Posts Tagged ‘Negative Projective Psychology’

Diagnostic & Statistical Manual DSM Series Part II ~ The Demise of Care: A Comparison of “Negative Projective Psychology” and “Positive Projective Psychology”

Wednesday, February 11th, 2009

 

The current DSM is the DSM IV-TR in which “TR” stands for “Text Revision.”  The most significant change between the DSM IV and the DSM IV-TR is that a new criterion was inserted almost universally into every category of major mental illness:

 

Denial of having a mental disorder or a mental illness became a bonafide criterion for diagnosing the client with mental illness.

 

That may not seem so odd but it is subtle.  Now, if a person claimed they were healthy, that “denial” counted as a mark in the check list finding that person mentally ill!

 

Thus, the entire field of mental health became self-serving and self-centered.  Rather than rely upon the client complaining & requesting our help, we were and are going to find them mentally ill and in need of our services, no matter what.  Whether they need our services or want them, matters not.  All that matters is what we as “experts” say. 

 

Such a move (to the “TR”) further strains credibility and reveals that what passes for mental health treatment today is nothing more than projecting negative diagnoses and labels upon less sophisticated, helpless and vulnerable persons who are unable to defend themselves from the overwhelming onslaught of the “experts,” from the numbers and shear size of the community of mental health treatment providers. 

 

It is a stacked deck against which no one prevails.  While those in cushy positions making larger salaries may think they are helping their fellow man, all they are really doing is helping themselves by riding on the backs of those upon whom they cast their labels, if you will, upon the backs of those upon whom they ‘cast their spells.’

 

Gee, maybe psychology really has become a field dominated by women.  Dare I say witchcraft?  Because

 

most of the professionals I see today, old and young alike, male and female alike, don’t know what they are doing!

 

This is why I call the practice that prevails today “Negative Projective Psychology” and why I have come up with the term “Positive Projective Psychology” to contrast the errors made across the field which cause so many in our country to suffer. 

 

A tell tale sign of negative practice is a practitioner who claims that ‘therapy is “hard” and it is “stressful” for the practitioner.’  Hog wash!  If it is difficult for those practitioners, it is because they have been ill trained, poorly equipped and don’t understand the limitations of natural boundaries & empowering and truly helping their clients!

 

Lastly, “liberal” psychologists should not be treating “conservative” clients!  This is because of the value system impasse.

 

Conservatives understand the true meaning and quest for independence and independent functioning, whereas, liberals caretakers invoke dependency and make their patient’s dependent upon them.  They want them coming back so they can make that payment on their air planes, vacations or extra houses. 

 

Liberals do not want their clients’ getter better and leaving them.  In part, it may be an “abandonment issue” for the practitioner!  But it is mostly about keeping the money flowing. 

 

Such is the fate of an industry controlled by insurance companies and subject to mismanagement of motivation on the part of the professionals!  According to one malpractice attorney with whom I consulted, the insurance companies have tainted it all!  The insurance companies have ruined it all!

 

There is no safe place.

 

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual DSM Series Part I ~ Diminished Salaries & The Demise of the Profession of Psychology

Tuesday, February 10th, 2009

 

By the time the DSM III R was published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 1987, the field of psychology had been on the way to its demise.  Many would argue that with the publication of the DSM III in 1980 the writing was on the wall.  The “political” rivalries that dominated the work conducted by multiple committees were the beginning of the downfall of psychology as the crown of science. 

 

Certainly, the rise of the American Psychological Association (note:  This is a “different” APA than above.) and its encroachment on the credentialing (accreditation) of colleges and university programs in psychology crested during that same time.  It is odd to observe these forces at work at the same time, but the fact is psychology became more politicized and psychiatry overtook psychology during those years as the profession recognized as the leader in mental health treatment.  During that time the pay of the average psychologist diminished greatly.

 

While liberals, especially feminists, blamed the drastic decrease in salaries to male chauvinism and the field becoming recognized as a field dominated by women who we don’t pay as much as men, the sad realities are a bit different.  Certainly, the profession today has more women than men.  Salaries are depressed for all. 

 

Psychiatry achieved dominance by getting their DSM series recognized and adopted by the entire profession, including psychologists and social workers.  Adoption of psychiatry’s DSM was guaranteed when insurance companies began reimbursing services for disorders coded with DSM diagnoses.  Moreover, the DSM series implied the only real treatment for mental disorders was medication, hence, the rise of the hegemony of the Medical Model and the demise of psychology.

 

The second reality was that the field of psychology did not become a field dominated by women as much as it was affected by the law of supply and demand.  Each year during that decade, the schools and universities were pumping out so many graduates that supply exceeded demand.  Under such circumstances, prices fall naturally.  In fact, on average there were 250-400 graduates each year who could not find suitable post doctoral internships in order to obtain licensure!

 

Today, that mismatch continues and it is not advised that anyone enter the field unless they feel a real “calling.”  In fact, one is likely to make more money over one’s lifetime in nursing with an average investment of four (4) years of undergraduate education in comparison to the additional five (5) years of graduate tuition required to achieve a doctorate.  Remember, most people who begin that quest do not finish.

Gun Control and BO (from Arizona 14 Jan 2009)

Tuesday, January 20th, 2009

 

The BO crowd has in the Congress right now a bill to make all present and future gun owners register all guns. The owners must provide a passport type photo of themselves, a thumb print, and ALL MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS. If no mental health records are available because the person has never had mental health contact, then the gun owner must to go a doctor and establish a mental health record saying there is no problem.

 

Thanks to the person who brought this to my attention.  It is indeed sad news. 

 

Creating unnecessary Mental Health Records is not a benign activity.  In fact, mental health treatment is not a benign activity.  It is fraught with danger.  The primary danger is iatrogenesis—physician caused illness. 

 

Under the current practice of diagnosing a person or projecting a diagnosis and label on the unsuspecting patient, the “professional” spends most of his time trying to convince their patient that they are mentally ill and in need of treatment.  Truly, it has become a system of sordid dependency as practitioners try to “help” patients remain under treatment—treatment that is not only unnecessary but harmful!

 

Having contact with mental health marks a man and/or a woman for life and it is expensive.  Moreover, under the prevailing system of “Negative Projective Practice” under the hegemony of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) system and the hegemony of the Medical Model, almost all persons who appear for mental health clearance may be shocked and stunned when they emerge with a diagnosis of mental illness!

 

The preponderance of “false positives” (Those who are diagnosed as having a mental disorder or a mental illness who do not in fact have any such thing.) is already astronomically high under the prevailing practice of “Negative Projective Psychology.”  Psychiatry in particular regards those diagnosed as “diseased.”

 

Let me give three examples of how contact with “mental health” or (falsely called) behavioral health and having a history of such can affect a person’s life: 

 

A.     Those given diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder cannot get life insurance regardless of treatment and/or treatment outcome.

B.      Those diagnosed mentally ill are given the diagnosis for life and carry that label forever.  It is pejorative.  One can rarely if ever discard a diagnosis even when it was obviously erroneous and made in error.

C.     Later in life it can have a tremendous impact.  When one is up for consideration for placement in nursing homes, having any history of mental illness bars one from admission in better facilities.  One will be re-directed to inferior settings where one they provide such treatment whether they need it or not.

 

In fact, under the DSM not only can the average person who has no complaints be found “mentally ill” and given a DSM coded diagnosis, but the vast majority will emerge with not merely one diagnosis but two or more!  These dual diagnoses or “comorbid” diagnoses should bar the average citizen from clearance to possess firearms.

 

Since the vast majority of psychologists and psychiatrists are “liberals” after years of having purged the remnants of any and all “conservatives” from their ranks, the proposed legislative requirements of Congress should result in removing most of the guns across the country. 

 

My mentor told me I would do well in psychology because I would be one of the minority of psychologists who were conservative, perhaps 15% in 1989, and I could better serve conservative clientele who were wealthier and had more resources (at that time). 

 

Little did we know that there would be a most “uncivil purging” of conservatives from our field while the “liberal” side was mouthing off about “tolerance” and “acceptance” and “diversity”—all while targeting us for removal from the profession!  Perhaps less than 5% of psychologists today remain who may be regarded as “conservative.”  And the group with the most wealth today that “represents” the rich in Congress is the Democrats and the “liberals.”

 

Furthermore, since there will be so much “professional liability” attached to giving a person clearance to possess firearms, the fees for such services will be inordinately high.  Under such circumstances expect psychiatrists & psychologists to double their fees in order to take advantage of this “windfall.” 

 

It certainly will be ‘good for business’ and solidifying the power of psychiatry and the “therapeutic state.” 

 

Remember: 

 

“The purpose of government is to make money off other people’s money.”

 

(Quote me)

 

But this is the folly of those who believe everything can be “kontrolled,” comrades.  This is the overreaching of government.  It is most unreasonable.  It is unconstitutional and un-American, a clear violation of the Second Amendment of The Bill of Rights.

 

More importantly, it is another step in the direction oppressive governments and oppressors always take.  Now, why is our United States Congress so fearful of the people?