reply to post by watchitburn
"Fair enough" to you!
What I'm seeing in this thread is a necessity to separate the profession from the laws.
I don't know if you read my post about having declined to go for my license due to the fact that I didn't want bureaucrats breathing down my neck.
The issue with the DSM is that is was created for BILLING PURPOSES. It's the insurance industry
that is to blame for the decisions made to
exempt people with "prior issues" (what do they call it? Pre-existing conditions...yeah, that) from future coverage.
One of the bureaucratic issues
worth looking at is government oversight of the profession. As I've explained, I chose not to go for my
license. The Bureaucrats who "granted" the money for the youth group plan I had devised (and submitted as an application for a part of the funding
they were accumulating through a voter-approved TAX - which was a mere fraction of a percent added to the state sales tax) said, "We will approve of
your program. Here you go: the amount you requested is granted.
BUT! BUT, you are NOT to use this money to treat anything EXCEPT the drug/substance abuse problems the client is experiencing. If they want to talk
about their recent divorce, or their job-loss, or the death of their child, you may only "charge us for the part of the session that talks about
their drug use, and NOT CHARGE us for discussing the event or circumstance that CAUSED the drug/substance abuse."
Does that make sense? No, it doesn't. I presented to the Board of Directors at one of their meetings and said, "This is ridiculous. The fund is
available only to treat the symptom, and not the real problem?"
The Chairman stood up and said, "I AGREE! There's no such thing as a happy junkie!" or something to that effect. At the time (10-11 years ago),
the insurance companies and bureaucrats wanted to divide (with a crowbar) treatment for the SYMPTOM from treatment for the CAUSE. It was absurd, and
Further, the agency used those funds I did
get awarded for the program as I had written it; and on which "conditions" the grantor had awarded
them.... - not to give me the salary I had built into the grant, nor the equipment I had requisitioned with such - but to pay the utility bills and
assign my salary at their own discretion.
So please understand, I am not condoning the systemic problems - I walked away from them myself. Still, I attempt with my education and knowledge to
help others anyway, at no charge, with no strings attached, and that is one of my "purposes" in life, and here on ATS.
Do I know everything? Of course not. Am I limited by bureaucratic rules, and "Behavioral Committee Licensing", and "billable hours with codified
diagnostic numbers"? NO.
I chose to practice outside of that system. They cannot stop me either.
So, I hope you all are beginning to understand the levels and layers of this issue.