Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR) was first
presented 36 years ago by Jon Kabat Zinn in the Pain Clinic of the University
of Massachusetts’ Medical Center. Since
then, tens of thousands of patients have benefited from mindfulness training by
taking classes that adhere to, and classes that are similar to, the MBSR
program. Today, variants of the program
have sprung up at leading medical centers worldwide. This has led many to wonder how should mindfulness
be best taught as a medical intervention, and by whom?
Zinn has been adamant that only a program that exactly
follows the one outlined in his book Full Catastrophe Living can truly be
called MBSR. At a teacher training with
Zinn and Saki Santorelli, Director of the Center for Mindfulness, it was
expressed that a move is being made to certify MBSR teachers, and that only
teachers that train at the Oasis Institute of the Center for Mindfulness will
be able to earn this certification.
Several teachers at the retreat spoke of adjustments they have made to
the eight-week program that Zinn developed, and others spoke of very different
methods of teaching mindfulness-based therapies. Zinn’s reply was “that’s fine, just don’t
call it MBSR.”
On the one hand, it seems as if the Center for Mindfulness
is tightening its grip on its franchise and erecting barriers to entry for new
entrants with new ideas concerning mindfulness instruction. This is classic economic stasis. As any enterprise grows and becomes
successful it can seek to bar or hassle new competitors by lobbying for
certification, regulation, and control.
The Center for Mindfulness, as it seeks to firmly establish what is and
is not MBSR, can tweak its 36 year old program. But no one else can and expect
the respect of the Center.
On the other hand, the MBSR program, and its results, have
been heavily researched and peer-reviewed.
It would be clinically invalid for any program that deviates
significantly from the MBSR program to claim the same, or even the same
potential, results attributed to MBSR without being subject to the same rigors
of research. And yet this is
happening. A lot.
Also, there exists the potential that insurance companies
may begin to cover mindfulness-based therapies such as MBSR. They are effective and inexpensive when
compared to other therapies for stress-related illness. However, if an insurance company is going to
write a teacher a check, it is going to want to know that that person is
qualified. Licensing and certification
are common devices used to establish expertise and qualifications.
Many types of meditation, from TM to Metta, have their own
body of research. Some produce results
similar to those found through MBSR, others do not. So it makes sense that the proponents of MBSR
want to develop and monitor the program that bears the title. But having a small group in charge that is resistant to ideas and training beyond its direct control can stifle development of the pedagogy and practice of MBSR. A successful move toward certification seems
certain. One can only hope that a more
open, dynamic certification board and a more creative and less tradition bound
education system than the one currently proposed prevails.
No comments:
Post a Comment