A couple of weeks ago, I commented on an on-line
sample from a new German book, Festhaltetherapien:Ein
Plaedoyer gegen umstrittene Therapieverfahren, edited by Ute Benz. I have
now received a copy of the book and am making my way painfully through
it-- I began by looking up three words
in every paragraph and am now down to two for most paragraphs, and even an
occasional paragraph where (I think) I understand everything.
I didn’t begin at the beginning, but wanted to look
at a chapter by Ute Benz on the historical development of Holding Therapies
(pp. 121-143). (I should emphasize here that the title is in the plural, and
that although the book focuses to a considerable extent on the treatment as
done by Jirina Prekop and Martha Welch, in fact there are other methods that
use restraint on children in almost the same way as Prekop and Welch.) I am going to translate some parts of this
chapter, but I do want to note that I have not asked permission to do so. I
assume that the short sections I will present, and the fact that I have no
commercial interest here, will make this acceptable, but if there are any
objections from authors or publisher I will naturally take the post down.
I’ll begin with Benz’s description of Prekop’s
holding method, which its proponents recommend for autistic children, for
oppositional children, and for “any child who needs it”. “The picture of the classical
holding scene looks like this: a boy or girl sits or lies on a mat with the
entire body held tightly by adults, the mother and/or father and perhaps a
third or fourth helper, so that the child can no longer move, but can only cry
out. For the child to scream and cry during the procedure is considered normal
and even desirable as the expression of emotion belonging to the method, so
crying must be provoked if a child becomes compliant too quickly. This is to
dissolve repressions. The child’s crying is much more easily tolerated by the
parents when many children are treated and cry simultaneously. If a child
immediately becomes still and resigned to his fate or goes to sleep or looks
around the room, he is practicing a defense against the treatment and must be
provoked in order to break through the defense.”
“When Holding Therapy is done in the home, the
parents are warned to close the windows, so that neighbors will not hear the
sound of screaming and call the police. Because the delaying tactics of the
restrained child may cause him to scratch, bite, hit, or kick, a certain
position needs to be taken, so there are no bruises as visible signs of
mistreatment. The child must cross his hands and legs in a sort of straitjacket
position and sit straddling the lap of the adult. His head must be laid or
pressed against the crook of the adult’s neck. … the child must not be let go
under any circumstances, such as begging, yelling, screaming , or desperately
crying, even if he needs to go to the toilet, his nose runs, or he becomes sick,
or when both bodies are bathed in sweat, or when the child trembles from stress
or is hungry or thirsty. All these things are done in typical evasive maneuvers [N.B. Benz is describing
Prekop’s viewpoint, not her own opinion!] that must be overcome in the course
of the process so that the goal of a tractable child is reached.” This goal is
shown when the child allows eye contact as the parents wish it, lets himself be
caressed, and says things like “I love you” or promises desired behavior. As Benz
notes later, this end is thought to justify the means.
Benz, who estimates 10,000 cases of this treatment
in Germany and Austria over the last 30 years, also notes people who have
contacted her to ask for help or explanations. (She also notes that few German
psychotherapists know about Holding Therapy or even know it exists.) In 2004,
she was contacted by a divorced father who had custody of a seven-year-old boy;
the boy was refusing to visit his mother. The boy told his father that the mother
would restrain him while he lay on the floor, would stroke him and whisper “I
am your mother, I love you.” Benz was also contacted by a town counselor who
was concerned about accusations of mistreatment against a staff member in a
children’s home, where there had already been repeated indications of trouble.
The accused person had already resigned, but the town council now needed to
review over a hundred videotapes although they did not know anything about the
theory and practice of Holding Therapy. In 2011 Benz was contacted by a
27-year-old woman from the Netherlands, who had been given intensive Holding
Therapy for years as treatment for cerebral palsy. For the first four years
holding was done three times a day, which was later reduced to three times a
week. At age 20 she had serious problems with being near other people and with
physical contact. Her doctor advised her to seek therapy but could not say
where to go.
Benz describes a number of similar cases who have
contacted her, but as far as I have read does not suggest specific techniques
for treating these effects of Holding Therapy, although she does note that
practitioners need to explore whether new patients have been subjected to this
treatment. As I have noted before, in one case I know in the United States, a
young woman who as a child was subjected to treatment of the Prekop-Welch type
suffered increasingly severe anxiety attacks in her 20s, but was relieved by
desensitization treatment focusing on her memories of the treatment, particularly
the screams of other children in the room.
I must say that distressing as I find treatment of
this type for autistic children, the idea of trying to apply it to someone with
cerebral palsy is really beyond anything I have encountered before. One wonders
whether these people would use holding for appendicitis! Surely declarations of
intense pain and vomiting could be interpreted as defensive delaying actions,
too … and no doubt similar interpretations have been made by some practitioners.
In a later post, I want to go into what Benz has to
say about the use of similar techniques by occupational therapists in Germany.
I am almost speachless. If you are doing something that may leave "visible signs of mistreatment" and are afraid that your neighbors may hear you and call the cops, you are, indeed, mistreating said child! It's telling you how to abuse your child and reduce the risk of getting caught!
ReplyDeleteYup. That's just what it is. But according to its supporters, it "makes the love flow".
DeleteI'll pass on more about this in the next few days.