Witness the serious questions clinical psychologists will not address

[Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.]

Witness the serious questions clinical psychologists will not address

Cognitee <Cogni...@aol.com wrote:

Dear Readers:

It is my view that as surely as we hold the medical establishment
(e.g. the CDC) responsible for epidemics of physical health, and as
surely as we hold the Fed. Trans. Safety Board responsible for airline
safety, the Amer. Psychological Assoc. has some notable responsibility
for services needed if they are not being provided.

With the present critical rise in teen suicides, I question whether
all that is reasonable and responsible is being done for the provision
of a system of mental health care. If a problem goes unabated, the
answer is (as it would be for other agencies or institutions): "NO".
I
have argued that the psychological establishment is *grossly*
negligent
in providing encouragement's for basic foundation research that would
point up special needs where professional work is most needed (and
thus
lead to the development of better care through reasonable
specialization) *AND* would lead to the development of a SYSTEM of
mental health care providers AS IS REASONABLE, with a variety of
roles.

I also see the organization failing to support the development of a
common and reasonable science-practitioner role that IS arguably THE
ONLY THING that will advance the science generally. I have clearly
outlined the nature of problems and deficiencies and they are not
being
addressed. There is a general self-satisfaction OR a willingness to
improve only on their terms; clinical psychologists and their major
parent organization show no willingness to make many improvements OR
even any willingness to do investigations that may lead to more
reasonable specialization's OF ROLES in the field and improvements in
services.

The pompous presumptuousness and pretentiousness of clinical
psychologists I say is killing our children (PERIOD). Well soon all
will see the blood on your hands.

We've seen the record of the APA and its members on mental health care
for a long time now. How long are we going to give them ?? At
least
we can see the rise in psychological problems unabated as a
sign that CLINICAL psychologists are not doing a good job though,
can't
we? OR SHOULD THEY BE ALLOWED TO SIMPLY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY (AND
CREDIT) AS CONVENIENT?? NOBODY'S GOING TO LET THEM DO THAT.

Snake oil "works" sometimes, too. Although the APA is not a
government
institution my point largely stands !! Especially since there is no
government
agency in the role of "policing-of-needs" job for them.
Come on, get real and really care about people.

It is my view that the point has been reached where clinical
psychologists do more to hold up AND PREVENT needed services and
science
progress than they do good. The APA basically facilitates this. Others
could step in and likely do most of the totally half-ass job clinical
psychologists now do.

And I do hold the APA and clinical psychologists responsible for
deaths already. There has been more of a concern about power and
politics (e.g. licensing and laws giving clinical psychologists
exclusive "turf") than there has been concern OR INVESTMENT for
developing an appropriate tested science. Now I know you have your
myths, convenient concerns, and rationalizations BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN
A
THING. The damned bastards have all the trappings and glory a group
could possibly have and be so damned useless. I have indicated
recently (again) basic foundation research needed and why (see
sci.psychology.psychotherapy) .

The points are OBVIOUSLY unassailable,
except on grounds of presumption, myth, and pretense. All clinical
people (INCLUDING THE MOST MASSIVE BUTT-HEADED NEW APA PRESIDENT,
SELIGMAN HIMSELF) try to do is drag down (they hope once and for all)
the few studies that have been done on some important questions. AND
THEY ARGUE SO ALL MIGHT BE SATISFIED WITH POOR SCIENCE !
They support basically whatever studies SEEMS TO BACK THEM (pick and
choose).

They are NEEDLESSLY SATISFIED WITH poorer studies than could
be done and with studies that are less than that which would be needed
to back things-as-they-are.

The research on the question of professional efficacy vs.
other helpers (not yet well answered at all and which has been
neglected
for 17 years, since the last good study) is pivotal to providing a
sound
basis for the creation of a system of personnel as mental health
resources *AND* to finding the truly difficult problems where
professional work should be concentrated. AND: Nothing has been done
AS APPROPRIATE, given the nature of the subject matter, to set up a
system that would yield continuously improving inter-rated reliability
on many fronts. The local science practitioner role I have outlined
would do this and becoming such should be part and parcel of graduate
training.

"Therapists" are nothing (generally, typically) but a bunch of
self-serving, hacks. They practice "science" (technology, or an
"apparent form" of such), as convenient, and otherwise make claims of
"art" as convenient. Well, it is all both at the same time. The
emphasizing one or the other as convenient for propaganda has to stop.
Additional problems are becoming more rampant in our society.
Children
are dying by their own hands. Maybe clinical psychologists don't
think
that is worth talking about, but others may. -- b jesness

P.S. It will not be long before even those without clear knowledge of
where the "science" is, the short-comings, and the active avoidance of
science foundations come to view you as deficient. When Skinner's
ideas
for learning (after Sputnik) where not thought up to it, look what
happened to him. Given the APA and clinical psychologist show
insufficient initiative in the field, possibly the psychiatrists
will end up with the real job. It really doesn't take
people who "know much", because no one does. It may (given how crude
things are) just take caring psychiatrists to turn things around.
Maybe
no one will turn things around. I just hope when the day of reckoning
comes, that it is their heads that are the first go on the "fence."