psychodrama theory

[Adam Blatner]

Dear Jenny, your comments intrigued me in a few ways: Much of what you say I guess I agree 
with. But, then you say,
  While I appreciate the wholistic vision of psychodrama I also suggest that unless some 
of the specifics are attended to within psychodrama theory then the here-and-now reality 
of psychodrama surviving as a therapy are under serious threat.

     AB: Please, which specifics need to be attended to within psychodrama theory? I like 
to think about such things and appreciate a fresh perspective!

    You then go on to speak about the other school--- i.e., the rise in CBT. Why that is 
so is obvious to me: The method is capable of being "manualized," described in a manual, 
and applicable pretty much according to the manual for almost all patients. This makes it 
possible to do research.
     Second, the method is used like a course of antibiotics, for a limited time. Again, 
that facilitates research.
     Third, it's effective, and that's because a large percentage of people with any kinds 
of problem also have confused patterns of thinking about their problems; cleaning up those 
confusions to some degree is what CBT is good at. Most people will be helped.
               (The problem that's avoided is any clear diagnosis of the actual situation, 
the uniqueness of the client's problem, which might then require a wide range of 
interventions: Further diagnosis. family therapy, conjoint couple therapy; work 
integrating the service of other professionals; even such obvious matters as nutrition. 
Many of the elements of psychodrama---and I see them as various elements rather than as a 
single package---also offer many benefits.)
This speaks to your saying: CBT's own research tells us we need other options for clients 
for whom CBT is not useful.

  AB:     Jenny, you then comment on the political-professional situation, which 
transcends theory and speaks instead to the materialistic, evidence-based, scientistic 
domination of medical and psychotherapeutic practice by cost-conscious administrators:

 In New Zealand it is difficult to find other therapy options within publicly funded 
services (e.g., Health System or Corrections/Justice ) that are not CBT based. For all its 
limitations CBT practitioners have  been able to reverse roles with funders and providers, 
opening doors for themselves and in the process shutting doors for other practitioners. 
While we may hope for (and work towards)a paradigm shift where many different options are 
valued and a vision of societal change, in the meantime we work within the system we have. 
A system that requires clear definitions, explanations, specific goals and research 
evidence of effectiveness.
>
> My own biases are clear I guess. I can enter and appreciate mystery and the unknown (my 
> "right brain" moves me to tears again and again in the
> mystical experience of psychodrama ) but I crave clarity, academic rigour and delight in 
> the creativity of an elegant theory!
                 AB: Please use this last sentence to frame the questions. I thought I 
presented "the creativity of an elegant theory" in my Foundations of Psychodrama, but 
perhaps that wasn't clear enough. Work with me here until (a) I can satisfy you; or (b) I 
cannot satisfy you, even though I've tried; but at least perhaps we can identify very 
clearly in what way I wasn't able to satisfy your desire for theory.

    Warmly, Adam