Therapeutic approaches
A group of activists and trainers in the U.K. is working on training
A&E (emergency room) personnel on ways to make what is often the
self-injurer's first contact with the medical system a productive
encounter. This effort is spearheaded by nurses, former
self-injurers, therapists, and others. Similar efforts in the US,
Canada, and Australia would be worthwhile.
Overall considerations
In order to help those who self-injure, therapists must understand
what role this powerful coping mechanism plays in their clients'
lives. Is it primarily a means of releasing tension? Grounding?
Communicating? Reliving painful experiences? Understanding why a
particular person self-injures is key to helping that person stop
using self-harm as a primary coping mechanism. "[H]aving [immediate
cessation of self-injurious behavior] as a primary goal may well be
counter-productive," warn Solomon and Farrand (1996); "techniques
based on the premise that self-injury should not be reinforced by
attention, or on the use of sanctions such as withdrawal of treatment,
will almost certainly cause greater distress."
Therapists need to examine their own motives for wanting a client to
cease or stabilize his/her self-injurious behavior. Too often, care
providers focus on stopping the SI as quickly as possible because they
themselves are not comfortable with it -- it repulses them, makes them
feel ineffective, frightens them, etc. Situations like this can easily
deteriorate into a power struggle in which the therapist insists that
the behavior stop and the client chooses to self-injure covertly and
becomes reticent and distrustful, thus reducing the chance that a
useful therapeutic alliance will be formed.
On the other hand, it is legitimate for therapists to help clients
devise some sort of plan for dealing with self-injurious impulses and
getting their lives (including SIV) stabilized. When a client is
engaging in uncontrolled self-injury, the SI and its concomitant
crises take center stage in therapy, leaving no room for dealing with
core issues. In order to have a minimum of stability in treatment,
therapists must walk a fine line between attempting to repress/control
all self-injurious behavior and allowing the SIV to dominate the
therapy.
An ideal approach would be one in which SIV is tolerated but has
specific consequences. For example, a client might be invited to
contact the therapist when an urge to self-harm occurs, but restricted
from contact for 24 hours after an actual self-injurious act. In a
system like this, the self-injurer has a chance to articulate what she
is trying to communicate through her body without having to resort to
self-injury, and she knows that carrying through an act of SIV will
have tangible and immediate (but not permanent) negative effects. This
kind of agreement between therapist and client can help stabilize the
SIV and clear the road for dealing with the issues underlying the need
to injure, allowing the therapist to follow Kehrberg's advice to treat
self-harm within the context of underlying pathology.
Therapists should ensure that self-injuring clients have access to
non-judgmental, compassionate medical care for wounds they inflict on
themselves (Dallam, 1997), care that does not rob them of their
dignity or autonomy. Together, client and therapist can devise a plan
for getting physical wounds treated without adding additional stress
to the situation. This may involve educating physicians at local
emergency rooms about the nature of SIV.
Since successful treatment of SIV depends heavily on teaching the
client new ways of coping with stressors so that underlying painful
material can be dealt with, hospitalization should be used only as a
last resort when the client is at risk for suicide or severe
self-injury (Dallam, 1997). Hospitals are artificially safe
environments, and the necessary tasks of learning to identify the
feelings behind the act and of choosing a less-destructive method of
coping need to be practiced and reinforced in the real world.
Favazza (1998) advocates the use of high-dose SSRIs and mood
stabilizers to get self-injury under control quickly, then suggests
that care be managed under a team concept, with an overseeing
psychiatrist who manages meds and coordinates care, a psychotherapist,
and a group therapist. He also recommends that hospitalizations be
kept brief.
Several SI units have been started in U.K. hospitals, however, where
self-injury is tolerated and clients are encouraged to examine their
behavior after an incident. The staff accept some SI as inevitable and
try to use these occasions as ways to teach about coping without SI.
In cases like these, longer hospitalization may have more value.
Approaches taken by those who see self-injury as associated with BPD
Dialectical Behavioral Therapy
* [3]Interpersonal Group Therapy
Approaches taken by those who see self-injury as non-BPD-related
The CPTSD approach
Healing from TRS
Rational-Emotive Therapy
Psychopharmacological approaches
[8]Individual psychotherapy and how to choose a good therapist
[9]Where to go for professional help
Hypnosis and relaxation
Hypnotic relaxation techniques have apparently been used, with some
success, as an adjunct to therapy. Malon and Berardi (1987) state that
treating those who self-injure requires that the therapist realize the
conflicting needs of the therapist to be in charge of the relationship
and of the patient to be treated like an equal; if the patient's need
for being seen as an equal isn't met, no progress can be made with or
without hypnosis.
The study in question reports success with three types of hypnosis:
- Breath counting: the patient is led into a trance and instructed
to notice her breathing, counting each deep slow breath.
- Positive imagery: the patient is put into a trance state and
instructed to visualize herself in a calm, pleasant, relaxing
place doing something she enjoys. This image is held for a while.
- Affect bridge: after trance is achieved, the patient is asked to
use the current unpleasant feelings to remember other times in his
life when he's felt this way. Memories that are too distressing to
talk about in a normal state are sometimes speakable in a trance
state.
It's important to note that in all of these techniques, the therapist
must remain seated close to the patient, offering encouraging words
and/or touches when appropriate. Malon and Berardi go so far as to say
that "simple hypnotic techniques...offered the most immediate relief
when delivered with a strong communicative focus and close
here-and-now contact."
Hospital-based treatment
SAFE Alternatives (1-800-DONTCUT) is an inpatient program specifically
for self-injurers located at MacNeal Hospital in a Chicago suburb
(this program was formerly located at Rock Creek Hospital and at
Hartgrove Hospital). The program combines milieu therapy,
cognitive-behavioral therapies, and group and individual exercises to
help patients gain an awareness of why they hurt themselves and how to
stop. They claim to be the only inpatient unit for self-injurers in
the U.S., though Rock Creek continues to have a program specifically
for SI, as do a few other hospitals. Although their zero-tolerance
policy toward SI is controversial, they claim to have lost very few
clients because of it. There is no empirical evidence of the success
of their approach, and I personally am uncomfortable with their overly
aggressive marketing style. The hospital is quite expensive, and if
you haven't insurance, you probably can't afford it.
The Sanctuary at Friends' Hospital in Philadelphia is an inpatient
unit for trauma survivors that is aware of the special needs of
self-injurers and takes them into account in its treatment program.
Butler Hospital in Rhode Island offers a partial hospitalization
program that uses dialectical behavioral therapy to treat a diverse
patient population of self-injurers. In a recent assessment of their
program, they conclude, "Two years of operation of the women's partial
program provides promising anecdotal evidence that DBT, which is an
outpatient approach, can be effectively modified for hospital
settings. . . . Our experience with more than 500 women certainly
suggests that such treatment may be a feasible alternative to
inpatient hospitalization" (Simpson, et al. 1998). Butler can be
contacted at (401) 455-6200.
The Rock Creek center still offers an inpatient self-injury management
program and can be reached at 1-800-669-2426.
Treatment efficacy
In a 1998 review, Hawton et al. evaluated the effectiveness of ten
different approaches to treating self-harm: problem-solving therapy, a
special emergency room card getting the patient faster treatment in
the ER, intensive education and outreach, and dialectical behavior
therapy were compared to standard aftercare; inpatient behavior
therapy was compared to inpatient insight-oriented therapy; admission
to the hospital was compared to discharge after the ER visit;
flupenthixol (fluanxol, an anti-psychotic drug not available in the US
with severe potential side-effects) and antidepressants were each
compared to placebo; followup by the initial treating therapist was
contrasted to followup by a different therapist; and long-term therapy
was compared with short-term therapy.
They found no significant difference in % of repeaters who were in the
long-term vs short-term therapy trials, the antidepressant vs placebo
trials (which used mianserin, a drug that increases serotonin in the
brain, and nomifensine, a dopaminergic drug that has serious side
effects and is no longer available), the intensive
intervention/outreach vs standard aftercare trials, the emergency card
trials, and the hospital admission vs discharge trials and the
(possibly too small to yield a significant effect) inpatient behavior
vs insight-oriented therapy studies.
The problem solving studies showed a distinct reduction in SI among
those who got problem-solving therapy, but the results of combined
studies did not reach statistical significance. The flupenthixol study
showed significant reduction in repeat self-harm, but it was a very
small study and there is some concern that the possible side effects
of fluanxol outweighed any benefit.
The two trials showing a significant decrease in repeat self-harm
among the experimental group were the DBT studies (the DBT group has
fewer repeaters) and the same vs different therapist doing followup
(the % of repeaters was higher in the group that saw the same
therapist).
|
|