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.
poster:Dinah
thread:710731
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20061123/msgs/710812.html