought of this as an important breakthrough. A subterranean world of feeling, now present in her awareness, has brought in the crucial thought that an ability to feel, to cry, or even to want to feel might be more satisfying than eating.

Catherine: It's very hard for me. These feelings are hard for me. I didn’t know I was filled with so much poison. Feeling these feelings is what’s hard for me. I don’t like who I am. But I do like myself for knowing all this.

The capacity to know and name herself is making the emergence of difficult self-knowledge bearable. We know how crucial this particular exchange is in psychological work. Not liking who one is but liking oneself for the ability to know it. The supposed safety of not-knowing is falling away before the power of insight.

Catherine: Last night I dreamed I was trying to warn a school full of small children (preschool) and teachers that a huge tidal wave was coming. Everyone was very busy and distracted and could not focus. Then I was in a meeting where someone was presenting us with his new beautiful chocolate bar. I raised my hand and asked, "What was your aesthetic inspiration for making this chocolate?"

I often dream about tidal waves: massive, blind destruction. But I never thought they were about what I was feeling. Or not feeling.

I think they represent my dread and fear and the sense of overwhelm I have about things. And the chocolate is so funny! That’s what I’ve found in my life, a chocolate bar to keep me safe against a tidal wave.

This is a curious insight because in fact the chocolate bar and its sister-sweets have served to protect her from the tidal wave of feelings that she fears. They’ve worked; they’ve captured her consciousness and shut it off. That’s why chocolate and muffins and brownies have been so hard to give up. Nevertheless, they are now seen for what they are and have become ludicrous.

Catherine: Any choice about my size, about losing weight, is astonishing to me. It lifts a lifetime of discouragement. How do I comfort and reward myself if not with food? (I want to replace compulsive eating with compulsive writing!) My shoulders ache, my eyes are heavy with un-slept sleep. I want to lie down right now in this library and cry.

Wonderful, this wish to replace compulsive eating with compulsive writing. She is in fact a very good writer and will, in a few months, discover that when she sits down to write, the inner turbulence she feels will subside. Not every time, not completely, but often enough to make her aware she has a choice between chocolate and self-expression.

Catherine: It's getting somewhat easier for me. Still many fantasies of treats, but it is balanced out by feelings of excitement and accomplishment. After all, it wasn’t hunger that was the problem. But all this poison inside me. So, now that I know it’s here? Now what? Can I just live with it? I don’t think so. But that’s what I’ve been doing, isn’t it?

The sense that these feelings are unbearable has not gone away, but there is the simultaneous discovery that after all they have been borne. The unbearable has become bearable. If this happens once, it can happen again: “I can’t live with it, but paradoxically I’ve just discovered that I have been living with it.”

Catherine: Clothes that were a bit too tight feel good and are fitting. Joy. Joy. JOY. Having these intense, florid cravings a few times a day. They stop me in my tracks. Today it was my childhood birthday cakes—"bakery cakes" we called them—white cake and frosting with clusters of pink frosting roses, they were even better slightly stale. Everyone wanted a rose on their slice—a mouthful of pure frosting. I practically moaned aloud as I pictured this. Bizarre. I could eat a truckload of that soft, fragrant, sweet white cake and frosting. Yesterday had a craving about thick ice cream shakes full of candy. Amazing that this is there, so deeply. Much much more than a memory. I can right now taste that pink frosting. Like those frosting roses were going to make up for everything that wasn’t so great in our childhood?

I still find it extraordinary that this transformational journey is taking place simply because Catherine isn’t eating in the way she ordinarily would. Through this precise memory, this sensually present image of the pink frosting roses, she has understood the full power of the emotions that she is engaging.

Catherine: I am starkly alone with all these bad feelings. I am hungry and I want to eat. I am sad and I want a treat and a reward. The only thing I can think of is going to bed, not so much as a reward but as a way to live through this. I am going to live through this. I have to live through this.

I admire this knowledge, this clear seeing of these very difficult feelings and the search for something other than food to see her through. Above all I am taken with this resolution: “I am going to live through this. I have to live through this.” It has some of the quality of a hero’s, or more precisely, a heroine’s journey.

Catherine: It gets easier. I am living with medium to mild cravings and longings; not much hunger; and a mounting pleasure in what I have done. It has been so hard and it’s not about hunger. I have been wrestling with an angel and trying to find my meaning in it all. The feelings are so intense: jealousy, grief, rage, cruelty, indifference, helplessness, mad cravings and feeling crushed. It's like living through a hurricane at times. I’m thinking again this is the hardest thing I’ve ever done in my life. But somehow I’m doing it.

I take this testimony seriously; this probably is the hardest thing she’s ever done in her life, harder than giving birth or separating from her family. The newly discovered feelings write the emotional narrative that had been driven out of awareness but was always lurking, lurking, driving the compulsion to eat.

Catherine: I am at my desired weight. I am really pleased. It's amazing. On the feelings front, I am in lots of turmoil. My temper is short, I am touchy and sad. This is the perfect moment to "assault eat." And I will not. I want to be able to handle my feelings and not use food to soothe them, but will I be able to do that for the rest of my life? Maybe if I ever am told I have 3 months to live I promise myself I will eat only ice cream.

I love the way she can simply say, after a lifetime of struggle with eating: I will not. She has acquired choice where she previously experienced compulsion. This transformation of compulsion into choice may be the single most crucial accomplishment in anyone’s therapeutic work.

Catherine: I want support from you and from my man but I feel vulnerable and raw when I think about sharing all this. But maybe it will be better if I talk to him? Maybe I will feel more recognized for how hard this is for me? I am not sure.

Food has so many purposes, meanings and uses; no wonder it’s so hard to work them all out. You give up food as comfort then it shows up as reward; you recognize it as a consolation, then it appears as an interpersonal shield.

Catherine: I spoke to you on the phone about how I'm feeling today. I'm noticing this kind or foundational feeling (that's the word I keep finding)—as if I have more of a right to be here. I think it has to do with feeling proud of myself for doing the hardest thing I can do. Working on my relationship to food is the oldest, toughest, most entrenched part of me. As we said today—it's not likely for me to find something harder. With my clients, I feel a new sense of balance, of rootedness. If I can deal with this for myself, I can ask them to do the hard things they need to do for themselves too. I can support them to do those things. This makes me feel transparent, more authentic. Like I am not a fraud.

This is a beautiful piece of psychological work. Catherine has discovered that experiences and moods she took at face value are actually the expression of emotions and conflicts. I love to recall that resounding phase: “I will not.” She has been able to substitute choice for compulsion. She has gained a great deal of self-respect by succeeding at something she found really difficult. She feels more confident in the work she does with her clients. She understands the meaning of her dreams, she sees life-patterns emerging, she has achieved much more self-knowledge than she’s had before. I like to think of this as the deconstruction of eating in favor of meaning. To this day, after some thirty years of work with these issues, I’m still astonished that something as seemingly mundane, concrete and literal as eating and food can have this crucial importance. Maybe it’s not surprising if we remind ourselves that our first act after birth and taking our first breath is a reaching out for food.

The Journey Continues

Successfully losing weight is not the end of the story, far from it.

Weight-loss faces anyone who has accomplished it with a number of immediate dilemmas. The body has changed but intimacy is still frightening; being dressed in size 8 clothes doesn’t necessarily secure a job; if one was shy before very likely one is still shy. A lot more social attention may be directed towards a woman who has changed her body’s size but cat calls, whistles, crude remarks, are not necessarily the attention she desires. The magic that weight-loss was supposed to produce as it solved all of life’s problems gets tarnished very fast. And there we still are, the same self in a different body, unless the dieting has helped us to change that self.

There’s still a long, hard road ahead. Learning to eat properly, sticking to the new habits one has acquired, shifting from the food of immediate gratification to food that supports health, these are going to present an ongoing struggle.

Catherine’s is not a typical story. Most people who lose weight on any kind of diet do not make a transformational journey. Nevertheless, many do. My intention in writing this article is to suggest that, as clinicians, we are going to be faced increasingly with the problem of obesity and its effect on health. If we learn to use dieting as a therapeutic tool, as a way of uncovering unconscious impulses and compulsions, weight-loss may be easier to accomplish, and certainly will be more rewarding, as knowledge of the self is acquired at the same time.

In closing, I would like to point out that I am not just speaking about dieting here. Any close examination of one’s eating habits and behaviors can yield the same consciousness of deep feelings, memories and life-patterns. As clinicians, I have the impression that we tend to be overly interested in people’s sexual experience and fantasy, and far less concerned than we ought to be in what food and eating have meant to them. In that sense, there is no contradiction between my work of thirty years ago and my work now: whether an individual chooses to diet or to become conscious of the ways she eats, the shared goal can be self-knowledge. Eating behaviors, as I wrote many years ago, can be the royal road to the unconscious as much as, or maybe even more than dreams, Freud’s favorite candidates for that distinction.

Steven Hayes on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)

Why ACT?

Tony Rousmaniere: In your experience, why do seasoned therapists who may already be proficient in other therapeutic modalities choose to learn ACT? What does ACT offer them that’s different?
Steven Hayes: I think there are a few main things that ACT offers. One is you can deal with deeper clinical issues, but inside of a model that feels progressive, so when you’re pushing into new territory, you have a road map that actually feels coherent. Another piece is that it’s personally relevant to people when they’re facing issues of their own. It’s kind of critical that we do work that does not feel false or hollow in some way, and almost all the ACT practitioners I know feel uplifted by the work when they’re struggling in their personal lives. They see the relevance.

I was giving a talk in England a few years ago and there was a person there from England’s evidence-based treatment program who asked that same question of the audience. Many of them shared that it’s fun to be part of a community that doesn’t speak down to you and that engages your intellectual interests in a number of different ways. People are able to integrate their interests in philosophy, evolutionary biology, social change and transformation, stigma and prejudice into their ACT work, which is unusual.

I think a lot of our psychotherapies have gotten way too focused on DSM disorders and things of that kind, especially the more evidence-based ones, and less interested in the broad application of behavioral science to all kinds of issues around human behavior. There’s a surprising number of people, for example, who are interested in Relational Frame Theory. It’s difficult material, very geeky, and doesn’t seem like something clinicians would be interested in. In fact, they’re not initially interested in it but as the work speaks to them, they become interested in it. Why is language like this? Why are our minds like this? Why does this model work? There’s also a community of scientists in ACT who are coming to conferences and presenting their work. It’s just kind of fun to be part of a group that has that aspect to it.
 
TR: How about therapists coming from CBT or just a purely behavioral angle? Is it challenging for them to move towards the philosophical side of things? 
SH: Part of what’s interesting about ACT is, when you go to an Association for Contextual Behavioral Science conference, which is the ACT community, there’s kind of a fruit-nut-seed mix of people there. There’s people from the gestalt, existential and humanistic side of things as well as behavioral and CBT folks. Because ACT sort of emerged out of behavior analysis, it includes some pretty hardcore Capital B behavioral people. Of the various groups, though, I think it’s hardest for traditional CBT folks because we’ve waved people off of some popular CBT methods that we just don’t think are very important or produce good outcomes. Especially detecting, challenging, disputing and changing cognitions—it’s just not something that we do very much at all. It can be hard for them to let go of these methods and can take some time to adjust.

We may do psycho education and cognitive reappraisal, but it’s just too dangerous and too close to things that are going to be too hard to do and that clients are going to sometimes misuse. You would think that the behavioral folks would really hate the philosophical aspect of ACT, but actually they like it a lot because they can see the connection to their tradition. And having a way to deal seriously with cognition that isn’t dismissive or reductionistic is kind of a relief to them.
 
TR: ACT is considered an evidence-based treatment?
SH: Yes, ACT and many others. I mean, Motivational Interviewing is really Rogerian thinking scaled up into evidenced-based care. People are increasingly required in agency after agency and state after state to show that their practices are evidence-based, and that’s probably even more true worldwide. There are some parts of Europe where you basically can’t practice unless you are doing things that are on a list of evidence-based treatments.
Motivational Interviewing is really Rogerian thinking scaled up into evidenced-based care.


ACT processes and procedures allow you to fit what you’re doing to the needs of an individual and create things on the fly and do things that make sense to you clinically, and yet know that you’re practicing inside an evidence-based care framework. It’s nice to not have to check your mind at the door and leave behind some of the deeper clinical issues that interest you. You don’t have to minimize or dismiss the complexity of human beings in order to make it on the list of evidence-based treatments.
 

If You're Note Busy Being Born, You're Busy Dying

TR: You mentioned that ACT is a progressive model. Can you give a concrete example of what that means or how that would appear in the work of therapy?
SH: There’s a tendency for us as therapists to get into a groove clinically speaking, with our personal style and our knowledge, and settle into it. It’s not a bad thing, but there will always be curve balls thrown by cases that we can’t reach, patients we don’t know how or what to do with, complexities that don’t yield to our methods. And if you’re not busy being born, you’re busy dying, to quote a Dylan song. So the kind of progressivity I’m talking about is the sense that we as individuals and as a field are getting better and better and more and more able to deal with what is complex and difficult, while not having to check what you already know works at the door.

So many of our evidence-based approaches basically ask people to buy in whole cloth to everything that some founder came up with. I don’t think that’s necessary, healthy or even reasonable frankly. I like to say to people when they get interested in ACT, “You’re going to find your own work inside this work. There’s a reason why you’re here, and if that’s not true then you should walk away from it.” Once you see that connection you can build on it. You can do new things and the entire community will support you.
I think our communitarian approach is one of the reasons ACT has developed so much over the years.
I think our communitarian approach is one of the reasons ACT has developed so much over the years. People bring these different ideas in and we keep adding things, subtracting things, modifying things, and extending things so there’s the sense that we’re doing more and doing better and that we’re all part of it. That’s the sort of progressivity I’m talking about.

Being part of a knowledge-development community is an exciting thing. If you look at the people who are active in the ACT world, we’re out there as trainers and writers, scientists and researchers and really sophisticated clinicians. We’re moving forward in a way that’s networked. I call it a reticulated model, meaning a web or a network where each little node has their part of the task of getting better as we move forward.
 

The DSM Kool-Aid

TR: ACT has much less of a focus on psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses than many or most other modalities. Can you talk about that and also your thoughts about the changes to the new DSM-5?
SH: We never did drink the Kool-Aid that was offered from the DSM-III onward. Not that it’s not of some use, of course, to have some sort of terminology or nosology, but it got way overextended. We don’t have any functional entities inside these syndromes. No diseases—none—have emerged. And that’s the whole point of that syndromal game—to lead you to an etiology so you can respond with proper treatment. An honest examination of it points to it being a billion dollar failure.
We never did drink the Kool-Aid that was offered from the DSM-III onward….ACT work is based more on the psychology of the normal.


ACT work is based more on the psychology of the normal. I think we have every reason to believe that most of the things that people struggle with are based on the failure to bring out normal psychological processes. Not that there aren’t abnormal processes, of course there are. But if you take, for example, our tremendously useful human capacity to problem-solve, analyze, categorize, predict and evaluate things—this process, when applied to the world within, can become very toxic. It turns your life into a problem to be solved. Once you start focusing on your sadness or your anxiety or your urges, your problem-solving processes are going to be anywhere between unhelpful and pathological. They’re going to increase your focus on things that are just a small part of what’s going on and create these kind of self-amplifying loops—like, the more you try not to think of things, the more you actually think of them. 

If you focus on the psychology of the normal as we have, we think that experiential avoidance accounts for about 25 percent of the variance in almost all of the major syndromes. But it also accounts for whether or not you can learn a new software program or are comfortable in your relationships and so on. We have to dig down and see what these processes are and how can we rein them in, because it isn’t possible—nor would we even want to—eliminate them. 

Problem solving, for example, is just too darned useful for us to check at the door, but we need to learn how to respectfully decline our mind’s invitation to use our problem-solving repertoire for our normal flow of emotional and cognitive events. That’s very hard to do, but people can learn to do that. The mindfulness folks have learned a number of methods for doing it and we’ve found some additional tools that people can integrate into their lives pretty easily. Using these tools people can become more psychologically flexible, more able to shift their attention from fear and avoidance to what they most deeply care about and want from their lives.
We need to learn how to respectfully decline our mind’s invitation to use our problem-solving repertoire for our normal flow of emotional and cognitive events.


So our approach—instead of the DSM medicalization of human suffering—is to try to dig into the processes that narrow human lives or expand them, and to learn how to measure them so that we can begin to train people to use them to evolve forward. People don’t go into therapy when life is moving forward at a reasonable clip; they go in when life is stuck or going backwards. And it’s not that they get cured or fixed, because humans are not broken, they don’t need to be fixed. They need to be supported in a way that allows them to grow and do a better job over time with the things that they really care about—their kids, their work, their intimate relationships, their sense of participation and connection with the world around them. That’s just not going to be found inside a syndromal model. It doesn’t mean you can’t draw on genetics, epigenetics, physiology and neuroscience in formulating your treatment, but not with the mindset that we’re discovering abnormal processes. 

What we’re actually discovering is the richness of human experience and what moves you forward and moves you back and how can we get evidence-based processes linked to evidence-based procedures that can be used creatively by competent clinicians. Not to fix you but to get you over that hump. From there we have a kind of family dentist model—if you run into problems again, if you find yourself in a cul-de-sac, come on back in. Part of what’s exciting about ACT work is that anybody who responds to it is likely to respond even faster the next time around because the same basic processes show up over and over again. Often just reminding people of the progress that they’ve made in the past by learning to be more open, more aware, and more actively engaged in their values is enough to get them over the new barrier that they’ve run into in their life.

Treating Addiction with ACT

TR: I’ve seen a bunch of literature recently on using ACT with addictions. What’s the ACT approach to addictions?
SH: It’s an exciting area. There are about 10 or 12 controlled studies on ACT with addictions—several very powerful ones on smoking and now some in other areas of addictive behavior. In a recent study we published in The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology titled, “Reducing Shame in Addictions: Slow and Steady Wins the Race,” we showed that you can focus ACT methods on reducing shame and self-stigma. We did a randomized trial at an inpatient unit comparing it to 12-step oriented inpatient care, and ACT interventions resulted in fewer days of substance use and higher treatment attendance at follow up.

When dealing with severe substance abuse, working with shame is critical because people have done a lot of damage, not just to themselves but to their families, their children, their work, to the things they care most about. You don’t get into a 28-day inpatient program in the modern era—at least, not in Nevada where it’s cowboy conservatives—without creating some real wreckage. You’ve probably lost your job and all the rest, and most likely someone else is footing the bill for your treatment.

Guilt actually predicts positive outcomes in substance abuse, but shame does not.
Guilt actually predicts positive outcomes in substance abuse, but shame does not. When you’ve done things that are harmful to others, guilt is a perfectly appropriate emotion; it’s something to have and experience and it can help reorient you toward what’s important in your life and what you can do to clean up the mess you have made. What shame adds on is the “I’m bad” piece—the kind of fused conceptualization of oneself as a broken organism. That’s toxic and it predicts bad outcomes.

The normal, reasonable way that a human mind tries to resolve this problem is to talk itself out of shame. The Stuart Smalley solution: “Gosh darn it, I’m good enough and people love me.” But that’s a form of suppression and it can blow up like a house of cards when people leave treatment because it’s not grounded in a deeper set of values.

What we did initially in our groups was to slow things down, to learn to just watch the mind, watch all the chatter and finger wagging and shame and blame coming up, and then dig into the part that’s useful and let go of what’s not. It sobers people up in a way.
There’s kind of a humbling that takes place when you inhale into the pain of your own history and your own addiction and then make that leap of openness.
There’s kind of a humbling that takes place when you inhale into the pain of your own history and your own addiction and then make that leap of openness. You know, “I’m willing to take a leap of faith that I’m big enough to have this feeling,” and then the intentional flexibility inside a more mindful place to now shift my attention towards what I deeply care about. Then one step at a time, one day at a time—how am I going to get there? This resonates with some of the deeper parts of the Twelve-Step tradition. There’s nothing in the Twelve-Step program, or at least what I see in the Big Book version of it, that contradicts ACT, but these principles are not always what’s being applied in treatment facilities.

For the folks participating in our ACT groups, their shame levels actually went down more slowly, but they continued to go down after treatment and their outcome rates were better. For those not in our groups, their shame levels went down more quickly while they were in treatment, but their recidivism rates were higher after treatment.
 
TR: So mindfulness work is really essential to ACT and specifically to this process of decreasing shame?
SH: Very much so. What’s true about any mindfulness work is that, if you’re going to open up, you’re going to see dark places. You can’t hide from yourself like you used to. Hiding from yourself created problems, but opening your eyes and being with yourself and watching your emotions rise and fall, being more honest about what you’re feeling, sensing, remembering, thinking—that’s also going to be difficult. I don’t think it’s by accident that mindfulness-based cognitive therapy works pretty well for people who have had depression three or more times, but is arguably inert for people who’ve only had a single depressive episode. Because if you’re going to open the door to the basement and go walking down into the basement you’re going to see stuff down there that’s not for the faint of heart.

If you’re going to do this kind of work you’re going to find pain within you and without; you’re going to see injustice, you’re going to see suffering around you. You’re going to walk into the grocery store and you’re going to see people who don’t have enough money to buy the groceries they need. You’re going to see people walking by you who have a hard time taking a next step because they’re old and in physical pain. You start opening up to a more varied kind of perspective on yourself and others that I think is more honest.

But we dare not take these Eastern traditions and simply throw them into our Western minds with the idea that we’re going to relax and walk around with a big smiley face all the time. It’s a richer soup than the kind that our western commercial culture is giving us and our children, but it’s a hard path. This study we did with shame and addiction sort of shows that giving people a healthy way to walk that path is slower, but it’s more surefooted. So we’re bringing something new, I think, to the addiction field that as it becomes more known will be helpful to people working with addictions.
 

“It’s Not a Happy-Happy, Joy-Joy Bliss Trip”

TR: It’s interesting what you say about mindfulness opening your eyes to some of the darker things in the world. Sometimes when I hear therapists or others talking about mindfulness and meditation it seems like they’re talking about a pleasure cruise to bliss land or this image of the Buddha looking all happy. It sounds like that’s not what you mean in ACT.
SH: It isn’t and frankly it’s a distortion of those traditions. Taking a compassionate approach to yourself and others only really makes sense if you know how hard that is. If it’s not connected to the pain for which compassion is useful, then it’s just another suppressive, self-delusional trip. It’s a sort of psychological tranquilizer that is undermining what it’s there for and what I think we need right now.

Science and technology are creating such a challenge for us now that we can instantly see all the horrific things happening in the world on our screens. Those destroyed homes left in the wake of the Oklahoma tornado, the Boston Marathon bombings, the faces of the Newtown victims—your children are seeing it on their screens and you can’t throw out enough televisions and iPhones and all the rest to protect them from it.
The amount of pain that we’re exposed to now is a magnitude higher than anything we evolved to face. Your great-grandparents didn’t see anything near the flow of horrific images and judgmental words and painful events that we do now.
The amount of pain that we’re exposed to now is a magnitude higher than anything we evolved to face. Your great-grandparents didn’t see anything near the flow of horrific images and judgmental words and painful events that we do now. So we need modern minds for this modern world, but it’s not a happy-happy, joy-joy, bliss trip to the beach kind of thing. It’s much more serious and sober. Not serious in the sense that it’s not fun and joyful to be alive and connected, but in the sense that it does justice to the richness of human life. And it’s right in there from an ACT point of view.

We have a saying: “In your pain you find your values and in your values you find your pain.” When you connect with things that you deeply care about that lift you up, you’ve just connected yourself into places where you can and have been hurt. If love is important to you, what are you going to do with your history of betrayals? If the joy of connecting to others is important to you, what are you going to do with the pain of being misunderstood or failing to understand others? The acceptance and mindfulness work doesn’t self-soothe and makes all of that easy; instead it gives us the openness and grounding and consciousness to be able to move our attention in a non-suppressive way towards what we care about. It empowers us to take that leap of faith that we can care, that we can have values and nobody can stop us. Like Viktor Frankl wrote about, you can take away all of my external freedoms but you can’t take away my capacity to choose to love and care about others. You just can’t do it.

With meditation, the artificial anxiety that we pump into our lives sometimes recedes very quickly, and that’s fine. But people sometimes make the mistake of becoming mindfulness junkies. That’s the psychological equivalent of a tranquilizer and it’s an abuse of the traditions. Yet I worry that many therapists use it in just this way. It’s important to have the added dimension of values and caring and compassion and participation and making a difference.
 

ACT and Social Justice

TR: Speaking of making a difference, there’s a social justice component of ACT that I haven’t heard of in very many other therapeutic modalities. Can you describe this a bit more and also maybe some specific examples of how it’s being utilized to help people?
SH: I think that’s kind of a natural extension of ACT. The same cognitive processes that allow us to have a sense of transcendence or oneness or consciousness—the I-here-nowness of consciousness itself—are based upon the ability to see the world through other people’s eyes. So it isn’t just “I,” it’s “I/You.” There’s a social extension of consciousness that happens right in the process of becoming more aware of your own processes in which you begin, suddenly, to become aware of the fact that people around you are suffering. We can model this in the lab, actually. We use Relational Frame Theory methods with kids who don’t have a sense of self, and very soon empathy begins to emerge. When I see from my eyes, it happens at the same moment that you see from yours. When I learn to feel my feelings as feelings, it happens at the same moment that I see that you have feelings—that you’re feeling, too.

The natural extension of that process then is, if I’m going to be more accepting of my emotions and try to walk with them in a values-based way, what about the difficult emotions that other people are experiencing because of things that have happened to them? This is not a kind of mindfulness work that’s alone and cut off and sort of in the corner; it extends across time, place, and persons.

Objectification, dehumanization and prejudice naturally connect to things like self-stigma. I mentioned that we’ve done that kind of work with addicts, but we’ve also done it with LGBT populations, with victims of racial and religious prejudice. It’s the natural, reasonable, sensible thing to take the next step toward reining in the parts of the mind that lead us to objectify and dehumanize others.
Can we bring a more compassionate and values-based world into existence, starting with ourselves and then extending it out?
Can we bring a more compassionate and values-based world into existence, starting with ourselves and then extending it out? 

In our research on experiential avoidance, we’ve found that part of the problem with people who are prejudiced towards others is that they are unable to take in the perspective of others. They get overwhelmed by seeing the pain of others and would rather objectify and dehumanize them than feel what they would have to feel to know what it’s like to be them. We’ve shown the same thing with social anhedonia; you don’t care about being around others unless you have the big trio of good perspective-taking, empathy towards others and not running away from pain. So you can see how the model naturally leads us to a concern for issues of social justice. In a way it’s one and the same.
I can’t cut myself off from others and objectify and dehumanize others except by attacking the processes that allow me to be more open and accepting of myself.
I can’t cut myself off from others and objectify and dehumanize others except by attacking the processes that allow me to be more open and accepting of myself.

And that gives us a way in because nobody goes into therapy saying, “Gee, I’m a bigot. What can you do for me?” But they do come in saying, “I feel distressed. I feel disconnected. I feel far away.” And it turns out that objectification and dehumanization of others produces those results for the individual.

This happens with us, too, as clinicians. You know the kind of dark humor that happens in the staff room—“Oh, Sally the Borderline has shown up.” “Oh, God! Not Sally.” I understand why people do it and don’t mean to wag my finger, but it comes very close to objectifying clients, dehumanizing them as a defense against the pain of not being able to reach them. These kinds of attitudes predict burnout and ultimately minimize your ability to make a difference with others.
 
TR: It’s so interesting to think of therapists as social change agents. Have you done research in this area too?
SH: Our very first randomized trial in the modern era—because we had a few in the ‘80s, then we went dark for 15 years while we worked out the basic model and the theory of cognition and the measures for fear—was done by a guy named Frank Bond at the University of London. He did research with people who were working in call centers in banks—a very tough job, a lot of pressure and very little pay. He compared ACT to a program that was encouraging people to take charge of the stressors in their environment and make changes so that their environment was more supportive. ACT was a more psychological model, obviously, and when people got more open and accepting and values-based, they started demanding work changes of their foremen. The thing that was keeping people small and keeping them in a box was fear—“What will my boss think if I raise this issue?’”

The values piece activated people and I’m proud of the fact that when you do the kind of work that we’re doing, you empower people who are downtrodden or on the short end of the stick. We’ve shown this in several studies, that If you are more open to your feelings, more conscious, more aware, more mindful, and more linked to your values, you will be more empowered to step up. We’re doing that now with racial minorities, ethnic minorities, religious minorities and also with a message for those who are in a majority status but who care about these issues.
Psychotherapists have a role to play not just in the area of mental health, but in social justice as well.
Psychotherapists have a role to play not just in the area of mental health, but in social justice as well.

There’s a richer journey there and I think a lot of therapists are frustrated just dealing one person at a time at a time with the results of a society that just doesn’t know how to support people in being more fully human. You can be in your therapist role but also be part of a social change effort that is linked directly to the clinical work that you’re doing.
 

Running Towards Values

TR: It seems like you’re working to shift the focus away from symptom avoidance and towards values. Does that sound right?
SH: Exactly. A whole person running towards values—not in a suppressive or avoidant way in order to feel less of anything. There’s no delete button. In the language of mathematics, this is addition and multiplication, not subtraction and division. If people can learn how to add and multiply and open up, it’s deeply empowering.
TR: I saw on your website that you’re doing a study looking at the training effects of consultation groups. Is that right?
SH: Yes. People have begun to apply some of these very same processes of openness, mindfulness and values to training itself and we have now several studies showing that we can apply these methods to therapists and they will do a better job of learning. Psychological flexibility is important to us as learners and we’re looking carefully at training and studying it—not only how we train in ACT methods themselves, but also how we use ACT to train in a variety of psychotherapy and other processes that are helpful to us in our professional roles. It’s not simply a matter of learning a clinical technology; instead, we’re trying to create a knowledge development community that takes these processes and procedures wherever they can be of use to people.
TR: Thank you so much for taking the time to share your work with us here at psychotherapy.net.
SH: It’s been a pleasure.

Embracing Your Demons: An Overview of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

Imagine a therapy that makes no attempt to reduce symptoms, but gets symptom reduction as a by-product. A therapy firmly based in the tradition of empirical science, yet has a major emphasis on values, forgiveness, acceptance, compassion, living in the present moment, and accessing a transcendent sense of self. A therapy so hard to classify that it has been described as an “existential humanistic cognitive behavioral therapy.”

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, known as “ACT” (pronounced as the word “act”) is a mindfulness-based behavioral therapy that challenges the ground rules of most Western psychology. It utilizes an eclectic mix of metaphor, paradox, and mindfulness skills, along with a wide range of experiential exercises and values-guided behavioral interventions. ACT has proven effective with a diverse range of clinical conditions: depression, OCD, workplace stress, chronic pain, the stress of terminal cancer, anxiety, PTSD, anorexia, heroin abuse, marijuana abuse, and even schizophrenia.¹ A study by Bach & Hayes² showed that with only four hours of ACT, hospital re-admission rates for schizophrenic patients dropped by 50% over the next six months.

The Goal of ACT

The goal of ACT is to create a rich and meaningful life, while accepting the pain that inevitably goes with it. “ACT” is a good abbreviation, because this therapy is about taking effective action guided by our deepest values and in which we are fully present and engaged. It is only through mindful action that we can create a meaningful life. Of course, as we attempt to create such a life, we will encounter all sorts of barriers, in the form of unpleasant and unwanted "private experiences" (thoughts, images, feelings, sensations, urges, and memories.) ACT teaches mindfulness skills as an effective way to handle these private experiences.
 

What is Mindfulness?

When I discuss mindfulness with clients, I define it as: “Consciously bringing awareness to your here-and-now experience with openness, interest and receptiveness. There are many facets to mindfulness, including living in the present moment; engaging fully in what you are doing rather than “getting lost” in your thoughts; and allowing your feelings to be as they are, letting them come and go rather than trying to control them. When we observe our private experiences with openness and receptiveness, even the most painful thoughts, feelings, sensations and memories can seem less threatening or unbearable. In this way mindfulness can help us to transform our relationship with painful thoughts and feelings in a way that reduces their impact and influence over our life.

How Does ACT Differ from Other Mindfulness-based Approaches?

ACT is one of the so-called “third wave” of behavioral therapies—along with Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR)—all of which place a major emphasis on the development of mindfulness skills.

Created in 1986 by Steve Hayes, ACT was the first of these "third wave” therapies, and currently has a considerable body of empirical data to support its effectiveness. The “first wave” of behavioral therapies, in the fifties and sixties, focused on overt behavioral change and utilized techniques linked to operant and classical conditioning principles. The “second wave” in the seventies included cognitive interventions as a key strategy. Cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) eventually came to dominate this “second wave”

ACT differs from DBT, MBCT, and MBSR in many ways. For a start, MBSR and MBCT are essentially manualized treatment protocols, designed for use with groups for treatment of stress and depression. DBT is typically a combination of group skills training and individual therapy, designed primarily for group treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder. In contrast, ACT can be used with individuals, couples and groups, both as brief therapy or long term therapy, in a wide range of clinical populations. Furthermore, rather than following a manualized protocol, ACT allows the therapist to create and individualize their own mindfulness techniques, or even to co-create them with clients.

Another primary difference is that ACT sees formal mindfulness meditation as only one way of many to teach mindfulness skills. Mindfulness skills are “divided” into four subsets:

  • Acceptance
  • Cognitive defusion
  • Contact with the present moment
  • The Observing Self

The range of ACT interventions to develop these skills is vast and continues to grow, ranging from traditional meditations on the breath through to cognitive defusion techniques.

What is Unique to Act?

ACT is the only Western psychotherapy developed in conjunction with its own basic research program into human language and cognition—Relational Frame Theory (RFT). It is beyond the scope of this article to go into RFT in detail, however, for more information see https://contextualscience.org/rft 

In stark contrast to most Western psychotherapy, “ACT does not have symptom reduction as a goal.” This is based on the view that the ongoing attempt to get rid of “symptoms” actually creates a clinical disorder in the first place. As soon as a private experience is labeled a “symptom,” a struggle with the “symptom” is created. A “symptom” is by definition something “pathological” and something we should try to get rid of. In ACT, the aim is to transform our relationship with our difficult thoughts and feelings, so that we no longer perceive them as “symptoms.” Instead, we learn to perceive them as harmless, even if uncomfortable, transient psychological events. Ironically, it is through this process that ACT actually achieves symptom reduction—but as a by-product and not the goal.

Healthy Normality

Another way in which ACT is unique, is that it doesn't rest on the assumption of “healthy normality.” Western psychology is founded on the assumption of healthy normality: that by their nature, humans are psychologically healthy, and given a healthy environment, lifestyle, and social context (with opportunities for “self-actualization”), humans will naturally be happy and content. From this perspective, psychological suffering is seen as abnormal; a disease or syndrome driven by unusual pathological processes.

Why does ACT suspect this assumption to be false? If we examine the statistics we find that in any year almost 30 percent or the adult population will suffer from a recognized psychiatric disorder.³ “The World Health Organization estimates that depression is currently the fourth biggest, most costly, and most debilitating disease in the world, and by the year 2020 it will be the second biggest.” In any week, one-tenth of the adult population is suffering from clinical depression, and one in five people will suffer from it at some point in their lifetime?. Furthermore, one in four adults, at some stage in their lifetime, will suffer from drug or alcohol addiction. There are now over twenty million alcoholics in the United States alone.? 

More startling and sobering is the finding that almost one in two people will go through a stage in life when they consider suicide seriously, and will struggle with it for a period of two weeks or more. Scarier still, one in ten people at some point attempt to kill themselves?.

In addition, consider the many forms of psychological suffering that do not constitute “clinical disorders”—loneliness, boredom, alienation, meaninglessness, low self-esteem, existential angst, and pain associated with issues such as racism, bullying, sexism, domestic violence, and divorce. Clearly, even though our standard of living is higher than ever before in recorded history, psychological suffering is all around us. 

Destructive Normality

ACT assumes that the psychological processes of a normal human mind are often destructive, and create psychological suffering for us all, sooner or later. Furthermore, ACT postulates that the root of this suffering is human language itself. Human language is a highly complex system of symbols, which includes words, images, sounds, facial expressions and physical gestures. We use this language in two domains: public and private. The public use of language includes speaking, talking, miming, gesturing, writing, painting, singing, dancing and so on. The private use of language includes thinking, imagining, daydreaming, planning, visualizing and so on. A more technical term for the private use of language is “cognition.”

Now clearly the mind is not a “thing” or an “object.” Rather, it is a complex set of cognitive processes—such as analyzing, comparing, evaluating, planning, remembering, visualizing—and all of these processes rely on human language. Thus in ACT, the word “mind” is used as a metaphor for human language itself.

Unfortunately, human language is a double-edged sword. On the positive it helps us make maps and models of the world; predict and plan for the future; share knowledge; learn from the past; imagine things that have never existed, and go on to create them; develop rules that guide our behavior effectively, and help us to thrive as a community; communicate with people who are far away; and learn from people who are no longer alive.

The dark side of language is that we use it to lie, manipulate and deceive; to spread libel, slander and ignorance; to incite hatred, prejudice and violence; to make weapons of mass destruction, and industries of mass pollution; to dwell on and “relive” painful events from the past; to scare ourselves by imagining unpleasant futures; to compare, judge, criticize and condemn both ourselves and others; and to create rules for ourselves that can often be life-constricting or destructive.

Experiential Avoidance

ACT rests on the assumption that human language naturally creates psychological suffering for us all. One way it does this is through setting us up for a struggle with our own thoughts and feelings, through a process called experiential avoidance.

Probably the single biggest evolutionary advantage of human language was the ability to anticipate and solve problems. It has enabled us not only to change the face of the planet, but to travel outside it. The essence of problem-solving is this:

Problem = something we don't want. 
Solution = figure out how to get rid of it, or avoid it. 

This approach obviously works well in the material world. A wolf outside your door? Get rid of it. Throw rocks at it, or spears, or shoot it. Snow, rain, hail? Well, you can't get rid of those things, but you can avoid them by hiding in a cave, or building a shelter. Dry, arid ground? You can get rid of it by irrigation and fertilization, or you can avoid it by moving to a better location. Problem solving strategies are therefore highly adaptive for us as humans (and indeed, teaching such skills has proven to be effective in the treatment of depression.) Given this problem-solving approach works well in the outside world, it's only natural that we would tend to apply it to our interior world; the psychological world of thoughts, feelings, memories, sensations, and urges. Unfortunately, all too often when we try to avoid or get rid of unwanted private experiences, we simply create extra suffering for ourselves. For example, virtually every addiction known to mankind begins as an attempt to avoid or get rid of unwanted thoughts and feelings, such as boredom, loneliness, anxiety, depression and so on. The addictive behavior then becomes self-sustaining, because it provides a quick and easy way to get rid of cravings or withdrawal symptoms.

The more time and energy we spend trying to avoid or get rid of unwanted private experiences, the more we are likely to suffer psychologically in the long term. Anxiety disorders provide a good example. It is not the presence of anxiety that comprises the essence of an anxiety disorder. After all, anxiety is a normal human emotion that we all experience. At the core of any anxiety disorder lies a major preoccupation with trying to avoid or get rid of anxiety. OCD provides a florid example; l never cease to be amazed by the elaborate rituals that OCD sufferers devise, in vain attempts to get rid or anxiety-provoking thoughts and images. Sadly, the more importance we place on avoiding anxiety, the more we develop anxiety about our anxiety—thereby exacerbating it. It's a vicious cycle found at the center of any anxiety disorder. (What is a panic attack if not anxiety about anxiety?)

A large body of research shows that higher experiential avoidance is associated with anxiety disorders, depression, poorer work performance, higher levels of substance abuse, lower quality of life, high-risk sexual behavior, borderline personality disorder, greater severity of PTSD, long-term disability and alexithymia.

Of course, not all forms of experiential avoidance are unhealthy. For example, drinking a glass of wine to unwind at night is experiential avoidance, but it's not likely to be harmful. However, drinking an entire bottle of wine a night is likely to be extremely harmful in the long term. ACT targets experiential avoidance strategies only when client use them to such a degree that they become costly, life-distorting, or harmful. ACT calls these “emotional control strategies,” because they are attempts to directly control how we feel. Many of the emotional control strategies that clients use to try to feel good (or to feel “less bad”) may work in the short term, but frequently they are costly and self-destructive in the long term. For example, depressed clients often withdraw from socializing in order to avoid uncomfortable thoughts—“I’m a burden,” “I have nothing to say,” “I won’t enjoy myself”—and unpleasant feelings such as anxiety, fatigue and fear of rejection. In the short term, canceling a social engagement may give rise to a short-lived sense of relief, but in the long term, the increasing social isolation makes them more depressed.
 

Therapeutic Interventions

ACT offers clients an alternative to experiential avoidance through a variety of therapeutic interventions. In general, clients come to therapy with an agenda of emotional control. They want to get rid of their depression, anxiety, urges to drink, traumatic memories, low self-esteem, fear of rejection, anger, grief and so on. In ACT, there is no attempt to try to reduce, change, avoid, suppress or control these private experiences. Instead, clients learn to reduce the impact and influence of unwanted thoughts and feelings through the effective use of mindfulness. Clients learn to stop fighting with their private experiences—to open up to them, make room for them, and allow them to come and go without a struggle. The time, energy, and money that they wasted previously on trying to control how they feel is then invested in taking effective action (guided by their values) to change their life for the better.

The ACT interventions focus around two main processes:

  1. Developing acceptance of unwanted private experiences which are out of personal control. 
  2. Commitment and action toward living a valued life. 

What follows is a brief summary of some core ACT interventions, illustrated with vignettes of clinical work with a client called “Michael.”
 

Confronting the Agenda

In this step, the client's agenda of emotional control is gently and respectfully undermined through a process similar to motivational interviewing. Clients identify the ways they have tried to get rid of or avoid unwanted private experiences. They are then asked to assess for each method: “Did this reduce your symptoms in the long term? What did this strategy cost you in terms of time, energy, health, vitality, relationships? Did it bring you closer to the life you want?”

Michael was a 35-year-old accountant who suffered from significant social anxiety, and had seen a number of therapists to no avail. In the first session we ran through the many strategies he had used to avoid or get rid of his social anxiety. They included: drinking alcohol, taking Valium, being a “good listener” (asking lots of questions, but sharing little of himself), arriving late, leaving early, avoiding social events altogether, deep breathing, relaxation techniques, using positive affirmations, disputing negative thoughts, analyzing his childhood, blaming his parents (who were both socially avoidant), telling himself to “get over it,” self-hypnosis and so on. Michael realized that none of these strategies had reduced his anxiety in the long term. Although strategies such as taking Valium, drinking alcohol, and avoiding social events had reduced his anxiety in the short term, they had created significant costs to his quality of life. His “homework” was to notice and write down other emotional control strategies, and to assess their long-term effectiveness and costs to his quality of life.

Control is the Problem, Not the Solution

In this phase, we increase clients' awareness that emotional control strategies are largely responsible for their problems; that as long as they're fixated on trying to control how they feel, they're trapped in a vicious cycle of increasing suffering. Useful metaphors here include “quicksand,” “the struggle switch,” and the concepts of “clean discomfort” and “dirty discomfort.” We might deliver these metaphors like this:

Remember those old movies where the bad guy falls into a pool of quicksand, and the more he struggles, the faster it sucks him under? In quicksand, struggling is the worst thing you can possibly do. The way to survive is to lie back, spread out your arms, and float on the surface. It's tricky, because every instinct tells you to struggle; but if you do so, you'll drown.

The same principle applies to difficult feelings: the more we try to fight them, the more they overwhelm us. Imagine that at the back of our mind is a “struggle switch.” When it's switched on, it means we're going to struggle against any physical or emotional pain that comes our way; whatever discomfort experienced, we'll try our best to get rid of it or avoid it.

Suppose the emotion that shows up is anxiety. If our struggle switch is ON, then that feeling is completely unacceptable. This means we could end up with anger about our anxiety: “How dare they make me feel like this?” Or sadness about our anxiety: “Not again. Why do I always feel like this?” Or anxiety about our anxiety: “What's wrong with me? What's this doing to my body?” Or a mixture of all these feelings. These secondary emotions are useless, unpleasant, and unhelpful, and a drain upon our vitality. In response we get angry, anxious or guilty. Spot the vicious cycle?

But what if our struggle switch is OFF? Whatever emotion shows up, no matter how unpleasant, we don't struggle with it. So if anxiety shows up, it's not a problem. Sure, it's unpleasant. We don't like it, or want it, but at the same time, it's nothing terrible. With the struggle switch OFF, our anxiety levels are free to rise and fall as the situation dictates. Sometimes they'll be high, sometimes low and sometimes there will be no anxiety at all. Far more importantly, we're not wasting our time and energy struggling with it.

“Without struggle, we get a natural level of physical and emotional discomfort, depending on who we are and the situation we're in. In ACT, we call this “clean discomfort.”” There’s no avoiding “clean discomfort.” Life serves it up to all of us in one way or another. However, once we start struggling with it, our discomfort levels increase rapidly. This additional suffering we call “dirty discomfort.” Our struggle switch is like an emotional amplifier—switch it on, and we can have anger about our anxiety, anxiety about our anger, depression about our depression, or guilt about our guilt.

Obviously, these metaphors are tailored to the particular feelings the client struggles with. With the struggle switch ON, not only do we get emotionally distressed by our own feelings, we also do whatever we can to avoid or get rid of them, regardless of the long term costs. We draw clients' attention to the many ways they've tried to do this—through more obvious strategies such as drugs, alcohol, food, TV, gambling, smoking, sex, surfing the net—to less obvious emotional control strategies such as ruminating, chastising themselves, blaming others and so on. (As mentioned earlier, many control strategies are not an issue, as long as they are used in moderation.)

Michael was able to connect with these metaphors readily, especially the idea of the struggle switch. We were able to refer back to this in subsequent sessions whenever he experienced anxiety. “Okay, right now, you're feeling anxious. Is the struggle switch on or off?”
 

Six Core Principles of ACT

Once the emotional control agenda is undermined, we then introduce the six core principles of ACT. ACT uses six core principles to help clients develop psychological flexibility:

  • Defusion
  • Acceptance
  • Contact with the present moment
  • The Observing Self
  • Values
  • Committed action

Each principle has its own specific methodology, exercises, homework and metaphors. Take defusion, for example. In a state of cognitive defusion we are caught up in language. Our thoughts seem to be the literal truth, or rules that must be obeyed, or important events that require our full attention, or threatening events that we must get rid or. In other words, when we fuse with our thoughts, they have enormous in influence over our behavior.

“Cognitive defusion means we are able to “step back” and observe language, without being caught up in it. We can recognize that our thoughts are nothing more or less than transient private events—an ever-changing stream of words, sounds and pictures. As we defuse our thoughts, they have much less impact and influence.”

If you look through the wide variety of writings on ACT, you will find over a hundred different cognitive defusion techniques. For example, to deal with an unpleasant thought, we might simply observe it with detachment; or repeat it over and over, out aloud, until it just becomes a meaningless sound; or imagine it in the voice of a cartoon character; or sing it to the tune of “Happy Birthday”; or silently say “Thanks, mind” in gratitude for such an interesting thought. There is endless room for creativity. In contrast to CBT, not one of these cognitive defusion techniques involves evaluating or disputing unwanted thoughts.

Here’s a simple exercise in cognitive defusion for yourself:

Step 1: Bring to mind an upsetting and recurring negative self-judgment that takes the form “I am X” such as “I am incompetent,” or “I’m stupid.” Hold that thought in your mind for several seconds and believe it as much as you can. Now notice how it affects you.

Step 2: Now take the thought “I am X” and insert this phrase in front of it: “I’m having the thought that….” 'Now run that thought again, this time with the new phrase. Notice what happens.

In step 2, most people notice a “distance” from the thought, such that it has much less impact. Notice there has been no effort to get rid of the thought, nor to change it. Instead the relationship with the thought has changed—it can be seen as just words.

There now follows a brief description or the six core principles, with reference to the case or Michael.
 
1. Cognitive Defusion: learning to perceive thoughts, images, memories and other cognitions as what they are—nothing more than bits of language, words and pictures—as opposed to what they can appear to be—threatening events, rules that must be obeyed, objective truths and facts. 

In session two, Michael said he experienced frequent distress from thoughts such as “I'm boring,” “I have nothing to say,” “No one likes me,” and “I'm a loser.” As the session continued, I had Michael interact with these thoughts in a number or different ways, until they began to lose their impact. For example, I had him bring to mind the thought “I'm a loser,” then close his eyes and notice where it seemed to be located in space. He sensed it was in front of him. I asked him to observe the thought as if he was a curious scientist, and to notice the form of it: whether it was more like something he could see, or something he could hear. He said it was like words that he could see, and he noticed that as he “looked” at it, it became less distressing. “I asked him to imagine the thought as words on a Karaoke screen; then change the font; then change the color; then imagine a bouncing ball jumping from word to word.” By this stage, Michael was chuckling at the very same thought that only a few minutes earlier had brought him to tears. “Homework” included practicing several different defusion techniques with distressing thoughts—not to get rid of them, but simply to learn how to step back and see them for what they are—just “bits of language” passing through.

2. Acceptance: making room for unpleasant feelings, sensations, urges, and other private experiences; allowing them to come and go without struggling with them, running from them, or giving them undue attention.

In session three, I asked Michael to make himself anxious by imagining himself at a forthcoming office party. When I asked him to scan his body and notice where he felt the anxiety most intensely he reported a “huge knot” in his stomach. I asked him to observe this sensation as if he was a curious scientist who had never seen anything like it before; to notice the edges of it, the shape of it, the vibration, weight, temperature, pulsation, and the myriad of other sensations within the sensation. I had him breathe into the sensation, and “make room for it”; to allow it to be there even though he did not like it or want it. Michael soon reported a sense of calmness; a sense of being at ease with his anxiety even though he didn't like it. “Homework” included practicing this technique with his recurrent feelings of anxiety—not to get rid of them, but simply to learn how to let them come and go without a struggle.

3. Contact with the present moment: bringing full awareness to your here-and-now experience, with openness, interest, and receptiveness; focusing on, and engaging fully in whatever you are doing.  

In session four, I took Michael through a simple mindfulness exercise, focused on the experience of eating. I gave him a sultana, and asked him to eat it “in slow motion,” with a total focus on the taste and texture of the fruit, and the sounds, sensations and movements inside his mouth. I told him, “While you're doing this, all sorts of distracting thoughts and feelings may arise. The aim is simply to let your thoughts come and go, and allow your feelings to be there, and keep your attention focused on eating the sultana.”

Afterwards, Michael said he was amazed that there was so much flavor in one single sultana. I was then able to use this experience to draw an analogy with social situations, where Michael would he so caught up in his thoughts and feelings that he wasn't able to engage fully in conversation, and missed out on the “richness.” “Homework” included practicing full engagement with all the five senses in a number of daily routines (having a shower, brushing his teeth, and washing the dishes) as well as continuing to practice his defusion and acceptance techniques. He agreed also to practice mindful engagement in conversations; i.e. keeping his attention on the other person, rather than on his own thoughts and feelings.

4. The Observing Self: accessing a transcendent sense of self; a continuity of consciousness that is unchanging, ever-present, and impervious to harm. From this perspective, it is possible to experience directly that you are not your thoughts, feelings, memories, urges, sensations, images, roles, or physical body. These phenomena change constantly and are peripheral aspects of you, but they are not the essence of who you are.
 
In session five, I took Michael through a mindfulness exercise designed to have him access this transcendent self. First, I asked him to close his eyes and observe his thoughts: the form they rook, their apparent location in space, the speed with which they were moving. Then I asked him: “Be aware of what you are noticing. There are your thoughts, and there you are noticing them. So there are two processes going on—a process of thinking, and a process of observing that thinking.” Again and again, I drew his attention to the distinction between the thoughts that arise, and the self who observes those thoughts. From the perspective of the Observing Self, no thought is dangerous, threatening, or controlling. 

5. Values: clarifying what is most important, deep in your heart; what sort of person you want to be; what is significant and meaningful to you; and what you want to stand for in this life. 

In session six, Michael identified important values around connecting with others, building meaningful friendships, developing intimacy, and being authentic and genuine. We discussed the concept of willingness. The willingness to feel anxiety doesn't mean you like or want it. Instead it means you allow it to be there in order to do something you value. I asked Michael, “If taking your life in the direction of these values means you need to make room for feelings of anxiety, are you willing to do that?” His reply was, “Yes.” 

6. Committed Action: setting goals, guided by your values, and taking effective action to achieve them. 

Continuing session six, we moved to setting goals in line with Michael's values. Initially, he set the goal of going for lunch with a work colleague every day, and sharing some personal information on each occasion. In subsequent sessions, he set increasingly challenging social goals, and continued to practice mindfulness skills to handle the anxious thoughts and feelings that inevitably arose. At the end of ten sessions, Michael reported that he was socializing a lot more, and more importantly, he was enjoying it. Thoughts of being “a loser” or “boring” or “unlikeable” still occurred, but usually he did not take them seriously or pay them any attention. Likewise, feelings of anxiety still occurred in many social situations, but no longer bothered him or distracted him. Overall, his anxiety levels had diminished considerably. This reduction in anxiety was not the goal of therapy, but was a pleasant by-product.

This illustrates how ACT can result in good symptom reduction without ever aiming for it. First, a lot of exposure took place, as Michael engaged in increasingly challenging social situations. It is well known that exposure frequently can lead to reduced anxiety. Second, the more accepting Michael became of his unwanted thoughts and feelings, the less anxiety he had about those thoughts and feelings. Indeed, practicing mindfulness of unwanted thoughts and feelings is a form of exposure in itself.

The ACT Therapeutic Relationship

ACT training helps therapists to develop the essential qualities of compassion, acceptance, empathy, respect, and the ability to stay psychologically present even in the midst of strong emotions. Furthermore, ACT teaches therapists that, thanks to human language, they are in the same boat as their clients—so they don't need to be enlightened beings or to “have it all together.” In fact, they might say to their clients something like: “I don't want you to think I've got my life completely in order. It's more as if you're climbing your mountain over there and I'm climbing my mountain over here. It's not as if I've reached the top and I'm having a rest. It's just that from where I am on my mountain, I can see obstacles on your mountain that you can’t see. So I can point those out to you, and maybe show you some alternative routes around them.”

Conclusion

The experience of doing therapy becomes vastly different with ACT. It is no longer about getting rid of bad feelings or getting over old trauma. Instead it is about creating a rich, full and meaningful life. This is confirmed by the findings of Strosahl, Hayes, Bergan and Romano? who showed that ACT increases therapist effectiveness, and Hayes et al (2004) who showed that it reduces burnout. If I had to summarize ACT on a t-shirt, it would read: “Embrace your demons, and follow your heart.”


References
 

  1. Bond, F. W. & Bunce, D. (2000). Mediators of change in emotion-focused and problem-focused worksite stress management interventions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 156-163; Branstetter. A. D., Wilson, K. G., Hildebrandt, M., & Mutch, D. (2004). Improving psychological adjustment among cancer patients: ACT and CBT. Paper presented at the Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy, New Orleans; Dahl, J., Wilson, K. G., & Nilsson, A. (2004). Acceptance and commitment therapy and the treatment of persons at risk for long-term disability resulting from stress and pain symptoms: A preliminary randomized trial. Behavior Therapy, 35, 785-802; Twohig, M. P., Hayes, S. C., Masuda, A. (2006). Increasing willingness to experience obsessions: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy as a treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder. Behavior Therapy, 37:1. 3-13; Zettle, R. D., & Raines, J. C. (1989). Group cognitive and contextual therapies in treatment of depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 438-445.
  2. Bach, P. & Hayes, Steven C. (2002). The use of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to prevent the rehospitalisation of psychotic patients: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 1129-1139.
  3. Kessler, R.C ., McGonagle, K.A., Zhao, S., Nelson, C.B., Hughes, M., Eshleman, S., Wittchen, H.U., and Kendler, K.S. (1994). Lifetime and 12-month Prevalence of DSM-111-R Psychiatric Disorders in the United States. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51 (Jan 1994): 8-19. 
  4. Davies, T. (1997), ABC of Mental Health, British Medical Journal, 314, 27.5.97: 1536-39. 
  5. Kessler, R.C ., McGonagle, K.A., Zhao, S., Nelson, C.B., Hughes, M., Eshleman, S., Wittchen, H.U., and Kendler, K.S. (1994). Lifetime and 12-month Prevalence of DSM-111-R Psychiatric Disorders in the United States. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51 (Jan 1994): 8-19. 
  6. Chiles J., and Strosahl, K. (1995), The Suicidal Patient: Principles Of Assessment, Treatment, and Case Management, American Psychiatric Press, Washington, DC. 
  7. Strosahl, K. D., Hayes, S. C., Bergan, J., & Romano, P. (1998). Does field based training in behavior therapy improve clinical effectiveness? Evidence from the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy training project. Behavior Therapy, 29, 35-64; Hayes, S. C., Bissett, R., Roget, N., Padilla, M., Kohlenberg, B. S., Fisher, G., et al. (2004). The impact of acceptance and commitment training on stigmatizing attitudes and professional burnout of substance abuse counselors. Behavior Therapy, 35, 821-836. 


 

The Ones That Get Away

On sunny days, the koi rise to the surface of the pond. Occasionally a particularly interesting one rises through the murk, and for a few moments it is clearly visible in all its mottled, sun-dappled glory, fins lazily stroking the water, eyes unblinkingly assessing my shadow before it propels itself back into the depths.

That is the image that comes to mind when I think of Cassie. She contacted me initially through an email, sending me a clear, carefully composed assessment of her situation that ran to several lengthy paragraphs. She said she could not maintain relationships. She could go to work, but otherwise was almost unable to function. She had no close friends or family. She became dissociative and unbearably anxious whenever she tried to talk to anyone about changing her life. Beneath her insightful description of herself there was a barely muted, desperate plea for help. I was hooked, and I responded carefully, aware already that any hint of impatience or intrusion would send her back to the bottom of the pond. I offered an appointment time, and she accepted in just a few words: already I was becoming real, and real made her wary.

In my waiting room on the day of our first appointment I found an elfin, fair-skinned woman with a dancer’s grace and a mass of auburn curls piled loosely on her head, stray tendrils curling over her cheeks and forehead, a scatter of freckles on her nose, tight jeans, black boots, green sweater. She was as carefully composed as her prose. She was well spoken and seemingly calm in the session, except for the constant trembling of her slender, pale hands. I tried to negotiate an impossibly fine line between keeping the session safe (she had warned me that she could not talk about her experience of abuse without dissociating) and getting some kind of rough history and initial therapeutic conversation going. I suspect part of her would have preferred to just sit silently and observe me, getting used to me and my office, my odds and ends, my clothing, my books, my body language.

In fact, it was soon clear that she wanted me to divine her needs and tolerances as a mother would—a fantasy mother, the one she never had. She wanted me to guess when she was tired, hungry, overstimulated, playful. When I didn’t get it exactly right, she was irritated and frightened. Like an infant, she could only protest–no, no, no!–when I inevitably got it wrong, but she could not or would not give me further direction. If I tried to offer her something concrete like specific coping skills, for example, her quick and analytic mind rejected my suggestions as facile and superficial. When I tried to offer her something nurturing and digestible like a supportive comment, my shadow inevitably fell on her, and she flinched away, diving deep.

We managed two or three sessions before I went too far, discovering something she did and didn’t want me to know about her secret world. She admitted she had been binging and purging most nights for years.

Immediately it was as if I were a thief who had invaded her home, intent on stealing her treasures, in spite of my reassurance that I could not take her eating disorder from her against her will. She fled from the session and wrote me an email saying she would not return. I wrote her back, leaving the door as wide open as I could. It worked after a fashion: a few months later she returned, but again we lasted only two or three sessions before I got too close and received another emailed goodbye.

Starved and unentitled, it is her pattern to reach out and snatch hungrily, wanting and needing “too much”—an impossible attunement. Her “greediness” is then followed by feelings of regret and shame, exposure and humiliation. She punishes and protects herself by retreating from contact. Binge, purge, restrict. For her, food and relationship are interlocking metaphors for each other. I imagine a sort of psychic double helix that twists around and replicates itself wherever fear and longing converge.

We are in another pause now. Maybe she has burrowed in the mud for a season, maybe she will never return. If I am honest, I am a little impatient, a little frustrated. She has given me a shorter glimpse, a smaller fraction than I am usually granted as a therapist, and I want more, even knowing as I do that getting Cassie in the office regularly will only be a small part of the challenges we are likely to face. Though I am prone to self doubt, I do not dwell on my possible failures with her. She knows I’ve done my best; I know she wishes for the courage to come back. There are no magic words or techniques or interpretations for coaxing her. I just remember her, and hope for her to return to the surface.

When Life Gets Messy, Don’t Cut and Run!

It was not one of my better moments. It was a very busy time of year, getting ready for Passover, juggling my schedule with patients and the kids' spring break. It was one of those times where I stood at the intersection of my mothering and my profession and my head was spinning.

On the top of the TTD list (things to do) was getting my five year old daughter a haircut. Routine errand as it seems, it did require a bit of scheduling and some tenderness, as she is quite fond of her long, wild and unruly hair. As am I. We did not want to mess with the mess on her head in haste. But my mother's eye knew it had to be tamed somewhat.

I was short on time. I was seeing clients until the last minute, trying to accommodate my own interrupted schedule and not have to cut out too many sessions due to the holiday. So, If you'll forgive the line, "T'was the night before Passover…." and even though most things were set and ready….the unruly hair atop my daughter's head still waited.

So I decided to cut it myself.

I was egged on a bit by another child. And advised (poorly, as it turns out), to cut the hair dry. Cutting in haste, dry or not, is not, I have learned, a good idea.  But I was not thinking clearly. You can guess what happened. I cut a little, and then a little more and soon we were heading toward a bad combo of Larry, Curly and Moe.

So among other good lessons about knowing when to say when, knowing our limits, not doing things that we are not "cut out" to do and getting help when we need it, I was once again reminded about the importance of slowing down. And I was thinking how this is a lesson I can never learn enough. In both my mothering and my practice.

Sometimes in our work, we can get rushed into all kinds of urgencies to take care of things quickly. Things hurt. We are healers. And we are constantly in the fluid space of intense feelings, unconscious undercurrents and old patterns being recycled.  And sometimes it feels like such an unruly mess, if not on top of the head, then certainly in it. And in the heart as well. I can never learn this message enough either: we have to live with unruly messes sometimes. We have to help our clients live with unruly messes. We have to wait and study the mess and not be so quick to the cut.

As it turns out, I knew when to say when, and thanks to the help of a good neighbor who knows how to cut hair properly, my daughter's new "do" is pretty cute. And even though she likes it, she wants it long again. We keep telling her it will take some time, but it will grow. Just like all of us.