Some Detail re the ESR System's Procedures


OVERVIEW

The mandatory Efficacy Study Research system was developed and instituted by Ian White in 1994. At that time it had four main purposes.

  1. It served to monitor the success (or otherwise) of practicing affectologists in order to signify satisfactory qualification for their practice to bear the mark - Af-x®.
  2. It served to allow for observation of Ian White's claims that the Af-x and Clinical Affectology approach were born out in experiential fact. Because Af-x is such a non-usual and atypical therapy paradigm, success as a successful psychotherapeutic approach had to (and has to) be proven.
  3. In a therapeutic approach that insists on a limited number of sessions - in the case of Af-x, three only - allowing ex-clients to freely report their outcomes and to register 'closure.'
  4. It served as a monitor to trainee progress through the latter part of their training course toward Af-x registration. In other words, not only registered practitioners have to take part, but Af-x trainees are required to participate for a period (including set client numbers) as prescribed in concert by White, the School of Affectology International and the Guild.

The ESR system still retains these points as illustrators of "purpose." In more recent years, with an increase in the number of people training in countries other than Australia, the existence of the ESR system and its permanence and apparent rigorous nature has been shown to be a comforting qualifier for those people considering undertaking therapy.
SYSTEM DETAIL

The manner of operation of the ESR system is permanent and inalienable.
In order to produce as authentic an efficacy report as is possible, the system ensures that ex-clients fully understand that the CONTENT and flavor of their report remains unavailable to their therapist.
What this means is that all ESR activities and processing remain the task specifically of the Guild, while details of either content or source remain undisclosed to the therapist.
The therapist receives only data related to (a) percentage return of questionnaires over a given period (usually bi-monthly) and (b) percentage of those questionnaires returned that report positive change and satisfaction after a period of "maturity of effect" - typically of four to five months.
BENEFITS OF THE SYSTEM

In spite of some discomfort experienced by a small number of therapists who are accustomed to not being 'judged' by their work, OR have deep-seated 'fear' of observing data related to their performance, the benefits of the ESR system are immense.
  • Therapists can operate on the basis of proven success of their clients as a result of exposure to the Af-x process.
  • They can operate on the basis that there is sound backing of evidence that an 'unusual' therapeutic approach is able to be promoted as efficacious.
  • Should a therapist be lagging in satisfactory results, this, then, becomes "a known" and efforts can be set underway to re-evaluate that therapist's approach and correct any evident inconsistencies with the standard approved Af-x approach and system of therapy.
  • Proven satisfactory success levels allow the trademark owner Ian White to maintain awarding of permission of use of the Af-x mark by therapists - and conversely, remove permission should a therapist prove intractable regarding improvement.
  • Clients are encouraged to comment (additionally to straight reporting), and this serves to keep a watchful eye on need for improvement and modification of the approved and set Af-x therapeutic system as a whole. The processes regarding therapy tentation are within the range of responsibilities held by the guild in consultation with Ian White.
Over time, a large number of clients have reported that their knowledge of the existence of the stringent and exacting, mandatory ESR system has been the very factor that has allowed their choice to undertake Af-x comfortable and confident.

This particular ESR method of independent assessment of practitioner performance is unique within professions, and cements our claim that we have put clients and their health first.
DRAWBACKS TO THE SYSTEM

The ESR system has no flaws, but some drawbacks regarding its perception by other regulatory bodies (example: University research implementers).

These may be stated as
  • It has no formalized "single-blind or "double-blind" study" facility.
  • It utilizes no "parallel groups" study
  • It does not consider placebo as a necessarily negative factor in longitudinal studies.
  • It is not conducted under formal laboratory conditions. 

The Guild rejects these concerns and honors the ability and capacity of persons to judge subjectively, their current "experience of life" without the influence of formal assessment bodies or their therapists' overview. The Guild considers the use of terms such as "only subjective" or "merely nuncupative" as being insulting to a person's right of self-determinative assessment.

Some Affectology Therapists do not avail themselves of the service as they see the 'drawbacks' as being
  • an extended wait for results.
  • clients unable to report directly to therapist.
  • unwieldy.
  • unnecessary.

The Guild respects affectology therapists' right to opinion as to the value of the ESR system, but cannot support the work done by that therapist in the same way as support is offered to ESR contributors.
_Click-line:  Home   About   Categories   Policies   Monitoring   ESR Details   Applications   Public Inquiries