Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Honest to goodness, what this thread boils down to are two questions:
1. Should a product or service that has no known benefit/does not do what it says it can do and causes known harm be able to be practiced by licensed therapists?
I think it is relevant to specify MEDICAL products and services. FDA regulations have long required efficacy. I wonder what support there would be to have the FDA have to clear psychological treatments the same way physical treatments must be.
I think it is relevant to specify MEDICAL products and services. FDA regulations have long required efficacy. I wonder what support there would be to have the FDA have to clear psychological treatments the same way physical treatments must be.
Excellent point re: specifying medical product/service. My bad for leaving it out.
In 2005, the APA issued a policy statement on evidence-based practice, basically saying that the field needs to continue to move in the direction of evidence-based treatment, that best practices treatment for any given presenting problem is going to be the one with the strongest efficacy based on research, and that health care policy must be made with evidence-based practice in mind. http://www.apa.org/practice/resource...-statement.pdf
Here's the list of therapies considered to have empirical support at this time: http://www.div12.org/PsychologicalTr...reatments.html
There is also accountability through the ethics code to do no harm, to provide treatment with a clear rationale, with the client's full informed consent of benefits and limitations of specific treatments, avoiding false or deceptive statements about therapeutic processes, etc.
I think it does get a little tricky because unlike most medical conditions, there is nothing as simple as a blood test that can be used for psychological diagnosis. That does not mean diagnosis is subjective, just that it uses somewhat different tests and measures. That being said, as technology advances and its applications increase, we are learning more and more about brain and neurochemistry differences associated with various psychological disorders, etc. Upthread I was talking with Jaymax about some of the tricky things involved in banning anything that does not yet have the requisite level of evidence to be considered empirically supported treatment (there are still quite a few treatments that don't do harm but don't lend themselves to quantitative analysis, if that makes sense). However, banning a treatment that is known to cause harm, with no efficacy to achieve its goals, seems a pretty clear case.
I can't just read Dr. Seuss to someone who comes in for treatment of panic attacks and call it therapy. Nor can I offer a treatment for a non-existent diagnosis of Fu Fu the Snu-ism. I'd be rightly slapped with a malpractice suit faster than you can say "one fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish."
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 10-05-2012 at 11:28 AM..
Then all mental health therapy is in doubt -- you can't cure schizophrenia, nor depression, nor addiction. So you would deny them therapy?
While these cannot be cured, the patient can be given ways to cope with their illness.
Schizophrenics, for example, can expect to recover a level of functioning that allows a satisfactory life in their community. In many cases, there will be periods of illness and periods of lucid functioning.
For depression, it seems that there *can* be a cure, but currently not many people achieve it because of the way things have been prescribed and the fact that many get no treatment.
Few patients now take antidepressants in a way that gives them a shot at curing the condition. The average duration of a prescription is about 100 days.
According to a national study of depression, 40% of sufferers get no treatment at all for their condition. And a scant 22% get anything resembling adequate care.
Addiction requires lifelong treatment, but again, what is desired is a level of functioning so that the addict can live a productive life.
There are physical illnesses that also cannot be cured, but they can be managed with treatment. Examples include Hepatitis B, Type One Diabetes, chronic cancer (for example, skin cancers are often chronic). We treat these even though we cannot cure them.
While these cannot be cured, the patient can be given ways to cope with their illness.
Schizophrenics, for example, can expect to recover a level of functioning that allows a satisfactory life in their community. In many cases, there will be periods of illness and periods of lucid functioning.
For depression, it seems that there *can* be a cure, but currently not many people achieve it because of the way things have been prescribed and the fact that many get no treatment.
Addiction requires lifelong treatment, but again, what is desired is a level of functioning so that the addict can live a productive life.
There are physical illnesses that also cannot be cured, but they can be managed with treatment. Examples include Hepatitis B, Type One Diabetes, chronic cancer (for example, skin cancers are often chronic). We treat these even though we cannot cure them.
Agree with everything you said except for depression being "cured." It is a super varied construct (lots of different ways to be "depressed" and different subgroups respond more or less well to different treatments). We talk about not carrying a diagnosis or meeting the diagnostic criteria, being in remission from an episode, having a history of depression, but not being "cured" per se. Particularly folks with repeated episodic depression do not need to be in treatment indefinitely. They need to know the signs of when they are entering an episode and when to seek professional help when symptomatic, if that makes sense. I would run the other way from any therapist who claims they can "cure" someone. That in and of itself should raise some red flags about those who claim to practice a "gay cure."
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 10-05-2012 at 11:16 AM..
If you're going to bring out a bat, you should at least make it clear who you are aiming at. You're the one who chose to use the term "they". Just because somebody else made some stupid comparisons doesn't mean that *I* agree with it. I think you took a cheap shot at me and that is what I reacted to.
If your intention is to turn this all nasty , I'm not playing.
Is your intention to turn this all nasty? I wasn't being "nasty." I was talking about the people who do exactly what I specified -- if that doesn't apply to you, I don't know why you felt the need to be defensive.
Honest to goodness, what this thread boils down to are two questions:
1. Should a product or service that has no known benefit/does not do what it says it can do and causes known harm be able to be practiced by licensed therapists?
2. Should parents be able to seek this treatment from a licensed therapist for their minor children?
Not should the therapy not be available to anyone anywhere from people without a license or within a religious community, not should people have to change their religious beliefs, not what do you personally believe, not what you think therapy is or is not. All of that is absolutely immaterial to the issue at hand. Pretend the ban is for a treatment of something else and answer those two questions. Is your answer the same as when it is about "reparative therapy?" If not, why not?
Then all mental health therapy is in doubt -- you can't cure schizophrenia, nor depression, nor addiction. So you would deny them therapy?
Much of psychiatry is quackery these days, the future is alternative therapy such as what this offers. No drugs, no dependence for life, just real help.
Much of psychiatry is quackery these days, the future is alternative therapy such as what this offers. No drugs, no dependence for life, just real help.
Take your pick readers: a blog about maintaining an open mind about conspiracy theories ( http://wemustknow.wordpress.com/about/) or information from professional organizations like the AMA, APA, CDC, etc.
Though I fail to see what medication has to do with the OP, which is about a talk "therapy."
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 10-05-2012 at 01:00 PM..
Take your pick readers: a blog about maintaining an open mind about conspiracy theories ( About « we must know) or information from professional organizations like the AMA, APA, CDC, etc.
Though I fail to see what medication has to do with the OP, which is about a talk "therapy."
It's the Church of Scientology at it again with their anti-psychiatry rants. Of course they want to sell you their "auditing' nonsense instead- cause we need to sort out those little bits of 'aliens' in us. Anyone who takes these people seriously.... needs a pyschiatrist.
There are people out there who will swear up and down that this therapy worked for them, though.
I don't buy it. But if an adult (or an informed teenager) wants to seek such therapy, I don't know that it is right to completely *ban* them from doing so. Maybe they are the type who need to know that they "tried everything" before they can gain a sense of self acceptance. Maybe they are bisexual and really want to enjoy having a monogamous relationship with a person of the opposite sex but have some conflicted feelings that they need to work through. I suppose there is also the chance that earlier sexual abuse/trauma has made them confused about what they are feeling, too. If so, maybe a therapy like this could be helpful (?).
I agree that parents shouldn't be dragging their kids into and forcing their kids through a therapy like this. I can see how that could be very damaging in so many ways and on so many levels. This is so very personal and definitely not the sort of therapy that a person can seek out for another person.
The law allows adults to avail themselves of this "therapy" if they choose; however, parents are no longer permitted to subject their kids to this kind of nonsense against their will.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
