Many thanks, Mark. Your contributions to the book--along with those of Anne Hanson and Cindy Geppert--are deeply appreciated. The section of the book dealing with physician-assisted suicide is among the most important to me, as I know it is to you. --Regards, Ron
Great introduction—I look forward to reading the book. I appreciate the humanistic / pluralistic approach.
I do worry about psychiatry getting involved in broader social issues, however well-intentioned. It seems that the antipsychiatry criticism that "psychiatry is a means of social control" has greater likelihood of actually being true in proportion to how much psychiatry feels it should (or is compelled to) weigh in on those issues. It is a nuanced and difficult topic.
Thank you for taking the time to comment, Dr. Greenwald. Yes--it is a tricky and complicated issue, as you suggest. On the one hand, we have the sub-speciality of "social psychiatry", which takes as its purview a very broad swathe of sociocultural issues; i.e., it "...combines medical training with the perspectives of social anthropology, social psychology, cultural psychiatry, sociology and other disciplines relating to the human condition and to mental distress and disorder."[1]. On the other hand, when psychiatrists opine on issues far removed from their medical expertise--I have in mind certain strongly held political positions--I think we risk overreaching.
That said, my impression is that when antipsychiatry groups disparage psychiatry as "a means of social control", they typically have in mind issues like involuntary commitment; involuntary medication; and, more broadly, the entire "medical model" and its use of so-called "diagnostic labels."
Finally, with certain caveats, I do think there is a constructive role for psychiatry to play in the wider world, outside the office and clinic, and I discuss this in one particular article in the book. You can read it at the link below [2]. Thanks again for commenting!
I have been reluctant to continue my formal education because of the crossroads that the field of psychiatry and psychology is at. The fear is that, should the purely medical route be taken, would I be contributing to something that I don't agree with. Especially, as things are becoming "woke," would I even enjoy or be able to work in the way I imagined? I hope that things can change and we can get back on course to developing a field that is focused on healing on all levels. Thank you for sharing this post, and I will be adding the book to my wish list.
Thanks for your cordial note, Rev. Cafaldo. You might be interested in a remark one of my residency mentors made, many years ago. He said, "With psychiatry, you can do biology in the morning and theology in the afternoon!" He was speaking slightly tongue-in-cheek, but he was also making a serious point. I have found his comment borne out in my own experience, over the past four decades in psychiatry. After all, the crossroads are taken by individuals, and each of us can bring our own values and goals to bear on the field. In short: I am optimistic that if enough of us speak out, the future holds much promise. Thank you for your interest in my book, and best of luck with your endeavors!
What is the photo for this post from? I've seen it elsewhere on another very obscure blog.
The False Mirror by René Magritte
What he said!!👆👆
Many thanks, Mark. Your contributions to the book--along with those of Anne Hanson and Cindy Geppert--are deeply appreciated. The section of the book dealing with physician-assisted suicide is among the most important to me, as I know it is to you. --Regards, Ron
Great introduction—I look forward to reading the book. I appreciate the humanistic / pluralistic approach.
I do worry about psychiatry getting involved in broader social issues, however well-intentioned. It seems that the antipsychiatry criticism that "psychiatry is a means of social control" has greater likelihood of actually being true in proportion to how much psychiatry feels it should (or is compelled to) weigh in on those issues. It is a nuanced and difficult topic.
Thank you for taking the time to comment, Dr. Greenwald. Yes--it is a tricky and complicated issue, as you suggest. On the one hand, we have the sub-speciality of "social psychiatry", which takes as its purview a very broad swathe of sociocultural issues; i.e., it "...combines medical training with the perspectives of social anthropology, social psychology, cultural psychiatry, sociology and other disciplines relating to the human condition and to mental distress and disorder."[1]. On the other hand, when psychiatrists opine on issues far removed from their medical expertise--I have in mind certain strongly held political positions--I think we risk overreaching.
That said, my impression is that when antipsychiatry groups disparage psychiatry as "a means of social control", they typically have in mind issues like involuntary commitment; involuntary medication; and, more broadly, the entire "medical model" and its use of so-called "diagnostic labels."
Finally, with certain caveats, I do think there is a constructive role for psychiatry to play in the wider world, outside the office and clinic, and I discuss this in one particular article in the book. You can read it at the link below [2]. Thanks again for commenting!
Regards,
Ron
1. https://www.socialpsychiatry.org/column/what-is-social-psychiatry
2. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychiatry-and-the-psychodynamics-of-societal-paranoia
I have been reluctant to continue my formal education because of the crossroads that the field of psychiatry and psychology is at. The fear is that, should the purely medical route be taken, would I be contributing to something that I don't agree with. Especially, as things are becoming "woke," would I even enjoy or be able to work in the way I imagined? I hope that things can change and we can get back on course to developing a field that is focused on healing on all levels. Thank you for sharing this post, and I will be adding the book to my wish list.
Thanks for your cordial note, Rev. Cafaldo. You might be interested in a remark one of my residency mentors made, many years ago. He said, "With psychiatry, you can do biology in the morning and theology in the afternoon!" He was speaking slightly tongue-in-cheek, but he was also making a serious point. I have found his comment borne out in my own experience, over the past four decades in psychiatry. After all, the crossroads are taken by individuals, and each of us can bring our own values and goals to bear on the field. In short: I am optimistic that if enough of us speak out, the future holds much promise. Thank you for your interest in my book, and best of luck with your endeavors!
Regards,
Ron