Psychology...Psychiatry?

Guest

Abstract wrote:

Poison IV wrote:: And there is no cure for crazy.

A little Mary jane can help...sometimes it makes it worse but in that case it makes less relevant when not high...

Anything to block the cell phone towers and temporarily get my brain back. My emotions are being played like ping pong.

Guest

Abstract wrote:: As long as it is pleasant to the self and doesn't induce situations that prevent one from being happy it is hard to call it a problem.

Anger can be a means of expression but I would think is worth practicing avoidance of IF it prevents the self from focusing and thus functioning. But generally it reduces overall functionality due to the resistance it causes in communication and thus persuasion...generally

frustration is a state not worth it i would think simply in that it consumes time where one can be achieving their goals more efficiently.

Anti-psychotics are a waste. I was on geodone for a while and that made me so tired and so...very...very...very...very...very board of being board, i could feel like breathing at one point... zyprexia was less but it is still makes one tired, and they all encourage weight gain. And ultimately they completely hide one's creative side. So I started smoking dope, and then realized it was a waste to be taking one drug and another to counter act it... So I quit them all... It better to just avoid all drugs but it requires getting one's mentality straight, finding ways of fitting and using or directing their "inspirations" to what aids growth and achievement of interests... but then underlying psychological thoughts often prevent certain states of mind that balance things...and thus a actual psychologist helps..problem is that many of the people, especially those who are considered "psychotic" are smarter then the psychologists they get placed with...to a degree, but nonetheless even a simple psychologists has things that are worth considering...

I'm still trying to figure out what you said. It sounds like nothing so it's really hard...

You're beginning to sound like a psychologist.

Guest

Poison IV wrote:

Abstract wrote:: As long as it is pleasant to the self and doesn't induce situations that prevent one from being happy it is hard to call it a problem.

Anger can be a means of expression but I would think is worth practicing avoidance of IF it prevents the self from focusing and thus functioning. But generally it reduces overall functionality due to the resistance it causes in communication and thus persuasion...generally

frustration is a state not worth it i would think simply in that it consumes time where one can be achieving their goals more efficiently.

Anti-psychotics are a waste. I was on geodone for a while and that made me so tired and so...very...very...very...very...very board of being board, i could feel like breathing at one point... zyprexia was less but it is still makes one tired, and they all encourage weight gain. And ultimately they completely hide one's creative side. So I started smoking dope, and then realized it was a waste to be taking one drug and another to counter act it... So I quit them all... It better to just avoid all drugs but it requires getting one's mentality straight, finding ways of fitting and using or directing their "inspirations" to what aids growth and achievement of interests... but then underlying psychological thoughts often prevent certain states of mind that balance things...and thus a actual psychologist helps..problem is that many of the people, especially those who are considered "psychotic" are smarter then the psychologists they get placed with...to a degree, but nonetheless even a simple psychologists has things that are worth considering...

I'm still trying to figure out what you said. It sounds like nothing so it's really hard...

You're beginning to sound like a psychologist.

I'm not...But I like anthropology and so i do not avoid discussing my thoughts on the subject. Though it seems I have said what you have been saying about yourself before, and had many of the thoughts you seem to be expressing...

Guest

Umm

sure...

Guest

Abstract wrote:: If it is a psychiatric problem a person well talk about it more openly, society thinks it is ok; that it isn't your fault.
If it is a psychological problem a person is afraid to talk about it more openly, society thinks it is wrong; that it has to be your fault.

I don't think this is the case - though it depends on what subculture you are in. Psychiatry is organized to deal with problems seen as physiological and tends towards a biochemical response. IOW you could see people who go to psychiatrists as having innate problems. Psychology deals via communication with problems that could be seen more to be on the end of nurture created problems - trauma, abuse, neglect, etc - and then also just problems dealing with society, relationships, work, etc., because of either nature or nurture causes.

Which is worse - to be a creature that has an innate problem to have a problem caused, at least in part, by experiences?

I think in many subcultures people are much more comfortable saying they see a therapist/psychologist than admitting they see a psychiatrist.

Guest

MonoExplosion wrote:: I don't know, but psychopaths shouldn't feel any anger or frustration. You can't not care and also be angry and frustrated about things.

They don't care how you feel, but they still want what they want and can get frustrated. And they sure as shit can get angry. Just as other people do car doors and mosquitoes.

Guest

Poison IV wrote:: Umm

sure...

I should add:

"Though it seems I have said what you have been saying about yourself before" about myself.

encase that was unclear...

Guest

Kovacs wrote:

Abstract wrote:: If it is a psychiatric problem a person well talk about it more openly, society thinks it is ok; that it isn't your fault.
If it is a psychological problem a person is afraid to talk about it more openly, society thinks it is wrong; that it has to be your fault.

I don't think this is the case - though it depends on what subculture you are in. Psychiatry is organized to deal with problems seen as physiological and tends towards a biochemical response. IOW you could see people who go to psychiatrists as having innate problems. Psychology deals via communication with problems that could be seen more to be on the end of nurture created problems - trauma, abuse, neglect, etc - and then also just problems dealing with society, relationships, work, etc., because of either nature or nurture causes.

Which is worse - to be a creature that has an innate problem to have a problem caused, at least in part, by experiences?

I think in many subcultures people are much more comfortable saying they see a therapist/psychologist than admitting they see a psychiatrist.

it does seem people are avoidant of mentioning the psychiatric issues, but it seems that they are avoidant of discussing the psychological as well. Yet i feel that people tend to go for the idea that their problem is one that is innate rather then one that is a matter of an issue with the way they are thinking about the world...

Guest

In a determinist universe or cosmos, how can personal responsibility and accountability exist?

I think that would be a more effective question here.

If free will and freedom are a delicious illusions much like how the determinists say that they are then there really is no such thing as willing independent choice.

Without free will personal responsibility and accountability means nothing.

Therefore Abstract nothing would be anybody's fault at all as they were already determined to act out the way that they did.

Quote :: WWWIII: How is a psychiatric problem not a psychological problem? Also, considering there's a pill for nearly everything these days, how aren't psychological problems also treatable through a pill?

The fundamental flaw of psychiatry is that it views everything to have a solution, cure, and treatment.

Another flaw is where psychiatry views there to be a problem or conflict where in all actuality there are none at all.

Some have said this is the effect of fictionally creating problems and cures for what otherwise didn't exist at all.

Of course this really is no surprise once you understand the history of psychiatry in how it has replaced the old role of the priesthood in regulating all social reality on whimsical fantasy ideals of nonstop constant moralizing.

Guest

Abstract wrote:

Poison IV wrote:: Umm

sure...

I should add:

"Though it seems I have said what you have been saying about yourself before" about myself.

encase that was unclear...

Nope.

Still makes no sense What a Face

Becuz you sound like a psychologist.

Guest

TheJoker wrote:

In a determinist universe or cosmos, how can personal responsibility and accountability exist?

I think that would be a more effective question here.

If free will and freedom are a delicious illusions much like how the determinists say that they are then there really is no such thing as willing independent choice.

Without free will personal responsibility and accountability means nothing.

Therefore Abstract nothing would be anybody's fault at all as they were already determined to act out the way that they did.

Quote :: WWWIII: How is a psychiatric problem not a psychological problem? Also, considering there's a pill for nearly everything these days, how aren't psychological problems also treatable through a pill?

The fundamental flaw of psychiatry is that it views everything to have a solution, cure, and treatment.

Another flaw is where psychiatry views there to be a problem or conflict where in all actuality there are none at all.

Some have said this is the effect of fictionally creating problems and cures for what otherwise didn't exist at all.

Of course this really is no surprise once you understand the history of psychiatry in how it has replaced the old role of the priesthood in regulating all social reality on whimsical fantasy ideals of nonstop constant moralizing.

Psychiatry does not have a view that everything has a solution or cure. Everything does have a treatment however, from therapy to emotional support to medicine, that's obvious. That is not a flaw either.

Psychiatry does have flaws in its diagnosis as as the entire medical profession, particularly when the are hard to pinpoint such as psychological issues. People typically come to psychologists and psychiatrists because they have problems, psychiatrists and psychologists don't come to your house telling you you have a problem with how you think, as opposed to what it you're making it seem like here.

Guest

TheJoker wrote:: In a determinist universe or cosmos, how can personal responsibility and accountability exist?

Exactly... Yet we have the capacity to change ourselves. No matter what we choose it was determined, but that gives no reason to do one thing over another. And yet there seems reason to avoid relying on drugs, as they cause more problems often, they are but a trade, and one needs them and must pay for them and are thus more reliant on the "system".

TheJoker wrote:: I think that would be a more effective question here.

If free will and freedom are a delicious illusions much like how the determinists say that they are then there really is no such thing as willing independent choice.

Without free will personal responsibility and accountability means nothing.

Therefore Abstract nothing would be anybody's fault at all as they were already determined to act out the way that they did.

Nothing is anybodies fault so why use it as a reason for thinking that one should not better help themselves rather then self determent by taking the easy way out.

But before one can say free-will does not exist, I would need them to define what is is supposed to be.

But I would think that sense the universe probably never began then nothing was exactly "determined" they are just happening one thing following another... "determined" works in a sense but it implies a beginning and so causes confusion. Really if there is an infinite regress of points of cause in time, what is to say one cause is more important then anything else? in fact is their really such thing as a cause or is "cause" just what we use to define a section of the continuum of action and reaction that is reality?

In other words technically everything is chaotic and free, because nothing was caused, so our will is free...It would seem.

Guest

Poison IV wrote:: Becuz you sound like a psychologist.

Is that a bad thing?

What defines "sounding like a psychologist"? What are the primary characteristics?

Guest

You.

And how you are.

Guest

Poison IV wrote:: You.

And how you are.

Do you mean in the sense that i am considerate of the workings of the mind.
Or do you think that I am "just another one of those psychologists that stupidly analyze behaviors in ways that can't really known, and for whom shouldn't be listened to on psychological matters as they have no actual capacity to aid anyone, including me."?

In other words I hope you do not intended to dismiss what I say simply because of the way what i say looks like...that is verb-ism... Crying or Very sad

Guest

It will be.

But don't worry; what I say doesn't matter either.

Because you sound like a psychologist....

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:: Psychiatry does have flaws in its diagnosis as as the entire medical profession, particularly when the are hard to pinpoint such as psychological issues. People typically come to psychologists and psychiatrists because they have problems, psychiatrists and psychologists don't come to your house telling you you have a problem with how you think, as opposed to what it you're making it seem like here.

Psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies make decisions that become embedded the law and are used by other authorities to judge the beliefs, behavior and personalities of other people. The most pernicious form of this is the way this gets aimed at children via schools and other authorities that have power over children and quite a bit of influence over parents. Psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies are reifying their concepts into rules, guidelines, laws, organizational practice and then more amorphously into the ways we view each other. They wage PR campaigns. some not out in the open - for example through OP ed pages and sponsored articles - that create part of what is considered reality by people. This directly affects their profits - not that all their motives are crass or negative, but nevertheless they moving out into society in a lot of univited and often not consciously noticed ways. And they have the skills and money and power to make these incursions effective.

Guest

Kovacs wrote:

WW III ANGRY wrote:: Psychiatry does have flaws in its diagnosis as as the entire medical profession, particularly when the are hard to pinpoint such as psychological issues. People typically come to psychologists and psychiatrists because they have problems, psychiatrists and psychologists don't come to your house telling you you have a problem with how you think, as opposed to what it you're making it seem like here.

Psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies make decisions that become embedded the law and are used by other authorities to judge the beliefs, behavior and personalities of other people. The most pernicious form of this is the way this gets aimed at children via schools and other authorities that have power over children and quite a bit of influence over parents. Psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies are reifying their concepts into rules, guidelines, laws, organizational practice and then more amorphously into the ways we view each other. They wage PR campaigns. some not out in the open - for example through OP ed pages and sponsored articles - that create part of what is considered reality by people. This directly affects their profits - not that all their motives are crass or negative, but nevertheless they moving out into society in a lot of univited and often not consciously noticed ways. And they have the skills and money and power to make these incursions effective.

You'll have to be specific in this critique as to which of these harder line psychological "dogmas" if you will that you can critique that have been embedded in law, I would like to know how it is detrimental.

Guest

Poison IV wrote:: It will be.

But don't worry; what I say doesn't matter either.

Because you sound like a psychologist....

Psychologists just regurgitate what you tell them, in a new format.

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:: You'll have to be specific in this critique as to which of these harder line psychological "dogmas" if you will that you can critique that have been embedded in law, I would like to know how it is detrimental.

I don't think I used that phrase.

The primary problem is the pathologization of people, especially children. Right now children who do not act as they are supposed to - correctly or incorrectly judged so - are pushed towards diagnoses that are in stone in the DSM4. The most popular are ADD, ADHD these days. Parents can and do face choices to have their children moved out of schools OR get medicated. There are all sorts of philosophical problems with this, which a look back at how confused diagnoses from these same professions created disease where there was not disease. Strong parents who think for themselves can of course try to find another school, but a shift is being made from interpersonal and discipline solutions towards medical ones. This is not a small phenomenon.

The bad consequences of what is embedded in law is not as bad as it used to: back when people could be incarcerated for all sorts of reasons following older versions of the DSM. Nowadays it is the bombardment via media of all kinds of the pharmacological model and all the norms/assumptions/confusions stuffed in there as if it was science. That model has positioned itself as the best model and uses the tremendous wealth and influence of the pharm. industry to turn humans into customers.

Of course some people benefit, but many do not. And as a species what we are doing is eliminating feedback loops and differences. Instead of people having issues with how society is run or how, for example, children are overstimulated and stressed - directly and via parents - we pathologize individuals through some very poor science based on poor philosophical assumptions. So instead of learning about some of what is not working in general, we treat the people having problems as ALL showing signs of some physical pathology, preferable genetic.

We are getting better and better at this. Instead of making society to fit humans, which was a goal that took a long time to get into the foreground, we are starting to figure out ways to make humans to fit the market.

Gene manipulation will make all this pharm approach moot, but until then they are definitely a problem. Monsanto's human focused sucessor, perhaps Monsanto itself, will be the next problematic industry.

Guest

Kovac, I agree with this however it is not the fault oh the psych industry, but the parents who find their comfort in it, as it is not their fault anymore. Does ADHD exist? I'm sure it dies. Do parents manipulate their efforts to psychologists to get them their Ritalin or take blame from themselves? Of course they do. Do psychologists and psychiatrists recommend Ritalin prematurely? Probably

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:: Kovac, I agree with this however it is not the fault oh the psych industry, but the parents who find their comfort in it, as it is not their fault anymore. Does ADHD exist? I'm sure it dies. Do parents manipulate their efforts to psychologists to get them their Ritalin or take blame from themselves? Of course they do. Do psychologists and psychiatrists recommend Ritalin prematurely? Probably

No, it's not just the parents fault. Parents are being told that their children have diagnosible conditions, that the pharm. model is scientific through and through, that they would be irresponsible not to follow the experts, etc.

I am sure that some children have problematic issues with attention and excitement.

Here's a bunch of things I would do first, long before I would label them as having a mental illness and give them medication:

See if they did well in other kinds of pedagogical approaches - ones where their bodies are more involved. In earlier periods in history lots of apprentice type educations are forms of these. Unfortunately schooling in the US is still primarily, sit still, listen, speak when spoken to. Anyone not a little hyper or restless in that situation has a problem.

I would also eliminate all the kinds of foods and preservatives that are known to create ADD/ADHD symptoms. I would also check the diet in general. Eliminate refined sugars, caffinated sodas, etc.

Cut down on internet surfing, take away cellphones, tone down media in general. If you sit around killing zombies and watching action movies and answering your cells and texting a lot of the time, suddenly having no media and droning public school teachers is going to be boring, critically boring, in ways former generations of children might not understand despite their boredom at times in school.

Check to see if the family can calm down. People are stressed more then ever these days, even in these days of relative plenty. If the home is stressed and the parents are stressed, kids will also be wired.

Those are the kinds of things I wish society tried and looked at rather than assuming that an individual who cannot sit still has a genetic or other disease and needs to be medicated.

Guest

Kovacs wrote:

WW III ANGRY wrote:: Kovac, I agree with this however it is not the fault oh the psych industry, but the parents who find their comfort in it, as it is not their fault anymore. Does ADHD exist? I'm sure it dies. Do parents manipulate their efforts to psychologists to get them their Ritalin or take blame from themselves? Of course they do. Do psychologists and psychiatrists recommend Ritalin prematurely? Probably

No, it's not just the parents fault. Parents are being told that their children have diagnosible conditions, that the pharm. model is scientific through and through, that they would be irresponsible not to follow the experts, etc.

I am sure that some children have problematic issues with attention and excitement.

Here's a bunch of things I would do first, long before I would label them as having a mental illness and give them medication:

See if they did well in other kinds of pedagogical approaches - ones where their bodies are more involved. In earlier periods in history lots of apprentice type educations are forms of these. Unfortunately schooling in the US is still primarily, sit still, listen, speak when spoken to. Anyone not a little hyper or restless in that situation has a problem.

I would also eliminate all the kinds of foods and preservatives that are known to create ADD/ADHD symptoms. I would also check the diet in general. Eliminate refined sugars, caffinated sodas, etc.

Cut down on internet surfing, take away cellphones, tone down media in general. If you sit around killing zombies and watching action movies and answering your cells and texting a lot of the time, suddenly having no media and droning public school teachers is going to be boring, critically boring, in ways former generations of children might not understand despite their boredom at times in school.

Check to see if the family can calm down. People are stressed more then ever these days, even in these days of relative plenty. If the home is stressed and the parents are stressed, kids will also be wired.

Those are the kinds of things I wish society tried and looked at rather than assuming that an individual who cannot sit still has a genetic or other disease and needs to be medicated.

I disagree, it is the parents fault. It is the parents responsibility to ensure that their child is taking medications due to a correct diagnosis. The medical profession is not the ultimate authority on our bodies, we are, thus the responsibility lies on the parent. You know better than to trust a doctors diagnosis do you not? If a parent is taking their child to a psych, they should've exhausted all other options and are agreeing that medicine might be what is needed before hand. Diagnoses of ADHD only comes from what information the parents and child provide. If the parents are unable to correct the problem on their own that is when medicine should be prescribed. The parents don't complain about how their child was prescribed Ritalin wrongly, these are all coming from the children, after they grow up, isn't it? With that.. wouldn't that mean the parents did a bad job and left it up to a pill? Again, it is a diagnosable condition is it not, so why should a doctor be ultimately responsible for what the parents and child tell them that falls under the criteria of this diagnosis? IT is bad parenting, if it is fixable by non medicinal ways, regardless of what the psych orders, because the psych goes off what the parents say, and their efforts and abilities.

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:: I disagree, it is the parents fault. It is the parents responsibility to ensure that their child is taking medications due to a correct diagnosis.

Most of these children do not need diagnoses. Sure, OK, yes, I do hold parents responsible. But that does not let of pharmaceutical companies for trying to increase their markets, downplaying side effects, convenient philosophical errors, using lobbying and money to put themselves in the position as THE EXPERTS and so on. And we know many parents go along with experts. I can blame the 'experts' also. The experts are nowhere near the experts they claim to be and they are philosophically and politically naive. And these are the people schools turn to and turn parents towards. It's not an either or situation. Sure, America went along with Bush and Cheney and they are responsible for being idiots. But then Bush and Cheney are responsible for their actions also. And given they are supposedly experts, demand to be seen as that, they are professionally responsible, which is heavier. Think what a parent has to go through to decide that the doctors are not competent. Not this or that doctor, but doctors in general.

Quote :: The medical profession is not the ultimate authority on our bodies, we are, thus the responsibility lies on the parent.

Actually that not true. If the parents decide not to follow doctors orders they can be put in prison if something terrible happens to that child. I don't think this has been done around psychotropic meds, but you are being quite brave if you go against doctor advice. Now you are right, parents should be that brave if they have reason to be, but that doesn't let off the pharm companies or the psychiatrists.

Quote :: You know better than to trust a doctors diagnosis do you not? If a parent is taking their child to a psych, they should've exhausted all other options and are agreeing that medicine might be what is needed before hand.

Same argument as above. It is not an either or situation. Both are responsible.

Quote :: Diagnoses of ADHD only comes from what information the parents and child provide.

Or what the school provides.

Quote :: If the parents are unable to correct the problem on their own that is when medicine should be prescribed.

I don't think it is that simple. Notice how it is assumed that in isolation parents will decide while looking at their child. Instead of experts trying to find out if the general pedagogy out there sucks - well, it does - whether children should be made to sit still all day long - they shouldn't - whether cellphones and other wireless technologies create nervous tension in the body - they do - whether preservatives cause ADD symptoms - they do - and so on and relaying this information to parents, we have the primary support of the state, the law and money behind PR, lies, and shaky science relaying a pharmacological paradigm.

Sure, parents are responsible to not fall for all this BS, to put in their time researching, despite whatever other stress and committments they have because other views of these patterns are marginalized by these industries.

But just because parents should do this, does not mean I shouldn't notice these experts are getting away with shit, are weilding they power and influence precisely to manipulate the parents and the children are the victims.

Quote :: The parents don't complain about how their child was prescribed Ritalin wrongly, these are all coming from the children, after they grow up, isn't it?

Sure, some do. Some % either gets disturbed by the results or listens carefully when their children complain about what it is like. Others do not. Are parents irresponsible sure.

Quote :: With that.. wouldn't that mean the parents did a bad job and left it up to a pill? Again, it is a diagnosable condition is it not, so why should a doctor be ultimately responsible for what the parents and child tell them that falls under the criteria of this diagnosis?

Doctors are also responsible to be critical. A small number are. They are not just passive people who have to listen to the DSM4 and the pharma companies. This is bad doctoring. And it is systematic.

Quote :: IT is bad parenting, if it is fixable by non medicinal ways, regardless of what the psych orders, because the psych goes off what the parents say, and their efforts and abilities

Sure if you can get insurance to pay for some of these options. The entire system backs up the use of medications. These are considered to be THE experts. How can most parents shift their children to schools that integrate physical activity in much of the curriculum and not just gym. Can they all afford to have their kids tested for food allergies and then get support feeding them if it turns out they are allergic? If you go the psychiatric route, you are supported by the system. And this set is there because of the lobbying of the pharm industry. Sure, parents should do the best they can, but none of this lets off the pharma industry.

Adults face similar problems getting insurance for certain kinds of treatments instead of pharm based approaches.

But yes, ultimately, I agree people are responsible. But so is the industry ultimately that is manipulating them based on poor knowledge and insight.

This is especially clear in that case of children.

I worked in the field as a clinical psychologist. I know how fast you get a diagnosis from a psychiatrist. It does not take long. Anxiety or depression will get you pills after 15 minutes. Likewise for many other symptoms or really feelings.
This is not a rare case issue, it is endemic. Sure, some people see psychiatrists for more time, but these people are shifting their diagnosis time downwards and fast. It is efficient and it pays well to do this. Sure, the parents who brought their kid to that office on the forceful recommendation of their kid's principal are responsible, but that does not let the guy behind the desk off the hook, or the people who are making billions elsewhere off an impovrished paradigm.

And sure some people are helped.

But we are making society deaf.

Imagine if every doctor gave everyone with pain, pain killers.

Well, that is what we are learning to do with emotional pain and different learning needs.

Note: the pharma companies have already one when the parents think the problem is in their own home and usually in the child. Often that is not where the problem is. But now that it is generally accepted, by the non-religious at least, that psychiatrists are THE EXPERTS and the neuropsychological model is the self and so pharmacological models of healing are THE methods, the system is even more impervious to criticism. Your kid has a problem, fix it. And sure the parents shouldn't listen, but they should also be supported rather than forced to swim uphill. I blame the people who have set things up like this and basically are saying shut the fuck up to anyone who thinks there are systematic problems.

Guest

Kovacs wrote:: Most of these children do not need diagnoses. Sure, OK, yes, I do hold parents responsible. But that does not let of pharmaceutical companies for trying to increase their markets, downplaying side effects, convenient philosophical errors, using lobbying and money to put themselves in the position as THE EXPERTS and so on. And we know many parents go along with experts. I can blame the 'experts' also. The experts are nowhere near the experts they claim to be and they are philosophically and politically naive. And these are the people schools turn to and turn parents towards. It's not an either or situation. Sure, America went along with Bush and Cheney and they are responsible for being idiots. But then Bush and Cheney are responsible for their actions also. And given they are supposedly experts, demand to be seen as that, they are professionally responsible, which is heavier. Think what a parent has to go through to decide that the doctors are not competent. Not this or that doctor, but doctors in general.

I see nothing wrong with increasing your market, if that right market is there. I don't know what you mean by philosophical errors and not sure what you're referring to by lobbying to put themselves in the position as the experts.

Kovacs wrote:: Actually that not true. If the parents decide not to follow doctors orders they can be put in prison if something terrible happens to that child. I don't think this has been done around psychotropic meds, but you are being quite brave if you go against doctor advice. Now you are right, parents should be that brave if they have reason to be, but that doesn't let off the pharm companies or the psychiatrists.

Right, I was thinking more along the lines of individual patients responsible for themselves, it is a different story with children since they cannot judge for themselves. Either way though like you mentioned with psychotropic meds and parents not being held liable for going against the doctors recommendations, the responsibility rests on the parent ultimately. I don't know however if there are "orders" for such scenarios; I'm not aware if there is liability on the doctor either for not prescribing a schizophrenic with antipsychotics then he goes and kills someone. That is something to consider. I do not wish to lift all blame from the psychological industry however just as I do not wish to lift all blame from the entire medical profession, with any procedures or prescriptions, regardless if they are mental health issues or not. We all are well ware of the industries mistakes. I don't see pharmaceutical companies however as experts, they offer a product. The psychiatrists are the ones who are the experts in this scenario and psychiatrists have to go by what the parents state.

Kovacs wrote:: I don't think it is that simple. Notice how it is assumed that in isolation parents will decide while looking at their child. Instead of experts trying to find out if the general pedagogy out there sucks - well, it does - whether children should be made to sit still all day long - they shouldn't - whether cellphones and other wireless technologies create nervous tension in the body - they do - whether preservatives cause ADD symptoms - they do - and so on and relaying this information to parents, we have the primary support of the state, the law and money behind PR, lies, and shaky science relaying a pharmacological paradigm.

Sit all day long? Hmm I don't know a majority of kids go to school and sit all day long and don't have problems, I don't think they should sit all day which they really don't, I think we all understand how tedious school can get, but I bucked up and dealt with it and it is good discipline for the rougher years latr in life. If that can't be handled and confronted at an early age then, you're not necessarily going to perform well on your own, yes? If you do, great.

Kovacs wrote:: Sure, parents are responsible to not fall for all this BS, to put in their time researching, despite whatever other stress and committments they have because other views of these patterns are marginalized by these industries.

I don't know if that's the case, it is well known of side affects. I don't know anyone ignorant of them. Doctors state what the side affects are, if they are known. This isn't ignored. ADHD is something that.. well probably shouldn't be medically treated. It was never medically treated previously. I don't personally agree with it. But nonetheless there's a pill for it that cures it and parents want it, because it helps their children perform. Is that right or wrong? That's not for me to decide for parents, because I didn't experience what they did. Of course there are errors in judgement on both sides. I see it as inevitable in such a scenario. The only way to eliminate it is to eliminate ADHD drugs altogether and deal with it the way society has the past 2000 years. Not all kids will pass school, thats just the way it is.

Kovacs wrote:: But just because parents should do this, does not mean I shouldn't notice these experts are getting away with shit, are weilding they power and influence precisely to manipulate the parents and the children are the victims.

Verify that it is manipulation, show me this. I couldn't say it is manipulation when there is definite ignorance involved if someone takes something like Ritalin when there is a better natural way.

Kovacs wrote:: Sure, some do. Some % either gets disturbed by the results or listens carefully when their children complain about what it is like. Others do not. Are parents irresponsible sure.

Then they can of course, choose to not have their child on it, if it doesn't work for them. Problem?

Kovacs wrote:: Doctors are also responsible to be critical. A small number are. They are not just passive people who have to listen to the DSM4 and the pharma companies. This is bad doctoring. And it is systematic.

Is it, how do you know a small # are actually critical?

Kovacs wrote:: Sure if you can get insurance to pay for some of these options. The entire system backs up the use of medications. These are considered to be THE experts. How can most parents shift their children to schools that integrate physical activity in much of the curriculum and not just gym. Can they all afford to have their kids tested for food allergies and then get support feeding them if it turns out they are allergic? If you go the psychiatric route, you are supported by the system. And this set is there because of the lobbying of the pharm industry. Sure, parents should do the best they can, but none of this lets off the pharma industry.

Adults face similar problems getting insurance for certain kinds of treatments instead of pharm based approaches.

But yes, ultimately, I agree people are responsible. But so is the industry ultimately that is manipulating them based on poor knowledge and insight.

This is especially clear in that case of children.

I worked in the field as a clinical psychologist. I know how fast you get a diagnosis from a psychiatrist. It does not take long. Anxiety or depression will get you pills after 15 minutes. Likewise for many other symptoms or really feelings.
This is not a rare case issue, it is endemic. Sure, some people see psychiatrists for more time, but these people are shifting their diagnosis time downwards and fast. It is efficient and it pays well to do this. Sure, the parents who brought their kid to that office on the forceful recommendation of their kid's principal are responsible, but that does not let the guy behind the desk off the hook, or the people who are making billions elsewhere off an impovrished paradigm.

And sure some people are helped.

But we are making society deaf.

Imagine if every doctor gave everyone with pain, pain killers.

Well, that is what we are learning to do with emotional pain and different learning needs.

Note: the pharma companies have already one when the parents think the problem is in their own home and usually in the child. Often that is not where the problem is. But now that it is generally accepted, by the non-religious at least, that psychiatrists are THE EXPERTS and the neuropsychological model is the self and so pharmacological models of healing are THE methods, the system is even more impervious to criticism. Your kid has a problem, fix it. And sure the parents shouldn't listen, but they should also be supported rather than forced to swim uphill. I blame the people who have set things up like this and basically are saying shut the fuck up to anyone who thinks there are systematic problems.

Very good. So is the only gripe with this parent/child issue and getting them meds and is the only solution to eradicate meds for children of this nature? Should parents have the choice? Can we prevent parental stupidity? Can we prevent psychiatric stupidity? (or is it greed?)

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:

Poison IV wrote:: It will be.

But don't worry; what I say doesn't matter either.

Because you sound like a psychologist....

Psychologists just regurgitate what you tell them, in a new format.

Pretty much, except the goal is often to regurgitate it in a way where certain connections are made as to the correlations between modes of thought that lead to others that are considered by the particular self (subject) to be detrimental.

Guest

Kovacs wrote:: See if they did well in other kinds of pedagogical approaches - ones where their bodies are more involved. In earlier periods in history lots of apprentice type educations are forms of these. Unfortunately schooling in the US is still primarily, sit still, listen, speak when spoken to. Anyone not a little hyper or restless in that situation has a problem.

Exactly...

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:: I disagree, it is the parents fault. It is the parents responsibility to ensure that their child is taking medications due to a correct diagnosis. The medical profession is not the ultimate authority on our bodies, we are, thus the responsibility lies on the parent. You know better than to trust a doctors diagnosis do you not? If a parent is taking their child to a psych, they should've exhausted all other options and are agreeing that medicine might be what is needed before hand. Diagnoses of ADHD only comes from what information the parents and child provide. If the parents are unable to correct the problem on their own that is when medicine should be prescribed. The parents don't complain about how their child was prescribed Ritalin wrongly, these are all coming from the children, after they grow up, isn't it? With that.. wouldn't that mean the parents did a bad job and left it up to a pill? Again, it is a diagnosable condition is it not, so why should a doctor be ultimately responsible for what the parents and child tell them that falls under the criteria of this diagnosis? IT is bad parenting, if it is fixable by non medicinal ways, regardless of what the psych orders, because the psych goes off what the parents say, and their efforts and abilities.

Are you aware of social-engineering?
It is both entities fault, fault does not lay in one place.
We cannot sit one our high intellectual chairs and expect the ignorant to work out how to get through the maze of bullshit that is created by the pharm companies and all of society. it is important to consider what aspect of society contribute to the ignorance of individuals in the first place. many people do not know that you should not completely trust the doctor, some do but not well enough... many nowadays are lead into thinking that they no better then their doctor indeed because they have seen the commercials that give evidence of how certain symptoms are removable...

The companies do not directly intend to manipulate the masses but they do not fully understand from a social engineering stand point how feeding the crap they do in to society contributes to modes of thought further that will encourage people from young ages to do things.

it is not as fair to say that it is the parents fault because they were brought up on the same shit and social model as others, and by their parents who were brought up by a form of social model.

Guest

WW III ANGRY wrote:: I see nothing wrong with increasing your market, if that right market is there. I don't know what you mean by philosophical errors and not sure what you're referring to by lobbying to put themselves in the position as the experts.

Is it just though to increase a market in its particular aspects that are socially destructive? (regardless of what market we are talking about here)

Guest

Abstract wrote:: The companies do not directly intend to manipulate the masses

Then their intention must be....

to sell happiness and joy in little bottles...

by no manipulation whatsoever...

because money is the last thing on their plate...

» Drugged Up On Psychiatry
» Psychiatry As A Way Of Population And Thought Control.
» Psychology 101
» Victim Psychology
» Evolutionary Psychology