Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:ethical milton and grinder |
Posted by: | D |
Date/Time: | 03/11/2003 19:04:45 |
Hi NJ, I believe that ethical therapy is a complex set of relations, some of which are often heavily content laden. Some people in NLP talk about the unecessity of content. I think they are overstating one of the most exciting aspects of NLP, and by overstating it, they draw attention away from the real value of many NLP processes. Yes, NLP is formal in that we are studying the structure of subjective experience. But no, that doesn't mean that it is unethical to work with content or introduce content. While there is no doubt that content can get in the way of the therapeutic process, that does not make all introduced content inherently unethical. When I work with people experiencing burnout, I use a model that I have developed over the years. There could be a thousand different models, but this is the one that I worked out. It makes many assumptions about burnout. It's proven effective and word of mouth brings many people to me. I'm not against doing six-step reframing for burnout, but it's not the product I offer. In terms of counterexamples, I can think of many circumstances in which not introducing content could be highly unethical. Like I said, to me it is a complicated issue. I only disagree with WITW to the degree that it states ethical therapy must not ever introduce content or work on the level of content. D |