Posted by toojane on February 2, 2007, at 8:30:51
In reply to Re: Abusive therapist *TRIGGER*, posted by one woman cine on February 2, 2007, at 7:40:35
> I can see we are at odds on this subject so I will only say these few things.
Even though we do disagree, I have really enjoyed talking with you.
> There is no way to know that once they are practicing, if serious violations occur because of the confidentiality of the therapy relationship.Yes. Once they are practicing. But I keep wondering HOW they were granted their degrees in the first place. Someone who is capable of beating his patients and treating them like dogs has serious problems that I can't believe magically appeared after he started practicing. If clinicians are able to diagnose patients, why can they not diagnose each other? Why aren't deviants screened out before they do harm? But I've posted this question several times and no one has answered, probably because there is no good explanation (see my post about Tyrell above).
>There is no meeting where dr. y says "oh yeah, by the way I had patient x in a dog collar"No, I agree it is doubtful the doctor tells colleagues directly that he puts patients in dog collars. But his colleagues are psychologists and psychiatrists. Shouldn't they be able to tell in their interactions with him, by comments he makes, opinions he shares, the ways in which he speaks about his patients, that there is something seriously wrong with him? If they are completely unable to tell, which may be true, then how can they maintain that they are capable of judging their patient's mental status?
> professionals don't discuss patients because of confidentiality unless it's a consult. & then the patient must sign a waiver saying it's OK to discuss -
> That is a fact. It is a part of the "standard of care".But they MUST practice only under supervision for years first. They are closely monitored and supervised and assessed and graded -- by other clinicians. Again, why aren't they screened out.
> So, I'm not understanding your point about associations/other professionals *knowing* about abuses.I honestly cannot grasp how they cannot. If they were accountants standing around saying they had no idea Bob was an embezzler, I could maybe understand that. They are accountants. They are trained to know numbers. But these are psychiatric professionals. They are supposedly trained to know people's mental health status.
> Being an informed patient/client is imprtant in seeking any kind of treatment.
> Would you agree or disagree?I completely agree with you - with a caveat. What you are suggesting is easily done by the worried well. But people who are more seriously mentally ill are not in a position where they are able to do this. It is unreasonable to expect them to be able to. Someone who is seriously depressed can barely get out of bed, let alone research therapy practice standards.
You agree that there are predatory doctors but believe the onus is on the patients to screen and protect themselves (unless I've misunderstood you?)
I believe training programs and associations need to take more responsibility and acknowledge that predators are slipping through the cracks and implement more effective screening procedures.
poster:toojane
thread:728702
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20070119/msgs/728982.html