Miles Jackson wrote:
>
> I hesitate to say anything, given andie's previous ill-mannered post,
> but I have to correct him. His experience is anecdotal; there are no
> double-blind studies that support his claim. Overall, experimental
> studies have demonstrated that outcomes are better for clients who
> recieve psychotherapy than for clients who receive a "placebo talking"
> treatment. I know that andie's had bad personal experiences with
> psychotherapists, but the existing scientific data do not support his
> argument.
All the empirical data can do in this area is establish what one could know in advance: that there are many good therapists, many bad ones, and many who are good with the 'right' patient but not good with the 'wrong' patient, and that the structure of medical care under u.s. capitalism gives us no way whatsoever to do anything about this except, in individual cases, hope that the roulette wheel (or pin in the yellow pages) spits out the right therapist for the particular patient.
Also, mental illness is so fucking complicated, and there is still so much not known about it, that carping like either Carl's or Andie's at therapists is bound to be tautologically true in some cases, wholly false in others, and simply irrelevant to anything on the whole. Most mentally ill patients (certainly over half of them, including many borderline or schizophrenic patients, would get along fairly decently if they had a decent income (decent place to live; no hassle about the rent; no hassle about moving about; etc. etc. Social conditions almost always trump individual cases.
At least half of the people in the local depressive support group would be able to handle their problems even without their condition improving if they were freed from outside hassle -- economic and social. It's amazing how much help a seriously depressed person can get just by finally getting a reasonably secure job.
Carrol