Psychology, Vs. Relgion, Homosexuals

[CopticChristian]

lifeandhope:
Life,

It is difficult for those that follow the postings to follow when a quote is used and the response is within the quote as seen here. This post contains none of the dialogue. In the future it would help to answer outside, not inside the quote.

The point is that those that are conditioned to use the DSM/ICD-9 based on insurance billing in the industry would see the DSM as usefull. William Glasser, M.D., myself and others see the DSM as something other than for what it was intended. If you are not tied to the insurance industry and do not operate independently outside of that paradigm then your belief in it as a useful tool is less than those that have no choice.

A worker in the field that operates within the insurance based paradigm must use the DSM and for that reason is jaded because their is no choice in using it and following it. It is useful because without it’s use you don’t get paid.

Your notion of its usefullness as it is now does not reflect the history of the DSM, what it was, what it was intended for and what it is now. The idea that there is science involved in its fabrication and change is nonsense when considering what happened with the homosexuality issue and the future changes of the LGBT groups lobbying for change in the wording.

That is the point.

 

[lifeandhope]

Life,

It is difficult for those that follow the postings to follow when a quote is used and the response is within the quote as seen here. This post contains none of the dialogue. In the future it would help to answer outside, not inside the quote.

For Pete’s sake, are you kidding me? You have to correct the manner in which I posted and the placement of my response? A little nitpicky, don’t you think? For the record, I actually did not mean to post where I did; there were so many links I misplace my response, but I don’t think it’s necessary to point that out. It certainly makes this a less than friendly discussion when extraneous issues are brought up and criticized. Just sayin’.

The point is that those that are conditioned to use the DSM/ICD-9 based on insurance billing in the industry would see the DSM as usefull. William Glasser, M.D., myself and others see the DSM as something other than for what it was intended. If you are not tied to the insurance industry and do not operate independently outside of that paradigm then your belief in it as a useful tool is less than those that have no choice.

A worker in the field that operates within the insurance based paradigm must use the DSM and for that reason is jaded because their is no choice in using it and following it. It is useful because without it’s use you don’t get paid.

Your notion of its usefullness as it is now does not reflect the history of the DSM, what it was, what it was intended for and what it is now. The idea that there is science involved in its fabrication and change is nonsense when considering what happened with the homosexuality issue and the future changes of the LGBT groups lobbying for change in the wording.

We can agree to disagree. For me, as a psychotherapist, there is a great deal of usefulness that the DSM provides besides getting insurance to recognize diagnoses and treatment plans based on those diagnoses. I find it useful clinically and use it all the time. It is not the only tool I use, but it is one of many. Regardless of its history or what other people think, many of my collegues and I use the DSM frequently. As anything, the DSM has its faults and limitations.

For what it is worth, I do not take third party insurance and so the DSM codes are for my clinical use and not for payment. I choose to use the DSM because it is helpful to the documentation for myself and my clients.

That is the point.

 

[CopticChristian]

lifeandhope:
Life,

I made a suggestion and you don’t like it. I understand.

You choose to use labels that are forever and a day part of a person’s idenity in the field of behavior. Ok…that is what you want to do and you find it useful. We disagree.

 

[blakjak12]

Life,

I made a suggestion and you don’t like it. I understand.

You choose to use labels that are forever and a day part of a person’s idenity in the field of behavior. Ok…that is what you want to do and you find it useful. We disagree.

As a graduate student at a psychology program, I agree that in many ways you are right. That being said, the DSM is currently undergoing some changes that will increase its utility. As of now, many of the DSM diagnoses are strictly categorical, meaning than an individual either meets the criteria for a disorder or he or she does not. However, study after study have demonstrated that the picture just isn’t that simple.

As a result, several DSM diagnoses (most notably the Personality Disorders) are beginning to switch to or at least incorporate aspects of a dimensional model of assessment where ideally every individual is placed along the same continuum. A small percentage of people would score highly on depression for example, but everyone would fall along the same general continuum. I think part of what you were trying to get at earlier in this discussion was that people who are given a label for a disorder are truly not categorically different than anyone else. A dimensional system of classification can assist with just that. Unfortunately at some point, cutoffs must still be made. We have to decide who receives treatment and who does not, but I still think the direction the DSM is heading is a vast improvement. The majority of it will still be based on a categorical system of diagnosis, but I think it will become more dimensional from this point forward.

 

[blakjak12]

L&H,

One of the problems is that too many people associate the word “psychology” with what is wrong and that is becuase most know about psychology because of what is called abnormal psychology.

The study of medicine is seeing what is Pathologic and understanding that Pathology to rectify the body however when it comes to the mind I am not so sure that this is the best approach.

I believe that too many are not aware that there is such a thing as the Psyhcology of excellence ie Maslow…and how is it that those that don’t have problems do well and soar rather than sink…

Thank you! What you are referring to is called “positive psychology,” or the study of why people who are functioning well are the way they are.

Clinical psychology, which primarily addresses “abnormal” issues, is just one branch of psychology. Others include social, development, personality, cognitive, neuroscience, perception and sensation, and quantitative. At most PhD programs, research is scientifically rigorous. Neuroscience and perception are often difficult to distinguish from pure biology, and studying quantitative psychology is really no different than majoring in math.

 

[Pisces_Adonis]

Come on this is supposed to be the 21st Century!

Why are people still making a big issue out of this???!!!

 

[blakjak12]

You either have forgotten, or never have learned that Psychology is not a science. At best, it is a secular art.
And, from the way you wirte, I will bet that you are either an adolescent or a troll!

What is your rationale for it being purely a secular art?

I am not disagreeing with you that it has a secular. Professionals in the field are less likely than average to be religious, and the field definitely has a liberal/progressive bias. These views certainly influence the direction of the field (in some areas more than others), but oftentimes issues such as these come down to VALUES. However, just because values often influence psychological research (as they do in any discipline), does not mean that psychology is purely an art.

Do the things I’m taught sometimes conflict with my beliefs? All the time. Would that happen in almost any discipline? Almost certainly. I am still confident that psychology, or anything else, when used the right way, can be beneficial to society and can still be line of work that can be used to glorify God.

I am Catholic and proud of it. In my studies, I have definitely learned some things that have even bolstered my faith and Catholic beliefs. I would be happy to elaborate in greater detail if you’re interested.

God bless.

 

[blakjak12]

Come on this is supposed to be the 21st Century!

Why are people still making a big issue out of this???!!!

I just really think that most people don’t know much about psychology. Whenever I tell people what I"m studying, I get one of two responses:

1. Oh boy you could make a lot of money off my family!
2. I better be careful about what I say around you! You’re analyzing me.

Sorry to break it to people, but psychology doesn’t revolve around laying down on a couch a free associating anymore.

 

[CopticChristian]

Come on this is supposed to be the 21st Century!

Why are people still making a big issue out of this???!!!

Pisces,

Come on, let me show you where I sat,
Come on, let me show you where sat,
Come on now, let me show you where I sat…

The name of the place…I like it like that…

so you appear to disaprove and you suggest that this discussion should end because it is the 21st century. Come on what else is there to talk about…