Further Support for BRAD's basic positions
B. Jesness, MA, mem. APA&APS
position statement and idea for a science and client advocay group:
Outline for an organization: a client and science
advocacy group, dedicated to furthering science standards and practices
in the therapy field.
We insist on fair and proper representation of treatments and on
providing information about costly or limited treatment options
available to clients "up front". We believe options and evidence of
their efficacies should be provided to clients before they enter a
course of counseling or therapy. Also, the various treatments and
programs
offered by each professional mental health service provider should be
outlined in some detail in a booklet made available to clients. Only
all this would provide reasonable information before the expense of and
commitment to a course of treatment.
Also, techniques or methods used that have NOT been clearly shown to
have efficacy AND validated for a particular, reliably-identifiable
problem type (i.e. showing blind inter-rater reliability) are NOT be
referred to as "therapy." Correspondingly, when what is done is
COUNSELING, the cooperative nature of this should be made clear and it
should be properly represented, engendering appropriate expectations.
Counseling is considered a most noble cooperative endeavor, requiring
the most consideration, judgement, and intelligence. Those who are
well-adapted will be better counselors. For this reason, and considering
the rest of the evidence, counselors/therapists should have a long
history of good adaptation.
Moreover, we believe daily standards-in-practice should provide
for on-going research (such as for the development of reliable
diagnoses) and this should be done within each large mental health
service agency. Furthermore, basic foundation research definitively
showing that graduate-school-trained counselors are superior to other
sources of help must be done to establish the range of problems for
which special treatment by professionals is actually better (and not
inferior to other more accessible and less costly sources of help, e.g.
peer counselors or paraprofessionals). The organization also supports
(given at
present there is no evidence against it and some good evidence in its
favor): peer counseling programs and counseling programs for
paraprofessionals. We seek to demystify mental health professions
and rid it of great myths. We hope for a sensible, delineated mental
health care SYSTEM, with the care often involving peers and
paraprofessionals and for care to be provided by individuals within a
client's working community.
What's wrong with this? What's missing? Feedback appreciated. -- B
Jesness
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding this statement Auke Tellegen responds
Auke T says: "Many of the proposed quality checks make sense to me,
especially the ascertaining of treatment effectiveness and evaluating
the minimum degree of credentialling that is called for."
---------------------------------------------------------
William M. Grove (a Counseling Dept. head at a major university) says:
Quoting me:
> > Moreover, we believe daily standards-in-practice should provide
> >for on-going research (such as for the development of reliable
> >diagnoses) and this should be done within each large mental health
> >service agency.
To This Grove says: "Furthermore, basic foundation research
definitively That would be nice, but without DIRECT (i.e., pretty
immediate) financial incentives I predict that not much quality research
is going to get done since provider organizations are ever more tightly
squeezed for maximizing the bottom line and research is time consuming
and often fairly expensive if it's done in a quality way."
> >showing that graduate-school-trained counselors are superior to other
> >sources of help must be done to establish the range of problems for
> >which special treatment by professionals is actually better (and not
> >inferior to other more accessible and less costly sources of help, e.g.
> >peer counselors or paraprofessionals). The organization also supports
Grove says: "Amen to that."
Quoting BRAD:
> >(given at
> >present there is no evidence against it and some good evidence in its
> >favor): peer counseling programs and counseling programs for
> >paraprofessionals. We seek to demystify mental health professions
Grove says: "Need I add that these are generally cost-free or low cost, and this is a major point in their favor assuming they are =
at least no more injurious to clients, on average, than therapy/counseling from highly credentialed professionals?
Picking up again on quoting BRAD:
> >and rid it of great myths. We hope for a sensible, delineated mental
> >health care SYSTEM, with the care often involving peers and
> >paraprofessionals and for care to be provided by individuals within a
> >client's working community.
Grove says:
"A laudable goal. "Need I add that these are generally cost-free or low cost, and this is a major point in their favor assuming they=
are at least no more injurious to clients, on average, than therapy/counseling from highly credentialed professionals?"
Allen Ivey also supports the above proposals I have made.
INDEED ROLF IS RIGHT. There is support for BRAD. But there is still much to talk about. -- b jesness
B. Jesness
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoting me:
To This Grove says: " That would be nice, but without DIRECT (i.e.,
pretty
immediate) financial incentives I predict that not much quality research
is going to get done since provider organizations are ever more tightly
squeezed for maximizing the bottom line and research is time consuming
and often fairly expensive if it's done in a quality way."
> >showing that graduate-school-trained counselors are superior to other
> >sources of help must be done to establish the range of problems for
> >which special treatment by professionals is actually better (and not
> >inferior to other more accessible and less costly sources of help, e.g.
> >peer counselors or paraprofessionals). The organization also supports
Grove says: "Amen to that."
Quoting BRAD:
> >(given at
> >present there is no evidence against it and some good evidence in its
> >favor): peer counseling programs and counseling programs for
> >paraprofessionals. We seek to demystify mental health professions
Grove says: "Need I add that these are generally cost-free
or low cost, and this is a major point in their favor assuming
they are
at least no more injurious to clients, on average, than therapy/counseling from highly
credentialed professionals?"
Picking up again on quoting BRAD:
> >and rid it of great myths. We hope for a sensible, delineated mental
> >health care SYSTEM, with the care often involving peers and
> >paraprofessionals and for care to be provided by individuals
within a
> >client's working community.
Grove says:
"A laudable goal."
----------------------------------------------------------------
Allen Ivey also supports the above proposals I have made.
There is support . But there is still much to talk about. -- b jesness
George Boggs
APA&APS" <no...@pre.sent> wrote:
> Below major figures in the field respond to proposals found in this
> position statement and idea for a science and client advocay group:
>
> Outline for an organization: a client and science
> advocacy group, dedicated to furthering science standards and practices
> in the therapy field.
> We insist on fair and proper representation of treatments and on
> providing information about costly or limited treatment options
> available to clients "up front". [..]
>
> What's wrong with this? What's missing? Feedback appreciated. -- B
> Jesness
>
What's the diff between this and Dawes' "House of Cards" position? Unless
you revilers of BJ can demopnstrate the diff, I'm with BJ (I have a Ph.D.
in psychophysics, FYI)
--
G. Boggs I'd rather be rich than stupid.
J. Handey
dlrogers
(snip)
> (I have a Ph.D.in psychophysics, FYI)
>G. Boggs I'd rather be rich than stupid.
> J. Handey
I'm sorry if I seem ignorant, but what is psychophysics? Don't get me wrong, I'm not
trying to attack, I'm really just curious. At what universties are there majors in
psychophysics?
Thanks.
Rolf Marvin Bře Lindgren
| What's wrong with this? What's missing? Feedback appreciated. -- B
| Jesness
[George Boggs]
| What's the diff between this and Dawes' "House of Cards" position?
| Unless you revilers of BJ can demopnstrate the diff, I'm with BJ (I
| have a Ph.D. in psychophysics, FYI)
Dawes does not clutter down newsgroups nor does he repeat himself
incessantly.
I agree with Brad's basic position, as any sensible person ought to.
I do _not_ agree with his methods.
--
Rolf Lindgren | FAQ for sci.psychology:
| ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/sci.psychology
9111 Sogn Studentby | Student of psychology. Writes thesis on
N-0858 OSLO | team building, requested by the market forces.
George Boggs
<rolf.l...@psykologi.uio.no> wrote:
> [B. Jesness, MA, mem. | APA&APS]
>
> | What's wrong with this? What's missing? Feedback appreciated. -- B
> | Jesness
>
> [George Boggs]
>
> | What's the diff between this and Dawes' "House of Cards" position?
> | Unless you revilers of BJ can demopnstrate the diff, I'm with BJ (I
> | have a Ph.D. in psychophysics, FYI)
>
> Dawes does not clutter down newsgroups nor does he repeat himself
> incessantly.
>
> I agree with Brad's basic position, as any sensible person ought to.
>
> I do _not_ agree with his methods.
Well, I see that I mistook Mr. "BRAD" for a person with a genuine point to
make instead of a pseudoadolescent whose hobby is spam. Thank you, Rolf,
and all of you who kindly sent me e-mail, for clearing up the real issues
here.
--