The Kolb Cycle is a theory David Kolb created to show the four stages that influence an individuals learning (Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2001). Throughout this reflective report, the experience I had during the Petrissage massage tutorial will be reflected upon and analysed under the theories Body-as-Machine, Professional Boundaries and Body Image. Following this, I will highlight how the experience has helped me in reaching goals for the future, showing how the use of the reflective cycle is significant as it provides the opportunity for me to better my own techniques.
The experience I had during the Petrissage massage tutorial was memorable as it provided me with many instances to reflect and learn upon. I had been looking forward to …show more content…
The emphasis of this approach is placed on the biomechanical and anatomical features of the body as opposed to social, cultural or spiritual factors (Nicholls & Holmes, 2012). By thinking of the body anatomically and biomechanically, the body is both depersonalised and desexualised, as the therapist only thinks of the function of the body part being massaged (Nicholls & Gibson, 2010). My own treatment followed the idea of Body-as-Machine as the practitioner spent a great deal of time focussing on massaging my legs and back. He failed to communicate with me to see how I was feeling while I having the massage done on my leg, despite carrying a serious injury. This is because the Body-as-Machine approach teaches that you treat the body part you intended to and as the rest of the body is separate, it will not be affected (Nicholls & Larmer, 2005). This also explains why the practitioner did not think anything when he left my back uncovered or of the placement of my shorts, as he was doing this to treat the affected area so the rest of me shouldn’t have been impacted. The idea of Body-as-Machine has received both positive and negative reviews. Some state that this idea aids in reinforcing the trustworthy reputation Physiotherapists have gained over time through separating themselves from the political aspects other medical professionals have to deal (Nicholls & Larmer, 2005). Others oppose this view stating that encouraging the Body-as-Machine approach in certain circumstances can lead to the patient feeling uneasy and inferior (Nicholls & Larmer, 2005). This is consistent with my own Body-as-Machine experience that highlights Nicholl and Larmer’s (2005) statement, which highlights how the use of Body-as-Machine approach could actually be sending Physiotherapists backwards in terms of their treatment of
The experience I had during the Petrissage massage tutorial was memorable as it provided me with many instances to reflect and learn upon. I had been looking forward to …show more content…
The emphasis of this approach is placed on the biomechanical and anatomical features of the body as opposed to social, cultural or spiritual factors (Nicholls & Holmes, 2012). By thinking of the body anatomically and biomechanically, the body is both depersonalised and desexualised, as the therapist only thinks of the function of the body part being massaged (Nicholls & Gibson, 2010). My own treatment followed the idea of Body-as-Machine as the practitioner spent a great deal of time focussing on massaging my legs and back. He failed to communicate with me to see how I was feeling while I having the massage done on my leg, despite carrying a serious injury. This is because the Body-as-Machine approach teaches that you treat the body part you intended to and as the rest of the body is separate, it will not be affected (Nicholls & Larmer, 2005). This also explains why the practitioner did not think anything when he left my back uncovered or of the placement of my shorts, as he was doing this to treat the affected area so the rest of me shouldn’t have been impacted. The idea of Body-as-Machine has received both positive and negative reviews. Some state that this idea aids in reinforcing the trustworthy reputation Physiotherapists have gained over time through separating themselves from the political aspects other medical professionals have to deal (Nicholls & Larmer, 2005). Others oppose this view stating that encouraging the Body-as-Machine approach in certain circumstances can lead to the patient feeling uneasy and inferior (Nicholls & Larmer, 2005). This is consistent with my own Body-as-Machine experience that highlights Nicholl and Larmer’s (2005) statement, which highlights how the use of Body-as-Machine approach could actually be sending Physiotherapists backwards in terms of their treatment of