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

[PsychSupreme]

I don't believe the chances of meaningful change in the right direction is all that high, but I think PCSAS has a higher small chance than APAs nonexistent chance of positive change. If I'm buying a lottery ticket, I'll take the one in a million chance ticket over teh one in a billion chance ticket.

10000% agree. And I don’t agree the PCSAS has an elitist academic mindset either. Most programs, including my own, are fully happy with graduates pursuing clinical careees. They just want to change the emphasis and integration of scientific competency within that goal. PCSAS explicitly sees itself as a renewed commitment to the original ideals of Boulder model.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Sanman]

The main thing I like about PCSAS is that I think they actually have a vision for psychology careers that goes beyond "You can be a professor or you can do 1:1 therapy 40 hours/wk." Historically....those were our choices. If you stepped outside those, you did it of your own volition and largely despite your graduate training and not because of it. That said, they are definitely playing the long game - it is being done to fundamentally reshape what psychology as a field looks like 20-30 years down the road, not what happens to medicare reimbursement next year. Long-term, I do think they are going to have a substantial impact. That doesn't mean medicare reimbursement for psychotherapy is going to triple. I do think it will mean psychologists in a wider variety of better-paying roles across different settings (insurance, hospital administration, hybrid clinical/leadership roles, government, certain technology sub-sectors, etc.). Right now, PCSAS programs have still had to carry APA accreditation concurrently to keep folks eligible for licensure, which limits their flexibility on the curriculum. That is starting to change and I think once that happens it is going to open the floodgates for far more innovation on the educational front.

I've said it before here, but I really don't view professional school PsyD grads as being much different from mid-levels and in many cases actually seem to get worse training than the quality LCSW/LPC/etc programs. It will obviously take time to shake out, but I do think we're on a trajectory to eventually have a two-tier system where PCSAS grads have options for higher pay and APA grads are closer to mid-level roles. Obviously this could change, but that is where I see it going right now. Definitely not ideal, but I fear without that we'd just be seeing the entire field pushed towards mid-level roles.

I'm sympathetic to concerns about further fracturing the field. At the same time, it was largely championed by people shouting from the rooftops that APA was doing a terrible job for quite literally decades while the powers that be played musical chairs. No one did **** and in fact actively tried to stop others from doing ****. Eventually, you have to cut your losses and do what you think is right.

I think it is a good idea to have expanded training and look into alternative roles. That said, the end of your first bolded thought is hopefully...if someone will pay me. This will also collide with some non-clinical programs that may be on a similar trajectory and other fields.

As for a two tier system in terms of clinical roles, I think that is a bit optimistic. People outside the field can barely tell the difference between a midlevel and a doctoral level provider (and often will not pay for it). You are assuming some MBA or HR person is going to know the difference between a PCSAS program and a diploma mill? Plenty of those professional school grads will be out there and they will not hold such a bias either. In fact, they may see PCSAS as not clinically driven enough. Keep in mind that even if the major hospitals adopt this scheme, outside the VA they do not hire many psychologists. The private practice landscape really does not care about PCSAS vs diploma mills. The instragram and tiktok life coaches are making more than either of those groups.

I don't want to get too far off topic as this has been discussed before. I am just not as optimistic as others.

 

[Sanman]

10000% agree. And I don’t agree the PCSAS has an elitist academic mindset either. Most programs, including my own, are fully happy with graduates pursuing clinical careees. They just want to change the emphasis and integration of scientific competency within that goal. PCSAS explicitly sees itself as a renewed commitment to the original ideals of Boulder model.

The elitism I am speaking of has to do with excluding vail model programs, let alone mid level programs. They are not going anywhere and will still be the bulk of clinicians. Just saying this group does it better is ineffective in my opinion.

 

[borne_before]

I've got kind of a relevant beef about this. This type of thing is a reoccurring conversation, with another psych at work. It's usually like SLP/pt/ot/medical doctor (specialist)/NP will ask us about a challenging patient. Other psych will usually say "no" (they're lazy) so myself and the other good psych at my work get more complex patients because we see it as part of our job to support the other specialities and we're here to help people...

Here's the messages:

SLP: Hey! Do either of you have experience with Selective Mutism? We got a speech referral for a child regarding concerns about selective mutism. Unfortunately, our speech team does not have experience with that. Didn't know if either of you diagnose and/or treat this?

Lazy psych: They can get a BH referral if they need an evaluation or counseling. These patients generally benefit from speech therapy services (nonverbal approach in therapy or play strategies until they warm to the therapist)

Me: I'm treating a kid with selective mutism right now - I got him talking in about three sessions, but it's going slow (there are some behavior challenges). I can usually get them talking in the clinic, but generalizing verbal language outside of clinic can be challenging. There's a ton of evidence supporting a behavioral intervention using graduated exposures, working with parents to limit reinforcing nonverbal behaviors, and reinforcing verbal behavior. Often they do benefit from a medication consult, as well. I'd love to meet with them.

So in the above the lazy psych is spreading misinformation. SLPs do not usually treat selective mutism. That's not what their job is (both of my parents are SLPs!). They treat communication disorders, not anxiety disorders. I didn't engage lazy psych because it would just cause work drama. But, I just said how I would handle it.

Here's the thing about competence and why so many providers avoid it: competence is punishing. Good work is rewarded with more harder work.

 

[Ollie123]

I think it is a good idea to have expanded training and look into alternative roles. That said, the end of your first bolded thought is hopefully...if someone will pay me. This will also collide with some non-clinical programs that may be on a similar trajectory and other fields.

As for a two tier system in terms of clinical roles, I think that is a bit optimistic. People outside the field can barely tell the difference between a midlevel and a doctoral level provider (and often will not pay for it). You are assuming some MBA or HR person is going to know the difference between a PCSAS program and a diploma mill? Plenty of those professional school grads will be out there and they will not hold such a bias either. In fact, they may see PCSAS as not clinically driven enough. Keep in mind that even if the major hospitals adopt this scheme, outside the VA they do not hire many psychologists. The private practice landscape really does not care about PCSAS vs diploma mills. The instragram and tiktok life coaches are making more than either of those groups.

I don't want to get too far off topic as this has been discussed before. I am just not as optimistic as others.

Definitely TBD. To clarify though, I don't think there will be two tiers of "generic staff psychologist" roles.

I think there will be a tier of "misc therapy providers that blends psychologists, counselors and social workers and all make about the same" and a tier of leadership who may maintain some clinical duties but ultimately helps steer the ship, measure the things we need to measure, ensure proper practice, etc. The latter will do meaningfully better financially even if they aren't buying yachts. I think it is the sort of thing PCSAS is positioning its grads to be able to do effectively and APA is actively resisting because knowing whether or not your patients are getting better is bad because then insurance companies might stop paying you to do primal scream therapy. These will be the folks who understand measurement, aren't afraid of numbers, see value in at least starting with an approach that utilizes what evidence says is most likely to succeed for a given patient as opposed to the therapeutic orientation that "aligns with my personal philosophical view of the world and speaks to me most deeply"

Obviously there will be overlap in these distributions and plenty of these positions would be filled with non-PCSAS grads and some PCSAS grads will be in staff psych roles.

That said, this will all depend on how value-based care and similar initiatives unfold though. I feel like this was really a missed opportunity by our field to reinvent ourselves, given our patients tend to be crazy-high utilizers of healthcare and have worse outcomes pretty much across the board...

 

[PsychSupreme]

The elitism I am speaking of has to do with excluding vail model programs, let alone mid level programs. They are not going anywhere and will still be the bulk of clinicians. Just saying this group does it better is ineffective in my opinion.

They don’t accept Vail Model programs because the Vail Model isn’t consistent with the ideology that clinical psychology programs should by definition seek to train scientific psychologists, regardless of whether they follow a clinical path or a research/academic path. I don’t think that’s elitist, it’s just defining a philosophy for training which reiterates the model that first defined the field. I’m not going pronounce judgment on all Vail programs, but I don’t think it’s controversial to say that the model generally doesn’t meet the standard for scientific training that would be consistent with PCSAS. But I’m happy to agree to disagree.

 

[Sanman]

I've got kind of a relevant beef about this. This type of thing is a reoccurring conversation, with another psych at work. It's usually like SLP/pt/ot/medical doctor (specialist)/NP will ask us about a challenging patient. Other psych will usually say "no" (they're lazy) so myself and the other good psych at my work get more complex patients because we see it as part of our job to support the other specialities and we're here to help people...

Here's the messages:

SLP: Hey! Do either of you have experience with Selective Mutism? We got a speech referral for a child regarding concerns about selective mutism. Unfortunately, our speech team does not have experience with that. Didn't know if either of you diagnose and/or treat this?

Lazy psych: They can get a BH referral if they need an evaluation or counseling. These patients generally benefit from speech therapy services (nonverbal approach in therapy or play strategies until they warm to the therapist)

Me: I'm treating a kid with selective mutism right now - I got him talking in about three sessions, but it's going slow (there are some behavior challenges). I can usually get them talking in the clinic, but generalizing verbal language outside of clinic can be challenging. There's a ton of evidence supporting a behavioral intervention using graduated exposures, working with parents to limit reinforcing nonverbal behaviors, and reinforcing verbal behavior. Often they do benefit from a medication consult, as well. I'd love to meet with them.

So in the above the lazy psych is spreading misinformation. SLPs do not usually treat selective mutism. That's not what their job is (both of my parents are SLPs!). They treat communication disorders, not anxiety disorders. I didn't engage lazy psych because it would just cause work drama. But, I just said how I would handle it.

Here's the thing about competence and why so many providers avoid it: competence is punishing. Good work is rewarded with more harder work.

This is certainly true in many cases. Though it is largely a case of the reimbursement model for us. There is no compensation for better quality care. Money is made on volume and lazy work allows for more volume than good work. Specialize in selective mutism and charge cash rates in your own PP and you will be rewarded if no one else is doing the work.

 

[Ollie123]

There is no compensation for better quality care. Money is made on volume and lazy work allows for more volume than good work.

Right now. There is increased recognition that this is a problem and efforts underway to shift away from the purely fee-for-service model that created this problem at the highest levels (e.g., CMS). How it will evolve remains to be seen.

Its not just us, this is true for all of healthcare.

 

[Sanman]

Definitely TBD. To clarify though, I don't think there will be two tiers of "generic staff psychologist" roles.

I think there will be a tier of "misc therapy providers that blends psychologists, counselors and social workers and all make about the same" and a tier of leadership who may maintain some clinical duties but ultimately helps steer the ship, measure the things we need to measure, ensure proper practice, etc. The latter will do meaningfully better financially even if they aren't buying yachts. I think it is the sort of thing PCSAS is positioning its grads to be able to do effectively and APA is actively resisting because knowing whether or not your patients are getting better is bad because then insurance companies might stop paying you to do primal scream therapy. These will be the folks who understand measurement, aren't afraid of numbers, see value in at least starting with an approach that utilizes what evidence says is most likely to succeed for a given patient as opposed to the therapeutic orientation that "aligns with my personal philosophical view of the world and speaks to me most deeply"

Obviously there will be overlap in these distributions and plenty of these positions would be filled with non-PCSAS grads and some PCSAS grads will be in staff psych roles.

That said, this will all depend on how value-based care and similar initiatives unfold though. I feel like this was really a missed opportunity by our field to reinvent ourselves, given our patients tend to be crazy-high utilizers of healthcare and have worse outcomes pretty much across the board...

Oh, I understand what you meant by the differentiation in roles. As you said, there will be a distribution of these grads and some will be filled by non-PCSAS grads. Certainly, there will be loyalties among groups and no one is just accepting they are not as well trained. This all hinges on formation of larger more centralized healthcare systems. I can see something like this at the VA. The problem is that the VA is not about value based care. Most community hospitals are looking to limit, not expand MH treatment.

As for measurement based care, I don't think it is about primal scream therapy. I do think there is a concern that measurement based care will turn into rationing care. If you look at what happens in sub-acute rehab, I can see the argument. Everyone gets 2-3 weeks to show progress. A post-op 90 yr old that is suffering delirium that takes a week to resolve and an outpatient 50 yr old knee surgery. People improve at different rates. What happens when an insurance company says that the patient is not improving enough after 3 or 4 sessions, no more care. That does not mean measuring progress as the clinician is not important.

 

[Sanman]

They don’t accept Vail Model programs because the Vail Model isn’t consistent with the ideology that clinical psychology programs should by definition seek to train scientific psychologists, regardless of whether they follow a clinical path or a research/academic path. I don’t think that’s elitist, it’s just defining a philosophy for training which reiterates the model that first defined the field. I’m not going pronounce judgment on all Vail programs, but I don’t think it’s controversial to say that the model generally doesn’t meet the standard for scientific training that would be consistent with PCSAS. But I’m happy to agree to disagree.

I understand that. My point is that by not including them, they stop caring about your goals. What would work faster in changing practice and include more people, the PCSAS model of accrediting programs or successful lobbying that provides a 20% bump in reimbursement for specific EBPs with data over just doing any old thing?

 

[Sanman]

Right now. There is increased recognition that this is a problem and efforts underway to shift away from the purely fee-for-service model that created this problem at the highest levels (e.g., CMS). How it will evolve remains to be seen.

Its not just us, this is true for all of healthcare.

Yes and no. E&M codes reimburse for level of cognitive complexity. Psychology codes do not. Shifting away from fee-for-service has been talked about for more than 20 years. I remember these discussions as a grad student almost 20 years ago. Same thing with the push for board certification and specialty care. Want to take bets on whether I will be retired before we see these changes?

 

[PsychSupreme]

I understand that. My point is that by not including them, they stop caring about your goals. What would work faster in changing practice and include more people, the PCSAS model of accrediting programs or successful lobbying that provides a 20% bump in reimbursement for specific EBPs with data over just doing any old thing?

Por que no los dos? Idk, I see your point about reimbursement for EBPs over and above other services, but I can foresee more folks just saying “Screw insurance, they only like practices that are DSM/Pharma/Choose your institution friendly and can fit into a narrow empirical model! I’ll just go to cash practice!”

Either way, folks are going to be ostracized at the outset, but the long term effect would hopefully be a cultural shift.

I think growing pains are just going to happen no matter which approach we take. But I agree that there are certainly other approaches that can be taken alongside the growth of PCSAS.

 

[Sanman]

Por que no los dos? Idk, I see your point about reimbursement for EBPs over and above other services, but I can foresee more folks just saying “Screw insurance, they only like practices that are DSM/Pharma/Choose your institution friendly and can fit into a narrow empirical model! I’ll just go to cash practice!”

Either way, folks are going to be ostracized at the outset, but the long term effect would hopefully be a cultural shift.

I think growing pains are just going to happen no matter which approach we take. But I agree that there are certainly other approaches that can be taken alongside the growth of PCSAS.

You can have both. As I said, I have nothing against PCSAS. I just think changing reimbursement is a more effective way of changing practice patterns overall. I don't think PCSAS is going to change how many midlevels or other folks practice.

 

[PsychSupreme]

You can have both. As I said, I have nothing against PCSAS. I just think changing reimbursement is a more effective way of changing practice patterns overall. I don't think PCSAS is going to change how many midlevels or other folks practice.

Oh, I definitely agree that PCSAS will have a negligible impact on midlevel practices.

 

[WisNeuro]

Midlevels are gonna midlevel and keep harming patients as they expand their scope. That horse left the barn a llooooonnnnggg time ago.

 

[Ollie123]

You can have both. As I said, I have nothing against PCSAS. I just think changing reimbursement is a more effective way of changing practice patterns overall. I don't think PCSAS is going to change how many midlevels or other folks practice.

100% true.

E&M codes are still fee for service - its actually quite a bit different than what is being discussed. That said, you are spot on that people have been talking about shift away from fee-for-service for some time, but it actually is starting to happen. It is very, very slow, but systems on the scale of "The entire US medical system" aren't going to change overnight. MACRA/MIPS are the drivers of this. Weirdly things seem to have stalled out a bit during COVID, but we will see...

 

[Sanman]

Definitely TBD. To clarify though, I don't think there will be two tiers of "generic staff psychologist" roles.

I think there will be a tier of "misc therapy providers that blends psychologists, counselors and social workers and all make about the same" and a tier of leadership who may maintain some clinical duties but ultimately helps steer the ship, measure the things we need to measure, ensure proper practice, etc. The latter will do meaningfully better financially even if they aren't buying yachts. I think it is the sort of thing PCSAS is positioning its grads to be able to do effectively and APA is actively resisting because knowing whether or not your patients are getting better is bad because then insurance companies might stop paying you to do primal scream therapy. These will be the folks who understand measurement, aren't afraid of numbers, see value in at least starting with an approach that utilizes what evidence says is most likely to succeed for a given patient as opposed to the therapeutic orientation that "aligns with my personal philosophical view of the world and speaks to me most deeply"

Obviously there will be overlap in these distributions and plenty of these positions would be filled with non-PCSAS grads and some PCSAS grads will be in staff psych roles.

That said, this will all depend on how value-based care and similar initiatives unfold though. I feel like this was really a missed opportunity by our field to reinvent ourselves, given our patients tend to be crazy-high utilizers of healthcare and have worse outcomes pretty much across the board...

E&M codes are still fee for service - its actually quite a bit different than what is being discussed. That said, you are spot on that people have been talking about shift away from fee-for-service for some time, but it actually is starting to happen. It is very, very slow, but systems on the scale of "The entire US medical system" aren't going to change overnight. MACRA/MIPS are the drivers of this. Weirdly things seem to have stalled out a bit during COVID, but we will see..

I'll add one more thought that makes our discourse interesting. I used to share your vision. In fact, I went to a balanced boulder-ish model program, got training in a specialized area of psychology (and qualify for that board cert), and work in a value based care program within the VA system. As it is, my salary will top out below $200k on the GS-Payscale. Not to mention middle managers harassing me about productivity to justify their existence. Meanwhile, there are plenty of folks with fee for service PPs that meet or exceed my income with more autonomy and the ability to grow a small business. Are we sure that this bright future is really so bright for us?

MACRA/MIPS were very poorly implemented for mental health and in practice did little to nothing to foster communication. I sent a note to the PCP that they were often already aware of or just ignored.

E&M codes are different than value based care, but provide a model for stepped compensation to reimburse an EBP over supportive therapy in ffs pay structure.

 

[R. Matey]

I am critical of PCSAS's indefensible exclusion of counseling and school psychologists from scientist-practitioner programs. In this brave new world presumably, graduates from these programs would be relegated to this lower tier for...wait for it....REASONS. I work with PCSAS grads and its pretty clear to me that they do not have any stronger command of statistics and measurement than I do (maybe a few more publications because they came from highly productive labs) nor do they seem to have a stronger set of clinical skills than me or any other of hoi polloi from a counseling or school program.

 

[R. Matey]

Very little appetite for advocacy of practice issues and guild protection by newer and midlevel psychologists these days. I've honestly kind of given up here. I'm just going to continue on making money in the legal realm while the gettings good. I don't have much hope that in a decade, psychologists will be on par with midlevels in clinical pay structures, with only ourselves to blame. Have fun kids.

We're in the position to charge more. Going rate for doctoral level psychotherapy in my locale is much higher than that of the mids.

 

[WisNeuro]

We're in the position to charge more. Going rate for doctoral level psychotherapy in my locale is much higher than that of the mids.

At the moment, yes, but as healthcare systems keep increasing teh number of midlevels in MH positions, and doctoral positions decreasing, this sill dilute. Eventually the private sector will feel some of the effects of a flooded market. Some people, those both well-trained and good at marketing, will continue to do well, but they will likely be outliers. This has already been happening if we look at inflation adjusted reimbursements from 20-30 years ago until now.

 

[R. Matey]

At the moment, yes, but as healthcare systems keep increasing teh number of midlevels in MH positions, and doctoral positions decreasing, this sill dilute. Eventually the private sector will feel some of the effects of a flooded market. Some people, those both well-trained and good at marketing, will continue to do well, but they will likely be outliers. This has already been happening if we look at inflation adjusted reimbursements from 20-30 years ago until now.

I would say that incompetence leads to frustration for both ends of psychotherapeutic relationships, which keeps me hopeful that psychologists stand to profit from their expertise. Really, the precarity exists for mids because there are a lot of them, putting power in the hands of the buyer. Not to mention the competition from tech companies (i.e., therapized digital content).

 

[WisNeuro]

I would say that incompetence leads to frustration for both ends of psychotherapeutic relationships, which keeps me hopeful that psychologists stand to profit from their expertise. Really, the precarity exists for mids because there are a lot of them, putting power in the hands of the buyer. Not to mention the competition from tech companies (i.e., therapized digital content).

The market will will always skew towards covered insurance services. One of the reasons certain cash pay services are difficult to start in certain areas. Just talk to people waiting for an adult neuropsych eval. If given the choice between waiting 6+ months for Medicare insurance, or getting a cash pay visit within a month, 95%+ will opt to wait. Same for my therapy referrals. For those who need it, I know a handful of very well trained psychologists who are cash pay and can see then very soon, or they can get an in-healthcare system referral for a midlevel in a few months, they almost always opt for the midlevel in-system through insurance. Unless we see a sea change, we'll just continue to see a gulf widening between the two-tiered system.

 

[R. Matey]

The market will will always skew towards covered insurance services. One of the reasons certain cash pay services are difficult to start in certain areas. Just talk to people waiting for an adult neuropsych eval. If given the choice between waiting 6+ months for Medicare insurance, or getting a cash pay visit within a month, 95%+ will opt to wait. Same for my therapy referrals. For those who need it, I know a handful of very well trained psychologists who are cash pay and can see then very soon, or they can get an in-healthcare system referral for a midlevel in a few months, they almost always opt for the midlevel in-system through insurance. Unless we see a sea change, we'll just continue to see a gulf widening between the two-tiered system.

Even so, I know that some are charging substantially more than midlevels, bill insurance, and still get paid. But, maybe there's regional variance.

 

[PsychSupreme]

I am critical of PCSAS's indefensible exclusion of counseling and school psychologists from scientist-practitioner programs.

I will say that I do at least empathize with this particular point. The clinical science model was proposed and created from within exclusively clinical psychology circles and thus has indeed left school and counseling behind in the process. I don't know if the solution should be to rebrand the model as the "applied psychological science" model or some such moniker and call the system the "Applied Psychological Science Accreditation System" (APSAS) and fold in school and counseling programs or if some other such kind of interdisciplinary approach should be taken, but I do see where this exclusion of other health service subfields does warrant criticism.

Regarding your point about stats--perhaps certain PCSAS grads aren't better than you (as a no doubt exemplary individual psychologist) are...indeed, I would say that the most upper tier Boulder model students are all equally as scientifically competent as clinical science folks are. However, I do think the average clinical science grad is generally better in the research areas of the field compared the average Boulder grad. I admittedly don't have any statistics to back that up and am leaning on my own anecdotal experience, and we could split hairs over whether that is due to the model itself or just a selection bias of research-minded students to those programs (and vice versa)...but I would wager that it holds. Again--no data to back that up, and it's not a hill I'd die on. Just speculation.

 

[cara susanna]

I'm on vacation but had to pop on over and share this one. From a Goodreads review:

"...alludes one time to speaking to a therapist which centered on some outdated exposure therapy"

Since when is exposure "outdated?" Uhhh. Was not expecting bad psych opinions while reading reviews of a romance novel.

 

[PsychSupreme]

A new one on r/therapists today..."Anyone here know how to help a middle-aged woman heal her 8-yr-old inner child who is stuck at the developmental stage at which trauma occurred and wants to die?" (paraphrased). What. The. ****?!

 

[Shiori]

A new one on r/therapists today..."Anyone here know how to help a middle-aged woman heal her 8-yr-old inner child who is stuck at the developmental stage at which trauma occurred and wants to die?" (paraphrased). What. The. ****?!

It sounds like a very exaggerated version of some of the concepts from "The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog." The revised edition has a whole section about people misunderstanding some key components and applying them...poorly.

 

[Sanman]

A new one on r/therapists today..."Anyone here know how to help a middle-aged woman heal her 8-yr-old inner child who is stuck at the developmental stage at which trauma occurred and wants to die?" (paraphrased). What. The. ****?!

Can this woman afford to buy her inner 8 y.o an ice cream cone? Ice cream makes things better...

 

[PsychSupreme]

It sounds like a very exaggerated version of some of the concepts from "The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog." The revised edition has a whole section about people misunderstanding some key components and applying them...poorly.

I admittedly don't know much about Bruce Perry, but isn't he also sorta on the sus side of things in terms of trauma science? Or am I incorrect? Might be getting him mixed up with someone else...

 

[Shiori]

I admittedly don't know much about Bruce Perry, but isn't he also sorta on the sus side of things in terms of trauma science? Or am I incorrect? Might be getting him mixed up with someone else...

You might be thinking of Gabor Maté.

ETA: Actually, it might be both.

 

[PsychSupreme]

You might be thinking of Gabor Maté.

ETA: Actually, it might be both.

Oh I am definitely familiar with Maté and his whacky views haha

 

[Shiori]

Oh I am definitely familiar with Maté and his whacky views haha

It seems Perry has aligned himself with Oprah and is more untethered from the literature. His old stuff seemed much more practical.

 

[aim-agm]

I'm on vacation but had to pop on over and share this one. From a Goodreads review:

"...alludes one time to speaking to a therapist which centered on some outdated exposure therapy"

Since when is exposure "outdated?" Uhhh. Was not expecting bad psych opinions while reading reviews of a romance novel.

Only tangentially related, but I did think of this:

 

[PsychSupreme]

Saw someone say today on Reddit that (paraphrasing): “Master’s-level practitioners are the best mental health diagnosticians because they spend more time out practicing than other practitioners.” Yikes.

 

[Sanman]

Saw someone say today on Reddit that (paraphrasing): “Master’s-level practitioners are the best mental health diagnosticians because they spend more time out practicing than other practitioners.” Yikes.

By that logic, bachelors level case managers are even better and people with mental health problems are the best. No one has more exposure than them.

 

[WisNeuro]

By that logic, bachelors level case managers are even better and people with mental health problems are the best. No one has more exposure than them.

Peer counselors, because "muh lived experience" trumps everything.

 

[WPMO]

"Chakra Psychology"....shoot me.

 

[PsychSupreme]

"Chakra Psychology"....shoot me.

Please elaborate!

 

[WPMO]

Please elaborate!

Bro I don't even know any more. I've just seen people online saying they are doing it:

When I actually looked it up months ago I believe it had something to do with attributing psychological distress to your Chakras being messed up. It's New Age stuff.

 

[PsychSupreme]

Bro I don't even know any more. I've just seen people online saying they are doing it:

When I actually looked it up months ago I believe it had something to do with attributing psychological distress to your Chakras being messed up. It's New Age stuff.

I see. I mean, I sorta figured I knew what the therapy was positing, I just thought maybe you came across a particular instance of it online somewhere and was hoping you could elaborate on what that particular instance was about haha

 

[cara susanna]

There's a thread where someone is asking about approaches for dissociation related to repeated sexual trauma and says they mostly use CBT. Almost everyone's saying that CBT won't work and this person needs to refer to a "trauma expert." Of course, somatic approaches are being advocated.

 

[borne_before]

We haven't bullied these people enough.

 

[cara susanna]

I'm just laughing at the idea of someone referring a patient to a "trauma expert" and then they get sent to someone like me who looooves and does nothing but CBT approaches

 

[PsychSupreme]

There's a thread where someone is asking about approaches for dissociation related to repeated sexual trauma and says they mostly use CBT. Almost everyone's saying that CBT won't work and this person needs to refer to a "trauma expert." Of course, somatic approaches are being advocated.

I beg you to send me a link to that thread.

 

[PsyDr]

I was curious to learn what Naropa “University” was. Now I know and am sad

 

[Sanman]

I was curious to learn what Naropa “University” was. Now I know and am sad

Have you checked out their notable alumni list on wikipedia?

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Has anyone on these reddit pages every referenced the Raven dissertation? If not I feel like it would be well received.

 

[borne_before]

I see. I mean, I sorta figured I knew what the therapy was positing, I just thought maybe you came across a particular instance of it online somewhere and was hoping you could elaborate on what that particular instance was about haha

The redditor you linked to, I read their post history, and they need to be bullied so bad.

 

[PsychSupreme]

The redditor you linked to, I read their post history, and they need to be bullied so bad.

I didn't link to any Redditor, did I?

 

[PsychSupreme]

Just saw a thread on r/therapists in which a newly minted therapist described their primary training as being in transactional analysis...yikes.