Bert Clanton:
You seem to be something of an LGAT junkie, going from one to another.
Not all LGATs are the same regarding how they may hurt people, some are worse than others.
But all LGATs pretty much share the same liabilities and potential safety issues.
You say, "...certain people who for ideological or moral reasons *will not* be comfortable at HAI workshops. There are also a few people whose psychological state is such that they may come out of a HAI workshop in trouble, psychologically. There are also shaky marriages and relationships that won't survive exposure to HAI--though I doubt that some of them would have survived even without such exposure."
Again, you are attempting to blame the victim, which is a typical tactic used by LGAT devotees. This is also cited as a danger sign.
See [
www.culteducation.com]
As pointed out "Leaders were true believers and sealed their doctrine off from discomforting data or disquieting results and tended to discount a poor result by, 'blaming the victim.'"
A more obvious explanation is that HAI caused people emotional and/or psychological distress and that some marriages and relationships broke up because of HAI training.
You say, "I'd really like to see a good empirical study comparing the outcomes of exposure to 'soft,' relationship-oriented LGATs with the outcomes of conventional psychotherapy and conventional relationship-counseling."
This is a very revealing statement. It exposes that HAI is seen as a substitute for psychotherapy and professional counseling.
However, as previously pointed out it is not. And despite your label that it is somehow a "soft LGAT" others posting on this message board seem to see it as a destructive LGAT.
But thanks for sharing, your posts have been helpful in exposing what's wrong with HAI.
By the way, HAI and other LGATs have never done a study to verify objectively measurable results, which has been peer reviewed and then published in a reputable journal.
Such a stud could potentially measure such things as a lowered divorce rate, reduced need for medication, higher grades in school, higher income, lessened need for professional counseling, over a period of time as a result of an LGAT.
LGATs like Landmark, Sterling, NXIVM, Impact, etc. seem financially able to fund such research, but apparently have chosen not to undertake such a project. There is no such published study that I am aware of produced by anyone regarding an LGAT.