In December 2020, The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine published an article entitled, “Optimal Terminology for Services in the United States That Incorporate Horses to Benefit People: A Consensus Document.”
We at the Natural Lifemanship Institute very much appreciate the authors’ timely work and its importance to our field, to your businesses, and most importantly to the clients you serve. They attempt to address a significant need in the field through a process of inquiry and consensus.
Seriously y’all this is a big deal – leaders (and competitors) in our field came together in a TWO YEAR process of discussion, exploration, research, and collaboration, because, like you, they care about our field, our businesses, and our clients.
We were glad to see that this article has been circulating on social media a bit, but we also realize that it’s an academic article and it’s long! Since we think it’s super important that you read this article and discuss it with us, I wrote up this lovely summary for you! I kinda geek out on these kinds of things, so it was truly a pleasure. 🙂
The purpose of this blog is to provide a concise summary of the article and its recommendations with the hopes of promoting ongoing dialogue amongst our members and others who partner with horses to help people. We want to hear from you! Please join us on Facebook and tell us what you think!
As stakeholders ourselves we have been engaging in lots of internal dialogue about the recommendations and will be publishing an official response in the coming weeks. Our discussions with you will inform our decisions.
Wood, W., Alm, K., Benjamin, J., Thomas, L., Anderson, D., Pohl, L., & Kane, M. (2021). Optimal terminology for services in the United States that incorporate horses to benefit people: a consensus document. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 27(1), 88-95.
Optimal Terminology for Services in the United States that Incorporate Horses to Benefit People: A Consensus Document (Wood et al., 2021)
The Consensus Process in a Nutshell
A working group of representatives from national organizations in the field of equine-assisted services participated in a 2-year process for the purpose of recommending terminology to be used and to be discontinued in the field.
The grant-funded project was motivated by the recognition that unclear and imprecise use of terminology in the rapidly expanding and diverse field of services incorporating horses to help humans is problematic and potentially damaging. Ambiguous terminology creates confusion and inadequate protection for consumers, obstacles to reimbursement and research, and misinformed policies and practices.
The six-step collaborative process started with an exhaustive search of sites, databases, and literature to identify the most commonly used terms in the field. The authors listed 12 distinct types of equine-assisted services represented under 3 broad categories of therapy, learning, and horsemanship. Next, they developed and disseminated a survey asking stakeholders in the field to rate the relative usefulness of each term. A 2 ½ day professionally facilitated summit was then convened, bringing in additional stakeholders, to discuss the results and to produce a draft of recommendations. The draft underwent review and revision by summit members as well as additional stakeholders to produce the final recommendations that are shared in the article.
The categories themselves, a description of the types of services within each category, and the expertise and credentials required of service providers are summarized in the Nuts & Bolts section below.
The Authors’ Recommendations in a Nutshell
Equine-assisted Services is the optimal unifying termwhen referring to two or more services. It is too imprecise to be used to describe one program or distinct type of service.
Therapy services (5 distinct types include: counseling, occupational therapy, physical therapy, psychotherapy, and speech-language pathology) should use therapy-first language (e.g., physical therapy using equine movement, psychotherapy incorporating horses, occupational therapy in equine environments). Reasons for emphasizing therapy-first language are outlined in the Nuts & Bolts section below.
Equine-assisted learning (3 types of non-therapy services): Equine-assisted learning in education, equine assisted learning in organizations, and equine-assisted learning in personal development.
Horsemanship (4 types of non-therapy services): Adaptive equestrian sport, adaptive riding or therapeutic riding, driving, and interactive vaulting.
Discontinue the use of problematic terminology, including: equine therapy, equine-assisted activities and therapies, equine-assisted therapy, equestrian therapy, hippotherapist, hippotherapy clinic or program, horse therapy, horseback riding therapy, and therapy riding.
NUTS & BOLTS of the Article
WHAT
The article describes the structure and outcomes of a two-year consensus-building process. The purpose of this process was to create a set of recommendations for terminology used when referring to services (within the U.S.) that incorporate equines to benefit people. Recommendations included both the adoption of optimal terminology and the discontinuation of terminology the working group found to be problematic.
WHO
The process was undertaken by a working group (the authors, listed below) comprised of representatives of several relevant national organizations:
Wendy Wood, PhD, Departments of Animal Sciences and Occupational Therapy , Temple Grandin Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Kathy Alm, BA, Professional Association of Therapeutic Horsemanship International (PATH, Intl.), Denver, CO, USA
Joann Benjamin, PT, American Hippotherapy Association, Inc., (AHA, Inc.), Denver, CO, USA
Lynn Thomas, LCSW, Equine Assisted Growth and Learning Association (EAGALA), Spanish Fork, UT, USA
Debbie Anderson, AS, Strides to Success, Plainfield, IN, USA
Michele Kane, MA, Major, USMC (Ret.), My Heroes, LLC, Fort Collins, CO, USA
WHY
In the past 30 years, human services incorporating horses have greatly expanded and diversified. As a result, terminology for naming and describing these services has become increasingly unclear and imprecise. The current state of imprecise terminology in our field generates serious problems for stakeholders (including consumers, service providers, funders, researchers, advocates, and regulatory agents). When terminology is vague or misleading, it contributes to confusion, inadequate consumer protection, obstacles to reimbursement, barriers to research, and misinformed policies and practices, among other adverse effects.
HOW
The consensus-building process was initiated in 2018 and spanned two years. The process consisted of 6 steps:
PATH obtained funding from the Bob Woodruff Foundation to support the consensus building process, and convened a working group of five leaders (authors Wood, Alm, Benjamin, Thomas, and Kane)
The working group designed and disseminated a survey that asked stakeholders to rate the relative usefulness of the most commonly used terms. The first round of consensus occurred at this step, and consisted of the following sub steps:
Before developing the survey, the team had to identify and agree on the most commonly used terms in the field. To do this, they conducted an extensive and systematic search of websites, databases and literature, including books and peer-reviewed journal articles. They used over 45 search criteria related to equine- and animal-assisted services and interventions. Nine databases were searched, returning 158 books and peer-reviewed journal articles. This literature was then examined to identify the terms that were used. The terms were entered into an Excel database for the purpose of comparing and contrasting their frequencies of use. The team divided the work and ultimately reached consensus on the most commonly used terms.
Once a list of commonly used terms had been compiled, the working group collaborated with experts in survey research to design, develop and approve the final survey.
The survey was distributed through:
AHA, Inc.
E3A
EAGALA
Equus Foundation
PATH Intl.
Directly to ~500 recipients of services, parents, or caregivers
A total of ~16,156 surveys were distributed with a return of 1,745 (or 10.8%) useable surveys, which made up the dataset.
Survey design, research questions, analysis, and key findings are not included in the article but may be obtained.
A professionally facilitated 2 ½ day terminology summit was held. The attendees (called the summit group) included the members of the working group plus 10 individuals chosen for their extensive experiences and perspectives, representing: AHA, Inc., Bob Woodruff Foundation, Certification Board for Equine Interaction Professionals (CBEIP), EAGALA, E3A, PATH, Intnl, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The summit group produced an initial framework of recommendations.
The working group developed a first draft of recommendations. Summit attendees approved the draft as suitable for further review by leaders and board members of the represented organizations.
The working group considered all received reviews and finalized their terminology recommendations.
The working group submitted final recommendations to other summit attendees for approval or disapproval, as well as to the Boards of Directors of eight relevant national organizations, who were asked to approve or disapprove the recommendations that were relevant to them. These organizations included:
AHA, Inc.
American Horse Council (AHC)
Certified Horsemanship Association (CHA)
CBEIP
EAGALA
E3A
Horses and Humans Research Foundation (HHRF)
PATH, Intl.
RESULTS
As a result of the 6-step consensus-building process, outlined above, the working group identified and organized 12 types of distinct types of services (see below) and produced the recommendations that follow.
12 distinct types of equine-assisted services were identified under 3 broad categories:
Equine-assisted Services
THERAPY
LEARNING
HORSEMANSHIP
· Counseling
· Occupational therapy
· Physical therapy
· Psychotherapy
· Speech-language pathology
· Equine-assisted learning in education
· Equine-assisted learning in organizations
· Equine-assisted learning in personal development
Refers to multiple services in which professionals incorporate horses/equines to benefit people. Each distinct service constitutes a type of EAS; but the inclusive term, EAS, alone does not suffice as a description for a particular service when it is marketed to consumers.
Therapy
Licensed therapy professionals may incorporate horses in each of the five distinct therapies listed in the table above.
These professionals work within the scope of their practice and particular discipline.
Best practice dictates that they obtain specialized training focused on incorporating interactions with horses, equine movement, or the equine environment into the individualized plans of care of those receiving therapy.
These professionals incorporate horses within treatments or interventions to help address individualized goals, and improve overall function, health, and wellness.
They may or may not work with equine professionals or other assistants for risk management and other purposes.
Therapy-first language is recommended to refer to any one of the types of therapies identified. The terminology must precisely identify the exact therapy (e.g., physical therapy, psychotherapy). Equine related descriptors can then be added. Examples:
Physical therapy using equine movement
Psychotherapy incorporating horses
Occupational therapy in an equine environment
Rationale for using therapy-first language:
Emphasizes licensed therapy professionals who determine how best to implement particular therapies while also acknowledging the potential of the horse to enhance therapeutic outcomes.
After completing discipline-specific evaluations, the therapists develop treatment plans for achieving goals and specify tools, strategies or interventions, which may include how best to incorporate the horse.
Therapy-first language reflects the fact that licensed therapy professionals have many options available to them, the incorporation of the horse being one of them.
Non-specific terms are problematic (see #5 below)
Learning
Specially trained or certified professionals may incorporate horses in 3 distinct types of nontherapy services:
Equine-assisted learning in education
Focuses on academic skills, character development, and life skills such as problem-solving and critical thinking.
Professionals providing services have expertise related to learning theory and teaching methodology.
Work is with schools and school systems to help integrate educational strategies that support individual education plans and academic remediation.
Equine-assisted learning in organizations
Assists members of organizations build effective teams and leadership, and improve work dynamics and performance.
Professionals providing services have expertise related to organizational theory, team building, strategic planning, or leadership development.
Various approaches or strategies, such as executive coaching, team-building, or group retreats, may be integrated to address the needs of clients.
Equine-assisted learning in personal development
Assists individuals and groups in discovering new ways to face life challenges and opportunities by developing skills in effective problem-solving, decision-making, critical and creative thinking, and communication.
Professionals providing services have expertise in facilitation, coaching, and teaching. They clearly understand how their services differ from psychotherapy and counseling.
Various approaches or strategies, including personal coaching, and wellness-related activities, may be integrated to address the needs of clients.
Horsemanship
Equine professionals may offer four distinct non-therapy services that are adapted from traditional equine disciplines of horseback riding, driving, and vaulting, to serve clients with diverse needs.
Equine professionals providing these services have specialized training or certifications to provide these services to individuals and groups with diverse needs. They require competencies in adapting equipment, the equine environment, and teaching techniques to match the abilities and needs of participants. They develop lesson plans that may involve riding, driving, vaulting, or ground-based activities to help participants attain individualized horsemanship skills and allow for the naturally healthful benefits of riding and other horsemanship activities to occur.
The four distinct non-therapy services include:
Adaptive equestrian sport
Prepares people with diverse needs to participate in events and competitions in equine disciplines such as driving, dressage, reining, and Western or English riding.
Trainers have expertise related to their specific equine disciplines, competition requirements, possible adaptations for athletes with diverse needs, and representative organizations.
Benefits of participation may include motivation and opportunities to excel as competitive athletes, physical fitness, self-confidence, and social inclusion.
Adaptive riding or therapeutic riding
Focuses on skillfully adapting riding to make the naturally healthful benefits of riding and horses accessible to individuals and groups with diverse needs.
Instructors have expertise in riding instruction across the continuum of horsemanship skills (groundwork to riding).
Benefits potentially include physical fitness and improved cognition, emotional, social, or behavioral skills.
Driving
Teaches individuals with diverse needs how to safely participate in driving activities with horses. This can occur with many types of vehicles, including carriages, sleighs, or wagons, and can be adapted as needed.
Instructors have expertise in techniques of safe driving and its instruction.
Benefits potentially include improved physical fitness or cognitive, emotional, social, or behavioral skills.
Interactive vaulting
Engages individuals and groups with diverse needs in movements and gymnastic positions around and on horses and vaulting barrels.
Instructors have expertise pertaining to the principles and techniques of vaulting.
Benefits may include improved physical fitness, social skills and communication, problem-solving, and teamwork.
Recommended discontinuingthe use of problematic terminology:
Equine therapy
Equine-assisted activities and therapies
Equine-assisted therapy
Equestrian therapy
Hippotherapist and hippotherapy clinic or program
horse therapy
Horseback riding therapy and therapy riding
The adverse impacts of these terms, which lack clarity and transparency, were identified through the survey and summit. Adverse impacts include:
Consumers having difficulty identifying and accessing services that best meet their needs
Payers establishing inaccurate payment codes and requirements based on misinterpretations of terms
Therapists experiencing funding barriers, denials, and having to request repayment of legitimate therapies
Journalists using sound bites such as “horse therapy” in stories and thereby obscuring from the public’s view the distinct nature and value of the particular services about which they are reporting
Promoting terminology inconsistencies in the literature
No profession, academic degree, professional license, or state regulation was known to exist that supported the above-named therapies as legitimate stand-alone therapies.
They are potentially legally indefensible for providers and misleading to stakeholders.
The article provides specific reasoning for the discontinuation of each of these problematic terms on pages 92-93.
The terminology recommendations were endorsed by a majority of the summit group and the Boards of Directors of AHC, CHA, E3A, HHRF, and PATH Intl. AHA, Inc.’s Board of Directors disapproved of associating therapies under the same umbrella of equine-assisted services as learning and horsemanship, yet agreed that the other recommendations were a tremendous step forward. AHA’s response can be found here. Votes of the Boards of Directors of EAGALA and CBEIP were pending at the time of the article’s publication.
We have recently confirmed that CBEIP did endorse the terminology recommendations after the article’s publication. Rumor has it that EAGALA did not endorse the terminology recommendations, but we have not yet been able to confirm this.
Summary of Authors’ Main Discussion Points
The most important recommendation stemming from this process was that stakeholders adopt terminology that precisely and accurately identifies distinct types of services and meaningfully distinguishes between them, and discontinue the use of terminology that is imprecise and potentially inaccurate or misleading. The use of such terminology may benefit the field in a number of ways as well as prevent or mitigate future terminology-related problems.
The use of the recommended unifying term, Equine-assisted Services, if used as intended to reference two or more services, may also prevent or mitigate terminology-related problems. It must not be reduced to a single homogenous service, however.
Ongoing questions and challenges:
There was disagreement on the use of therapy-first language. Licensed therapy professionals who recommended using therapy-first language and discontinuing the use of “equine-assisted” to define therapy (as in as equine-assisted psychotherapy (EAP)) argued that it erroneously implied a different stand-alone therapy from that of psychotherapy itself. Other licensed therapy professionals disagreed and reported that the use of terms such as EAP had not been problematic.
Some noted that the modifier, equine-assisted, was universally recognized and aligned with widespread uses of animal-assisted and was therefore preferable to terms like equine-facilitated or equine-guided.
The use of adaptive riding and therapeutic riding were questioned and there was some disagreement regarding the best terms to describe services in which riding was adapted to make the benefits accessible to persons with diverse needs. The historic use of “therapeutic riding” to label any service incorporating horses was rejected. Likewise, the adjective, “therapeutic”, was rejected insofar as it implies that therapeutic riding is a type of therapy. Yet, therapeutic riding is viewed as a highly recognizable term, both nationally and internationally, and has been used for more than half a century. Adaptive riding, a more recent term, aligns with terminology in adaptive recreation and sports while accurately conveying that the activity is adapted. Ultimately, valid preferences for either term were recognized.
The authors maintain that the article is a living document and they encourage critical evaluations of all recommendations plus ongoing monitoring of any positive or negative impacts of the recommendations.
Curious about the Natural Lifemanship Institute’s response?
Jumping into the field of Equine Assisted Therapy (EAT), Equine Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP), and/or Equine Assisted Learning (EAL) can be daunting – figuring out how to be properly trained and prepared can be even more so.
You can’t just google “get certified” and find a website that explains it all. It’s a bit of the wild west out here – so many teachers to choose from, so many approaches, and no central rules or regulation.
So what is an aspiring equine assisted practitioner to do?
The short answer is “do your research”…but, that’s not a very satisfying answer, is it?
So, we at The Natural Lifemanship Institute have put together a list of things we consider to be incredibly important to a thorough and quality certification in Equine Assisted Services (our inclusive term for EAT, EAP, and EAL) – and we’d like to share it with you!
Over the three decades that Natural Lifemanship founders Bettina and Tim Jobe have worked in the field of Equine Assisted Services (EAS), they have learned quite a bit about what is needed for effective, ethical practice.
It isn’t a simple process, nor should it be…because when you enter a field in which expertise is needed in both the human and equine realm, there is a lot to learn. Of course, we would love for you to train and get certified with us…but more than that, we want you to find exactly what you need to nurture your continued growth in this ever-growing field. Below are our Ten Things You Need to Know When Choosing an EAS Certification – we hope it is helpful!
1. Teacher Experience!
First and foremost, as you begin a certification, you want to know you are in capable hands. This is why understanding the qualifications of your teachers and trainers is so important.
Consider their experience!
How long have they been doing actual EAS work? In this newer field, many teachers may have great ideas but haven’t actually been offering EAS sessions for very long, or for very many total hours of practice. Consider some practitioners see 25 clients a week while others might only see one or two – weeks and months may not be the best measure of experience.
Time in the “pen”, so to speak, makes a world of difference when you are teaching both theory and skills. So as you do your research, ask yourself, how many hours of experience does this trainer have?
Malcolm Gladwell argues it takes 10,000 hours to master a skill…do your teachers come even close to that in either clinical experience, horse experience, or both?
2. Excellent Equine Experience!
Understanding the nuance of relating to equines and partnering with them in this work is a process that can only evolve with time, practice, and seasoned guidance.
Working with equines is just like any other relationship – intimacy, trust, and clear communication come with intentional effort over time. . .
There are no shortcuts to good horsemanship. Be careful of programs suggesting otherwise – there are no cheat sheets and quick fixes to understanding the complex and often understated ways equines communicate their needs.
Each one is an individual.
Not only is it important to learn about general equine behavior, learning, and communication, it is also important to learn about the specific equines with which you hope to work.
This takes time.
3. Clear ethics!
As you search for a program, consider the language that is used and the ethics that are both implied and explicitly stated.
The ethical motivations and underpinnings of any good certification program should be clear and readily available to you.
How does a program see the clients, the animals, and the therapy team? How does the program value experience, working within one’s skill set, perspective, theoretical underpinnings, acknowledgment of science/research, and a practitioner’s personal growth?
All of these are areas needing attention and guidance if one is to practice any helping profession ethically. It should also be evident that there are checks and balances in the approach itself, to safeguard against damaging bias and countertransference.
4. Personal Growth!
As NL says “the horse doesn’t know who the client is”…in our unique field we are relying on feedback and communication from our equine partners to help us move forward in our relationships with our clients.
Because we cannot ensure our equines only pay attention to client issues, our own patterns and internal experiences absolutely will and do influence our sessions.
Therefore, we cannot separate our own personal development from our professional development. A quality certification program will require you to consider your own internal experience as much as the client’s and horse’s in order for you to become a more conscious and effective practitioner.
Reflecting on your own relational history, your personal blind spots, triggers, motivations, and being in tune with your own body/mind/spirit should all be valued in your professional development.
5. Depth and breadth of learning!
What would you prefer if you were a client – a practitioner who had spent 5 days learning EAS, or a practitioner who had spent a year (or more) in coursework, practice, supervision, and consultation?
The requirements for certification in the EAS field are wide and varied – pay close attention to what it takes to become certified and consider the client perspective. What is best for our clients, who have little to no information about what it takes to say “certified in EAP, EAT, or EAL”?
Programs of excellence should offer theoretical and scientific underpinnings for their approach to both equines and humans – and should give you plenty of hours of not only learning but practice and reflection as well.
6. Practical Experience!
Practical experience is where the deeper learning happens…it is where theory is infused with reality, where cognitive information becomes embodied, where knowledge becomes wisdom, and where practitioners develop the “art” of their work.
Some programs do not require a practitioner to have ever worked with clients before becoming certified. Quality EAS isn’t just about what you know, it’s about what you do with what you know. Practical experience is necessary for quality work.
7. Trauma Informed Care!
The term “trauma informed care” has become a buzzword in recent years, but what does it really mean?
Trauma Informed Care means that practitioners operate from a foundation of knowledge based in brain science – it conveys an understanding of how life’s rhythms and relationships impact an adaptable brain and body from a macro level down to the smallest neurons.
This knowledge informs the way in which practitioners engage with clients AND their equines, both in and out of session.
Trauma Informed practitioners value relationship, rhythm, and science in their approach – it should be explicitly taught, as well as modeled in their everyday behavior.
Trauma Informed Care should create safety and flexibility in the certification learning environment as well as in client sessions.
8. A Blend of Science and Art!
Relationships are an art – an improvised dance informed by all that each individual carries within them as well as the energy between the two.
There is no doubt that intuition and experience are paramount to guiding clients through a healing process unique to their needs. However, there is so much that the relational neurosciences can offer us so that our work is better informed – making our art more effective.
It is common in our field to acknowledge the art of EAS, what is less common is the incorporation of the sciences that can inform and guide our individual approach.
The fields of interpersonal neurobiology, attachment, somatics, and more have transformed psychotherapy and our understanding of living beings, with so much to offer this work – it would be negligent to ignore them.
9. Individual Support!
No two journeys are the same.
A certification process needs to be flexible and helpful to your specific skills, goals, and dreams. Whether you are a seasoned clinician, an experienced horse professional, a student just starting out, or something in between or otherwise – you can reach your EAS goals.
Look for a certification process that not only considers your experience an asset but offers teachers who know your field of expertise.
EAS can be blended with a wide variety of therapeutic approaches – and the certification process should reflect that!
And finally, more than anything else…does a certification process offer you….
10. Relationship!
Rather than a nameless, faceless, and relation-less training process, how about one where you know your teachers, engage with them in a variety of ways on a variety of topics over time, and develop a supportive and engaging network of colleagues?
Relationships are the vehicle for change – whether in therapy, in learning something new, or out in day to day life.
Can you speak to someone when you need guidance? Do teachers care about your individual development? Is your time valued and respected? Relationships make all the difference.
So what kind of relationship do you want with your training and certifying organization?
Wondering how to get started with NL?
The Fundamentals of NL is the entry level training for all certification paths. The next cohort starts September 13th and registration is OPEN.
Lately, I have been pondering what I am calling the principle of development. Development of an embryo. Of an infant. Of a child. Of the brain. Of a relationship. And of the entire field of equine assisted interventions.
When the brain and body develop, there is a delicate balance between integration and differentiation. Integration is the ability for the whole to work together toward a common goal – with this comes ease, a flow, and a balance. However, integration can’t occur without differentiation. Different parts do different things – they specialize and get really good at what they do. This is necessary for our brain and our body – indeed even our cells have to differentiate in order to work together. This is important in any healthy relationship and an important part of secure attachment. AND this is important for our little field of equine assisted psychotherapy and learning. We too have to differentiate to integrate.
Differentiation can feel scary, painful, and competitive, but it is needed for the consumer and for the health of this field.
Over the last 10 years we have done our best to differentiate gracefully, but unfortunately no one gets to skip adolescence. ☺ Maturity requires that we know who we are and also how we fit into the greater community. To differentiate safely and responsibly we must always hold space for productive integration and collaboration. After all, differentiation without integration will also lead to cell and neuronal death, causes major issues in the brain and body, AND in this field.
At the 2019 NL Deep Dive Conference we are seeking to strike the balance between differentiation and integration as we collaborate with others in this field who are on the same journey. We may not be on the same path or agree on every point, but our destination is the same. While NL has always integrated many different treatment modalities (and will continue to do so at this conference), this time around we seek to intentionally integrate with other EAP/L modalities.
NL is a principle-based modality. NL is a process, a framework, and a set of beliefs – a primary goal is to dig into the beliefs driving practice, which means NL can be paired with any model that honors our core beliefs.There are so many modalities and organizations in this field that do, indeed, share core beliefs!
If you’re new to the field and have been wondering where to start, the 2019 NL Deep Dive Conference is a great place to learn from many of the pioneers in this field. If you’ve been with NL and want to broaden AND deepen your learning, this conference is for you!
Philip Tedeschi, with the University of Denver and The Institute for Human Animal Connection will offer a Keynote address. Philip has done so much to make the world a better place for people and animals and I could not be more thrilled to learn from him. Leif Hallberg, a renowned author and teacher in this field, will offer a keynote address and teach a workshop. We are in for such a treat! Sara Schlote with EQUUSOMA will be teaching a workshop and guiding a retreat. I even get to co-present with her – well, mostly just support Sarah and learn, learn, learn! Sara Sherman will guide a retreat in which NL is blended with the Equine Gestalt Coaching Method. This is going to be transformative, no doubt! Take a look at all the other presentations by those who are NL trainers, NL certified practitioners and equine professionals, and NL certification students! My only complaint is that I can’t attend every workshop!
I so look forward to powerful collaborations at this conference and in the future with many others! We’re better together!
The numbers for this conference are limited to ensure intimacy and allow for experiential workshops. If you want a free, SUPER COOL conference t-shirt sign up by the registration deadline before the shirts go to print. Registration closes when the conference is full or by September 15th. Sign up soon!
July 1, 2021: It has come to our attention that this blog post is being misused on Twitter to justify animal abuse.
Please see the official statement from the author that is available here.
******************************************
Can Animals Consent?By Sarah Schlote
This interesting question, which came out of a post I shared on Facebook (here and here) about a yoga on horseback video that went viral recently, elicits differing opinions. Some claim that consent is a human construct linked to morality, and therefore cannot apply to animals philosophically or legally (calling it anthropomorphism). Others claim that since all mammals share a similar neurobiology, responses to safety, danger and life threat, experience emotions, are sentient and perceptive — and that since both human and non-human animals can express “yes” and “no”, aversion, attraction, fight, flee, freeze, fawn, collapse, submit, and make informed choices — they can indeed “consent” or not (in their own way). This second group suggests that to deny animals the ability to consent is anthropocentric and can be a way to justify the exploitation of non-human animals for the benefit of people.
This article certainly will not resolve this debate, and its goal is not to malign or shame any particular horsemanship discipline, method, or equine-assisted intervention approach. Rather, I hope to invite curiosity and offer a different lens in a spirit of gentle openness and non-judgment about ideas that, while controversial, are nonetheless important to reflect upon.
The word consent means to permit or allow. Barbara Rector, one of the pioneers in the field of equine-assisted practice, understood the notion of consent in relationship with horses. Her exercise, Con Su Permiso, which means “with your permission” in Spanish, speaks to the idea that animals can communicate consent or permission through their body language and that healthy relationships are built on a foundation of mutual respect. Words are not the only way to express when something is a “no” or a “yes”, and Barbara is not the only person championing the idea that horses (and, indeed, mammals in general) can express permission or objection through their body language, of course. But, even so, this idea is not consistently applied in the field of animal or equine-assisted interventions.
A common statement heard in the industry is that the horses are always free to move away if they ultimately do not want to take part in something. However, what is the interpretation if they do not move away? Is it always because they are choosing to stay willingly and without coercion? One might not move away but show other signs of “not wanting to be involved” that are often missed or dismissed. Does that mean that someone (human or animal) who goes into submission, freeze, or collapse in the face of something they don’t want to do or experience is consenting? Shutting down technically is “allowing” something to happen on some level, but only because the other options (fighting back, fleeing) might not be possible or might lead to greater harm, punishment, pain or death. Equating “going along with” to “consent” is a very murky and dangerous proposition. There’s a distinction between being in the lower parts of one’s brain, dominated by survival physiology and reacting out of self-protection (instinctual), and being integrated and able to express conscious choice freely from one’s neocortex, when regulated and connected to self and other. And even this is not a clean dichotomy, but more of a continuum. Regardless, can consent happen when someone – human or animal – is hijacked by fear, terror, or primal subcortical self-protective responses in the face of coercion, control, threat, or helplessness? Can healthy relationships exist under those conditions? And how can there be connection in relationship without consent? Even the polyvagal theory proposed by neuroscientist Stephen Porges proposes that the capacity for social engagement and connected relationships decreases the more the nervous system is activated in sympathetic charge or in a dorsal shutdown.
Evolutionary biologist Marc Bekoff states, “over the years, I’ve noticed a curious phenomenon. If a scientist says that an animal is happy, no one questions it, but if a scientist says that an animal is unhappy, then charges of anthropomorphism are immediately raised. This ‘anthropomorphic double-talk’ seems mostly aimed at letting humans feel better about themselves”(2009). This phenomenon also occurs when people use “human” concepts like “addictions” and “neglect” when referring to other mammals, instead of sterile words like “stable vices” and “deprivation” which minimize and deny that non-human animals also sense and cope with pain and distress in ways that are remarkably like our own. The same also happens when discussing other animal emotions, in spite of the evidence from the field of affective neuroscience, or even when wanting to use the word “trauma” in relation to non-human animals, a leap many are still reluctant to make. The same can be said for extending the idea of consent to non-human animals as well. This does not mean that there are no differences between humans and non-human mammals, for indeed there are. But all too often a false dichotomy between us and them is created that seems to promote the status quo, rather than face the cognitive dissonance or discomfort that comes when recognizing the impact of one’s actions on others.
The following quote aligns particularly well with this trauma-informed perspective:
“Like many vulnerable humans, animals are capable, though often deprived, of making informed decisions about their lives. Animals can express assent and dissent, but we rarely respect their personal sovereignty in ways that acknowledge their aptitude for making choices. Play and cooperation among animals are examples of how animals can express consent with one another, but we don’t speak the languages of other animals, and they typically don’t speak ours. Even when they express dissent to us, their feelings are often ignored. The ways animals are exploited in research, entertainment, food and clothing production, and other areas of human society clearly defy their sovereignty – much like human exploitation does, suggesting that something much deeper is at work here. In addition to the physical violence animals suffer through, they also suffer from fear, anxiety, and depression – like we do – when their personal sovereignty is violated.” –Hope Ferdowsian, MD, MPH
If saying the word “consent” is still too politically laden, too controversial or too far of a mental leap to make, then using “assent and dissent” still conveys the underlying point. Anecdotally and the research shows that mammals – including humans and equines – are capable of choice and expressing their preferences and opinions. This does not mean that learning to tolerate things that are uncomfortable or doing things we or other animals don’t want to do does not have value. There is a need to be able to do so in life, to compromise, to do what needs to get done (even if unpleasant), such as having to do certain tasks or jobs to pay the bills, following through on commitments or requirements (work ethic), or using distraction in order to cope with an uncomfortable or painful medical procedure, for instance. But there is a far cry between getting a horse to comply with a medical practice that might benefit its own health and wellbeing in the long run, and getting a horse or other animal to comply or submit to an activity that seeks to provide some benefit to someone else at its own expense (or, at worst, causes harm to the animal).
While this issue is difficult to resolve at a macro level (such as using animals in medical testing or other industries that benefit humans – a conversation that is beyond the scope of this article), it is much easier to tackle at a micro level, such as in the field of equine-assisted practice, where partnership with a horse should be the foundation for growth and healing. If the healing, growth or enlightenment of one member of a relationship comes at the expense of another whose “no” is not being respected, what message is this conveying? How “healing” is an interaction if the needs of only one are being acknowledged or respected in the process? Doing so comes at the risk of reinforcing an unfortunate win-lose re-enactment that, ultimately, benefits neither and, at worst, is retraumatizing… something that may be all too familiar for either the horse or the human. Peter Levine, founder of Somatic Experiencing® (SE™), uses the term “renegotiation to refer to the reworking of a traumatic experience in contrast to the reliving of it” (In An Unspoken Voice, 2010, p.23). Reliving, or re-enacting, is repeating a familiar situation or dynamic without resolution. Renegotiating is experiencing a different outcome or experiencing oneself differently in a familiar situation, completing what did not get a chance to biologically complete(such as a self-protective response – the traditional definition of renegotiation within SE™) or repairing or restoring what was ruptured, such as relational trust and attunement. For instance, if one of the goals is for humans to connect with animals in a deeper way, how is this possible if the animal’s needs are disregarded in the process and they are tuned out, shut down, frustrated or merely tolerating the interaction? If one of the goals for humans is congruence, assertiveness and greater agency around voicing needs and boundaries, what is being modeled if the equines’ voice and boundaries are disregarded in the process?
It is important to acknowledge and balance the needs of both members of a relationship – even an inter-species one – especially when the relationship is purported to be the vehicle for healing. And, again, compromise and doing things we might not want to do from time to time are also necessary. But there is a difference between getting there through dominance, fear, submission, coercion, and shutdown, and getting there through mutual respect, choice, compromise, responsiveness to signs of “yes” and “no”, and connection. Offering animals choice does not inherently mean that humans have to relinquish theirs – or vice versa. Rather, it is about really hearing what is being communicated and negotiating from there in a way that honours both voices. Even if this is not always achievable for various valid reasons, aiming for win-win scenarios in human and inter-species relationships to the degree that is possible is nonetheless a worthwhile intention.
Even if equine-assisted practices are typically for human benefit, this does not mean that such programs cannot also seek to benefit the animals in some way. At the very minimum, the interaction will be neutral for the animals, and ideally both would gain from the interaction – the ethical concepts of “do no harm” and “do good” apply equally to the human client and the equines involved. The same can be said for the principles of trauma-informed care. Safety, choice, voice, empowerment, trust, collaboration, compassion – and, yes, even “consent” as defined in this article – can be applied to all those taking part, whether two or four legged, to the degree that is reasonably possible. Since these principles are foundational components of human therapy and of animal rehabilitation programs, extending them to equine-assisted practice also makes sense. After all, “a good principle is a good principle, regardless of where it is applied.”
*The word horse in this article was used to lighten the text. The points raised in this post can apply to other equines and mammals as well. Images in this article are by David Karaiskos Photography.
A recent article published in the Journal of Equine Veterinary Science suggests that the concept of human leadership equating to the hierarchy in a horse herd, which has become foundational in many training approaches, is unreliable and largely irrelevant. Instead, the researchers found that consistent reinforcement of desired behaviors had a much greater effect on horses’ responses than the application of dominance or leadership types of interventions. Although the emerging language used in Natural Horsemanship training methods may sound kinder and gentler, the techniques employed still tend to be based on the use of power, domination and control, which ultimately removes the element of choice from the interaction and largely keeps a horse in his brainstem, where he is operating out of a survival, or fear response system.
The Natural Lifemanship approach to building relationships between horses and humans relies on the principles of pressure, or the raising and lowering of a calm, centered body energy, to invite connection as a choice coming from the horse’s neocortex. The horse always has the option to ignore, resist, or cooperate with the request. By creating a safe space for all of these responses, the horse learns to experience the positive benefits of being in a connected relationship with a human without fear or coercion. Releasing pressure when the horse makes the choice to cooperate uses negative reinforcement (the removal of a stimulus) to encourage positive behaviors. This lines up with what these researchers concluded after sifting through 100 scientific studies on horse behavior, where they found that “horses’ responses to training are more likely a result of reinforcement” rather than of humans taking a leadership role. The researchers ask, “could horses be assigned a more active role during training or are they merely followers with little autonomy if concepts such as leadership are applied in a training context?” Natural Lifemanship practitioners are all about giving horses an “active role” in developing healthy relationships!
In Natural Lifemanship, mounted work is an integral part of our model of trauma-focused equine assisted psychotherapy (TF-EAP). However, I recently read a published article arguing that horseback riding is contraindicated in the treatment of military veterans with moral injury. The authors suggest that mounted work victimizes the horse and puts the client in a place of power, domination, and control. While we do not disagree that relationships characterized by power, domination, and control are indeed contraindicated for this population and for others, we feel this article begs two important questions with respect to equine assisted psychotherapy: 1) what benefits are accrued uniquely through mounted work that renders it an integral component of TF-EAP; and 2) is the aforementioned power dynamic an inevitable byproduct of riding, or is there a way to engage in mounted work that promotes its benefits without resulting in a damaging relational dynamic? Natural Lifemanship strongly contends that riding has powerful therapeutic benefits that cannot be obtained by other means and is contraindicated only when it is not done in a connecting and mutually beneficial way. Let’s explore why this matters – therapeutically speaking.
The physical benefits of horseback riding are well documented in the literature. Due to the many physical benefits, specifically related to balance, gait, and psychomotor difficulties, there have been many efforts to produce a horseback riding simulator for the purposes of physical rehabilitation and training. A company in Japan claimed, “almost 100% reproducibility (of the horse’s movement) has been achieved.” The simulator is not able to walk, but it does synchronize the six major movements of the horse while under saddle. However, in a publication about this simulator, the authors note that it does not have a mechanism “which catches the center of gravity movement of the rider.” They go on to explain that this important aspect of carrying is “similar to the case where the mother who is carrying her baby on her back is able to keep her balance compensating for the baby’s movement.” The simulator can reproduce movement, but it cannot reproduce the responsiveness of a sentient being carrying another. The ability of the horse to respond to the rider’s body and balance, much like a mother carrying her child, is more than just convenient. This responsiveness between the carrier and the one being carried activates physical attunement and connection in the relationship– the horse adjusts to the rider, and eventually, the rider adjusts to the horse. Movement alone organizes the lower regions of brainstem and diencephalon, but movement with attunement to the other and responsiveness is the relational connection, which reaches higher in the brain, targeting the limbic system. So while the movement of a horse can be reproduced, even the scientists responsible admit that there are limitations to riding a non-responsive machine. This is merely the beginning of what makes riding such an important part of treatment for mental health disorders.
In Natural Lifemanship there are two major components of TF-EAP – Relationship Logic and Rhythmic Riding. Relationship Logic takes place on the ground and Rhythmic Riding takes place on the horse’s back. Whether mounted or on the ground the connected relationship is the goal. This is the most important aspect of why riding a living, breathing horse is more valuable than using a tool – connection between horse and rider can make all the difference.
So why does connection matter so much? The Neurosequential Model of Therapeutics (NMT), developed by Dr. Bruce Perry, is one of the primary problem-solving approaches that guide the sequence and progression of treatment in TF-EAP, for example, when and in what way mounted work is used.
Dr. Perry divides the brain into four main regions:
1. Brainstem
2. Diencephalon
3. Limbic System
4. Neocortex
We do realize that this is an oversimplification of very complex neurological systems. Nonetheless, we have found that simplification makes this information more accessible in clinical practice.
In Trauma-Focused Equine Assisted Psychotherapy, our primary goal is to integrate these 4 major regions of the brain so that the different regions can communicate effectively. For health and well-being, it is necessary for them to do so because they are responsible for all the major functions that support us. The brainstem is responsible for automatic systems like breathing and heart rate, as well as our survival responses of fight/flight/freeze. The diencephalon directs our movement and motor skills. The limbic system is responsible for connection, bonding, and emotional experience. And finally, the uppermost region, the neocortex is responsible for our abstract and concrete thought. Imagine if any of these major regions were to be significantly hindered – leading a typical life would be quite difficult.
Why does an integrated brain, one that communicates easily across regions, matter in everyday life? Ultimately, it makes self-regulation, and therefore self-control, possible – the neocortex is able to guide the entire brain and when necessary override impulses for fight, flight, or freeze in the lower regions. When the neocortex is integrated with the rest of the brain, we can think before we act. For this to happen there have to be actual neuronal connections (think of roads in our brain) going from the lower regions of the brain up into the neocortex. This can only happen when all 4 regions have gotten that rhythmic, predictable input that helps them grow and operate in an organized fashion. The limbic system is in charge of connection…bonding, attachment, and therefore key in having healthy relationships. It is also crucial to understand that the limbic system is nested between the upper region of the neocortex and the lower regions of the diencephalon and brainstem. Without an organized and functioning limbic system – not only does one’s ability to connect falter, but the rest of the systems do as well. The disorganized limbic system interferes with all other cross-brain communication.
Additionally, an integrated brain with adequate cross-brain connections or pathways (making it possible for the entire brain to work together) results in a secure attachment pattern. Children and adults with a secure attachment pattern are able to feel connected and secure in their intimate relationships, while still allowing themselves and their partner to move freely. Numerous longitudinal studies have shown that infants and toddlers with a secure attachment to a primary caregiver do better during adolescence and adulthood in a variety of areas related to self-regulation, and relationship with self and others. With this foundation in place, they are more resilient when traumatic events occur. For example, research has shown that securely attached individuals in the military report far fewer incidences of PTSD symptoms. For those who didn’t develop a secure attachment in childhood, intentional therapies like Rhythmic Riding can form the cross-brain connections necessary for brain integration, what people in the attachment field call an “earned secure attachment.”
Lastly, an integrated brain can better process traumatic events and memories. Be on the lookout for a blog explaining how and why we use mounted work to process trauma through the use of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR).
While brain development, integration, and attachment all begin in utero, I would like to focus on what happens after birth to continue this process. In reference to the primary caregiver, I am going to use the terms “Mommy, Mama, or Mother”, primarily because my experience as a primary caregiver is as a mother. Also, I will utilize some pictures throughout the remainder of this blog for two reasons:
1. To illustrate some core concepts, and
2. As an excuse to show you some pictures of our adorable child! ☺
Okay, so something like this scenario represents the ideal situation: When a baby cries, the mother picks up the baby and starts to rock or bounce him, while talking with a soothing tone and cadence, or maybe singing. All the while the rhythmic heart rate of the calm and regulated mother is regulating the heart rate of the baby. The electromagnetic field of the heart, the rocking, and the calm, rhythmic sounds of the mother’s voice passively activate the brainstem and the more this rocking, singing, and talking occurs the more the brainstem continues to develop in an organized manner. Passive movement causes an active movement that happens even more as the baby grows and begins to manage some of his own balance when being held and rocked. This develops and organizes the diencephalon. When a child is upset in some way the mother feels a deep connection to her baby. Oxytocin is coursing through her body as her limbic system is activated and she is overcome with love for her child. As the brainstem and diencephalon develop and organize it makes it possible for the child to connect to the one holding him, and the limbic system of the child begins to further develop and organize. This occurs most remarkably, between 18-24 months, the sensitive period for attachment learning.
Each time the child is rocked, carried, touched, and moved in a rhythmic manner while also experiencing love and connection, pathways throughout the lower regions of the brain are formed – the beginning of integration. When these parts of the brain are integrated, it creates the ideal environment for the neocortex to optimally develop. The baby starts to explore and learn from his environment, and thus begins the development of concrete and abstract thought. The activation and organization of the limbic system is the crux of an integrated brain because it touches every part of the brain. For example, if the mother is disconnected, depressed, or struggling with something that makes it difficult for her to emotionally connect with her baby, the lower regions of the brain may develop through rocking, but limbic system development will be compromised. When the limbic system is shut down or disorganized, it is like a roadblock from the lower regions of the brain to the thinking part of the brain (neocortex). Remember, in an integrated brain the neocortex guides (and sometimes overrides) what is happening in the lower regions of the brain. Basically, connecting to and bonding with the one who carries and rocks me sets the foundation for an integrated brain and secure attachment.
This is a Mommy. She can simultaneously provide rhythmic, regulating movement AND connection.
This child (who is quite adorable, indeed!) is connecting to and bonding with the one who carries and rocks him.
It’s worth noting that this was a tough night and I had to work the next day! Just sayin’
This is a Daddy. Just to be fair, he too, can simultaneously provide rhythmic, regulating movement AND connection.
Please disregard the “do NOT take a picture of me!” look. (It’s somewhat genetic! ☺)
This was taken after a full day of Christmas shopping – thank goodness there was a rocker at Toys ‘R’ Us!
Many children (and, therefore, adults) do not get what is needed for their brains to integrate. Both sensory input and connection are needed for optimal brain development. When this input is unpredictable and arrhythmic the brain will be disorganized. When it is lacking, like in cases of neglect, development and organization are compromised. Additionally, trauma that occurs later in life, like military combat, can compromise integration. When we live in a situation for a period of time in which the survival centers are hyper-activated and the limbic system is hypo-activated, our brain changes, much like a muscle can, to accommodate the manner in which it is being used. In the trauma world, we understand the importance of somatosensory and sensorimotor input for organizing the developing brain and re-organizing the traumatized brain. In fact, numerous sensory tools are used for just this purpose – I have quite a few of them in my office. Understanding how to best utilize these tools is an important part of trauma informed care, but this is not the focus of our conversation today. Many of these tools (pictured to the left) help to organize and regulate the brainstem with passive sensory input. However, they do not move our body or require that we move our body. They do not have the ability to form a relationship or connection with us. They can, though, work wonders for the dysregulated brainstem alone.
Another of my favorite tools is the rocking chair or glider. I think every therapist should have one of some sort in their office and every equine therapy program should have them in the barn and next to the spaces in which they meet with clients and horses. Rocking chairs provide rhythmic, patterned, repetitive movement that is passive (activating and organizing the brainstem). In order to maintain posture and balance in the rocking chair, the muscles contract which is an active movement. Passive movement thereby causes active movement, which moves us up a bit higher into the brain – the diencephalon. The rocking chair is not, however, alive. It does not have a limbic system or the ability to connect, bond, or love another. Brainstem? Check! Diencephalon? Check! Yet, still no connection.
This rocking horse cost about $40 (a bit inflated, because it’s “vintage”). There has been absolutely no upkeep or cost since the day I purchased it!
It offers rhythmic, regulating input, and earned its keep in Cooper’s one-year pictures, but still. . . it is not alive. No connection. You get what you pay for!
This is where horseback riding distinguishes itself. Being on the back of a horse can calm the nervous system through the movement that is inherently rhythmic, patterned, and repetitive. When a person is sitting on a horse, they do not have to create the rhythm or the movement, so the brainstem is passively regulated. Additionally, the sound of the horse’s feet and the movement that can be seen (like the movement of the horse’s head) all passively regulate the brainstem. As the horse moves, the rider’s muscles actively contract to maintain balance so the diencephalon is able to regulate. This is really great, but isn’t this something that could just be done with a rocking chair? It could definitely be argued that the movement of the horse is much more complex than that of a rocking chair. The physical and psychological benefits of this movement are so great that much effort has been made to re-create this complex movement. Yet, even if a simulator is able to fully reproduce this movement, the simulator still lacks the ability to activate and organize the limbic system, something we believe a live horse is definitely capable of …if we allow the horse to be more than just a “sensory tool.”
So, how do we ride horses in a way that fosters rhythmic limbic input? When the horse and rider are able to form a relationship based on attunement and connection, the limbic system is activated and organized. But, a paramount distinction is this kind of relationship is not possible when we operate from a paradigm of power, control, and domination. Pause for a moment and consider how often humans utilize power and control with horses – even if done gently. When the horse is encouraged, even through kind or humane techniques, to appease, submit, or dissociate, the horse becomes no more than a rocking chair or a horseback-riding simulator. When connected to the rider, the horse can help the rider to connect (engaging the limbic system), just like the mother who connects to the baby. The rider’s brainstem is passively regulated as the horse moves. The diencephalon is regulated, as the passive movement becomes active movement. The limbic system is activated and organized when the rider and horse connect and begin to respond one to another. Again, connecting to and bonding with the one who carries and rocks me is how an integrated brain develops and a secure attachment is formed. If we are going to simply use the horse as a “sensory tool”, we might as well use actual sensory tools, rocking chairs, or the horseback riding simulator – all of which are much cheaper, require significantly less maintenance and carry less liability. The horse’s ability to connect is where the real healing happens, and it is what differentiates her from the many other sensory tools to which we have access.
Many would argue that if connection is ultimately the goal – why couldn’t therapists simply work with smaller animals like dogs? It is a legitimate question. However – while connection is absolutely necessary for the rest of the integration to occur, most clients who have experienced trauma need the passive regulation and motor stimulation of riding, which offers the sense of being carried AND connected with, all at once.
Lots of connection here! However, generally speaking, riding of the dogs and chickens is frowned upon in our home.
Really, no matter our age, sometimes we just need to be rocked and deeply heard in a connected relationship. I’ve watched horses do this in ways that still bring tears to my eyes.
This is a horse (Peanut to be exact!). He, too, provides rhythmic, regulating input and movement. He is an alive, sentient being, and most definitely capable of connection! (He is not a rocking chair or sensory tool)
Arguably, the fact that the horse can carry us, rock us, and connect with us makes her different than any other sensory tool and most other animals. With this comes quite the responsibility, however! The mental health and equine professional must learn how to tell the difference between compliance, appeasement, submission and. . . connection. Between dissociation and cooperation. We must continue to learn what connection looks and feels like as we relate to humans and horses, which typically requires that we understand ourselves, and that our intimate relationships are characterized by genuine connection. NOT an easy thing to do, but we believe it is necessary to really, intentionally help our clients reorganize their brains, learn new, healthy ways of connecting, and ultimately, heal.
Connecting with the one who carries me. . . the stuff brain integration and attachment are made of!
Let us return to the article I mentioned in the beginning. In this recent publication about why horseback riding is contraindicated for the psychological treatment of military veterans who have suffered moral injury, the authors do a beautiful job of describing the difference between psychotherapy and recreational activities. There is also wonderful information to help the reader distinguish between PTSD and moral injury. I very much appreciate the authors’ understanding of trauma and the insistence that clinicians need extensive training in a number of modalities to ethically work with this high-risk population. The authors also make it clear that horseback riding is not psychotherapy. In NL we definitely do not believe that horseback riding, in and of itself, is psychotherapy. On the majority, I agree with the distinctions made in this article.
However, the authors described riding in a way that, I must admit, made me cringe. There was talk about cross-ties which greatly restrict the horse’s movement and choice. The authors described saddles “made of dead animal hide,” and cinching up the horse in a way that compresses the two areas of the body that are the most vulnerable to attack by a predator. The description was quite graphic. The authors then, correctly in my opinion, conclude with the following statement: “We have rendered a horse docile and submissive and put a warrior in a position of control and dominance. We have established a predator/prey relationship. And for a war veteran, we have evoked the experience of being a perpetrator in control of a victim. Within the context of this duality, morally injured military veterans, struggling with feelings of worthlessness, self-hatred and inner evil because of what they have done or witnessed in combat, are being obstructed from the deep healing of soul that they so desperately need.”
Yes, I agree 100% that if this is the only paradigm you have for riding a horse, then riding is, indeed, contraindicated not only for military veterans with moral injury, but for any person seeking psychotherapy services, especially those who have experienced relational trauma. I strongly support that the authors challenged the status quo. They shed light on one of the ways in which EAP can, indeed, be damaging to our clients. There is, however, an assumption made by the authors with which I do not agree. I do not agree that the way they described the horse’s and the client’s experience of mounted work is the only experience possible. Horseback riding is not the problem. The paradigm of power, domination, and control is the problem, and this is a problem in any clinical setting, and honestly, in most horse-human relationships in general.
If your only paradigm is one of power, control, and domination, it is best that you utilize many of the amazing sensory tools available to clinicians, and don’t partner your clients with horses. A paradigm of power, control, and domination is damaging and traumatizing (and often re-traumatizing) for both the horse and the client, even if the domination and control is done “gently”. This paradigm is also a problem when building a relationship with a horse on the ground – this is not just about riding. A partnership based on connection, attunement, trust, and mutual respect starts on the ground, and all that is built on the ground must transfer to the horse’s back if mounted work is going to be restorative and transformative for both the horse and person. Again, this often requires an enormous amount of learning, practice, and a willingness to let go of old beliefs and patterns. The most intimate we will ever be with a horse is on his back – the place we can experience much joy but also much risk and vulnerability. If power, control, and domination are our only options at the height of intimacy, it might be worth dismantling the principles we employ, both mounted and on the ground.
Therapeutically speaking, the ability of the horse to carry, rock, and connect is powerful for brain integration, which all humans need and is at the core of the work we do with most of our clients. While we do ride to reach other therapeutic goals, the primary reason we ride horses in therapy is because of the horse’s uncanny and unmatched ability to “re-parent” and restore that which was lost in an organic and powerful way. Riding, then, is only contraindicated when that riding is not done in a connecting and mutually beneficial way. When horses are allowed to do what they do best – connect, and sometimes carry, then riding can be an unparalleled therapeutic intervention for lasting change. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater – what is necessary to do good work with horses isn’t just ‘what’ we do, it is ‘how’ and ‘why’ we do it. That understanding is at the foundation of Natural Lifemanship, and it is why we can proudly say, “Yes, we DO ride in therapy!”
References:
Escolas, S.M., Arata-Maiers, R., Hildebrandt, E.J., Maiers, A.J., Mason, S.T., and Baker, M.T. (2012) “The impact of attachment style on posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in postdeployed military members.” U.S. Army Medical Department Journal.
Kitagawa, T., Takeuchi, T., Shinomiya, Y., Ishida, K., Shuoyu, W., and Kimura, T. (2001) “Cause of Active Motor Function by Passive Movement.” J. Phys. Ther. Sci. Vol. 13, No. 2, 167-172.
Perry, B.D. and Szalavitz, M. (2006). The boy who was raised as a dog and other stories from a child psychiatrist’s notebook: What traumatized children can teach us about loss, love, and healing. New York: Basic Books.
Siegel, D. (2010). Mindsight: The new science of personal transformation. Bantam.
Siegel, D. (2012) Applications of the Adult Attachment Interview. PESI Publishing & Media
Usadi, E.J., & Levine, S.A. (2017) “Why We Don’t Ride: Equine Assisted Psychotherapy, Military Veterans, and Moral Injury.” Journal of Trauma and Treatment, 6 (2), 1-5
Recent Comments