OCD Action Online Forums

forum Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

Ouija Boards - Therapy?

(19 posts) (6 voices)
  • Started 1 year ago by
  • Latest reply from
  • This topic is Not a support question

Tags:

No tags yet.

  1. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Can anyone tell me exactly what advice David Veale gives on superstitious fears concerning the devil and spirits and the use of a Ouija board?

    I read on this forum that he suggests the use of a Ouija board in his book on OCD (presumably as a form of therapy) but no-one I know has read this. I certainly believed the member who spoke about it. I recall she said it was as dangerous as advising someone with a fear of snakes to play with rattlesnakes. I agreed with her.

    Given the danger of using Ouija boards, I still find it difficult to believe it’s something a psychiatrist would actually recommend.

    How many books has David Veale written? Perhaps I shall have to buy them to find out exactly what he does say!

    Has anyone actually tried this as a form of therapy?

    Wed May 26 2010 13:18:54 #
  2. Hi,
    Yes he does say this more in concept of having one in the house. I wasn't impressed and said so to the therapist when i went to the maudsley. cant remember name of book

    Wed May 26 2010 19:54:58 #
  3. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Hello Teresa, What response did you receive from the therapist at the Maudsley, did he or she agree with you?

    So, as far as you can recall, David Veale only advises buying one and having it in your home, not actually using it?

    I have to admit to having a fascination for such things. My mother has told me how amazed and scared she and a group of army friends were by a homemade Ouija board used during the war. It frightened them more than the bombs! However, OCD is enough to contend with, without inviting that kind of trouble.

    I can’t think of any religion, apart from Spiritualism, that would approve of such a thing, and even Spiritualists warn they are not for the inexperienced or those with a sensitive nature, which pretty much rules OCD sufferers out!

    Tricia x

    Thu May 27 2010 12:25:10 #
  4. it was just to have in the house, i told my therapist in no uncertain terms that i wouldnt be having one in the house and she let it lie saying not everything applies to everybody, if she thought this was one of my issues not sure how she would have approached it.
    Teresa

    Thu May 27 2010 17:19:40 #
  5. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Teresa, I am not sure whether I have a different edition of the book, but, on page 111, David Veale does speak about using a Ouija board. My heart sank when I read those words. He said he didn’t want to offend anyone’s cultural beliefs but when dealing with OCD we need to bring out the ‘big guns’.

    Ouija boards are dangerous and should only ever be used by experienced people. Michael Bentine’s father was a scientist who spent most of his life researching the paranormal. Michael Bentine stressed the danger of Ouija boards and advised anyone with a sensitive nature to steer well clear of them (he considered his own personality to be too sensitive). Given the fact that as a group we are very sensitive, using such a device as a form of therapy is like letting an inexperienced person fire one of those ‘big guns’ only to discover it backfires in their face. David Veale makes it sound as safe as getting out the Scrabble board!

    Tue Jun 15 2010 12:41:30 #
  6. Hi Tricia,

    It's not on page 111 of my copy. What chapter and what heading is it under?

    Tue Jun 15 2010 13:32:23 #
  7. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Trudy, I'll have to get back to you with that tomorrow. I'm clean and the book is dirty, you know how it is. I'm sure people have wondered about me at times with all the 'dirty' books I own!!!

    Tue Jun 15 2010 14:20:40 #
  8. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    P.S. The only clean book I have in the whole house is Fred Toates’ Biological Psychology. It’s wrapped in cellophane. Fred Toates asked me if I enjoyed the book, I had to confess that I had so far been preserving it in its clean cellophaned state!

    Tue Jun 15 2010 14:24:04 #
  9. @Tricia, I personally would agree with the comparison of a ouija board to a scrabble board.

    There is no evidence of ouija boards having any kind of supernatural power or abilities beyond a piece of cardboard. The seemingly involuntary motion towards towards various characters has been shown to be the result of a well documented psychological event known as the ideomotor effect.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_effect

    I see no need to worry about anything supposedly supernatural. Empirical science has proven this ideology to be little more than superstition, I believe anybody who fears anything in this realm may find comfort in the objective certainty of reason, logic, and scepticism.

    Tue Jun 15 2010 14:43:39 #
  10. Even if you accept that, I'm not sure that it really solves the problem. Involuntary movements would be quite enough to produce deeply scary messages for someone who was expecting them (more so, in fact, since the messages would come not from any old ghost but from the terrified brain of an OCD sufferer). I should say that would rather defeat the object of showing that there was nothing to be afraid of! Tricia, was that what you meant about Ouija boards not being suitable for sensitive people?

    Tue Jun 15 2010 18:54:16 #
  11. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Trudy, it’s in the third chapter of my book (edition printed 2005) sixteen pages in. The chapter is Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Self Help For Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

    Is your book written in American English? Mine is, even though it’s printed in this country and written by a British psychiatrist. Weird, isn’t it?

    Can you check two tables in your copy, please? Mine has table 1.1 listing most common obsessions and table 1.2 listing most common compulsions. Table 1.1 looks fine, the obsessions in the table adding up to 100%. However, table 1.2 only comes to 62.5% (if my memory serves me correctly!). The missing 37.5% I would guess is washing. Don’t know whether to point this out to David Veale!!

    I was really shocked to read that the obsession of harming a child is 4% and paedophilia fears 6%. As we have been saying, these obsessions are far more common than that.

    Wed Jun 16 2010 12:23:14 #
  12. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Wombat, You are right about how sensitive people could react to a Ouija board, even if we suppose it is as innocuous as a game of Scrabble. I am a believer in the occult and have a fear as well as a fascination for such things. But, putting that aside, I still feel playing around with a Ouija board would be dangerous to a sensitive mind, even if it were just a piece of cardboard. I have friends who regard such things as harmless fun, but they agree with me that when it is used as therapy for vulnerable minds it could be damaging. Michael Bentine and his father were referring to dangers encountered by stirring up spirits, but either way, it could cause damage to highly sensitive people.

    Suvorov, I respect your opinion, which is probably the view of David Veale and the vast majority. However, unless people have direct experience of the paranormal, I don’t feel they can state that it’s just superstitious nonsense. I am not a superstitious person at all. The paranormal is very different, however. At your age, I can recall my scepticism over such matters and how I mocked my sister-in-law for her beliefs (behind her back, but shameful behaviour nonetheless). Personal experience has shattered my sceptical views. I have to acknowledge that there are many things that exist which science has yet to categorically prove.

    At the age of seventeen, I queued at my local cinema with a friend who had persuaded me to see ‘The Exorcist’. Outside the building Catholic priests were pleading with us not to go inside. Watching films like 'The Exorcist' is another of David Veale’s suggestions.

    I don’t wish to make anyone’s obsessions worse. I strongly disagreed with Dan on this forum who believes our OCD is caused by dark entities. His views alarmed me, because vulnerable people might actually believe such a statement. OCD is nothing to do with the devil or evil (despite at times feeling as if it were!).

    Suvorov, naturally there are many scientists who dispute the paranormal, but there are others, like Michael Bentine’s father and E.R. Laithwaite who are believers. There are also many who have an open mind.

    Wed Jun 16 2010 13:05:39 #
  13. Hi Tricia,

    Am I being dense or what? But I still can’t find the reference to ouija boards, perhaps I need a brain transplant

    Do you know until you mentioned it I hadn’t noticed that the book is in American English, I just thought it wasn’t particularly well written

    I’ve checked those two tables that you mentioned, the first actually adds up to 101% but I don’t think it’s necessarily meant to total 100%. For it to add up to 100% you would have to have a complete list of the obsessions or compulsions and thereby be able to express the individual results as a percentage of the whole list.

    But I think what he is referring to in these tables is the percentage of people that answered yes to each question. Therefore each question is independent of the other and is just expressing the percentage that answered yes to each question.

    I’m not explaining myself very well am I? But it’s how my tired and frazzled brain is interpreting it I’m glad medicine isn’t as ambiguous as psychiatry or I'd never have passed my finals

    I am at a loss as to explain why hand washing isn’t listed in the compulsions.
    With regard to the obsessions of harming a child and paedophilia fears, the results very much depend on the size of the survey and whether those people felt comfortable enough to be able to answer yes to either of those questions. We know from this forum that so many people with these obsessions are too afraid to tell the professionals for fear of the reaction they might get.

    Information about OCD can be so confusing

    Wed Jun 16 2010 21:24:24 #
  14. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    Trudy, my daughter was thinking on the same lines as you about the tables, but I don’t feel that‘s the case. If it is then it’s very ambiguous. (Anne pointed out to me yesterday that table 1.1 adds to 101%). I feel the fact that washing/cleaning has been omitted from a list of the most common compulsions adds weight to there being an error and I do feel that both tables should amount to 100%.

    Is your copy the 2005 edition? I may have misled you, because I thought mine was, too, but perhaps that was the first printing, because I've checked on Amazon and mine appears to be the 2009 edition. If that's the case, mine has 480 pages as opposed to 288 in the earlier edition. Possibly the Ouija board and ‘The Exorcist’ were not included. Hopefully they will be excluded from any further editions!!

    I do feel that a British book should be written in English English (if you know what I mean)!! I have no problem at all reading books by American authors which are in American English, but I do feel we Brits should stick to our own ‘language’ when we are writing books!

    As for paedophilia fears and especially thoughts about harming a child (I stress that one because more people are open about it) David Veale and others must have been aware by 2005 that these symptoms are far more common that that. Lee Baer had written about it earlier and information must be shared surely?!

    Thu Jun 17 2010 13:04:56 #
  15. I know that this isn't about ouija boards but I was wondering does 'sterile' have a different meaning in American English to that in English English? I ask because in the book it says that it's not usually necessary to wash your hands after urinating as urine is sterile. Yes, urine is sterile but only prior to passing through the urethra.

    Fri Jun 18 2010 21:47:09 #
  16. Hi Trudy,
    Whichever way he uses the word sterile urine is a very attractive growth medium for bacteria and also if you flush the loo you have touched the toilet which will be dirty, so in my view he's talking rubbish, of course you need to wash your hands after having a pee I just bought a couple of books finally on OCD and I've only read snippets but I'm already wondering which planet are these people on, I know my OCD stuff takes things to the extreme but i'm not planning on doing things I wouldn't normally do when I'm ok

    Fri Jun 18 2010 22:24:59 #
  17. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    I don’t have time to write much now! Jo and Trudy have you read ‘Stop Obsessing’ by Edna Foa?!!

    Sat Jun 19 2010 14:03:49 #
  18. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    P.S. Will check with my American friend, but I'm fairly sure 'sterile' means the same in America.

    Sat Jun 19 2010 14:04:35 #
  19. Avatar Image


    Unregistered

    I apologize for my sarcasm over the word ‘sterile’ it was uncalled for!!

    Trudy is right in what she says, urine is only sterile in the bladder (unless there is a urinary infection, in which case it isn’t sterile then either, obviously).

    However, many people have claimed to have drunk urine (other people’s as well as their own) and they have come to no harm. And I thought I had a problem!!

    I know some people are very worried about this subject, but I think they are worrying unnecessarily. I recall a very unpleasant and extremely embarrassing incident that occurred when I was nursing. We had a patient on the ward in isolation, who was very ill. He had abscesses in various places internally and the infection was also in his urine. He was not responding to any antibiotics, and although a young man, previously in good health, his situation was becoming very concerning. It was quite an effort to enter his room because of the smell. On one occasion I helped him out of bed and he was using a bottle. His hands were shaking. The flow of urine caught the edge of the bottle and I ended up being spayed in the face. Alas, my mouth was open at the time because I was talking to him. I felt a desperate need to wash my mouth out with carbolic, but due to the man’s extreme weakness, and equally extreme embarrassment, I had to help him and ignore my own panic. I made a joke of the incident and it was too late to do anything much afterwards, any ‘damage‘ was done. However, I didn’t even develop a sore throat.

    A few years ago, I was alarmed by a notice in the toilets at my doctor’s surgery. It was a list explaining why we need to wash our hands. The final sentence stated that doing so could ‘even save your life‘. I felt this was alarmist and extreme. I read the notice a few months after watching Professor Salkovskis’ documentary, where he and a patient went ‘toilet dipping‘. When I saw my GP, I mentioned both the therapy and the warning notice and commented on the conflicting messages. My GP screwed his face up at the therapy, but went on to say although he wouldn’t do it, it was not that dangerous. His comment on the notice was that it was never intended for the likes of me! He summed up by saying both were extreme and over the top.

    I personally would not be prepared to face Edna Foa’s exposure therapy for those with contamination fears of germs, faeces etc. I don’t have her book to hand, so I am unsure how long she advocates not washing one’s hands, but I think unless you live alone it’s unacceptable (I wouldn‘t do it even then, but it‘s up to the individual!). David Veale doesn’t seem to take his therapy that far and he does state when it is necessary to wash our hands. However, Edna Foa stresses not to wash, even after using the toilet (she says ‘bathroom’, I believe, but we know what she means!). She suggests wearing gloves to clean our teeth so that water doesn’t come in contact with our hands even then. I believe she permits a brief shower on the second or third day of therapy, but, apart from that, no washing of hands!

    Jonathan Grayson, has therapy sessions at the OCFoundation conferences, where he encourages people to touch toilet seats and then eat with their ’dirty’ hands. Another of his favourites is encouraging us to chew gum that one of his colleagues has had in his mouth first. Actually, I’d prefer the toilet seat! Actually, thinking about it more deeply, I would prefer the gallows!

    Whether we approve of this therapy or not, Edna Foa and Jonathan Grayson are highly regarded professionals in America, who, given the culture in their country of suing for the slightest thing, would not be risking bankruptcy, which would be the case if their patients were dropping like flies (or even developing stomach bugs)! Even our NHS would put a stop to Professor Salkovskis and his therapy, if people were suing after becoming ill. Unpalatable it might all sound, but it must be relatively safe.

    Mon Jun 21 2010 13:51:04 #

Reply

You must log in to post.

OCD Action Forums

Key

  • - Forum section
  • - New post in forum
  • - Topic post
  • - New post in topic
  • - Announcement, important
  • - Support Question
  • - Resolved Support Question
  • - Locked topic
  • - Hot topic
  • Bold text denotes an unread post in topic or forum area.

What’s new

Fundraising & Database Administrator

Posted May 22, 2012

Volunteer Advocates Wanted

Posted May 18, 2012

Parents' Seminar - Coping with Stress at School

Posted May 3, 2012

Art, Me & OCD - Stephanie's Exhibition

Posted April 24, 2012

More News »

Helpline: 0845 390 6232 / 020 7253 2664
Helpline email: support@ocdaction.org.uk

Office: 020 7253 5272
Office email: office@ocdaction.org.uk