Continuing the Dialogue between Psychoanalysis and Somatic Experiencing: Reply to Bass,Leddick, Levine,Blakeslee, Sylvae,and Lombardi

I had expected that bringing together psychoanalysis and Somatic Experiencing (SE) might be controversial. That expectation was certainly not disappointed. Although Bass resonated with much of my thinking, he also challenged the whole idea of integrating these two forms of treatment. Leddick provided extensive critique, though more about how I drew upon SE, not so much the fact that I did. While Lombardi appreciated aspects of my work with the patient, he utterly rejected the whole notion of drawing upon SE, viewing it as mechanistic, simplistic, narrowly behavioral, and merely about modulation. To address these critiques, I revisit here the clinical process with Sue, highlighting how SE is about so much more than just modulation. SE can deepen our forms of analytic holding and can help patients (re)connect with their bodies in ways that are emotionally alive, intimate, and healing. In revisiting the clinical process, I draw upon Levine, Blakeslee, and Sylvae’s in-depth discussion of SE: its goals, principles, and techniques. Though I agree with Bass’s and Lombardi’s concerns about “integration” of psychoanalysis and SE, I do not propose integration of the two, but rather interweaving of one into the other. In essence, I seek here to continue to illustrate how SE can interweave into our work, enriching our psychoanalytic ways of looking, listening, and responding.