Posted on 10/04/2009 9:35:34 AM PDT by TennesseeGirl
The prevalence of mental health disorders in this country has nearly doubled in the past 20 years. Who is treating all of these patients? Clinical psychologists and therapists are charged with the task, but many are falling short by using methods that are out of date and lack scientific rigor. This is in part because many of the training programs—especially some Doctorate of Psychology (PsyD) programs and for-profit training centers—are not grounded in science.
A new report in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, by a panel of distinguished clinical scientists—Timothy Baker (University of Wisconsin-Madison), Richard McFall (Indiana University), and Varda Shoham (University of Arizona)—calls for the reform of clinical psychology training programs and appeals for a new accreditation system to ensure that mental health clinicians are trained to use the most effective and current research to treat their patients.
There are multiple practices in clinical psychology that are grounded in science and proven to work, but in the absence of standardized science-based training, those treatments go unused.
For example, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has been shown to be the most effective treatment for PTSD and has the fewest side-effects, yet many psychologists do not use this method. Baker and colleagues cite one study in which only 30 percent of psychologists were trained to perform CBT for PTSD and only half of those psychologists elected to use it. That means that six of every seven sufferers were not getting the best care available from their clinicians. Furthermore, CBT shows both long-term and immediate benefits as a treatment for PTSD; whereas medications such as Paxil have shown 25 to 50 percent relapse rates.
The report suggests that the escalating cost of mental health care treatment has reduced the use of psychological treatments and shifted care to general health care facilities. The authors also stress the importance of coupling psychosocial interventions with medicine because many behavioral therapies have been shown to reduce costs and provide longer term benefits for the client.
Baker and colleagues conclude that a new accreditation system is the key to reforming training in clinical psychology. This new system is already under development: the Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (PCSAS www.pcsas.org).
NONSENSE.
As I noted . . . I and my classmates had more training in psychoactive drugs TEN TIMES MORE than UCSD’s PSYCHIATRISTS HAD by the time they graduated.
The legal definitions of kosher medical etc. practice are changed all the time.
Physicians Assistants didn’t even used to be a category.
Parochial turf wars AT SOME POINT are a gross disservice to the client/patient/customer.
One of my classmates prescribed psychoactive meds at Bethesda Naval Hospital all the time. WITHOUT ANYTHING BUT BENEFIT TO THE PATIENTS.
Besides, MD psychiatrists who see patients for 10 minutes, charge megabucks without really knowing or understanding anything more about the patient than a label someone else gave the pateint . . . are not exactly beacons of responsible safe MEDICAL TREATMENT BEHAVIOR!
I suggest that you
Clean up your own house first, before crying about folks encroaching on your turf.
Dear Dodger, the entire system is rigged to one end and one end only, to sell the product.
Psychologists and psychiatrists work out of the same knowledge base, and refer their marks back and forth. The essential difference being that psychologists do not yet possess the prescription pad, and psychiatry, as pharmaceutical companies sales force, are working on Getting psychologists the pad.
There are currently 374 different psychiatric/psychological excuses to turn people into life long drug addicts, with drugs which cure, nothing.
Every psych course in America has already targeted 60 Million Americans as needing their drugs: Exactly the same percentage it started out with from the Psychs in Hitler’s Germany: 1 in 5, 20%.
You can make all the jokes you like about it but it isn’t a laughing matter when those drugs have little kids slashing their wrists and hanging themselves.
Blah, blah, blah...
I have no “turf,” but someone sure does.
Actually, I don't play that turf either. I hated those aspect of the PROFESSION. The snobbishness; the holier-than-thou junk; the elitism etc. were all nauseating smells to me.
I ended up doing more teaching than counseling and now do only a small amount of informal counseling for free. I counsel more folks on FR by far than I do face to face in any context.
I agree with you wholesale.
The diagnoses have doubled because insurance requires a diagnosis for payment. And everyone wants to use insurance instead of paying out of pocket expenses.
Thanks Quix.
If anybody wants to make any More crackpot jokes about what a Clear and Present Menace the whole psych con actually is:
http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/
They need to understand just What, those drugs actually Are, First.
I mostly agree with you.
I used to be more in favor of some drugs.
And, I can still see some use for seretonin reuptake inhibitors for some small percentage of extreme cases for a limited time.
And, I can see some need for Ritilin for a very very small minority of TRUELY ADHD cases.
But mostly, it’s a racket very destructive to living things like humans.
Besides, PASTOR HENRY WRIGHT and his book
A MORE EXCELLENT WAY now show us how to do things right and get rid of such horrific maladies healthier ways.
www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/
Scientology alert
Dismiss the site, due to the source, if you wish.
You haven’t had time to SCAN the DATA without KNEEJERKING it as scientology first.
The DATA ITSELF, is from the FDA. It was BURIED by the FDA, and Regardless of Who put up the site:
That FDA DATA required FOIA REQUESTS TO MAKE IT PUBLIC.
FDA’s 2008 budget was $2.2 Billion. Half a Billion of that FDA BUDGET came directly from the Drug Companies, as “User Fees.”
Scientologist or Not, the DATA, is the DATA.
Slagging the ACTUAL SCIENCE, no matter Who retrieved it, is NOT a VALID ARGUMENT.
ping
Are you a Scientologist?
Nope. My religion is the Constitution.
The closest I can get to Scientology is Thomas Jefferson’s maxim that:
“The best way to silence religious disputes is to take no notice of them.”
Whatever they believe is their business, not mine. So long as they’re not holding me up, live and let live.
And no matter how weird they might appear to others: If the Founding Dads thought it good enough to tell Congress to keep Their nose out of it, why should I even Have an Opinion?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”
Religion V Cult? Christianity itself was viciously attacked as a dangerous Cult not all that long ago. If Scientology turns out to be a worthless, dangerous hustle, a Real Free Marketplace of Ideas will finish it off in time, anyway.
Suuuuuuuuuuuure.
And you are basing that suuuuuuuuuure on, what?
My knowledge of L.Ron Hubbard, to start...
OK. But our last exchange was about the Constitution.
FDA Data, is FDA Data. It’s not Dianetics or L.Ron Hubbard.
Bringing Hubbard in isn’t any different than trying to invalidate the work of Werner von Braun because of where he came from. Rocket Science is still Rocket Science, and FDA DATA is what it is, no matter Who dug it up, or for what reason.
The fact that there’s a COS connection in the URL still doesn’t invalidate the DATA.
Here’s another source: Loaded with real Science papers from within the Industry itself, and this guy won’t have Anything to do with the scientology crowd. NOTHING.
http://psychrights.org/index.htm
Click on Scientific Research By Topic. There’s enough in there to send you hurling for the can. READ some of those papers. Then if you still want to suspect me of being a Dianetics salesman, help yourself, but READ some of the research on those drugs from people who Aren’t working for the makers.
No joke. Your earlier message was confused and/or confusing although this post makes more sense ...
Thanks Dodger.
This is going to be a tough axle to get wrapped around, BUT, the Drugs themselves, actually Cause mental illness, Wholesale.
Check Robert Whitaker’s “Anatomy Of An Epidemic”. It’s a short read.
http://www.madinamerica.com/Mad%20in%20America/Documents.html
and: “The Case Against Antipsychotic Drugs, A 50 Year Record Of Doing More Harm Than Good.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.