A worrying trend in the NHS at the moment is to offer “catch-all therapies” that claim to help with numerous different ailments. One such therapy that is gaining momentum within several Primary Care Trusts is Human Givens Therapy. It is also endorsed by the usually responsible MIND mental health charity. It was invented relativley recently by two men called Ivan Tyrrell and Jo Griffin.
This approach claims to integrate elements from a variety of sources, including neurobiology and cognitive behavioural therapy. CBT has a strong evidence base and is well researched, but it cannot just be assumed that by combining different therapies that an approach might work.
The most alarming thing about Human Givens is its very poor evidence base. I have not been able to find any peer reviewed papers or articles on the effectivness of the therapy, or anything significant in any professional journals about Tyrrell and Griffin.There are a few articles and a few texts on the internet, but these all appear to have been published by The Human Givens Institute (surprise, surprise).
Like most purveyors of sciencey-sounding counterknowledge, they have an impressive website. There are the usual new-age phrases such as “Is the UK emotionally happy? ” and “Humanity under stress…a survival strategy”. There is also a short mention of two clinical outcome studies, but it does not describe the methodology used or the setting.
The topics of the most recent HGI conference in the news section make interesting. Titles include “How schizophrenia can be created in 24 hours” and the bizarre “Amazing transformations; working with molar memories”. My favourite is “Why emotional arousal is the handmaiden of tyranny”.
Becoming a Human Givens therapist entails you becoming a member, a graduate member or a registered member. To achieve some of these levels you will have to get a Human Givens diploma (naturally, you have to pay for this). Memberships are available through the “MindFields college”. Can you guess who the college principal is? Mr Ivan Tyrrell. Director of studies? Yup, Jo Griffin. Kerching!
When you qualify, you can apparently put the initials GHGI (Graduate Human Givens Institute) after your name. But I bet it would soon get boring having to explain what it stood for everytime anybody asked.
On a darker note, this kind of therapy is being touted as offering patients “more choice”. But patient choice should be informed choice. Spouting claims that any one therapy can help numerous problems gives more vulnerable patients false expectations. To me, this seems like a money-making exercise dressed up as an effective alternative to traditonal psychotherapy. With the government’s pledge to offer more psychological therapies to people with mental health difficulties, I fear the floodgates will soon be open to more of this kind of nonsense. Beware of Human Givens: it’s coming to a town near you soon.
The author has worked in the NHS as psychiatric nurse for 17 years. He currently hold a management position in one of the country’s largest Mental Health Foundation Trusts.
If you enjoyed this post, why not subscribe to our RSS feed or follow us on Twitter? You might also consider making a donation to the Counterknowledge.com fighting fund.
Click here to sign up for free RSS updates.
Download the free 
Join 
24 responses
The New Scientist has some interesting views on HGT. I’m sat here thinking about a supposedly groundbreaking work that has no emipirical data to back up its claims and wondering why it seems so familiar. The Interview with Griffin is an eye opener - he mentions encountering conflict from the academic community, but acceptance from people working “at the coal face”. Again, this sounds familiar. Dianetics anyone? The discussion of “molar memories” being an ancient survival mechanism that affects our rational processes, almost identical to Hubbard’s notion of the engram. And in the blurb for the book discussing Molar Memory it’s described as “an immensely inspiring book, ‘An Idea in Practice’, also demonstrates how the human givens organising idea can bring clarity to ethics and diplomacy.” Ethics and diplomacy?
There is a Joe Griffin listed on the excellent Scientology Stats database - not a smoking gun, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the same guy. Someone should call RTC!
GHGI? GNDN more like it.
Interesting - I was working in a bookshop at one point and I remember seeing this book and thinking how odd it was that it was basically a self-help book but full of neurosciencey jargon.
Maybe I need to read it and blog about it…
For Darwins’s sake! How much more of the taxpayers hard earned is the NHS going to waste on such idiocy? Please sign my petition on precisely this matter at “petitions.number10.gov.uk/quackery”. Thankyou.
It’s absurd to link Joe Griffin of MindFields College with Scientology because a “Joe Griffin” is listed on a scientology database. If you knew anything about the Human Givens approach or Joe himself this would be self evident - It is simply not him.
Human Givens may be quackery. I don’t know yet, but this article has no substance to help me decide. Essentially it reads more like egocentric sarcasm assuming a sympathetic audience. I take it the author hasn’t noticed a lot of people make a significant amount of money from traditional forms of medicine? Perhaps that is what he is trying to protect?
It hasn’t given me a reason to come back to counterknowledge.com.
Two years ago I marked the 12th anniversary of my first diagnosis of depression. I had been given just about every possible kind of counselling, psychiatric drug and intervention known to science, including being sectioned. I had not made an inch of progress in all that time. I sought a human givens therapist, rather cautious because I had previously read a web site similar to yours. It’s NOT a cult, and it’s NOT a system of belief - far from it. What it does, very effectively, is to get past all the quackery provided for years by the NHS. I have now celebrated a different anniversary - one year without a moment of depression, and not now taking any medication, and this is due entirely to the human givens approach. My success will not have been counted in any scientific evidence-based study, but I do feel very much better, and that’s thanks to the human givens. When I find anybody caning the human givens lot I always begin to look behind the scenes and ask myself where their emotional needs are not being met. Perhaps the answer will give the clue as to why somebody has a vested interest in trying to bad-mouth something about which they clearly know very little.
This seems to be the reaction to any form of new thinking, I understand why as there are con merchants out there, but I doubt many con merchants would go to the levels that the Human Givens Organisation has, and I bet that when Ration Emotive Behavioral Therapy or CBT was thought up and introduced that it was seen as Quackery by those a little fearful of it, and I know that someone will say that these forms of treatment are backed up by scientific study now; however there is some conjecture about the way that CBT’s studies are researched and reported (not saying that this is correct but it is out there). And in terms of getting qualified for Human Givens you have to study with them and pay them to get their qualification. How stupid a statement is that, to be able to practice CBT you have to go and learn with someone associated with CBT, afraid that doesn’t allude to evidence that it is quackery. And looking at the fee’s for the course, it’s about the same as diploma in photography, hardly Kerching is it?
I think what the Human Givens want to do is take elements of other therapies that have had success and look at them in terms of effectiveness to include and use to treat people, that seems a sensible approach to me. As someone who has had a mental health issue I get a little annoyed when therapies seem exclusive of others, no one approach can work for everybody.
I think you do a disservice to anyone suffering to discredit something just because it seems to be new and might upset more intrenched therapies and in the long run drug companies.
Perhaps what would be more beneficial to patients, clients whatever you want to call us is to open a dialogue, share - I’m sure that the Human Givens would be open to that. I cannot tell you how much disservice you do people out there who are suffering with all this bickering between models of therapy, it’s not very adult and something I would like to see less of.
I’m not suggesting that anything should be beyond scrutiny, just don’t think to yourself your doing anyone a service by cynical attacks to something new.
Ultimately from someone who has had a mental health issue what I hope that anyone who is setting themselves up as a therapist would do is be open to what can work. Take their lead from the patient, see the ‘work’ as a team effort.
What worked for me was various elements of relaxation, hypnotherapy and CBT, and discussions with a therapist - all working together for the common goal of elevating pain, which is what should be the intention of anyone offering help. I bet you if you looked into any of those treatments you would find reports of how they haven’t worked, or claims that they can ‘cure all’.
Getting better is hard enough, but when it’s a mind field of conjecture out there without good reason it just makes it all the more difficult. If the psychiatric profession would stop seeing themselves as experts but rather that the patients are, and that we all fight the good fight - maybe the better off we all would be.
What a dreary, ill informed and generally sour article this individual has written. It is devoid of any factual information or explanation of Human Givens, other than to cause mirth and hilarity- I only hope this doesn’t sum up how the person has worked with patients over a 17 year career?
However, I was D E L I G H T E D to know that this person is now a manager in one of the UK’s largest mental health authorities. Perhaps they might spend a little more time trying to help patients find constructive ways forward, rather than promoting a pill popping culture?
I am going to give Human Givens Therapy a try.
I suffer from agoraphobia and I take zoloft and yet no relief.
I am sick of living in fear and the counter auguments have convinced me that HGT may be worth a try.
Thank you gentlemen. God bless you all
I have been researching and looking at Human Givens for 8 years. I have a few criticisms and a few things I agree with. Some of it makes sense like the Human Givens main basis that we have emotional needs and if they are met we can be free of depression and other health problems. Basically you need good friends, and intimate relationship and a challenging job and something you do you are respected for to have your needs met. Not sure I agree with this but it makes sense and is a good selling point to NHS hospitals and more. If you look around at people who are depressed you ususlly find that they are not getting their emotional needs met. But which comes first?
If you are feeling low you probably will not want to go out and get a partner and you will struggle to cope at work. What the Human Givens can help with is breaking the cycle.
Unlike the use of drugs you can’t in reality test such a subjective based approach to health care as it relies on individual experience. If it works for you then good if not then try something else. You will have to search for something that you think may work for you if you think it HG there is a lot of information available for you to make a informed choice – which is what it’s all about
I have spent 2 years having CBT and for me it was a nightmare, and I could not break the cycle that I found myself in. I therefore, decided to try to find another way. The HG spoke about things that I could understand and relate to, and there was someone there to work through the pain with me. I am now trying to find out more, and to become a councelor for others. However, I really do not think that anyone who has not been in a state of depression themselves should make such unhelpful statements without trying the system first.
I first heard about Molar Memories in a Youtube video of Joe Griffin speaking about paraphilias. He claimed these disorders could quickly and easily be cured if the sufferer was guided back to the precise moment in his past where an imprintation took place, setting these lifelong obsessions into motion.
I have had a severe tattoo paraphilia for more than half of my life. Nearly every minute of everyday for over 20 years I have been thinking of tattoos. I’ve tattooed myself hundreds of times with any implement i could find that would do the job. My life has been completely out of control, so Griffin’s concepts were more than interesting to me. I just wanted to know how i could use his information to treat myself, since i couldn’t find a practitioner in the US for this therapy.
When i was four years old, i discovered masturbation. I have always vividly remembered what it was that excited me to have an orgasm that first time. It was a strange thought, a thought of transforming into a different person. I have no clue why this excited me, but it did. I could always recall this experience, but it wasn’t until last month after revisiting the video, that I understood what ultimately took place.
I began to fully process what Griffin was saying, and realized that ALL of my turn ons (there were others like amputation, becoming blind) fell under an umbrella of all things Transformation. They were clearly aligned with my first sexual experience. And just like that, a massive blow was struck to this devastating obsession. I saw tattoos in an entirely new way. They were less meaningful and seemed even silly. The day after this epiphany, the “tattoo loop” was nearly half its usual strength, the first ever reduction in these thoughts.
Now it wasn’t completely gone, but it Was weaker. So I decided to take further action, and went to a tattoo removal clinic. I have been for removal in the past, so this was nothing new. What WAS new however was how i felt after this particular treatment. I no longer found tattoos attractive!!! They instantly meant nothing to me.
And I’m sitting here a month later, still with no desire to tattoo myself, feeling as if i conquered the world. Just remembering the many times I contemplated ending my life because of doctors and literature telling me there was nothing that could be done. That I’d have this ruinous disorder for life. So the author can call Joe Griffin a quack if he’s gets some satisfaction from it. It really makes no difference to me, because I know the man’s a lifesaving genius.
The Human Givens approach is new and exciting and about as far from being weird or cultish as you could ever get. There is nothing on the agenda for HG therapists but getting people to feel better as quickly as possible because the knowledge is there to enable that to happen.
As a business model, what could be better than saying that people are really sick and need years of therapy, yet they do precisely the opposite of this.The founders are themselves experienced and effective therapists who have found a way of teaching what they do to others, so that more people can recover from anxiety and trauma.
They are genuine and commited to bringing relief to people suffering from stress in many different ways and they aim to bring actual relief from a lot of long term suffering because they know that this is what good therapy should be doing. They do not pathologise people, they just help people to build on their strengths and calm themselves down into a state of optimum mental health.
blah blah blah, The NHS is a waste of time anyway, Hurra to HG, its a breath of fresh air!!! wake up, its time to weed out the dinosaurs and move on!
I have worked in the area of mental health for over thirty years and been a clinical co-ordinator for many of them. I do have some criticism of HG and yet . . . . this is my first visit to the site and, if this sorry and dreary article, clearly played for cheap points from a sympathetic audience, is the standard of critique you offer, it will be my last.
This article is disgusting. The writer clearly has no knowledge of HG therapy, and simply labelling the pioneers of it as money grabbers is a cheap.
Having suffered debilitating depression and anxiety in the past, I know for a fact the HG approach works. Having spent 6 months in deep depression (made no easier by the NHS waiting list for counselling and trying several anti depressents), just 2 months with a HG counseller I completely turned it around.
It appalls me that the ‘old school’ type therapies are not open to new approaches which clearly have a higher success rate than than CBT or sending the poor patient away from the doctors surgery with boxes of pills which side effects are worse than the problem.
Human Givens is absolutely the right way forward.
The author who has worked with the NHS for 17 years is certainly trapped in a tunnel and thinks the world ends there. if he is a living person he should know that there will always be movement and renewing of the mind to better solutiion to human issues. He will do better in his profession if he read about HG . If he does no do this , then I have no choice that so borrow one of the commentator phrace.
Essentially he sounds more like egocentric sarcasm assuming a sympathetic audience. I take it the author hasn’t noticed a lot of people make a significant
Having experienced depression for years and experiencied every type of help available. The HG approach finally answered the question. I have attended some seminars and it makes sense. I would love to undertake the full qualification to help others but unfortunately cannot afford the courses having given up my destructive job to follow my hearts desire to help others. The HG approach offers common sense and a QUICK solution rather than years of navel gazing and £ down the drain.
As a qualified psychologist I find the claims made by the Human Givens people interesting. I live in Australian and have had some exposure to one or two people from the UK touting this stuff but they are very scant on the details of the supposed evidence. The only thing they have been able to give me are a few light on articles published in their own publications that contain no methodological information or data that could be replicated by an independent body. I have also done a check of the psychotherapy outcome literature from recognised peer reviewed journals and found nothing. In spite of this they hand out brochures that make very bold and wild claims that I found very bizarre. What is also interesting is that they attack psychodynamic therapy as being harmful, when in actuality there is now considerable evidence in peer reviewed journals that it does work. I must admit there is more available evidence for CBT but nothing for human givens. As Carl Sagan once said “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.
I have studied the Human Givens approach, having attended all the workshops and seminars that make up the first part of the MA programme they are running via Nottingham Trent University.
They offer the normal Diploma or, Via NTU, three exit points (Post Grad Certificate, PG Diploma or the full MA).
A psychotherapist for 22 years i have a great deal of sympathy and admiration for the approach and believe it to be a wonderful ‘organizing idea’. I found there is a tendency to discuss the positive and negative elements from other therapies, but this is more to explain where the HG approach sits. The only exception is Psychodynamic therapy. This is not looked on kindly purely because it is a longer term therapy, whereas the HG approach is to help clients in the shortest time/number of sessions possible.
Regarding evidence - Many HG therapists now use CORE-M and HG needs questionnaires as standard and evidence is being compiled all the time. The MA programme also allows scope for further evidential work. Organisations who are using the approach are also using evidential gathering at present. So there is expected to be a LOT of evidence soon.
My own feeling is that HG is not perfect, but certainly IS worth a look and will benefit many organisations as well as individuals.
I agree change is coming and there are some entrenched schools of therapy & pharmaceutical companies objecting from ignorance or self interest.
These are only my personal experiences, implementing HG with real clients and is not suggested as evidenced based yet!
Andrea
Having experienced Human Givens therapy myself, and now as a practicising therapist, it is disappointing to see such destructive and self intererested comments about a form of brief therapy that is not only effective but supported by a mass of scientific evidence. It may not yet take the form of ‘Human Givens Research’, but it is substantial, credible and comes from a number of fields such as neuroscience, CBT and interpersonal therapies.
The point that seems to be missed by the original author, from their limited perspective, is that Human Givens is an organising idea, integrating the most effective therapies and interventions to meet an individual client’s needs. It is the opposite of the destructive labelling, and mass produced therapy that is churned out by the schools that peer review articles from a limited perspective. It is about helping people to retake control of their lives as soon as possible. In other words, it’s a practical solution focused approach that helps people who are in danger of being failed by our depersonalised Natiional Health Service.
The evidence to support the Human Givens Approach is being collected and analysed in the form that is required and will show that brief, solution focused therapy is the way forward very soon.
As a psychology post grad I have yet to come across a more integrated and ethical approach to psychological well being than HG. Perhaps those who criticise this approach should study biological and neurological psychology as well as HG before dismissing it. As a HG therapist my main focus is on teaching individuals to be their own therapist/psychologist. I also measure outcomes so clients can track progress and I get feedback on how the client is progressing. It might be an idea to speak to some individuals who have experienced the HG approach before dismissing it.
Incoming links from other sites