My previous post on the “Language We Use” garnered a number of replies on other sites, though not as much as I had hoped. I feel like I may have hit a raw nerve in many.
I believe that I, like many of you, get so caught up in the enthusiasm of learning a new modality that we forget to touch base with reality. It is not my point to trash anyone’s beliefs or manner of explanation. I simply ask whether you have ever stepped back and analyzed the language that you use to explain your work.
A number of years back I took a trashing on SomaSimple.com for my defense of the language I spoke. Based on the number of hits that thread received, some of you may have read it. My defense of Myofascial Release was quite weak, as I was only repeating the words I was taught. Certainly not the best way to defend a subject. This experience was a turning point for me, in many ways. My language has changed since that time, and so has my treatment.
Has your language changed?
I’m a week late on reporting, but another loss by the Bills… It seems like that may be a pattern.
Over the years as I slowly developed the techniques I now teach, I knew that I could not convey the physiological response until I could explain what I call ‘the science behind thermal therapy’. I was not simply going to say… ‘this feels good, this is how you do it’. I had to be able to convey to student massage therapists (including MD’s, DO’s, DC’s PT’s and RN’s) the critical WHY it works. This becomes the basis of how to be more effective. I also include the client in my explanation to further educate them. This generally is followed by increased compliance in follow-up Self Care between visits and helps them understand the value of maintenance therapy (self or therapist). It is delightful to hear my explanation being passed on (by clients and students alike) once the understanding has been achieved! Yes, I occasionally coin a word, or create a description to help lock it in their memory (humor helps here), but the basis of actions and therapy always ring true when an explanation is added. Thanks for making me think about this! Karen
Karen,
Using accepted science to explain what you do and teach is fine. What I take issue with is pulling together abstract bits of new age science to create “explanations” for a method. Calling this a scientific rationale is bunk. Unfortunately this is rampant in our fields.
Hi Walt! So good to see you taking off like this! It has been a long time. I continue to practice MFR and am so, so grateful for the education we received. I say we because in many classes we were right there together, discovering ourselves and each other. What a great time it was. We had some fun. To answer your question, my language has changed over the years as I have learned more and more about the body from study and the practice of MFR nearly every day of my life for 14 years now. It seems completely like a natural progression to me. First we mimic the ones we want to be like, then we grow into our own flower and offer the world what WE have to offer. What a beautiful trip it has been. Many blessings to you and your success.
Doreen,
So nice to hear from you and of your success.
Our language should be one of both our background and the present day. Not static, but ever changing as new information comes to light.
Best Wishes,
Walt