Do you smoke?

[feral chile]

Well said.

How can a therapist possibly overlook the intricate relationship that the person has built up with the labelling world before beginning to tell them how to adjust?

[worm]

Consider an example of a mother being assessed to see if she's fit to be a parent. she's found to have Narcissistic Personality Disorder, so she won't be able to put the child's needs first. There's something wrong with her personally. She's a bad mother. End of story.

Edited February 19, 2011 by worm

[feral chile]

That conclusion is absolute rubbish. It is only because she can't put the child's needs first that she has a personality disorder.

There isn't a disorder of any kind unless there is a socially defined problem. I've pointed this out about four times now - ideology causes the problem. This is because judgement is required to say what is and what is not bad. Then we look to see what it is that is creating the 'badness'. It could be that the person can't cope very well with social expectation or it could be that there is a pathology caused by a past trauma. In either case, there is only a psychological problem (personality disorder) once an ideological problem has been identified (not being able to cope with a child). You could apply a disorder to every 'happy' person. it simply depends upon whether there is an inability to cope going on, which is measured by society.

You aren't addicted to smoking until you are made to see that you are.

Edited February 19, 2011 by feral chile

[worm]

So instead of labelling her as an unsuitable person, how about we identify the missing attitudes and skills and teach her what society deems appropriate?

[feral chile]

Because in doing so you're labelling her. As I've already said, her coming to a therapist labels her.

You are taking 'her' out of the equation. 'She' is a complex social construction. This situation she faces is comprised of an experiential narrative, which has shaped how she sees the choices.

To make her see the decision as an objective and unattached choice is to remove, rather than address, her sense of self that has brought her to this point. In doing so, you're just giving her a painkiller to deal with an illness. As a therapist, you should not be using objective idealisations of the choice she faces, but her own subjective existential situation. You shouldn't force her to see it your way, but invite her to see the options she faces according to the way that she sees it, pointing to the pathological factors that keep cocking it up for her.

Edited February 19, 2011 by feral chile

[worm]

And what would they be then, if they're not behaviours that aren't putting the child first? (I use behaviours in a very broad sense, to include thought patterns etc.)

[feral chile]

Patterns of behaviour that conflict with her logic, mainly. If it's just that she hates and resents the child from a logical perspective, then she requires a social worker not a therapist.

[feral chile]

Patterns of behaviour that conflict with her logic, mainly. If it's just that she hates and resents the child from a logical perspective, then she requires a social worker not a therapist.

[worm]

How can patterns of behaviour conflict with her logic? They might conflict with what we would regard as logical, but they must make sense to her.

[feral chile]

I'll give you one example taken from behaviourism, if you like:

These are her thoughts.......

1. She wants to be a mother

2. She wants to be a mother that other people approve of

3. She believes that she can be a good mother

However.....

She is a mother that she dislikes and that other people don't approve of. What we need to get to the bottom of is why she believes that she can be a good mother and address it in relation to the other two factors. Because something is leading to a conflicting outcome.

This is a behaviourist model mind, which I find unsophisticated. But it serves as an example.

[feral chile]

When it becomes pathological.

The above is the work of a social worker, not a therapist. The person simply needs help in adjusting.

[worm]

I have a problem with the word pathological when it's used to discuss social and mental issues as though there's a disease involved.

[worm]

however, if both her notion and society's roughly coincide, we'd look at how she would be able to obtain a closer relationship to her ideal. Whether that's ensuring there's food available, providing affection, looking at ways to establish discipline, etc.

[feral chile]

Do yo have the same problem with logical?

Pathological means any thought process that acts against the self.

[feral chile]

That's social work, not therapy.

[worm]

Social workers have referred her for a psychiatric assessment. If a mental disorder is the label attached to the problem, then therapy should be the solution, yes?

Or is the mental health label a convenient way of writing off social deviants?

[worm]

is that some kind of postmodern definition then?

Edited February 19, 2011 by worm

[feral chile]

You're telling her how to function better within a social situation according to a social role. That's social work.

Looking at her psychology would be therapy.

Edited February 19, 2011 by feral chile

[worm]

No, I'm looking at her psychology. I'm telling her that her problems are treatable/resolvable, that she's not defined by a label that she has no control over.

[feral chile]

I'd argue that telling her that she isn't defined by the label of mother in relation to her child is irresponsible.

It can be if you're insecure about your mothering skills. But if those mothering skills are tainted (i.e. they threaten the child) and the client can't see that then it isn't. It's feeding a delusion.

[worm]

tch! I was talking about the mental disorder label, not the mother label.

[feral chile]

But she's displaying those symptoms regardless of label.

No. She's first classed as an unfit mother, thereby using the psychological institution to see to what extent it can help her.

Again, not the case. Everyone has a personality. It becomes a disorder when it is disordered. We use personality as a way of using it to explain some of the behaviours being enacted by clients.

No. It's got nothing to do with them accepting it.

Their personality may be a reason why they have a problem. Their personality is disordered if it causes them suffering.

Edited February 19, 2011 by feral chile

[worm]

oh, so everyone has a personality and that's used to explain behaviours?

Edited February 19, 2011 by worm

[feral chile]

So this is about personality rather than personality disorder? Is that what you have an issue with?

As I said earlier, the term person means mask and personality means pertaining to a mask. This is what personality is: a projection of your inner desires on to a social and ideological environment. It is disordered when it can no longer operate effectively in relation to the self that uses it.

[worm]

Our self image is nothing like the image others have of us. And we seem different to different people. So how can we have a stable personality? And if we don't have a stable personality, how can we have a disordered one?