We had about 8 inches of Global Warming three days ago. Now, Global Warming has produced really low temperatures. I’m concerned, perhaps we should put government experts in charge of fixing the problem. Because, if they can’t fix the weather, who can?
According to most “mental health experts” almost all of us have serious problems which they, of course, are well suited to fix.
“The Department of Energy believes that geothermal energy holds enormous potential to heat our homes and power our economy while decreasing our carbon pollution,” said Stephanie Mueller, a spokeswoman. Statement made after millions had been spent on a useless “project”.
from the book: Shadow Dancing on the Grave of Hope:
1. Drugs are useful. They are, but only for a much, much smaller group of people than currently receives them. As Michael Frank says, "No drug can teach you effective … skills. …no drug can make your environment more positively reinforcing." If something is in the medical tradition and can be treated with drugs, it appears more legitimate. If something can be linked to biological factors, it appears more legitimate. A psychologist in Britain, referring to violence on British roads, had an explanation dealing with the atavistic or "older brain" taking over in times of conflict. This explains nothing and, more importantly, doesn’t tell how to prevent or minimize violence. I try to keep an open mind on these issues so perhaps removal of the atavistic parts of the brain will decrease violence on British roads. Why stop there? Removal of the entire troublesome organ should solve the problem completely.
2. Long-term change can only occur because of long-term therapy. This is just wrong without qualifiers. Long-term treatment implies a worthless procedure. If someone is really suffering from "psychological" distress, long-term treatment allows time to produce the cure, which it does without treatment. If things are really bad, they tend to get better over time because it’s highly unlikely that they will become worse.
3. The change must occur in the deep structures of personality. To repeat: Dealing with theoretical entities produces theoretical results. The engine of change is in the environment, not the psyche.
4. No one will change unless they (sic) want to change. This apparently comes from the religious notion that you must accept (favorite religious icon here) before you reach (Heaven or whatever state of grace you fancy). This assumption has led to the alienation of thousands of people who won’t assume the stance of, "I’m awful. You’re omniscient and omnipotent and must save poor little me with your vast superior ability.", in order to be saved. There’s no evidence, except from the deadly useless notion of "clinical experience", that this assumption is true or useful. It is one of the jobs of the therapist to get the client to cooperate in the program, not discard the client if he\she is not a sufficiently subservient true believer. New Mexico is a state. Virginia is a state. Denial is not a state. Client "resistance" is not a valid excuse for a therapist’s inability to be useful. Motivation is the therapist’s job. Miller and Rollnick show how "motivational interviewing" can greatly increase the number of people entering and engaging in therapeutic programs. Michael Frank shows how to analyze and remove "barriers" to treatment. Motivation is the therapist’s job.
5. Profound change can only occur with talking therapy in which the client talks, the therapist listens and may or may not offer advice. Now let’s see. The person talks to a therapist each week and then goes forth and everything is changed. The client will automatically know how to act differently, although most therapies concentrate on how the client feels or how the client responds to paper and pencil tests designed to measure their deep personality structures. The evidence for this hypothesis is thin. It does, however, make some therapists very rich. Does anyone see contingencies here which have nothing to do with effectiveness but result in therapists receiving money for each of many return visits?
6. No data are taken. Apparently the client gets better and everybody will know when this happens. If there are no goals for the treatment program, there can be no disappointments. Happily, treatment can go on with consequent economic benefit to the therapist.
7. Problems come from traumatic events or early life experiences. Lots of drama and little evidence in this one. If this theory guides therapy, the therapy is bound to fail.
Frank, M. J. (1995). Do You Really Want to Get Better: Learn to Eliminate Those Behaviors, Thoughts, and Feelings That Are Barriers to Your Happiness. Toronto: Bridgerock Press.
Miller, W.R. and Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People to Change. NY: Guilford Press
Cheerio and ttfn,
Grant Coulson
