Is Hypnosis the most mocked vocation?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on January 3, 2010 at 2:15pm

Fable,

I too love this unconventional version of "Dueling banjos", and if you can talk Joey into agreeing to juggle Richard's and my books and then pronounce which one is "weightier", then we might well have found a solution!
; - )

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com

Fable Goodman said:

guys,if it's to be duelling Banjo's...
what better than to have another hypnothehrapist play the music,
whilst yet another entertains the onlookers.

I thoroughly reccomend Joey and my version of Duelling Banjos
Or more accurately... Duelling Saw, Hammers and Diablolos.

Check it out!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Hazlerig on January 4, 2010 at 9:36am

Bwa-ha-ha! All your research are belong to us! *evil hypnotist laugh*

Seriously, Saul--the issue is more complex than you make it out to be. I'll admit that I'm no expert, but I can cite a few examples.

Larry Dossey, MD, has written several books about the placebo effect, calling on the medical community to pay more attention to it. His work does not involve demonstrations of authoritarian techniques, yet the medical community still pretty much turns a blind eye.

Milton Erickson and his followers, famous for their permissive techniques, have not succeeded in mainstreaming hypnosis.

And the point behind citing reiki as an example is to show that authoritarian techniques are not the *only* reason mainstream medicine is reticent about hypnosis. (To be honest, I think authoritarian techniques are more likely to appeal to medical doctors. They are quite well accustomed to playing an authoritarian role with their patients.)

Our culture in general devalues imagination. It devalues the mind-body connection. So it's not surprising that it devalues hypnosis, whether its authoritarian or permissive.

James

Saul Rosenfeld said:

James,

Not surprisingly, there's a (brief) section in my book that deals with the pre-induction interview, but I'm not going to copy & paste it here because I have a sneaking suspicion that you're nefariously trying to trick me into pasting my whole book on this Forum in order to save yourself the 27 bucks it would cost to BUY the freakin' thing.
Nice try, my dastardly clever and woefully frugal friend, but no cigar! (HAH!)

Hey, I know all ABOUT their "world view"- my own daughter is an M.D., and my best buddy in Holland was an American Psychiatrist who also resided in The Hague.
Some of what you say is all too true (sadly so!); but one can't really lump hypnosis in with Reiki, placebos, aroma-therapy, and other such things for the simple reason that the history of hypnotism is replete with serious attempts by notable (and sometimes even world-FAMOUS) physicians to "mainstream" it.
Think James Braid, think Charcot, Bernheim, Liebeault, Janet, FREUD!
The REASON that they were ALL unsuccessful was NOT because it "wasn't in their (colleagues') world view", it was because those pioneer hypnotists were all laboring under a variety of unfortunate misconceptions, and were ALL handicapped by having to TOTALLY rely on (and demonstrate for their skeptical colleagues) HIGHLY AUTHORITARIAN INDUCTIONS- which were, for all intents and purposes, IDENTICAL to the harsh tactics of the old STAGE hypnotists (and before them the early stage MESMERISTS- which is simply a rose by another name)!
It was, in a word, "AMATEUR-HOUR", and these distastefully authoritarian inductions coupled with their ludicrously-inefficient attempts at "therapy" (which consisted SOLELY of "command" suggestions such as: "When I count to three and snap my fingers your headaches will DISAPPEAR! One, two, three, SNAP!") are what has, in the past, always prevented it from being accepted by the mainstream.

But hey, you almost tricked me once AGAIN into revealing stuff from my book!
How the heck do you keep DOING that?!
(must...resist...replying...to...his...posts...)

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com

James Hazlerig said:

Saul Rosenfeld wrote:
"That must really be SOME kick-ass "90 second" pre-talk you give if it's able to effectively and entirely and instantly counter a LIFETIME of misunderstanding, trepidation, and sadly all too often outright Fear (about "losing control", being "under the spell or Power of the hypnotist", being "compelled" to "obey" his "commands", etc., etc.) that the vast majority of newbie clients/patients experience either overtly or subconsciously!" I take a little longer than Richard's 90 seconds, but I've found it's usually not that hard to dispell any misconceptions my "newbie clients" have. In fact, if they reference stage hypnosis at all, it's to say that they understand that what I do in my office isn't like that. Indeed, the most common misconception they have is that stage hypnosis is all fake. Ultimately, there are other reasons why the medical community hasn't embraced hypnosis the way that you apparently feel they should.

Simply put, it's not in their world view.

Medical researchers take great pains to avoid the placebo effect. They avoid inadvertently using the power of suggestion to influence drug trials. While that may be important for the purposes of chemical research, the bias spills over into practice. If a patient does get better due to suggestion, physicians scoff at the event as "just the placebo effect." Never mind how amazing it is that the mind has brought about nearly miraculous healing--medical doctors (for the most part) turn a blind eye toward that power that the human mind has.

There's been a lot of research done on the medical benefits of prayer, but most medical doctors are still not going to pray with their patients. There have been studies showing that having a pet lowers stress, and other studies showing the medical benefits of lowered stress, yet very few hospitals provide a space where patients can be visited by their pets. (My father, in his final days, bemoaned the fact that he could not see his cats while in the hospital.) There are a lot of great ideas that medical science just isn't ready for.

Now I'm not equating the placebo effect with hypnosis. (That's a completely different debate.) I'm not saying that hypnosis is prayer. (That's yet another fun debate.) My point is that there are a lot of things that medical science just isn't able to grasp, and hypnosis is one of them.

To put it another way, no one mocks reiki practitioners. Well, almost no one. Likewise, almost no one fears that reiki practitioners are going to take over their minds. There are no outrageous stage reiki shows. But the medical community is still highly dubious about reiki--it doesn't fit their world view.

James

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on January 4, 2010 at 1:28pm

James,

You touch on several salient points, but I never meant to imply that their aversion to the "showy" authoritarian/"magical" inductions/routines was the ONLY reason they've always either undervalued or been hostile to hypnosis- just that it's been the MAIN reason.

The fact that the "placebo effect" has garnered such paltry interest among medicos despite REAMS of documented empirical evidence over the years is almost INcomprehensible to me! It just so happens that I've gathered a considerable amount of such historical evidence that was, eventually, going to comprise an entire chapter in my "Volume II". But seeing as how I now know just HOW much work such a book entails, there's a much greater likelihood that I'll be struck by lightening three times in a row on three successive days than that I'll be willing to spend the next decade or so writing ANOTHER book...
The flip side to their ignorance about the stunning implications of the "placebo factor" is the inadvertent HARM they do to their patients by careless use of negative "iatrogenic" suggestions ("You'll never be able to walk again", "I suppose you could TRY hypnosis, but it probably isn't going to help", etc. etc.).
Shameful, and totally INexcusable...!

Milton Erickson and his successors have always been terribly handicapped by having to wage a war on TWO fronts: against the mainstream medicos who scoff at hypnosis per se', and against their "Traditionalist" rivals who are committed to maintaining their woefully outdated and mostly ineffective tactics and theories, and who despise the vastly more enlightened Ericksonians for making them look like the sorry-assed old-fashioned fools they are.
In my book I used the phrase "(the Traditionalists) defend their errors as if they're defending their inheritance"...

Our culture HAS always devalued "imagination" and the "mind-body" connection, and the rigid Cartesian framework adopted by medicos hundreds of years ago still holds sway for the most part.
But there have been SO many studies lately (e.g., over the past few decades) that PROVE the effects of hypnosis on healing by "scientific" standards, that it's only a matter of time before denial is no longer an option.

That last statement is so uncharacteristically "optimistic" for a jaded, cynical old curmudgeon like me that I apologize if it shocked you.
I'll try not to do it again...; - )

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com




James Hazlerig said:

Bwa-ha-ha! All your research are belong to us! *evil hypnotist laugh*
Seriously, Saul--the issue is more complex than you make it out to be. I'll admit that I'm no expert, but I can cite a few examples. Larry Dossey, MD, has written several books about the placebo effect, calling on the medical community to pay more attention to it. His work does not involve demonstrations of authoritarian techniques, yet the medical community still pretty much turns a blind eye.

Milton Erickson and his followers, famous for their permissive techniques, have not succeeded in mainstreaming hypnosis.

And the point behind citing reiki as an example is to show that authoritarian techniques are not the *only* reason mainstream medicine is reticent about hypnosis. (To be honest, I think authoritarian techniques are more likely to appeal to medical doctors. They are quite well accustomed to playing an authoritarian role with their patients.)

Our culture in general devalues imagination. It devalues the mind-body connection. So it's not surprising that it devalues hypnosis, whether its authoritarian or permissive.

James

Saul Rosenfeld said:

James,

Not surprisingly, there's a (brief) section in my book that deals with the pre-induction interview, but I'm not going to copy & paste it here because I have a sneaking suspicion that you're nefariously trying to trick me into pasting my whole book on this Forum in order to save yourself the 27 bucks it would cost to BUY the freakin' thing.
Nice try, my dastardly clever and woefully frugal friend, but no cigar! (HAH!)

Hey, I know all ABOUT their "world view"- my own daughter is an M.D., and my best buddy in Holland was an American Psychiatrist who also resided in The Hague.
Some of what you say is all too true (sadly so!); but one can't really lump hypnosis in with Reiki, placebos, aroma-therapy, and other such things for the simple reason that the history of hypnotism is replete with serious attempts by notable (and sometimes even world-FAMOUS) physicians to "mainstream" it.
Think James Braid, think Charcot, Bernheim, Liebeault, Janet, FREUD!
The REASON that they were ALL unsuccessful was NOT because it "wasn't in their (colleagues') world view", it was because those pioneer hypnotists were all laboring under a variety of unfortunate misconceptions, and were ALL handicapped by having to TOTALLY rely on (and demonstrate for their skeptical colleagues) HIGHLY AUTHORITARIAN INDUCTIONS- which were, for all intents and purposes, IDENTICAL to the harsh tactics of the old STAGE hypnotists (and before them the early stage MESMERISTS- which is simply a rose by another name)!
It was, in a word, "AMATEUR-HOUR", and these distastefully authoritarian inductions coupled with their ludicrously-inefficient attempts at "therapy" (which consisted SOLELY of "command" suggestions such as: "When I count to three and snap my fingers your headaches will DISAPPEAR! One, two, three, SNAP!") are what has, in the past, always prevented it from being accepted by the mainstream.

But hey, you almost tricked me once AGAIN into revealing stuff from my book!
How the heck do you keep DOING that?!
(must...resist...replying...to...his...posts...)

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on January 8, 2010 at 7:50pm

James,

If you carefully re-read my original post you'll see that you completely MISunderstood what I was saying about hypnosis and childbirth! What I was doing was mocking the fact that every so often articles appear in MODERN publications that announce, as if it were JUST "discovered", that hypnosis could be a valuable and effective aid in alleviating the pain of childbirth without the use of anesthesia. I clearly stated that this had been known already ALL THE WAY BACK in 1829, but that such historically documented facts about the many benefits of hypnosis are all too quickly forgotten or ignored by mainstream physicians, and then suddenly RE-"discovered" again in a cycle that seems to occur every 20 years or so.

As for my views regarding the harm caused by stage hypnosis to hypnotism's IMAGE as a serious modality for HEALING, I have neither the time nor the inclination to repeat all the things I've been saying on this Forum for the past month (as well as back in December 2008 when I first joined); so I suggest you try reading some of my previous (and numerous) postings if you're interested in hearing my views on this subject.

Yes, organized medicine does indeed sometimes use hypnosis; but as I've said MANY times before, those who do so are but a TINY INSIGNIFICANT FRACTION compared to the TOTAL number of health care professionals.

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com




James Szeles said:

Hi Saul, Have you giving birth and know for a fact that hypnosis will not take the pain away or lower the blood pressure during birth? I know three women who have giving birth with no pain and their blood pressure under hypnosis . Your mind controls your body and hypnosis is one of many tools the mind can use. I do agree we should respect one another despite our differences of opinion. I have been performing stage hypnosis for many years. Your not the first person to put done hypnosis as a form of entertainment and you will not be the last. But that is your right and I do not agree with your opinion on stage hypnosis. Organized medicine dose indeed use hypnosis. I received a hypnosis relaxation CD from the hospital a few weeks before I had surgery and that was nine years ago.
James Saul Rosenfeld said:

Hi Pete,

Actually, there are few things quite as pathetic as seeing gushing articles in the latest issues of magazines trumpeting the fact that hypnosis can actually help women achieve "Painless Childbirth!!", or "Eliminate Phobias!!", etc. Similar "revelations" are also made on the telly in various talk shows. When you consider the documented fact that hypno-anesthesia was employed in childbirth WAAAY back in 1829 (e.g., 180 years ago!), it always makes me smile rather whimsically... The fact that this "cycle" appears to re-emerge about every 20 years MAY point to the fact that it is somehow "generational" in nature; but it "could" possibly be ascribed to mere coincidence (I really don't know one way or the other).
What I DO know, however, is that we are once again in the "up" part of this cycle, and I can only hope that it will be more lasting this time around.
I really like your comment about "critical mass"! Let's hope you're right about that!

"Regulation" is a sticky issue indeed, and I don't pretend to have the answer (not by a long shot!).
On the one hand I'm opposed to exhibitions of stage hypnosis for "entertainment" because I feel that this negatively impacts the chances of hypnosis ever becoming widely accepted by health care practitioners (as well as a large percentage of the general public) as a SERIOUS modality for HEALING; but on the other hand I'm ALSO firmly opposed to any and all regulations banning "lay" hypnotists- and only permitting medically trained "professionals" to practice it...

Of course, it goes without saying that I think people who "abuse their position of trust" by "sexual abuse" should not only be banned for LIFE from ever practicing hypnosis again- I think they should be locked up!!
Thanks for your input,

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on January 8, 2010 at 8:16pm

Hi again James,

I forgot to add that my opposition to stage hypnosis is not meant to be a personal attack on stage hypnotists (even though I do understand that it sometimes certainly sounds like that).
It has been pointed out to me (by James H.) that stage hypnotists are not "deliberately" causing harm to hypnotism's image because they're bad people and just don't care, but rather that they simply don't KNOW that what they're doing can have such negative repercussions, and don't even realize that this possibility EXISTS!

I've been studying and researching this topic for SO many years that I tend to forget that other folks never even THINK about what, to ME, is such a vital and clear-cut issue when it comes to the future of hypnotism and its widespread acceptance (and use) by what will one day hopefully be a MAJORITY (or at least a plurality) of health care professionals.

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com


Saul Rosenfeld said:

James,

If you carefully re-read my original post you'll see that you completely MISunderstood what I was saying about hypnosis and childbirth! What I was doing was mocking the fact that every so often articles appear in MODERN publications that announce, as if it were JUST "discovered", that hypnosis could be a valuable and effective aid in alleviating the pain of childbirth without the use of anesthesia. I clearly stated that this had been known already ALL THE WAY BACK in 1829, but that such historically documented facts about the many benefits of hypnosis are all too quickly forgotten or ignored by mainstream physicians, and then suddenly RE-"discovered" again in a cycle that seems to occur every 20 years or so.

As for my views regarding the harm caused by stage hypnosis to hypnotism's IMAGE as a serious modality for HEALING, I have neither the time nor the inclination to repeat all the things I've been saying on this Forum for the past month (as well as back in December 2008 when I first joined); so I suggest you try reading some of my previous (and numerous) postings if you're interested in hearing my views on this subject.

Yes, organized medicine does indeed sometimes use hypnosis; but as I've said MANY times before, those who do so are but a TINY INSIGNIFICANT FRACTION compared to the TOTAL number of health care professionals.

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cerbone - The Trance-Master on January 8, 2010 at 9:37pm

At the moment it's late at night, and I am about to go to bed.
I don't know if we are the most mocked, but I think there are a lot more jokes about lawyers, than the two or three jokes about hypnotists I've ever seen, after researching jokes that been written about us.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on January 9, 2010 at 5:52am

James,

No problem- that happens to all of us every so often (myself included).

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com




James Szeles said:

Saul I did misread you posting sorry about that.
James

Saul Rosenfeld said:

Hi again James,

I forgot to add that my opposition to stage hypnosis is not meant to be a personal attack on stage hypnotists (even though I do understand that it sometimes certainly sounds like that).
It has been pointed out to me (by James H.) that stage hypnotists are not "deliberately" causing harm to hypnotism's image because they're bad people and just don't care, but rather that they simply don't KNOW that what they're doing can have such negative repercussions, and don't even realize that this possibility EXISTS!

I've been studying and researching this topic for SO many years that I tend to forget that other folks never even THINK about what, to ME, is such a vital and clear-cut issue when it comes to the future of hypnotism and its widespread acceptance (and use) by what will one day hopefully be a MAJORITY (or at least a plurality) of health care professionals.

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com


Saul Rosenfeld said:

James,

If you carefully re-read my original post you'll see that you completely MISunderstood what I was saying about hypnosis and childbirth! What I was doing was mocking the fact that every so often articles appear in MODERN publications that announce, as if it were JUST "discovered", that hypnosis could be a valuable and effective aid in alleviating the pain of childbirth without the use of anesthesia. I clearly stated that this had been known already ALL THE WAY BACK in 1829, but that such historically documented facts about the many benefits of hypnosis are all too quickly forgotten or ignored by mainstream physicians, and then suddenly RE-"discovered" again in a cycle that seems to occur every 20 years or so.

As for my views regarding the harm caused by stage hypnosis to hypnotism's IMAGE as a serious modality for HEALING, I have neither the time nor the inclination to repeat all the things I've been saying on this Forum for the past month (as well as back in December 2008 when I first joined); so I suggest you try reading some of my previous (and numerous) postings if you're interested in hearing my views on this subject.

Yes, organized medicine does indeed sometimes use hypnosis; but as I've said MANY times before, those who do so are but a TINY INSIGNIFICANT FRACTION compared to the TOTAL number of health care professionals.

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on January 9, 2010 at 6:06am

Sheila,

I hear what you're saying, but aside from the rare exception, I really can't see a way to put a positive spin on this terribly negative "don't make me bark like a dog" image.
I think you'll agree that health care professionals are, generally speaking, a serious lot (I don't mean without humor, I mean serious about their calling), and in my opinion, which has been formed over thirteen years of intensive research, the VAST majority of medicos have, throughout its two hundred year history, always been turned off by this highly counter-productive "carnival-like" atmosphere surrounding hypnotism.
Rather than fall into tedious repetition, I recommend that you read my previous comments on this thread.
I'd really be interested to hear what you think afterwards...

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com




Sheila M. Street, CH CI T.NLP said:

Whether or not we get mocked, especially by the medical community, it doesn't always mean that's a bad thing.

Yesterday, while hunting for office space at a Holistic Medical Center in town, and meeting with the owners (married couple, both Naturopath doctors), he was interested in having some personal sessions for a phobia he has, and joked "but you won't make me bark like a dog, will you?" (big grin on his face) at which I grimaced/smiled simultaneously . Although I didn't take the space there (though they were eager that I would), they will both be attending my NGH Hypnosis training (probably in Fall 2010) as they feel it would be useful for them to have the ability to use it, and in the interim are definitely planning to send me client referrals.

I think much of what might be considered "mocking" is perhaps sometimes a funny/awkward way for at least some involved in the medical community (specificially addressing the issues raised here that they don't like us because of "stage hypnotism") to actually allow themselves to be coached to a better understanding. In gaining rapport with those individuals, they can be great allies, as I'm fast learning as I begin approaching them on their own turf.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Ellner on January 9, 2010 at 6:24am

Hi Shelia,

FYI -
In most US states - Naturopathic Doctors would be not be considered part of the medical community themselves.

In terms of renting space, one would naturally expect a more open minded reception from people in a Holistic Medical Center - The fact remains that members of both APAs (American Psychological and Psychiatric Associations would not rent space to a non-licensed professional in one of their centers.

Warmest regards,

Michael E.



Sheila M. Street, CH CI T.NLP said:

Whether or not we get mocked, especially by the medical community, it doesn't always mean that's a bad thing.

Yesterday, while hunting for office space at a Holistic Medical Center in town, and meeting with the owners (married couple, both Naturopath doctors), he was interested in having some personal sessions for a phobia he has, and joked "but you won't make me bark like a dog, will you?" (big grin on his face) at which I grimaced/smiled simultaneously . Although I didn't take the space there (though they were eager that I would), they will both be attending my NGH Hypnosis training (probably in Fall 2010) as they feel it would be useful for them to have the ability to use it, and in the interim are definitely planning to send me client referrals.

I think much of what might be considered "mocking" is perhaps sometimes a funny/awkward way for at least some involved in the medical community (specificially addressing the issues raised here that they don't like us because of "stage hypnotism") to actually allow themselves to be coached to a better understanding. In gaining rapport with those individuals, they can be great allies, as I'm fast learning as I begin approaching them on their own turf.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Vince C on December 25, 2010 at 6:24pm

I'm renting space from a psychiatrist with an office full of psychologists as well as LSW's

 

Some people mock hypnosis and it seems that they are afraid of 1) being contolled, 2) losing control, 3) divulging secrets 4) the work of the devil 5) the unknown  6) abuse

 

I never let that stop me.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page