Log in

No account? Create an account
bear by san

March 2017



Powered by LiveJournal.com
spies mfu illya bitch please _ truepenny

what do you want us to use? harsh language?

Well, yeah.

Pardon me, but What a fucking twit. (via oursin)

I would like to force this asshole to live with the contents of my skull--or the contents of the skulls of anybody else I know with bipolar disorder or OCD--for one (1) calendar year, without benefit of cognitive strategies. His article reveals a basic ignorance of the causes of mental illness and the relevance of neural plasticity to treatment of same. The benefit of cognitive therapy is that it physically alters the structure of a malfunctioning brain to make it work better--as physical therapy can physically alter a damaged body to make it stronger and healthier.

I have neurochemical issues that are the result of genetics and neurochemical issues that are the result of trauma (bipolar, PTSD, various less trendy neuroses). and you know, I understand the roots of those issues with a fine and nuanced understanding. And you know what? Understanding the cause of the damage, while comforting, is not really useful at all to being a happier and more productive person. It's like understanding that you were in a car accident that severed your arm. While it's essential to treatment to understand the cause of the trauma, talking about the damned car accident doesn't help you learn to operate a prosthesis.

What is useful is having strategies to deal with it when my brain chemicals are going haywire, and other strategies with which to reprogram the thought processes and in turn modify the underlying hardware to make both healthier.

Cognitive strategies work. They have an empirically measurable effect on the brain. They make people's lives better.

If this interferes with Mr. Leader's entrancement with Teh Romance And Tragedy of mental illness, well, I invite him to enjoy his Romance And Tragedy. Hopefully without screwing up anybody else's chances for recovery.

I bet he's a Freudian. I just bet.


Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>
According to Wikipedia: Darian Leader is a noted British psychoanalyst, currently living and practicing in London. He is a founding member of the Centre for Freudian Analysis and Research (CFAR).
So, not only Freudian, but beating off (uh... probably literally) to Freud.

That article is very compelling evidence towards my thesis of "why undergrads shouldn't major in certain things," subset "why sociology students generally do pretty okay, while psychology students will probably have a mental breakdown."
Yeah, well, I'm sorry he's sold his life to a therapeutic model that doesn't work.

I bet he's a Freudian. I just bet.

Ding! *awards you fluffy toy*

Okay, his bibliography suggests a dash of Klein and Lacan too, but basically he's a Freudian.

He's a practicing psychoanalyst (so we know what market's driving his view of the human psyche) who wrote (among other things) a book called "Why do women write more letters than they post?"

I'm all for saying "CBT is very useful but may not be optimal in all cases", but -- what a fucking twit.
Well, you know. CBT is probably cutting into his yacht payments.
I've been going to too many fetish nights lately, I think - every time I see him use CBT I think of the fetish interpretation of that instead, and giggle. :-)
Because I'm terrified of what will happen if I try to google for it: what does CBT stand for in that context?

I always enjoyed my family’s homespun cure for my anxiety and depression, which was yelling at me to “get over it.”

One of the few benefits of my daughter having such serious cognitive disabilities and seizures is that nobody doubts that her abnormal neural pathways are the cause. I've also learned a lot about how different therapies impact the brain's plasticity from working with her and her team.

*froth* *raven*

CBT is one of the few things that has helped a close friend of mine with some of his issues, because there isn't any reason for some of them that anyone has been able to find. He had an idyllic childhood - there's absolutely no reason for him to have abandonment issues to the degree he has. And yet, there they are. So now what? CBT. And it works, and it helps. (There are other issues, but that's the one that sticks out as kind of a "Huh?" issue.


I fired mine when she started trying to analyse my dreams. I have lucid dreams, there is nothing to analyse but the obvious. Let's try to manage my anxiety instead, ok?

There are days where kiks in the pants are sorely missing aren't they?

Edited at 2008-09-09 08:43 pm (UTC)
Yeah, definitely Freudian. Not to mention out of touch with reality. (Which may be repeating myself.)

Ah, well.
He also seems to be under the impression that self-actualization is a newfangled notion- evidently he never heard of Maslow?
Of course he hasn't. Freudians don't want to know about Maslow. "You are hungry because you have an Oedipal complex", not "you are hungry because you can't afford food".
I went through several courses of CBT and each time the problems came back. Only once I'd worked out the underlying issues did I actually benefit from CBT. Entirely agree that understanding doesn't fix things, but I've found it a lot easier to accept and move on from the past -- and use CBT to deal with the thought-habits and spiralling in the present -- once I had some notion of where the problems had started.

The UK mental health trend seems to be towards CBT as a 'cure', rather than drugs as a temporary solution. But I don't think either CBT or drugs solves the underlying issues: what they do is make it easier to get at and unravel them.

My experience, my opinion: your experience sounds different. But I don't see CBT as the panacea that the NHS promotes it as.
I do not have any familiarity with the NHS--in the US, we prefer to drug people into mental health. *g* And I will have to take your word for it.

Frankly, I think the appropriate strategy is a combined attack. Also, anecdotally, CBT seems to work better for people who are very intellectualized and have already learned the techniques of alienating the problematic portions of their psyche.

The cognitive model's provision of a metric for "this is not me; this is the brain chemicals making me crazy" has proved incredibly helpful to me.
I don't have time to finish reading it, but it looks to me like the guy disagrees with CBT (an abbreviation that makes me think of something else entirely) because it doesn't agree with his notions of what mental illness and emotional disorders are. Piffle.
I agree, probably a Freudia.
Yep. I also like how he associates CBT with Maoist Communism. Sheez, overstate things much?
I couldn't make it through the article. The scare quotes made me want to slap him.
oh my goodness, renatus, may I steal your icon please? that is made of WIN.

I need something for "Argh! But now I'm going to DO something about teh Stupid!"
God damn right!

(You are, not pud-flunky across the pond.)
Some context worth noting here: the author is British.

CBT has been heavily, heavily marketed and pushed as a cure for just about everything in the UK. Folks like me, with chronic fatigue syndrome (called ME over there) have had a serious battle to persuade the National Health Service to give them *anything but* CBT and exercise. They are not alone in this fight. There was a very large movement in the UK to make CBT the go-to answer for many syndromes and diseases, and if CBT failed, you just weren't trying. Other treatments? Medication? Sorry, this is all the NHS will give you. (Also, CBT is relatively cheap once you've hired a practitioner.)

While I disagree with much of what the author is saying, I'm frankly glad to see a certified shrink speak out against the "CBT solves everything" theory in a British paper.

Fair enough. However, that isn't the thrust of his article.
I'm not usually a big fan of CBT alone (I also benefited from medication and, to some degree, realizing where some of my cognitive distortions came from - because knowing where one of them did originate has helped me on the road to a lot of self-forgiveness). But this article is infuriating. And I kind of want to scream at this guy for comparing CBT to, of all things, Mao's little red book! (Because, you know, oppression in a communist regime and therapy are so very similar).

Leader can suck my cock.
The comparison was trying to make a valid point, I think, which is that CBT used as a universal palliative -- especially if everyone's reading from the same script -- is probably going to do far more harm than it does good. However, going straight to the "ooh, evil Communism" comparison has the effect of removing any relevancy or veracity his argument may have had.

*Any* treatment regime, mass-produced and handed down according to a single set of standards, can be used to oppress. CBT may be the latest darling of those who want to keep the masses in their place, but it isn't the first, it won't be the last, and it certainly isn't the only.

Do I make myself plain?

Because I can repeat that if you need me to.
Was that for me or him? ;-)
Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>