ECOTHERAPY expanded
To recover a sense of unity with all life is to also recover from the trauma of having been so utterly divorced from it. - Andy Fisher
Ecotherapy
differs from conventional psychotherapy in two fundamental ways. First,
it frames common problems that develop in everyday life as a reflection
not only of our social milieu – family, community, culture – but also of
our ecological milieu. How one relates with nature greatly influences the
mental well-being of individuals, families, and society at large. Second,
ecopsychology and ecotherapy hold that the process of healing and enhancing
well-being should address all members of the social-ecological “family,”
including the earth with its plants and animals.
This model of healing has been adopted in the Care
Farm movement as a means to address a wide range of developmental and
mental health concerns as well as revitalize rural areas. Care Farming has
taken root in several European countries as well as the United Kingdom,
but the concept is relatively new in the U.S.(Bartholomew & Horowitz,
1991). The concept is fully backed by national governments (outside the
U.S.) as a growing body of evidence suggests that the Care Farm experience
is a vital and effective adjunct to conventional psychotherapy.
Ecotherapy addresses simultaneously the separation from others (humans)
and the separation from the Other (the natural world) that stem from dysfunctional
“attachment styles” (see Theoretical Roots, below). Just as individuals
may lament the absence of a parent they have never known, so too a missing
connection with the natural world may bring grief, loss, and even trauma.
The task of ecotherapy is to fill this “hole in the soul” with acts of healing
in a place of safety and security. In this setting, individuals learn about
and work with the earth, plants, and animals that make up their local ecosystems.
Although education about earth-as-ecosystem is a crucial aspect of Care
Farms and ecotherapy, the mindful, focused, experience of working on one’s
relationship with the earth is more relevant to the healing process. In
this manner, ecotherapeutic work explores one's ethcial stance toward the
natural world in a way that accommodates diverse points of view.
Theoretical Roots
Several
extant psychological theories that address attachment and trauma suggest
why ecotherapy set in the context of a Care Farm can be effective in resolving
mental health problems. From the ecopsychological perspective, grief and
loss are often the legacy of our modern “separation” from nature (Fisher,
2002). For others, psychic numbness and dissociation regarding the natural
world is the condition of life in a technologically-advanced, industrial
society. In its quest to explain these disturbances in modern mental life,
ecopsychology invokes attachment theory, an established psychodynamic model
of human emotional bonding and behavior. From this perspective, human development
– from childhood through adolescence to adulthood – is portrayed as a process
leading to adult “attachments”, the quality of which depends on the nature
of childhood attachments with primary caregivers.
According to this theory, our childhood attachment experiences predispose
us to a particular adult attachment “style” toward others. For example,
one’s relationships may be characterized largely as secure, anxious, dismissive,
fearful, or some combination thereof (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991).
For some, traumatic events in childhood or adulthood can shape attachment
styles, leading to dysfunctional patterns of fearful and avoidant behaviors.
In ecopsychology terms, even children whose family provides a relatively
secure attachment experience may lack a “culture of wildness”, a context
where secure attachments to the natural world are established (Fisher, 2002).
With such an ecologically-impoverished upbringing, nature-deficit disorder
may be the logical outcome (Louv, 2006). A life-long nature-deficit may
leave adults feeling like “strangers in a strange land” should they venture
into the wild – or even down to the farm.
Finally, the practice of ecotherapy is also informed by trans-species
psychology. This evolving field provides a new context—indeed,
a new paradigm—for thinking about the differences we perceive between
ourselves and other inhabitants of the natural world. Trans-species psychology
also informs practitioners of ecotherapy of the responsbility we hold toward
animals and the land who accompany us on the healing journey.
References
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.
Fisher, A. (2002). Radical ecopsychology. Psychology in the service of life. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Hassink, J. &, van Dijk, M. (Eds.). (2006). Farming for health: Green-care farming across Europe and the United States of America. Proceedings of the Frontis Workshop on Farming for Health, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 16-19 March, 2005. New York: Springer.
Louv, R. (2006). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.
CALL NOW at (541) 326-0848 or email to info@commensa.org