A new study published in Frontiers in Public Health confirms some of what we have come to understand in Natural Lifemanship. The study indicated that riding horses improved the child’s ability to exercise appropriate response and self-control, but it depended on the horse that was ridden, and whether or not a stress response was activated.
The study was conducted with three different horses, all of differing breeds and sizes. After riding two of the horses (horses A & C), children showed an increased ability to appropriately perform tasks that required them to press a space bar when green or blue appeared on a computer screen and to avoid pressing it when red appeared. This required them to use an appropriate response and exercise self-control. However, after riding one of the horses (horse B), more children were unable to successfully complete this test than showed improvement in it.
Here is what happened. The researchers tracked the three-dimensional movements (up & down, left to right, front to back) of each horse along with the heart rate variability of the children. Riding horses A & C increased the sympathetic nervous activity of the children, indicating a fight or flight stress response. Riding horse B increased the parasympathetic nervous activity of the children indicating a rest response. Riding horse B did not activate a sympathetic nervous activity. Horse B had a significantly greater up and down movement than horses A & C. It seems the difference in this up and down movement, at least for this study, made the difference in the activation of the stress response in the riders, leading to a difference inappropriately performing the response and self-control tasks. Interestingly though, it did not have a significant effect on the improvement of performing simple arithmetic problems.
Put simply, the children who experienced a stimulating effect from riding horses A & C performed better in self-control than those who experienced the calming effect of riding horse B. In Natural Lifemanship trainings, we often talk about the benefits of appropriate levels of stress. That’s why, contrary to what many believe about therapeutic work with horses, using the horse to calm the client is not the goal. In many cases, this is not what helps the client activate good decision making.
This also highlights important implications for your Rhythmic Riding practice. It is important to understand your client’s needs and your horse’s natural gait and movements. Pairing a client with a horse whose movement increases activation of the parasympathetic response when they need an increase in sympathetic response is likely going to be counterproductive to your therapeutic goals. The reverse is also true.
One important aspect that was not mentioned in this study, was the effect of the relationship between horse and rider and whether or not that would change the stress response of the child. As in everything we do in Natural Lifemanship, connected relationship is the thread that flows through all of our interventions and ties everything together. Does a connected relationship with the horse change the activation of the stress response? We certainly think so.
Here are some other questions to consider. Would having a connected relationship with the horse change the results of this study? Would the movements of the horse change depending on whether or not the rider was connected? What does your experience with Natural Lifemanship and Rhythmic Riding tell you?
Journal Reference:
Ohtani N, Kitagawa K, Mikami K, Kitawaki K, Akiyama J, Fuchikami M, Uchiyama H and Ohta M (2017) Horseback Riding Improves the Ability to Cause the Appropriate Action (Go Reaction) and the Appropriate Self-control (No-Go Reaction) in Children. Front. Public Health 5:8. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00008
Frieda kicked out, ears back, black and white tail lifted high. She was clearly not happy about the pressure that Natural Lifemanship founder and Equine Professional Tim Jobe was putting on her to ask for connection. Tim explained that Frieda had spent the whole 12 years of her life occupying a pasture near a mobile home park, where the residents and their children petted her and gave her apples. No one had ever asked her for anything in return, until now. Frieda started out by pointedly ignoring Tim when he began asking for attachment. When he brought his body energy up a bit and made a smooching sound with his lips, she promptly burst into a frenzy of bucking and kicking as if in disbelief that he would continue to make this (in her mind) ridiculous request. I watched Frieda’s spirited display of resistance, which reminded me of a child’s tantrum, while Tim continued to keep the pressure the same by maintaining his proximity to Frieda no matter where she went in the round pen and directing the same amount of body energy from his core, directed now towards her side, in a request for detachment (connection with some space, or a boundary).
One of the training participants asked if it wouldn’t be better for Frieda to be allowed to just continue enjoying her peaceful life of being petted and given treats. Why should we upset her by requesting something clearly only we humans wanted, and she did not seem to value at all? I thought about this question. I generally avoid conflict, and it can be difficult for me to ask for things in a relationship that I know might be considered inconvenient or difficult for the other person to give. I sometimes settle for less than I should in a situation simply because asking for what I need feels “too hard.” I felt a bit sorry for Frieda too, actually. In the weeks that followed, I did a great deal of soul searching about this principle of the Natural Lifemanship model: If it is not good for both parties in the relationship, it is not good for the relationship itself. How was asking for a connection from a human or horse who seemed unwilling and unhappy about giving it still good for the relationship? I came up with the following reasons:
1. Experiencing a healthy connection enhances the quality of life
Both humans and horses experience better physical, emotional, and mental health when they know how to have a positive connection with others. Connection builds cross brain connections which allow for responding (making choices from the neocortex informed by the limbic system) instead of reacting (from the brainstem where the only options are fight, flight, or freeze). Horses who are able to access the thinking part of their brain engage in fewer skirmishes in the herd, resulting in a decreased risk of injury from being kicked or bitten. The experience of connection in a relational context releases dopamine in the brain, which creates a feeling of well being. Humans also benefit from healthy connection: research shows that people with a strong social support network live longer with fewer health problems than those who are more isolated.
Domestic horses depend on humans for food, shelter, and care. The more they can access their neocortex in cooperating with their human caregivers, the better their experiences with humans is likely to be. People respond more positively to friendly horses, keep them longer, and are able to give them the medical care they require if they are allowed to touch their ears, hooves, and other parts of the body to give medicine, as well as perform massage or other therapeutic touches. Horses who have not been helped to be comfortable with being touched all over their bodies may not receive the care they need when sick or injured. Reactive horses tend to have multiple owners and often end up in bad situations as people give up on trying to manage their behaviors. Connections between horses in the herd also change. Joey, a wild mustang at Spirit Reins, was not a part of the herd until clients began choosing him as their relationship horse. Now, Joey allows and engages in mutual grooming behaviors with some herd members. This has increased Joey’s safety and sense of well being as he becomes part of the herd.
3. Healthy connection heals trauma
Both humans and horses may avoid intimacy because they have learned that relationships are a source of pain rather than comfort. At some point, they may have decided that requests for connection will only lead to harmful interactions, and find ways to avoid intimacy as a form of self-protection. Healing this broken pathway through patient, persistent work on attachment and detachment results in restoring trust in relationships as a safe place to be both seen and known. Our deepest desire as humans is to be fully known and fully accepted. Trauma destroys any hope that this is possible. Inviting connection using the principles of pressure rewires the brain to have a different response, unfreezing the trauma and allowing it to process through for both horses and humans.
We can co-regulate with those whom we have positive, trusting relationships. Attunement in relationships allows us to give and receive comfort to each other. Any stressful situation immediately feels less overwhelming if we don’t feel so alone in it. Connection helps calm and soothe us when we are distressed.
Biologically we are driven towards connection. Both human infants and foals depend upon their mothers or early caregivers for survival and learn how to get their needs met either in positive or negative ways depending upon the environment they are born into. Even those who struggle with intimacy due to abuse or neglect experience a consistent conflict around the internal drive to seek connection while simultaneously fearing the result of doing so. On a primal level we know we need relationships to survive, so we set about creating the only kinds of relationships we know how to have which often results in a serial pattern of maltreatment and heartbreak. As we rewire the brain through a healthy connection we increase our capacity to experience positive emotions which results in a positive synergy: positive connection building more cross brain connections which build more opportunity for positive connection. Symptoms of anxiety and depression diminish as deeper and more satisfying connections are achieved.
While it can seem more benevolent not to initiate or persist in asking for connection with a being who appears disinterested or resistant, I realized that avoiding the work of connection indicates a devaluing of self, the other, and the relationship. I am not seeing that I have enough inherent value to make the request, or that the horse/human has enough value for me to pursue them. In other words, if I am more interested in self-protection than pursuing the relationship I am choosing the relative comfort of isolation over the deeper comfort of intimacy. I am essentially demonstrating that the relationship is not worth investing my time and energy in and that I am not willing to risk initially being ignored and/or rejected as I seek to build the relationship.
When Frieda eventually tired of galloping and bucking around the ring, she slowed down and seemed to consider Tim’s quiet, persistent request for connection. She stopped and swung her beautiful head toward him, wide-eyed and snorting, ears flicking back and forth. Tim immediately stepped back to release the pressure and let Frieda know that her choice was good for the relationship. Frieda considered for a few moments longer, then took that long-awaited step towards Tim. He stepped back a bit more. Frieda changed her mind a few more times along the way, going back to ignoring and resisting, before realizing that maybe attachment felt better than running away. By the end of the session, Frieda was walking comfortably alongside Tim, resting her head on his arm occasionally, and turning her big brown eyes to him as if to say that this was her idea all along. Frieda finally realized that a healthy connection can feel safe and enjoyable.
I just had a session today where for a whole 15 minutes my co-therapist and I left the client alone with her horse. Our client requested it, and though it is not something I would do for everyone, for her it was appropriate. My co-therapist and I began a conversation, once apart from the client, about how we had to regulate ourselves against this feeling of “doing enough” in session. But then I have to remind myself that this is why Natural Lifemanship is principle-based – it is intended for an organic unfolding in each session. There is no formula in good therapy, clients come to us and we learn about them – for this, we draw on our training, our understandings of relationships, and our trust in our therapy partners and clients themselves. It is easy to fall into a habit of asking clients to “do attachment” and “do detachment”, but attachment doesn’t just mean asking a horse to look at you and detachment doesn’t just mean asking a horse to move in circles around you. We have to be more flexible in our thinking so that each session is adapted appropriately for our client’s needs.
Attachment and detachment happen in every move that we make within a healthy relationship. I was immediately reminded of this when we walked back after this 15 minutes to check in with our client and see what happened for her during that time. I had noticed that she mostly sat on the opposite side of the round pen while the horse grazed quietly nearby. From the outside, this looks like nothing is happening. But as we visit with our client we find out that she has noticed that her horse is choosing to eat clovers over just plain grass, they are sharing space and coming into physical contact every now and then. She has also noticed other things about her horse, small subtle things about her body language – her ears, a tail flick, the flies are bothering her. This client found herself picking clovers and taking them over to her horse with the desire to connect and “make her horse happy”. Though it doesn’t look like much, this is a beginning to attachment. She is attuned to her horse, she’s paying attention and she’s noticing things about her, all important aspects of being engaged in the early stages of a relationship.
As we talk about her experience, the client notices that she has done all the work that day in the relationship, asking nothing of her horse except to be allowed in the same space. While it looked like nothing happened, a small practice of attachment was occurring, but it was a one-sided attachment. These choices that my client made allowed for great processing of her relationships – in which she often works hard to meet the needs of another without asking much in return. She was able to see this herself because this is exactly how she approached this new relationship with her horse.
What I hope to work toward with this client is an understanding that for this to be a healthy relationship there has to be some growth toward mutual attachment. And hopefully, when she gets that, she will likely find that for her relationship to continue to be healthy she will need some detachment (connection with space) as well. All of this can unfold organically – just like this first session. If we trust that we created a safe (and brave, as my colleague Rebecca Hubbard, says) space for processing and vulnerability – the client can be the driver of realization and the driver of change. For now, this does not require that our client stand at the horse’s hind end and ask the horse to look at her, come to her, and to follow her, yet it is still an experience in attachment in a new relationship and provides plenty of information for reflection, processing, and goal setting. Do I expect to spend every session leaving my client alone while she sits on the grass and watches her horse? No. But if that’s what our client wants, then we have important aspects of the therapy and important aspects of a healthy relationship to explore together. It’s all information for the therapy. Allowing the process to unfold organically means that issues arise naturally, as they need. And consider how much more powerful it will be for that client when SHE decides she wants more from the relationship, and then SHE decides to ask for it. It is her relationship with that horse after all. If I am the driver of change, if I set it up and “make” it so, then is it ever really hers? What kind of relationship am I modeling to her if I don’t trust her to think, to want more, to grow?
It is not unusual for professionals to want a toolbox of “what to do” – and to therefore walk away from our Fundamentals training with the thinking that attachment is asking a horse to look at you, come to you, and follow you, and detachment is asking a horse to go away. But in fact, attachment and detachment are two categories of behavior within a relationship. If, as the saying goes, relationships are a dance, then attachment and detachment are the behaviors that make up that dance. Attachment is the contact; it’s the invitation to dance, it’s taking their hand, it’s the cheek-to-cheek connection, and the energy exchanged between the two people in close proximity. Detachment is the space between that makes it possible for fluid movement and for keeping off of each other’s toes, it’s the strong arms that create a frame around the two people, it’s the energy that is exchanged to maintain space between. It is the structure that supports the dance while attachment is the closeness. Both are necessary, both require engagement between the two. In order to execute the dance, there is a flow back-and-forth between attachment behaviors and detachment behaviors – structure, closeness, structure, closeness. This is an easy exchange of attachment and detachment based on our attunement, based on us paying close attention to each other as we move closer and then we move further away, as we make contact and then we create space – all while we are engaged with each other.
So in our sessions, and with our horses, attachment and detachment occur like this – unfolding organically as each participant makes choices. Attachment and detachment are simply building blocks of healthy relational interactions. And, as our relationship grows, our intimacy grows – the steps of the dance become more challenging, more intricate, and more rewarding – but within them is always engagement through attachment and engagement through detachment.
Recent Comments