Read about natural parenting tools every family can use
Natural Family and Parenting Community Message boards
Shop for natural family items
Write to us or get writers guidelines
Contact or read about us

Read about natural parenting tools every family can use
Natural Family Living
Attachment Parenting
The Bottom Line
Education & Learning
Make Today Magical
Pregnancy, Birth & Fertility
Questions & Answers
Resource Guide
Your Family's Health
Join Our Newsletter
Natural Family and Parenting Community Message boards
Discussion Boards
How do you cope when you fall off the wagon into not-so-natural ways? Let’s talk!
Shop for natural items every family can use

Product Reviews



Write to us or get writers guidelines

Reprint Permissions

Send Us Feedback


We're looking for writers! Visit our Writer’s Guidelines for more details.

Contact us or read about us

About NFO

Advertise with NFO
Contact NFO
Media Page: See who's talking about NFO.
NFO is going to print!
Interested in getting NFO by mail? Send us a YES here. Be sure to include your full name, e-mail and mailing address. We'll contact you with more information in the future.
Visit other BFN sites:
Busy Parents Online
Busy Homeschool
Busy Parents University
Busy Family Network
The report's key finding: Formula DOUBLES THE DEATH RATE for American infants.
NFO Special Follow-Up Report:

Optimizing the Health of Your Formula-Fed Baby.

Join our newsletter for new article updates!
More AP Articles

Please visit our AP sponsor:

The Dangers of Holding Therapy

By Jan Hunt

Holding therapy is a practice described and recommended in the book Holding Time by Martha Welch. It consists of forced holding by a therapist or parent until the child stops resisting or until a fixed time period has elapsed; sometimes the child is not released until there is eye contact. Although this technique was initially intended for autistic adults, it has also been used for autistic children, teenagers and younger children with "attachment disorders" and infants with "residual birth trauma."

Proponents of this practice defend it as being "for the child's own good," the very same justification that many use for spanking and other punishments. Because it is labeled "therapy," it can be difficult to regulate this practice by professionals or to help parents to recognize its dangers.

At odds with gentle parenting

I consider this practice to be completely at odds with attachment parenting, which is above all a relationship based on mutual trust. It can be immensely difficult for a child to regain full, genuine trust after being forcibly held, regardless of the parent’s good intentions or the resulting surface behavior. As Alice Miller wrote:

I regard [holding therapy] as a kind of violation. People with the best intentions just don’t feel what they are doing when they violate the rights of another person (the child). The aim is to release forbidden, repressed feelings, but the violence of this technique makes it absolutely impossible to benefit from such a release.1 Force, the therapy implies, is used for the child’s own good, and the child will be rewarded and loved for his tolerance in letting it happen. He will come to believe that force contributes to his well-being and is ultimately beneficial. A more perfect deception and distortion of someone’s perceptions is barely imaginable.2

It is human nature to resent and resist the use of force. The use of forced holding by a parent inevitably engenders strong feelings of fear, confusion, helplessness, anger and betrayal as the child’s natural attempts to break free are disregarded by those they have come to love and trust.

When held by force, children finally understand that freedom comes only by giving in to outside control -- a dangerous lesson. Their wills can be broken, but that is not what I would call psychological health. Imposing any action by force on a child who is in no position to make an informed choice is unconscionable. Even if there were an emotional breakthrough from this therapy, it would come at a great hidden cost; there is no way to avoid the child's feelings of anger, frustration, resentment and betrayal. These intense feelings cannot be measured in the present, nor can their future ramifications be known.

The value of the uncoerced “yes”

As with spanking and all other forms of punishment, children who are held may appear to comply, yet their deeper feelings become submerged until they can be more freely expressed. Furthermore, when force is used, the authenticity of any success is forever in doubt. When a child cannot say "no," what does his "yes" really mean? The coerced child has learned to feign attachment behavior. Such dissimulation is at the core of the sociopathic personality.

The use of force on a child is always a risk factor and is never justified unless the child's life or health is immediately endangered and there is no better alternative. There are alternatives, many of them, to nearly all parental acts of forced submission. For the unhappy or out-of-control child, the best alternative is prevention. Meet the child's legitimate needs (undivided attention, food, sleep, attention to hidden allergies, relief of family stress factors, etc.). Where force is simply unavoidable (the proverbial child running into a street situation), it should be kept to the barest minimum possible and followed by gentle explanations and apologies.

Forced holding when there is no immediate danger should be challenged on humanitarian grounds that are self-evident. Far from having health benefits, as proponents claim, it may also pose a serious psychological risk:

... one of the most important advances in our understanding of health and disease in the past few decades... has been identifying the prototype of pathogenic (disease creating) situations - being trapped in adverse or threatening circumstances and being unable to either fight or flee. When we can only passively submit, our health tends to deteriorate.3 On the other hand, being in a position to take the initiative is health enhancing.-- The Scientification of Love, Michel Odent, 1999

There is yet another compelling reason to challenge this procedure: how can we justify forced holding in a society where children are cautioned to say no to unwanted touch?

A violation of trust

Whether by a parent, therapist or stranger, physically overpowering a helpless child is wrong. Justifying it by calling it "love" or "therapy" is a violation of the child’s trust and understanding of life as he has come to know it. Like all other forms of forced compliance, forced holding associates love and submission. Delusional defenses are likely to arise as the child tries to comprehend and make sense of something he knows in his heart to be a distortion of what love should look like.

Gentle, empathic approaches are far less stressful for all concerned than forced holding, more effective for the long term and more respectful of the child, who deserves above all our love and compassion. How sad that something as lovely as having a child in our arms -- when the desire is mutual -- has been perverted into such a heartless practice.

1 Miller, Alice. Personal communication.
2 Miller, Alice. Breaking Down the Wall of Silence. New York: Penguin USA, new edition 1997.
3 Maier, S. F. and Seligman, M.E.P. "Learned Helplessness: Theory and Evidence." J. Exp. Psychol. General 1976; 105:3-46.

Reprinted with permission of the author.

Jan Hunt, M.Sc., is a parenting counselor, director of the Natural Child Project and editorial assistant for the Canadian journal Empathic Parenting. See more about Jan.






Let's Play Yoga - A yoga program for children between the ages of 2 and 6. Teacher training and home-study courses available.
Operation Special Delivery offers doula services to military spouses
In Association with
See the monthly adventures of Hathor the Cowgoddess.

Join our newsletter

Being a parent is only natural, so why not parent more naturally?
Let NFO show you how.

"The media have become the mainstream culture in children's lives. Parents have become the alternative. Americans once expected parents to raise their children in accordance with the dominant cultural messages. Today they are expected to raise their children in opposition to it."
-- Ellen Goodman, Boston Globe columnist

[Home] [Read] [Discuss] [Shop] [Write] [About Us] [Contact Us] [Advertise] [Natural Family Living] [Attachment Parenting] [Family Health]
[Qestions & Answers]
[Pregnancy, Birth & Fertility] [Breastfeeding] [Bookshelf]
[Bottom Line] [Education & Learning] [Family Resources] [Product Reviews]

Natural Family Online™ is intended to provide an open forum for the public exchange of information. Throughout this web site, statements are made pertaining to the properties and functions of foods, supplements, herbs, medicines and other nutritional products as well as to strategies and procedures. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and these materials, products and strategies are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or condition. Natural Family Online™ and the Busy Family Network™ are not affiliated with any political or religious organization. Natural Family Online™ and the Busy Family Network™ do not endorse the personal opinions of the individual writers presented on this web site. No part of this website may be misconstrued to be medical or legal advice. Please review the rest of our disclaimer and user agreement. This site © 2000-2004 Busy Family Network™ (BFN). All Rights Reserved.  Send mail to with questions or comments about this web site. Graphics by . Web design by Busy Family Network. Hosting by BFN Hosting. Also visit: Busy Parents Online | Busy Parents University | Busy Pets | Busy Homeschool | Parent & Family Niche | AntHill Editors & Publishers | Spa products, Cosmetics and Skincare | Affordable Family Healthcare