Scientific Validation

Scientific validation of The Bodynamic System (a psycho-motor developmental psychotherapy)
– additional to the EABP scientific validation of Body Psychotherapy

Lisbeth Marcher, Lennart Ollars and Erik Jarlnaes (eds.)
June 2001, Copenhagen, Denmark
Answering 15 questions as agreed upon between EAP and EABP.

The Bodynamic System
A psychomotor developmental psychotherapy

Contents:

Preamble: Introductory remarks

Chapter 1: Presentation of the Bodynamic System

Chapter 2: Scientific validation of The Bodynamic System
answering question no. 15 as stated by the EAP

Chapter 3: Scientific validation of the Bodynamic System:
answering questions 1-14 as stated by the EAP

Part 4: Bibliography concerning The Bodynamic System

Part 5: List of congresses
attended by Bodynamic members

Names and short presentation
of trainers mentioned

The END

Appendix: A collection of Bodynamic working models

Preamble: Introductory remarks

We are asking for a scientific validation of The Bodynamic System. We alternate between calling it The Bodynamic System (Analysis), The Bodynamic Analysis, Bodynamic Analysis and The Bodynamic System. It is the same, but occurs owing to a recent name change from Analysis to System, which signals that our System includes so many models and concepts, and that we traverse (go across) officially recognized boundaries between different professional disciplines.

We recognize the importance of a scientific validation of body psychotherapy as a mainstream (modality) of psychotherapy in general, although an understanding of the body as a part of mans’ being, as a psycho-socio-physical entity, has historical roots to the very beginning of psychology and psychotherapy as we know it from the work of among others: William James, Pierre Janet, Sandor Ferenczi and Wilhelm Reich. However, we are also aware that this history has its roots all the way back in the Greek psycho-physiological way of characterizing people.

Consequently, we have actively participated in the work done by EABP concerning the scientific validation of Body Psychotherapy in general.
It is our opinion that this documentation offers a great deal of background material and information. Much of what is said in this material relates to the background of The Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis).

Additionally we have also documented what we regard as teaching and practicing a form of psychotherapy, and also documented the scientific validation of our work, as far as this is possible, bearing in mind the concept of science and scientific validity’s complexity.

Before entering this documentation directly, we would first like in this foreword or preamble to share some of our thoughts about modalities versus sub-modalities, psychotherapy versus bodywork and finally, the concept of science and the quest to validate psychotherapy scientifically.

Modalities and submodalities of psychotherapy

We regard body psychotherapy in total as a mainstream within psychotherapy. We find it reasonable to consider body psychotherapy as a mainstream of psychotherapy, just as well as cognitive / behavioral psychotherapy, family oriented and systemic psychotherapy, psychodynamic and psychoanalytic psychotherapy etc. ALL of these are considered mainstreams – although this way of categorizing the field of psychotherapy can certainly be discussed.
To give an example of our own: THE Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis) certainly takes into account everyday human behavior, as well as the actual social networks, the cognitive-behavioral skills and characteristics and the psychodynamic development of the individual, as crucial points of focus in the therapeutic process, together with the knowledge about how this process is integrated in the perceptual-motor development. This means that the Bodynamic System spans many of the accepted psychological mainstreams – BUT we also emphasize a body related approach to working with and understanding our clients and students.

In our opinion it is not quite as reasonable to talk about any of the different specific body psychotherapeutic ways of understanding and working as mainstreams of psychotherapy. Each of the 4 or 5 or more distinguishably different approaches to body psychotherapy should, in our opinion, be considered as submodalities of body psychotherapy, or as substreams but not mainstreams of psychotherapy.

Unfortunately there is no consensus on this field. There is no mutually shared understanding among body psychotherapists or other psychotherapists of whether body psychotherapeutic approaches deserve to be mentioned as specific and distinguishable submodalities of body psychotherapy.
No wonder, one might say, as even the more well established and recognized modes of psychotherapy are still having a hard time in entering into a genuine dialogue amongst themselves.

Psychotherapy or bodywork

Another, and in our opinion very crucial question, is how the therapist works with a client or group, and whether he works mostly nonverbally, verbally or in a combination.
Another way to state this point could be to question whether what is going on between client and therapist can be accurately described as a modality of psychotherapy, or whether it should rather be described as a form of bodywork, movement therapy or massage. All of these ways of working are more related to Physiotherapy, Relaxation-therapy, Rolfing or other ways of improving well-being or ways of inspiring personal development, than they are related to psychotherapy.
Let’s give an example: A good Rolfing session might very well be an important part of a personal developmental process, but it is not psychotherapy, because there is no contract concerning this. There is a contract concerning changing the physical alignment (physical well-being), and not the psychological or behavioral way of being. So even though there may be such changes (seldom or often) in these – the focus has been different, and this is the important difference.
But what then, is psychotherapy?:

When we look and search for a definition of psychotherapy the most basic is “treatment of the soul” or “treatment through using psychotherapeutic approaches” (see Psykologisk Leksikon (“Psychological Dictionary”),edited by K.B.Madsen and published in Denmark.
A more elaborated definition is hard to find because most psychotherapeutic approaches steer clear from making a definition.
The published EABP definition of Body-Psychotherapy is of course more elaborated, but the most clear and precise definition we have found is found in a Norwegian book edited by 2 Norwegian professors, where 5 different approaches are described in 5 chapters – and only ONE has a definition.
This one definition is by Borger Haaverdsholm, a well-known Norwegian Body Psychotherapist (Nic Waal Institute). He writes:
“BY BODY PSYCHOTHERAPY I UNDERSTAND A THERAPYFORM THAT THROUGH A PSYCHOLOGICAL AND BODILY UNDERSTANDING, THEORY AND WAY OF WORKING, HAS THE GOAL OF IMPROVING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH OF THE CLIENT”. (Høstmark and von der Lippe, Oslo, 1993. The book is written in Norwegian, and when I translate the title it is called: “Psychotherapy with adults, 5 perspectives on theory and praxis”).

SUMMARIZING FROM THIS DEFINITION:
WE HAVE NO DOUBT THAT WE – THE BODYNAMIC SYSTEM – OR MANY OTHER BODY PSYCHOTHERAPY SYSTEMS, ARE PERFORMING PSYCHOTHERAPY.

And we DO support the Strasbourg Declaration.

BECAUSE bodily oriented ways of working have been used, and are still used, as much within a psychotherapeutic context as within several non-psychotherapeutic contexts, we regard it as an important reason for the submodalities of body psychotherapy to declare themselves, and to document that they are in fact psychotherapies and not merely bodily oriented techniques of providing well-being and development.

At the end of this document we have enclosed a paper that we give out to clients in order to inform them about our way of working (appendix).

Whether a way of working with individuals or groups can justifiably describe itself as a kind of psychotherapy depends on a series of questions, although there is also no common consensus on what these questions should be.
We would suggest questions like:
– is some kind of clarified understanding of personality and personal development used as a basis for the way of working in question ?
– are inquiry, problem recognition, problem analysis and a working contract clearly stated between client and therapist and part of the way of working in question ?
– if so, is this working contract regularly followed up with a mutual evaluation of the outcome of therapy ?
– is the relationship between client and therapist, including an awareness of trans- and countertransference (or these phenomena described in other words) recognized and part of the teaching and the way of working in question ?
Answers to questions like these would be helpful in clarifying whether the way of working in question could be considered as a form of psychotherapy, although not necessarily helpful in clarifying whether the same way of working is scientifically validated.

We also imagine that this crucial point is the main reason why EAP wants the different submodalities of body psychotherapy to produce a “so-called” scientific validation.

As a consequence of these view points we believe it is reasonable that every school or institute teaching psychotherapy should be obliged to state if, and in what way, they perceive themselves as teaching a psychotherapeutic submodality, and also what kind or kinds of psychotherapeutic submodality they are mostly connected to, or inspired by.

We also consider it as a fair request that any specific and distinguishable submodality somehow documents the scientific validity of their specific tradition.
In principle, but contrary to this, we do not find it fair or appropriate that every school teaching body psychotheraputic methods and skills should be asked to document the scientific validity of their work.
This latter request should be a demand to the specific submodality only.

However, independently of how the above mentioned questions are answered, we are willing to document both what we consider as teaching and practicing a form of psychotherapy – A SUBMODALITY OF BODYPSYSCHOTHERAPY – and also to document the scientific validation of our work.

One reason is that we consider The Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis) not just as a school or an institute, but instead rather as something approaching an actual submodality of bodypsychotherapy.
We will leave the evaluation of this question for others , but we do consider our way of working as meticulous, well described, widespread AND DIFFERENT FROM OTHER SUBMODALITIES – and we also want to emphasize that our approach has training programs and workshops currently in several countries, both in Europe and North America. (8 countries right now)

Another reason is that working on this documentation and validation provides another good opportunity for ourselves to challenge and clarify our approach.

Finally, we are clearly interested in maintaining an open and fruitful dialogue with both EABP and EAP, just as we similarly work on gaining recognition from the academic psychology and the established psychotherapy.

We have earlier stated points of view like these in professional contexts and also once in the Journal for the Danish Psychologist Association: (In danish: Psychologists News) PSYKOLOGNYT:
Bodil Claesson, Lisbeth Steen Jensen and Lennart Ollars:
Kropsrelateret psykoterapi. (BODYRELATED PSYCHOTHERAPY) Dansk Psykolog Nyt 1999 p. 16 – 19

On the concept of science

Now lets address a big and quite complex question, or rather a series of questions: What is scientific validation, or: How can the concepts “science” and “scientific validation” be defined?
Does such a thing as a common consensus exist in this area?
Have meta-scientists reached a consensus concerning these questions?

As we understand this field of knowledge, the short (humoristic) answers to these questions would be something like:
Outch ! Oops ! Not at all ! and: Certainly not !

We are certainly not professional meta-scientist ourselves, but we know enough to be fully aware that the term science or scientific, IS used in many different, and in principle all correct (as long as you are clear about your own position), ways:
– scientific is something that is “proven” or documented as very likely correlations through quantitative, big, randomized and double blind investigations, and this only !
– scientific is any clear, well defined and self critical description of a phenomenon, no matter its size
– scientific is something several persons have written books ABOUT on a certain academic level
– scientific is something that is well known, and something most specialists within any academic field are agreed upon
– scientific is what professors at universities or the academic subculture do
– scientific is an attitude that consists of elements like: a self critical sense, knowing that man knows extremely few things with certainty, a non-prejudiced openness to sensations or “facts”, willingness to alter and develop description and investigation methods with respect to the object under study, and last but not least: willingness to have your assumptions, descriptions and results investigated and discussed by others.

The above written statements are examples expressing different modes of science, or different traditions within scientific thinking; the quantitative or positivistic tradition, the hermeneutic or qualitative tradition, several social history and sub cultural context study examples and finally an inclusive contemporary meta-scientific statement.

In practice, within the recent more than 40 years of academic investigations in psychotherapy, including discussions concerning what works best and most efficient, the term scientific most often means quite bluntly: understanding and describing THE WAY we (as professionals connected to one specific scientific tradition / way of thinking) do it, and unscientific are all the other ways to do it.

You might say, that also within the scientific subculture that concerns itself with psychotherapy, there is an unresolved and ongoing disagreement about what the proper way of doing things is.
On one side we have a natural science inspired, positivistic tradition stating that only quantitative studies count – an attitude that has resulted in the so-called “positive-list” of acceptable psychotherapies in USA. On the other side we have a more humanistic science inspired attitude, stating that we need more case-describing studies (hermeneutic investigation) to understand what is actually going on in the therapeutic context, and what actually makes psychotherapy work.
The latter attitude was the main conclusion at the latest congress arranged by The Society for Psychotherapy Research: The Chicago Conference in June 2000, and which was also reported during a 2-day research seminar arranged by the Danish Psychological Association, in spring 2001, in Denmark.

Does this mean that scientific validation is not important?
No, not at all.
We believe that scientific validation is important, and a crucial task for psychotherapy in general and body psychotherapy specifically, if we actually want to gain recognition from our contemporary society.
In addition to this cooperative attitude, we find it though crucial, to be critical and unimpressed by any kind of “superior” attitude like: You are not scientific at all!!
On the contrary we believe that we need to be humble when facing the true and very complicated term and practice of science. We especially have to be clear about what we specifically mean, and what we as well as others are specifically asking for or doing, when we ask for scientific validation.( or documentation).

After discussing these matters, especially with scientists and metascientists, it is our attitude that we should participate in and initiate as many quantitative and qualitative scientific studies as possible, with an open and critical mind. As well as this we should exercise self critical awareness of the type of knowledge which the different ways of working scientifically can and can not provide.
To some extent The Bodynamic Institute has already participated and even initiated several studies of both kinds.

The very first scientific quest is probably to describe our theory publicly, its implicit and explicit ways of understanding human nature, the resulting working models and methods, and guidelines for therapeutic strategy and intervention.
We have invested a lot of energy in descriptions of this kind (published by The Bodynamic Institute), as can be seen from our bibliography, although we would still like a lot more of our thinking to be written down and presented to colleagues and other professionals.

One last thing, we would like to mention, is participation in professional congresses.
Over the last 20 years several of our trainers have attended many international congresses within the area of humanistic psychology, body psychotherapy, pre- and perinatal psychology and PTSD, and also within other traditions of psychotherapy. Foremost Lisbeth Marcher, but also several other Bodynamic trainers, have offered a long series of presentations at congresses, as well in Europe as in USA.
Over these years we have always seen congresses not only as a platform for presenting ourselves, but also as an opportunity to enter into a dialogue with professional colleagues within the field.
A list of the congresses we have attended is included at the end of this document (Appendix).

We will end this discussion by mentioning a few of the international scientists and metascientists we have been talking to, and in many ways have been learning from, in addition to our dialogues with Danish professionals within the field:

William P. Henry, University of Utah, who has written:
Science,Politics, and the Politics of Science: the Use and Misuse of empirically Validated Treatment Research.
Psychotherapy Research 8(2), 126-140 1998.

Geir Høstmark, who is Professor in Clinical Psychology at the University of Bergen (NORWAY), mentioned above (page 5), has also written:
“Relational Psychodynamic Practice is supported by evidence: An examination of certain assumptions in the debate on treatment effects”.
This is a published paper but unfortunately we do not recall the name of the journal or the year.

Agnes Petocz, University of Western Sidney Macarthur, Australia
Psychology, science and the symbol.
The Meaning of Science and the Science of Meaning: Implications for Psychological Practice. Lecture and paper given on the annual meeting of the Danish psychology association, March 2001.

Larry Hedges, California, author of many psychoanalytical books.

We will also mention 5 Danish authors that we have shared our thoughts with, and have had many fruitful discussions with.
Jes Bertelsen, spiritual teacher
Ole Vedfeldt, Jungian therapist and author of books dealing with consciousness
Lars Sørensen, chief psychologist and author
Marchen Møller, Professor, psychotherapist and author
Nancy Bratt, Professor emeritus, expert Rorschach “teacher” and expert early child development psychologist.

Guide for this documentation

This documentation has the following structure:

In the first chapter we give a presentation of The Bodynamic SYSTEM, the theory and the most important working models etc. This part is based on our application for recognition which was addressed to the EABP, and now has been slightly corrected, extended and updated.

In the next (and second) chapter we address question no. 15 stated by EAP, the question directly concerning scientific validation. This part too, is an extended and updated reformulation of our answer on this subject from our application for recognition addressed to the EABP.

In the third chapter we address the first 14 questions stated by EAP, partly extensively, partly shortly, with some referring back to previous paragraphs in order to avoid repetition.

The fourth part is a print of our bibliography: A list of what is written about Bodynamic Analysis.
Beside this we kindly ask you to go on the Internet and search the name Lisbeth Marcher (as the leading Bodynamic theory-maker) and see that her name is mentioned close to 200 times in connection to many other people and systems. Of course there are also other books where the system and Lisbeth Marchers name is included and where she is thanked for her influence – e.g. chief psychologist Lars Sorensen at the Hospital in Nykøbing Sjælland, Denmark, Ole Vedfeldt, Denmark, Jungian psychoanalyst and author of two books dealing with consciousness (also translated into English) and finally the spiritual teacher Jes Bertelsen, Denmark, who also mentions Lisbeth Marcher in one of his latest books (in Danish).

The fifth and final part contains a list of the congresses we have attended and also those we have conducted at The Bodynamic Institute. This part also includes a list of trainers mentioned in the congress list.

As an appendix we have included a selection of Bodynamic working models

This report is written and edited by Lennart Ollars in cooperation with Lisbeth Marcher, (founder of The Bodynamic (Analysis) SYSTEM) and several other CO-founders of the System and senior members of the Danish Institute: Bodynamic International ApS. (Erik Jarlnaes, Merete Holm Brantbjerg, Ditte Marcher and Steen Jörgensen).

Lisbeth Marcher Lennart Ollars Erik Jarlnaes MAY 2001

Lisbeth Marcher has been a leading force in developing the Bodynamic System since 1970, she has had teaching assignments at many Universities, worked as a consultant in the business world, been a guest teacher at Esalen Institute, California, USA, etc.

Lennart Ollars is Co-founder and former senior trainer and member of Bodynamic Institute. Now a guest trainer with The Bodynamic International ApS. University educated psychologist and a recognized specialist and supervisor in psychotherapy within the Danish Psychological Association.
Lennart Ollars is primarily working as a guest-professor at the University of Århus, Denmark, and has for the last year been member of a committee in The Danish Psychologists Association working on the issue of scientific validation of psychotheraputic practice and education.

The other members have been part of the development since the mid-seventies and the beginning of the 1980´s.

Chapter 1:

Presentation of The Bodynamic System

1.1: The Bodynamic Institutes

The Bodynamic System is practiced and trained in several Countries in Europe, North and South  America and in Asia. The main responsibility for all the training is held by The Bodynamic International ApS of Copenhagen, Denmark (formerly the Bodynamic Institute) or more precisely a Board of International Educational Managers.
The director of Bodynamic International ApS. in Copenhagen is Ditte Marcher  (DK).
The head of training of Bodynamic  is Lisbeth Marcher (DK).

Trainings in other countries are organized from Denmark with local organizers.

1.2: Origins and modality

The Bodynamic System was founded by Lisbeth Marcher in Denmark. Lisbeth Marcher developed the basis of Bodynamic (Analysis) from the late 60’s and up through the 70’s by observing correlations between musclular response and different psychological processes. Some of this work was done in collaboration with several of the later senior members of Bodynamic Institute. From the early 80’s, and especially from 1985 when the Bodynamic Institute, Copenhagen, expanded from 4 to 10 members, all workings on the theoretical and methodological development was shared by senior members of the Bodynamic Institute, though still under the main responsibility of Lisbeth Marcher. This group work is something we are especially proud of, and we believe it has made for a strong system. Not only do we use the collective creativity for developing our theory, but also for finding holes in any one person’s statements.

THE Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis) is a resource-oriented type of Body Psychotherapy, based on a detailed developmental model, combining motoric, social and psychological development. We work with a level of specificity that includes the correlations between single muscles, which ego-functions they are connected to and which character structures they are connected to. The spiritual dimension is acknowledged and included in our work, but is not seen as the major part of the work, which centers on personal and social development.

Interaction and intervention is adjusted according to assessment of deficits and resources (to defense and character-structures), as well as to the contract between client and therapist, prior to any therapy process. Interaction and intervention can be both verbal, non-verbal and by touch. We always work with clients and workshop-participants when they are fully dressed (preferring “comfortable clothing”).
The Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis) has a visible element of teaching although it is clearly a type of Body Psychotherapy. We have learned from observation and feedback that we work just as often in a teaching mode as in a therapeutic mode. We consider our way of combining these two modes of interaction as one of our special characteristics.

The Bodynamic System works with both children and adults and has several general fields of application (modalities): individual therapy, supervision, group therapy, marriage and couple therapy, developmental groups and training groups, where we are teaching social skills, PTSD and crisis, as well as workshops with a more specific focus: team-building, development of leadership, communication and conflict resolution, TAKING CARE OF THE CARETAKER, focus on Boundary, focus on Spirituality grounded in the body, etc.
We do NOT have a specific target group, for example refugees or traffic-accident people.

We perceive the theory and methods of The Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis) to be original both in our way of combining known theory and also owing to our truly original contributions. Nevertheless our work, and also the initial development of Bodynamic Analysis, conducted by Lisbeth Marcher, is also a result of inspiration from many other sources.

Some of these inspirational sources are: Pedagogical theory and tradition (Neill, Makarenko, Vygotsky , danish “little schools”,etc). Animal etiology (The first one being Konrad Lorentz). Theory of motor-perceptual development including its correlation to psychological and social development (a well developed and acknowledged tradition in Denmark and Norway – E.g.: Danish Britta Holle, the books of whom have been translated into 11 languages, and english speaking authors Jean Ayres and Ashley Montagu). Norwegian traditions concerning psychosomatic connections: (Psychiatrist, neurologist and psychoanalyst Tryggve Braatøy, Physiotherapist Edel Bülow-Hansen and Physiotherapist Lillemor Johnsen). Developmental Psychology (Piaget, Erikson, Bruun (Gesell, Ulin) and Stern); Psychodynamic theory. Humanistic Psychology, including TA (Transactional Analysis) (Schiff, Erskine, Goulding, Steiner and Maslow). Client-centered Therapy (Rogers), and Gestalt Therapy. LifeMODE Analysis – originally based on class-specific theory of socialization, as inspired by Marxistic psychology (Lorentzer, Brückner), later developed to have a more subcultural and cultural focus (Thomas Højrup and other danish ethnologists and anthropologists).
Body psychotherapy (Reich, Boadella, Lake), Pre- and Perinatal Psychology (Rank, Mirdal, Lake, Verny, Chamberlain), PTSD (Pavlov, Isaacs, Kirsch, Kohlrieser, Levine, Wilson, van der Kolk, Buus-Jensen, Herman), Spirituality (Native American Shamans, Jes Bertelsen, Tibetan Lama), Group development (Sjølund, Hjelholdt, Schutz).

A part of of our original contribution is that we have developed how “all kind” of therapeutic work (see the above mentioned) has a close and very precise correlation to the body, and we have worked hard to find out how we can make these different therapeutic directions work together – we have distilled from the above what fits into our Basic Concept: “MUTUAL CONNECTION” (as being the primary drive).

In a real sense all life is interrelated.
All men are caught in an inescapable network
of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.
Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly.
I can never be what I ought to be
until you are what you ought to be,
and you can never be what you ought to be
until I am what I ought to be.
This is the interrelated structure of reality.

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

This ‘saying’ from Martin Luther King, Jr. signals both mutual connection and broad-mindedness (in danish ‘frisind’), which are two very important concepts for us.

For further information about the origins and fields of application of Bodynamic Analysis we refer to our literature list, especially the following titles:
Peter Bernhardt: “Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources”
Peter Bernhardt: “The art of following structure”
Lisbeth Marcher, Erik Jarlnæs and Lennart Ollars: “Fra afspænding til Bodynamic Analyse” (this paper is not translated; but the title means: From Relaxation Therapy to Bodynamic Analysis – and includes many articles describing the widespread applications)
Steen Jørgensen: Forløsning af Choktraumer. (3 PTSD articles that are also in english).

BEING A DANISH SPEAKING COUNTRY nearly all our material is written in danish – but since we are present and teaching in so many other countries, using the english language, most of our basic material is also in english.
We also have a  translations into greek, russian, german, and some in polish, at least one into french, one into dutch, two into japanese.

When we mention danish literature, we will try to include in english what the meaning of the title is – although it will not be systematically.

1.3: The essential theory

We understand the human being as a social being, whose strongest motivation is to strive for as much ‘Mutual Connection’ as possible. Taking this point is deliberate. We obviously recognize the importance of sexuality, but only as one of the emotions. In this respect we differ from Reich and most Reichians.

Development of personality (bodily, social and psychological) depends on at least four kinds of interaction between the individual and his/her surroundings:
– pre- and perinatal processes
– learning ways of acting and understanding from seeing and imitating parents, siblings and other close social persons
– the characterological development that comes out of everyday interaction with the primary caretakers
– more sudden events, like peak experiences, traumatic events causing different degrees of post-traumatic disturbances etc.
Also the transpersonal or spiritual dimension of human development is seen as influenced by all three kinds of interaction, as well as of course in many cases by a deliberately chosen meditative or spiritual practice.

It is our basic theory, based on actual observations, that the psychological, social and motor-perceptual development is interconnected and inseparable and as such they are presented in our Character Structure Model.
Our basic theory also contains three (or rather four) aspects of the ego:
Body Ego, Identity Ego and Social role Ego (and in addition: the Observing part of the Ego), as well as 11 functions of the Ego:
Connectedness; Posture and Positioning; Centering; Boundaries; Grounding and Reality Testing; Social balances; Cognitive skills; Gender and gender skills; Management of Energy; Self-Expression and Selfassertion; and finally: Patterns of Interpersonal Contact.
Agewise the Character Structure Model is horizontally based whereas the Ego Aspects and Ego Functions are vertically based.
As such we cover both traditional and modern thinking within child development research.
We need to add that even though we use the concept “EGO”, we do not use EGO in the same way as Ego psychologists, and we do not use the concept “SELF” as the SELF psychologists use it. We use “SELF” as a concept that includes spirituality. The danish word “JEG” is more correctly translated with “I” (rather than Ego), but we know that this is not commonly used in english, so as long as we do not have a book out (published), describing and defining our use of the word “I”, we still prefer to use “EGO”.

We understand the child’s development as moving through a series of overlapping age-level-thematic phases: Existence, Need, Autonomy, Will, Love-Sexuality, Opinion, and Solidarity-Performance. Also the teenage period is understood as a significant period of personal development.

It is part of our theory (based on actual observations) that the child in each of these thematic phases can go through a healthy development or get stuck in either hypo-responsive or hyper-responsive body-psychological-social patterns.
It is our observation that the result of this psychological and social development is connected to a person’s motor-perceptual development, and is thus mirrored in body and movement of the individual, so that defense patterns as well as resources are reflected in body, muscle-responses and movement. Special attention is also given to development and management of boundaries in the interaction with others.

We know that personality, later on in life, is remolded through a series of adult developmental phases, overlaying and interacting with the character structures developed during childhood and adolescence. In accordance to this we work with events and themes from adult life in every therapy process, but we do not have a specific Bodynamic model of adult development phases. When we are looking into adult development phases we refer to authors like: Erikson and Lievegood.

Both principles and specific ways of working psychotherapeutically are developed to meet variations of developmental disturbances as they are expressed bodily, psychologically and in social skills.
Parallel with this the Bodynamic System (Analysis) has developed specific ways of understanding and working with disturbed pre- and perinatal processes and with posttraumatic disturbances.

For further information about the theory underlying Bodynamic Analysis we refer to our literature list, especially the following titles:
Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego I: Core Concepts and Principles”
Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego II:
Psychomotor Development and Character Structure”
(These two titles are by far the most comprehensive description of the Bodynamic System, in english – so far)
Steen Jørgensen: “Character Structure and Shock”
Steen Jørgensen(ed): “Forløsning af Choktraumer” ( title means: “Release of Shock-traumas” 3 of the articles are in english as well)
Lisbeth Marcher and. Lennart Ollars: “Bodynamic Analytic Developmental Re-birth Therapy”. (Pre- & perinatal psychology journal)
Jorgensen: Ph.D. Dissertation on the Bodynamic movement theory and development, 1979, Copenhagen
Ivanow. Ph.D. Dissertation on measuring muscle responses in different systems including The Bodynamic, 1977 and 1980
Jorgensen: Kropsterapeutisk Karakterteori 1978, Copenhagen University.

1.4: The basic methodology and working models

We work with a series of basic methods or working models in The Bodynamic System (Analysis):
* – Contract. Principles and methods concerning the contract between client and therapist including: – What the client actually wants to change, ways of working, initiation of how to integrate changes in daily life of the client
* -The Character-Structure model, with connected principles of interaction and intervention.
* – The three Ego Aspects and how and when to work with them.
* – The eleven Ego Functions and how to work with them.
Agewise the Character Structure Model is horizontally based whereas the Ego Aspects and Ego Functions are vertically based.
As such we cover both traditional and modern thinking within child development research.

* – The Body-Map, a registration of the bodily patterns of neutral-, hypo- and hyper-responses mostly in the muscles. This is probably the most scientific instrument we have, because this can be used to evaluate how clients are changing, “with a client-neutral-instrument” rather than only relying on a client’s own verbal statement of the changes he/she experiences.
* – Principles of verbal interventions connected to the character-structure model, integration of child and adult parts of personality, including principles of parental core-messages.
* – Development, management and re-establishing of healthy boundaries.
* – The Bodyknot – a model that describes the formation of human interaction with the surroundings: sensing, reacting, understanding, choice and acting, and as such a very crucial model in analyzing whether, how and where interaction with the outer world is functioning as opposed to being “stuck”
– The Bodyknot – is also used as a communication and contact model with connected principles of how to work with conflicts.
* – The F8-model. A model of social skills developed late in childhood and at the same time a model describing functions of group-interaction and team-development.
* – A model of differentiation between five levels of interaction and therapeutic work including: – Body Sensing;- Energy Sensation;- Body Experience; -Body Expression (emotional containment and release) and Body Regression. (Levels mentioned first are also active when you work at a level mentioned later, e.g. when you work at the level of Body Experience you must also address the levels of Energy Sensing and Body Sensation).
* – A model (or actually several models) describing how to work with post-traumatic stress.
* – The womb and birth-model including principles of working with pre- and perinatal disturbances
* – Life-MODE analysis and class specific socialization
* – Different modes and modalities of touch and movement (also including use of music and rhythm)
* – Levels of the human consciousness, connected to an understanding of energy fields
* – Principles of understanding and integrating Peak-Experiences.
* – Active sensing, a very basic model about the development of bodily sensing as a way to more accurate and authentic self-understanding , as well as to a grounded containment of emotion and a solid basis for authentic interaction
* – Tracking transference and counter-transference in interaction.

* – Our content and models that we use in working with shock and trauma (PTSD) is a combination of the above and more specific tools, methods and models, that e.g. include a specific approach to “Peak-Experiences”.
* ALSO OUR WAY OF TEACHING IS A BASIC METHOD THAT IS UNIQUE, A METHOD THAT WE TEACH OUR STUDENTS AND CLIENTS, (while we use it) – a method that constantly includes many shifts among many levels within each teaching/psychotherapy module. Only now is it in the process of being described.
It is far too big a project to describe all these basic models in this context. Most of the models are described in various papers and handouts. For further information about the basic methodology of THE Bodynamic SYSTEM (Analysis) we refer to our literature list.

We have chosen to include some of the models mentioned in Appendix.

1.5: Training programs

Trainings programs in THE Bodynamic SYSTEM takes place currently in Greece, Brazil, Norway, Holland, Denmark, Germany, Ukraine, Russia and Japan.

Requirements prior to trainings, the structure of training programs etc is described in our application for recognition addressed to EABP.
This application is enclosed in Appendix

Chapter 2:

Scientific Validation of The Bodynamic System (Analysis)

We consider this chapter as our direct answer to the 15th. question stated by EAP:
Please provide evidence that your approach has investigative procedures that are defined well enough to indicate possibilities of research.

We have several papers and some books written about The Bodynamic System (Analysis).
A few of these are based on experimental or comparative research projects. Most of the written material contains descriptions of theoretical assumptions and methods.
We have enclosed a literature list as part 5 of this report.
In this context we will mention only some of the most basic books and papers.

2.1: The basic and initial Research

The Bodymap, a chart over the clients hyper- and hyporesponsive muscular patterns, is used as a basic and very accurate diagnostic tool in Bodynamic Analysis. The Bodymap is also used as an important piece of information during the therapy, and we have done a great deal of checking the effects of therapy by comparing bodymaps of the client made before and after therapy.

The development of the Bodymap and its interpretation has taken place over the last 25 years. The test and its interpretation are based on a training and a interpretation-system, which has long term research on clients and their therapeutic process as its foundation.
The initial collecting of correlations between single muscles and their psychological “parallels” (ego-functions and character-structures) was made by Lisbeth Marcher from the beginning of the 70’s based on a systematic collection of parallel reports from therapy-sessions from therapists and clients (approximatly 10.000 reports of this kind). This work was later followed up and refined on the background of the practical experiences of all senior members of the Danish Institute.
This basic empirical research has never been described extensively, but is referred to in basic writings on Bodynamic Analysis.

In order to get this precise knowledge as a therapist it is important to mention that a huge part of our training is spent on learning and training the precise anatomical movements of the muscles in the body – and here we depend on different anatomical atlases and manuals and books used by other professional systems (medical field, physiotherapy etc), (please notice this is the only time we mention this)

References:
Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher
Peter Bernhardt: The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the Roots of the Bodynamic System
Sonja Fich, Lisbeth Marcher: Psykologi og Anatomi. (PSYCHOLOGY AND ANATOMY)
Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap. 2. udgave (udvidet). This manual is both in danish and english. Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.
Peter Bernhardt & Joel Isaacs: The Bodymap. Article in The Journal of Bioenergetic Analysis.

>From our experiences the Bodymap functions as a diagnostic instrument, as a helpful guide for the therapist during therapy and as a prognostic tool.

2.2: Research and papers on the question of validity:

We have taken some steps towards a scientific validation by initiating some comparative studies, listed here in no specific order:

In 1992 Marianne Bentzen informally compared the Bodymap of a client with the Rorschach-test of the same client. This work, done in collaboration with NANCY BRATT, Danish Rorschach specialist, was unfortunately never published. It only exists as an internal working paper.

At present a group of psychologists/Bodynamic Analysts are working on a research project in this area, where comparison between the Bodymap and Rorschach is made on a series of clients.

In 1995 Tom Verpe made a theoretical/practical comparison between the Bodymap and Rorchach. Tom Verpe: Egopsykologi og kroppspsykologi. Et forsøg på teoretisk integration. (Egopsychology and bodypsychology. Trying out a theoretical integration) Dissertation Ph.D., psychology, University of Bergen. Norway. Private print. Bergen, 1995.

In 1980’s Lisbeth Marcher et. al. contributed to a research project on children of torture victims. This project was under the Danish National Hospitals Center for Treatment of Torture Victims (RTC). The purpose was to see, which kind of testing procedures (and one of these was use of the Bodymap as a non-verbal test) could give relevant information about these children/adolescents’ situation and their difficulties. Using a non-verbal test like the Bodymap could be very helpful seen from the perspective of language-problems between the client and the therapist.
The report showed that very relevant and good descriptions of personality and problems could be obtained with the use of the Bodymap. The main reason for not getting a recommendation for the use of the Bodymap internationally was, that the training and education of the persons, that should use the Bodymap as a test, was too extensive (in fact they would need a total of 5 years training in Bodynamic Analysis). The report is regarded as confidential material by the RTC and is not public.

Another area of interest has been the validation of the knowledge you can acquire about a person by making a visual body reading of the person. Psychologist and assistant professor, Tove Hvid has written two books on the Bodynamic Character structure theory, using body reading and interpreting from this theory:
Tove Hvid: Kroppens fortællinger and Kroppens fortællinger i billeder.
(Tales of the body, and Tales of the body in pictures).
Tove Hvid has also made a pilot study on comparing visual body reading and Rorchach-testing: Tove Hvid og Nancy Bratt: Kropslæsning og Rorschach-testning. P. 325-45 in a Danish journal: Pædagogisk-Psykologisk Rådgivning no. 5-6, 1994.

On a more theoretical level, comparison between the theory and practice in Vegetotherapy and Bodynamic Analysis has been made by:
Jan Steiner Urdshals: Kropsorienters Psykoterapi: En sammenligning av karakteranalytisk vegetoterapi og kroppsdynamisk analyse, med henblik på teorier om utvikling, opprettholdelse og endring af psykopatologi.
Dissertation Ph.D. Psychology, University of Bergen, Norway, spring 1991.

Bodynamic Analysis has furthermore been put into perspective with other systems of Body-Psychotherapy by Mai-Britt Bjørndal: Psykosomatisk Teori og Kropsterapi. (psychosomatic theory and bodytherapy). Special paper in clinical psychology, Århus University, Denmark: 1997.

2.3: Papers on the question of reliability:

A basic question in using a muscle palpation test as a tool for making a personality description is the question of the reliability of palpable different types of muscular hyper- and hyporesponsive reaction patterns. The Norwegian physiotherapist traditions since Edel Bülow Hansen (1930-40-50´s) has in fact done some scientific research on this, and we have made our own research in the form of:
Lennart Ollars: Muskelpalpationstests pålidelighed. (The reliability of the Bodymap) Main thesis (dissertation) made for the candidate study of psychology, University of Copenhagen. Private print, 1980.
This empiric study shows, that you can differentiate different categories of muscular response patterns; that different testers trained in the system agree on the different muscle responses when testing the same client, and that the resulting Bodymap is fairly stable in time, unless the person tested goes through personal therapy or in other ways undergoes a change as a result of a crisis, trauma or more positively because of personal development in relation to his surroundings.

2.4: Papers on the question of efficacy, or the outcome of therapy:

We have obviously made informal evaluation of individual therapy, group therapy and workshops through all the years of Bobynamic Analysis. In two cases we can refer to more scientific evaluation of the results of working with Bodynamic Analysis.

The outcome of participating in workshops has been described and examined in Lennart Ollars. Voksnes Udvikling . (How adults grow) Kreatik , Copenhagen.: 1984.
This book is an empirical study of how adults experience their personal development, and eventually what role participating in Bodynamc group-workshops plays in this context.

Recently a group of clients and some Bodynamic Analysts participated in a research project conducted by a Danish sociologist working at the University of Copenhagen. The main focus of the research was on the effect of Bodynamic Analysis on psychosomatic symptoms, and the conclusion is, that it works effectively:
Eva Brendstrup: Klienter i Bodynamic Analyse. Sociologisk Institut, Kbh.Universitet: Juli 1998.

Marianne Bentzen has participated in a project on working with mentally retarded people in Ribe Amt (Ribe County), Denmark. The main focus was to use the Bodynamic Analytic knowledge about character structures and non-verbal communication in the pedagogical contact with the mentally retarded clients. The conclusions of the evaluation is that by using Bodynamic theories and recommendations a different form of contact with the mentally retarded clients can be established, but that it also demands that the personal involvement and experience by the people, who are going to work with the mentally retarded in question.
This project was described in a report:
Hvad kroppen kan fortælle, (What the body can tell?) published by Ribe county, Denmark 1992

In the 70’s Lisbeth Marcher and Lennart Ollars participated in an outcome study based on participant observation of a group workshop on personal development / development of leadership, published in: “Møde med mennesket”, Technological Institute, Copenhagen, DK 1973.
In 1974 Lennart Ollars published a survey based outcome study: Om virkningerne af intensiv psykologisk træning. Technological Institute Copenhagen, DK 1974.
Body sensations and experience was one of the investigated items in both these studies.
Lisbeth Marcher and Henrik Wengel have also evaluated the outcome of participation in a 2-module workshop. Technological Inst. Copenhagen 1975.

2.5: Papers that describe theory and method

Most of what has been written about The Bodynamic System (Analysis) are descriptions of theory or method.
The foundations of the system is described in:
Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s Resources: An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher and:
Peter Bernhardt. The Art of Following Structure: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the Roots of the Bodynamic System and:
Lisbeth Marcher, Erik Jarlnæs & Lennart Ollars: Fra afspænding til Bodynamic Analyse.

The Bodymap and guidelines for its interpretation is described in:
Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap. 2. udgave (udvidet) and in:
Steen Jørgensen & Lisbeth Marcher: Bodymap Reading – Bodymap Interpretation.
Ivanow: see earlier 1.3
Jorgensen: see earlier 1.3
Bernhardt and Isaacs: The Bodymap. The Journal of Bioenergetic Analysis.

The Bodynamic Analytic Character Structure Model is described in different publications over the years. The most recent version is in:
Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen & Joel Isaacs: Waking the Body Ego I, &:Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt & Joel Isaacs: Waking the Body Ego II.
The model was originally published in Energy and Character:
Marianne Bentzen, Steen A. Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher: The Bodynamic Character Structure Model.
An up to date and detailed description of the muscles relation to each Character Structure is published in a booklet from 1998:
Sonja Fich & Lisbeth Marcher: Psykologi og Anatomi. (Psychology and anatomy)

Presently a detailed description of the extensive work with ego-functions is only available in danish. However, a broad description in English can be found in:
Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt & Joel Isaacs: Waking the Body Ego II and in: Sonja Fich (ed.): Jeg-funktioner.

The basic “searching” model and “Contact and Communication” model used in all training programs in The Bodynamic System (Analysis) are described in a paper by EriK Jarlnaes: The Art of Undoing Knots. 1994

Our basic model for group interaction: “The F8 – model”, is used in training programs and in addition to this also Europe-wide by some management consultants and some private companies, who also compare it with the much more well-known MBTI-model (and the evaluation is very positive). This model is described in:
Lennart Ollars: Flying or falling, and: Lennart Ollars: Teamudvikling – hvordan gør man det? (Teambuilding – how to do it ?)

The whole area of PTSD is one where we have very strong opinions and a set of guidelines in a very encompassing practical model – and we are also in direct contact with two of the recognized experts in the field to get support for our thoughts, Bessel van der Kolk and Søren Buus-Jensen.

The Bodynamic System (Analysis) has developed special methods for working with shock trauma and PTSD. Different aspects of this are described in many books and publications. Peter Bernhardt is presently making a comparison between the work of Bodynamic and Peter Levine (who has recently written “Waking the Tiger”). Another article is co-written by Lisbeth Marcher and Peter Levine, in a publication by EABP, where they make the distinction between developmental trauma and shock trauma. Two articles are by Babette Rothschild (who has recently expanded her knowledge into a book “The Body Remembers”), two by Erik Jarlnaes, and three more by Jorgensen, Ollars and Marcher. Here are some of the more important ones:

Steen Jørgensen (ed.): Forløsning af chocktraumer; (3 articles in english)
Steen Jørgensen: Bodynamic Analytic Work with Shock/Post-Traumatic Stress and Character Structure and Shock;
Lennart Ollars: Bodynamic Analytic Work with Assault and Abuse;
Babette Rothchild: A shock primer for the body-psychotherapist;
Babette Rothschild & Eric Jarlnæs: Nervous System Imbalances and Post-Traumatic Stress: A Psycho-Physical Approach;
Erik Jarlnaes: Bodynamic guidelines to working with shock and trauma
Peter Bernhardt: Somatic Approaches to Shock. A Review of the Work of the Bodynamic Institute and Peter Levine. (In Ian Macnaughtons book)

The theory and methods of working with pre- and perinatal disturbances are described in Lisbeth Marcher & Lennart Ollars: Bodynamic Analytical Developmental Re-birth Therapy. This article has been published both in the Pre & perinatal journal and in The Nordic psychology journal.

Basic work with grounding, centering and boundaries in Bodynamic, and their relation to the interaction between therapist and client, is described in:
Merete Holm Brantbjerg: Caring for Yourself while caring for Others.

The most recent overview of Bodynamic Analysis will be published this autumn in a paper written by Steen Jørgensen and Lennart Ollars, in a danish journal called: ‘Psykologisk Set’ (translated: A Psychological View): Kropslig forankring i psykoterapeutisk arbejde. (Bodily anchoring in psychotheraputic work – a short presentation of Bodynamic Analysis: a bodily related modality of psychotherapy, based on empirical observations concerning correlations between elasticity patterns in muscles and psychological themes).

The principles and thinking behind our training programs, our methods of teaching and the development of competence in Bodynamic Analysis is described in: Lennart Ollars: Fra amatør til mester. (From amateur to master), whilst more writing on this issue is “work in progress” in a special project group.

Our own practical basic concepts stretch back to the 1970´s, whereas the theory goes even further back. Denmark in general has strong traditions in education for including the body, and in our field we have had a very strong movement, dealing with “building bridges” between the medical and the educational field – the so-called “Relaxation” movement, where Gerda Alexanders Eutonie is best known. Today this field of work has chosen to change its name to psycho-motor development, while keeping their focus on teaching Body Awareness to the public in general and also in specialized areas.
In this educational field a great deal of material has been written, and this material is part of our background understanding.

Our philosophical background is described by the Danish philosophers Kierkegaard, Grundtvig and Peter Zinkernagel and the physicist Niels Bohr, and also by Danish thinkers and writers within the Danish Folk-High school movement.

Lennart Ollars has written on supervision including Bodynamic perspectives, published in Danish psychological Journal in 6 articles.1999.

Many of the articles in English are published in Energy and Character, most papers are published by the Danish institute, a few have been published in pre-and perinatal psychology journal, some in Danish and Scandinavian psychology journals, in Danish magazines and newspapers, and some in Canadian and American magazines – and then there are all the references in books by other authors.
We also have manuals for our 1-year and 2-3 year training programs.

Chapter 3:

Answer to the first 14 questions concerning scientific validation, stated by the EAP

We consider chapter 2 as our answer to the 15th question stated by EAP.

In this chapter we address each of the first14 questions stated by EAP, all meant to cast light on different aspects of theory, method, application etc., all in summary in a broad sense: scientific validity of psychotherapeutic work.
The questions will be addressed one by one. 3.1 – 3.14.
In order to offer a straight foreword readable documentation, we have chosen to give an answer to all questions, even though we understand some of the questions as very overlapping and interconnected.
Some repetition has therefore been unavoidable and indeed necessary.

Let us also just mention that our Danish school (our approach) has been visited by 2 evaluators within the EABP-Forum system.

3.1. Please provide evidence that your approach has clearly defined areas of enquiry, application, research, and practice.

3.1.1: Enquiry in The Bodynamic System (Analysis)

The enquiry work done in The Bodynamic System (Analysis) includes common procedures of psychodynamic psychotherapy, like making an initial interview and anamnesis, making a working contract with the client (or group, or “customer”) and so forth, but also includes specific ways of assessing the clients resources and areas of further development as they are mirrored bodily, in posture and movement patterns, verbal patterns and interview around the client’s life story (Lifemode) including analyzing the patterns of lifestyles..
The Bodymap is the ultimate tool of this type while body reading and investigation into the client’s psycho-socio-physic in cooperation with the client is always used.

Our Character theory, the connected hypothesis concerning social and psychological skills and the suggested possibilities of therapeutics strategy in total, provides the therapist in Bodynamic Analysis with quite elaborate tools and methods of enquiry, as well as it is the basis for offering a quite precise mirroring of the client.

Literature describing enquiry in Bodynamic Analysis:
Peter Bernhardt & Joel Isaacs:The Bodymap. A Precise Diagnostic Tool for Psychotherapy. The j. of Bioenergetic Analysis. Vol. 11, No. 1, Spring 2000.
Steen Jørgensen & Lennart Ollars:Kropslig forankring i psykoterapeutisk arbejde. (Bodily anchoring in psychotherapeutic work) En kort præsentation af Bodynamic Analyse, en kropsrelateret psykoterapiform. Psykologisk Set. København: efteråret 2001.
Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.
Integral Press, North Vancouver, BC, Canada: 1997.
This is the best and most comprehensive collection of articles describing the Bodynamic System in English so far.

3.1.2: Fields of application and practice

The Bodynamic System (Analysis) is applicable within many fields.

First of all, and most obviously, Bodynamic is used in psychotherapeutic work with individuals and groups, both in private practice and teaching, and at public and private institutions working with child development, with families and with adults.
Bodynamic can be used – and has been used – for working with a variety of client categories: from groups of mentally retarded clients, ego weak or psychotic clients to clients with more neurotic personality disorders, and all age categories. We have also earlier mentioned the field of P.T.S.D.

As previously mentioned parts of the thinking and methods of Bodynamic are applied to a wide range of different teaching and coaching e.g.:
Training of communication skills within the social working field, and within the field of teambuilding, development of communication and cooperation skills and development of leadership.

Some Bodynamic therapists in private practice, often include both individual therapeutic work, supervision and teaching connected to both private and public institutions.
Another group of trainers or finished therapists/analysts work within private or public institutions and use their Bodynamic skills in addition to other professional skills, whether it is within the area of psychotherapeutic treatment, institutions that offer mental care, or the area of teaching. Also Day Care Institutions from preschool children up to adolescents and youths is one area that many Bodynamic therapists work in.

Literature describing some of the fields of application of Bodynamic Analysis: (in Danish only)
Mulighederne i Kropsdynamisk Analyse., Bodynamic Institute, København 1989.(the possibilities in Bodynamic Analysis)
Kroppen husker det hele.,Bodynamic Kbh1993. (The body remembers it all)
Erik Jarlnæs: Betydningen af at høre sammen. (7 articles in Danish on different Bodynamic subjects) (The importance of Mutual Connection)
Forlaget Kreatik/Bodynamic Institute: København: 1995.
3.1.3: Research

We have already described in what ways we have been working on describing and validating our modality of Body Psychotherapy, please see chapter 2, about scientific validation.

In our own perception the methods of The Bodynamic System (Analysis) are so well described that it would be easy to initiate more research. The reasons that this is not done more than already described, are solely connected to the resource constraints of time and money.

3.2. Please provide evidence that your approach has demonstrated its claim to knowledge and competence within its field tradition of diagnosis/assessment and of treatment/intervention.

The Bodynamic System (Analysis) has been taught for more than 30 years in several countries in Europe, as well as in USA and Canada – the last 18 years as a specific training program. This includes both shorter and longer training programs, and also a lot of shorter workshops, lectures and presentations to institutions, hospitals and universities.

A whole series of papers have been written about different aspects of Bodynamic Theory and working method.

Foremost Lisbeth Marcher and Erik Jarlnæs, but also several other senior Bodynamic trainers have presented theory and methods of Bodynamics whilst participating in a long series of international professional congresses starting already in 1977.
During the latest 5-8 years qualified Bodynamc Analysts have also taken part in both the writing and the presenting of the system, especially in USA and Canada.

Bodynamic Trainers have been participating in organizational work both in Europe in the EABP and in recent years also in connection with the process of establishing the USABP.
Peter Bernhard has been teaching for several years at a San Fr. University (CIIS, California Institute of Integral Studies) in psychology and Bodynamic, and he was also director of a therapy clinic in Berkeley, CA.

Since 1998 Lennart Ollars has been working as a guest professor at the Psychological Institute, University of Århus, Denmark, teaching students on the clinical program of psychology about body sensation, nonverbal aspects of communication, ego development and psychotherapy. Some of Lennart’s teaching colleagues outside the Institute have compared his writings on the teammodel “F8” (Flying or Falling) to the widely recognized Meyers Briggs model (MBPI).

Marianne Kristiansen, Associate professor, Aalborg University, DK, teaches at the department of communication, teaching amongst other things the use of bodynamic communication models and other models. The same applies for her colleague assistant professor Helle Alrø (who has less Bodynamic Training).
Tove Hvid, Psycholgist and associate professor at Denmarks Educational University in psychology. (written two books mentioned above – and many articles)
Psychologist, Bioenergetic Analyst and Bodynamic Therapist Josette van luytelaar, Holland, teaches medical doctors in psychology.
Ian Macnaughton, Bodynamic Analyst and trainer, is also main trainer and member of the Board in Family system Therapy, Vancouver – and also a main speaker in many therapy societies.
Lisbth Marcher, consults at Copenhagen University Special Children’s Kindergarten, plus teaching at several Danish Universities and Hospitals.
More of our American trainees are working in different positions at universities, colleges etc.
Ditte Marcher has worked with the Police in Copenhagen, with difficult young people in prison in Denmark, with criminal children in a well known Swedish institution, with conflict resolution in Kosovo and she has worked with both Danish, Palestinian and Israeli soldiers, plus many Muslim groups in Denmark.
Erik Jarlnaes also works for the Danish Center for Conflict Resolution, teaching mostly in Denmark but also once in Bosnia..

The contributions of Bodynamic to the professional field probably ought to be assessed by others than ourselves, but as the question is asked, we will share our thoughts on this matter.
We regard it as one of the main contributions of The Bodynamic Analysis System, that we have developed the connections between psychological, social and motoric developmental thinking and the muscle responses of single muscles. This is reflected in our character structure model as in the Bodymap, and the eleven egofunctions.
You might say that in other words: we have put words on the connection between psychodynamic thinking, based on developmental psychology, motor-perceptual development and bodywork, with movements / action and posture as well as with muscles and added cognitive-behavioral elements.

We have also developed the integration between verbal work as seen in psychodynamic experiential psychotherapy, and nonverbal work, including tactile work with the clients’ body sensations and body experiences.
On this background we are of the opinion that we have contributed to a resource oriented, cognitive-integrative way of understanding and working with the body in psychotherapy and working with psychotherapy in bodywork.

Finally, we believe that we have contributed to both understanding and finding practical ways of working not only with character logical themes, but also with PTSD and birth-issues, as well as communication, group work and conflict resolution issues.

Literature connected to this question:
Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego I: Core Concepts and Principles”
Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego II: Psychomotor Development and Character Structure”
Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher
Peter Bernhardt: The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the roots of the Bodynamic System
Sonja Fich, Lisbeth Marcher: Psykologi og Anatomi.
Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap. 2. udgave (udvidet).
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.
Steen Jørgensen (red.): Forløsning af choktraumer. Forlaget KREATIK, København, 1993.
Steen Jørgensen: Character structure and shock.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995. Published as p. 172 – 184 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

3.3. Please provide evidence that your approach has a clear and self-consistent theory of the human being, of the therapeutic relationship, and of health and illness.

We believe that this question is somewhat covered earlier in Chapter 1 of this report where we described our understanding of human development:

Development of personality (bodily, social and psychological) depends on at least four kinds of interaction between the individual and its surroundings:
– pre- and perinatal processes
– learning ways of acting and understanding from seeing and imitating parents, siblings and other close social persons
– the character logical development that comes out of everyday interaction with the same persons
– more sudden events, eventually mostly like peak experiences, eventually traumatic events causing different degrees of post-traumatic disturbances
Also the transpersonal or spiritual dimension of human development is seen as being influenced by all three kinds of interaction, as well as of course in many cases by a deliberately chosen meditative or spiritual practice.

It is our basic theory, based on actual observations, that psychological, social and motor-perceptual development is interconnected and inseparable. Our basic theory contains three (or rather four) aspects of the ego: body, identity and social role (and in addition: the observing part of the ego), as well as 11 functions of the ego: Connectedness; Posture and Positioning; Centering; Boundaries; Grounding and Reality Testing; Social Balances; Cognitive skills; Gender and gender skills; Management of Energy; Self-Expression; and finally: Habits of Interpersonal Contact.

We understand the child’s development as moving through a series of thematic phases: existence, need, autonomy, will, love-sexuality, opinion, and solidarity-performance. Also the teenage period is understood as a significant period of personal development. It is part of our theory (based on actual observations) that the child in each of these thematic phases can go through a healthy development or get stuck in either hypo-responsive or hyper-responsive body-psychological-social patterns.We have observed that the result of this psychological and social development is connected to the motor-perceptual development, and is thus mirrored in the body and movement of the individual, so that defense patterns as well as resources are reflected in the body, muscles-responses and movement. Special attention is also given to the development and management of boundaries in interaction with others.

Both principles and specific ways of working psychotherapeutically are developed to meet variations of developmental disturbances as they are expressed bodily, psychologically and socially. Parallel at the same time the Bodynamic System (Analysis) has developed specific ways of understanding and working with disturbed pre- and perinatal processes and with posttraumatic disturbances.

We might add that the developmental model (the Character Structure model) is elaborated in a way so that it describes not only typical tension patterns and postures, but also typical social behavior and relational patterns, typical verbal key-sentences etc, connected to each sub-theme of development.
Thus this model can also be used as a model for describing different patterns of transference and counter transference, in a quite specific way.
It is our experience, also from teaching and training non-bodynamic therapists, that this way of thinking offers a helpful and operational approach to the very difficult task of untangling transference and counter transference. In fact we in the institute use this method of thinking – and other professionals who have taken Bodynamic training also use it.

Touch.
We regard touch as a natural part of out therapeutic approach. When, how and where you touch, is individually based, depending on the client and this is taught in our training programs.
Being a body psychotherapist, it is obvious that touch is necessary, but as soon as we work in the PTSD-field we are a minority in number and low on the recognized scale. Part of the reason is the USA-influence (read psychiatrists) in the PTSD field, and their fear for therapists overstepping boundaries of the client (e.g. sexual relationships between therapist and client that happens too often, so the fear is real) – so politically it has been banned. Another part is that also psychologists and psychiatrists in many European countries have the same ban. So the political situation produces fear in most psychotherapists, and they tend to stay away from touching – whereas the body psychotherapist keep touching – and we are well trained in this.

As the EABP description says in answering question 3D, not a lot has been written about touch.
A new book written by Physiology professor Kerstin Moberg, Stockholm describes how touch helps a part of the autonomic nervous system to calm down (the parasympathetic part). This is like a “calming-down” reflex, just as important as the sympathetic “fight-flight” reflex. Kerstin Moberg: Lugn och beröring (Calming down and Touch- the healing impact of oxytocin in the body). Stockholm, 2000.
Bodynamic trainers has written the following: Ethical considerations in somatic therapies. Macnaughton, Bentzen and Jarlnaes, in Macnaughtons book: Embodying the Mind, Minding the Body, 1997

3.4. Please provide evidence that your approach has
methods specific to the approach which generate developments in the theory of psychotherapy, demonstrate new aspects in the understanding of human nature, and lead to ways of treatment/intervention.

We see it as one of the main contributions of the Bodynamic System (Analysis), that we have developed the connection between psychological, social and motor-perceptual developmental thinking and the muscle responses of single muscles. As stated this is reflected in our Character Structure model as in the Bodymap, and the Eleven Ego Functions.
You might say that in other words: We have put words on the connection between psychodynamic thinking, based on developmental psychology, motor-perceptual development and bodywork, with movements / action and posture as well as with muscles. And, this includes Ollars research concerning the reliability of the muscle test, (the Bodymap).

We have also elaborated the integration between verbal work as seen in psychodynamic experiential psychotherapy, and verbal and nonverbal also including tactile work with the client’s body sensations and body experiences.
On this background it is our own opinion that we have contributed to a resource oriented, cognitive-integrative way of understanding and working with the body in psychotherapy.

It is furthermore our perception that the work we have done within the area of describing and understanding boundaries, especially in connection to children’s development, has had quite an impact on pedagogues and professionals.

In the field of touch Ian Macnaughton and Erik Jarlnaes have written an article about this in a Canadian journal for counseling psychotherapy (also Macnaughtons book, see above) that shares the Bodynamic views on this area, and we shall briefly share some of the thoughts:
When we touch we primarily do so with well-bounded hands, firm hands.
Then we make a distinction between 3 ways of touching: A provoking touch, a supportive touch and a neutral touch.
The provoking touch can happen in either a “female” way that is used for muscles that are “hyporesponsive”, or a “male” way that is used for muscles that are “hyperresponsive”.
The supportive touch can also happen in either a “female” way which is used so that the client can lean into the hand, or a “male” way where the client gets a little push (“it is ok that you go out in the world).
The neutral touch receives the response from the muscles, when the client verbally answers different questions from the therapist. This is a kind of biofeedback, since the therapist can pick up if the question he puts forward is “wrong” in relation to the situation, or too provoking or right on in the balance (meaning whether it touches the client overwhelmingly or psychologically)

Finally, we believe that we have contributed to both the understanding and the practical ways of working not only with character logical themes, but also with PTSD and birth-issues.
For further information concerning our historical perspective see both chapter 1 and the EABP-answer in question 4.

Literature:
Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego I: Core Concepts and Principles”
Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego II: Psychomotor Development and Character Structure”
Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher

Peter Bernhardt: The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the roots of the Bodynamic System
Sonja Fich, Lisbeth Marcher: Psykologi og Anatomi.
Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap. 2. udgave (udvidet).
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.
Steen Jørgensen (red.): Forløsning af choktraumer. Forlaget KREATIK, København, 1993.
Steen Jørgensen: Character structure and shock.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995. Published as p. 172 – 184 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

3.5. Please provide evidence that your approach includes processes of verbal exchange, alongside an awareness of non-verbal sources of information and communication.

We work as well with traditional body-posture reading connected to the ego-development model, as we more or less constantly work by addressing the body sensations and body experiences of the client, both directly by asking and also by using mirroring interventions. Most of this information, checking and exchange with the client, is verbal – in order to develop his awareness.
The way we do this is of course very individualistic, but part of it is described in the 2 models: “The Bodyknot” and “Active sensing” (our expanded version of Rogers “active listening”). Both models are very important for us as therapists not only in order to be precise in the contact, but also as tools that we teach the clients to use in their environments so that their communicative- and contact skills improve.
In relation to Michael Hellers research (see the EABP-answer to question no.5) that shows that there are over a million possible non-verbal exchanges of information in a single psychotherapy session of any sort and Alfred Pritz that states that about 80% of our communication system is non-verbal, we find it interesting that we “so to speak” have added the non-verbal component to Rogers model of “active listening”, because we experienced (and got the feedback) that clients felt much more “seen” when we included this part in our exchange.
When we are doing our therapy we both support and/or confront, verbally and/or non-verbally and we draw on all the other models we have in order to decide the most “fitting” verbal content, transformed into a genuine expression from the therapist to the client.

The psychotherapeutic room or field is primarily set or established through verbal contact and contract, whereas the actual therapeutic work is mixed nonverbal and verbal.
The interpretation of the Bodymap is done verbally, AND in contact.

Hardly any session would end without an integrative piece of mutual (verbal and bodily) understanding on the outcome of the session and most often also with home-assignments for the client, which will be reported and “commented” on in the first part of the next session.

Please also see chapters: 1. and 3.2.

3.6. Please provide evidence that your approach offers a clear rationale for treatment / interventions facilitating constructive change of the factors provoking or maintaining illness or suffering.
and:
3.7. Please provide evidence that your approach has clearly defined strategies enabling clients to develop a new organisation of experience and behaviour.

We have allowed ourselves to give a joint answer to these two questions, as we understand them as very interconnected.

As we pointed out in chapter 1, working with clients in The Bodynamic System (Analysis) includes an understanding of many aspects: bodily tension patterns and movement patterns, psychological and interactional difficulties as well as resources, social conditions in the client’s present life (economic, in terms of work and other activity, social networks etc) and an understanding of the client’s previous experiences during upbringing and general family experiences.

Our models include not only a paradigm of extreme ways of being, but also of a healthy way of functioning – a flexible way of being – in the society you belong to. And this without having any RIGHT / WRONG way of being, but instead having access to the ability of being flexible.
This understanding is developed and shared in cooperation with the client, and the outcome of this and of the actual therapeutic work in sessions will almost always lead towards new ways of acting for the client, because we have a clear contract from the beginning that includes which issue the client wants to change, and how the client wants “the reality” to “look like” after the change (how he has integrated the therapeutic growth in relation to himself and other people in his environment).

A basic attitude in Bodynamic System (Analysis) is this: history was there, and can not be changed, the present world is here, and might be somewhat influenced but is still pretty given, and: there is always a possibility of understanding and relating in new ways both to history, yourself and the present world. This is also expressed in one of our “catch phrases” (slogans): “It is never too late…”.
In EABP’s answer (to question 6) it says “whilst past history cannot be changed, emotional reactions to the historical events and the client’s feelings about themselves that result from this history, can be altered significantly”.

Often we refer to this change of perspective in the words of tracking old codes, decoding and recoding, and sometimes actually just coding: learning new stuff from the beginning. We use the concept “Re-decision”, originally taught to us by different T.A. people, to help develop new beliefs that are very important when we have to live in a healthy way in our society.

A few examples of papers relating to these questions:

Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher
Peter Bernhardt: The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the Roots of the Bodynamic System
Lennart Ollars. Voksnes Udvikling . Forlaget Kreatik ,Kbh.:1984.
Lennart Ollars: Om virkningerne af intensiv psykologisk træning. Teknologisk Institut København 1974.
Møde med mennesket, Teknologisk Institut København 1973.

3.8. Please provide evidence that your approach is open to dialogue with other psychotherapy modalities about its field of theory and practice.

As mentioned earlier we have invested a significant amount of energy in describing our theory, our working models and our way of working, a fact reflected in the length of our bibliography.

Not only do our members have many different professional backgrounds before being associated with Bodynamic, but our members also have extensive training in other modalities, and through that they have been in dialogue with other psychotherapy modalities.
2 are certified in Bioenergetic Analysis. 1 has extensive TA training. 2 have participated in many workshops with Richard Erskine (Integrated Psychotherapy) 4 have 20 days of training in NLP already back in 1979-81. All members have basic TA 101, basic gestalt training (15 days) or more than basic (1-2 years). 2 have 3 years of training in Biosynthesis. 2 have many years of Pesso-Boyden training. 2 have lots of systems training workshops, one is certified in the Human Element leadership training (Will Schutz). 1 has extended training with Stanislav Grof. We all have had forgiveness training, and lots of PTSD training (eg. Levine, Kohlrieser and Kirsch).
So we feel well equipped in the dialogues that arise when we visit conferences, Universities etc. plus when we internally constantly challenge and expand our own theory.

Also, being that it is a group that has developed the Bodynamic System, instead of a one-person system, has assured that this dialogue takes place – and we always welcome it.

In addition to this we have also in the last 20 years attended a long series of congresses.
Several of our trainers have attended a long series of international congresses within the areas of body psychotherapy, (se also the EABP answer to question 8), Pre- and Perinatal psychology and PTSD, but also within other traditions of psychotherapy. Predominantly Lisbeth Marcher but also several other Bodynamic trainers have offered a long series of presentations at congresses, in Europe and USA.
Over these years we have always regarded congresses not only as a platform for presenting ourselves (or as Tom Lehrer, a famous american comedian, would has put it, for “selling the product”), but certainly also as an opportunity to get into dialogue with professional colleagues in the field.
We have included a list of congresses we have attended, as part 5 of this documentation.

In addition to this we have always, for more than 20 years now, invited trainers from other body psychotherapeutic traditions, and from other modalities of psychotherapy to teach members of our institute, and in the most recent years we have also guest-trainers in our education, and as a part of this they are invited to have discussions with us.

We feel open and willing to cooperate with other modalities as long as integration is possible, both theoretically and in praxis – and this is not possible with all theories or praxis, because some are in direct opposition!!
Eg: When some systems believe in breaking down defenses, while we believe in building up resources (and are against the breaking down) and when some systems believe in exploding boundaries while we believe in expanding boundaries – then it is not possible. But of course we have to discover this before we can reach a conclusion.

Even when we find modalities very different, we are willing to discuss and look into the differences in order to understand the other modalities, notice how they differ from our beliefs, and see if /what we can learn from the other systems. We also find it challenging to discuss and find out the practical outcomes of being different.
As an example, we have looked at how some therapists have a basic human belief that “you are alone”, and comparing this with our belief that “you always have a relation” (which shows in our basic concept “Mutual Connection”). When we compare teaching in a group or doing therapy the two systems look pretty much the same, we use the same kind of words and we wonder where the differences are – and then suddenly… it shows that there is a lack of caring when clients have a lot of “giving up” plus they have “early issues” (early childhood issues). Here we notice that some therapists leave the clients to figure out things themselves, whilst we teach (similar) clients what they are missing.

There are many more situations that will be interesting to look at. The next thing is that within a system it shows that therapists have different opinions / values – and sometimes therapists within the same system will teach their clients different values. But then we have discrepancies between systems and their therapists, and how do we tackle this?
Irwin Yalom writes well on existentialism as background for a similar therapist approach, yet he emphasizes the “basically being alone” aspect, which we disagree with, and believe the “basically being in Mutual Connection” aspect. And at the same time it looks like we use many of the same observations, words, descriptions, interventions etc. Therefore the question is can we cooperate ?
These are the kind of considerations that we are making and discussing, among ourselves and with each other.

3.9. Please provide evidence that your approach has a way of methodically describing the chosen fields of study and the methods of treatment or intervention which can be used by other colleagues.

We have put a lot of effort into writing about our thoughts and experiences, both about theory and practice, a fact that we have already documented, and feel it would too repetitive to take up again.
However, we would like to emphasize that our physical understanding of the body comes from intensive studies of muscles and their movements, including principles of stretching and tensing up, how to give Bodynamic massage strokes, physical training principles etc. and in order to support this whole area of study we use books that are available from other professional fields. On top of this we have the Danish tradition from the Relaxation Educations, where their exists a wealth of literature on aspects of Body Awareness. See books by Jorgensen, Ivanow and Ollars, and the book by Jarlnaes (ed) – although they are all in Danish.
We put a lot of emphasis on this precise knowledge, because we see the body as the container for emotional well-being, and the more precise you know your body and your resources and possibilities -the healthier you are, and the better possibilities you have to function well, personally, in your worklife and socially.
It is also in this area we see possibilities for a common knowledge for all body psychotherapy approaches. (See also the EABP-answer to question 9)

For an extended answer on this question, see chapter 2, segment 3.8 and part 5: our bibliography.

3.10. Please provide evidence that your approach is associated with information which is the result of conscious self reflection, and critical reflection by other professionals within the approach.

We are in a constant ongoing process of developing and correcting our understanding both of the specific connections between muscles and psychological themes, and in developing further connection between what we already believe to know, and new knowledge coming from inside our own practice and outside from the professional field.

One area we are very preoccupied with is the growing knowledge stemming from research in the area of PTSD and in the area of overlap between medical psychology, brain- and neurological research, understanding of human hormone and immune systems etc.
We also work on integrating this new knowledge in new practice-oriented models. For the time being we are, as stated earlier, working on a more specific understanding of emotions, as we are trying to separate levels of instincts, emotions and feelings. In this context we are trying to integrate results from contemporary animal research and medical science, concerning brain scanning and blood-testing, reflecting different layers of emotion and behavior.

In order to nurture this process we do several things in addition to simply reading new literature: we participate in congresses in the above mentioned areas, we continuously arrange approximately 5-6 days of internal updating every year (for ourselves and the staff of guest teachers), and we arrange approximately 4 – 6 days a year to make updates and share dialogue with our former trainees. Some of this updating is lead by ourselves, some of it by teachers / trainers from outside the Institute.

In this context we will repeat that we also present our work at congresses arranged by other psychotherapeutic traditions, as well on congresses within the field of body psychotherapy.
Whenever we have a chance to do it, we also expose ourselves to dialogue with the more established academic psychology and psychotherapy traditions, sometimes quite a task, but most often a rewarding task.
Lennart Ollars association to the University of Århus could be one example of our efforts to get into a dialogue with the established academia.
Marianne Kristtiansen and Hella Alrø’s association with the University of Aalborg is another example.

We would like to mention an example of our interest in joining and offering our knowledge to the ongoing development of culture and society.
Ditte Marcher is currently working systematically with issues relating to multi-cultural ism and integration, an issue that is very “hot” at least in Denmark.
Ditte Marcher is also working in cooperation with the international organization: “Doctors without Frontiers”.

We do miss a more specific, detailed and critical, but still respectful, dialogue between ourselves and body psychotherapists coming from other submodalities of body psychotherapy (please see the EABP answer to this question 10).
Until now it seems like most body psychotherapists have been preoccupied with describing their own approach.
It seems though, especially through the work of the Forum of EABP with the mutual recognition visits, that a new phase of cooperation is emerging: there seems to be a growing interest to search for a common ground of body psychotherapy, as well for a language that can respectfully put words on the differences between submodalities of body psychotherapy.

The upcoming autumn EABP congress, in September 2001, is addressing these issues, and several of the senior trainers from Bodynamic International will be active there with presentations.

3.11. Please provide evidence that your approach offers new knowledge, which is differentiated and distinctive, in the domain of psychotherapy.

A whole series of papers have been written about different aspects of Bodynamic Theory and working method.

The contributions of Bodynamic to the professional field probably ought to be assessed by others than ourselves (at least according to our Scandinavian norms concerning modesty), but as the question is asked, we will share our thoughts on this matter.

We see it as one of the main contributions of The Bodynamic System (Analysis), that we have developed the connection between psychological, social and motoric developmental thinking to the muscle responses of single muscles. This is reflected in our Character Structure model as in the Bodymap, and the eleven Ego functions.
You might say that in other words: we have put words on the connection between psychodynamic thinking, based on developmental psychology, motoric development and bodywork, with movements / action and posture as well as with muscles.

We have also developed the integration between verbal work as seen in psychodynamic experiential psychotherapy, and verbal and nonverbal also including tactile work with the client’s body sensations and body experiences.
On this background we are of the opinion that we have contributed to a resource oriented, cognitive-integrative way of understanding and working with the body in psychotherapy.

Finally, we believe that we have contributed to both the understanding and the practical ways of working not only with character logical themes, but also with PTSD and birth-issues. (See also EABP-answer to this question 11).

Literature:
Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego I: Core Concepts and Principles”
Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt and Joel Isaacs: “Waking the Body Ego II: Psychomotor Development and Character Structure”
Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher
Peter Bernhardt: The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the roots of the Bodynamic System
Sonja Fich, Lisbeth Marcher: Psykologi og Anatomi.
Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap. 2. udgave (udvidet).
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.
Steen Jørgensen (red.): Forløsning af choktraumer. Forlaget KREATIK, København, 1993.
Steen Jørgensen: Character structure and shock.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995. Published as p. 172 – 184 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

3.12. Please provide evidence that your approach is capable of being integrated with other approaches considered to be part of scientific psychotherapy so that it can be seen to share with them areas of common ground.

It is our experience that the thinking and the way of working in Bodynamic Analysis is very compatible, and thus can be inspirational for therapists coming from as varied traditions as: analytical and psychodynamic tradition, cognitive and behavioral tradition, the family or systemic oriented tradition and as one more example: gestalt therapy.
The same can be said for non-therapeutic psychologists focusing on communication or the flow of consciousness.
This experience of ours comes from dialogue with therapists from the mentioned traditions, from the occasions where we have presented our approach, theory and method during speeches or special teachings to these groups.

Both Ditte Marcher and Erik Jarlnæs have done quite a lot of work in cooperation with institutes and groups that focus on conflict resolution, also in a cross cultural sense, for example in Bosnia and Kosova.

Lisbeth Marcher has started a closer cooperation with The Human Element Institute (Will Schutz).

We believe that it is the broad approach of the Bodynamic System (Analysis), including the body, as behavior, emotions, thinking patterns, social network work, and psychodynamic understanding, that makes this integration and mutual inspiration possible and rewarding.

At least in Denmark there is an ongoing movement towards a more integrative approach to psychotherapeutic understanding and practice.
Viewed historically it could be fair to say that different traditions have focused on one, and mostly one of the following aspects: emotions, behavior, thinking patterns or interactional patterns.
In contrast to this, the more integrative approach tries to emphasize, that even though a specific tradition (like cognitive therapy) focuses mostly on one aspect (thinking patterns), it should not neglect in practice that the other aspects are very much present (the clients do have emotions and relations as well as they behave, and not to forget: all this is done also with and within the body!).
Please consult with the EABP answer to question no 12, where you will find
3 references among 8 mentioned.

3.13. Please provide evidence that your approach describes and displays a coherent strategy to understanding human problems, and an explicit relation between methods of treatment/intervention and results.

As we pointed out in chapter 1, working with clients in Bodynamic Analysis includes an understanding of many aspects: bodily tension patterns and movement patterns, psychological and interactional difficulties as well as resources, social conditions in present life (economic, work and other activities, social networks etc) and an understanding of the clients previous experiences during upbringing and family experience.
It is our basic theory, based on actual observations, that the psychological, social and motoric development is interconnected and inseparable. Our basic theory contains three (or rather four) aspects of the ego: body, identity and social role (and in addition: the observing part of the ego), as well as 11 functions of the ego: Connectedness; Posture and Positioning; Centering; Boundaries; Grounding and Reality Testing; Balances; Cognitive skills; Gender and gender skills; Management of Energy; Self-Expression; and finally: Habits of Interpersonal Contact.

We understand a child’s development as moving through a series of thematic phases: existence, need, autonomy, will, love-sexuality, opinion, and solidarity-performance. Also the teenage period is understood as a significant period of personal development. It is part of our theory (based on actual observations) that a child in each of these thematic phases can go through a healthy development or get stuck in either hypo-responsive or hyper-responsive body-psycholocical-social patterns. It is our observation that the result of this psychological and social development is connected to the motoric development, and thus is mirrored in the body and movement of the individual, so that defense patterns as well as resources are reflected in the body, muscles-responses and movement. Special attention is also given to the development and management of boundaries in interaction with others.

The ultimate working tool in Bodynamic Analysis is the Bodymap, an elaborate and precise mapping of both resources and blockages in the client’s body, where these are mapped, as mentioned above, in elasticity patterns in the muscles.

Both principles and specific ways of working psychotherapeuticly are developed to meet variations of developmental disturbances as they are expressed bodily, psychologically and socially. In a parallel way Bodynamic Analysis has developed specific ways of understanding and working with disturbed pre- and perinatal processes and with posttraumatic disturbances.

We also work with the Bodymap, with traditional body-posture reading connected to the ego-development model, and constantly by addressing the body sensations and body experiences of the client, both directly by asking and also by using mirroring interventions. Most of this information and checking and exchange with the client, in order to develop his awareness, is verbal.

Hardly any session would end without an integrative piece of mutual understanding of the outcome of the session, and often also with home-assignments for the client.

Literature:
Peter Bernhardt: Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s resources: An interview with Lisbeth Marcher
Peter Bernhardt: The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the roots of the Bodynamic System
Lennart Ollars. Voksnes Udvikling . Forlaget Kreatik ,Kbh.:1984.
Lennart Ollars: Om virkningerne af intensiv psykologisk træning. Teknologisk Institut København 1974.
Møde med mennesket, Teknologisk Institut København 1973.

3.14. Please provide evidence that your approach has theories of normal and problematic human behavior which are explicitly related to effective methods of diagnosis/assessment and treatment/intervention.

Again it seems obvious to mention the character structure model, which describes early disturbances (psychologically: giving up, depressed or “not-knowing-about”-related patterns, and bodily: hyporesponsive patterns), late disturbances (psychologically: actively defensive holding back, often anger-based patterns and bodily: hyperresponsive tension patterns).

Especially an understanding of the first three developmental phases will be fairly accurate in describing the precise dynamics of personality disorders like ego-weakness, unbounderdness, border-psychotic and borderline.
Likewise ,it will probably be later developmental disturbances that you would expect to find connected to diagnostic terms like: neurotic, rigid, persistent etc.
In addition to this it is interesting to see how many bodily characteristics you are presented with when describing panic, anxiety-attacks and PTSD.

Bodynamic Analysis provides both verbal and non-verbal working strategies for all the above-mentioned states.

The Bodynamic System (Analysis) has also provided therapists with working tools to help (not necessarily cure) as different client categories as: very early damaged and multi handicapped children, autistic and psychotic children, mentally handicapped grown ups, victims of torture and abuse, multipersonality disorder, anorexia and other eating-disorders etc.

In our teaching is contained a workshop that specifically teaches the relationship between our theories and traditional psychiatry and diagnostic models (in USA DSM-4).
For further info on this question, please see chapter: 1, and: 3.1, 3.3 & 3.6..

Part 4

Bibliography Updated may 2001.

BD = Danish version
BE = English version
BF = French version
DT = German version
BH.= Dutch version
BP = Polish version
BN = Norwegian version
BS = Swedish version

Same number indicates versions of the same publication in different languages.

Bodynamic Institute: Mulighederne i Kropsdynamisk Analyse.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1989.

Bodynamic Institute: Kroppen husker det hele.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1993.

Bodynamic Institute: A presentation.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1995.

BD 55 Mette Bennike: Derfor afslører dit udseende dig.
S. 30-34 i Alt For Damerne 4/98.
(bl.a. s. 33 kort af Lennart Ollars)

BD 24 Marianne Bentzen: Intimacy, Sexuality & Boundaries in Bodypsychotherapy.
P. 18 – 20 in Bernhard Maul (ed.):Body psychotherapy or The Art of Contact. Verlag Bernhard Maul, Berlin 1992.

BE 25 Marianne Bentzen: Healthy love and the psychotherapist.
Requested Presentation at the Strasbourg Congress 1993 of the European Association for Bodypsychotherapy.

BD 9f Marianne Bentzen og Erik Jarlnæs:
Udviklingen af Bodynamic choktraumeterapi – en historisk oversigt.
P. 51 – 55 in Steen Jørgensen (red): Forløsning af choktraumer.

BS 9f Marianne Bentzen og Erik Jarlnæs:
Utvecklingen av Bodynamic chocktraumeterapi – En historisk översikt.
P. 45 – 49 in Steen Jørgensen (red.): Förlösning av chocktrauman. (Swedish version of BD 9f)).

BE 11 Marianne Bentzen, Erik Jarlnæs, Peter Levine:
The Body Self in Psychotherapy. A Psycho-motoric Approch to Self Psychology. P. 36 – 47 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BD 1 Marianne Bentzen, Steen A. Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher:
Kropsdynamisk Karakterstruktur.
Forlaget KREATIK, Hørsholm 1990.

BE 1 Marianne Bentzen, Steen A. Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher:
The Bodynamic Character Structure Model.
Energy and Character, Volume 20 No.1, April 1989.
Corrections in volume 21, No. 1, April 1990. (Eng version of BD1))

BP 1 Marianne Bentzen, Steen A. Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher:
Model strukturing charakteni opracowany W. Instrytucie BODY- namic. Rezonans I Dialog nr. 4, 1992. (Polish version of BE 1).

BD 2 Marianne Bentzen, Steen A. Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher:
Kropsdynamisk karakterstruktur – en model.
2. udviderede udgave. Forlaget KREATIK, København 1992.

Marianne Bentzen, Peter Bernhardt and Joel Isaacs:
Waking the Body Ego II,
Unpublished manuscript, Bodynamic Institute USA, 1993. Published in Energy and Character, 1997. Also p. 112 – 137 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BD 7 Peter Bernhardt:
Individuation, samhørighed og kroppens ressourcer: Et interview med Lisbeth Marcher. P. 20-32 in Erik Jarlnæs (red): Betydningen af at høre sammen. (Danish trans of BE 7 or BE 7a).

BE 7 Peter Bernhardt:
Individuation, mutual connection and the BODY’s resources. A somatic view of human development. An interview with Lisbeth Marcher. Bodynamic Institute, 1991.

BE 7a Peter Bernhardt:
Individuation, Mutual Connection and the Body’s Resources: An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher. P. 281-293 in: Pre- and Peri- Natal Psychology Journal, 6 (4), Summer 1992.
Shorter version of BE 7). Also p. 72 – 79 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BF 7 (Lisbeth Marcher), Peter Bernhard:
Individuation, liasons interpersonelles et ressources du corps (interview).
Side 52-58 i: Marsyas, Revue de pédagogie musicale et chorégraphique nr. 22. Institut de pédagogie musicale et  chorégraphique, la Villette, Paris, 1992. (French version of BE 7 or 7a ).

BP 7 Peter Bernhardt:
Rozwoj jednostki, wzajemna wiez potencjal ciala – somatyczne podejscie do rozowoju czlowieka.
Rezonans I Dialog nr. 4, 1992. (Polish version of BE 7).

BE 9c Peter Bernhardt, MFCC:
Somatic Approaches to Shock. A Review of the Work of the Bodynamic  Institute, and Peter Levine.
Manuskript, 1991. Publiced as p. 150 – 171 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BP 9c Peter Bernhardt:
Somatyczne podejscie w pracy z szokiem. Przeglad prac Petera Levine’a oraz Instytutu Bodynamic.
Rezonans I Dialog nr. 4, 1992. (Polish version of BE 9c).

BD 38 Peter Bernhardt:
Kunsten at følge struktur.: Et interview med Lisbeth Marcher om Bodynamic-systemets rødder.
P. 33-52 i Erik Jarlnæs (red): Betydningen af at høre sammen.
(Danish version of BE 38).

BE 38 Peter Bernhardt:
The Art Of Following Structure. An Interview with Lisbeth Marcher exploring the roots of the Bodynamic System.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995. Also p. 80 – 93 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BH 38 Peter Bernhardt: De kunst van het volgen van struktuur.
(Dutch translation: Josette van Luytelaar).

BE 26 Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs: Waking the Body Ego.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995. Also p. 94 – 111 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BE 26a Peter Bernhardt,Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs:
Waking the Body Ego – Part 1.
P. 47 – 62 in Energy and Character, Volume 26 No. 1, April 1995.
(First half of BE 26)

BE 26b Peter Bernhardt, Marianne Bentzen and Joel Isaacs:
Waking the Body Ego – Part 2.
P. 38 – 50 in Energy and Character, Volume 27 No. 1, April 1996.
Second half of BE 26)

Peter Bernhardt & Joel Isaacs:
The Bodymap. A Precise Diagnostic Tool for Psychotherapy.
Bioenergetic Analysis. Vol. 11, No. 1, Spring 2000.

BD 35 Susanne Bjertrup: Søhesten og mandlen
Weekendavisen, 2. – 8. juni 1995.

Mai-Britt Bjørndal: Psykosomatisk Teori og Kropsterapi.
Specialeopgave i klinisk psykologi ved kandidatstudiet i psykologi,
Århus Universitet. Eget tryk: 1997.

BD 44 Merete Holm Brantbjerg: Tag vare på dig selv som behandler.
P. 94-104 in Erik Jarlnæs (red): Betydningen af at høre sammen.

BD 44a Merete Holm Brantbjerg: Tag vare på dig selv som behandler.
P.6-14 in Nyhedsbrev for psykoterapeutforeningen.(Short version of BD44)

BE 44 Merete Holm Brantbjerg: Caring for Yourself while caring for Others.
P. 138 – 145 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BD 63 Merete Holm Brantbjerg: Mærk suset af frihed.
S. 96-97 i Alt for Damerne 35/2000.

BN 48 Merete Holm Brantbjerg og Lars Jahnsen:
Hvordan ta vare på oss selv som behandlere?
P. 16-19 in Nettverk-Nytt nr. 3, mai 1995.

Eva Brendstrup: Klienter i Bodynamic Analyse.
Sociologisk Institut ,Kbh.Universitet: Juli 1998.

BD 51 Elsebeth Egholm: Man udvikler sig af god kritik.
S. 108-110 i Alt for Damerne 18/97.
(Bl.a. interview med Merete Holm Brantbjerg.)

Bodil Claesson, Lisbeth Steen Jensen og Lennart Ollars:
Kropsrelateret psykoterapi. Dansk Psykolog Nyt 1999 p. 16 – 19

Sonja Fich: Testmanual/Bodymap.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1992.

Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap. 2. udgave (udvidet).
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.

Sonja Fich, Lisbeth Marcher: Psykologi og Anatomi.
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.

Sonja Fich (ed.): Jeg-funktioner.
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.

BD 45 Susan Forling: Traumatic memory: A Bodynamic Perspective.
P. 9-10 in Newsletter of BC Association of Clinical Counsellors, Vol. 07 nr. 3, nov. 1995.

BD 51 Elsebeth Egholm: Man udvikler sig af god kritik.
P. 108 – 110 in Alt for Damerne no. 18, 1997.

BD 10b Peter Hjerrild:
KROPSTERAPI. Glemmer du – så husker kroppen. (Interview med Lennart Ollars). Alt for damerne nr. 41, 8. oktober 1992.

Tove Hvid: Kroppens fortællinger.
Forlaget MODTRYK, Århus 1990.

Tove Hvid: Kroppens fortællinger i billeder.
Forlaget MODTRYK, Århus 1992.

Tove Hvid:
Hvad kroppen kan fortælle. Et anderlede kommunikationsprojekt.
Ribe Amt, 1993.

BD 33 Tove Hvid og Nancy Bratt: Kropslæsning og Rorschack-testning.
P. 325-45 in Pædagogisk-Psykologisk Rådgivning nr. 5-6, 1994.

Jan Ivanouw & Lisbeth Marcher: Individuel behandling.
P. 125 – 151 in Steen Jørgensen og Lennart Ollars (red.): Afspændings-pædagogens arbejdsområder. Eget tryk, 1979.

BN 47 Lars Jahnsen: Kroppens fortellinger – om terapi og bevissthedsutvikling P. 10-11 + 15 in Nettverk-Nytt nr. 2, april 1994.

BN 58 Lars Jahnsen: Klare grenser gir grobunn for kontakt.
S. 44-52 i EMBLA nr. 8, 1998.

BE 12 Erik Jarlnæs: Bodynamic Analysis.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1989.

BD 22 Erik Jarlnæs: Grænseoverskridende oplevelser.
Tidsskrift for idræt, april 1992.

BD 17 Erik Jarlnæs: Kunsten at løse knuder op.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1993.

BE 17 Erik Jarlnæs: The Art of Undoing Knots.
Bodynamic Institute, København 1995.
English version of BD 17).

BD 40 Erik Jarlnæs: Betydningen af at høre sammen.
Forlaget Kreatik/Bodynamic Institute: København: 1995.

BD 42 Erik Jarlnæs: Grundtvig og Bodynamic – et historisk perspektiv.
P. 53-57 in Erik Jarlnæs (red): Betydningen af at høre sammen.

BD 49 Erik Jarlnæs og Merete Holm Brantbjerg:
Pas på dig selv – focus på hjælperrollen.
Bodynamic Institute, 1996.

BE 60 Erik Jarlnæs:
The Bodynamic Analysis guidelines for working with the core of a shock-trauma. The Bodynamic Shock-trauma resolution “recipe”.
Bodynamic Institute ApS, 2000.

Steen Jørgensen: Kropsorienteret gruppeterapi.
Specialeopgave i klinisk psykologi ved kandidatstudiet i psykologi,
Københavns Universitet 1978. Eget tryk, København: 1978.

Steen Jørgensen: Kropsterapeutisk karakterteori.
Afløsningsopgave i almen psykologi ved kandidatstudiet i psykologi,
Københavns Universitet 1978. Eget tryk, København:1978.

BD 3 Steen Jørgensen:
3 artikler om KROPSSPROG OG KROPSLÆSNING til brug for undervisning ved Bodynamic Institute.
Forlaget KREATIK, Hørsholm 1990.

BD 9a Steen Jørgensen:
Bearbejdning af chock/posttraumatisk stress i Bodynamic Analyse. P. 9-36 in Steen Jørgensen (red): Forløsning af choktraumer.

BS 9a Steen Jørgensen:
Bearbetning av chocktrauman/posttraumatisk stress i Bodynamic Analyse.
P. 5 – 30 in Steen Jørgensen (red.): Förlösning av chocktrauman. – Se denne. (Swedish version of BS 9a).

BE 9a Steen Jørgensen:
Bodynamic Analytic Work with Shock/Post-Traumatic Stress.
Energy and Character, Volume 23 nr. 2. september 1992 .
English version of BD 9a).

BT 9a Steen Jørgensen:
Bodynamisch-Analytische Arbeit mit Schock und Post- Traumatischen Stress. P. 116-132 in: Energie & Charakter, 23. Jahrgang Heft 5, Juni 1992. (German version of BE 9a).

BD 9d Steen Jørgensen:
Chok/posttraumatisk Stress: Symptomer og årsager.
P. 57-75 in Steen Jørgensen (red.): Forløsning af choktraumer.

BS 9d Steen Jørgensen:
Chocktrauman/posttraumatisk stress: Symptom och orsaker.
P. 51 – 67 in Steen Jørgensen (red.): Förlösning av chocktrauman.
Swedish version of BD 9d).

BD 9e Steen Jørgensen (red.): Forløsning af choktraumer.
Forlaget KREATIK, København, 1993.

BS 9e Steen Jørgensen (red.): Förlösning av chocktrauman.
Centrum for Intrgrativ Psykoterapi, Mi Årling AB. Karlstad, 1994.
(Swedish version of BD 9e).

BD 20 Steen Jørgensen: Karakterstrukturer, traumer og chok.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995.
(Danish version of BT 20)

BE 20 Steen Jørgensen: Character structure and shock.
Bodynamic Institute, 1995. Published as p. 172 – 184 in: Ian Macnaughton,Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body. (English version of BT 20)

BT 20 Steen Jørgensen: Charakterstruktur und Schock.
P. 160 – 191 i Dagmar Hoffmann-Axthelm (red.): Schock und Berührung, Körper und Seele, Bd. 4. Oldenburg: Tranform Verlag, 1994.

BD 54 Steen Jørgensen: Kulturelle grænser og non-verbal kommunikation.
Upubliceret manuskript. Bodynamic Institute, 1997.

BD 53 Steen Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher:
Fortolkning af Bodymap – Bodynamic Analyses Personlighedstest.
P. 57 – 72 in: Sonja Fich (ed.): Testmanual/Bodymap.

BE 53 Steen Jørgensen, Lisbeth Marcher:
Bodymap Reading – Bodymap Interpretation.
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1998.

Steen Jørgensen & Lennart Ollars:
Kropslig forankring i psykoterapeutisk arbejde. En kort præsentation af Bodynamic Analyse, en kropsrelateret psykoterapiform.
Psykologisk Set. København: efteråret 2001.

BD 4 Bente Kjær: Motorisk og Perceptuel Udvikling 0-7 år.
Eget tryk, København 1990.

BE 4 Bente Kjær: Motor and perceptual development 0-7 years.
Eget tryk, København. May 1992. (English version of BD 4).

BD 57 Peter Øvig Knudsen: Den åbne krop.
Weekendavisen 28/11-4/12-1997. (interview med Erik Jarlnæs)

Henrik Lauridsen-Katborg:
Et rør til himlen. Personlighedens grænseland.
Modtryk, Aarhus: 1995.

BE 50 Peter Levine and Ian Macnaughton: Breath and consciousness.
P. 19-37 in: Energy and Character, Volume 27, No. 1, April 1996.
Also p. 197 – 212 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BD 23 Gabriella Bering Liisberg, Dorthe Taxbøl, Ellen Egede Andersen:
Liv i moderen. Interview med kropsdynamisk psykoterapeut Lisbeth Marcher.
P. 4 – 8 in: Tidsskrift for Jordemødre, 1990.

BE 29 Ian Macnaughtom, Marianne Bentzen, Erik Jarlnæs:
Ethical Consideration in Somatic Psychotherapies.
P. 38 – 45 in Energy and Character, Volume 24 no. 2, September 1993.

Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.
Integral Press, North Vancouver, BC, Canada: 1997.

Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D.:The Narrative of the Body-Mind – Minding the Body.
P. 25-34 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

Ian Macnaughton, Marianne Bentzen, Eric Jarlnæs:
Ethical Consideration in Somatic Therapies.
P. 64 – 69 in: Ian Macnaughton, Ph.D. (ed.): Embodying the Mind & Minding the Body.

BE 31 Lisbeth Marcher: Spisning i stedet for.
P. 47 – 58 in: Tykke børn – trygge børn. En symposierapport. Brundhøjskolen, Glesborg, 1994.

Lisbeth Marcher: Energy Concepts and Body Psychotherapy.
Bodynamic Institute, København: 1997.

BS 61 Lisbeth Marcher: Kroppens muskler minns det som hänt dig.
Svenska Dagbladet måndagen den 24 augusti 1998.

BD 59 Lisbeth Marcher: Få styr på kroppens signaler.
S. 150-156 i Alt for Damerne 45/98.

Lisbeth Marcher:
At være krops-psykoterapeut – og Bodynamic systemet.
Foredrag holdt ved den Hollandske psykologi forenings konference i oktober 1999 i Amsterdam.
Bodynamic International Aps.. København: 2000.

Lisbeth Marcher: Being a Body Psychotherapist
English version of the above mentioned.
Bodynamic International Aps.. Copenhagen: 2000.

BD 41 Lisbeth Marcher, Erik Jarlnæs og Lennart Ollars:
Fra afspænding til Bodynamic Analyse.
P. 8-19 in Erik Jarlnæs (red): Betydningen af at høre sammen.

BE 30 Lisbeth Marcher, Peter Levine:
Developmental and Shock Trauma.
P. 279 – 287 in Bernhard Maul (ed.): Bodypsychotherapy or The Art of Contact. Verlag Bernhard Maul, Berlin 1992.

BD 6 Lisbeth Marcher, Lennart Ollars:
Kropdynamisk analytisk arbejde med refødselsterapi.
Forlaget KREATIK, Hørsholm 1989.

BD 6a Lisbeth Marcher, Lennart Ollars:
Kropsdynamisk analytisk arbejde med refødselsterapi.
P. 226-231 in: Nordisk Psykologi Vol. 41 (3) 1989. (Shortened version of BD 6).

BE 6 Lisbeth Marcher, Lennart Ollars:
Bodynamic Analytic Developmental Re-birth Therapy.
Energy and Character, Volume 22 No.2, September 1991.
(English version of BD 6).

BT 6 Lisbeth Marcher, Lennart Ollars:
Der Entwicklungs-Rebirthing-Prozess der Bodynamischen Analyse.
P. 60 – 76 in: Energie & Charakter, 22. Jahrgang Heft 4, Dezember 1991.
(German version of BE 6).

BD 10a Bodil Moes:
Når musklerne sladrer om barndommen (Interview med Marianne Bentzen).
Femina nr. 5, 1991.

BD 16 Bente Mørup:
Om børns chok i hverdagen.
Bodynamic Institute, København.

BD 16a Bente Mørup:
Om børns chok i hverdagen.
Bodynamic Institute, København. (Shorter version of BD 16).

BD 21 Ellen Ollars & Bjørn Kassøe Andersen: Spirituel jordforbindelse.
P. 5 – 7 in Nyt Aspekt nr. 3, 1994.

Lennart Ollars: Muskelpalpationstests pålidelighed.
Eget tryk, 1980

Lennart Ollars. Voksnes Samhørighed .
Forlaget Kreatik ,Kbh.:1984.

BD 15a Lennart Ollars: Europæisk krops-psykoterapi I.
P. 654-656 in: Dansk Psykolog Nyt, 43. årgang, nr. 21, 1989.

BD 15b Lennart Ollars: Europæisk krops-psykoterapi II.
P. 685-688 in: Dansk Psykolog Nyt, 43. årgang , nr. 22, 1989.

BE 15 Lennart Ollars: European Congress of BODY-Psychotherapy.
Energy and Character, Volume 21 No.1, April 1990.
(English version of BD 15a og BD 15b).

BT 15 Lennart Ollars: Der Europäische Kongress für Körper- Psychotherapie. Side 42-49 i: Energie & Charakter, 21. Jahrgang Heft l, August 1990. (German version of BE 15).

BD 9b Lennart Ollars:Kropsdynamisk analytisk arbejde med overgreb. P. 366 – 368 and p. 406 – 408 in: Dansk Psykolog Nyt nr. 11 og 12, 1991.
Also published as p. 37 – 50 in Steen Jørgensen (red.): Forløsning af choktraumer.

BS 9b Lennart Ollars:
Bearbetning av övergrepp i Bodynamic Analyse,
P. 31 – 43 in Steen Jørgensen (red.): Förlösning av chocktrauman.
(Swedish version).

BE 9b Lennart Ollars: Bodynamic Analytic Work with Assault and Abuse.
P. 63 – 70 in: Energy and Character, Volume 25 No. 1, April 1995.

BD 18 Lennart Ollars: Alene-terapeuter -burde ikke findes.
P. 630 – 631 in Psykolog Nyt nr. 18, 1993.

BD 28 Lennart Ollars:
Pas på den indre rindalist.
P. 437-39 in Psykolog Nyt nr. 12, 1994.

BD 32 Lennart Ollars: Mulige veje til integration og problemløsning.
Bodynamic Institute, 1994.

BE 32 Lennart Ollars: Flying or Falling.
Bodynamic Institute, 1994. (English version of BD 32).

BN 32 Lennart Ollars: Gruppefunksjoner. (Norwegian version of BD 32)

BS 32 Lennart Ollars: Gruppfunktioner. (Swedish version of BD 32)

BD 43 Lennart Ollars: Fra amatør til mester.
P. 58-93 in Erik Jarlnæs (red): Betydningen af at høre sammen.

BD 39 Lennart Ollars:
Hvad en terapeut har brug for. Supervisorspot 1.
P. 12-13 in Psykolog Nyt no. 2, 1996.
Konsekvenser af manglende balance. Supervisorspot 2.
P. 6-7 in Psykolog Nyt no. 3, 1996.
Problemniveauer – orden på værktøjskassen. Supervisorspot 3.
P. 12-13 in Psykolog Nyt no. 4, 1996.
Se, mærke, lytte, spørge – før der handles. Supervisorspot 4.
P. 18-19 in Psykolog Nyt no. 5, 1996.
Præstation og supervision. Supervisorspot 5.
P. 10-11 in Psykolog Nyt no. 6, 1996.
Kroppen som anker. Supervisorspot 6.
P. 8-10 in Psykolog Nyt no. 7, 1996.
Terapiproces & terapeutrolle. Supervisorspot 7.
P. 6-8 in Psykolog Nyt no. 9, 1996.

BD 39a Lennart Ollars: Supervision – med kroppen som anker.
In print – Bodynamic Institute, 1998. (alternative version of BD 39)

BD 52 Lennart Ollars: I anledning af Reich.
P. 12 – 13 in: Psykolog Nyt no. 14, 1997.

BD 56 Lennarts Ollars:
Hvad siger kroppen – og hvad kan man stille op med det?
Introduktion til kropssprog.
Bodynamic Institute, 1998.

BD 56a Lennarts Ollars:
Hvad siger kroppen – og hvad kan man stille op med det?
Introduktion til kropssprog.
2. lettere reviderede udgave, Bodynamic International Aps, sept. 2000.

BD 62 Lennart Ollars:
Teamudvikling – hvordan gør man det? Konkrete handlingsanvisninger til teamudviklingsarbejde.
Bddynamic International Aps, 1999.

BE 8 Babette Rothschild:
Filling one of psycholotgy’s gaps.
Energy and Character Vol. 20 No. 1, April 1989.

BE 13 Babette Rothschild:
Bodynamic Bodypsychotherapie.
P. 27-30 in: Radix Review vol. 1 – 1, 1991.

BD 14 Babette Rothschild:
Post-traumatisk stress. ABC i Posttraumatisk stress for Krops- Psykoterapeuter.
P. 4 – 7 in: Danske Fysioterapeuter nr. 22, 1993.

BE 14 Babette Rothschild:
A shock primer for the body-psychotherapist.
P. 33-38 in: Energy and Character., Volume 24 No. 1, April 1993.
(English version of BD 14)

BT 14 Babette Rothschild:
Ein Leitfaden zum Thema Schock.
Side 26-32 i: Energie & Charakter, 24. Jahrgang Heft. 7, Juni 1993.
(German version of BE 14).

BE 19 Babette Rothschild: Transference and Countertransference
P. 25-31 in: Energy and Character, Volume25 No. 2, September 1994

BE 34 Babette Rothschild: Defining Trauma and Shock in Body-Psycho Therapy.
P. 61-65 in Energy and Character

BD 37 Babette Rothschild, Eric Jarlnæs:
Nervous System Imbalances And Post-Traumatic Stress: A Psycho-Physical Approach.
Bodynamic Institute, 1994.

BD 36 Tine Seibæk:
Vent ikke for længe. (Interview med Marianne Bentzen).
Femina nr. 7, s. 32-33, 1995.

BD 46 Annette Tholstrup: Det chokerede barn.
P. 64-67 in Forældre og barn nr. 2, 1996.

BN Jan Steiner Urdshals:
Kroppsorientert Psykoterapi: En sammenligning av karakteranalytisk vegetoterapi og kroppsdynamisk analyse, med henblik på teorier om utvikling, opprettholdelse og endring af psykopatologi.
Hovedopgave Embetsstudiet i Psykologi, Universitetet i Bergen, Vår 1991.

Tom Verpe:
Egopsykologi og kroppspsykologi. Et forsøg på teoretisk integrasjon.
Hovedopgave embedsstudiet, psykologi. Universitetet i Bergen.
Eget tryk. Bergen: 1995.

Part 5:

List of congresses attended to by the Bodynamic Institutes

1981-83: Lectures and seminars at Nordic Conferences for Humanistic Psychology and Education (LM,EJ)

1984: Lectures and seminars at the Nordic Conference for Humanistic Psychology and Education (MB,MHB)

Lectures and seminars at the 1st Conference for Third generation Reichians, Easalen Institute California, USA (LM,EJ,JI,AI)

1985: Lectures and seminars at the 2nd Conference for Third generation Reichians, Easalen Institute California, USA (LM,EJ,JI,AI,PB)

1986: Lectures and seminars at the 3rd Conference for Third generation Reichians, Easalen Institute California, USA (LM,EJ,JI,AI)

1987: Lectures and seminars at the 1.st EABP Congress in Davos (MB,SJ)

Seminars at the 3rd Conference of Pre and Perinatal Psychology,
San Fransisco USA (LM,EJ)

1989: Lectures and seminars at the 2nd EABP Congress in Seefeld (LM,MB,EJ,LO)

1991: Seminars at the 5th Conference of Pre and Perinatal Psychology,
in Atlanta USA (LM,EJ)

1992: Lectures and seminars, University of Warsaw, Department of Psychology and Institute for Psychotherapy, Warsaw, Poland (EJ,LM,MB)

1993: Lectures and seminars at the 3rd EABP Congress in Strassbourg (EO,SF,MHB,EJ)

Seminar at, The Conference of the Norwegian Association for Vegetotherapy, (Body psychotherapy days) Bergen, Norway (EJ)

3th.ESTSS – workshop presentation – Bergen, Norway (EJ)
1994: Lectures and seminars at the 14th and 15th Congres for Psychotherapy and Applied Psychology organized by the Foundation for Mental Health, Krasnoyarsk, Russia (EJ)

Seminar Leader of the Aldous Huxley Centennial Conference “Children – our ultimate investment”, Los Angeles USA (LM)

1995: 4th.ESTSS – seminar at European Conference for Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder, Paris, France (MHB,MB)

Seminar at the 7th conference of Pre and Perinatal Psychology,
in USA (LM, EJ)

Seminar at “The Living Body” Conference in San Franscisco USA (LM,EJ)

Lectures and seminars, University of Warsaw, Department of Psychology and Institute for Psychotherapy, Warsaw, Poland (MHB,DM)

1996: Lectures and seminars at the International Federation of Body Psychotherapy Conference (EJ,LM,), San Fr. California.

Lectures and seminars at the 1st. USABP (the United States  Association for Body Psychotherapy) & the 5th International conference, Boston, USA (LM,EJ, AI,JI,PB)

1997: Lectures and seminars at the 6th Congress of EABP – the European Association of Body Psychotherapy, Wienna, Austria,
(LO,LM, IM)

Seminar at the 5th ESTSS – European Conference for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Maastricht, Nederland (EJ, MHB)

Libanon, Interview of scandinavien, palestinian and jordanian soldiers concerning PTSD (DM)

Seminar on Conflictresolution, Bosnien (EJ)

1998: Lecture and seminar, American Academy of Psychotherapists Conference, Austin, Texas (LM)

Lectures and seminars at the 2nd USABP ,conference, Boulder, Colorado, (LM,AI,JI,PB,MP,TB)

1999: PTSD-delegation to South Africa (People to People) (EJ)

Seminars and Lectures at “The Living Body” conference – American Humanistic Psychology Association, in San Bernardino California (LM)

Lectures and seminars at the 7th Congress of EABP, Travemünde, Germany, (LM,EJ,LO)

Lecture at Dutch Psychology Association Conference, Amsterdam, Nederland (LM)

2000: Presentations at the 3rd Worldcongress on shock (ISTSS) in Melbourne (EJ)

Plans for the next year:

2001: Lectures and seminars on the 8th Congress of EABP, Egmond an Zee, Holland, (LM,EJ,LO.)

ESTSS Congres in Edinburgh may (DM,EJ)

Presentation at the EAP Congress in Moscow, june (MHB)

Names of trainers mentioned in the congress list:

Teresa Beldon (TB) United States
RMFTI, Certified Bodynamic Analyst, member of and trainer at Bodynamic USA

Peter Bernhardt (PB) United States
MFCC Certified Bodynamic Analyst, member of and trainer at Bodynamic USA

Marianne Bentzen (MB) Denmark
Co-founder and former senior trainer and member of Bodynamic Institute.

Merete Holm Brantbjerg (MHB) Denmark
Co-founder and senior trainer of Bodynamic Institute, member and director of Bodynamic International ApS.

Sonja Fich (SF) Denmark
Co-founder and former senior trainer and member of Bodynamic Institute, Now guest trainer of Bodynamic International ApS.

Anne Isaacs (AI) United States
MA, LCSW, Certified Bodynamic Analyst, member of and trainer at Bodynamic USA

Joel Isaacs (JI) United States
Ph.D. Certified Bodynamic Analyst, member of and trainer at Bodynamic USA

Erik Jarlnaes (EJ) Denmark
Co-founder and senior trainer of the Bodynamic Institute and the Bodynamic Analysis System. Also certified as Bioenergetic Analyst. Member of Bodynamic International ApS.

Steen Jörgensen (SJ) Denamrk
Co-founder and senior trainer. University educated psychologist. Also certified as Bioenergetic Analyst. Member of Bodynamic International ApS.

Ian MacNaughton (IM) Canada
Ph.D. Certified Bodynamic Analyst. Founder, member and trainer of Bodynamic Canada.

Ditte Marcher (DM) Denmark
Certified Bodynamic Analyst. Member of and Trainer at Bodynamic International ApS.

Lisbeth Marcher (LM) Denmark
Founder of Bodynamic Institute and the Bodynamic Analysis System. Member and educational director of Bodynamic International ApS.

Ellen Ollars (EO) Denmark
Co-founder and former senior trainer and member of Bodynamic Institute. Now guest trainer of Bodynamic International ApS.

Lennart Ollars (LO) Denmark
Co-founder and former senior trainer and member of Bodynamic Institute. University educated psychologist. Now guest trainer of Bodynamic International ApS.

Barbara Renshaw (BP) United States
MA,MFT,RN Certified Bodynamic Analyst, member of and trainer at Bodynamic USA

Marian Preston (MP) United States
MA,MFT Certified Bodynamic Analyst, member of and trainer at Bodynamic USA

Copyright © 2008 Bodynamic International ApS | Alle rettigheder reserveret / All rights reserved | Forbehold for trykfejl og ændringer