IFS vs. AEDP: A Comparison | Experiential Therapy Series - Part 5 of 7

[@pinkodegallo]

"When we are over-dominated by learned self-protective maneuvers, it makes it really difficult to stay open and available for life, and relationships, not to mention the flexibility and wisdom we would have (if we simply used our adult intelligence rather than whatever protective response got ingrained when we were young)" 🙂

[@Jacob011]

IFS could use Kamala to unburden its ontologically overburdened language that burns a comical amounts of intellectual power to keep the session moving forward. It's far more likely you'll get completely distracted from what is presented to you (somatically or otherwise) in the moment w/ IFS because you have to "keep tabs" on each part. Another thing I don't like about IFS, is that it teaches therapists to talk about parts in third-person. How would you feel being talked about in third-person when you're present in the room? I'm very thankful I have a highly experienced therapist versed in several experiential modalities who is able to go with the flow and deploy whatever suits best in the moment. Even when we do IFS it doesn't feel so robotic and proceduralized as with other IFS therapist before.

[@darinsmith2458]

You said a lot in a short period of time.. I am starting to see the similarities between the different therapeutic approaches.. I have been doing some research on the psychology of pain and they do talk about getting to the root of the pain.. They also talk about the importance of being safe..

[@SonamHoani]

♥

[@RonyDeConinck]

Do you see ACT as an experiental therapy or is this rather an old one?

[@kanguruster]

Therapies that rely on a special theraputic relationship do not scale to the number of people who need them (or who will need them). The privilege of having one's own therapist who one sees regularly is only for the 1%. Is there any way AEDP can be done without the relationship? I liked hearing that IFS doesn't demand the therapeutic relationship is the core part of the therapeutic mode; that might mean it's more amenable to self-help, being baked-in to school curriculums, finding its way into free AI apps, and otherwise becoming available and accessible to people who don't have psychological services as part of their employer-provided health insurance. Even in enlightened countries (i.e. with free health care) access to counselling is often constrained so finding ways to provide access to healing more cheaply is really important to me.

[@kanguruster]

I should have started my comment with profuse thanks for providing us with such helpful information and insights, basically free. I appreciate the intellectual depth and rigour, delivered with kindness and compassion, in these videos, which are helping to make the world a better place.

[@harveysky6637]

Regardless of modality, many people's experience of therapy is that it works at all due to the therapeutic relationship. While this isn't unique to AEDP, as she mentions, AEDP is essentially an interpersonal treatment for interpersonal wounds. The relationship is central. Apart from cost, the main scaling issue is getting enough providers trained. Fortunately, there has been exponential growth in experiential therapy training in recent years. While the cost issue sadly affects every area of healthcare in the US, about a third of adults in this country have been in therapy this year. This has also been trending upwards for decades. Many of them do not have insurance through work or at all. The myth that consistent therapy is only something rich people can do needs to be dispelled. Meanwhile, therapy apps steal and sell people's data - look up the lawsuits against BetterHelp. While books and podcasts can be useful, there is no replacement for real-time conversation with a tangible person who is skilfully attentive to your vulnerabilities and wounds.

[@kanguruster]

@ I can see that the therapeutic relationship could be the gold standard and I applaud “exponential growth” leading to people on a silver budget gaining access, but how long until that growth rate can cover 2% of the 1st world, let alone the global 98%? It’s never going to happen, is it? Dispelling said “myth” isnt likely to make it into therapists prayers. All we’re likely to see is another attempt to make a form of therapy cheaper, like DBT did. I'm all for that sort of innovation, but it’d be better if it was brain based, experiental, polyvagal and trauma informed, etc., etc. So what parts of AEDP can find their way into the next DBT? I've heard Dick Schwartz is working on molding IFS into something widely deployable that doesn't need to be manlintained by the insurance-industrial complex.