When I work, I use both verbal and non-verbal interventions. I analyze, I make contracts, I integrate cognitive, behavioral, somatic and social elements, I touch (in ways that can be supportive, neutral and/or evoking), I work from ethical guidelines, I teach and I confront, I use developmental theory and character structure theory, I use transference and countertransference concepts, and much more. My intention is to help clients with issues that prevent them from functioning in the world, help them to overcome obstacles and to develop new resources.

In terms of understanding the scientific validation of The Bodynamic System, we alternate between calling it The Bodynamic System (Analysis), The Bodynamic Analysis, Bodynamic Analysis and The Bodynamic System. It is the same, but occurs owing to a recent name change from Analysis to System, which signals that our System includes so many models and concepts, and that we traverse (go across) officially recognized boundaries between different professional disciplines.

I believe that we need to move towards a common ground of body psychotherapy, and also that we need to enter into a more professional dialogue with the world of established and academic psychologists. These are no easy challenges. I will address some of the difficulties I see as connected to these processes including what I perceive as our fears and resistances. And I will suggest a few steps in both (interconnected) directions: what is the common ground of body psychotherapy and how can we establish a dialogue with the world of academic psychologists?

What does it actually mean to care for oneself? Some of the first words that come to mind are personal integrity, to feel oneself and to listen to oneself.  One of the great gestalt therapists was once asked: Who was more important the client or the therapist? The answer was the therapist. It is a provocative way of seeing it, but the point is true. If the therapist does not see him/herself as the most important, it is not possible to help the client fully. 

What is it that lets a work group function optimally? What promotes the completion of the task, an atmosphere conducive to cooperation, the solution of conflicts and the further development of the group and of its individual members?  Many models have been constructed at various times to answer these questions. BODYnamic's answer is a model consisting of eight necessary functions to be maintained by a leader (leader functions) or as a group (group functions). Hence the name: F8. Associations to the F16 fighter bomber are not out of place here: A "crash landing" cannot always be avoided, but the F8 model generally "keeps you flying" when used consistently.