KMI Overview

My overview of the series is divided into 3 parts: A brief summary of the series; differences between KMI and the 10-session recipe; and lessons learned, from my experience as a practitioner and a receiver of the work.

Series Summary
The KMI series is divided into 12 sessions, as opposed to the 10 sessions of the traditionally taught recipe in its many forms. Each session is based upon a complete or partial fascial continuity. The fascial continuities are broad, three-dimensional myofascial lines which act synergystically to determine posture. These continuities are a convenient model for describing myofascial and postural relationships, but the fascia in the body is continuous from head to toe, front to back, and interpenetrates every tissue in the body, excluding the lumens of the circulatory system and the voids in the hollow organs.

Each continuity is described as an Anatomy Train, with myofascial “tracks” and bony “stations” along the way. The stations are attachment points for the fascia, on its winding route throughout the body. The tracks are muscular or purely fascial units. The tracks are divided into “expresses” and “locals”, an express describing a myofascial unit that often traverses two or more joints, with the locals only spanning one. Generally, the locals are closer to the bone and determine posture, while the expresses are more superficial and govern movement.

When these continuities are in a state of even tone, known as palintonicity, the tissue has an even, homogeneous texture to it. This evenness of tone is seldom realized in “random” bodies, random implying a lack of symmetry and ease in the gravitational field. Dr. Rolf described a body’s relationship with gravity by subdividing the body into series of blocks, which if stacked one on top of the other described the body’s most efficient usage in the gravitational field. This idea of palintonicity is a further refinement of ease in gravity, and one that yields easily usable data for manual or movement therapy.

The KMI series consists of 12 sessions, and each session has its territory defined by the Anatomy Train associated with it. These 12 sessions are subdivided into 3 groups; the first 4 sessions are the sleeve (superficial fascia) sessions, the second four sessions comprise the core (deep and visceral fascia) sessions, and the last four sessions are the integrative (girdle-balancing and functional) sessions.

The first four sessions are the sleeve sessions, and consist of the Superficial Front Line (SFL), Superficial Back Line (SFL), Lateral Lines (LL), and Spiral Lines (SL) in that order. The first three lines deal with flexion, extension, and lateral flexion. The spiral line session is a sleeve integration session and addresses superficial rotations in the body, and serves as the transition into the core sessions.

The second four sessions are the core sessions. Sessions 5,6, and 8 involve the Deep Front Line (DFL) of the body. The line is divided approximately as follows: Session 5 includes the DFL from the feet to the pelvis and session 6 includes the DFL from pelvis to neck. Session 7 readdresses the SBL again on a deeper level, and pelvic and spinal balance as mediated by the structurally significant but fascially discontinuous “Deep Back Line”. Session 8 includes the DFL from the shoulders up.

The last four sessions are the integrative (girdle-balancing and functional) sessions. These sessions are concerned with fine-tuning and stabilizing the changes in structure developed during the first 8 sessions, and integrating sleeve and core functioning. Session 9 attempts to balance the pelvic girdle from below, sessions 10 and 11 readdress the breath and attempt to balance the shoulder girdle and arms, and session 12 attempts to fine-tune spinal balance and functionally relate the girdles and spine in movement. A further function of the last four sessions is to create palintonicity among the lines and clean-up work from previous sessions.

Contrasting the KMI Series and the 10-session Series
An exhaustive, line-by-line comparison of the two models in included in Thomas Myers’ upcoming article in The Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, so I will not repeat his work, but rather highlight the main points as I see them.

The primary difference between the KMI series and the 10-session model is the way the two models subdivide the body into sessions. The 10-series model divides the body functionally or by regions, each session describing a specific territory. The KMI series divides the sessions into Anatomy Trains, or the myofascial continuities described earlier in this article. Looking at the first two sessions in each series will help to illustrate the differences.

The first session in the 10-series addresses the breath, and the territory it traditionally covers extends from knees to neck, although some variations of the recipe include more of the body. The first KMI session addresses restrictions in the SFL from head to toe, and superficial flexion patterns in the body. The second 10-series session addresses the foundation, primarily including the feet and lower legs. The second KMI session addresses restrictions in the SBL from head to toe, and superficial extension patterns in the body.

The advantages in addressing the myofascial continuities one at a time are subtle but obvious. Each myofascial continuity is just that - a continuity – and working at one point along the anatomy train can (and will) affect tonus in other parts of the same train. Since each train “governs” one structural function (i.e. flexion, extension), the strategy of each session can be developed to address the fascial holding patterns in order of their significance within that structural function. The territory of the first three sessions in each series covers the same territory – the superficial fascia – but subdivides the sessions more clearly.

A further advantage is the KMI series preserves the integrity of the sleeve and core sessions. Delving into the core before the body is sufficiently prepared through sleeve work is a factor which can lead to structural imbalance, or sproing (the sound made when you snap a watch spring by overwinding it). The first and second sessions of the 10-series, affecting the breath and the foundation, necessarily touch into the core (DFL) in a significant way. One emphasis in the KMI series is on affecting the core through the sleeve work, which prepares the core for work in a future session, without diving headlong into the core itself.

The most visible difference between the two models is the addition of 2 sessions to the KMI series, the Spiral Line (KMI #4) and Arm Line (KMI #11) sessions. The Spiral line session is a superficial integrative session that addresses rotations in the sleeve. The 10-series does not have a particular session that addresses sleeve rotations, or discriminates between core (primary) and sleeve (secondary or compensatory) rotations. The Arm Line session was developed by dividing the upper girdle session (10-series #9) into two sessions, the upper girdle (KMI #10) and the Arm Line session. The arms are largely ignored in the 10-series except as they affect standing posture. The important functional aspect of the arms in movement and daily activities was the determining factor in splitting the session into two parts, although completing the body image is an important aspect as well.

Lessons Learned
Rather than covering lessons learned for each individual session, I will cover lessons learned for the series in general, both from my sessions as a practitioner and receiver of the work.

Forcing – Having my own way. Frequently during the work I found myself working “harder” than was necessary to allow the work to make the changes I wanted to make. Part of this was my frustration in attempting to do “everything” within the session, my compulsive need to do everything possible to best benefit the client, or perhaps meet my own need for completion in the work. I am still trying to internalize the experience that “less is more” or its corollary in trauma medicine “slow is smooth, smooth is fast”. I find that this “agenda” and the resulting forcing has been a constant in my personal relationships as well, and often a source of friction or sadness.

Forecasting future work – Beginning with the end in mind. Starting the series with a clear picture, or roadmap of where the client and I want to go (rather than where I want to take the client) would have been of great benefit in the sessions with both Jeff and Peter. Peter’s work on me was pure artistry in his forecasting of trouble spots and paving the way for upcoming sessions in the present one, an example being my “X” leg pattern. An example of my lack of foresight is Jeff’s lumbar spine. I spent many sessions opening the front of his body, but now at the end of the series, I am struggling to open his back “non-traumatically” (my quotation marks) to allow him to move back into his lumbar spine.

The arc – Seeing the client’s “internal roadmap” within the roadmap of the sessions and series. During the sessions with both Peter and Jeff, I had NO sense of where they were in the arc of the series or the individual session. During at least 2 sessions with Jeff, he was already low on energy at the beginning of the session, which limited what I was going to be able to accomplish during the session and more importantly, what he would be able to internalize. Peter’s age led him to fatigue easily, especially when I held him at “the edge” during the entire session, with little or no time for the work to sink in. This lack of vision is intimately related to my sense of an agenda during the session, where I have a great internal need to accomplish certain goals and lose both the details AND the bigger picture. This does not occur when I do either Myofascial Release or Cranio-Sacral work, where I hold no agenda, but where there is also less of an emphasis on symmetry within each session. I consider the arc, and losing the agenda, to be my greatest challenges.

Choosing battles/Bodyreading – Although I feel my lack of skills in the area of bodyreading, this does not seem to be the limiting factor in my work so much as practical application of the bodyreading. Rather than starting in the area where there is the most restriction, I often find myself going back to a default pattern, starting at the feet and working up the legs, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Taking a few moments at the beginning of the session to evaluate a few simple goals and how I want to accomplish them, and taking time to reevaluate my goals in light of what has changed during the session, will benefit me once I am able to internalize that experience.

Discernment and specificity of working with fascial layers – Using an artist’s tools rather than a jackhammer. During my work on Peter, his most common complaint was that I was engaging too many layers of fascia at once, and the work was too painful, he could not move, or I was moving too fast rather than pinning and stretching the fascia. Although I feel somewhat comfortable with my anatomical “book knowledge”, my palpatory skills, especially of individual layers, is somewhat lacking. During the last few sessions, Peter did nearly as much instruction as receiving, for which I am in his debt.

KMI