PhD/PsyD Just a thread to post the weirdest/whackiest/dumbest mental health-related stuff you come across in the (social) media...

[cara susanna]

Yup, PE doesn't release anything from the body. It's not like it targets physiological responses or visceral trauma reactions.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[RxPsych]

This is really complex—EMDR isn’t enough. Have your tried somatic therapy? I hear it releases stored remnants of complex developmental trauma.

(/sarcasm, just in case)

IFS might be more effective tbh. The exiled part of my past is disconnected from the rest of my self. This is why my spices MUST be organized A-Z, or else this exiled part will arise and I have no idea who I am anymore.

 

[WisNeuro]

Also agreed. There's research to suggest that many or even most people will, at some point in their lives, experience at least one Criterion A event. Yet the lifetime prevalence rates of PTSD, or even mental illness more broadly, are suspiciously not 100%.

I guess that means we just aren't diagnosing everyone accurately.

Yeah, Breslau did a lot of epi stuff with the DSM-IV criteria. Most people will experience event that falls pretty clearly within A1, but we're still at the 7-8% give or take a few that will develop PTSD or clinically meaningful symptoms. Obviously some events have a much higher conversion factor (e.g., sexual assault), but even with the relatively higher conversion events, resilience is still the modal response to all but the most horrific of experienced events.

The issue we have to wrestle with, is acknowledging and validating experiences of these events, but also not falling into the trap of iatrogenically damaging people. We know that one's own perception of these events is a contributory factor. We see this in the CISD lit, as well as retrospective appraisal of events tied to current presentation. So, how do we identify those who are suffering, and need help, but not tipping those who are coping just fine over the edge and somehow shaming/convincing them that they should be experiencing something? No easy answer, but, to be honest, as a clinician, I'd much rather be guilty of missing something, than causing harm. It's not perfect, but it is what it is. And, in this community of Reddit pseudoprofessionals, they seem all to happy to inadvertently cause harm through their ignorance as they forge blindly along their self-righteous path liek a bull in a China shop.

 

[chicandtoughness]

The problem is a lot of therapists have latched onto this "little T trauma" concept and are milking it for all it's worth. And by that I mean $$$ worth.

 

[MCParent]

I may not distinctly remember it

Incomplete recollection? That’s a trauma.

 

[aim-agm]

This is more what I wonder from the thread. I think a reasonable person could advocate for universal screenings for many different potential problems, but I wonder where we go from there. These screenings of children probably turn up many things that result in mandated reports to CPS...is that good for the child? Maybe. Depends on the situation.

The problem is that by definition screenings will have many false positives, but the people who will be seeing the results will miss the subtlety and treat all results as true positives.

 

[WisNeuro]

The problem is that by definition screenings will have many false positives, but the people who will be seeing the results will miss the subtlety and treat all results as true positives.

And, we already have good idea of what happens when we do this in a population after experiencing a traumatic event.

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

I have seen a shocking number of therapists on Reddit mention that folks read materials and trainings sponsored/published by the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation (ISSTD), which is a shockingly bad organization with a wild history stretching way back to the Satanic Panic. And for folks who are unaware, IFS was created by a man with a questionable reputation, and popularized by a man with known connections the ISSTD. I know this latter website is, well, rough, but as far as I can tell the information is mostly correct (and they bring receipts). So, in short, the current en vogue treatment is in the direct lineage of an organization that actively promoted conspiracy theories about Satanic ritual abuse. The scary thing is that I don't think most of the folks recommending ISSTD materials or using/promoting IFS are even aware of this connection.

 

[WisNeuro]

I have seen a shocking number of therapists on Reddit mention that folks read materials and trainings sponsored/published by the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation (ISSTD), which is a shockingly bad organization with a wild history stretching way back to the Satanic Panic. And for folks who are unaware, IFS was created by a man with a questionable reputation, and popularized by a man with known connections the ISSTD. I know this latter website is, well, rough, but as far as I can tell the information is mostly correct (and they bring receipts). So, in short, the current en vogue treatment is in the direct lineage of an organization that actively promoted conspiracy theories about Satanic ritual abuse. The scary thing is that I don't think most of the folks recommending ISSTD materials or using/promoting IFS are even aware of this connection.

At this point, they'd likely cognitive dissonance their way out of any concerning information.

 

[WPMO]

This sentiment is eerily similar to early psychology theorists that attributed everything to the unconscious. Granted, trauma has research support for actually existing, but relating everything to trauma is just ridiculous.

Agreed. There's a segment of MH professionals (and patients) increasingly moving in the direction of thinking that everyone, at some point, has experienced trauma (probably in childhood and which they may or may not remember), and that this trauma is then the cause of any and all psychological distress they experience in their lives.

I think we are literally seeing a 3rd(?) wave of Psychoanalysis taking the form of this trauma focus. If the first wave was Freud and his cohort, and the second was the Neo-Freudians, then this would be our third wave. If everything is trauma, especially "little t-trauma", then we can justify seeing everything as a negative unconscious response to past events. That is also why these theorists want to call it "little t-trauma", since calling something a "stressor" means that it is a specific event that we are consciously aware of. They want to tie our problems to the more nebulous concept of something hiding in our past.

My favorite example of this is regarding the etiology and case conceptualization of Bipolar Disorder. Keep in mind, Bipolar is one of the most genetically-influenced disorders in the DSM, has clearly documented biomarkers, and responds predictably to medications. A co-worker I spoke to said something along the lines of "People who are Bipolar are down for so long that their unconscious just sends them right up!". No word on how to explain euthymia, people who have euthymia between episodes of mania and depression, or people who sometimes have a depressive-manic cycle instead of the traditional manic-depressive cycle. She also explained the episodic nature of Bipolar Disorder as some kind of response to these minor traumas of everyday life. She used "little t-trauma" and unconscious conflict to explain why episodes can happen without any trigger. There is a trigger! It's just unconscious little t-trauma!

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

I think we are literally seeing a 3rd(?) wave of Psychoanalysis taking the form of this trauma focus. If the first wave was Freud and his cohort, and the second was the Neo-Freudians, then this would be our third wave. If everything is trauma, especially "little t-trauma", then we can justify seeing everything as a negative unconscious response to past events. That is also why these theorists want to call it "little t-trauma", since calling something a "stressor" means that it is a specific event that we are consciously aware of. They want to tie our problems to the more nebulous concept of something hiding in our past.

My favorite example of this is regarding the etiology and case conceptualization of Bipolar Disorder. Keep in mind, Bipolar is one of the most genetically-influenced disorders in the DSM, has clearly documented biomarkers, and responds predictably to medications. A co-worker I spoke to said something along the lines of "People who are Bipolar are down for so long that their unconscious just sends them right up!". No word on how to explain euthymia, people who have euthymia between episodes of mania and depression, or people who sometimes have a depressive-manic cycle instead of the traditional manic-depressive cycle. She also explained the episodic nature of Bipolar Disorder as some kind of response to these minor traumas of everyday life. She used "little t-trauma" and unconscious conflict to explain why episodes can happen without any trigger. There is a trigger! It's just unconscious little t-trauma!

Gosh I'd hate to be in the room to hear her convoluted explanation of how mixed episodes work.

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

I think we are literally seeing a 3rd(?) wave of Psychoanalysis taking the form of this trauma focus. If the first wave was Freud and his cohort, and the second was the Neo-Freudians, then this would be our third wave. If everything is trauma, especially "little t-trauma", then we can justify seeing everything as a negative unconscious response to past events. That is also why these theorists want to call it "little t-trauma", since calling something a "stressor" means that it is a specific event that we are consciously aware of. They want to tie our problems to the more nebulous concept of something hiding in our past.

My favorite example of this is regarding the etiology and case conceptualization of Bipolar Disorder. Keep in mind, Bipolar is one of the most genetically-influenced disorders in the DSM, has clearly documented biomarkers, and responds predictably to medications. A co-worker I spoke to said something along the lines of "People who are Bipolar are down for so long that their unconscious just sends them right up!". No word on how to explain euthymia, people who have euthymia between episodes of mania and depression, or people who sometimes have a depressive-manic cycle instead of the traditional manic-depressive cycle. She also explained the episodic nature of Bipolar Disorder as some kind of response to these minor traumas of everyday life. She used "little t-trauma" and unconscious conflict to explain why episodes can happen without any trigger. There is a trigger! It's just unconscious little t-trauma!

I once saw someone on r/askpsychology comment that schizophrenia was case in which "the imaginal portions of the unconscious have simply shattered the conscious ego" or some other similar psychoanalytic psychobabble. As a psychosis researcher, I was, to put it mildly, incensed.

 

[chicandtoughness]

I think we are literally seeing a 3rd(?) wave of Psychoanalysis taking the form of this trauma focus. If the first wave was Freud and his cohort, and the second was the Neo-Freudians, then this would be our third wave. If everything is trauma, especially "little t-trauma", then we can justify seeing everything as a negative unconscious response to past events. That is also why these theorists want to call it "little t-trauma", since calling something a "stressor" means that it is a specific event that we are consciously aware of. They want to tie our problems to the more nebulous concept of something hiding in our past.

My favorite example of this is regarding the etiology and case conceptualization of Bipolar Disorder. Keep in mind, Bipolar is one of the most genetically-influenced disorders in the DSM, has clearly documented biomarkers, and responds predictably to medications. A co-worker I spoke to said something along the lines of "People who are Bipolar are down for so long that their unconscious just sends them right up!". No word on how to explain euthymia, people who have euthymia between episodes of mania and depression, or people who sometimes have a depressive-manic cycle instead of the traditional manic-depressive cycle. She also explained the episodic nature of Bipolar Disorder as some kind of response to these minor traumas of everyday life. She used "little t-trauma" and unconscious conflict to explain why episodes can happen without any trigger. There is a trigger! It's just unconscious little t-trauma!

This this this so much this. It's exactly what is happening. Which is hilarious because most of these therapists are quite anti-Freud! They think they're being so innovative and holistic and cutting edge but they're just regurgitating the same old problems. At this point just put neuroses back in the DSM 🙄

 

[RxPsych]

This this this so much this. It's exactly what is happening. Which is hilarious because most of these therapists are quite anti-Freud! They think they're being so innovative and holistic and cutting edge but they're just regurgitating the same old problems. At this point just put neuroses back in the DSM 🙄

Wait a sec... is IFS the modern equivalent of the wandering womb?

 

[chicandtoughness]

Pretty sure IFS is just repackaged Jungian archetypes tbh (actual seriousness).

 

[cara susanna]

I think we are literally seeing a 3rd(?) wave of Psychoanalysis taking the form of this trauma focus. If the first wave was Freud and his cohort, and the second was the Neo-Freudians, then this would be our third wave. If everything is trauma, especially "little t-trauma", then we can justify seeing everything as a negative unconscious response to past events. That is also why these theorists want to call it "little t-trauma", since calling something a "stressor" means that it is a specific event that we are consciously aware of. They want to tie our problems to the more nebulous concept of something hiding in our past.

My favorite example of this is regarding the etiology and case conceptualization of Bipolar Disorder. Keep in mind, Bipolar is one of the most genetically-influenced disorders in the DSM, has clearly documented biomarkers, and responds predictably to medications. A co-worker I spoke to said something along the lines of "People who are Bipolar are down for so long that their unconscious just sends them right up!". No word on how to explain euthymia, people who have euthymia between episodes of mania and depression, or people who sometimes have a depressive-manic cycle instead of the traditional manic-depressive cycle. She also explained the episodic nature of Bipolar Disorder as some kind of response to these minor traumas of everyday life. She used "little t-trauma" and unconscious conflict to explain why episodes can happen without any trigger. There is a trigger! It's just unconscious little t-trauma!

The irony is that Freud denied childhood sexual abuse was a thing (well, later on he denied it).

 

[cara susanna]

Unrelated to the current topic, but in the latest season of Bridgerton we have a character who is very introverted and prefers engaging in her hobby to socializing. Everyone is now saying she is autistic or neurodivergent.

 

[Sanman]

Unrelated to the current topic, but in the latest season of Bridgerton we have a character who is very introverted and prefers engaging in her hobby to socializing. Everyone is now saying she is autistic or neurodivergent.

Whatever happened to just being an introvert?

 

[WisNeuro]

Whatever happened to just being an introvert?

It's not cool unless it's actually a MH diagnosis. Being diagnosed is "in" right now.

 

[Sanman]

It's not cool unless it's actually a MH diagnosis. Being diagnosed is "in" right now.

Cool, more money for us then.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Cool, more money for us then.

Nah, they don't need us--they can totally diagnose themselves solely using Tiktoks and Reddit comment sections now. We're just "ableist gatekeepers."

 

[WPMO]

Whatever happened to just being an introvert?

No one can be normal. We all have to be special. And because our society doesn't focus much on identity development, you can't be special just due to the unique combination of traits and decisions that make you who you are - you need to have a diagnosis.

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

Does anyone else notice a trend among some therapists to make "being a therapist" essentially their entire identity? Maybe it's just an illusion based on seeing posts in therapy-centered forums, but it does seem like some folks really make it their whole personality.

 

[aim-agm]

Does anyone else notice a trend among some therapists to make "being a therapist" essentially their entire identity? Maybe it's just an illusion based on seeing posts in therapy-centered forums, but it does seem like some folks really make it their whole personality.

My first thought was "You won't survive long in this line of work if you don't boundary off therapy from the rest of your life."

My second thought was the realization that they aren't in our line of work. If you never do real therapy you can get away with (for a while at least) poor practices.

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

Can anyone here speak to whether r/psychotherapists is better than r/therapists?

 

[chicandtoughness]

Can anyone here speak to whether r/psychotherapists is better than r/therapists?

Isn’t that the sub that required everyone to send in their licenses to prove they were real therapists?

EDIT: nvm that was r/psychotherapy, looks like r/psychotherapists was the reactionary response to that fiasco. A brief glance through r/psychotherapists looks a little better than r/therapists. Most of the threads seem focused on business practices and career development instead of chatting about whether diagnoses are real or EMDR is worth the training lol

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

Isn’t that the sub that required everyone to send in their licenses to prove they were real therapists?

EDIT: nvm that was r/psychotherapy, looks like r/psychotherapists was the reactionary response to that fiasco. A brief glance through r/psychotherapists looks a little better than r/therapists. Most of the threads seem focused on business practices and career development instead of chatting about whether diagnoses are real or EMDR is worth the training lol

Last night I did a search for the phrase “IFS” in r/psychotherapists and only found like 2-3 posts, which is encouraging.

 

[cara susanna]

I just saw a FB ad for Better Help that was like "Tom Brady's been in therapy since college!" Is that... is that really the best testament to therapy that you guys could find?

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

I don’t follow anything related to Huberman because I think he’s a shill and a huckster, but Reddit recommended me a post on r/HubermanLab. I took a look at it (it was about the lack of a scientific basis for dopamine detox). Surprisingly, that one thread was pretty good, with lots of folks calling BS on the whole concept of “dopamine detox” and rightfully criticizing Huberman. Unfortunately, however, some the other posts I perused in that sub were downright horrific—people outright recommending psychedelics and and other psychoactive substances for “dopamine reset,” people making grand claims about Wim Hof showers changing their lives, recommending unregulated vitamin supplements…if you have any kind of morbid fascination with Internet cesspools, give it a look.

 

[R. Matey]

I just saw a FB ad for Better Help that was like "Tom Brady's been in therapy since college!" Is that... is that really the best testament to therapy that you guys could find?

When the modal therapist has a master's degree in depth psychology, probably.