Re: Mind, Body, Spirit in Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry

[Robert Wildblood]

This always seems to come up in Abnormal psychology and my typical response is first the "psychology is a science" argument, and if that doesn't suffice, then I turn the discussion as to how almost all medications, vaccinations, etc. have a certain level of possible of fatality, but that doesn't prevent physicians from using them in spite of the risk, particularly if the risks are known and discussed with the patient.  Except in the most severe cases in which ECT is used (and even then, someone who has been designated by the patient or the court), the procedure is discussed, the risks presented and the choice is in the hands of the patient or the person with power of attorney.  That often ends the discussion. Bob W. On 25 Mar2006, at 23:15 PM, Jeffry Ricker wrote: The other day in my abnormal-psychology course, I taught about the uses of ECT for the treatment of mental disorders. I stated that ECT is used to treat major depressive episodes in those with psychosis, those who are nonresponsive to antidepressant medications, those who are highly suicidal, and a few other categories of patient. I mentioned the side effects; in particular, memory loss, which rarely is permanent or extensive, and death in about 4/80,000 patients (according to one estimate). One student asked how ECT could ever be used given these severe, though rare, side effects. I attempted to outline an argument for its use based on the greater number of deaths we could expect from suicides and other bodily complications from chronic and severe depression. But he rejected this argument saying that, we would not be responsible for these deaths since we had not done anything directly to cause them. I, of course, used the standard rejoinder: withholding a treatment that we know is effective would make us bear some responsibility for these deaths, and so on, all to no avail. It turned out that what really was bothering the student is that "science" does not take into account the whole person, especially the spiritual aspects of the person. He asked, "what about dualism?", to which I applied that scientific psychology does not assume dualism because it has not been useful in explaining behaviors and mental events. This, of course, also did not satisfy the student.  My question (which I know has been discussed in the past with respect to other topics): how would you have dealt with this student's rejection of a scientific approach to treating mental disorders? -------------------------------------------------------- Jeffry P. Ricker, Ph.D. Chair Division of Social & Behavioral Sciences -------------------------------------------------------- Scottsdale Community College 9000 E. Chaparral Road Scottsdale, AZ 85256-2626 Office Room #: SB-128 Office Phone #: (480) 423-6213 Division Fax #: (480) 423-6298 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dr. Bob Wildblood Lecturer in Psychology Indiana University Kokomo 2300 S Washington St PO Box 9003 Kokomo, IN 46904-9003 765-455-9483 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Too many good docs are getting out of the business.  Too many OB/GYN's aren't able to practice their love with women all across the country." George W. Bush.  Poplar Bluff, Missouri; September 6, 2004. "I am mindful of the difference between the executive branch.  I assured all four of these leaders that I know the difference, and that difference is, they pass the laws and I execute them. George W. Bush.  Washington, D.C.; December 18, 2000 "I'm the master of low expectations." George W. Bush.  Aboard Air Force One; June 4, 2003 "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin, 1775 "We are what we pretend to be, so we better be careful what we pretend to be." Kurt Vonnegut --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]