As an Alexander Technique teacher, I often work with people who are living with trauma. Usually, it’s something that is only disclosed to me later on in a course of lessons, as trust is built up. In other cases, people are not consciously aware that they are living with trauma, or they do not perceive their life experience in that way. Trauma is rarely the primary reason for beginning Alexander lessons, which is not surprising given that Alexander teacher training does not equip us to be trauma therapists. However, having Alexander lessons and learning to apply the Alexander Technique in daily life, can be a very helpful adjunct to trauma therapy.
Trauma covers an immense range of human experience, and can originate from one-off events such as a car crash, to prolonged experiences of childhood abuse or neglect (‘developmental trauma’ or ‘complex PTSD’). As a generalisation, the more complex the trauma, the more beneficial it can be to find support through several different but complementary approaches.
So why is it, and in what ways, can having Alexander lessons and learning the Alexander Technique be helpful for someone living with trauma?
Perhaps a place to start here is to recognise the way in which trauma therapy has been developing over recent years. Now, most trauma therapists recognise that talk therapy alone is often not sufficient. Trauma is ingrained in our whole selves and is a present-day experience (the event may be in the past but its impact is happening now). So we need approaches that explicitly address our entire mind-body selves and, therefore, interventions that recognise and are founded on our embodied nature [1,2]. This is why talk therapy is often now combined with, for example, trauma-informed yoga or T’ai Chi.
Alexander lessons can be a beneficial adjunct to talk therapy because the Alexander Technique addresses the whole mind-body simultaneously in a way that is distinctive, and, I believe, unique.
There are different facets to how taking Alexander Technique lessons can help people living with trauma and I discuss some of these below. It’s important to mention first that, typically, Alexander teachers use gentle, light touch as one of the main means of communication during lessons. However, touch may not always be appropriate or helpful for someone living with trauma, and an Alexander teacher should be able to adapt their work accordingly.
I would say that the following elements are the best practice that an Alexander teacher aspires to in the context of a lesson, and in the skills that they are teaching (and this applies when working with anyone, not simply for those living with trauma). I also highlight below where some of these elements may mirror established trauma therapies in ways that might not always be obvious:
- Safe environment: This is a fundamental aim for every Alexander lesson, not least because learning and change cannot meaningfully happen without it. Fostering a safe environment is facilitated by the teacher aspiring to an attitude of unconditional positive regard, having clear boundaries, a clear commitment to the requisite for ongoing informed consent, and the use of the trained Alexander gentle touch that in itself has therapeutic qualities.
- Coming to a quiet, yet alert, embodied presence: Facilitated by the touch, voice and presence of the teacher in a lesson environment, and then taking the learnt Alexander skills into practice in our daily life.
- ‘Bottom up and top down’: We learn the Alexander Technique on two levels – experiential (hands on Alexander guidance to facilitate breathing, movement and self-regulation) and cognitive (practising the core thinking skills). We can think of this as mirroring the ‘bottom up–top down’ approaches advocated by trauma specialists such as Bessel Van Der Kolk and Peter Levine [1,2].
- ‘Where’ rather than ‘what’: A key part of learning the Alexander Technique is how we orientate ourselves – enhancing our sense of where we are, both in relation to our environment and to ourselves. So, for example, having an ongoing awareness of where my head is in relation to the top of my spine and where this is in relation to my tail, and where all of me is in relation to my environment. To orientate myself in movement I might then think of my head leading. All of this relies on our proprioceptive sense and ability for embodied spatial thinking – basic human attributes, but ones that tend to be under-used in a world that is more complex than the one we evolved for (with all our unconscious adaptations to it), and a culture that encourages us to concentrate on the ‘what’.
Now, neuroscience has shown that in any experience (traumatic or otherwise) the ‘where’ is always registered fractions of a second before the ‘what’. This hierarchy is one aspect underpinning the ground-breaking, ‘bottom-up’ approach to trauma of deep brain reorienting, pioneered by the psychiatrist Frank Corrigan [3]. In deep brain reorienting, the therapist facilitates the individual coming to a quiet, embodied presence with an awareness of spatial orientation. They then work with a trigger, while continuing to help the individual to stay present and to become aware of tensions, particularly around the head (including eyes) and upper torso; as well as of emotional responses. I would say that this approach is a mirror of what is happening in an Alexander lesson, except that (because it is not a trauma therapy) we are working with our response to any stimulus, rather than to specific trauma triggers. Interestingly, Corrigan has been influenced by the Alexander Technique in developing his method, in particular through tapping in to the subtle skills of an Alexander teacher in observing the head-body relationship in human reaction. - Deepening sense of self: During a course of Alexander lessons, we come to have a different experience and perception of ourselves. Through the very practical, self-help-oriented approach of the Alexander Technique, there is an awakening self-awareness and a gradual development of self-kindness. I see a reflection of these in Pete Walker’s compassionate and practical, self-help approach to trauma [4]. The changes we experience through the Alexander Technique are grounded, in part, in developing our ability to become more aware of and to pay non-judgemental attention to the sensory information that we receive from our internal and external environments. This is something that usually goes awry in trauma states, where either the person is dissociated (shut down from) or overwhelmed by bodily sensations, and where the internal and external sensory information is often in conflict [2,5].
- Developing greater agency: At the heart of the Alexander Technique are the core skills of ‘inhibition’ and ‘direction‘. This is what we are learning during lessons, and when we practise these in daily life, we tend to feel more in control and confident. We become aware of how we react, and how deeply entrenched these reactions can be, and we gradually develop more ability to respond (or not) in ways that we prefer.
- Building resilience: Over time, we become more and more adept at applying the Alexander Technique in our daily lives. I believe that as we become more anchored in the present through this practice, we become less likely to be so easily triggered into overwhelm – our window of tolerance gradually widens [6]. Also, when we do exceed our limits, we have a very practical method for coming back within our window of tolerance. (I’m not claiming here that we can always easily achieve this).
In this latter respect, it can be interesting to draw parallels with some trauma therapy techniques. Trauma specialist, Maaike Beech brings together a useful ‘toolbox’ of around ten different ways for coming back to, and staying within the window of tolerance [7]. She makes the point that no single safety technique will work for every individual, and that trauma therapists therefore need to be skilled in all of them. If now we take a step back from this specific context of potential trauma-induced overwhelm, I’d like to make the simple observation that pretty well all of these trauma safety techniques are routine and integral components of any Alexander lesson, as well as of applying the Alexander Technique for oneself. So, although, in an Alexander context, we are not using these practises for a specific purpose as such, they together enable us to gradually find a different way of being in the world that is emotionally and physically easier than our habitual default. In this list below, the items on the left come from Maaike Beech’s trauma therapy training [7], and the items on the right are my attempt at describing the Alexander Technique ‘equivalent’:
- Moving the eyes / Working with vision
- Lengthening the spine through gently changing our posture / This occurs as a result of hands-on work and our own thinking (instead of directly trying to change our posture)
- Movement / Everyday movement such as sitting, standing, walking facilitated by a teacher
- Using an anchor (thinking of a place, person, object, activity and observing oneself) / No direct equivalent of the anchor idea but observing ourselves non-judgementally is key
- Grounding techniques / Paying attention to what we are receiving through our senses, what is present here and now
- Exaggerated sigh / Always working with the outbreath (not the inbreath)
- Just notice / Noticing whatever you’re noticing right now without having to do anything about it
- Dual awareness of internal and external / Expansive awareness (simultaneous/integrated)
- Container / No direct equivalent
So, I see Alexander Technique as complementary to other trauma approaches. Just to emphasise again that the Alexander Technique is inherently a self-help method, and what you practice in lessons is what you can then apply in your daily life. As such, the elements I describe above are present within the context of a lesson and can, to the extent we are able to, be brought into our daily life.
If you are someone who is living with trauma and who is considering taking Alexander lessons as an adjunct to specific trauma therapy, do ensure that the Alexander teacher you choose has sufficient understanding and awareness of trauma and its impact (as well as being accredited by STAT or equivalent professional organisation). They will then be better able to adapt their teaching appropriately to best meet your individual needs.
References
- Van Der Kolk, B (2015). The body keeps the score. Penguin Books.
- Levine, PA (2010). In an unspoken voice. How the body releases trauma and restores goodness. North Atlantic Books.
- Corrigan FM, Young H, Christie-Sands J (2025). Deep brain reorienting: Understanding the neuroscience of trauma, attachment wounding, and DBR psychotherapy. Routledge.
- Walker P (2013). Complex PTSD: From surviving to thriving. Azure Coyote Books.
- Treleaven DA (2018). Trauma-sensitive mindfulness. WW Norton & Company.
- Siegel, D (2012) Pocket guide to interpersonal neurobiology. WW Norton & Company.
- Maike Beech (2025). Safety techniques for trauma training. Beech Trauma Academy. https://www.beechtraumaacademy.co.uk/