Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy: A Comprehensive Clinical and Scientific Review

Introduction: The Genesis and Guiding Theory of EMDR

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy stands as a unique and influential modality in the landscape of modern psychotherapy. Its development did not follow the traditional path of theory-to-practice, but rather emerged from a moment of serendipitous personal observation that sparked decades of clinical innovation, empirical research, and theoretical refinement. This introduction explores the therapy’s origins, tracing the pivotal discovery by its founder, Dr. Francine Shapiro, and examines the sophisticated neurobiological framework—the Adaptive Information Processing (AIP) model—that was subsequently developed to explain its profound clinical effects.

The Serendipitous Discovery of Dr. Francine Shapiro

The history of EMDR therapy begins not in a laboratory or a university, but with a personal experience during a walk in a park in 1987. Dr. Francine Shapiro, a clinical psychologist, noticed that as distressing thoughts entered her mind, her eyes began to move rapidly and spontaneously from side to side. When the thoughts returned, she observed that their negative emotional charge had significantly diminished. Intrigued by this phenomenon, she hypothesized that eye movements possessed a desensitizing effect and began to experiment with this observation in her clinical practice, finding that others reported a similar reduction in distress when intentionally pairing eye movements with traumatic memories.

This initial observation was quickly formalized into a structured procedure she named Eye Movement Desensitization (EMD). Shapiro recognized that eye movements alone were not sufficient to produce comprehensive therapeutic effects and began to integrate other clinical elements, including a cognitive component, to create a standardized protocol. From its inception, this new approach was subjected to empirical validation. In 1989, Shapiro published her first controlled study, which randomly assigned individuals with traumatic memories to either an EMD condition or a control condition that used the same procedure but replaced eye movements with imagery and detailed description. The results were striking: the EMD group showed significantly greater decreases in subjective distress and increases in confidence in a positive belief compared to the control group.

A pivotal moment in the therapy’s evolution occurred in 1991 when Shapiro changed the name from EMD to Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR). This was not a mere semantic adjustment but a reflection of a deeper understanding of the therapeutic process. Clinical experience had revealed that clients were not just becoming desensitized to traumatic memories; they were experiencing cognitive shifts, new insights, and a fundamental change in how the memories were stored and understood. This shift from a focus on desensitization to a broader concept of accelerated information processing marked a critical theoretical leap and set the stage for the development of a comprehensive model to explain its effects.

This developmental trajectory—from personal experience to clinical procedure and only then to a formal theoretical model—is a distinguishing feature of EMDR’s history. Unlike therapies that are derived from pre-existing psychological theories, EMDR’s practice predated its full theoretical explanation. The Adaptive Information Processing model, first detailed in Shapiro’s 1995 textbook, was constructed to make sense of the powerful clinical results being observed. This “practice-to-theory” pathway was a significant reason for the initial skepticism it faced from an academic community more accustomed to the reverse, but it also underscores the therapy’s pragmatic, results-oriented origins.

The Adaptive Information Processing (AIP) Model: A Neurobiological Framework for Healing

The Adaptive Information Processing (AIP) model is the theoretical bedrock of EMDR therapy, providing a neurobiologically informed explanation for the development of psychopathology and the mechanisms of therapeutic change. It is a hopeful and empowering model that reframes the nature of psychological healing.

At its core, the AIP model posits that the human brain has an innate, physiological information-processing system that is geared toward mental health and integration. In the same way the body is configured to heal a physical wound, the brain is designed to “digest” or “metabolize” new experiences by linking them to existing memory networks. This process allows for learning and adaptive resolution, where an experience is understood and integrated into a person’s life story in a healthy way.

Pathology, from the AIP perspective, arises when this natural processing system is blocked or overwhelmed, typically by a traumatic or highly distressing event. The nervous system’s response to the overwhelming experience—marked by physiological imbalances such as increased cortisol and adrenaline—prevents the memory from being adequately processed. As a result, the memory becomes “stuck” or “unprocessed,” stored dysfunctionally in the limbic system in its raw, state-specific form. This unprocessed memory contains the original images, emotions, physical sensations, and negative self-beliefs experienced at the time of the event. These memory networks remain isolated, disconnected from the brain’s cortex where more adaptive information and context are stored.

This leads to the central AIP concept that “the past is present”. When a current event triggers this isolated memory network, the individual does not simply remember the past; they re-experience its raw emotional and physical components in the present moment, leading to symptoms such as intrusive thoughts, flashbacks, emotional reactivity, and somatic distress. The AIP model views negative self-beliefs, such as “I am not good enough” or “I am in danger,” not as the core problem but as symptoms of the unprocessed memory that contains that perspective.

EMDR therapy is designed to directly address these blockages. Through its standardized protocol, particularly the use of dual-attention bilateral stimulation (BLS), the therapy is believed to activate the information processing system, allowing it to resume its natural healing function. This process facilitates dynamic linkages between the previously isolated traumatic memory and more adaptive memory networks. The result is a “transmutation” of the memory: the distressing emotions and physical sensations fade, and the negative cognitions are replaced by more adaptive ones. The goal is not to erase the memory but to integrate it, transforming it from a source of ongoing distress into a neutral memory of a past event that can inform but no longer controls the individual’s present.

This framework represents a significant philosophical shift in the locus of healing. The AIP model’s analogy of the body healing a physical wound is central; healing is an automatic, innate process that proceeds naturally unless a “block” is present. The therapist’s role in EMDR is not to be the primary agent of change, but rather a facilitator who helps to “remove the block,” allowing the client’s own brain to do the healing. This client-centered, non-pathologizing perspective can be profoundly empowering. It reframes the therapeutic narrative from “What is wrong with you?” to “What happened to you, and how can we unlock your natural capacity to heal from it?”. It conveys a message of hope, suggesting that current difficulties are the result of being “stuck,” not “biologically broken,” and that what was learned can be unlearned through reprocessing.

The Anatomy of Healing: Deconstructing the Eight-Phase Protocol

EMDR therapy is not a single technique but a comprehensive, integrative psychotherapy approach delivered through a highly structured eight-phase protocol. This protocol provides a map for the therapist to guide the client through the process of accessing and reprocessing distressing memories in a safe and systematic manner. Each phase has a specific purpose, and their deliberate sequencing is designed to ensure client safety, resource installation, and effective processing. While not all eight phases are used in every session, they collectively form the framework for the entire course of treatment.

Phase 1: History-Taking and Treatment Planning

The foundation of EMDR therapy is laid in this initial phase, which typically takes one to two sessions. The therapist conducts a thorough client history to identify the specific problems and symptoms bringing the client to therapy. This process involves identifying potential target memories—the past adverse life experiences that are believed to be the root of the current dysfunction. A key distinction from many traditional talk therapies is that the client is not required to provide a detailed, narrative account of the trauma. A general outline or a representative image of the event is often sufficient to begin the targeting process, which can be a significant benefit for clients who find it difficult or re-traumatizing to speak about their experiences in depth.

A comprehensive treatment plan is then developed collaboratively between the therapist and the client. This plan is structured around a “three-pronged protocol,” which ensures that therapy addresses the full spectrum of the client’s experience by targeting:

1. Past Events: The historical memories that created the problem.
2. Present Triggers: The current situations and stimuli that cause distress.
3. Future Needs: The skills and adaptive behaviors the client needs to learn for future well-being.

During this phase, the therapist also assesses the client’s internal and external resources and overall readiness for trauma processing.

Phase 2: Preparation

This phase is paramount for ensuring client safety and establishing a strong therapeutic alliance. It can last anywhere from two to four sessions for most clients, and may be extended significantly for those with complex trauma or dissociative tendencies. The therapist thoroughly explains the EMDR process, what the client can expect during and between sessions, and addresses any questions or concerns.

The primary goal of the preparation phase is to ensure the client has adequate coping skills to manage any emotional distress that may arise during the reprocessing phases. The therapist teaches and helps the client practice various self-regulation techniques, such as grounding exercises, deep breathing, and other self-calming strategies. A critical component of this phase is the development and installation of a “safe place” or “calm place”—a vivid and positive mental image that the client can access at any time during therapy to feel grounded and secure if they become overwhelmed. This phase builds the client’s confidence and sense of control over the therapeutic process.

Phase 3: Assessment

Once a specific target memory has been selected for processing, the assessment phase identifies and activates the various components of that memory network. For the chosen target, the client is asked to identify:

• The Image: A specific mental picture that best represents the most disturbing part of the memory.
• The Negative Cognition (NC): A negative statement about the self that is associated with the event (e.g., “I am worthless,” “I am powerless,” “I am not safe”). This represents the maladaptive belief stored with the memory.
• The Positive Cognition (PC): A positive, adaptive statement that the client would rather believe about themselves (e.g., “I am worthwhile,” “I am in control now,” “I am safe now”).
• Emotions and Body Sensations: The specific emotions (e.g., fear, shame, anger) and physical sensations (e.g., tightness in the chest, tension in the shoulders) that are felt when focusing on the image and the NC.

Two baseline measurements are then established to track progress. First, the client rates the Validity of Cognition (VOC), or how true the Positive Cognition feels to them at that moment, on a scale from 1 (completely false) to 7 (completely true). Second, the client rates their level of distress on the Subjective Units of Disturbance (SUD) scale, from 0 (no disturbance) to 10 (the highest disturbance imaginable). These measurements provide a clear starting point for the reprocessing work.

Phase 4: Desensitization

This phase marks the beginning of the core reprocessing work. The client is instructed to hold the target image, the Negative Cognition, and the associated body sensations in mind. The therapist then initiates sets of bilateral stimulation (BLS). While eye movements are the most well-known form of BLS, therapists may also use auditory tones that alternate between ears or tactile pulsers held in each hand.

Each set of BLS typically lasts for about 30 seconds. After each set, the stimulation is stopped, and the therapist asks the client a simple, open-ended question, such as, “What do you notice now?” or “What came up?”. The client briefly reports whatever new thoughts, feelings, images, or sensations have emerged, without judgment or analysis. This process allows the brain’s information processing system to make spontaneous new connections and associations, effectively “digesting” the traumatic material. The therapist continues to lead the client through repeated sets of BLS, following the associative channels that emerge, until the client’s SUD rating for the target memory is reduced to 0 or 1.

Phase 5: Installation

Once the distress associated with the memory has been cleared (desensitization is complete), the focus shifts to strengthening the desired Positive Cognition. The client is asked to hold the original target event in mind along with the Positive Cognition (e.g., “I am in control now”). The therapist then administers further sets of BLS to “install” and reinforce this new, adaptive belief. This process continues until the client rates the PC as a 7 on the Validity of Cognition (VOC) scale, indicating that it feels completely true. This phase is crucial for linking the now-neutralized memory with a positive and empowering sense of self.

Phase 6: Body Scan

This phase addresses the somatic, or physical, component of traumatic memory. A core premise of EMDR is that unresolved thoughts and traumas are often stored in “body memory” and manifest as physical tension or other sensations. After the PC has been installed, the therapist asks the client to bring the original target event to mind and mentally scan their body from head to toe, noticing any remaining tension, tightness, or other unpleasant physical sensations. If any residual disturbance is detected, it is targeted with additional sets of BLS until the client can recall the original event without feeling any negative body tension. The reprocessing of a target is not considered complete until the body is clear of any related disturbance.

Phase 7: Closure

Every EMDR session, regardless of whether a memory has been fully processed, ends with the closure phase. The purpose of this phase is to ensure that the client leaves the session feeling calm, grounded, and in a state of emotional equilibrium. If the processing of a memory is incomplete, the therapist will guide the client through containment exercises, such as the “safe place” technique developed in Phase 2, to help them manage the material until the next session. The client is also briefed on what to expect between sessions, as the brain may continue to process the material. They are often encouraged to keep a journal to log any new memories, dreams, or insights that may arise, which can then be discussed at the beginning of the next session.

Phase 8: Reevaluation

The reevaluation phase opens every new session that follows a reprocessing session. The therapist and client review the progress made so far, checking the targets that were processed in the previous session to ensure that the SUD level remains at 0 and the VOC for the positive belief remains high. This phase serves as a crucial feedback loop, allowing the therapist to assess the effectiveness of the treatment over time and to determine the direction for the current session. Based on this reevaluation, they may decide to address any new material that has emerged, move on to the next target in the treatment plan, or focus on present triggers or future templates.

The deliberate architecture of this eight-phase protocol reveals a sophisticated clinical awareness of the challenges of trauma work. The protocol is not arbitrary; it is carefully sequenced to prioritize client safety and containment. The extensive work in Phases 1 and 2—history-taking, rapport-building, and resource installation—creates a robust scaffolding of safety before the client ever engages with distressing material. This preparatory work is a direct counter to concerns that the therapy could be re-traumatizing. Furthermore, the consistent use of Phase 7 (Closure) at the end of every session acts as a container, ensuring that the client is returned to a state of stability, even if the processing of a memory is ongoing. This built-in emphasis on safety and pacing is particularly vital for clients with complex trauma histories, demonstrating the protocol’s capacity for careful and responsible therapeutic application.

Clinical Applications: Scope of Treatment and Target Populations

While EMDR therapy gained its initial and most prominent reputation as a treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, its clinical application has expanded significantly over the past three decades. Guided by the Adaptive Information Processing model, which posits that many psychological conditions stem from unprocessed adverse life experiences, clinicians have successfully applied EMDR to a wide range of mental health issues. This section examines the scope of EMDR’s use, from its primary indication for PTSD to its growing role in treating depression, anxiety, and other complex disorders.

Primary Indication: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

EMDR therapy was originally developed for and remains the gold standard treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). It is recognized as a first-line, evidence-based psychotherapy for PTSD by a consensus of major national and international health organizations, including the World Health Organization and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

The therapy has demonstrated robust efficacy across the full spectrum of traumatic experiences. This includes single-incident traumas, often referred to as “Big T” traumas, such as physical or sexual assault, combat exposure, car accidents, or natural disasters. Research has shown remarkable rates of symptom relief for this population, with some studies indicating that between 84% and 90% of single-trauma victims no longer meet the diagnostic criteria for PTSD after just three to six sessions.

Furthermore, EMDR is effective for treating complex or developmental trauma, which can result from prolonged or repeated adverse experiences, often occurring in childhood, such as ongoing abuse or neglect. The therapy’s efficacy has been consistently validated in diverse populations, including military veterans, first responders, refugees, and survivors of sexual assault, demonstrating its cross-cultural applicability and broad utility.

Expanding Applications: Depression and Mood Disorders

A significant and growing body of research supports the use of EMDR for depression and other mood disorders. This application is grounded in the AIP model’s premise that many cases of depression are linked to unprocessed memories of loss, failure, humiliation, or other distressing life events that contribute to negative self-beliefs and a hopeless outlook. By targeting and reprocessing these foundational memories, EMDR can alleviate the depressive symptoms they fuel.

Multiple randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have found EMDR to be an effective treatment for depression, with outcomes comparable to those of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Notably, some studies suggest that EMDR may produce these positive results more rapidly than CBT and may be associated with a lower rate of relapse at long-term follow-up. The therapy has shown particular promise for individuals with recurrent or treatment-resistant depression, offering a valuable non-pharmacological option for those who have not responded to other interventions.

Anxiety, Phobias, and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

EMDR therapy is increasingly utilized for a wide array of anxiety disorders, including generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety, panic attacks, and specific phobias. The therapeutic strategy involves identifying the formative life experiences that underlie the persistent fear and worry. For example, a debilitating fear of public speaking might be traced back to a specific memory of humiliation in a classroom, which can then be targeted for reprocessing. Similarly, a panic attack may be linked to an earlier, unprocessed frightening event. By neutralizing the emotional charge of these root memories, EMDR helps to reduce the client’s present-day anxiety and avoidance behaviors. Evidence also indicates its potential utility for related conditions such as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and body dysmorphic disorder, where intrusive thoughts and compulsive behaviors are often linked to underlying distressing experiences.

Addictions and Eating Disorders

The application of EMDR to addictions and eating disorders is based on the clinical understanding that these conditions frequently develop as maladaptive coping mechanisms for unresolved trauma or severe emotional distress. Substance abuse, compulsive eating, or restrictive behaviors can serve as attempts to numb painful feelings or regain a sense of control that was lost during adverse experiences.

EMDR therapy in this context follows a dual approach. It is used to identify and reprocess the underlying trauma that drives the maladaptive behavior. Concurrently, it can be used to desensitize the triggers and cues that lead to cravings or compulsive urges, reinforcing more positive and adaptive emotional states. While more large-scale research is needed, clinical case studies and reviews have shown promising results. For instance, EMDR has been instrumental in the recovery of patients with unremitting anorexia nervosa and has been shown to produce positive changes in emotional eating behaviors.

The successful application of EMDR across such a diverse range of diagnostic categories—from PTSD to depression, anxiety, and addictions—points to the unifying power of its underlying theoretical framework. This breadth of efficacy suggests that the AIP model may function as a trans-diagnostic theory of psychopathology. The common thread connecting these seemingly disparate conditions is the etiological role of unprocessed adverse life experiences. This implies that the specific symptom presentation (e.g., depressive rumination versus anxious avoidance) may be a secondary manifestation of a primary, underlying mechanism: a dysfunctionally stored memory network. The AIP model provides a single, coherent explanation for how these different clinical pictures can emerge from similar root causes. This perspective challenges a purely symptom-based approach to mental health treatment, suggesting that by targeting and resolving the foundational memory networks, EMDR can produce therapeutic effects across multiple symptomatic domains simultaneously, offering a potentially more efficient and holistic path to healing.

The Evidence Base: A Critical Examination of Efficacy

Since its inception, EMDR therapy has been the subject of extensive scientific research, evolving from a controversial new technique to a therapy with a robust and continuously growing evidence base. Its effectiveness, particularly for PTSD, is now widely acknowledged, supported by numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and its inclusion in major clinical practice guidelines worldwide. This section provides a critical examination of this evidence, presenting quantitative findings, summarizing its official recognition, and acknowledging the methodological considerations that are part of a healthy scientific discourse.

Meta-Analytic Findings and Effect Sizes

Meta-analyses, which statistically aggregate the results of multiple independent studies, provide a powerful tool for assessing a therapy’s overall effectiveness. A significant body of meta-analytic research has consistently concluded that EMDR is a highly effective treatment for PTSD, yielding moderate to strong treatment effects.

One comprehensive meta-analysis of 26 RCTs involving PTSD patients quantified these effects, finding that EMDR treatment resulted in significant reductions in the primary symptoms of PTSD, with a standardized mean difference (Hedges’ g) of -0.662. This same study also found significant reductions in comorbid symptoms of depression (g=−0.643) and anxiety (g=−0.640), indicating that the therapy’s benefits extend beyond the core trauma symptoms. Another recent meta-analysis focused specifically on depression confirmed EMDR’s efficacy for this condition, particularly in severe cases, reporting a large and significant effect size (g=0.75) for the reduction of depressive symptoms. Across studies, a consistent and clinically meaningful outcome is the high rate of loss of PTSD diagnosis following a course of EMDR therapy, with many participants no longer meeting the criteria for the disorder post-treatment.

Recognition in Clinical Practice Guidelines

The strength of the evidence base for EMDR is reflected in its widespread endorsement by major national and international health organizations. It has achieved the highest level of recommendation in most authoritative clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of PTSD, placing it firmly alongside other gold-standard, trauma-focused therapies.

This global consensus is a testament to the quality and consistency of the research findings. Key organizations that strongly recommend or recognize EMDR as a first-line treatment for PTSD include:

• The World Health Organization (WHO): Recommends EMDR as a preferred psychotherapy for PTSD in children, adolescents, and adults.
• The American Psychiatric Association (APA): Notes EMDR’s effectiveness for treating both acute and chronic PTSD symptoms.
• The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs & Department of Defense (VA/DoD): Places EMDR in their highest “A” category as “strongly recommended” for the treatment of trauma in both military and civilian populations.
• The International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS): Includes EMDR in the highest category of effectiveness and research support.
• The United Kingdom’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): Identifies trauma-focused CBT and EMDR as the empirically supported treatments of choice for PTSD.
• Other National Health Bodies: Similar recommendations have been issued by health authorities in France, Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, and Israel, among others.

Methodological Considerations and Critiques

While the overall body of evidence supporting EMDR is substantial, a balanced assessment requires acknowledging the methodological critiques that have been raised within the scientific literature. Some reviews and meta-analyses, while affirming the therapy’s effectiveness, have also highlighted limitations in parts of the existing research base.

Common criticisms have included the use of small sample sizes in some studies, a lack of long-term follow-up data to assess the durability of treatment effects, and potential allegiance bias, where researchers may be predisposed to finding positive results for a favored therapy. For instance, one recent meta-analysis concluded that while EMDR showed a positive effect, many of the selected studies lacked sufficient methodological rigor to allow their findings to be definitively extrapolated to all clinical settings, calling for continued high-quality research. Similarly, a systematic review on EMDR for depression noted that while the therapy appears promising, the literature still contains studies with methodological flaws that could lead to an overestimation of its effectiveness.

The trajectory of this scientific discourse, however, reveals a field that is maturing under scrutiny. The nature of the research has evolved significantly since the therapy’s introduction. Early trials in the 1990s were often less methodologically rigorous, which contributed to initial skepticism and conflicting results. In response to these early critiques, the research community has produced a growing number of more sophisticated and well-controlled RCTs in recent years. The very existence of multiple, large-scale meta-analyses is a testament to the fact that a sufficient volume of primary research now exists to warrant such comprehensive reviews. Therefore, the ongoing critiques should not be seen as a sign of the therapy’s failure, but rather as a hallmark of a healthy and dynamic scientific process. EMDR has successfully navigated the challenging path from a novel and controversial technique to a therapy with a substantial evidence base that is robust enough to withstand, and indeed benefit from, continuous critical evaluation.

A Comparative Therapeutic Landscape

To fully appreciate the unique contributions of EMDR therapy, it is essential to situate it within the broader context of evidence-based treatments for trauma. A comparative analysis with two other leading trauma-focused psychotherapies—Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Prolonged Exposure (PE) therapy—illuminates the key differences in theoretical underpinnings, therapeutic techniques, and the overall client experience.

EMDR vs. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)

While both EMDR and trauma-focused CBT are highly effective treatments for PTSD, they operate on different principles and utilize distinct methods.

• Core Difference in Approach: CBT is a form of talk therapy that operates on the principle that psychological problems are based, in part, on unhelpful ways of thinking and learned patterns of unhelpful behavior. The primary goal is to help clients identify, challenge, and change their distorted or negative thought patterns (cognitive restructuring) and modify their behaviors. In contrast, EMDR is less focused on direct, conscious-level cognitive challenging. It operates on the AIP model’s premise that negative cognitions are symptoms of a maladaptively stored memory. The therapy aims to reprocess the memory itself, with the understanding that as the memory is integrated, the associated negative thoughts will naturally shift to more adaptive ones without the need for direct Socratic questioning or debate.
• Client Experience and Requirements: The therapeutic process in CBT typically involves a high degree of verbal disclosure, as the client and therapist talk in-depth about thoughts, feelings, and events. CBT often includes “homework” assignments to be completed between sessions, such as thought records, behavioral experiments, or worksheets, to reinforce learning and practice new skills. EMDR, conversely, does not rely on homework and can be effective with significantly less detailed verbalization of the traumatic event. This can make it a more suitable option for clients who find it exceptionally difficult or re-traumatizing to talk about their experiences at length.
• Efficacy and Efficiency: Numerous head-to-head comparisons and meta-analyses have found EMDR and CBT to be roughly equivalent in their effectiveness for reducing PTSD symptoms. However, a recurring theme in the research is the potential for EMDR to be more efficient. Several studies have suggested that EMDR can achieve comparable or superior results in fewer sessions and with a lower overall time commitment from the client, making it a potentially faster-acting therapy.

EMDR vs. Prolonged Exposure (PE) Therapy

Prolonged Exposure is another gold-standard, evidence-based treatment for PTSD, and while it shares the goal of reducing trauma-related distress, its mechanism and methods differ fundamentally from EMDR.

• Core Difference in Technique: PE is rooted in emotional processing theory and learning principles. Its primary therapeutic mechanism is exposure. The client is systematically and repeatedly exposed to trauma-related memories (imaginal exposure, by retelling the traumatic story in detail) and safe, real-world situations they have been avoiding (in vivo exposure). The goal is to help the client habituate to the fear and anxiety, learning that the memories and reminders are not dangerous, thereby extinguishing the conditioned fear response. EMDR’s primary mechanism is not habituation through exposure but the reprocessing and integration of the traumatic memory into more adaptive neural networks, facilitated by bilateral stimulation.
• Treatment Structure and Demands: PE is a highly structured and demanding therapy, typically involving 8 to 15 weekly sessions. A critical component is extensive homework; clients are usually required to listen to audio recordings of their imaginal exposure sessions for an hour each day and to engage in daily in vivo exposure exercises. This high level of homework compliance can be a barrier for some clients in community settings. EMDR, by contrast, does not involve homework and can often be completed in a shorter overall timeframe.
• Efficacy: Both PE and EMDR have strong empirical support and are strongly recommended as first-line treatments for PTSD. Direct comparative studies have produced mixed results; some have found the treatments to be equally effective, while others have found a slight advantage for one over the other in certain domains. An explorative study on combining the two therapies in an intensive program found that the sequence mattered, with patients showing a greater reduction in PTSD symptoms when they received PE sessions before EMDR sessions. This suggests that the therapies may have complementary effects, and more research is needed to understand which clients might benefit most from each approach or a combination thereof.

The fundamental distinction between EMDR and exposure-based therapies like PE can be understood as a “processing versus exposure” dichotomy. These approaches have different theoretical goals. Exposure therapies are based on extinction learning models; they aim to make the client less afraid of the traumatic memory and its reminders through habituation. The memory itself remains unchanged, but the client’s reaction to it is diminished. The AIP model, which guides EMDR, posits a different outcome: the “transmutation” and “reconsolidation” of the memory itself. EMDR seeks to change the very nature of the memory, integrating it with adaptive information so that it is no longer stored in a distressing form. This distinction has important clinical implications. For clients who are highly avoidant or for whom prolonged, detailed retelling of their trauma is too aversive, EMDR’s approach—which requires less direct verbalization and no homework—may offer a more tolerable, yet equally effective, path to recovery.

The Discourse of Debate: Criticisms, Controversies, and Considerations

Despite its widespread acceptance and robust evidence base, EMDR therapy has been accompanied by a significant level of debate and controversy since its inception. This critical discourse has been essential to its development, pushing the field toward more rigorous research and a deeper understanding of its processes. The controversies primarily revolve around its unique mechanism of action, its potential risks, and early criticisms of its scientific foundation. This section provides a balanced examination of these issues.

The Central Controversy: The Mechanism of Action and the Role of Eye Movements

The most persistent and scientifically intriguing controversy surrounding EMDR is the uncertainty about how it works and, more specifically, whether the bilateral stimulation (BLS)—particularly the characteristic eye movements—is a therapeutically essential component.

• The Skeptical View: From the beginning, critics have questioned whether the eye movements provide any specific therapeutic benefit beyond what can be attributed to other, more established therapeutic elements. The core argument of this position is that EMDR’s positive outcomes are simply the result of imaginal exposure (i.e., recalling the traumatic memory) combined with other common therapeutic factors like a strong therapeutic alliance and cognitive restructuring that occurs naturally during the session. From this perspective, the eye movements are considered an unnecessary, theatrical addition—a “purple hat therapy”—that adds no value to the underlying exposure component. This view is supported by some studies that have failed to find a significant difference in outcomes between standard EMDR and modified versions where the eye movements are removed, leaving only the memory retrieval component.
• The Proponent View and Leading Theories: Proponents of EMDR maintain that BLS is a critical ingredient that accelerates the processing of traumatic material. While the exact neurobiological mechanism is still a subject of active research, several compelling theories have been proposed to explain its effects:

• Working Memory Theory: This is currently the most empirically supported explanation. It posits that recalling a vivid, emotional memory consumes significant cognitive resources in a person’s working memory. Simultaneously performing a dual-attention task, such as following a therapist’s moving finger, also demands working memory resources. This competition for a limited pool of resources “taxes” the working memory, making the traumatic memory less vivid and less emotional. This degradation of the memory allows it to be re-encoded (reconsolidated) in a less distressing form.
• REM Sleep Analogy: An early hypothesis suggested that the saccadic eye movements used in EMDR mimic the eye movements that occur during Rapid Eye Movement (REM) sleep. REM sleep is known to play a crucial role in memory consolidation and the processing of emotional experiences. The theory suggests that EMDR may artificially stimulate this natural processing state, allowing for the accelerated integration of distressing memories.
• Orienting Reflex: Another theory proposes that the novel, back-and-forth stimulus of BLS triggers a physiological “orienting reflex” or investigatory response. This initial alert response is followed by a reflexive pause and a state of relaxation, which may help to inhibit the negative affect and hyperarousal associated with the traumatic memory, creating a state more conducive to processing.

The nature of this debate has evolved significantly over time. Early criticisms often dismissed the therapy entirely due to its unconventional origins and a perceived lack of a plausible mechanism. However, as the body of evidence demonstrating EMDR’s efficacy grew to be undeniable, the focus of the scientific discourse shifted. The central question is no longer whether EMDR works, but why and how it works. This evolution from a debate about efficacy to a more nuanced debate about mechanism is a sign of the therapy’s scientific maturation. It has moved from the periphery to a position where its underlying neurobiological processes are a subject of serious and ongoing scientific inquiry.

Potential Risks, Side Effects, and Contraindications

Like any potent psychotherapy, EMDR is not without potential risks and side effects, and it is not suitable for every client. A properly trained therapist will conduct a thorough assessment and ensure adequate preparation to mitigate these risks. The side effects are typically short-lived and are often considered a natural part of the brain’s reprocessing work.

• Common Short-Term Effects:

• Emotional Distress: Accessing deeply distressing material can lead to a temporary increase in emotional intensity during or immediately following a session. Clients may experience heightened anxiety, sadness, anger, or feel emotionally sensitive for a few hours to a couple of days.
• Physical Symptoms: The intense cognitive and emotional work can manifest physically. Some clients report headaches, fatigue, dizziness, lightheadedness, or muscle tension after a session.
• Vivid Dreams and Emergence of New Memories: As the brain continues to process information between sessions, clients may experience an increase in vivid dreams or nightmares. It is also common for new, sometimes forgotten, memories or insights to surface, which can feel unsettling but is a sign that the memory networks are connecting.

• Contraindications and Client Suitability: Careful client screening is essential. EMDR may be contraindicated or require significant modification and stabilization work before proceeding with clients who:

• Are in an active crisis or an ongoing traumatic situation (e.g., living with an abuser, active and unstable substance use disorder). The client’s environment must be stable enough to support the therapeutic work.
• Have certain co-occurring conditions, such as severe dissociative disorders, active psychosis, or seizure disorders, which could be exacerbated by the intense emotional processing. For these clients, an extended preparation phase (Phase 2) focused on stabilization and resource-building is absolutely critical.

• Risk of Retraumatization: The most significant risk is that of retraumatization, which can occur if the therapy is rushed, if the preparation phase is inadequate, or if the therapist is not sufficiently trained. A skilled therapist carefully paces the treatment, monitors the client’s level of distress, and uses containment techniques to ensure the client remains within their “window of tolerance” and is not overwhelmed by the material.

Common Myths and Misconceptions

The unique nature of EMDR has led to several common misconceptions. It is important to address these with factual information:

• Myth: EMDR implants false memories. Fact: EMDR works only with existing memories and information stored in the brain. It does not create new or false memories. While new connections or forgotten aspects of a memory may surface, the process is one of uncovering, not implanting.
• Myth: EMDR is a “one-session cure.” Fact: While Shapiro’s initial paper noted significant desensitization in a single session, she never claimed EMDR could cure PTSD in one session. EMDR is a comprehensive, multi-session psychotherapy. While some single-incident traumas may resolve relatively quickly, complex trauma requires a longer course of treatment.
• Myth: You will lose control during a session. Fact: The client is always in control during EMDR. They are awake, alert, and can stop the process at any time. The therapist uses pacing and grounding techniques to ensure the experience remains manageable.

The Practitioner and the Profession

The successful transition of EMDR from a controversial technique to a globally recognized psychotherapy was not solely due to its clinical effectiveness; it was also driven by the strategic development of a robust professional infrastructure. The establishment of clear training standards, a certification process, and a governing professional association was instrumental in ensuring practitioner competence, promoting ethical practice, and gaining the trust of the wider mental health community and major institutions.

Training and Certification Standards

Practicing EMDR therapy effectively and safely requires specialized training that goes well beyond a standard graduate degree in a mental health field. The EMDR International Association (EMDRIA), the primary governing body, has established rigorous standards for what constitutes an approved “EMDR Basic Training” program.

The minimum curriculum requirements set by EMDRIA include:

• 20 hours of didactic instruction: Covering the theoretical foundations (AIP model), the eight-phase methodology, case conceptualization, and treatment planning.
• 20 hours of supervised practicum: Providing trainees with hands-on experience practicing the EMDR protocol with other trainees under the direct observation and feedback of a trainer.
• 10 hours of case consultation: This crucial component requires trainees to discuss their actual clinical cases with an EMDRIA-Approved Consultant, ensuring they can apply the methodology correctly and ethically in their real-world practice.

Eligibility for this training is typically restricted to licensed mental health professionals who hold a master’s degree or higher in a clinical field (e.g., psychology, social work, counseling), or to graduate students who are in the practicum or internship phase of their program under licensed supervision.

Beyond the initial basic training, therapists can pursue advanced credentials to signify a higher level of expertise. EMDRIA Certification is an optional but highly regarded credential that requires a therapist to have completed basic training, conducted a minimum number of EMDR sessions with a minimum number of clients, and received additional hours of consultation from an Approved Consultant. A further level of expertise is the EMDRIA-Approved Consultant status, which qualifies an experienced certified therapist to provide consultation to other clinicians and to become a facilitator in basic training programs. This tiered system of professional development ensures a high standard of practice and mentorship within the EMDR community.

The Role of Professional Organizations: EMDRIA

The EMDR International Association (EMDRIA) was founded in 1995 as a professional association independent from Dr. Shapiro and the EMDR Institute. Its establishment was a critical step in the professionalization and legitimization of the therapy. EMDRIA serves several key functions: it sets and maintains the standards for training, certification, and clinical practice; it promotes research and the dissemination of knowledge about EMDR; and it serves as a vital resource for both clinicians and the public. One of its most important public-facing roles is maintaining a searchable online directory of its members, allowing individuals seeking therapy to find qualified, trained, and certified practitioners in their area.

The development of this professional infrastructure was a deliberate and necessary strategy to overcome the significant skepticism EMDR faced in its early years. By creating a rigorous, multi-level system of training and certification, and by restricting training to licensed clinicians to ensure ethical application, the EMDR community built a framework of quality control and professional accountability. This professionalization was instrumental in gaining the trust of major institutions like the APA and the VA, providing the institutional credibility necessary for EMDR’s widespread adoption and its inclusion in clinical practice guidelines.

Finding a Qualified Practitioner

For individuals seeking EMDR therapy, finding a properly trained and qualified practitioner is crucial for a safe and effective experience. The following steps can guide this process:

• Use Reputable Directories: The most reliable way to find a qualified therapist is through the online directories maintained by professional organizations like EMDRIA or by reputable training bodies like the EMDR Institute or the Maiberger Institute.
• Verify Training Credentials: At a minimum, a therapist should have completed an EMDRIA-Approved Basic Training program. Looking for a therapist who is an “EMDRIA Certified Therapist” or an “EMDRIA Approved Consultant” ensures a higher level of experience and expertise.
• Ask Specific Questions: During an initial consultation, it is appropriate to ask about the therapist’s training, how long they have been practicing EMDR, and their experience working with issues similar to one’s own. Important questions include their approach to the preparation and stabilization phase, how they handle client distress during a session, and their experience with complex trauma or dissociation if applicable.

For individuals in the United States, particularly in Missouri, finding a local practitioner involves similar principles. State and local networks, such as the Greater St. Louis EMDR Network, can provide resources and information for both the public and professionals. Clinical practices and counseling centers across the state, from Kansas City and St. Louis to Columbia and Springfield, often have EMDR-trained professionals on staff. When searching, it is important to look for therapists who are licensed in Missouri and have completed an EMDRIA-approved training program. Verifying credentials such as “EMDRIA Certified Therapist” or “EMDRIA Approved Consultant” ensures a higher level of experience and expertise.

Conclusion: The Integrated Future of EMDR Therapy

The journey of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing therapy over the past three decades is a remarkable story of clinical innovation, scientific validation, and professional maturation. From its origins in a moment of serendipitous self-observation, EMDR has evolved into a sophisticated, comprehensive psychotherapy that has fundamentally changed the landscape of trauma treatment. Its path, marked by both fervent support and significant skepticism, highlights the dynamic interplay between clinical practice, theoretical development, and empirical research in the advancement of mental health care.

Summary of Findings: From Serendipity to a Scientific Standard

This review has traced EMDR’s evolution from Dr. Francine Shapiro’s initial discovery to its current status as a globally recognized, evidence-based therapy. Its core strength lies in the synergy between its guiding theoretical framework, the Adaptive Information Processing (AIP) model, and its structured, eight-phase clinical protocol. The AIP model offers a compelling, neurobiologically plausible explanation for how traumatic memories become dysfunctionally stored and how they can be integrated through targeted reprocessing, reframing pathology not as a personal deficit but as a block in the brain’s innate healing system.

The eight-phase protocol provides a safe, systematic, and client-centered methodology for removing these blocks. Its efficacy, particularly for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, is now supported by a substantial body of evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, and it has earned the highest level of recommendation from a consensus of major international health organizations. Furthermore, its unique client experience—often requiring less detailed verbal disclosure and no homework compared to other leading trauma therapies—has made it an invaluable and often preferred option for many individuals who have been unable to find relief through other means.

Lingering Questions and Future Directions

Despite its success, the scientific inquiry into EMDR is far from complete. The most significant lingering question remains the precise neurobiological mechanism of action of bilateral stimulation. While the Working Memory Theory provides a strong and testable hypothesis, further high-quality research is needed to definitively elucidate the complex processes at play during reprocessing and to further validate the essential role of the dual-attention component.

The future of EMDR also lies in the continued exploration of its clinical applications. While its efficacy for PTSD is well-established, the evidence base for its use in treating depression, anxiety disorders, addictions, and other conditions continues to grow. More large-scale, rigorous RCTs are needed to fully validate its effectiveness across this broader spectrum of disorders. Additionally, a promising area of clinical innovation involves the thoughtful integration of EMDR with other therapeutic modalities. Clinicians are increasingly combining the power of EMDR’s memory reprocessing with insights and techniques from approaches like Internal Family Systems (IFS), somatic therapies, and attachment theory to provide even more nuanced and holistic care, particularly for clients with complex developmental trauma.

Final Synthesis: EMDR’s Place in Modern Psychotherapy

EMDR therapy has secured its place as an indispensable tool in modern psychotherapy. It has not only provided millions of people with a powerful pathway to healing from trauma but has also profoundly advanced the field’s understanding of memory, information processing, and the brain’s incredible capacity for resilience. Its journey from a controversial outlier to a mainstream, evidence-based standard of care serves as a powerful testament to the value of clinical curiosity, empirical rigor, and an openness to novel approaches in the ongoing mission to alleviate human suffering. As research continues to unravel its mechanisms and clinicians continue to refine its application, EMDR therapy is poised to play an even larger and more integrated role in the future of mental health treatment worldwide.

Works cited

1. History of EMDR – EMDR Institute – EYE MOVEMENT …, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdr.com/history-of-emdr/
2. The History and Evolution of EMDR Therapy – Therapist Education Institute, accessed September  , 22, https://www.therapisteducationinstitute.com/blog/history-and-evolution-of-emdr-therapy
3. The Comprehensive History Of EMDR Therapy: Origins And Evolution – Ezra Counseling, accessed September  , 22, https://ezracounseling.com/comprehensive-history-emdr-therapy-origins-evolution-scottsdale-az/
4. Appendix G: History of EMDR Therapy – Springer Publishing, accessed September  , 22, https://connect.springerpub.com/content/book/–2 –/back-matter/bmatter
5. EMDR Therapy Beginnings: Francine Shapiro, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdria.org/blog/emdr-therapy-beginnings-francine-shapiro/
6. Healing Through AIP: Insight Into EMDR – Ezra Counseling, accessed September  , 22, https://ezracounseling.com/healing-through-aip-insight-into-emdr/
7. EMDR and the Adaptive Information Processing ModelPotential Mechanisms of Change, accessed September  , 22, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233  _EMDR_and_the_Adaptive_Information_Processing_ModelPotential_Mechanisms_of_Change
8. Bolstering the adaptive information processing model: a narrative review – PMC, accessed September  , 22, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC   3 /
9. Adaptive Information Processing (AIP) Model – EMDR International …, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdria.org/about-emdr-therapy/aip-model/
10. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) | Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, accessed September  , 22, https://www.ttuhsc.edu/medicine/psychiatry/counseling/emdr.aspx
11. Blog | Adaptive Information Processing Model (AIP) – Tamie Pushlar, LCSW-R, accessed September  , 22, https://www.pushlarlcsw.com/blog/ /2 /adaptive-information-processing-model-aip/
12. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) for PTSD, accessed September  , 22, https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treat/txessentials/emdr_pro.asp
13. The Eight Phases of EMDR Therapy – EMDR International Association, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdria.org/blog/the-eight-phases-of-emdr-therapy/
14.  Mental Illness Symptoms EMDR Therapy Can Help With, accessed September  , 22, https://www.therapyutah.org/mental-illness-symptoms-emdr-therapy-can-help-with/
15.  Phases of EMDR: A detalied walkthrough – Corner Canyon Health Centers, accessed September  , 22, https://cornercanyonhc.com/blog/-phases-of-emdr/
16. The Eight (Magical) Phases of EMDR Therapy Demystified | Psychology Today, accessed September  , 22, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/relationship-and-trauma-insights/22 2/the-eight-magical-phases-emdr-therapy-demystified
17. EMDR Therapy (Eye Movement Desensitization & Reprocessing), accessed September  , 22, https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/emdr-what-is-it
18. EMDR Overview: The  Phases and 3 Prongs – YouTube, accessed September  , 22, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGRojouD h
19. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) for PTSD, accessed September  , 22, https://www.ptsd.va.gov/understand_tx/emdr.asp
20. The  Phases of EMDR Explained – Zinnia Health, accessed September  , 22, https://zinniahealth.com/mental-health/therapies/emdr-therapy/phases
21. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR): Helping During Treatment, accessed September  , 22, https://www.ptsd.va.gov/family/how_help_emdr.asp
22. Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, accessed September  , 22, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_movement_desensitization_and_reprocessing
23.  Mental Health Conditions that Can Benefit from EMDR – Amen Clinics, accessed September  , 22, https://www.amenclinics.com/blog/-mental-health-conditions-that-can-benefit-from-emdr/
24. Tapping into the benefits of EMDR – American Counseling Association, accessed September  , 22, https://www.counseling.org/publications/counseling-today-magazine/article-archive/article/legacy/tapping-into-the-benefits-of-emdr
25. How effective is EMDR? – PTSD UK, accessed September  , 22, https://www.ptsduk.org/how-effective-is-emdr/
26. EMDR as Treatment Option for Conditions Other Than PTSD: A Systematic Review – PMC, accessed September  , 22, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3/
27. The Efficacy of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Treatment for Depression: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized Controlled Trials – MDPI, accessed September  , 22, https://www.mdpi.com/2-33/ 3/ /33
28. Efficacy of Eye-Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing for …, accessed September  , 22, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id= . 3 /journal.pone. 3
29. The Use of Eye-Movement Desensitization Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy in Treating Post-traumatic Stress Disorder—A Systematic Narrative Review – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed September  , 22, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3 /
30. National & International recognition | EMDR Europe, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdr-europe.org/what-we-do/science/national-international-recognition
31. Discover EMDR – EMDR UK Association, accessed September  , 22, https://emdrassociation.org.uk/discover-emdr/
32. The Unique Integrative Aspects of EMDR – Psychology Today, accessed September  , 22, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/relationship-and-trauma-insights/222 2/the-unique-integrative-aspects-of-emdr
33. Efficacy of EMDR in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials – Psicothema, accessed September  , 22, https://www.psicothema.com/pdf/2.pdf
34. Why is EMDR so Controversial in Trauma Therapy? – Waterside Behavioral Health, accessed September  , 22, https://watersidebehavioralhealth.com/blog/why-is-emdr-so-controversial/
35. Why Is EMDR So Controversial? | SoCal Sunrise, accessed September  , 22, https://socalsunrise.com/why-is-emdr-so-controversial/
36. Evaluating the effectiveness of tfCBT and EMDR interventions for PTSD in an NHS Talking Therapies service | the Cognitive Behaviour Therapist – Cambridge University Press & Assessment, accessed September  , 22, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-cognitive-behaviour-therapist/article/evaluating-the-effectiveness-of-tfcbt-and-emdr-interventions-for-ptsd-in-an-nhs-talking-therapies-service/A2A3 CDEABD3CBEBE
37. EMDR vs CBT: What’s the Difference? – Transformations Care Network, accessed September  , 22, https://www.transformationsnetwork.com/post/emdr-vs-cbt-whats-the-difference
38. EMDR vs. CBT: What’s the Difference? [Explained By a Therapist], accessed September  , 22, https://www.hopefulheartcounseling.com/blog/emdr-vs-cbt
39. Comparison of EMDR – EMDR Institute – EYE MOVEMENT DESENSITIZATION AND REPROCESSING THERAPY, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdr.com/comparison-of-emdr/
40. Trauma Focused Cognitive Behavioural Therapy vs Eye Movement Desensitisation Reprocessing (EMDR) – YouTube, accessed September  , 22, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiuGARYXSMg
41. EMDR vs Prolonged Exposure Therapy – The Wellness Institute, accessed September  , 22, https://www.wellness-institute.org/blog/emdr-vs-prolonged-exposure-therapy
42. Overview of Psychotherapy for PTSD, accessed September  , 22, https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treat/txessentials/overview_therapy.asp
43. Sequence matters: Combining Prolonged Exposure and EMDR therapy for PTSD – PubMed, accessed September  , 22, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/323 /
44. Why Is EMDR So Controversial? Understanding the Criticisms and Concerns – BHSI, accessed September  , 22, https://bhsiclinics.com/why-is-emdr-so-controversial-understanding-the-criticisms-and-concerns/
45. Dangers of EMDR Therapy: Side Effects & Misconceptions, accessed September  , 22, https://www.simplypsychology.org/dangers-of-emdr-therapy.html
46. The Effectiveness of Eye Movement Desensitization for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Indonesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial – Frontiers, accessed September  , 22, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/ .33/fpsyg.222.2/full
47. Dangers of EMDR Therapy: Risks and Precautions – Healthline, accessed September  , 22, https://www.healthline.com/health/dangers-of-emdr-therapy
48. Side Effects of EMDR Therapy – High Focus Centers, accessed September  , 22, https://www.highfocuscenters.com/22//2/side-effects-of-emdr-therapy/
49. Dangers of EMDR Therapy: What No One Tells You | Healing Springs, accessed September  , 22, https://healingspringswellness.com/emdr-therapy-risks-controversy/
50. Exploring the Dangers of EMDR Therapy | Essential Guide – The Counseling Center Group, accessed September  , 22, https://counselingcentergroup.com/the-risks-of-emdr-therapy/
51. EMDR Therapy Training & Certification – The Institute for Creative Mindfulness, accessed September  , 22, https://www.instituteforcreativemindfulness.com/emdr-therapy-training/
52. Basic Training Overview – EMDR Institute – EYE MOVEMENT DESENSITIZATION AND REPROCESSING THERAPY, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdr.com/us-basic-training-overview/
53. EMDR Basic Training, accessed September  , 22, https://www.emdria.org/emdr-training/
54. Evergreen Certified EMDR Clinician, accessed September  , 22, https://www.evergreencertifications.com/certification/evergreen-certified-emdr-clinician/
55. How to Find a Qualified EMDR Therapist: What to Look for & What to Ask – Sage Leaf Wellness, accessed September  , 22, https://www.sageleafwellness.com/blog/how-to-find-a-qualified-emdr-therapist-what-to-look-for-and-questions-to-ask
56. EMDR International Association – Yoko Co, accessed September  , 22, https://www.yokoco.com/project/emdria/
57. EMDR Therapist Directory™️ – Maiberger Institute, accessed September  , 22, https://maibergerinstitute.com/emdr-therapist-directory/
58. Greater St. Louis EMDR Network, accessed September  , 22, https://stlemdr.com/
59. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy in Kansas City, MO, accessed September  , 22, https://thriveworks.com/kansas-city-counseling/emdr-therapy/
60. Find EMDR Therapists and Psychologists in Saint Louis, MO – Psychology Today, accessed September  , 22, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/therapists/mo/saint-louis?category=emdr
61. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) – Aspire Counseling, accessed September  , 22, https://aspirecounselingmo.com/emdr-trauma-therapy-services
62. EMDR Therapy | The Mind and Body Clinic, accessed September  , 22, https://www. mindandbody.com/emdr
63. EMDR Therapy Training Course Overview, accessed September  , 22, https://emdrtrainingcenter.com/?page_id=2