OneX2
Posts: 157
Joined: 1/3/2006 Status: offline
|
Your sites are not academic sites. These things all have an agenda, like you, like me. These are not fair and impartial. You are going out there trying to prove what you are saying by simply sifting through info that fits your purpose. I have yet to see a balanced statement with fact and opinion in your posts. I have not given any journal articles because they are simply boring in this sort of medium, and to long, not to mention that to understand many of the implications you need to be trained to look for flaws in what they are doing. Under the term differential therapeutics, Frances, Clarkin, and Perry (1984) discuss ways of fitting different kinds of treatment to different kinds of clients. They also discuss the conditions under which “no treatment” is the best option. In the no-treatment category, they include clients who have a history of treatment failure, or whom seem to get worse from treatment, such as criminals trying to avoid or diminish punishment by claiming to be suffering from psychiatric conditions- “We may do a disservice to society, the legal system, the offenders, and ourselves if we are too willing to treat problems for which no effective treatment is available.” There is also patients with malingering or fictitious illness, chronic nonresponders to treatment, clients likely to improve on their own, healthy clients with minor chronic problems; reluctant and resistant clients who refuse treatment. Although a decision needs to be made in each case, and although some might dispute some of the categories proposed, the possibility of no treatment deserves serious attention. The no-treatment or no further treatment option can do a number of useful things, interrupt helping sessions that are going nowhere or are actually destructive; keep both client and helper from wasting time, effort, and money; delay help until the client is ready to do the work required for constructive change; provide a “breather” period that allows clients to consolidate gains from previous treatments; provide clients with the opportunity to discover what they can do without treatment, keep helpers and clients from playing games with themselves and one another; and provide motivation for the client to find help in his or her ability and daily life. This is basic text that you should be familiar with if you went for any board certification or licensure in the counseling field. So far I can only see you've gotten a one sided education. It is good to know both sides of any issue but until your out there doing it and have some experience with it, you'll never really know. It is very hard to make a double blind study when dealing with qualitative data like emotions and the mind. The qualitative and quantitative studies are a good distinction to understand. Also I recommend How to lie with Statistics. Great book, I read it in a graduate class. There are very clear examples and you will be surprised what you will find in the real world measures when you are finished with it. I am not into Scientology, rebirthing, Rogerian nursing, and I don’t know enough about them to offer an opinion. I think NLP can take care of itself. I don’t need to defend it. Any one would tries it can make up their own mind. I do wonder if you would even say it was worth learning about to some one else? Joseph
|