Good point, but...

Ron Carson wrote:

> Personally, I think it may be simplistic to say that a therapist's
> beliefs does not impact practice.  It seems to me, that the very nature
> of all medicine is bringing our professional beliefs into practice.

But the question is: Personal beliefs "do not" or "should not" influence our practice? 
I accept that it is
very difficult to prevent our personal beliefs affecting practice, but I don't think 
it should be accepted.

> For example, if I believe NDT treatment is a proven treatment and this
> treatment will benefit my client, then aren't I bringing my beliefs to
> the therapeutic relationship?  Even looking strictly at integrating
> personal beliefs is confusing.

In this example, belief in NDT is a professional belief, based on reasonable evidence. 
Belief in buddha, for

example, would be a personal belief, based on no evidence whatsoever, and quite 
irrelevant and
unprofessional.

> For me, the line between personal and professional (while sometimes very
> clear) can also be very blurry.  For example, professionally I believe
> in the importance of engaging in meaningful activity and personally I
> believe (and do) the same.  So, if I am enabling a client to regain
> occupational performance aren't I integrating professional and personal
> beliefs?

Not really. One could quite conceivably not believe in any of the central tenets of OT 
and yet still act as
a competent (not particularly good, though) therapist. However, whether one believes 
in them or not, they
still have to be adhered to when acting as a therapist. Whatever other personal 
philosophical beliefs we
have are irrelevant to therapy.

> Mike, do you see any therapeutic good that might come from integrating
> your atheistic beliefs with a client's Sikh beliefs?

None at all. The last thing a person coping with disability needs is to see me 
wandering in and challenging
their belief system. They have enough to cope with already. A skilled and 
knowledgeable therapist would use
elements from the client's own belief system as motivational tools, but should not 
start injecting elements
of their own personal belief system in preference to other philosophical ideas. I 
confess I am not
sufficiently proficient in any religion (other than Roman Catholicism) to do that, 
unless the client gives
me something of a clue to start on.

> Depending on the
> nature of the client's impairment/disability/handicap, I see potential
> good in bringing differences to the table.

Potentially, but again I would argue that you we should not give preference to our own 
philosophical ideas.
If there is a need to inject another philosophical viewpoint it should be selected 
from all those available,

not just our own, based on a balanced consideration of what is appropriate. To rely on 
our own philosophy
would be prejudicial.

> Maybe this is a dividing line.  If integration of personal beliefs has
> potential therapeutic benefits, it is more acceptable than integration
> solely for personal reasons.

In that case, the nature of the belief becomes professional rather than personal. We 
must be accountable for

our professional decisions. We can be accountable for decisions based on accepted good 
practice or sound
evidence based practice. How can we account for encouraging a hindu paraplegic to 
chant buddhist mantras as
part of their therapy because we have some personal leaning toward buddhism?

After the discussion so far, which has been very useful, I would sum up my position as 
this:

There may be times when a client's philosophical outlook is exacerbating their 
difficulties. In such
situations, it may be appropriate for the therapist to introduce alternative 
viewpoints, but the therapist
should not give preferential consideration to their own personal beliefs over other 
beliefs. Therapists
should make every effort to ensure that their approach to treatment is not influenced 
by their own personal
philosophy.

How does that sound?

Mike
http://www.otdirect.co.uk


> ----------
> On 4/3/2001, Mike Said:
>
> M> 2. Ron's reference to Rogers implied that it is acceptable to integrate
> M> the therapist's beliefs into practice. I am not clear about how this can
> M> be done without evoking a conflict with the client's belief system. If
> M> my client is a sikh and I am an atheist, surely my own personal beliefs
> M> should not be allowed to become apparent during the course of therapy.
>
> ********************
>
> Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]  In the message's body, put 
>the following text:
>
> unsubscribe OTlist
>
> ------
>
> OTnow messages are archived at:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] (and)
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
> ********rC***********

********************

Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]  In the message's body, put 
the following text:

unsubscribe OTlist

------

OTnow messages are archived at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] (and)
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

********rC***********

Reply via email to