Quote:
Originally Posted by DocJohn
We published the article because it was a followup to a panel I organized at SXSW last year about what it means to push the boundaries of what is considered "therapy" -- due primarily to technology like mobile phones and the Internet. She actually has an interesting essay about how she came up with the idea, and seems genuinely interested in exploring the ideas set forth there.
So I don't think she's "full of it," but I do think that she's very much pushing the boundaries of what others consider "therapy," and if she continues to be serious about it, who knows? A part of what we do here at Psych Central is report on new things like this. Time -- and research -- will tell if there's anything more to it.
Licensed sex therapists never get naked with their clients. A licensed sex therapist is just psychotherapy that focuses on sexual issues. If you need actual help with performing a sex act, the sex therapist may refer you to a "surrogate" if you don't have a partner. But it's not commonplace.
In this day and age of viagra and the like, most men simply take a pill rather than go to therapy to try and work on any sexual issues.
DocJohn
|
I am not particularly interested in what this person calls themselves. But it does concern me that Doc John is giving it such legitimacy. What is he saying about the importance of therapist education, training, supervision, etc.? Why even have trained and licensed therapists if anyone can just call whatever they do therapy and receive recognition as such from someone with respect in the therapeutic community?
As is often said, there is a difference between something that may be therapeutic and therapy. This may *possibly* have the potential to be therapeutic. So is playing with my dog. But I don't expect Doc John to recognize my dog as a therapist.