psychiatry is bunk

[bentnotbroken]

This thread title is not only wrong, it's dangerous advice. Psychiatry is not what it used to be and has no connection at all to the way it had been portrayed in movies in eras passed. A psychiatrist is not an analyst. A psychiatrist is an M.D.--a physician. He or she's job is not to sit there and listen to you and try to blame your mother or whatever. If anyone does that it is a psychologist which is something very different. A psychiatrist is simply gears to address the physiology of your mind/brain and prescribe medication where appropriate to help level the playing field for a person with off-kilter chemical issues in the brain which manifest as emotional or behavioral problems. A good psychiatrist will ask you about your current sleep patterns, nutrition, and how if at all you've responded to previously prescribed medication. That's about it. There's no "bunk" to it--it's all about chemicals and whether yours are working in harmony or eating you alive. Psychology or psychoanalysis is where there is a lot of what could be called "bunk". Practitioners try to apply reason to your reason--to me that's an outdated idea. All psychological issues are driven by chemistry. And until one sees a psychiatrist and arrests the chemical disarray that is involved in such things as overreaction, phobia, obsession, paranoia etc, trying to meat those extremes with simply reason is like pissing in the wind.

 

 

Some psychological issues aren't chemistry driven but result from behaviors that have become so ingrained they become a part of the person's life routine, some of which are pretty destructive and with proper training can be minimized or eliminated.

[betterdeal]

Which service? they essentially are saying that given behaviours are optimally good, without any substantiation behind it. Mental health professionals must be autistic or otherwise duped, since they cannot relate to society as it is.

 

How can you tell if they're autistic?

[Feelin Frisky]

Some psychological issues aren't chemistry driven but result from behaviors that have become so ingrained they become a part of the person's life routine, some of which are pretty destructive and with proper training can be minimized or eliminated.

 

I'm sorry bent, but all emotions are a matter of chemistry. People with fortunate chemistries who are not over-taken by intensities can usually reason their own way out of things. But people who are seriously in emotional disarray are not driven that way strictly by matters of logic otherwise they could simply apply other logic to put things right. I'm not saying everyone needs medication--just that the way today's medications work, how they differ from those of passed eras where they only tranquilized the nervous system to produce a false calmness--today's medications improve the clarity and focus of the mind so that therapy can work where new reason meets errant perception. It is a mistake to assume that all a disturbed person needs is new knowledge--what they need first is the ability to detach from the feelings that have overwhelmed them so that they can reason anew with confidence. There is no way for many people to be other than who they are by mere discussion--they don't know how to separate the issue for the feeling or don't even believe that is possible many times.

 

When a medication that works strictly on the mind to make it more focused and more capable really starts working, the suffering person learns that it is possible to reason away pattern thoughts which have triggered negative emotional states. This is a tricky distinction that take a lot of open-mindedness to understand and many people even in the mental health field have varying understandings of it which sometimes result in patients wasting a lot of time getting ineffective help. The consequences can be grave and are always costly. Therefore I try at every opportunity to educate through my own experience what the issues often are with regard to how feelings are chemical reactions that are triggered by thoughts or perceptions and that it is wiser to try to enhance the thought or perception process through new medication first before trying to simply rationalize away the reason for the disarray. Please consider that medication can now really do this--make you much more clearheaded whereas it used to do the opposite and make people's senses dull. That's the disconnect that many people who recoil from my advice have. Medication works the opposite now and changes your ability to comprehend and separate feelings from facts. I hope you can see that this could be an important thing many people could be helped by if misinformation were to be better driven away with new understanding.

[bentnotbroken]

I'm sorry bent, but all emotions are a matter of chemistry. People with fortunate chemistries who are not over-taken by intensities can usually reason their own way out of things. But people who are seriously in emotional disarray are not driven that way strictly by matters of logic otherwise they could simply apply other logic to put things right. I'm not saying everyone needs medication--just that the way today's medications work, how they differ from those of passed eras where they only tranquilized the nervous system to produce a false calmness--today's medications improve the clarity and focus of the mind so that therapy can work where new reason meets errant perception. It is a mistake to assume that all a disturbed person needs is new knowledge--what they need first is the ability to detach from the feelings that have overwhelmed them so that they can reason anew with confidence. There is no way for many people to be other than who they are by mere discussion--they don't know how to separate the issue for the feeling or don't even believe that is possible many times.

 

When a medication that works strictly on the mind to make it more focused and more capable really starts working, the suffering person learns that it is possible to reason away pattern thoughts which have triggered negative emotional states. This is a tricky distinction that take a lot of open-mindedness to understand and many people even in the mental health field have varying understandings of it which sometimes result in patients wasting a lot of time getting ineffective help. The consequences can be grave and are always costly. Therefore I try at every opportunity to educate through my own experience what the issues often are with regard to how feelings are chemical reactions that are triggered by thoughts or perceptions and that it is wiser to try to enhance the thought or perception process through new medication first before trying to simply rationalize away the reason for the disarray. Please consider that medication can now really do this--make you much more clearheaded whereas it used to do the opposite and make people's senses dull. That's the disconnect that many people who recoil from my advice have. Medication works the opposite now and changes your ability to comprehend and separate feelings from facts. I hope you can see that this could be an important thing many people could be helped by if misinformation were to be better driven away with new understanding.

 

 

We will respectfully disagree Frisky.

[OldSkool]

It both amuses and disturbs me how often I hear "There ought to be a law against..." or some variation thereof. This plaintive cry is often followed by the statement "Won't someone think about the children".

 

Don't like trans fat in foods, let's outlaw it.

Don't like happy meal toys because you cannot bear to tell lil precious he/she cannot eat junk food all the time, let's outlaw it.

Psychiatry... oh, let's outlaw that too.

Obesity.... just give me enough time...

 

Whatever happened to freedom of choice, and bearing the consequences of our actions. Personal responsibility?

 

Have you ever seen "Demolition Man"? Because that's the way this world is going if we continue to demonstrate that we are mindless sheeple who need the nanny government to protect us from ourselves.

 

"According to Cocteau's plan, I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've seen the future. You know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin, sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing, "I'm an Oscar Meyer wiener." Dennis Leary

[Taramere]

Outlawed since it serves no purpose other than to push forward subjective beliefs of life. Are YOU so insecure, in that others' beliefs offend you and phase you? Why do you let a stranger's attitudes rile you?

 

If a particular medication stops a schizophrenic from having delusions that are causing them (and others close to them) immense distress, believing that it's in their interests to take that medication is a pretty objective belief. I'm pretty sure most psychiatrists have enough on their plate dealing with people who are certifiably insane to be interested in making subjective judgements about slightly insecure and moody Joe Bloggs and using those judgements to pathologise him with the latest craze.

 

I think "subjective" comes more into play in the everyday course of life when people put on the clinician's mask in order to play therapist, when what they're really setting out to do is manipulate or get one over on eachother. So a person might let you know that they've mentally put you in a box marked, say, "narcissistic" (always a popular one). Then they'll tell you how to escape from that box. The likelihood is that escaping from it will involve you behaving in ways that benefit them. Or it might be that they're testing you out to see where your Achilles heel is, for future reference. And yes, psychologists can it too, to their friends and family.

 

As far as "outlawing" that goes....what for? Just because some self appointed expert feels like labelling you with a clinical term, doesn't mean you have to get upset and seek out treatment for it. If you think they're talking a lot of crap, all you need to do is say "mmmm. Fascinating..." then carry on doing exactly what you were doing before.

 

For me, a lot of that stuff is fascinating. I love 1960s films with all their heavy handed symbolism and cheesy Freudian stuff...but I don't think Freud & Co invented psychoanalytic theory. For centuries, writers have made observations on the human condition that entertained people (like me) who enjoy reading about all that stuff.

 

You don't have to take it too seriously though. Cherry pick the observations you find helpful and/or entertaining, and chuck the rest in the trash.

[Feelin Frisky]

We will respectfully disagree Frisky.

 

 

Respectully I think we don't disagree. It's just a lot easier to say that we do so that to evade the work of reaching an understanding. Oh well. Such is the state of the world today.

[ilikesunita]

It both amuses and disturbs me how often I hear "There ought to be a law against..." or some variation thereof. This plaintive cry is often followed by the statement "Won't someone think about the children".

 

Don't like trans fat in foods, let's outlaw it.

Don't like happy meal toys because you cannot bear to tell lil precious he/she cannot eat junk food all the time, let's outlaw it.

Psychiatry... oh, let's outlaw that too.

Obesity.... just give me enough time...

 

Whatever happened to freedom of choice, and bearing the consequences of our actions. Personal responsibility?

 

Have you ever seen "Demolition Man"? Because that's the way this world is going if we continue to demonstrate that we are mindless sheeple who need the nanny government to protect us from ourselves.

 

"According to Cocteau's plan, I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've seen the future. You know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin, sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing, "I'm an Oscar Meyer wiener." Dennis Leary

 

Not everybody is, or frankly ever has been, liberal-minded.

[ilikesunita]

They aren't pushing their own beliefs onto anyone. They are schooled to know how to handle different individuals. So if anything, it's the teachers who are pushing their beliefs onto others.

 

lol... psychiatry just comprises beliefs as to how the world should be.

I'll play along - What are "the norms of society"?

 

And more importantly, would you prefer to follow "the norms of society", no matter how stupid it is?

 

Please, none of that liberal claptrap. I consider myself libertarian, but beliefs extending from the liberal tradition are not universally endorsed or accepted. Humans are social animals, and we exist in collective groupings. If one wants to live as a human being, one must learn how to interact. it's a fact of life, you sound like you stuck in an adolescent rebellion phase.

[ilikesunita]

Nope. Not buying this.

 

It is not normal to hear and see non existent things. This is one of the features of psychiatric pathology called "psychosis."

 

 

What if it causes the sufferer no distress? Who is to say s/he cannot do that?

It is not normal to consistently have no remorse for actions, which hurt others greatly. This is why murderers are often diagnosed as "sociopaths."

 

human history, nay the human condition, is one of savagery. Get over it, it's how we are.

It is not normal to have constant thoughts of suicide, frequent crying spells and low energy. These behaviors point to "depression."

 

Suicide per se does not denote mental illness.

Any sensible person knows that the aforementioned behaviors are not normal, no medical degree needed.

 

no, people who push a conservative "normal" onto society.

[ilikesunita]

How can you tell if they're autistic?

 

Not understanding social cues, and social norms, and how people actually behave in regular society. Are you going to tell me that cues and norms don't exist, or other such nonsense?

[bentnotbroken]

Respectully I think we don't disagree. It's just a lot easier to say that we do so that to evade the work of reaching an understanding. Oh well. Such is the state of the world today.

 

 

Mmmmm.....kaaaayyyy.

[Trishi]

With all due respect Ilike, keep it to one post, and only make more if you hit a character limit. This quadrouble posting is ridiculous.

 

I don't even know why I'm trying. This troll is so obvious it's almost painful. Look, what you are essentially hoping will get outlawed, is what have helped a lot of people move on with their lives. I would probably have rotten up in my apartment without the help of a professional, so I know from experience. So tell me; Do you think a psychiatrist have "ruined" me by helping me function socially? Is it wrong of him to have pushed me forward, away from my experiences that had made me a socially inept?

 

And again... norms isn't optimal. What you are saying is litterally that it is best for people to eat McDonalds and be obese. You can't possibly be serious.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Trishi

[KathyM]

This thread title is not only wrong, it's dangerous advice. Psychiatry is not what it used to be and has no connection at all to the way it had been portrayed in movies in eras passed. A psychiatrist is not an analyst. A psychiatrist is an M.D.--a physician. He or she's job is not to sit there and listen to you and try to blame your mother or whatever. If anyone does that it is a psychologist which is something very different. A psychiatrist is simply gears to address the physiology of your mind/brain and prescribe medication where appropriate to help level the playing field for a person with off-kilter chemical issues in the brain which manifest as emotional or behavioral problems. A good psychiatrist will ask you about your current sleep patterns, nutrition, and how if at all you've responded to previously prescribed medication. That's about it. There's no "bunk" to it--it's all about chemicals and whether yours are working in harmony or eating you alive. Psychology or psychoanalysis is where there is a lot of what could be called "bunk". Practitioners try to apply reason to your reason--to me that's an outdated idea. All psychological issues are driven by chemistry. And until one sees a psychiatrist and arrests the chemical disarray that is involved in such things as overreaction, phobia, obsession, paranoia etc, trying to meat those extremes with simply reason is like pissing in the wind.

Actually, both psychiatrists and psychologists practice psychoanalysis, and provide the same service. The only difference is that psychiatrists are also MDs that can prescribe medication for mental illnesses and disorders. I would also disagree with you that all psychological issues are driven by chemistry. That's not really true. A person can have a brain chemistry that is normal, but the person is dysfunctional because of things that happened during their childhood or later on in life that has scewed their thinking or caused them to have irrational or dysfunctional thoughts. Some dysfunction among people is caused by chemical imbalances. Some is caused by environment or events that happened to the person. Some is a combination of the two.

[Feelin Frisky]

Actually, both psychiatrists and psychologists practice psychoanalysis, and provide the same service. The only difference is that psychiatrists are also MDs that can prescribe medication for mental illnesses and disorders. I would also disagree with you that all psychological issues are driven by chemistry. That's not really true. A person can have a brain chemistry that is normal, but the person is dysfunctional because of things that happened during their childhood or later on in life that has scewed their thinking or caused them to have irrational or dysfunctional thoughts. Some dysfunction among people is caused by chemical imbalances. Some is caused by environment or events that happened to the person. Some is a combination of the two.

 

I didn't say all psychological disorders are driven by chemistry. All symptoms are facilitated chemically. All thoughts involve chemical processes as well. No electrochemistry, no thought, no life.

 

The only distinction I was interested in making is that resolution or relief of emotional maladies comes from a mind that is able to understand that feelings are not thoughts or facts. They are spearate although people think and feel so quickly in an instant, they find it impossible to intercede on their own behalf and decide whether to feel, how much to feel or if they should chose to feel something else.

 

Feelings are reactions to thoughts--sometimes intense and unwanted reactions felt deeply that trigger more negative thoughts in an escalating spiral. A person who suffers from this kind of emotional malady, no matter how much validity there is to the initial fear or phobia, may not be able to separate the two and reason away the chemically-facilitated symptoms. Medicine is now switching to "tuning" the mind to make it more focused and thus detached from instantaneous reaction in the gut so that there is a new and sober feeling when considering trauma or phobia. This differs from treatments of the past which did the opposite--they used to "dull" the perception with a blanket tranquilizer and try to induce discussion through an actually less-capable state. A problem is that when many people hear the word "medication" they jump to the assumption of the traditional sedated approach without realising that a profound change has been achieved--so profound a change that it really deserves recognition on the order of eradicating polio or something. Unfortunately, it's just a breakthrough that has come about among many others and it's meaning has not gotten adequate acknowledgement in the public consciousness. So, people might hear my dialogue and think "oh, a drug advocate", where in fact I'm, the opposite, a "clarity" advocate which ironically is accomplished through new drug therapies.

 

New meds allow the mind to achieve a clarity that can allow that critical split-second of detachment from the former instantaneous release of "feelings" where people now learn to choose "how" to feel, and what the "proportion" should be. If one keeps looking at things through one same unfocused mind he or she has always had, which may be hampered by a chemical shortfall in the neurotransmitter system, progress through talk therapy alone will likely be a tougher slog that may never quite get there. These are great times to be alive in this regard.

[ilikesunita]

Anyone who wants to outlaw anything they disagree with is very liberal minded.

 

"If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one. If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

 

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't` eat meat. If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

 

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. If a liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

 

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life. If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

 

If a person of color is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful. Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

 

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

 

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.

 

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church. A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)

 

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

 

If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed. If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he's in labor and then sues.

 

If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.

 

A liberal will delete it because he's "offended"

 

So true!

 

huh? I'm not using American labels. I'm putting a belief in freedom in its proper context. Not all cultures, even today, value the primacy of the individual in his/her own life and dealings. It's incidental from the discussion, but I think that freedom is largely theoretical.

[ilikesunita]

With all due respect Ilike, keep it to one post, and only make more if you hit a character limit. This quadrouble posting is ridiculous.

 

I don't even know why I'm trying. This troll is so obvious it's almost painful. Look, what you are essentially hoping will get outlawed, is what have helped a lot of people move on with their lives. I would probably have rotten up in my apartment without the help of a professional, so I know from experience. So tell me; Do you think a psychiatrist have "ruined" me by helping me function socially? Is it wrong of him to have pushed me forward, away from my experiences that had made me a socially inept?

 

And again... norms isn't optimal. What you are saying is litterally that it is best for people to eat McDonalds and be obese. You can't possibly be serious.

 

Life is hard, such IS life.

 

Also, most mental health professionals don't seem to understand day to day society and only push their warped conceptions of how THEY think life is.

[PelicanPete]

Life is hard, such IS life.

 

Also, most mental health professionals don't seem to understand day to day society and only push their warped conceptions of how THEY think life is.

 

I think they do. How else are you to learn about how life is "suppose" to be lived. That is the purpose of society and culture after all.

 

Please stop "countering" peoples actual arguments with your own opinion. All you are doing is enforcing your belief on others which gets nowhere. If you don't have any sort of logical argument to back it up, why would anyone consider your point of view above their own?

[linwood]

 

"It's like going to the dentist, and a dentist advising you to floss more regularly because it promotes healthy gums. I'm sure the majority of people don't floss as much as they should, but does that make the dentist wrong?" - Theres another branch of medicine for ya.

 

Actually dental hygiene is based upon observable, repeatable, objective, observation.

 

You`re comparing apples to oranges.

[betterdeal]

Not understanding social cues, and social norms, and how people actually behave in regular society. Are you going to tell me that cues and norms don't exist, or other such nonsense?

 

No, I was just wondering where you'd get the definition of "autistic" from, if not the mental health professionals you want to outlaw.

[betterdeal]

Also, most mental health professionals don't seem to understand day to day society and only push their warped conceptions of how THEY think life is.

 

How are THEY pushing their WARPED views, and how does that differ from, say, the way YOU are pushing your WARPED views?

[betterdeal]

Actually dental hygiene is based upon observable, repeatable, objective, observation.

 

As is CBT training, for instance.

[linwood]

As is CBT training, for instance.

 

Have you a curriculum sample?

 

I could perhaps alter my opinion.

[ilikesunita]

No, I was just wondering where you'd get the definition of "autistic" from, if not the mental health professionals you want to outlaw.

 

from psychology textbooks, where else?

 

My views are based on fact. they push views and show little cognisance as to how society is. I met several last year who had no clue about the general memes, values and structure of the society they themselves interact in.

[ilikesunita]

I think they do. How else are you to learn about how life is "suppose" to be lived. That is the purpose of society and culture after all.

 

Please stop "countering" peoples actual arguments with your own opinion. All you are doing is enforcing your belief on others which gets nowhere. If you don't have any sort of logical argument to back it up, why would anyone consider your point of view above their own?

 

Human beings are social species, how can one NOT know about basic social interactions, unless one is disabled? Do you pat back on the back if they tell you that they walk on two legs, or can abstract?