Posted by pseudoname on July 29, 2006, at 9:24:11
In reply to Re: ACT » pseudoname, posted by mayzee on July 28, 2006, at 21:37:24
> I didn't want to hijack the ECT thread so I posted my reply on the Psychology board
Good move! ;-D
> a friend from my meditation class (who is a psychologist) told me about it.
So many neat things in one little sentence: friendship, mindfulness, sharing interests, learning…. Maybe your friend could go to one of Steve Hayes' many many ACT seminars all over the place? I'd like to sneak into one.
> I see that what I hoped would be there --i.e., how to find/develop commitment if you don't already have it-- is not part of ACT.
Well, I sure didn't see it there, but it might be something obvious that I was just overlooking. (I don't think so, though.)
> just what I *don't* need, any more guilt for "not committing" to something
Yeah. Actually, Steve Hayes himself monitors and responds to the ACT discussion group on Yahoo. I don't remember any commitment questions there, so it might be a good place for you to bring that up. ("How do you get commitment?") I'd be very interested in Hayes' answer.
ACT forum: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ACT_for_the_Public/
> I certainly can look back and see how I have made commitments in the past.
Hayes uses that "looking back" technique to find a person's Values, too. Values & Commitment seem a bit confused in Hayes' work, although I'm sure he sees a clear distinction. I'm with you, though: a lot of things I seem to have valued in my life weren't all that healthy.
> Sorry also to hear that you don't think much of the Values piece.
I think his basic ideas about Values are good. Everybody has her own Values; and they can't be imposed by anyone else; and you sort of discover them within yourself; and you can't figure out by reasoning what they should be. And your personal Values are the guide to what you should (really should) "go for" in life. I think that's a pretty "validating" and "empowering" attitude, and it's also a little neglected in other therapy.
But, yeah, in the ACT books there does seem to be a bit of a narrow, prejudiced expectation about what Values most clients will have ("Family", "Citizenship", etc). So I guess that component might just need a little tweaking to suit me.
> Who knows, maybe the ACT values stuff might be useful for me; I'll take a look.
Absolutely! I would expect you will get quite a bit out of it.
> ... trying to stop struggling against what is already there; accepting it, whatever it is, because it is already there.
My very words!! It's not automatic for me, by any means. And I seem to have to re-learn it all over again, going through the whole process, for every set of uncomfortable feelings I gradually become aware of. I haven't been systematic about it for quite a while (haven't been meditating or doing the exercises or anything). Maybe I should.
> Would you recommend "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life" as the best place to start?
Yeah. Hayes had a pop-lit co-author for it and a lot of it seems easier to follow to me. My objection to "Get Out" is that it spends too much time on his theory of language (Relational Frame Theory, RFT), which is IMO dubious but more importantly completely unnecessary to doing ACT therapy. So if those parts bog you down, I'd say just kinda skip 'em.
There's also an introduction on the ACT web site: http://www.contextualpsychology.org/about_act
But with your mindfulness background, you've already got an important portion of it. Getting that mindful perspective is a bit of a steep learning curve. Like Hayes says, "It's hard. Not difficult hard, just tricky hard."
Thanks for your great comments, Mayzee. Thanks for moving the thread, too. (I felt guilty posting that on the meds board, LOL.) If you get into ACT, please post your impressions or how it's going. Good luck!
poster:pseudoname
thread:671597
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20060721/msgs/671720.html