Therapy made a bargain with the medical model: trade definitional control for legitimacy. New post on what it actually got in return, and what it gave up.
https://t.co/GpdVyjB8sP
Ugh.
Look, I am in favor of criticizing a certain kind of online therapist influencer and the culture they push as vapid, vain, and… bad.
But the article cited here -as much as I could read w/out subscribing) is just wrong headed. And Pinker retweets a lot of this stuff
1/
He argues that in order to weaponize empathy effectively, one must separate it completely from sympathy. In this case, empathy is purely cognitive perspective-taking. It is the act of looking at the battlefield through your opponent's eyes to map their motivations, constraints, culture, and predictable reactions.
Sympathy is the positive regard and the warm&fuzzies. Empathy seems to spoken about like it's Super Sympathy because that what Good People™ do. In reality, empathy is a neutral quality.
The idea of empathy seems to have ballooned into something ridiculous. The idea of being able to conceptualize the other person's emotional state, with some degree of accuracy, is useful and somewhat necessary for society.
However, it gets talked about if it were some type of spiritual enlightenment.
Apparently, the people of X dot com are not ready for accurate interpretations of human behavior that has already been accepted over a century ago by not only the most mainstream understanding of psychoanalysis, but the most normie mainstream understanding of human psychology.
This might be a good thing. I'd wanted to delete my account and start afresh anyway. It was growing too big and drawing unwanted attention, and distracting from reading actual smart people. In my ghost form I'll mostly lurk and sometimes jump out at you when you least expect it.
Well, I struggle with not coming off as a cantankerous asshole about the whole thing. There are things that are legit concerning and upsetting.
However, we're seeing the downstream effects of the mentorship model being hollowed, personal analysis being removed from the therapy education model, and then forced to choose between an exploitable business model (usually backed by PE) or learning how to run a business on the fly.
Then the slippery slope emerges of therapeutic integrity vs business strategies to ensure one's livelihood. On top of that, this is a field that underpays, overworks, and doesn't train very well, so when clinicians enter social media and have the opportunity to feel important, competent, and make money, it's easy to lose yourself in that.
Day 4 of Exploring Therapy Influencer Culture: A concerning trend is the therapist becoming an entertainer on social media. This is done through skits (often referring to hypothetical interactions with clients), dances, and meme soundbites. The person pictured is dancing on a chair as she lists things that no longer bother her as a clinician.
First, why does the therapist need to be entertaining? Who exactly are they entertaining? How will this affect prospective clients who book with them, since most of these therapists link back to their websites? How will this affect current clients? How would they deal with a client bringing this up, stating they felt bothered or uncomfortable? Again, none of this seems to be asked.
Furthermore, why does almost every aspect of the clinician's day and development need to be fashioned into consumable content? At some point, I begin to wonder if this less about marketing yourself as a therapist and more about something else entirely
I should clarify that it's not like I have zero tolerance on these things, but it's a fine line to walk. In fact, it's a fine line to walk for any content a therapist produces outside of therapy. Those things should not be off limits, but one should very intentional and prepared to address any complications it may produce in the therapy relationship.
@sometherapist I realized mentioning this topic may open up a can of worms. I have mixed feelings on it. I'm familiar with some of his work. The one poking fun at the advice is pretty good, but I'm always feel iffy about anything that indirectly references a client.
Sometimes when an influencer therapist posts something about breaking the rules as a Gen Z therapist, rebelling against Freud, etc., they will post a response video where they are legitimately upset and surprised when they receive negative comments that assume the worst about the therapist. This prompts a follow-up video that shows they do indeed follow The Good Rules but not The Bad Rules.
They seem baffled that no matter how they present themselves, someone will...get this...project onto them unconscious material and beliefs and interpret the therapist's actions through that lens. AND that response to them may stir up strong feelings within the therapist. In fact, it also seems like a dynamic that plays out, to some degree, across almost every human interaction.
It seems that in breaking away from “the blank slate” therapist, the field also abandoned understanding transference and countertransference in a meaningful way.
The Freudian boogeyman rises again as influencer therapists rebel against the “blank slate” therapist (it's actually “blank screen” therapist, but everyone seems to get that wrong).
I get the sense that these clinicians think that being a “proper” therapist is the absolute suppression of the therapist's personality and ability to express oneself in treatment. A “proper therapist” is a list of stuffy and outdated rules that effectively muzzle the therapist, an injunction against the therapist's individuality. Thus, the rules must be discarded.
Make way for The Authentic Therapist™. Ironically, many of these authentic therapists seem to behave the same way and express similar things: I want to gratify the client's need to be comforted and approved of, along with potentially having my own emotional needs met as well.
If only someone wrote extensively about this in the early 1900s.
The Freudian boogeyman rises again as influencer therapists rebel against the “blank slate” therapist (it's actually “blank screen” therapist, but everyone seems to get that wrong).
I get the sense that these clinicians think that being a “proper” therapist is the absolute suppression of the therapist's personality and ability to express oneself in treatment. A “proper therapist” is a list of stuffy and outdated rules that effectively muzzle the therapist, an injunction against the therapist's individuality. Thus, the rules must be discarded.
Make way for The Authentic Therapist™. Ironically, many of these authentic therapists seem to behave the same way and express similar things: I want to gratify the client's need to be comforted and approved of, along with potentially having my own emotional needs met as well.
If only someone wrote extensively about this in the early 1900s.
Hey all. Had a great time today on the podcast.
Thanks to everyone who showed up! @DFMagee@RyanMalphrus@CoryGrad_LCSW@Careerflex and more!
Clip: dear clinicians…don’t touch your patients. Full episode w/context below ⬇️
Precisely C.S. Lewis's point in The Screwtape Letters: the enemy doesn't need to ruin you, he only needs to distract you.
Screwtape finds that a reliable way to lead a patient to hell is to distract him with jargon, for instance. Have the patient evaluate ideas not by their content but by their labels ensures that he never engages meaningfully with their content.
Another method is to fix his attention on the "stream of immediate sense experiences," so that his mind is drawn away from universal issues and he no longer thoughtfully engages with things that matter.
The path to hell is not so much paved by grand sins than it is by small, constant distractions from what really matters. The path to goodness begins with reclaiming your attention, and turning your eyes from the endless stream.
Wasting time "doomscrolling" is not neutral. It distracts you from doing good in the world.
@AlobhaPatrick@awaisaftab You and I know that, but there are forces at work that see that as a stubborn riddle that has yet to be solved. There are also major players that have a financial incentive to make these factors solvable and machine-like.
💯 The medical model has a system of diagnosing with the pathological cause backed into the diagnosis. That works for many physical health things but not mental healthcare.
The field keeps hoping for the Fabled Biomarkers to act as the rosetta stone for understanding MH disorders, but they may never arrive. Worse yet, they may not even provide the clarity that the field is searching for.