From: William Linne (photoassistant@hotmail.com)
Date: 09/02/02-03:33:38 PM Z
What the fuck does this have to do with alt-process?
Should be renamed alt-lonelyoldlady
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 2:12 PM
Subject: Re:Psychanalysis/ The Natural Order of Things
>
> On Sun, 1 Sep 2002 ARTHURWG@aol.com wrote:
>
> > Most contemporary psychiatric practice seems to center on which drug or
> > combination of drugs to use, or on various forms of behaviorism. Then
there's
> > all the psychotherapists who have an MSW degree and have no idea what
> > they're doing and often do more harm than good. Arthur
>
> Since I was witness to my husband's training as psychiatric resident 35 or
> so years ago, and his descriptions of training given the psychiatric
> residents he teaches today, not to mention my own observations about
> vicissitudes of "mental health" biz in the interim, I am moved to comment:
>
> In the '60s, psychiatric residents were trained in "psychodynamics,"
> generally, or at the best hospitals, with a very psychoanalytical (read
> "Freudian") bent. Today, for many reasons, most of them having to do with
> medical economics (rise of the HMO, which only pays for a limited number
> of visits, quick effects of psychotropic medicine) but also remarkable
> advances in psychopharmacology, residential training has little
> psychodynamics, while, to be boarded, a psychiatrist has to pass not just
> psychopharmacology, but neurology, a field now also much enlarged.
>
> In the meantime however, the fields of social work and psychology have
> vastly improved their training in psychodynamics -- an MSW in social work,
> for instance (depending on where they trained) is, odds are, better
> equipped for "talking cure" than the MD psychiatrist, unless the MD has
> done a postgraduate course as some elect to do.
>
> But one who is contemplating this .... let's say fascinating & potentially
> lifesaving.... adventure MUST MUST MUST ask about the "therapist's"
> training. I've watched folks go into "therapy" without a clue about the
> "school," degree or training of the "therapist," simply taking it on faith
> because a friend "loved" them. And/or being embarrassed to ask. Would you
> buy a used car no questions asked? And if you don't feel free to
> question/challenge the therapist in such areas... finding out why not
> should be very productive.
>
> The first question, after training, "modality," etc., is have they
> themselves been through therapy, and of what nature. If a therapist has
> not at least done a walk-through, odds of malevolent counter-transference
> increase.
>
>
> J.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/02-03:47:07 PM Z CST