Are psychologists worth it?

[A window to the soul]

There's a sucker born every minute.

 

[danseen]

Sucker? Kindly prove I'm lying then..

Or prove that casual sex is an illness, so thus the many must be ill, right?

I too sense you're threatened.

 

[danseen]

You would be right, though I think it may be too soon to assume the psychologists you're describing are trying to hurt you. They may simply be negligent and disrespectful of others' belief systems. This often comes hand-in-hand with fundamentalism, though it's certainly not limited to just that. Either way, I think they're breaking the principles their clinics/hospitals/health centers hold them by.

Still, I'm curious as to what rationale your psychologists had for critiquing casual sex.

It's how they think.

 

[danseen]

It certainly does seem that a lot of people are coming to the thread with their own baggage about therapists.

Are you really going to pay someone to provide you with warmth/empathy/support?

That sounds a lot like just paying someone for validation, like I said in my first responses to Danseen, who I have no prior contact with or opinion of.

I dont think that therapy is purely about seeking validation and agreement, someone to reflect your values and tell you life is great and you can do no wrong.

I'm sorry if some people have had bad experiences of therapists and they've brought that o the table, what about therapists or helping professionals who've had experiences of clients who hate to be challenged? Who're apt to deflect with drama, vitriol, complaints and even litigation?

Who'd be a psych eh?

Look, you said my point was "nonsense".

You then said my point was "empty validation".

You then say I am "narcissistic".

lolol..

Why then do you presume I must respond well to your comments? Either you have a huge ego, or you're insecure. Unless we're related by blood, or somehow know each other, I don't get why you are so eager for me to respond "well" to you. I blame the PC society, to many normal people interactions are shallow unless trust/respect is earned.

 

[Lark]

The point of therapy is not "to pay someone to provide you with warmth/empathy/support".

Well, on that we are agreed.

A therapist needs to be warm empathetic and supportive in order to form a good relationship with the client, gain their trust, and help foster cooperation. Psychotherapy is not something a therapist does TO the client, it is something both of them cooperate on.

Hmm, I would agree to a point but what you are describing is also the pop cultural understanding of what therapy is, I would say that there is an important element involving the quality of the therapists attention, it is qualitatively different from that of just anyone, incorporating active listening etc. but I would also say that there is a very important ethical duty upon all therapists to be honest with their clients too.

The goal is to help the client cope and be better-adjusted (and the specifics are highly dependent on a situation). A therapist isn't there to "correct" the client, tell them what to do, or to substitute their judgement for the client's. If, and it's a big IF, a client's judgement is, in fact suspect and is causing the client problems, the therapist is to help the client develop it, by teaching specific reasoning tools/techniques, and, perhaps, providing alternative perspectives/scenarios.

I dont know if correct is the right word, I wouldnt expect any therapist to usurp the autonomy and judgement of their clients. It is only likely to make the therapy interminable.

On the other hand I do believe that the therapist has a duty of honesty, as I have said, which involves at no point reinforcing or supporting or endorsing or validating maladaptive behaviour, the very behaviour likely to have at the very least contributed to them coming into therapy. That too would make the therapy interminable too.

Another very important aspect of therapy is challenging behaviour and thinking, that's very important and it is a fact that not all therapists are good at it or do it correctly, some try to perform that sort of task too early, some too late. And I dont believe there is ANY big if about it, there's no ifs, ands or buts about it, sick people dont need a Dr and someone whose judgement and reasoning is spot on isnt going to seek a therapist.

Based on what you've said so far, it seems to me that your understanding of psychotherapy is based mostly on psychoanalytic theory/practice. Well, bad news: any "science" behind psychoanalysis has been demonstrated to be made up wholesale, and has no evidence to support it. If there's anything at all in Freud's theories (or those of some of his followers) that has any relation to reality, that is purely coincidental. The practice of psychotherapy has moved on since.

In my own practice I use crisis intervention and life space interviewing, which incorporate co-regulating with persons who are out of control their emotional state and then linking the feelings with behaviour and rehearsing alternative behaviours when those feelings inevitably arise again. A good part of my practice, in the wider sense because no one is perpetually in crisis, is about modelling caring behaviour and developing consequential thinking.

I would say that I use conclusions from a range of therapies that I'm familiar with, including cognitive behavioural therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy but I do think depth psychology has contributed a lot more than either of these schools of thought.

Its very easy for people to rubbish psychoanalysis, often the people who're quickest to do so are the least acquainted with either the school of thought itself or the legitimate criticism of it. Something you've made clear in your post here.

The scientific basis of psychoanalytic psychotherapy was derived from clinical observation, analysis and clinical practice, when any authors, such as John Bowlby, found it wanting in some respects, ie not having the same evidence base as social learning theories, they did not throw out the baby with the bathwater and did acknowledge that the tools, ie transference, knowledge of ego defences etc. where useful. Bowlby developed psychoanalysis through his research of attachment and ethnography and that is pretty much how any discipline grows and develops. Psychoanalysis has had set backs arising from schisms and control stretching back to the days of Freud but this happens too and it does not invalidate the school of thought as a whole in my opinion. Not any more than theories about miasmas invalidate modern biology and medicine.

 

[danseen]

There's a sucker born every minute.

OK, says somebody who refers to themselves as "Nerd Girl". Lack of self-esteem?

 

[Lark]

Do you make a habit of assuming that whatever a person says they are lying? Nothing danseen has said about his experience is out of the realm of possibility.

I tend not to make assumptions, I do make judgements on the basis of what people have decided to reveal about themselves though.

Unless you have specific (and weighty) reasons to believe that his report of being victimized by a therapist is a fabrication, why jump to that conclusion?

You're pretty invested in believing what they have said is valid and should not be challenged. That's similar to what Danseen has posted himself.

My reason for skepticism about what Danseen has said about his therapist is Danseen's interaction with ever poster in this thread.

It has been consistent, which therefore leads me to believe that this is typical, its difficult to know, other than taking Danseen at their word, anything about his therapist but it is possible to know about Danseen, they have provided information from which it is possible to reach conclusions.

Perhaps you don't like what he has said in this thread, or even in others, maybe you think he is an asshole

I've not seen any posts by this member on the forum, I believed they were a new poster and I have simply responded to what they have posted within the thread. Assuming that there's some sort of pre-existing animosity which has eschewed my judgement on the topic is groundless. Do you deploy this sort of reasoning regularly? Does it work for you?

maybe you actually agree that being reserved/atheist/nonconformist or liking casual sex are somehow wrong, that still doesn't prove that his report is a lie, or make the behavior he describes from his therapist even remotely acceptable.

You have assumed that the report is factual, simply because, unlike the basis of any skepticism, which is his posting in the thread, you dont have any grounds for that.

My opinions on the being reserved, atheist, or sex are besides the point, as I largely suspect they are besides the point in Danseen's therapy.

 

[Lark]

OK, says somebody who refers to themselves as "Nerd Girl". Lack of self-esteem?

How do you not see that as hostile?

You're going to fast track yourself on to ignore, unlike you're therapist no one here has to interact with you and its hard to have any kind of discussion by yourself.

 

[Lark]

Look, you said my point was "nonsense".

You then said my point was "empty validation".

You then say I am "narcissistic".

lolol..

Why then do you presume I must respond well to your comments? Either you have a huge ego, or you're insecure. Unless we're related by blood, or somehow know each other, I don't get why you are so eager for me to respond "well" to you. I blame the PC society, to many normal people interactions are shallow unless trust/respect is earned.

I didnt say those things, and I only gave you some advice about how to communicate well.

I hope being a defensive asshole works out for you in therapy because its not going to work out well for you in the threads here, people will ignore you and then you'll have to decide if its worth feeling interaction with others is a battle to be fought and "won" if that is the outcome.

Good luck with that.

 

[Lark]

I'm saying that I'm not a typical INTP. And?


If you are hostile, then so am I. Why do you presume strangers must owe you their time? If you respond in a hostile manner, others will to you.


So you resent intelligence, which I don't believe I am, and hold an unhealthy attitude towards it? Ok....


Narcissism? No, you mocked my posts and OP, so this is how people respond. I never mock anybody's posts here, since if you truly don't care then it makes no sense to post.


haha.. If you make judgments of me, I make them of you. You're insinuting you hold some "upper hand" here, but I don't know nor care...

I really, really see why you're seeing a therapist.

 

[Lark]

yes, it was. You meant all to say that casual sex is bad, yet if you all have friends with benefits, how is it truly bad?

It seems you feel threatened that others intrude on your perceived territory, but then you can never seemingly prove how you're the virtuous party. I sense that you feel threatened that I have casual sex, since you feel only "cools" as yourself should. I'm a free human being, I do as I please. That is grounded in fact, not some empty social norm I don't care about (nor need/want to at 34 years).

You sense? That does not appear to be working out for you there.

I'd pity the fool who would be threatened by you because you're largely, if not completely, unknown here and in little over two pages of a thread you've suceeded in acting appallingly.

For a while I thought there'd be a point to discussing it with you and point out how you are projecting and appearing very insecure but now I think its only going to result in more posting like this. Very poor. You fail. At life.

 

[Lark]

Er.. no.

I posted, you all said or affirmed "GTFO out of here". Now, I do not "get" communications?

You yourself have used an ascerbic (eek!!! "high class language" haha.. how do you know I'm not a linguist, or a writer, or an academic? Perhaps such "wording" is second nature to me. Seems you have issues with intellect, since from your posts you like to mock it...) tone with me, so I respond in kind. You have said I am "ill", and that the "issue is with me" regarding therapists.

Not all language is subjective, it cannot be by definition. If I call somebody an idiot, then this holds a clear meaning. If I call an animal a tiger, this holds a clear meaning.

Then again, I'm not interested in any discussion, since I don't get why I must be "kind" to some stranger online who does not seem to reciporate based on his or her bias and insecurity. I doubt you interact with strangers in real life this way, and I frankly have stuff to do in the real world that's more pressing, you know like shopping, watching TV, going out to bars (which psychologists hate ) and being with my gf.

I would continue to contend that you feel threatened over what I have said, and that you have insecurity issues.

Oh I know you would contend that, although there's ample evidence to the contrary but its pretty much been established, although by all means dont hold yourself back from posting some more, that you arent good with evidence and prefer to go with what you, er, sense.

No one said or affirmed GTFO of here, there's rules against that sort of thing here, by all means make a complaint to the mods if you think there is any substance to what you've just alledged at all. I'll be waiting a long time for any notification of an infraction of board rules and I'm pretty sure the other posters in the thread will be too.

I never said you were ill, honestly how we're meant to take you seriously when you keep making things up is beyond me, although I do think, from your on going posts, that you exhibit traits which mean you'll be unable to benefit form any helping relationship.

What if the world is not in conflict with you? What if your psychologist and everyone else isnt out to get you? What if they all dont give a shit and you're not worth a second thought to anyone who's not being paid to?

Man, what a trip that'd be? Reality check coming in one, two, three....

 

[Evo]

You guys may enjoy this short:

I have never been to one. Is this what really happens, like in this short?

If so, I would become impatient just like the gentleman did. 2 years is long ass time. I want results, and I want them now.


Someone suggeted that I call a hotline for something one time, when I was feeling a little overwhelmed by a situation...and they were actually pretty rude.

That kind of deterred me from any further pursuit. I also thought "If I was about to comit suicide, I would have done it after that phone call" What a joke. That person should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Lexicon]

I have never been to one. Is this what really happens, like in this short?

If so, I would become impatient just like the gentleman did. 2 years is long ass time. I want results, and I want them now.


Someone suggeted that I call a hotline for something one time, when I was feeling a little overwhelmed by a situation...and they were actually pretty rude.

That kind of deterred me from any further pursuit. I also thought "If I was about to comit suicide, I would have done it after that phone call" What a joke. That person should be ashamed of themselves.

I imagine some complacent psychologists may behave as the character in this short, but no, not all of them are like that.. not by far.

Hotlines in general seem like a joke. What hotline has ever been useful except 411 & 911, if those are even considered hotlines...

 

[two cents]

Hmm, I would agree to a point but what you are describing is also the pop cultural understanding of what therapy is, I would say that there is an important element involving the quality of the therapists attention, it is qualitatively different from that of just anyone, incorporating active listening etc. but I would also say that there is a very important ethical duty upon all therapists to be honest with their clients too.

Yes, obviously a therapist's attention is qualitatively different from that of just anyone. Or, at least, it should be (in practice qualifications vary and small-minded morons often end up on the job). Yes, I agree, it's important for therapists to be honest with their clients. At least for the most part. There's a huge difference between honesty and bluntness, and I would think there could be at least some limited/isolated scenarios when it's best that the therapist keep some information to themselves, at least temporarily.

someone whose judgement and reasoning is spot on isnt going to seek a therapist.

I'm going to have to disagree. It is entirely possible to have judgement and reasoning that is spot on and face trying circumstances, possibly while also not having much of a support system. In that case seeking a therapist mainly for emotional support and to have someone to simply talk through problems with and to offer input and perspective that comes from a position of professional neutrality and good judgment is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

Its very easy for people to rubbish psychoanalysis, often the people who're quickest to do so are the least acquainted with either the school of thought itself or the legitimate criticism of it. Something you've made clear in your post here.

I think you are making unwarranted assumptions with very limited information (I also made some when writing the previous post which brought us here). I do still disagree with you regarding the merits of psychoanalysis as a whole, rather than the use of some concepts that originated there (like transference, for example). However, I'm not interested in having a debate on the matter right now, and I would propose we agree to disagree.

I tend not to make assumptions, I do make judgments on the basis of what people have decided to reveal about themselves though.

We all make judgments based on what people reveal about themselves. So far in this thread you seem to be making judgments that are way far more reaching and far more certain than any information you are getting warrants. There's a lot more room for ambiguity and alternative explanations to the behavior of people that you are observing and jumping to conclusions about. In fact, your behavior is leading me to conclude that being a psychologist makes you far more certain of the snap judgments you are making than you ought to be. But hey, maybe I'm jumping to conclusions here myself.

You're pretty invested in believing what they have said is valid and should not be challenged. That's similar to what Danseen has posted himself.

My reason for skepticism about what Danseen has said about his therapist is Danseen's interaction with ever poster in this thread.

It has been consistent, which therefore leads me to believe that this is typical, its difficult to know, other than taking Danseen at their word, anything about his therapist but it is possible to know about Danseen, they have provided information from which it is possible to reach conclusions.

Assuming that there's some sort of pre-existing animosity which has eschewed my judgement on the topic is groundless. Do you deploy this sort of reasoning regularly? Does it work for you?

You are making unwarranted assumptions about my assumptions! I wasn't assuming any pre-existing animosity. I was simply stating that IF this were the worst possible scenario, and you DID, in fact, think all the things I theorized you MIGHT think about Danseen, or hold the opinions I theorized you might hold in general, that would still not make the behavior of his therapist, as he described it, acceptable.

You have assumed that the report is factual, simply because, unlike the basis of any skepticism, which is his posting in the thread, you dont have any grounds for that.

My opinions on the being reserved, atheist, or sex are besides the point, as I largely suspect they are besides the point in Danseen's therapy.

Ok, so let's play hypotheticals. Let's assume Danseen is either outright lying or misconstruing his therapist's behavior. He offers the report he did. What exactly is gained by berating him for treatment noncompliance? You might be a therapist, but you are not HIS therapist. Do you believe that, if he is as screwed up as you seem to suggest he is, your taking the side of his presumed therapist is going to convince him he is somehow in the wrong or help him in ANY way or make him more compliant with any therapy? Even if he is completely wrong or lying, his relationship with that therapist is beyond saving. The only productive thing he can do is move on to another one. The only helpful thing you can possibly do is convince him to do just that. The only possible harm is providing validation for misbehavior to a deeply screwed up human being -- given that this is a forum of strangers, the emotional "value" to him of such validation is low indeed, and there's no actual cost to you.

If, on the other hand, HYPOTHETICALLY, despite all the evidence you are convinced you see, he is actually telling the truth about his treatment at the hands of his therapist (which, given the political/social/religious climate in the US is not even remotely unrealistic), then what you just did by disbelieving him and basically telling him it's all in his head and all his fault, you are re-victimizing him. Congratulations, you have just done the worst possible thing in the situation and caused actual harm to a human being.

Given the two scenarios, regardless of what you think the probability of each of them is, I would think erring on the side that DOES NOT cause harm is the right thing to do, especially for someone whose profession boils down to helping people. Regardless of what you think your "duty of honesty" obligates you to as a therapist, don't you think the moral (and professional) duty to avoid causing harm is the more important one here?

 

[Lark]

Yes, obviously a therapist's attention is qualitatively different from that of just anyone. Or, at least, it should be (in practice qualifications vary and small-minded morons often end up on the job). Yes, I agree, it's important for therapists to be honest with their clients. At least for the most part. There's a huge difference between honesty and bluntness, and I would think there could be at least some limited/isolated scenarios when it's best that the therapist keep some information to themselves, at least temporarily.

Sure.

I'm going to have to disagree. It is entirely possible to have judgement and reasoning that is spot on and face trying circumstances, possibly while also not having much of a support system. In that case seeking a therapist mainly for emotional support and to have someone to simply talk through problems with and to offer input and perspective that comes from a position of professional neutrality and good judgment is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

We'll disagree then.

I think you are making unwarranted assumptions with very limited information (I also made some when writing the previous post which brought us here). I do still disagree with you regarding the merits of psychoanalysis as a whole, rather than the use of some concepts that originated there (like transference, for example). However, I'm not interested in having a debate on the matter right now, and I would propose we agree to disagree.

I think you are projecting. You could create a thread, about analysis, I accept it was a tangent.

We all make judgments based on what people reveal about themselves. So far in this thread you seem to be making judgments that are way far more reaching and far more certain than any information you are getting warrants. There's a lot more room for ambiguity and alternative explanations to the behavior of people that you are observing and jumping to conclusions about. In fact, your behavior is leading me to conclude that being a psychologist makes you far more certain of the snap judgments you are making than you ought to be. But hey, maybe I'm jumping to conclusions here myself.

Yeah, I dont believe you're right about this, although you've been honest about personal baggage you bring to the thread already and I would have expected a post like this one.

You are making unwarranted assumptions about my assumptions! I wasn't assuming any pre-existing animosity. I was simply stating that IF this were the worst possible scenario, and you DID, in fact, think all the things I theorized you MIGHT think about Danseen, or hold the opinions I theorized you might hold in general, that would still not make the behavior of his therapist, as he described it, acceptable.

At this stage you're just desperately trying to save face.

Ok, so let's play hypotheticals. Let's assume Danseen is either outright lying or misconstruing his therapist's behavior. He offers the report he did. What exactly is gained by berating him for treatment noncompliance? You might be a therapist, but you are not HIS therapist. Do you believe that, if he is as screwed up as you seem to suggest he is, your taking the side of his presumed therapist is going to convince him he is somehow in the wrong or help him in ANY way or make him more compliant with any therapy? Even if he is completely wrong or lying, his relationship with that therapist is beyond saving. The only productive thing he can do is move on to another one. The only helpful thing you can possibly do is convince him to do just that. The only possible harm is providing validation for misbehavior to a deeply screwed up human being -- given that this is a forum of strangers, the emotional "value" to him of such validation is low indeed, and there's no actual cost to you.

If, on the other hand, HYPOTHETICALLY, despite all the evidence you are convinced you see, he is actually telling the truth about his treatment at the hands of his therapist (which, given the political/social/religious climate in the US is not even remotely unrealistic), then what you just did by disbelieving him and basically telling him it's all in his head and all his fault, you are re-victimizing him. Congratulations, you have just done the worst possible thing in the situation and caused actual harm to a human being.

Given the two scenarios, regardless of what you think the probability of each of them is, I would think erring on the side that DOES NOT cause harm is the right thing to do, especially for someone whose profession boils down to helping people. Regardless of what you think your "duty of honesty" obligates you to as a therapist, don't you think the moral (and professional) duty to avoid causing harm is the more important one here?

No, lets not. Your view about harm is seriously eschew, by encouraging what's likely to be a flawed and typical way of relating to others, including the therapist, you're likely to make the therapy that's already unway unsuccessful, by encouraging the sort of behaviour exhibited already to remain typical you're likely to make Danseen miserable in his relationships with more people than his therapist and by encouraging complaints and reports, which will be investigated, you're also jeopardising the livelihood and career of what could be a very good therapist with a very difficult client. By you're own lights you're seriously wrong.

I'll also thank you not to my remarks upon my career or my duties when you so obviously know so, so little about it.

Now you're welcome to reply to this post, you seem a little compulsive about it so far but I'm not going to reply because I seriously suspect that you're trying to make sport and that is very unworthy.

 

[Lark]

I have never been to one. Is this what really happens, like in this short?

If so, I would become impatient just like the gentleman did. 2 years is long ass time. I want results, and I want them now.


Someone suggeted that I call a hotline for something one time, when I was feeling a little overwhelmed by a situation...and they were actually pretty rude.

That kind of deterred me from any further pursuit. I also thought "If I was about to comit suicide, I would have done it after that phone call" What a joke. That person should be ashamed of themselves.

Two years is a very long time, although some psychoanalysis can go on for two to three years but that is two to three years or meeting perhaps a single time a week or fortnight or month.

There's different arrangements about time, resources and pricing/costing any service, its been considered in the course of developing practice too, Freud thought that the costs of sessions and penalties for non-attendence were important because it would concentrate the minds of those in therapy and also act as a deterrence to simply dropping out if psychological resistance was building up before a possible break through. Although I think others, like Alfred Adler, didnt feel the same way.

I know that there's been discussions about whether or not a therapy is proving that it will be terminable or interminable, ie whether it can be concluded or will just carry on perpetually, Erich Fromm believed there was such a divide and that therapists had a duty to inform clients or families of their suspiscions as soon as they arose, as opposed to simply draining bank accounts.

There is also solutions focused brief therapy, I've been trained in that and its interesting, it would or could well be labelled life couching instead of therapy. When it first emerged it split the therapeutic community in half and lead to walk outs of conferences and all of that kind of thing.

A case study was presented in which someone presented saying they were ill because they couldnt sleep and that their neighbour upstairs was beaming a lazer down into their head preventing them sleeping. The therapist never mentioned or responded to the comment about lazers and simply concentrated upon sleep disorders and task centring around getting sleep. With that done the patient got more sleep, felt better and never mentioned lazers again. For some therapists that is job done, for others the symptoms were never even tackled.

 

[prplchknz]

my therapist calls me on my shit but it works because than I'm forced to get honest and it works better

 

[Ginkgo]

So basically the services of a psychologist are often what you make of them. In a nut shell, you're going to, at least, get a sounding board for ideas, thoughts, and feelings. Even if you sit there, trash what your psych recommends, and use your time to reflect in a controlled setting, you can make plenty of progress if you have the nerve.

Then there's the idea of goal setting. Where would you like to be by the time you no longer need the services of a trained counselor or physician? If you can't establish these goals and commit with any discipline, you're fucked. Don't bother paying good money for sessions that only enable you by giving you the illusion of progress.

You have to have some level of self-awareness in order to make anything count, otherwise you're going to fail to determine a feasible vision for your future.

As far as disparaging comments from your psych are concerned... idk. It's possible that they were premature in saying these things. It's also possible that they failed to perceive a level of regression in your progress with you and proceeded down a particular path as though they already established your full trust.

Overall, I'd just be careful as to what I take to heart.

 

[Lark]

my therapist calls me on my shit but it works because than I'm forced to get honest and it works better

^ see that's proper.