APA Calls for End to 'Armchair' Psychiatry

a reply to: Hazardous1408
Do you have any CONCEPT of what a diagnosis is ?
Do you have any CONCEPT of Doctor/Patient relations ?
Do you have HIPPA regulations ?
I could get away with something like "so and so is mentally unstable" as I am not a professional and do not proclaim to be.
Some folks think they are "professional" due to tremendous egos. I can name one...

originally posted by: rickymouse
They actually should lose their license to practice.

Yes that.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Actually speculation can be done by anyone.

Yeah, exactly.

Not necessarily.

In terms of this discussion it absolutely is.

The only time a diagnosis could be considered unconfirmed is with a misdiagnosis.
Even then, mistaken is a better description than unconfirmed.

Even something that is found to be a misdiagnosed was still initially “confirmed” the right conclusion by a patient’s doctor.

A diagnosis however, is not speculation.
It is an official decision followed by a course of action.

Long story short, these people have not been diagnosing Trump.

Unethical, agreed.

Absolutely.

Doctors have rules, it's actually in their code of ethics.

Yeah.
In terms of mental health...
en.m.wikipedia.org...

This is their rule. It is a strongly requested approach.
I do not believe it is forced, but I am sure there are probably some kind of consequences for a disregarding the Rule.

But good for you for wanting free speech!


This is different for you!

Dunno really, only thing I don’t believe is free speech is incitement.
Anything beyond that it’s just censorship.

a reply to: Gothmog

I can’t find what you keep talking about in google.
I am sure you actually mean HIPAA.


To your point...
You just confirm what I already said.

It’s unethical.

Do you know why these people have not been struck off?
Or reprimanded in any way whatsoever?

Because it is not “a violation” of any Act whatsoever, despite your claims to the contrary.


The worst thing is you’ve decided to start a hostile back and forth with me even though I already said it’s an unethical thing to do.
You’re wrong. Deal with it.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: Gothmog

I can’t find what you keep talking about in google.
I am sure you actually mean HIPAA.


To your point...
You just confirm what I already said.

It’s unethical.

Do you know why these people have not been struck off?
Or reprimanded in any way whatsoever?

Because it is not “a violation” of any Act whatsoever, despite your claims to the contrary.


The worst thing is you’ve decided to start a hostile back and forth with me even though I already said it’s an unethical thing to do.

You’re wrong. Deal with it.

Yeah , I guess I did get the abbreviation incorrect.
Long work night.
I am sorry you took offense to my correction . However , life is life
C'est la vie
C'est la mal

a reply to: intrptr

Ha! Professionals. Bah! Those organizations don't self-police; they self-protect. Goes for any other organizations.

I predict that in the future psychiatrists/psychologists will be a real joke of this society.

And HIPPA! Yeah, right.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

This has always been the stance of the APA as far as I know, I was a psychology major and learned this. That's why I didn't jump on the bandwagon of calling Trump "mentally ill" when he had no examination.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Interesting.

I find this a fascinating statement from the APA. The nation from which the APA originates is quite literally awash with examples of improper, and amoral uses of psychiatry and psychology. From the psychological operations performed on the American people by their own government, both in times past, and right now for that matter, to the fact that private organisations use psychological tricks to gain confidence and investment or sales and employ qualified people specifically to develop more of them, more effective ones, or improve their targeting parameters, America is a prime breeding ground for utterly unsupportable applications of psychiatry.

And yet most of the examples I have given, receive virtually no real attention, either from the press, or from Congress, Senate, or the office of any official in government, voicing concerns over those applications of psychiatry and psychology, and their effects both immediate and long term. The situation in this regard has been totally unacceptable for decades, and not a peep from the professional bodies, about the improper use of psychological levers in advertising, unsupportable behaviour on the part of government in trying to control the narrative by way of many operations, including co-opting the media and peddling lies therefrom, over successive administrations since most of our parents were children themselves.

You have people using the lessons taught by psychiatry to directly market things to the vulnerable minds, to twist concerns into full blown phobias, to make them easier to control and more readily willing to hand over their cash to those who will sell them protection from the bogeymen, and THAT does not present a problem, but someone performing a task as relatively mundane as good old fashioned profiling, somehow is a serious problem for them?

I call BS.

If they can seriously suggest that its a violation of ethical principle to profile the man a nation has to trust with their safety, then its a more massive violation surely, to permit people qualified in their field, to operate as part of an advertisement agency, or as a part of government initiatives which have run for decades, designed to disinform the population, and make them compliant with things which must not be complied with?

I mean for crying out loud, there are double standards, and then there is just blatant piss takery of this nature!

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

They are exactly correct

Its a deplorable behavior that its users should be ashamed of

a reply to: TrueBrit

Oh for christ sakes man.

Are you saying you disagree with them, and that we should politicize psychiatry? Or are you just on an "i hate America" rant?

The FORMER state of psychiatry in the US and Britain was pretty damn similar. But in 2018, what you are complaining about violates ethical standards in both countries. So what are you on about?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Read the post!

Profiling is either acceptable or it is not. Using psychiatric tools for reasons other than healing the individual, is either acceptable or its not.

But if it is not, the place you start fixing that problem, is not with someone who profiled the damned President of the United States, especially when a peon could see the man presents as a halfwit at best, and a dangerous, malignant, narcissist and worse on the other end of the scale.

You dig into the MOST harmful uses first, and giving the President a dressing down he deserves and has earned so very deliberately and forcefully, is no where near the most harmful use of psychological tools to achieve ends. Psyops are, advertising is, and if you start anywhere else, you might have an agenda which is colouring the entire clean up effort.

See, I am not a licensed Psychologist, I can say I think Trump is a little crazy if I want to. If I had a license, I would not comment. I do think that Trump has a problem with being challenged, he seems to lash out like some people I know do when challenged. These people are not mentally ill that I know though, they are just a little insecure in a certain way and utilize one or more ad hominum techniques when challenged. Many professionals are like that, I see some doctors and lawyers express that trait and also teachers I know seem to express that trait. Many nurses around here also do that, mostly RNs for some strange reason. If people think trump is a little crazy because of his ways, then maybe they should look around and see how many people they know have these same personality traits. Of course a psychiatrist would consider this a disease, but it is common in many professionals including psychiatrists and psychologists.

a reply to: TrueBrit

You start with individual clinicians who are violating their code. That is where you start.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That is a great way to make sure that the most harmful things about abuse of positions KEEP happening, and the least harmful get an example made of them, to the benefit of the very groups who are causing the real trouble.

a reply to: TrueBrit

What you recommend will take months of debate to ensure 1st amendment freedom. Even then....caveat emptor seems to ring true

What i recommemd can happen immediately

Low hanging fruit.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Wow...

Thats the sort of capitulation I did not expect.

a reply to: TrueBrit

What...that i have people in front of me violating their oaths, and brush off your Whataboutism to focus on them instead?

Start a thread. Ill be on topic there.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse



Uh, I don't really need a DR, to tell me what is right there for the world to see. The man is a NUT JOB. I can see it and so do more than half of all Americans, and all of the World.


trump is bat #### CRAZY. I could give you examples, but what is the point.

Every time I have seen them on the news giving their 'diagnoses" I cringe. It is so wrong, on so many levels, and they disgrace themselves by doing so. So, good for the APA.