Major kudos to Jane Roy Brown and The Wilhelm Reich Museum! For those who have not yet read it, on September 6, a beautifully written and—get this—a factually accurate story about the museum and Dr. Reich appeared in the Boston Globe’s travel section. Entitled, “Idyllic Grounds Belie Tussle Over Founder’s Research,” the article goes into significant (albeit brief) detail about Reich’s major discoveries and struggles with the FDA.
The fact that Ms. Brown got it right is short of amazing, considering how often the media has wrongly portrayed Reich’s life and legacy. It was no accident. Apparently, having been burned by the press many times, the Museum now maintains a strict policy for the print media. Among other requirements, writers requesting the museum’s participation must sign an agreement guaranteeing that it be allowed to fact check work before publication, at the same time recognizing that writers and editors always have the right to correct factual errors (or not) prior to publication. What a smart procedure. From a legal standpoint, this sets the museum up to effectively challenge libel. From a practical standpoint, it means writers are much more likely to get the story correct. The obvious benefit is that the public is treated to the truth, something that has, in the past, been exceptionally rare.
I strongly urge that anyone speaking to the press about Reich review the museum’s policy and implement a similar version themselves. Of course, Globe correspondent Brown deserves much praise. She avoided taking even one cheap shot—remarkable! The link to her story is http://www.boston.com/travel/explorene/maine/articles/2009/09/06/idyllic_grounds_belie_tussle_over_founders_research/ and the link to the museum’s policy for print media is http://www.wilhelmreichmuseum.org/07_04_update.html#print.
First, I would like to thank you for this new site and blog. It is refreshing, has openness and hopefully will continue to be exciting.
ReplyDeleteI would like to respond to the question you posed about “ orgonomic lay analysis”. Ever since the start of modern psychiatry-which was founded by physicians-there have been non-medical practitioners using psychoanalysis; they also had the overt approval of Sigmund Freud (The Question of Lay Analysis). So, it is not so much a question of “only physicians”, but of who are best qualified.
While it is true that a physician has had many years of training in anatomy which makes this the perfect groundwork for bio-psychiatric work, I don’t think it precludes others from understanding the body with proper training. This includes one's restructuring with the capacity for fluid emotions and their containment, and an open pelvis to be able to sustain deep contact with the client. If such a future candidate has shown intelligence, a strong desire to help others by psychotherapy, and is approved by a training orgonomist, these attributes are adequate to allow one to practice orgone therapy.
I would hope one day, that there will be a governing orgonomic body composed of various institutions (that can work out all their differences regarding minimum requirements for students), that will create a study course for schools or institutions to follow. I also think that it would be important to train non-physicians in these “future schools” in anatomy as it relates to orgone therapy. Even though doctors have had anatomy lessons and the actual practice of working on bodies, they were taught in a mechanistic way leaving out the functionalism. So, in effect, the doctors have had to re-learn anatomy as it applies to orgone therapy. Functional biologist or physicians can do this training, and it would definitely shorten the amount of time necessary for a bio-psychiatric understanding of the organism.
Not every patient wishes to see a psychiatrist, nor does every psychology student want to be a psychiatrist. I think a post-graduate degree student has at the minimum shown an interest and maturity in the discipline. Even the American College of Orgonomy-which only trains specialized physicians-includes a few PhD’s on their staff, and perhaps they too realize the possibility of medical orgone therapy disappearing without inclusion of others in their field.