Shrink Liberally
I was reading the National Journal today and found this little tidbit by Neil Munro entitled "Shrink Liberally:"
When the APA wonders why more people don't take advantage of all that psychology has to offer, maybe they should understand that the conservative half of America doesn't trust them to be fair or objective. Diversity is a good thing, so maybe psychology needs more political diversity. It could hardly have less.
Everybody knows that the media and academia lean left. But these elites are bipartisan wafflers when compared with psychologists who donate roughly 21 times as much to Democratic candidates and political action committees than Republican ones. According to Opensecrets.org, psychologists gave 526 donations worth $499,982 to Democratic causes and candidates in the '04 and '06 cycles and the '08 cycles to date. In contrast, the shrinks opened their wallets to Republicans only 43 times, and gave just $22,255. Maybe that explains why some conservatives prefer prayer to psychotherapy.
When the APA wonders why more people don't take advantage of all that psychology has to offer, maybe they should understand that the conservative half of America doesn't trust them to be fair or objective. Diversity is a good thing, so maybe psychology needs more political diversity. It could hardly have less.
posted by Helen at 1:19 PM
28 Comments:
Considering that the profession is overwhelmingly left wing, I would assume that most psychologists favor gun control. Not to sound paranoid, but this makes me wonder whether they might be quick to label gun owners as less than mentally fit. (With predictable, lifelong consequences to their patients' right to keep and bear arms.)
I'd feel a lot more comfortable seeing more diversity in the profession. Is there an NRA-certified list of therapists?
Eric,
What a great question. I have never seen such a list. The world of psychologists and therapists is very confidential--as it should be to some degree--but this makes it hard to know if a therapist is anti-gun or labels those with legal guns as "nuts" etc. Perhaps something like ratemytherapist.com is needed.
The donations come out to 95.7% in favor of the Democrats. This sounds close to the same percentage in the APA who are liberal that you mentioned in another post.
serket,
You have a good memory; I believe the number I read once was that 93% of all psychologists are left-leaning.
The "mental healh professional" is overwhelmimgly left-wing. Much of it is self-selection-- believing that environmental manipulations-- psychotherpy in its various forms or behavioral or cognitive therapy-- can effect significant personality and behavior change. They typically cannot and this has been known for a very long time, ever since Eysenck destroyed psychoanalysis in 1959. (MHP foisted on us the bizarre system of psychoanalysis-- and psychoanalysis still has a huge presence in psychodynamic therapy)
Of course there is no evidence of any specific change agents-- nor even simple diagnostic validity or reliability-- but MHP believe in environmental causation and that they have the skills to help people through environmetal means.
Hence, politically liberalism is the result-- all differences beween the genders, races, rich and poor etc are mostly environmental and can be "rectified" by social engineering. That this absurd idea has not yet disappeared is really surprising-- but we have a gazillion "therapists" with no demonstrable knowledge or skills who make big bucks in the mental health hoax .
Most governmental programs are based on totally false environmental causation views-- like Head Start- which is still funded, although in 1969 we knew it was a failure in raising poor/black IQ. There is big money to be had in claiming a problem exists, defining it, continually expanding that definition, claiming you are an expert on it, getting the government to fund you as you eradicate the environmental sources of the problem-- this trough- feeding is the essence of feminism-- see rape, domestic violence , the "dead beat Dad" myth, Battered Wife Syndome ( what utter BS-- no such thing exists as employed in court), Violence Against Women ( white women( nearly all feminists are white, black women do not attack their men ) are the safest people in our society-- for every female murdered, 28 black men are murdered
((The Missing White Woman Syndrome, is evidence of white women's irrational obsession with other white women's safety. They don't care about missing men or blacks .))
It must be noted that a man should seek therapy-- if he has the money and time to waste and risk stigma, defamatory medical records, and emotional harm-- from a man or-- a woman over 45-- the older the better. Women from the pre-feminist hate movement do not have irrational animosity toward men and -- having the relevant feminine aptidues-- are very empathetic and excellant listeners-- if that is what you want.
This animosity toward men found in the vast majority of women is recent. This generation of women will have to die out-- like the white, Jim Crow racists , before anti-male bigotry decreases.
Females dominate clinical psych and psychiatry now-- i think 50% of psychiatrists are woman-- and 1/3 of them have a history of depression.
Point being-- men-- stay away from female therapists under 45-- they are usually anti-male either overtly or implicitly. Never go to a marriage counselor who is female-- ever.
I witnessed their training and knew them socially-- they are anti-male.
But eschew "therapy"-- its worthless and there is a significant risk of harm. A GP can prescribe meds as well as any psychiatrist. If you must-- go to a clinical psychologist-- they are the cream of the psychology crop in ability, as the competition is so intense. When I was in the Behavior Genetics program at Minnesota, the clinical students had the highest GRE average of all the grad school divisions... but psychiatrists-- are bottom feeders-- the worst of their class-- very high psychopathology and dysfunction ( divorce, suicide, drug abuse, sexual abuse of patients, mental illness, etc )-- choosing the worst paying and least regarded of any field of medicine ( they are held in dismmisive contempt by "real ' doctors, who ,upon hearing a 3rd year med student wants to go into psychiatry, may say " Why are you throwing your life away " ( personal observation ).
Why? They are incompetent losers-- they fear the need to prove competence in legitimate medicine so they pick a field where all is trial and error, no one can predict anything, nothing is learned from experinece, there is a very small risk orf malpractice-- and-- the key-- you never have to show you ever helped any body. And insurance will pay your fee ! What a dreamm job ! And its 9-5, no calls to rush to the hospital -- tell them to go to the ER or Prolixin IM and call me in the morning...
Psychotherapy IS Liberalism in practice. Its denouement will signal the coming of science to the field of mental health.
then there is those damn forensic psychiatrists ( whores of the court) with their baseless claims of predicting dangerousness, fabricating evidence for IVCommiting people they think "need" treatment ( narcissism anyone ) and retrospective clairvoyance , communing with the minds of alleged felons who murdered or maimed someone a year ago.
This comment has been removed by the author.
So how will this play out for people who aren't liberals when John Edwards sends us all for a mental heath exam with his forced preventive medicine plan?
Jeff,
I would hope that most psychologists would refuse to do such exams. Remember that even though many (though not all!) psychologists are liberal, not all would go along with such measures.
Well, does it matter? Does political ideology affect one's ability to be an effective psychologist? Can a psychologist help someone with opposing political views? It seems to me that they can.
If it does, how do we fix it? Tell psychologists to change parties? Offer scholarships to conservatives to study psychology?
Or just accept that some professions draw people with certain political views?
Really, ideology is not that big a deal. I can understand its relevance in academia (and there's the same problem of what to do about it), but in psychological practice it seems minor to me.
Therapists may be left leaning but, at least in my experience, experimental psychologists are much less so. Well maybe they are left leaning but they also seem more willing to go where the data takes them. Where the bias is apparent is in some of their explanations and attributions. But the literature is large enough that there is always some lonely voice in the wilderness who can offer other explanations and make other testable predictions.
Feminists like to talk about the "click". My click with respect to therapists occurred when I read "The Myth of Repressed Memory" co-authored by Elizabeth Loftus. Loftus was/is a research psychologist in memory, specifically creating false memories. She was major force in stopping therapists from planting false memories of abuse in their patients' minds.
What scares me is the possibility that left-leaning bigots may prevent these lonely research voices from every being published in high-quality peer-reviewed journals. If that happens, we're doomed.
Mike Adams wrote a 7 part series "Of Mice and Mormons" about a Mormon graduate student's experience in a Master's program at Purdue Calumet.
John Lynch,
"Does it matter?" It matters if the therapist's political beliefs influence how he or she provides treatment to patients.
Bobh,
"If that happens, we're doomed." It's already happening.
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MikeSAdams/
You people need to check out www.shrinkwrapped.blogs.com. You'll be pleasantly surprised that there's someone in the psychology/psychiatry "community" (I use that word advisedly) who shares our views!
betsybounds,
Yes, I like Shrinkwrapped very much and read his blog often. What I find interesting is that most bloggers who are in the mental health field are libertarian or right-leaning; my guess is that the internet is one of the few places we can share our views and find others who think in a similar manner. It gets tiring always being told how one is supposed to be, think and act politically.
Helen,
The analytic community is likewise overwhelmingly left and liberal, but it seems many maintain what I would call a "true liberal" anti-totalitarian streak.
Yes, Bush is Evil.
But so too, Saddam.
And OBL.
They are a very interesting bunch, the analysts.
Maybe the most interesting.
Or not.
Just sayin'.
MeTooThen
exactly how balanced is the psyche of an individual when the must seek "balance" from someone who is not themselves psychologicaly balanced?
Aside from the political issues I simply do not trust 'mental health professionals' is the fact they they are both the ones defining mental health 'problems' and then the ones who profit from medicating those same 'problems'.
All my life I've seen more and more things defined as 'mental conditions'. Of course, it doesnt help that all the psych majors I meet in college probably where crazy.
So psychology is a feminine liberal "science."
Men realize that and avoid it.
In addition, we know women can out-talk us. We'll lose in counseling.
Counseling should be based on arm wrestling instead of talking, then we would have the advantage for a change.
Liberal psychologists create pathology for everything else, so why not for gun ownership?
God help us all.
WRT lib/left psychiatrists and JEdwards "mandatory checkups":
What if someone of a libertarian streak wants to refuse _treatment_ (like neuro-affective medication) under the JEdwards mandatory healthcare plan ... we can expect the same compassion shown by the DEA, TSA, DHS, etc.
I fully expect the caring-and-kind power of the Federal government to enforce mandatory doctor's orders ... and to treat "resisters" as having anti-social(-ist)-disorder ... which of course will be "treated" by psych-drugs in a FedMed treatment facility (which is not a socialist re-education-camp ... really).
As I recall, either the AMA or the equivalent association of psychiatrists got involved a few years back in home-gun-ownership ... and I fully expect them to use the power JEdwards would grant to the Federal Department of Mandatory Medical Treatment to "treat" gun owners (with psych drugs of course) as anti-social(-ist) paranoids who are clearly a threat to themselves, their kids and society.
Parents who refuse mandatory treatments for their kids (ritalin, birth control, paxil, etc) would lose their kids (and their freedom) under social service rules.
Remember HRC and Kennedy about the "cult of the individual" ... people of their type consider us individualists as mentally-ill or evil.
Helen ... you said most psychologists would not go along with doing mandatory checkups ... but if 5-10% do, that's all that's needed ... and 5-10% of more-left psychiatrists, not more-centered psychologists.
Note: I'm neither a parent (yet) nor a gunowner. However, I am an incurable individualist (Asperger's Autism) with other neural strangenesses they would certainly like to "cure", leaving me without my 165IQ or imagination intact.
I am not a paranoid person, being a forward thinking raging-optimist, but the pattern I see in the merger of politics, mandatory medicine and Bush-Derangement-Syndrome lefties taking away my right to refuse treatment (thus ownership of my body) ... is worthy of considerable fear.
(My apologies .... I had meant to keep this shorter ... we ASpies tend to either stay silent or babble.)
I thought Edwards' thing was if you want government health services you would have to play by the government's rules - including mandatory checkups and lifestyle restrictions. Presumably, if you have non-government health insurance or can pay your own way, you can do whatever you want.
Is that incorrect?
What bothers me the most in all of this, is how one can have the absolute certainty that they are 100% right, and another is 100% wrong, and needs to be "fixed", or at least branded - based on a "politically correct" point of view. Is that science based? Is that tolerance? Is that right? I believe it is, in itself, an illness.
It is done in a manner that makes it "official", even becomes law, if you will. "If you do not conform to our beliefs, we will be forced to eventually in one way, shape, or form, drag you into a courtroom and make you see it out way, and live in the manner we prescribe." Or risk loosing your rights and freedoms, and of course, finances.
I do not believe that is why anyone would risk life and limb to come to a country such as ours, or defend it, if and when it comes to that.
In order to ensure my own rights, I also have to be willing to fight for someone else's. My rights end where they infringe on another's. Another's rights end, where they infringe on mine. I do not intend to forget that, and do not take it lightly. I recommend the same for someone who is not happy with what I believe, and wishes to control who I am.
john --
In addition, we know women can out-talk us. We'll lose in counseling.
Actually, they can't. If a long-winded and difficult to parse paragraph is issued, just say "You didn't answer my question / address my issue" and repeat. Insist on short and direct responses and they crumble.
Somewhat little tongue in cheek.
bizdoc, My mom has a cousin (I think he just turned 30) and he wants to be a Psychology professor and he is also a Mormon. I believe he is in the PhD program right now and he attends a school in Texas. I don't really know much about his experience, I'll probably send that series to him after I read it. I think he was against the Iraq War, or at least hesitant about it. His wife seems really conservative just being around her, but I don't know her political views. There are Mormons who are also Democrats (think Harry Reid), including one of my friends.
I began the training and schooling necessary to enter a Ph.D program a few years back, with the intention of becoming a licensed Psychologist. I have walked away from that goal only this past summer, as I can no longer endure the Leftism in Academia. The Psychology that is being taught in our classrooms is largely based upon bad science; it's no surprise that the bulk of that science is being researched by hardcore Lefties. One very sound reason for the lack of Conservatives in Psychology can be concluded thusly: Conservatives base their views largely on facts, logic, and reason. Lefties prefer to base their views upon what makes them feel good. When Conservatives observe how far along the decay of the Psychological sciences has gone, they simply walk away and look for better opportunities.
At least, that's my observation.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
性愛影片色咪咪影片網哈啦聊天室咆哮小老鼠影片aa成人漫畫葉晴貼影片影片轉檔程式情色影片foxy下載色情小說女影片免費下載a片aa免費看情色文學成人小說aa 片免費看影片 aa訊豆豆出租名模情人視訊aaa影片下載城男同志影片免費影片線上直播日本美女寫真集免費av18禁影片18成人卡通成人a片同志影片
Post a Comment
<< Home