Hey there,

Here's a question I've been thinking about lately:

What's the difference between a therapist who uses EMDR sometimes with some clients, and an EMDR therapist who uses the framework with all clients?

In other words…

Is there really a meaningful difference between being trained in EMDR vs. identifying as an EMDR therapist?

At first glance, this might seem like a semantic distinction.

Who cares what you call yourself as long as you're helping people?

But I’ve been doing this a long time, and the difference between using EMDR as a technique and being an EMDR therapist is actually pretty significant (it has rather large implications for how you make clinical decisions).

Let me explain what I mean.

EMDR as a Technique You (Sometimes) Use

Let’s say you use EMDR as a technique:

In this case, you're trained in multiple modalities (maybe CBT, DBT, narrative therapy, or psychodynamic work). EMDR is one tool in your toolbox that you pull out for specific situations.

For example, maybe a client comes in with PTSD from a car accident.

You think, "This is a good case for EMDR."

So you do the 8 phases, process the accident, and once the PTSD symptoms resolve, you either terminate or shift to a different modality for other issues.

Or maybe another client comes in with depression.

However, you don't conceptualize their depression through an EMDR lens because there's no obvious trauma. Instead you use CBT for cognitive restructuring, or maybe psychodynamic work to explore relational patterns. It's a protocol you apply when the presenting problem fits a particular profile (usually explicit trauma with identifiable targets).

No, there's nothing wrong with this approach.

In fact, plenty of therapists use EMDR effectively this way. But this “EMDR as a technique” approach is fundamentally different from being an EMDR therapist.

EMDR as Your Primary Clinical Framework

If you're an EMDR therapist, you're operating from a completely different place than a therapist who applies the technique sometimes. EMDR becomes the lens through which you understand psychopathology, conceptualize cases, and structure treatment with every client.

In this case, the Adaptive Information Processing model becomes your primary theory of how problems develop and how healing happens.

When a client walks in (regardless of their presenting problem) you're likely thinking:

• What maladaptively stored memories are driving this?
• What earlier experiences set the foundation for these symptoms?
• What memory networks are activated when they're symptomatic?

Even if you never use bilateral stimulation with a particular client, you're still working from an EMDR framework.

Let me give you a few examples:

Example 1: The Anxious Client Who Never Gets Bilateral Stimulation

Imagine a client comes in with generalized anxiety.

They don’t have any specific trauma history, but do have pervasive worry about work, relationships, and health.

If you use EMDR as a technique, you might think:

"This isn't an EMDR case. There's no clear target. I'll use CBT."

However if you're an EMDR therapist, you're thinking:

"What are the touchstone memories that taught this person the world isn't safe? What earlier experiences created the belief that they need to be constantly vigilant?"

So you spend sessions in Phase 1 and 2. You're taking a thorough history, identifying feeder memories, building resources, and teaching the client about their window of tolerance.

• You might install Safe Place.
• You might do Resource Development and Installation (RDI) to build their capacity for calm.
• You might do BLS to reprocess a touchstone memory - an adverse childhood experience that you found drives the anxiety
• You might use Future Template to rehearse staying regulated in triggering situations

Or you might never get to bilateral stimulation and desensitization (if the client stabilizes through preparation work and doesn't need processing). In this scenario, you’re still doing EMDR therapy, just doing Phases 1 and 2 because that's what this client needs.

Example 2: The Depression Case That's Really About Memory Networks

Now imagine a client presents with depression.

They have low energy, anhedonia, negative self-talk, and generally feeling stuck.

If you use EMDR as a technique, you might not see this as an EMDR case at all unless they mention trauma (because you're only thinking about EMDR when there's an identifiable trauma target).

However if you're an EMDR therapist, you're immediately curious about the memory networks maintaining the depression.

• What are the earliest memories of feeling this way? What events precipitated that?
• When did they first learn they weren't good enough, or that effort doesn't matter, or that they don't deserve good things?

You're not looking for Big-T trauma necessarily.

You're looking for whatever experiences (often relational and subtle) created the beliefs that maintain the depression.

You might process those memories, or you might not. But either way, you're conceptualizing the depression as a symptom of unprocessed material.

Example 3: The Client Who Needs Stabilization

Now imagine a client comes in during a crisis.

They had a recent job loss, relationship ending, or maybe financial stress. And as a result, they're dysregulated, not sleeping, and barely eating.

If you use EMDR as a technique, you're probably thinking:

"This isn't the time for EMDR. We need crisis intervention first."

Otherwise if you're an EMDR therapist, you're thinking:

"This client needs Phase 2 work right now." Or, when they’re ready: “Let’s go through the protocol targeting this present day stressor.”

In this case, you’re often focused on stabilization, resourcing, and helping them stay within their window of tolerance.

You might:

• teach them grounding techniques
• install Calm/Safe Place
• use the Container exercise to set aside overwhelming material until they're ready to process it.

If you're not doing desensitization, you are still using EMDR preparation phase protocols because they're designed for this (building capacity to regulate before processing).

The Difference in Clinical Thinking

If you’ve made it this far, you've probably noticed the pattern here:

When you use EMDR as a technique, you're asking: "Does this client's problem fit the EMDR protocol?"

But when you're an EMDR therapist, you're asking: "How does the AIP model explain this client's symptoms, and which phase of EMDR treatment do they need right now?"

Let me be clear:

Being an EMDR therapist doesn't mean you never use other approaches.

Plenty of EMDR therapists I know (myself included) integrate other modalities such as CBT, Internal Family Systems, mindfulness based therapies, somatic work, etc.. The key, though, is that the AIP model is always the foundation of case conceptualization, even when you're using IFS parts work or somatic interventions.

Why This Distinction Matters

"Why does this matter?” you might think.

“If both approaches help clients, who cares what framework I'm using?"

First, how you conceptualize EMDR changes who you can help.

If you only use EMDR when there's an obvious trauma target, you'll miss the clients whose problems stem from subtle, chronic, relational wounding that doesn't fit the PTSD profile.

Second, it changes how you structure treatment.

If you see EMDR as Phases 3-8 only, you might rush to bilateral stimulation before a client is ready. However if you understand Phases 1-2 as legitimate EMDR therapy, you can spend as long as needed in preparation without feeling like you're "not doing EMDR yet."

Third, it changes your clinical identity.

When you think of yourself as an EMDR therapist, you have a coherent framework for understanding psychopathology. (In other words, you're not eclectically pulling from different theories depending on the client).

The Learning Curve

Having practiced EMDR for many years, I’ve noticed a pretty consistent pattern, which is that most therapists start by using EMDR as a technique (and maybe you have, or are currently):

1. You get trained in the eight phases
2. You learn the protocol
3. You start using it with PTSD clients and it works.

Then over time (usually through consultation, advanced training, and treating more complex cases) you start internalizing the AIP model. You start seeing memory networks everywhere. You start recognizing how even non-trauma presentations are rooted in earlier experiences.

Then eventually, you realize you're not only using EMDR anymore. Rather you're thinking like an EMDR therapist (i.e. the framework has become your primary lens for understanding how change happens).

Where You Are Right Now

If you're reading this and thinking, "I use EMDR sometimes but I don't conceptualize every case through AIP," that's completely fine.

Not every therapist needs to be an EMDR therapist in the way I'm describing. Using EMDR as one technique among many is a legitimate, effective approach.

But if you're curious about deepening your relationship with EMDR (and you want it to be more than a protocol you apply to trauma cases) then I recommend you start paying attention to how the AIP model applies to clients you wouldn't typically think of as "EMDR cases."

• What are the memory networks maintaining your anxious client's worry?
• What touchstone experiences created your depressed client's negative cognitions?
• How would Phases 1-2 help your crisis client stabilize?
• How would you use the Container technique with your overwhelmed client before they're ready to process anything?"

When you start thinking this way, you might find that EMDR has applications far beyond what you originally learned in basic training.

Final Thoughts

So what's my point in all this?

I'm not trying to say one approach is better than the other, or that you need to use EMDR with every single client.

Some therapists use EMDR as one tool in an eclectic practice, and they do excellent work.

Other therapists let the AIP model become their primary framework for understanding psychopathology, and EMDR's eight phases guide treatment with every client (even when bilateral stimulation never happens).

Both approaches are valid.

But they're different approaches, and understanding the difference can help you clarify what kind of EMDR therapist you want to be.

If you're looking for consultation that helps you deepen your relationship with the AIP model and think through how it applies to your full caseload, come see what we're building with Helicon.

Once we launch, you'll find therapists who are asking the same questions you are about how to apply EMDR thinking beyond obvious trauma cases, and consultants who can help you deepen that clinical identity.

I hope this has been helpful to think about!

Until next time,
Chris

Thanks for reading Helicon's EMDR Therapist Weekly, where we aim to provide a weekly dose of insights, tools, and opportunities for EMDR therapists; designed to support your growth, sharpen your practice, and connect you with what's next.

​
​If you're not already subscribed, subscribe here. You can also click here to learn about what Helicon is building, or apply to join our pilot if you're an EMDR provider and want to connect with others on the same path.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article is for informational purposes only. This is not legal or clinical advice and we make no guarantees about the outcomes or results from information shared in this document. Proceed at your own risk and discretion.