![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 7 of 7. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by ace on December 5, 2006, at 20:23:02
I spurn therapy in all it's forms due to the following....
1. I believe it is unethical for a practitioner to ask for money for advicing one on their life decisions, goals, etics, values etc This is better done by a good friend.
2. A great deal of therapy relies on the belief in what is empirically untestable, and hence is an affront to science: therapy should not have one to believe in a God, an Inner Child, and other such things. CBT has proven empirically sound, although, I question the statistical methods used, by which it has proved sound and beneficial. Further, many therapies actually act in juxtaposition to medical advice. Instead of seeking a doctor for an ailment, we should use visualization.
3. Counducting therapy to people with biological abberations is not only useless, but is cruel.
4. By virtue of it's very nature, therapy, from it's very outset, puts a patient in a position which pre-emptively thwarts the possibility of self-esteem attainment and autonomy. There is the THERAPIST and PATIENT. The therapist is guiding the patient, the patient is not guiding the patient. The power structure inherent in such a dynamic is repulsive. Therapists are only human beings. We all have our own paths we must choose ALONE.
CAVEAT: this is only my opinion, and I absolutely respect the right of others to theirs, and also to voice them.
Posted by Dinah on December 6, 2006, at 8:05:24
In reply to Rejection of Therapy, posted by ace on December 5, 2006, at 20:23:02
> I spurn therapy in all it's forms due to the following....
>
> 1. I believe it is unethical for a practitioner to ask for money for advicing one on their life decisions, goals, etics, values etc This is better done by a good friend.Therapy is rarely about advising one on their life decisions, goals, ethics or values. Most therapists will refuse to do this at all. Some counselors might give advice, as will coaches, but it's nowhere near universal. If you had a therapist who did this, please realize that he or she was not in the majority.
>
> 2. A great deal of therapy relies on the belief in what is empirically untestable, and hence is an affront to science: therapy should not have one to believe in a God, an Inner Child, and other such things. CBT has proven empirically sound, although, I question the statistical methods used, by which it has proved sound and beneficial. Further, many therapies actually act in juxtaposition to medical advice. Instead of seeking a doctor for an ailment, we should use visualization.To my knowledge, the majority of therapists do not require or ask one to believe in a God, an inner child, or other such things. I don't think therapy asks you to do anything *instead* of seeking a doctor. Even cancer patients use visualization to help control pain, or for other reasons. It doesn't mean they aren't getting chemo.
>
> 3. Counducting therapy to people with biological abberations is not only useless, but is cruel.
>
Conducting therapy with cancer patients and diabetics isn't particularly unusual. The same for people who have brain based conditions. One does not replace the other. Both can be useful to some, or many, people. Therapy doesn't have to be useful for you. Nardil doesn't have to be useful for me. I'm glad you have Nardil if it helps you.> 4. By virtue of it's very nature, therapy, from it's very outset, puts a patient in a position which pre-emptively thwarts the possibility of self-esteem attainment and autonomy. There is the THERAPIST and PATIENT. The therapist is guiding the patient, the patient is not guiding the patient. The power structure inherent in such a dynamic is repulsive. Therapists are only human beings. We all have our own paths we must choose ALONE.
Therapy does not put the patient in a position that prevents self esteem attainment and autonomy. The goal of therapy is to help a client who is struggling with those things (or other things) learn to cope in ways that facilitate the achievement of those things.
>
>
> CAVEAT: this is only my opinion, and I absolutely respect the right of others to theirs, and also to voice them.
>You most certainly have the right to your opinion. And I thank you for coming here to share it with us. It's always interesting to see different viewpoints.
FWIW, and this is anecdotal and applies only to me, I've figured out the exact bioequivilancy of therapy and the medications that help me most. Therapy costs more, particularly since I have prescription drug coverage, but it also doesn't cause weight gain (very bad for my diabetes), flatness of emotions, hypomania, or anorgasmia. It's not that I dont' take medication. I just don't take more than I have to.
I'm not sure where you get your concepts of therapy. If you had a bad therapy experience, I'm sorry. If you haven't studied therapy extensively, or the neuroscience of therapy, or had experience with therapy, perhaps you'd enjoy looking at it. Or perhaps not. That's your choice.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 6, 2006, at 9:03:30
In reply to Rejection of Therapy, posted by ace on December 5, 2006, at 20:23:02
> 3. Counducting therapy to people with biological abberations is not only useless, but is cruel.> CAVEAT: this is only my opinion, and I absolutely respect the right of others to theirs, and also to voice them.
Ace,
I appreciate your statement about respecting others' views, and I'm glad you feel free to express yours here. However, I have to ask you to not post anything that could lead others to feel put down, please.By posting this, I'm not saying I think this topic is off limits. I read your post with interest, and I think it could spark an interesting discussion.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin and should of course be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions. Thus, you can always appeal this decision to him, and he may choose a different action.Thanks,
deputy gg
Posted by madeline on December 6, 2006, at 9:43:41
In reply to Rejection of Therapy, posted by ace on December 5, 2006, at 20:23:02
It sounds to me as though you are describing a life coach rather than a psychotherapist.
I can only comment on my experience with therapy and it has been completely different from what you describe.
I was actually hoping that I could find someone to tell me how to live my life, because - man I wasn't doing that very well.
I didn't, I simply found a process that helped me to understand myself better, make better decisions based on that insight, and move myself toward becoming more human.
While there may be a biological basis for a lot of mental illness, pharmacological intervention in most cases can only do so much for a certain amount of time. In fact, a lot of studies show that the most efficacious treatment for depression is the combination of therapy and drugs. They just seem to work better together.
The power structure in a therapeutic relationship is tricky to manage I agree, and without a doubt there are some really really crappy therapists out there. However, as with any treatment, appropriately applied by trained personel, it can (and often does) work.
I'm not sure that we should call therapy an affront to science but rather consider it as an adjunct to science.
The methods used to quantify the success/failure of therapy are quite subjective. "Do you feel better" would hardly stand up to the rigors of the scientific method, but the answer to that question is important to know nonetheless.
I think of it as similar to pain management. No physician can ever know how much physical pain a patient is in either post-op or the result of trauma. Yet the efficiacy of so many analgesics is based solely on the patient's report of "I don't hurt anymore". Sure, we may know which receptors morphine binds to, but don't know how that correlates to pain relief in a particular patient. Yet no one would ever say pain management is an affront to science.
I'm not going to turn you into an advocate of therapy by any means, but rather present a different opinion.
With much respect,
Maddie
Posted by cassie17 on December 6, 2006, at 12:22:29
In reply to Re: Rejection of Therapy, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2006, at 8:05:24
I think its unfortunate that you've had experiences in therapy that bring you to these conclusions.
My therapist has been SUCH a positive influence in my life, and I hope you'll be able to find some form of help that will give you the same comfort.
Meg
Posted by Declan on December 6, 2006, at 12:42:53
In reply to Re: Rejection of Therapy, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2006, at 8:05:24
My T used to say with feeling 'if only there were a drug', meaning one that worked without problems.
Posted by laima on December 6, 2006, at 20:01:31
In reply to Rejection of Therapy, posted by ace on December 5, 2006, at 20:23:02
A lot of good therapists have clients rather than patients. I've met a large number of therapists I didn't click with, but am thrilled that I finally found one who I am excited about and have respect for. I'm really glad I was persuaded to give this person a chance. A therapist can be a mentor, teacher, illuminator, or guide...various roles. (I don't want to put my friends in the front of that role, and a therapist need not have the biases of friends or family.) I can't wait to get started!
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.