Psycho-Babble Psychology | about psychological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Hmmm... clarification

Posted by Dinah on August 11, 2004, at 12:54:20

In reply to Re: therapy debate gets 'raucous' - Auntie Mel Shadowplayers721, posted by Dinah on August 11, 2004, at 11:55:11

What I said in my previous post could clearly be construed to mean that I judged contribution to society as a purely monetary function. That is not at all my belief.

I was merely putting on a fiscal responsibility hat for a moment to point out that it is not only humane, but economically responsible to provide people with the treatment they need. How many therapy sessions can one inpatient hospital stay pay for? How many therapy sessions can the hospital stay for a failed suicide attempt pay for? What is the lifetime earnings potential of a person who completed a suicide attempt.

And of course, my main point was that I would never judge whether therapy is a personal indulgence because someone still has problems. That can only be judged by comparing the same person with and without therapy. Which admittedly makes outcome studies difficult.

A fictional, but reasonable to me, example is in the TV show Monk. Mr. Monk goes to frequent therapy, yet is still plagued by what most would consider to be extreme dysfunction. Yet in one episode we meet his brother who is not going to frequent therapy and get an understanding that Mr. Monk is actually coping quite well. Fictional, yes. But a good object lesson, I think.




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Framed

poster:Dinah thread:376384