User talk:Spiritfeet

The subject of whether or not SE is "alternative" has been discussed before. It also appears as if you have attempted to change this particular word choice before but have provided little explanation other than the fact that it is a "bottom up" approach. Essentially all mindfulness practices or somatic bodywork modalities are considered bottom up. Polarity therapy, craniosacral therapy, feldenkrais therapy, Rubenfeld Synergy, body mind centering, etc, can all considered bottom up approaches and complementary and alternative medicine. There is a place for SE to be labeled a "psychotherapeutic" approach and not an alternative modality. Focusing oriented psychotherapy is clearly grounded in psychotherapy, grew out of Carl Rogers Client Centered Therapy and was researched extensively within the halls of academia and psychology departments. It is a bottom up approach and a psychotherapeutic method. SE was marketed by Peter Levine as a complement to psychotherapy but as something separate from and exempt from psychotherapy. He labeled it as a body based method of preventing shock trauma and was to be differentiated from psychotherapeutic treatment requiring a mental health license. If one successfully argues that it is indeed a legitimate psychotherapeutic treatment method then that method can only be practices by those with a mental health license. Unfortunately, SE is practiced by a whole host of complementary and alternative medicine practitioners who do not hold a mental health license. It cannot hold the designation as a CAM approach and as a mainstream psychotherapeutic approach at the same time. In Waking the Tiger, Peter Levine essentially made the claim that it was "alternative" and differentiated from a psychotherapeutic approach. More recent publications (e.g. Brom) have made the claim that it is a psychotherapeutic method that incorporates the body into the process. It is the originator who made the choice to ground it outside of "traditional" medicine and in the realm of shamanism, Rolfing, etc. In order to prove its credibility you have to cite, not just proclaim it to be true, especially when the originators own writings clearly put it outside of the mainstream. If you note that "Focusing" in wikipedia does not call Genlin's approach "alternative". Levine chose to give credit for his ideas to prophetic dreams rather than the actually scientists and researchers who were at the forefront of the trauma field. Sensorimotor psychotherapy gave credit to everyone and Peter Levine gave credit to himself. Levine has always resisted efforts to brand it as mainstream and prefers to keep one foot heavily in the mystical inspiration where he was divinely inspired in the womb by Einstein. So the label "alternative" can definitely be argued to fit.