Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Ok, » Dinah

Posted by so on May 23, 2005, at 18:57:30

In reply to Ok, » so, posted by Dinah on May 23, 2005, at 1:38:38

If I were Mrs. Hsiung, I would say so, and would want to be addressed either by my own name, by the handle I established on the board or by our family name. If my role in his communities were described primarily as an extension of his persona, I would suggest we seek family counseling together. If I were the first lady of the United States, I wouldn't want to be called "Mrs. George."

> so let me see if I can summarize your concerns.
>
> You don't think Dr. Bob gets enough sleep, and that he may make errors on the board because of it, and later justify them. You're worried about his personal wellbeing, and the wellbeing of us Babblers. Have you perchance had experience with doctors or interns who try to function on too little sleep?

This question seeks to inform your speculation about my experience, exploring reasons I might hold a view in line with those you might think I hold but have not yet verified. Nonetheless I will reply as if you are inquiring about the veracity of your understanding of my perspective, as is the stated purpose of your message, clarified in a summary paragraph and in a follow-up post.

My original concern stated in this thread, in response to a request that I propose a first step toward more effective goverance patterned after the historic experience of nations worldwide, was that medical professionals do best to administer services based on established protocols developed in a process of peer review, and when they venture into new services, they do best to substantially involve peers in defining the scope and methods of those new protocols. This is especially a concern to me when new protocols are unique and are administered in a dynamic setting that requires judgement calls by the provider that can involve large numbers of people in diverse situations. I proposed seeking funding as a means of formally involving other organized, established groups that would help attend to matters involving efficacy, harm and liability.

The possibility that he attends to the site when he is near the end of a very long day, and that he attends to the site 365 days a year is a result I cited of his go-it-alone strategy. It might be part of the reason his solo effort doesn't rise to what might be it's full potential, and could be part of the reason his late-night/early morning interventions don't seem entirely understandable to some people. Involving others, either as co-administrators, or as benefactors who contribute based on formal presentation of his methods and purposes, could serve to resolve problems that might arise from his 365-days-a-year involvement.


My experience with physicians is different, though when you mention it, they might have first learned social behaviors that I now recognize during the time they were required to work more than 24 hours without sufficient rest.


>
> (You don't happen to be Mrs. Bob, do you? In which case I concede to your greater knowledge.)
>
> You don't think this is a problem particularly of Dr. Bob's site, but of PsychCentral and similar sites as well. But it appears to you to be more evident at Babble because Dr. Bob does his administrating up front rather than behind the scenes.


I have addressed my concerns solely to the administration of this site. I did not cite PsychCentral as an ideal site or as a less than ideal site, but cited as alternative models sites administered under the aegis of well-established health-care organizations, and in which the identity and personality of administrators is scarcely discernable if at all.

> You want Dr. Bob to get funding for Babble. I don't quite understand the rationale behind this one. If Dr. Bob wants funding, I certainly understand. But I don't see what huge difference it would make. I sort of like the credit card idea better (yes, yes, I know others don't). But perhaps I'm missing something?

I suggested he pursue formal funding arrangements as a way of substantially involving other responsible parties in reviewing policies at the site. It is not my first suggestion, but one means of reaching the goal of substantially involving other qualified parties in development of policy.

>
> You think Babble decisions should be a committee view, with a committee composed of mental health providers.

Not the individual decisions, but policies. If policies were articulated to a board, a panel or even a limited partnership of professionals, the refinement and clarification gleaned from other professionals might result in more coherent explanations to those with less training -- and I don't mean to those, such as yourself, who assert an understanding of his terms, but to those who routinely represent that they don't understand some of his judgements.


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:so thread:491889
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050517/msgs/501894.html