Originally Posted by growlycat

Although I enjoy reading the blogs whether I agree with the article or not it would be helpful if blogs were labeled opinion pieces and true news items labeled separately. I think a vulnerable person may mistake opinion for fact.

I think this is an excellent suggestion, I too worry that a vulnerable person may mistake opinion for fact, a disclaimer at the start of every article in bold print may go some way to avoiding that.

[DocJohn]

We have different sections of the site that are labeled according to what kinds of information you may find in that section. For instance, in our News section, you're only going to find news articles about new studies and research (no opinion pieces). In our mental health library, we offer mostly reference content, generally-speaking, that discusses various mental health disorders, their treatments, and psychological issues. (There are two exceptions to that -- we also publish book reviews in our library, and personal stories. Both are the opinions and views of their respective authors.)

For any blog, including our World of Psychology blog, you're going to find opinion mixed in with information about interesting research, or perspectives from news-related items. However, every blog item is always going to represent only the perspective of the author, and not of Psych Central.

I apologize that things aren't always 100 percent clear-cut in starting to read an article about what kind of article it may be. We've tried to help that more recently by putting "breadcrumbs" above the title of the article you're reading, which should help indicate whether it's a blog or news item more clearly. Some of this is due to just being around for so long, the buckets of categories we used in the past aren't always as useful as they could be...

Thanks for the feedback, and we'll work harder to make it clear when you're in someone's blog, or somewhere else, so you can better set your expectations about the article.

DocJohn

[mugwort2]

Originally Posted by DocJohn

Our World of Psychology blog is a community blog about all aspects of psychology, mental health, emotions, and relationships. It has always featured articles from a wide array of people and professionals, and I don't necessarily agree with everything we publish. That's the nature of having an open platform where we accept submissions from anyone.

The World of Psychology blog features authors who have opinions -- that's what makes a blog interesting. It is not, nor has it ever been, a blog exclusively written by professionals. I feel like there is value in most people's perspectives, even if their overall message is not one I agree with.

Best,
DocJohn

I think the blogger who wrote the CEN article should say where s/he is coming from and plainly note this is her/his opinion. Or at least give sources for the views expressed. I thought the report was terribly overgeneralizing and worse gave no or little hope for achieving a way to improve oneself.

[growlycat]

Unfortunately many of the blogs are a combination of news and opinion. I agree that I have read too many blogs that claim borderline personality disorder is not treatable (at 44 I do not fit the criteria I did at 22. My therapists have believed that it is treatable )

This isn't aimed at psych central alone. The other big name psych site does it too. Just something to think about. Old school newspapers had it right with a separate editorial section

Maybe they should leave their credentials (eg, LCSW) off the end of their names when they write articles about their personal experiences or write unprofessional articles like the one I linked.

[TishaBuv]

If they have titles at the end of their names like Ph.D, MD, etc... You know they are professionals. If they just have a name, you can tell they are just opinion articles.

The two articles I read on here as examples say--

The one about hackers and autism, was written by a professional. I found it complementary toward autism. It said they are especially good problem solvers and pay attention to detail.

The article about child neglect, I don't agree with at all. It says those adults who were neglected all act the way she described, and that's just not true.

As far as taking offense, I haven't been offended by any articles on here. I enjoy reading them and find them very educational. I like hearing all aspects and opinions.

The issue I raised has nothing to do with agreement or disagreement.

I swear that author had credentials after her name, but I just checked and they are not there.

[-jimi-]

I sometimes have to laugh. Like here is an article. It will take 2 minutes to read and it will teach you how to be happy/how to be successful/how to raise a child.

Yup. Sign of the world we live in. Maybe I should write one about how people need to actually slow down and stop reading those things and realize there is no happiness in a 2 minute read, the last phone will not make you happy, you don't need the new fad diet. Or power naps or power meditation to make up for lost sleep and too much stress.

That maybe if we all slowed down we'd find our own answers. But, writing such an article is contradictory, isn't it? LOL.

[growlycat]

I wish some of the blogs had a blurb written after the author's name as well as credentials.

For example:
"Mrs smith is a woman who writes about her experiences and her treatment of borderline personality disorders. She consults with local counseling agencies on the patient perspective".

Vs
"Dr brown PhD has twenty years experience in treating and researching borderline personality disorder. "

Vs
"Joe blow is a professional blogger with a family member with BPD. He shares his own experiences weekly on his blog."

Big difference in how these three blogs would be perceived , right?

I have found no "trend" in the blogs, and no one has established a "trend" in the blogs. They are blogs, not research articles (it's explicitly stated that research articles must have APA annotation).

I've read several blogs pertaining to CEN, and they espouse a variety of POVs. Furthermore, what constitutes an "offensive" blog? Is it a blog that you disagree with the author's POV?

As for the blogger's credentials, I believe it's important to list the credentials of the blogger for transparency.

I've already stated the issue is not about agreement or disagreement--I even stated this explicitly in it's own post.

Instead of explaining myself again, about promoting stigmas on a mental health resource site, substitute another condition for CEN.

Hypothetical:

"Schizophrenics are dangerous, violent individuals. If you meet a schizophrenic, you might want to think twice about befriending them".

Under the World of Psychology blog section that states it's reviewed by Dr. Grohol. That's just not ok!

Originally Posted by seahorse

I've already stated the issue is not about agreement or disagreement--I even stated this explicitly in it's own post.

Instead of explaining myself again, about promoting stigmas on a mental health resource site, substitute another condition for CEN.

Hypothetical:

"Schizophrenics are dangerous, violent individuals. If you meet a schizophrenic, you might want to think twice about befriending them".

Under the World of Psychology blog section that states it's reviewed by Dr. Grohol. That's just not ok!

I was simply asking what makes a blog offensive, and the hypothetical you provided does answer the question. Thanks for that.

You didn't answer the "trend" question: Are you referring to one blog or a series of blogs?

Only Dr. Grohol can answer your last paragraph.

[DocJohn]

Yes I suppose if you misquote an article to make a point, then it seems obvious.

But the example and quote you provided are not in the article you linked to. I can't answer what people read into an article, but that's not the takeaway I had after reading the article in question. If it had explicitly said what you claimed it said, I too would be upset by it. But an author suggesting people be aware of some of the possible patterns of behavior in some people with CEN seems completely reasonable to me. It would not be that different from saying, before you get into a relationship with someone with depression, be aware that there may be some dark days you need to live through with that person.

DocJohn

Yes I suppose if you misquote an article to make a point, then it seems obvious.

The quote in my original post is the exact text in paragraph 7 of the article i linked. The quote in my last post was marked hypothetical, if that is the one you are referring to here.

I did not misquote anything in the article.

This information is available at the end of the blog being discussed ...

ABOUT MARIA BOGDANOS: Maria Bogdanos is an emotional health coach. Her work focuses on the core of what a client is feeling, which always plays a role in their whole person health. Co-active coaching works through a client’s agenda to explore where there are hindrances and to reframe possibilities, which ultimately lead to a domino effect of empowerment in other areas. Contact her at tulip.magnolia4@gmail.com.

I've read and re-read the blog on CEN about 5 times now.

At first it seemed offensive, but the more I read (and digested) what was being said, the more I understood what she was trying to convey.

It's not so much what she said but how she said it that went Ouch!

I mourn for all the losses I suffered while enduring 33.5 years of physical, emotional and sexual abuse by my parents and siblings.

I struggle and have many challenges and obstacles to overcome because of it.

I don't need anyone to tell me this as I live with the heartache of it each and every day!

I do tend to have more empathy and compassion for other human beings than myself, though, and for that I am thankful.

I just hope one day I can learn to love and care about myself the way I was supposed to be loved and cared about for the first 33.5 years of my life.

It would be nice to know what that's supposed to really feel like before I die.

Sincerely,
Pfrog!

[DocJohn]

Yes I was talking about your hypothetical text since you made it sound like the article was saying or had said that. I agree with pfrog that it could have been written better taking into account how things are said and the tone conveyed.

Glad you clarified the misquoting DocJohn. Lately it seems I cannot communicate well, as I have been feeling misunderstood more often then usual (eg, like people thinking that perhaps I think offensive = my disagreeing with something, which I think would be totally absurd).

I probably have what the author says of anyone with CEN history (as i have that background in addition abuse):

When you have exposure over time to an adult with childhood trauma, you will notice that the person has trouble communicating emotions or feelings, constantly withdraws instead of exploring feelings, and uses only functional, simple sentences.

Thanks for reading and considering.