Criticisms of mindfulness-based interventions. There have been many criticisms about using mindfulness applications in psychology. Individuals have viewed mindfulness as merely being a fad modality in psychology. However, Gehart and McCollum (2008) countered that if mindfulness is merely a fad, it is one that has endured for more than 25 centuries. Moreover, even though mindfulness has been empirically validated more recently with controlled trials, it has shown effectiveness over time in its traditional teachings from the Buddha (Gehart & McCollum, 2008).
Gause and Coholic (2010) stated that another criticism of mindfulness application in psychology from practitioners and researchers of this subject is that it has been divorced from its roots in Eastern philosophy. For instance, practices rooted in mindfulness have been adapted and used by cognitive behavioral practitioners and researchers. Cognitive-behavioral interventionists have defined mindfulness on an operational level so that results can be more accurately measured. Gause and Coholic described that this operationalization is problematic since traditional mindfulness methods differ from mindfulness integration into CBT. Particularly, holistic approaches to mindfulness are characterized by flexibility, creativity, and have an overall goal of meeting the needs of an individual. As well, holistic approaches entail sensitivity to one’s spirituality in mindfulness practice. This is important since the philosophy and practice of mindfulness can be spiritual for some individuals (Gause & Coholic, 2010).
Kristeller, Baer, and Quillian-Wolever (2006) expressed that mindfulness may create discomfort for individuals who feel that this practice is affiliated with Buddhism or Hinduism. Particularly, one may have a religious belief system that differs from these religions, and so one may not desire to be affiliated with them. However, Kristeller et al. explained that virtually every religious tradition including Christianity contains meditative traditions. Namely, Kristeller et al. described that all religious traditions contain goals of quieting one’s mind and for one to attain inner wisdom. It is crucial to also note that for many researchers and practitioners within mindfulness, one does not have to be spiritual or affiliated with Buddhism in order to acquire results from the practice (Gause & Coholic, 2010; Gehart & McCollum, 2008). Furthermore, Flowers (2009) argued that mindfulness is a universal phenomenon and so it is inaccurate to think that it is encompassed by only one philosophical or spiritual tradition.
Mikulas (2011) expressed concerns pertaining to mindfulness being taken out of its original context in Buddhism. Mikulas noted that overall mindfulness is something that pertains to concentration, insight, and attitude. Mikulas delineated between the content of the mind and the behaviors of the mind. The content of the mind is defined as objects that occur in one’s consciousness which include memories, feelings, and perceptions (Mikulas, 2011). Marchand (2012) argued that out of the treatments for depression that seem to be based in Buddhism including MBCT, MBSR, and Zen meditation, only Zen is a tradition that is actually authentically Buddhist.
Monteiro et al. (2015) also noted that concerns exist that applying mindfulness in psychology is weakening Right Mindfulness. Thus, there are concerns that exist that mindfulness in psychology can be used to cause more harm than good in individuals. Hence, Monteiro et al. advocated that mindfulness-based intervention should include a teaching of ethics from Right Mindfulness as opposed to merely focusing on symptom reduction. When mindfulness is taught within the context of traditional Buddhist traditions, a discussion of ethical conduct (sila) is included. This discussion routinely is not a central part of clinical, modern-based interventions. Overall, traditional and modern views should continue to share the goal of alleviating suffering and healing the relationship one has with oneself (Monteiro et al., 2015).
There are also theorists who criticize how mindfulness is implemented into psychotherapy. Specifically, Germer (2013) reported that arguments have been made that mindfulness is not an independent modality and is instead something that underpins every treatment method. For instance, awareness and acceptance are used in emotional regulation in DBT, free association in psychoanalysis, and systematic desensitization of a specific phobia (Germer, 2013). This therefore counteracts the idea that mindfulness is an independent practice in therapy. However, Fulton (2013) advocated that mindfulness should be integrated into psychotherapy as a “model of no-model” in that it should not have to be integrated in a systematic, schematic fashion in therapy (as cited in Germer, 2013). This differs from the systematic way that mindfulness has been fused with cognitive behavioral approaches in MBCT and MBSR. There have been further criticisms of the way that MBCT is integrated into psychotherapy. Segal et al. (2013) described that there is a risk for patients in using the 3-minute breathing space. Specifically, Segal et al. stated that the risk of this practice is that it may be viewed by an individual as an escape from psychological crisis which can reduce the likelihood that one will actually shift from doing to being mode in one’s mind.
Another criticism noted by Chiesa and Serretti (2009) is that mindfulness research has focused on studying individuals suffering from psychopathologies. Studies pertaining to MBSR have focused on individuals who are afflicted with mental and physical based disorders. Hence, Chiesa and Serretti opted to conduct a meta-analytic study to examine evidence for the effectiveness of using MBSR in healthy subjects to reduce stress. This study deduced that MBSR exhibited a nonspecific effect in reducing stress in groups that received MBSR as compared to inactive control groups. However, Chiesa and Seretti also concluded that standard relaxation training has been shown to have equal effectiveness at reducing stress as MBSR.
Mindfulness practice has also been criticized as being subjective and having effectiveness based on the experience of the instructor. Grossman (2008) noted a limitation of mindfulness practice is the limited knowledge of the practitioner of Buddhist philosophy (as cited in Gause & Coholic, 2010). As well, Deatherage (1975) further stated that if individuals wish to teach Satipatthana techniques to clients, then it is important that they use the techniques on themselves first. This is encouraged so that the therapists can develop a better understanding of the insights and progress that come with this practice (Deatherage, 1975). Deatherage stated that if a therapist has more experience, then more facilitation of the practice will occur with his or her client. Problematically, this practice is therefore dependent on the expertise of the therapist, which creates issues if the therapist does not practice this.
