Brainspotting?

So I just saw a new T for the first time yesterday. I feel hopeful....I had two sessions with a T prior to this one, and after the second session, (where she ended it by asking me to contact her to schedule the next session), she sent me an Email saying she didn't think her modality would be helpful for me, so we would not be scheduling any further sessions.

Anyway, this new T is a somatic experiencing T, she advertises herself as a "holistic psychotherapist,", and she is a big believer in "brainspotting." Anyone familiar with this?

She made notice of things I didn't realize, like I would look to the left or right, depending on what I was talking about. I guess, in thinking about it, my therapists have always kind of kept an eye on where my eyes shift.....so maybe it's actually very common, just not used by its term.

Here's a website... https://brainspotting.pro/

Okay, I may get slammed for this, but I looked into this and learned that Dr David Grand, originator of this "method" is not a medical doctor but a licensed clinical social worker with a questionable "doctorate" from a University in the Dominican Republic ...in a town of less than 5,000 people. This is not based on medical evidence or neurology and seems questionable at best and without a doubt a pseudo "science."

If you feel your T is a net positive, then by all means continue but brainspotting, in my view, is right up there with BigFoot and the Mayan calendar. Caveat emptor

Oh, the "University" where Dr. David Grand got his "degree" is in Dominica, not the Dominican Republic. .

I tried it for a year and a half and it did nothing for me. My therapist trained others and believed strongly in it. I felt like a failure because I couldn’t do “it.’ She said that I was towards the end but I felt like she was gaslighting.

The issue for me was that I would immediately dissociate and therefore couldn’t access my feelings. Supposedly, brainspotting will work even when someone is in a dissociate state. It cost me a lot of money and I got nothing out of it and I did it weekly for nearly two years.

I recently had one session of EMDR and I felt some benefit even though I still have trouble accessing traumatic events. Talk therapy and IFS helped me the most but it takes a long time and I don’t think that therapist have the patience for it anymore.

I do brain spotting withT3. I have found it very helpful. After 8 years of therapy, I was still suicidal and miserable, and brain spotting made the intense suicidal thoughts chill out. It has helped on other ways also.

I like it because I don't have to talk about or even remember specifics of trauma. I like it because with other ts I have been painfully attached and that has not happened with T3.

When I started, I was desperate and somewhat sceptical, now I am not so desperate and a believer.

Completely agree. Readig that website (the whole website is a big redflag in its own) it's obvious this is all quackery. They present it as a science (scientific vocabulary) but there are no evidence and it's all " we believe". Anytime a "treatment" is presented as a wonderful cure for all, alarm bells should go off. If it was so life-changing everybody would have heard of it: in the media, newspapers, everywhere. And yet I had never heard of it until today. Personally I would be wary of any therapist who advertizes for this nonsense (actually I would be wary of any therapist period).

Musing, I'm glad you're trying a new therapist. If you like her, I would be open to the brainspotting. Nothing about therapy is scientific, even the so called evidence based alphabet therapies. I say give it a try.

I know nothing about brainspottimg, but I had a friend that swore by it and his life improved. My former therapist taught me that if someone believes a treatment will work, many times it does. I think the same thing about many medicines. I guess it’s the power of positive thinking. I hold onto it dearly.

OP I hope it helps move you forward.

I watched the 2 minute "what is brainspotting" video and I think it shares some features with EMDR (which was widely laughed out when it first came out, and now has reasonably solid effectiveness research behind it). I also think the "technique" is basically mindfulness, asking someone to focus on where they feel something in their body (a classic T question that has existed long before any of these somatic based techniques and which does nothing for me). I think asking a client to shift where they look and asking them where they feel something in their body is nothing more than interrupting the perhaps-traumatic automatic reaction. I think the special pointer is a scam, here's something you have to buy to practice "brainspotting".

It could have something to it, especially since IMO it is a type of mindfulness, which is helpful to many people. The specific aspect does seem more like quackery especially in the exaggerated claims of its helpfulness. If I had a T who did it, I would probably be willing to try it if it didn't take up too much time, but I wouldn't seek it out (but neither do I seek out EMDR for myself, which I don't think is quackery). I'm into talk therapy.

It appears to be an off-shoot of EMDR and NLP, both of which have some research evidence behind them, but also both of which aren't really new discoveries, but rather new packaging. The basic issues for me are that in controlled studies, EMDR doesn't show results significantly different from CBT and exposure therapies. And doing a cursory search on brainspotting research, there just is very little evidence that doesn't track back to this "Dr" Grand. The few articles that mention brainspotting at all have very few citations outside of the 3-4 co-authors with Grand. That is significant in terms of how "fringe" this topic may be.

I don't believe in therapy research for the most part and would be open to trying it based on anecdotal stories in some cases, such as Kecanoe's success with it.

I also wouldn't rely on one approach or technique and would focus on the whole package...

Research on therapy like most research can have serious design flaws.

But, if we do say we believe in scientific principles in general, the existence of research is what allows one to critique it, find flaws and check validity.

Anecdotes are great but they’re just that anecdotes — the problem being that you can always find some on either side and so, by their very nature, there is no way to know what is really valid versus what is not.

Of course, all of this with the usual disclaimer that one is free to chuck / choose what one desires without caring about anything else.

I don't find that true as I believe in scientific principles.

I think using flawed research is worse than using no research. In this case, kecanoe is a credible source of information to me, so I would give more weight to it.

Just like anecdotes, there is another side to research. Health research is a prime example, where someone constantly conflicts/disproves previous research. Simplified-eggs are bad for you, but no, they are good for you. The next article says they are bad for you. Remember, the FDA has had simple carbs on the top of the food pyramid for years and years--based on research. This has been proven to be wrong time and time again.

(Also, I've worked in a field where research is widely applied and the results are a disaster in many cases; worse than if no research was used.)

What was said earlier in this thread was precisely that — research on brain spotting is shaky / non-existent (the research that in fact touts the benefits of brain spotting).

It would be hard to come to that conclusion without the existence of research itself.

And yes, you’re right — there is a lot of research that shows that the conclusions reached by previously conducted research were wrong. There is no way to get those findings / reach those conclusions in the absence of a general adherence to scientific principles. The point of research is not to have a final / unshakeable truth or total agreement but to basically be able to say that given all that we know and the most valid of the methods we have to test our ideas, here’s what we’re finding.

So, basically there is no way to do that with anecdotes — everyone’s equally right or not.

I’m not dismissing anyone’s personal experience with it — far from it. There’s a lot of stuff I believe that wouldn’t stand up to scientific rigor’s scrutiny and I’ll happily admit that and still say I won’t chuck it because it adds value in some way or the other to my life.

I see where you're coming from, no question in my mind about research not being the "final conclusion".

My point is that looking back, I've learned over the years that I have been misguided by research and was not better off by using it to guide my decisions. In some cases, I've been made worse. Then there are my observations from industry inside information.

We do agree on research purpose, but maybe disagree on applying it? Regardless, these are good discussion points.

I would also suggest that the course of responsible research (and it is up to the consumer to distinguish responsible from irresponsible research) isn't necessarily contradictory: rather, it is cumulative. As additional information is compiled, research must, according to scientific principle, consider it and reformulate conclusions accordingly. In that light, all conclusions are "temporary," as is our collective knowledge base.

I have done maybe 10 brainspotting sessions with my T over the last 18 months. I have C-PTSD, so the focus is on early life trauma. We typically do a modified version of brainspotting called gazespotting, which is essentially brainspotting without the pointer and goggles. My T tracks where my eyes naturally go when talking about my trauma and guides me from there. I find this less invasive and dehumanizing than the traditional brainspotting process.

I am highly dissociative and have been numb to my body and emotions my entire life. Brainspotting is very slowly helping me to feel and gain a sense of my self as a real, solid person. I am skeptical about how much of this should be attributed specifically to brainspotting, but it has been working for me like nothing else so I'm sticking to it.

Unlike kecanoe, I do find that brainspotting draws forth attachment feelings I have for my T. I think much of this is due to the intense attunement between my T and me and our close physical proximity during the process. YMMV.

If it was working for me, I would also STICK TO IT!!! Good for you! i wish you the best in your continued healing journey

I don't believe any of the research around therapy. I think it is all biased by therapists to support them and give them more credibility. Also some of the discrediting is done between warring factions.
I see no reason not to give something like brain spotting a chance and see if it helps.
In something like therapy - I tend to go with if it is useful for a client - then go with it.

There doesn't seem to be much research that shows that any particular kind of therapy is better than others, it seems like most of what I have seen says that the most important thing is the therapeutic alliance.

There also is not much research that shows that meds help.

I've tried meds, they don't work for me. But I believe that they help some people. Same goes for DBT, CBT, psychoanalysis etc.

T3 says that brain spotting combines EMDR and Somatic Experiencing. I find that to be an accurate description.