The Same Old Elephant ..by Richard Kluft, MD,PhD

Available online: 24 Jan 2012

Journal of Trauma & Dissociation

Abstract

We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will

be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.

T. S. Eliot (Little Gidding, 1971)

 

Sorry folks, this is all the abstract states on the Journal of Trauma & Dissociation web page. This article is by Richard Kluft, MD who is a prolific writer & researcher about multiple personalities and dissociative identity disorder and is a major player in the movement.

This scant abstract tells the public nothing. Article for purchase $36 US dollars. How’s that for easy access to information?

Got money?

updated 9-15-14.

Leave a comment

29 Comments

  1. ThanksDr.K-BK

     /  05/05/2012

    Jeanette, I don’t know who you are or what your background is, but your posts appear to be written in an attempt to harm the credentials of Dr. Kluft. It sounds to me like you and others writing here have a personal agenda on which you are acting rather than a desire to promote the truth or correct an injustice. I am just a nobody without academic scholar in the area of psychology or DID. I have no formal degrees in this area or experience other than what I have learned through living with DID. I believe no professional knows everything, no matter how long they practice. No one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes. What I do know and truly appreciate is the fact that Dr. Kluft has devoted his life to studying and researching DID. For those of you who doubt that DID exists, it does. I live with it and it’s trials daily and have for half a century. I was not diagnosed by Dr. Kluft, but by several other professionals after living a very difficult life filled with turmoil and fear. I’ve had many other diagnoses over the past 21 years and none of the treatment, pharmacological or therapy based, I received proved effective. I was finally diagnosed with DID 4 years ago and continued in treatment without success. A year ago, my therapist and psychiatrist referred me to Dr. Kluft. I have worked with him since then and what I can tell you is that he is very cautious in his treatment. I have asked him to hypnotize me and just find out what I have suppressed over all these years, but to date, he will not. He feels I am not ready for that yet and that it is not safe to do so at this point. I don’t always agree with everything he says, however, if I did I would be concerned. I feel I am able to think for myself and am not just accepting his word as gospel. He is a good man with good intent. I think he knows as much or more than any man alive on this topic. I think there are many out there that would like to discredit him for their own selfish reasons. I fear this will only turn out harmful to all. In the future, if you actually have a point to make in the interest of correcting a wrong or for the betterment of society, you may want to express that with a different attitude next time. What I have read here screams of revenge, jealousy, and/or personal vendetta. I think more ears would be tuned to your message if presented in a different tone with a different intent.

    Like

    Reply
    • jeanettebartha

       /  05/05/2012

      reply to ThanksDr.K-BK.

      I appreciate the time you took to leave a comment and to share your experiences with me and other readers.

      I offer my personal experiences with Dr. Kluft to make him a human being, not an expert on a controversial diagnosis, or a writer of papers, or a researcher, or a clinician, or an adviser to a TV comedy (The United States of Tara). My intent is to take you and my readers into his ivory tower so you can meet the man behind the string of credentials he has amassed.

      I do not need to “harm” as you put it, Dr. Kluft’s credentials. Credentials, by the way, mean that someone went to school and graduated – they do not make someone think logically or rationally as we patients would like to believe all our health care providers to do. To realize they are human and that they can be wrong can be scary.

      Dr. Kluft damages his own credibility beautifully on his own – he doesn’t need my help. I’ve sat across the table from him and know how he thinks, and how he conducts himself with patients.

      I wish you didn’t think as you said: “I am just a nobody without academic scholar in the area of psychology or DID.” You are very much somebody. Somebody who believes they have a controversial condition who is depending on the psychiatric community to help you. You are somebody who knows more about yourself than any psychiatrist ever will. In my opinion, you are being mislead by the treatment you have chosen – no disrespect intended. You are free to seek whatever mental health treatment you deem appropriate for you.

      Of course Dr. Kluft will not formally “hypnotize” you. It would be improper as it has proven to do nothing to promote accurate information via “buried memories” (see opinion papers by the American Psychiatric Association). I wonder if Dr. Kluft asks to speak to other personalities of yours? If he does, that is suggestion and equally unprofessional and improper.

      Why would I be jealous if Dr. Kluft you ask? I think the man is quite nutty. I would love to have a bank balance as high as his but that’s about it.

      I can see how you would view my opinions about Kluft and DID/MPD as a “vendetta” as you are a patient of Dr. Kluft, support him and his theories, and lionize him. If you find Kluft and his therapy helpful in your life that is your choice and right to make. I hope, however, that you can make use of what I have to share about my experiences with the man.

      You are quite right that my “tone” can be quite sharp. I am always like that when I find people being hurt by… say, a goofy doctor, by someone who beats a woman, or by a crazy dictator who kills his countrymen. These are examples, in my opinion, of man’s inhumanity to man and worthy of having a sharp tone to what I say and how I write. I have a responsibility to do something about it.

      I have, or should say, Had a friend named Lori N.. She was a patient of Dr. Kluft’s in the mid 1980s. She died during treatment from complications after she slashed her wrists – it would be called “self-harm” these days. After receiving medical treatment she returned to therapy for multiple personalities at the hospital where he worked. Do you know about Lori? She was a sweet young woman of 24 when she dropped dead without warning. Ask Dr. Kluft about Lori. I’d be interested to know what he tells you.

      The deaths of mental health patients are statistics unknown to the public. Psychiatrists don’t tell new patients how many died in their care – we don’t think to ask. That’s a fact you can take to the bank.

      I truly wish you the best in your treatment for multiple personalities and hope you don’t need to spend another 4 or more years healing yourself. Best to you. JB

      Like

      Reply
    • “ThanksDr.K-BK” — It seems you have an “agenda” to justify and endorse Kluft, just as any of us might have an agenda to warn people that the “therapy” he advocates is counter-productive, harmful, and based upon debunked premises. What does it mean to say one is forwarding an “agenda”? Anybody who forwards an opinion can be said to have an agenda to make that opinion known. Why is it that absolutely 100% of the time, without exception, an argument against the validity of Recovered Memory Therapies or the legitimacy of a DID diagnosis will include, at some point, the DID defender decrying the “agenda” of those whose opinions are based on current understandings of the mind and brain (and thus recognize that DID is sociocognitive construct, not a naturally occurring condition, and that Recovered Memory Therapies are harmful quackery)?
      It is ironic that you mention that Kluft is hesitant to engage in formal hypnosis. The article of his that we are commenting on here suggests that Kluft feels he is using hypnosis when it is called hypnosis or not. He seems to feel that hypnosis is unavoidable. This isn’t surprising, as hypnosis is really an acquiescence on the part of the subject to submit to the command of the hypnotist, to take his voice as the word of authority and follow his instructions — to believe his interpretation of events and give oneself to his interpretations. The indoctrination into the DID diagnosis seems uniform enough across the US that all self-proclaimed DID victims I encounter seem to use the same language: doubters have an “agenda”, and if the argument for DID becomes too untenable, you may always withdraw without confronting the hard questions by stating that the whole thing has become “triggering”.
      I, too, look very forward to hearing Kluft’s comments about Lori. I would ask him myself, but I’ve tried calling Kluft before. I don’t think he’s interested in confronting any difficult questions. Please keep us updated.

      Like

      Reply
  2. Did Kluft ever get sued for malpractice? I don’t know if anyone to took him to task. Then again, maybe they didn’t survive this medicine.

    Yes, he sat pretty while many of his colleagues were successfully found negligent and convicted of medical malpractice. He made tens of thousands or more as an expert witness.

    He’s quite the slippery one.

    Like

    Reply
    • Anonymous

       /  01/23/2022

      Yes he did get sued. There was a trial in Philadelphia in the 1990’s.

      Like

      Reply
      • Thanks, I suppose the info can be found on the Internet.

        Like

        Reply
        • I appreciate how you describe your changes in handwriting and I think you express a universal way of writing depending on what you are doing. I would think that writing a birthday card would be different than filling out medical information on a form. Not everyone, of course, would find themselves writing differently in various places; in no way would that constitute alternate personalities IMHO. It’s normal, sorry to say.

          Like

          Reply
  3. British psychologist Ashley Conway contributed a hugely-revealing essay to the 1994 book ‘Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse’ edited by Valerie Sinason.

    At the time, using hypnosis to investigate clients who it was thought could recover repressed memories was just making its way across the Atlantic to the UK, and Dr. Conway was at the forefront of this new means of treatment.

    Clients determined to be dissociative though appeared to be both easily hypnotized and vulnerable to the insertion or creation of false memories;

    ‘The idea of using hypnosis in therapy is logical because, as discussed above, patients who have dissociative problems are likely to be highly hypnotisable.

    However, using hypnosis to aid recall is not without difficulties in itself. Hypnosis increases the productivity of recall, but also increases the likelihood of confabulation. Additionally, it is likely to prove greater confidence that material recalled is accurate (Perry, 1992). Hypnosis can be deliberately use to create pseudo-memories, for therapeutic purposes, and it has also been demonstrated that the hypnotist can deliberately or unwittingly provoke pseudo-memories by asking leading questions under hypnosis (Perry et al, 1988). Inaccurate memories in hypnosis can be confident ones, and highly hypnotisable subjects are more prone to confuse real and imagined memories than are less hypnotisable subjects (Sheehan, 1988) and Lynn et al (1991) report that when target events of pseudo-memory suggestions are not publicly verifiable, the pseudo-memory rate is invariably higher. Orne (1986) states that typically, memories from different periods in a patient’s life are combined, that phantasies, beliefs and fears may be mixed with actual recollections and that, although some ‘memories’ may represent a psychologically meaningful truth, they cannot be assumed to be historically accurate fact, even though patients may how a therapeutic improvement from working through such memories. ‘

    (Pages 259 and 260 – Trance-formations of abuse by Ashley Conway, from Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse, Routledge – now Informa PLC, 1994)

    Strangely, having recognised that ‘dissociative’ clients are ‘highly hypnotisable’ and that there are considerable risks in introducing pseudo-memories (‘Hypnosis can be deliberately use to create pseudo-memories, for therapeutic purposes, and it has also been demonstrated that the hypnotist can deliberately or unwittingly provoke pseudo-memories by asking leading questions under hypnosis’), what would you have expected Dr. Conway to do? Perhaps suggest that clients diagnosed with dissociative conditions (notably MPD at the time) aren’t hypnotised?

    Nope, no chance of that. Hypnotise, hypnotise is the theme of the essay. Even better, suggest what the client should remember during hypnosis-induced ‘dreaming’.

    ‘To maintain the client’s sense of control I use a technique of hypnotically induced dreaming. Having first checked out with the client via ideomotor signalling that it is acceptable, two lines of approach may be used: (i) suggest that the client has a dream which provides some useful information about what took place and (ii) suggest that the dream be used to express and release a manageable piece of feeling. Clients can be given the suggestion that they will remember what is useful for them to remember at this time.’

    So as a cash-cow, you couldn’t get better than the easily hypnotised subset of clients determined to be dissociated. Even better, implanting false memories, deliberately or by accident, is a doddle with such people. In 1994, as Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse was published, this combination made for a toxic brew, with hynotherapy all-the-rage.

    For Richard Kluft, ‘The Same Old Elephant’ is a plea for a return to those old times, when fortunes could be made and reputations harnessed, thanks to a seemingly endless stream of female clients willing to have their memories recovered through hypnosis. I’m tickled by his obvious worship of Bennett Braun, who managed to abuse women in his care in a fashion unheard-of even in his profession before. His reference to Brown, Scheflin and Hammond came from their book ‘Memory, Trauma Treatment, and the Law’ which recognised the value in using hypnosis as the sole means of recovering ‘repressed’ memories;

    “Because some victims of sexual abuse will repress their memories by dissociating themselves from consciousness, hypnosis can be very valuable in retrieving these memories. Indeed for some victims, hypnosis may provide the only avenue to the repressed memories”.

    And what harm is there in asking a few leading questions? If the client can’t recover any repressed memories of being sexually abused in the past, why not suggest (she) imagines being abused in the past ‘without worrying about accuracy’ and then move on to speculate who might have abused you in your imagination?

    ‘In the Sexual Healing Journey, therapist Wendy Maltz suggests a series of exercises for patients feeling “stuck”, Maltz directs patients to “spend time imagining you were sexually abused, without worrying about accuracy, proving anything or having your ideas make sense. As you give rein to your imagination, let your intuition guide your thoughts…Ask yourself or have a support person or therapist ask you these questions: What time of day is it? Where are you? Indoors or outdoors? What kind of things are happening? Is there one or more person with you? Male or female? What types of touch are you experienceing? What parts of your body are involved? What do you see, feel or hear? How do you feel emotionally? Angry, scared, excited, confused? Once the patient reflects on answers to these questions, Maltz recommends that the therapist proceed by asking: “Who would have been likely perpetrators? When were you most vulnerable to sexual abuse in your life? Why would it have been important for you to forget what happened?”‘

    (page 93 Making Monsters: False Memories, Psychotherapy, And Sexual Hysteria (1996) by Dr. Richard Ofshe and Ethan Watters)

    But even the issue of repressed memories of alien abduction can be explained away, not by choosing the obvious path (i.e. the memories are false) but rather by determining that wicked satanists have implanted such memories as a distraction. Noted American feminist E. Sue Blume tried this on, not realising that she had inadvertantly confirmed that false memories could be deliberately induced. In ‘Victims of memory’ by Mark Pendergrast, he notes Blume’s willingness to believe in satanists using advanced technology to implant such memories in abduction ‘survivors’;

    ‘More recently, therapists such as E. Sue Blume have seized “virtual reality” technology as a explanation of alien abduction memories. They were really just fooled by satanic cults, according to Blume:

    “These groups often employ sophisticated and elaborate special effects and computer-generated “virtual-reality” to make people think that they have experienced things which have not really occured. For example, a victim will “remember” being abducted by aliens to their ships, where “medical experiments” were performed”‘

    (Victims of Memory – Mark Pendergrast, page 194)

    fortunately the marketing industry hasn’t managed to get hold of the “virtual reality” technology the satanists are using (nor medical industry yet secured the cure for AIDS/HIV eluded-to by other SRA Myth/DID advocates.)

    Other than the money, what other incentives are there for the likes of Kluft and his mate (until he was finally stopped) Bennett Braun and Hammond and co. to pursue their beliefs? Well, Mark Pendercrast identifies the very thrill of working in this field, in pages 194-195 of ‘Victims of Memory’;

    ‘Specialists such as Bennett Braun, Corydon Hammond and Colin Ross receive enormous support from books, articles, and conferences where the myths of satanic cults are repeated and elaborated. In the final analysis, such therapists believe in the cults because they want to believe. The sessions in which menacing, evil alters appear provide the same thrill which exorcists experienced hundreds of years ago. It is challenging, exciting, frightening work-a far cry from the humdrum existence of a routine mental health professional who listens to a boring litany of drab complaints all day long.’

    If you had experienced that thrill, as no doubt Richard Kluft has, wouldn’t you want to experience it again and again?

    Like

    Reply
    • “avalon11” —
      Thank you so much for this great background material. The more I think on this article by Kluft, the more amazing to me the piece seems. It’s really an open confession that he hasn’t let the harm done to subjects undergoing MPD therapy change a goddamn thing in his practice. Sure, “Buddy” Braun & many people around him took the malpractice hit, but Kluft sits back and chuckles in “pachydermal amusement” as he plays semantic games with the “treatment” program. Interesting too how this flies in the face of what another past president for the ISSTD was trying to impress upon me: That DID treatment need not be tied to Recovered Memory Therapies, and certainly not hypnosis…

      Like

      Reply
  4. Ha! David — thank you very much.

    Lines like this are typical of this debunked dinosaur:

    “The work of Loftus (1993) and allied colleagues was lionized. Notwithstanding these contributions’ shortcomings and limited applicability to the therapeutic situation, they were enlisted energetically into efforts to discredit hypnosis.”

    What are these shortcomings he speaks of, and are these “shortcomings” in fact short enough to justify his apparent broad dismissal of false memory research? The only argument for “shortcomings” that I can think of come from the fact that no human subjects research would allow for intentional traumatic false memory cultivation. Here again, it would be worth pointing out the case of Bennett Braun and the malpractice suit against him which revealed how real the cultivation of traumatic false memories can be. That is, of course, if Kluft would agree that the “memories” Braun “recovered” of satanic cult conspiracy, infant sacrifice, cannibalism, as well as Braun’s conviction that subject’s are “programmed” to self-destruct if they remember too much were indeed misguided notions.
    But wait — what’s this??:

    “Further, several new approaches focused on the body-mind interface, always the home field of hypnosis, employ “new” techniques that give old hands in the world of hypnosis a chuckle, because generations of hypnosis practitioners have relied upon them, and Bennett Braun applied many of them to the dissociative disorders in his publications (1988a, 1988b) about the BASK model. No matter how hard many have tried to drive it away or to generate a negative hallucination which appears to make it vanish, the same old elephant continues to graze in the living room, for all we know chuckling in pachydermal amusement at the intricate intellectual dances that attempt to circumnavigate the denied but all too present bulk of the very beast that has been wished away, but is still there.”

    It is, in fact, Braun and his wild conspiracy theories that are the elephant in the room, and shriveled old adherents like Kluft who chuckle in “pachydermal amusement” self-quarantined from rational dialogue or critical debate as he continues to pretend that this is an academic debate, not one of delusion versus Science. Whether it is past-life regression, alien abduction, Scientology auditing, entranced exorcisms… wherever such “channeling” or Recovered Memory Therapy is practiced, delusion always follows. The delusions of alien abduction and Satanic Ritual Abuse have long been the elephant that Kluft has chosen not to address. To be sure, he pretended to address the address the issue when he produced some quotes — intending to paint himself “moderate” — regarding some false confessions of ritual abuse, but whether (or how) this may have informed his practice is entirely unclear, as it is also unclear still (as stated in my prior comment) what Kluft meant by declaring Lannings findings that there was no organized satanic cult conspiracy a “bullshit cover-up”.
    In my previous comment I mentioned continued reference to discredited works, such as Scheflin, Brown, and Hammond’s paper which failed to mention organic head injuries in subjects for which they were trying to prove “repressed trauma”. Sure enough, Kluft cites them here in this paper, revealing how little he’s learned or grown during his isolation:

    “The landmark contributions of Brown (1995) and Brown, Scheflin, and Hammond (1998) should have stopped the dissociative disorders community’s retreat from hypnosis in its tracks.”

    In fact, a reading of Hammond’s famous “Greenbaum Speech” (Google it if you haven’t read it. It is a classic of unhinged paranoid conspiracy literature) which describes a world-wide plot instigated by a satanic Jew on a quest to produce an army of “mental robots” should have stopped anybody from putting credibility into the “information” of this nature that Hammond and his cohorts were drawing out of their subjects during hypnosis
    Again, Kluft avoids all the hard questions. His article is nothing better, in fact, than a “bullshit cover-up”.

    Like

    Reply
    • What I observe in this article is that Kluft is, once again, circumventing the American Psychiatric/Psychological/Medical Associations by quietly suggesting that a new definition (or new and improved and expanded definition) of hypnosis be adopted.

      I love the elephant metaphor – it is perfect.

      Psychiatrists promoting multiple personalities successfully used a similar tactic when they corralled their political clout and changed the name of multiple personality disorder to dissociative identity disorder. Remember, that action was taken after many of them had been successfully sued for medical malpractice.

      I think this article is laying the groundwork that will lead to expanding the definitions of hypnosis so DID theorists & psychotherapists can rationalize the use of hypnosis on patients. In so doing, they circumvent the law as well.

      This article wants readers, the public, psychiatric patients, therapists who subscribe to dissociative identity disorder theories, and students of psychology and psychiatry to focus on the silly elephant so none of them Remembers the debacles Kluft has made over the past two decades.

      I imagine it would also suffice for no one to Remember the women gravely injured with wacky medical/psychiatric theories.

      How & when did physicians lose their ability to comprehend that they are toying with human beings with beating hearts, inquiring minds, and families who love them? Psychiatric patients are not guinea pigs, Doctors. Women are not toys for you to play games with in your therapy rooms.

      I think theorists like this one should stop “researching” and begin publishing fiction – there, they can continue to let their imaginations run rancid, and no patients will get hurt or killed in the writing of the story.

      Regarding elephants and remembering. I will always remember my friend who died while being treated for multiple personality disorder/dissociative identity disorder at a hospital in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA in the late 1980s. I know who was treating her; I also know he will not be stepping forward to offer that information. Her name was Lori.

      I trust that the silly elephant-protagonist in this story will not keep anyone from scrutinizing this article thoroughly.

      Remember the past, read what is in front of you, and look to where this theory is going. History is about to repeat itself. And more women will suffer at the hands of the psychiatry machine.

      I am here to insure that women like Lori, who died while being treated for multiple personality disorder, have not died in vein.

      Rest in peace young woman.

      Like

      Reply
      • Dear Readers,

        For the first time, I sadly have to edit this post left by David to comply with copyright.

        I received no response to my question to David to reveal his identity and to offer me permission to copy this article in full as he posted it.

        Therefore, the full-text has been removed. Sorry. It is an article worth chasing. If anyone finds a link to the full-text, do share. JB

        Like

        Reply
  5. Well, I’m sure that it’s not only the abstract that is uninformative. In fact, as the abstract contains a quote from T. S. Eliot, it is almost certain to be the best part of the text. Kluft has been an elusive broken record for many years, dodging direct questions and repeating the same litany. When he does rear his toad-like head, it is typically in a letter to the editor where he will declare that there is a “wealth of data” that actually support his debunked notions of repression and memory recovery. He doesn’t tell us where this wealth of data is, and I am left to assume that he – like many other true believers – is really speaking of the “wealth” of citations referencing worthless retrospective surveys, mis-applied studies in memory distortion, references to amnesia that conveniently ignore organic head injury (as brazenly put forth by Sheflin, Brown, & Hammond to their everlasting discredit), and other papers that wouldn’t withstand basic scrutiny if Kluft had the conviction to point us to them directly. I wish Kluft would tell us what, exactly, went wrong with his buddy Bennett Braun? Had Braun somehow misapplied this DID therapy that has been proven valid by a wealth of mysterious data, or was Braun’s later lawsuit alleging malpractice in which he cultivated false memories of satanic abuse, cannibalism, intergenerational bloodline conspiracies – was this just part of a massive cover-up? After all, Kluft did declare the FBI’s Lanning report on the Satanic Panic hysteria as a “bullshit cover-up”, but he’s never bothered to elaborate on this point. Kluft claims affiliation with Temple University where a Dr. David Jacobs has used hypnosis to recover memories in various subjects of alien abduction. At least one of Jacobs former subjects, like Braun’s, claims these memories, which she now recognizes as false, are nonetheless traumatic to her. I wonder if Kluft ever advised Jacobs and, if so, could he perhaps tell us what went wrong in this case? Did Jacobs’s subject suffer false memories, or is she in denial of her actual alien abduction? I’m willing to bet that none of the answers to these questions are in Kluft’s piece, the point of which seems to be “we shall not cease from exploration”, we will continue finding “evidence” for what we believe… even if we have to make it ourselves…

    Like

    Reply
    • Well, Doug, your questions have been on the lips of many of us for decades & yet remain unanswered.

      I find it interesting that my former psychiatrist, a close colleague of Kluft’s, is accused of making a misdiagnosis of multiple personalities on me. He was incompetent, irresponsible and self-indulgent. When I asked for a second opinion, he got Dr. Richard Kluft to come to the hospital to conduct an interview. I did not know Kluft’s expertise in diagnosing and treating multiple personalities. As a patient, I trusted that my psychiatrist would offer me an unbiased second opinion as requested. I was naive & didn’t know what responsibility I had in my health care – at that time.

      When I tell people that Dr. Kluft also diagnosed me with multiple personalities, there is a slight hesitation and then a total negation of what I said.

      If a medical doctor of Kluft’s status can render a misdiagnosis, where does that leave patients?

      I digress.

      I found the title of this paper, “The Same Old Elephant” rather humorous and a bit of redundant redundancy.

      Elephants, we all know, never forget. Perhaps it’s time for that ole’ elephant to tell us what she knows about how Braun, Kluft, Wilbur and others brought the profession of psychology down to it’s knees with foolish fantasies that only prove to denigrate patient’s welfare.

      Like

      Reply
      • david

         /  01/28/2012

        We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will
        be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.
        T. S. Eliot (Little Gidding, 1971)

        We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will
        We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will
        be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.
        T. S. Eliot (Little Gidding, 1971)

        Efforts persist within the dissociative disorders field in general and within many of its current models, theories, and therapeutic approaches to bypass, dismiss, marginalize, or otherwise dissociate hypnosis from their mainstream concerns. These endeavors provide an ongoing source of delicious irony, painful distress, and intellectual astonishment to researchers and clinicians whose experience, expertise and explorations encompass both areas of study.

        For such individuals, three salient facts together suffice to establish hypnosis and hypnotizability as foundational concerns in the study and treatment of dissociation and the dissociative disorders. 1) Hypnotizability, a genetically-mediated capacity (e.g., Raz, Fan, & Posner, 2006), is high in most dissociative disorder populations (e.g., Frischholz, Lipman, Braun, & Sachs, 1992). 2) Hypnotic phenomena occur commonly in most dissociative populations and play a significant role in their psychopathology (Braun, 1983). 3)

        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

        Readers, for the first time, I sadly have to edit this post left by David to comply with copyright.

        I received no response to my question to David to reveal his identity and to offer me permission to copy this article in full as he posted it.

        Therefore, the full-text has been removed. Sorry. It is an article worth chasing. If anyone finds a link to the full-text, do share. JB

        Like

        Reply
        • Hello, David.

          I appreciate you posting what appears to be all or part of the text of Richard Kluft’s article, The Same Old Elephant. Are you Richard Kluft, are you the publisher? Do you hold the copyright to this article and by posting it, are you granting me permission to reprint?

          This article, is provisionally approved for the next 48 hours until such time as the above questions can be answered.

          -Jeanette Bartha

          ~~~~~~~~~

          Like

          Reply
        • I find this statement interesting – and quite telling: The only way to conduct the treatment of most dissociative disorder patients without acknowledging the inevitability of hypnosis is redefine hypnosis to be limited to heterohypnosis, avoid doing formal inductions, and declare that no hypnosis has occurred.

          It seems that Dr. Kluft needs to redefine another psychological technique so it can fit into his MPD/DID theories/model. He did the same by expanding it and renaming multiple personality disorder to dissociative identity disorder.

          Been there, seen that.

          Like

          Reply
          • K

             /  01/30/2012

            “The only way to conduct the treatment of most dissociative disorder patients WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING THE INEVITABILITY OF HYPNOSIS is redefine hypnosis to be limited to heterohypnosis, avoid doing formal inductions, and declare that no hypnosis has occurred.”

            Actually, may I ask why you interpretted the statement this way? To me, it appears that Dr. Kluft is saying that hypnosis is necesary in the treatment of a dissociative patient. If you claim to have treated them without hypnosis, you’re misinterpretting what hypnosis means.

            Like

            Reply
            • Kluft said: “inevitability of hypnosis is redefine hypnosis” That, to me, indicates that hypnosis is used.

              What point am I missing?

              Like

              Reply
              • K

                 /  02/01/2012

                Yes, he is saying hypnosis is being used. But where do you see that he’s trying to redefine hypnosis?

                I interpreted him as saying that the only way you can deny the use of hypnosis in treating someone with DID would be to redefine hypnosis. I didn’t take it to mean that he himself wished to.

                Like

                Reply

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: