[BudFox]

Seems to me that it is not ok to bring up certain topics or viewpoints on PC:

- Any forceful assertions that psychotherapy might have fundamental flaws or might be lacking in credibility or legitimacy.

- Personal accounts of therapy that talk openly about significant harm or that criticize the therapist in strong terms.

- Challenges to biological psychiatry and psych drugs. This one in particular has brought out angry attacking and the feeling of being chased away by a sectarian mob.

In another thread I was told by a frequent poster that I was "once again bashing the mental health system". It was a distortion, but also the message was clear: dissent is not tolerated.

Of course it is a 2 way street, and saying contentious things stirs people up, so have to be mindful of choice of words.

ps: I am posting this in the Psychotherapy forum because thats where I have seen the above.

[missbella]

I was diagnosed and name-called just today for talking about how I've tried to overcome my harmful experiences. Rather than admitting that my post ignites their fears, people shoot the messenger.

[stopdog]

I think this kind of thread may be against the rules. But I don't see that dissent is stopped - I am very critical of therapists and know some consider it bashing - they can think that if they want - I of course disagree. But I don't feel shut down just because some other person does not like my opinion or wants to label it bashing. I accept my opinions are not the popular ones here. I still feel free to give them. I block the people I can't tolerate at all.

[JaneTennison1]

Well maybe I'm wrong but I've seen more than one thread where the poster was so harmed by a therapist they are filing a grievance and seem to receive a lot of support in return so I'm not sure about point #2.

As well I've seen posters that are in some bad therapy situations be urged repeatedly to seek other help.

I'm not sure what a "forceful assertion" is exactly in forum context.

[atisketatasket]

No. 2 doesn't seem right to me. Some people may avoid those threads, and I have seen "tough love" tried in them, but I don't think they're "forbidden." I have not seen a No. 3 thread, but I probably wouldn't read a drugs thread, so I don't know.

No. 1...maybe. I don't, by the way, think the attitude towards therapy on here is all that positive. People seem to like their therapists for the most part but do not unilaterally approve of the profession and all who practice it. My own views are skeptical, but I'm reserving further judgment till I see how it works for me.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[vonmoxie]

I think perhaps some perceive psychiatry/psychology as entities unto themselves and even as belief systems, as opposed to the complex and still somewhat subjective sciences they represent. Therefore dissent with any element of it is seen as bashing the whole system.

Idk, but I notice a lot of conflation of ideas occurring here on PC, especially when it comes to debating the opinions of others. It can really bog down the discourse.

[Favorite Jeans]

My understanding is that the recent thread in question was closed because it had become argumentative and because it had devolved into a discussion between a few people that had little to do with the original poster's question (ie it was hijacked).

I do think that they too often close threads where debate becomes spirited. I have a pretty high threshold for spirited debate and generally think it's appropriate as long as it remains respectful. However I think the forum's moderators are somewhat more reluctant to let significant dissent unfold. I suppose that is their prerogative.

I have not found that certain viewpoints are censored more often. There's lots of skepticism about psychotherapy and medication on the forum. I think it's really the tone of the debate that shuts down threads.

[SkyscraperMeow]

Well, I've had posts removed both for saying therapy sucks, and for saying that I think people bash therapy. (Over the course of months, I've had several changes of mind re: therapy, etc.)

So, if PsychCentral is anything, it's an equal opportunity censorship. You can't tell people that they're bashing therapy, and you can't bash therapy. It's a very fine linguistic line you must dance.

The trick is, to frame everything in terms of personal experience. If you say 'I found having sex with my therapist to be very helpful therapeutically, and I'm thinking of sneaking into his attic and living secretly above his bedroom', you'll be fine.

You can also say 'I think therapy is worthless and I go out of my way to treat my therapist in a way I wouldn't treat a dog. I like to be cold, derisive and dismissive. My therapist is useless in all possible ways, but it's nice to have someone to throw cash at once a week,' - that is also fine.

If you judge either of the comments above in a negative light, your post will be removed faster than you can say 'SSRIs are sometimes implicated in less than ideal outcomes'. Of course, you're always free to judge positively, because propping up the ideas of others is always a good idea, no matter what they are. That's called 'support'.

The rules according to Psych Central!

[Yoda]

I don't think those topics are forbidden but they are controversial and as members post their opinions the threads may at times become heated. I enjoy civilized debate and sometimes threads are civilized. Other times not so much.

[unaluna]

Well, psychology was clever enough to build in a response to naysayers - youre just being resistant. If a hundred percent of those initially resistant would have the good grace to remain resistant, maybe the naysayers could win and the "science" would die out. But darn it, some poopy percentage of people overcome their resistance to become converts and get happy and thus the sham is perpetuated.

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by hankster

Well, psychology was clever enough to build in a response to naysayers - youre just being resistant. If a hundred percent of those initially resistant would have the good grace to remain resistant, maybe the naysayers could win and the "science" would die out. But darn it, some poopy percentage of people overcome their resistance to become converts and get happy and thus the sham is perpetuated.

Indeed - it is a bit like religion and true believers versus infidels versus agnostics. Dumbo's feather did help him -not because it was special - but because he believed it was.

[unaluna]

Originally Posted by vonmoxie

Idk, but I notice a lot of conflation of ideas occurring here on PC, especially when it comes to debating the opinions of others. It can really bog down the discourse.

I had to look up conflation.

Its like when Palin said that word - refudiate, mixing up two words into a new one. I think what youre saying is, its hard to argue a point sometimes, cuz people cant stay on topic? I would agree.

[unaluna]

Originally Posted by stopdog

Indeed - it is a bit like religion and true believers versus infidels versus agnostics. Dumbo's feather did help him -not because it was special - but because he believed it was.

A BIT like religion. And usually mutually exclusive with.

[vonmoxie]

Lol Hankster, it's a real word..! I've more often seen it used in terms of erroneously mixing up meanings rather than just mixing up words though, so I'm surprised to now notice that the latter is listed as its primary definition. Guess that's its origin.

I forgot about Palin's refudiate tho.. blast from the past, thank you.

I think that SkyscraperMeow's post is right on. Psych. Central's Psychotherapy forum is an equal opportunity "closed thread" place. I've seen threads closed for too much therapy bashing and for overly zealous therapy gushing. To me, it seems that when the gushing or bashing gets too personal or attacking, the monitors swoop in and close things down so they can "discuss". I'm not sure what discussing goes on but it seems that most of the time, the thread just slides into oblivion because this is a pretty active forum.

I'm a person who has not been successful in therapy. I just can't seem to do it in a productive and healing manner, but I'm definitely a pretty positive person about seeing the value of therapy . . . BUT I am pretty vocal and adamant about situations in which I consider the therapy relationship being described by the poster as unhealthy. I know that I've encouraged people to leave their therapist, get a consultation or file a complaint if I thought things were really going off the rails. BUT I've also given advice to people suggesting they might want to slow down, talk to their therapist about what they're feeling and give their therapist another chance. Sometimes I've thought that people were too quick to bash therapy, but at other times, I've felt that people were too encouraging or supportive of situations that I thought were dangerous or at least, unhealthy emotionally. It's all individual.

As for the specific thread about psychotropic medication--I personally thought that was a great discussion with some wonderful points presented by BOTH sides. I don't think anyone was being bashed or thrashed or told not to post. I thought the links were interesting from both individuals. I think both people posting were very passionate about their view on the topic and that's a good thing for a lively, engaging, intellectual conversation BUT it did get the thread off the topic of the original poster and perhaps that was why it was closed.

i think everyone should just do what is right for them. No two people are the same so no two solutions for people will be the same. I think you just have to do what is best for you but i also think once you have decided that it is not ok for someone to continue to push you in a direction they believe is right for you. Often people only post snippets of what is going on for them and i do think when they ask people to stop pushing them it would be polite for said people to stop. At the end of the day you are the person who knows you best not someone online. I think sometimes there are boundries crossed here and as a result people get hurt yes you can ignore people but it is hard when you feel you are being attacked and cant defend yourself especially when that has been a problem in your past. I just think we could all be more respectful and open to new ideas and opinions sometimes.

[Leah123]

Originally Posted by BudFox

Seems to me that it is not ok to bring up certain topics or viewpoints on PC:

- Any forceful assertions that psychotherapy might have fundamental flaws or might be lacking in credibility or legitimacy.

- Personal accounts of therapy that talk openly about significant harm or that criticize the therapist in strong terms.

- Challenges to biological psychiatry and psych drugs. This one in particular has brought out angry attacking and the feeling of being chased away by a sectarian mob.

In another thread I was told by a frequent poster that I was "once again bashing the mental health system". It was a distortion, but also the message was clear: dissent is not tolerated.

Of course it is a 2 way street, and saying contentious things stirs people up, so have to be mindful of choice of words.

ps: I am posting this in the Psychotherapy forum because thats where I have seen the above.

Posters can bring up any of those topics and do frequently. Also, what you put in quotes is not the actual quote, and further- I was not referring to any one post nor to your post specifically. Your conclusion that I was is simply incorrect.

Here's what I wrote on that thread: "How did we get from was your diagnosis a surprise to saying everyone has PTSD and once *again* bashing the mental health system?"

I'm also not sure how you concluded dissent is not tolerated- there is constant dissent on the site. The site hasn't imploded yet.

What I asked in the thread you referred to was to start a thread on the side topic that was raised, rather than going so far from the original topic. The topic was whether or not a PTSD diagnosis was surprising to the client and the thread got off topic.

You talk about not being allowed to dissent, but dissent is alive and well on PC and has been for years, easy to see through a review of past threads.... where's the prohibition? No "mob" is stopping anyone from posting anything.

http://forums.psychcentral.com/psych...-surprise.html

Also, that thread is not locked nor is the lengthy ongoing one about intelligence and therapy or many others with significant disagreements.

[JustShakey]

Speaking only for myself, you were quite insulting to me in the thread in question. You called me cynical about about something that I am quite passionate about and care deeply about because I don't share your opinion.
It's not so much about forbidden topics as it is about being rude. The thread had moved so far away from its original point that it was insulting to the OP too IMNSHO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Idk, but I notice a lot of conflation of ideas occurring here on PC, especially when it comes to debating the opinions of others.

My impression is that the site is meant to be for "support" and not for "debate". Not saying that I don't enjoy debate.

[msxyz]

People talk critically about therapy and their therapists here all the time.

There will always be dissent, but that's not automatically bashing.

[vonmoxie]

Personally I don't want to debate or conflate. I know of no better support for sanity than the healthy exchange of ideas though.

[missbella]

Originally Posted by jo_thorne

My impression is that the site is meant to be for "support" and not for "debate". Not saying that I don't enjoy debate.

I hope then that "support" includes respect and accommodation for those harmed by therapy as well as those who find it beneficial.

[Gavinandnikki]

Personal attacks are not tolerated.

What is perceived as a personal attack depends on alot of variables.

There are are a number of posters with some serious mental illnesses that include delusional thinking and hallucinations. So any disagreement or discussion of such thoughts would be interpreted as a personal attack.

Overall, I think PC does a fair job patrolling the posts.

However, when a thread is closed for "discussion", it it rarely resurrected.

[divine1966]

People often speak about their negative experiences, I don't recall anyone having major objections to it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk