"when I still believed many of the mental health narratives I´ve since given up on..."
Do tell! What are these narratives you no longer believe in? I know this phrase is peripheral to the topic of your post, but it´s the phrase that ignited my curiosity.
Well, I have an article in the works called "Psychotherapeutic Myths," so stay tuned for that one! But we have busted quite a few narratives already, I think, Like in Happy Time, I wrote about how Peter Attia attributed his anger to "helplessness masquerading as frustration," a classic psychotherapeutic phrase, whereas I thought it was more likely a result of time pressure. In What To Do About Emotions III, Rob and I talked about the difference between conceptualizing the problem IN the client as opposed to BETWEEN the client and their situation. In Adaptive Role of Emotions, I argued that emotions are adaptive, so it makes no sense when certain orientations, e.g. CBT, call them maladaptive. So, stuff like that.
Just today in supervision, I brought up a client who "just needs $7,000 and a month off work." My colleagues were convinced that even if I gave these things to my client, she'd be back in my office 6 months from now with the same problems. Because the issue is "in her." I disagreed and told them so: "It's not that complicated," I said. Anyway, hopefully I can dive more into this stuff in the article I mentioned.
Thanks! I´ll go back and look at some of the earlier posts you mentioned. Looking forward to "Psychotherapeutic Myths."
Interesting how professionals within various disciplines see things differently. I´m thinking that therapists who mostly see individual clients see problems as within the individual, family therapists locate problems within the family, sociologists within the wider society, etc. Seems to me it´s helpful to be able to look beyond the "myths" of one´s profession and take in all the possibilities.
"when I still believed many of the mental health narratives I´ve since given up on..."
Do tell! What are these narratives you no longer believe in? I know this phrase is peripheral to the topic of your post, but it´s the phrase that ignited my curiosity.
Well, I have an article in the works called "Psychotherapeutic Myths," so stay tuned for that one! But we have busted quite a few narratives already, I think, Like in Happy Time, I wrote about how Peter Attia attributed his anger to "helplessness masquerading as frustration," a classic psychotherapeutic phrase, whereas I thought it was more likely a result of time pressure. In What To Do About Emotions III, Rob and I talked about the difference between conceptualizing the problem IN the client as opposed to BETWEEN the client and their situation. In Adaptive Role of Emotions, I argued that emotions are adaptive, so it makes no sense when certain orientations, e.g. CBT, call them maladaptive. So, stuff like that.
Just today in supervision, I brought up a client who "just needs $7,000 and a month off work." My colleagues were convinced that even if I gave these things to my client, she'd be back in my office 6 months from now with the same problems. Because the issue is "in her." I disagreed and told them so: "It's not that complicated," I said. Anyway, hopefully I can dive more into this stuff in the article I mentioned.
Also, this article kind of nails it: https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-therapy-myth
Thanks! I´ll go back and look at some of the earlier posts you mentioned. Looking forward to "Psychotherapeutic Myths."
Interesting how professionals within various disciplines see things differently. I´m thinking that therapists who mostly see individual clients see problems as within the individual, family therapists locate problems within the family, sociologists within the wider society, etc. Seems to me it´s helpful to be able to look beyond the "myths" of one´s profession and take in all the possibilities.
Yeah, totally agree. A really important point that should be standard for any profession or way of seeing the world.
Seconded.