Posted by alexandra_k on March 27, 2005, at 22:42:52
In reply to Re: (ii) The Socio-Cognitive Model » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on March 27, 2005, at 22:20:44
> He believes that the response of pro-DID/MPD clinicians may encourage people to behave in a way that conforms with this model.
Ah. It is more that he believes that the response of pro-DID/MPD clinicians (among other things) may encourage people to behave in a way that has them meet DSM criteria for the disorder.
He thinks ALL of the reported cases are like that.
> On the other hand, he never considers that his proposed treatment may promote iatrogenic "wellness". That if a clinician ignores or disapproves of a legitimate report of symptoms or experiences, the patient may well quit reporting them, not because they ceased to exist, but to please the clinician.
Yeah. Gleaves (and others) use that same objection too. I guess all that can be said is that for Spanos the world does not work that way.
I guess it is the behaviourist influence. They have a case of the 'nothing buts'. All of the DSM disorders are 'nothing but' a list of behavioural symptoms. If you can alter the behaviour so that it no meets the criteria then you have cured the subject of their ailment. All there is to their ailment is their meeting the criteria. Spanos may well say that he had cured someone only to have them revert in the face of altered reinforcement contingencies when a new clinician starts reinforcing them for the behaviour that he was punishing away.What I don't understand is how he got ethical approval to attempt to induce DID in first year college students by the use of hypnosis. For course credit, no doubt...
It worked.
Temporarily.
Lucky for him, I would say.
Or they would surely have sued his *ss.
At least I hope it was temporary...
And what does that show us: nothing.
Try interpreting the significance of that finding...
poster:alexandra_k
thread:476469
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/write/20050321/msgs/476510.html