Now,I do believe that what some psychotherapists do is valuable and even contributes to the alleviation of mental and emotional dysfunction. I better. I've spent almost forty years doing something in this arena. I just disagree with calling it "therapy." I also recognize the great connections between physical health and mental/emotional function. If there were a clear cause and effect between what the therapist does and the emotional results in the patient/client, then I would be more sanguine about using the word therapy, but there simply isn't.
Despite the claims of various "inventors" of new therapies, and claims of research, a close examination of the results and that research reveals a clear lack of cause and effect links. This is not to say that there are no good results from some of these "therapies". Indeed there are. In fact, for example, there is an enormous body of research demonstrating the efficacy of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy and other forms of Cognitive Behavior Therapies (Cognitive Therapy [Aaron Beck] is another form of CBT as is Dialectical Behavior Therapy [Marsha Linehan]). Similarly there are indicative result sets for other modes of "therapy".
So what is my beef? It is simply that these are not "therapies" but rather educational endeavors. Those that work do so by training people to think, behave and emote differently. The words for that endeavor are "education", "training" and "coaching". Most states have licensing laws for "therapists" put in place ostensibly to protect consumers, but really to limit the competition*. One way some people surmount those laws is by calling themselves coaches. They think they are getting around the licensing laws, but in reality they are simply being more accurate. (Aside: Even though it would seem obvious that licensing would contribute to better "therapy", the evidence is inconsistent and does not support that contention.)
It is my contention that the best therapy is really training and coaching. Unfortunately we are probably saddled with the word "therapy" because it has come into common and indiscriminate use. When the American Association of Marriage and Family Counselors changed the last word to "Therapists", I resigned in protest. (Yes, "Quixote" is my middle name.) About 15 years ago, I capitulated and rejoined. I have also surrendered and call myself a "pastoral psychotherapist" when pushed.
In case you think I'm alone in these crazy ideas, I recommend reading E. Fuller Torrey's book "The End of Psychiatry", or Thomas Szasz's "The Myth of Mental Illness" or, again, William Glasser the originator of Reality Therapy, who has also cast doubt on the idea mental lllness.
As Szasz has said
Trying to eliminate a so-called mental illness by having a psychiatrist work on your brain is like trying to eliminate cigarette commercials from television by having a TV repairman work on your TV set (The Second Sin, Anchor Press, 1973, p. 99). Since lack of health is not the cause of the problem, health care is not a solution.
---------------------------------
*How do I support that statement? Historically, the psychiatry professional organizations opposed allowing and licensing psychologists; later, local APA groups opposed the licensing and recognition of social workers and marriage and family therapists. Now the MFTs are opposing the licensing of professional counselors. In each case the arguments have been specious and self-serving. This post is not about that subject but there is a great amount of historical data, some on the web, that demonstrates what I've said.
No comments:
Post a Comment