Touchy Subject: Psychology Vs Medicine

curadh

I am at risk of stating the obvious here, I have felt in the past that the medical community looks down on Psychology in general with a hocus pocus type attitude. I know some doctors in fact who have a genuine dislike of psychologists. My opinion on that as a psychologist is that it is a fear response.

My own story is simple, I want to study neuropsychology however it is a vague career path here in Ireland, with study in the UK a necessity. Even if I do go on to practice neuropsychology after jumping through many psychology hoops such as the rigmorole attached to accessing a Dclin, my salary and status will never meet that of an MD's.

Im sure it has crossed the mind of many of you that it is a quicker route to Psychiatry than to Clinical Psychology.

I'm looking for some opinions and a general discussion on this. Any thoughts or beefs

jokettle

Neuropsychology is my primary interest too, and although I know I'll have to study in the UK at some point it doesn't bother me. Chances are I'll have to emigrate to find work once I'm qualified anyway, so it's no big deal!

The reasons I didn't go for medicine are 1) psychology is my primary interest, and my fascination with neuropsych came about during my undergrad; however, I'd happily work in other areas of psych to sate my intellectual thirst! 2) to work in Neurology invloves climbing the long Medicine ladder and trying to break into an incredibly competitive specialty, and 3) med school involves rotations in a myriad of fields, none of which I'm remotely intereted in, as well as stupid hours of overtime and next to no quality of while a junior doctor. No than you.

Neuropsych obviously overlaps hugely with medical neurology, but the med side was never what held my interest. I care much more about how different injuries/dementias/conditions effect cognition and behaviour.

dissed doc

curadh wrote: »

I am at risk of stating the obvious here, I have felt in the past that the medical community looks down on Psychology in general with a hocus pocus type attitude. I know some doctors in fact who have a genuine dislike of psychologists. My opinion on that as a psychologist is that it is a fear response.

My own story is simple, I want to study neuropsychology however it is a vague career path here in Ireland, with study in the UK a necessity. Even if I do go on to practice neuropsychology after jumping through many psychology hoops such as the rigmorole attached to accessing a Dclin, my salary and status will never meet that of an MD's.

Im sure it has crossed the mind of many of you that it is a quicker route to Psychiatry than to Clinical Psychology.

I'm looking for some opinions and a general discussion on this. Any thoughts or beefs

So to summarise - you want to be paid as a doctor, without actually being a doctor or meeting the standards of education required to practice as a physician. Length of study is not the issue (despite it taking ~ 14 years to be able to work as a general psychiatrist).

Therefore, doctors are afraid of ur awzum pwarzz!!!

I would imaging your interview for medicine would be hilarious, "why do you want to be a doctor" - "well, primarily the salary and status, but I don't really know what it involves TBH. Is it like sikologygyololol"?

They are entirely different fields. If you want to be a psychiatrist, then fire ahead. Nothing is stopping you. Especially, if as you said, it's quicker and other doctors will be afraid of you. Has it occured to you that those other people (because doctors are people as well right) dislike those psychologists (who are also people too) because they think they are a55holes? And just don't like their personalities? Nothing to do with career, status, or money or what letters your have after your name.

2Scoops

dissed doc wrote: »

Especially, if as you said, it's quicker and other doctors will be afraid of you. Has it occured to you that those other people (because doctors are people as well right) dislike those psychologists (who are also people too) because they think they are a55holes? And just don't like their personalities? Nothing to do with career, status, or money or what letters your have after your name.

Looks like he touched a neuro-thingy there. Do you want to talk about it? :pac:

dissed doc

2Scoops wrote: »

Looks like he touched a neuro-thingy there. Do you want to talk about it? :pac:

TrollHammaren

curadh wrote: »

Im sure it has crossed the mind of many of you that it is a quicker route to Psychiatry than to Clinical Psychology.

Huh? They're completely different fields. Neither neuropsych nor clinical are routes to psychiatry - you have to study medicine to become a psychiatrist. If you're looking for shortcuts to psychiatry then I'm afraid I have some bad news.

I don't know where you're getting this "fear response" thing from; until psychologists learn how to treat bacterial infections, lacerations, a prolapsed anus etc doctors have nothing to worry about. Besides, of all the med students I've ever met, 9/10 of them are too far up their own rectums to be even remotely interested in what a psyhologist does.

Also, I reckon this medicine vs psychology thing you speak of is largely non-existent.

krd

TrollHammaren wrote: »

Besides, of all the med students I've ever met, 9/10 of them are too far up their own rectums to be even remotely interested in what a psyhologist does.

What does a psyhologist do?


But hey, aren't there some therapists allowed to write prescriptions for psychiatric meds without having a medical degree?

curadh

Interesting to see peoples take on my post.

Huh? They're completely different fields. Neither neuropsych nor clinical are routes to psychiatry - you have to study medicine to become a psychiatrist. If you're looking for shortcuts to psychiatry then I'm afraid I have some bad news.

Psychiatry involves psychotherapy, and working with mental handicaps, it is not completely different to Psychology. Psychology career path is quite diverse. Mainly the difference is prescription.

I don't know where you're getting this "fear response" thing from; until psychologists learn how to treat bacterial infections, lacerations, a prolapsed anus etc doctors have nothing to worry about. Besides, of all the med students I've ever met, 9/10 of them are too far up their own rectums to be even remotely interested in what a psyhologist does.

Usually when someone does not know much about something that intrudes on their normal activity, they dismiss or mock it out of fear. This is a basic fear response. Are you dismissing my post out of fear? Of course doctors care about the psyche of their patient don't you know what stress does to bacterial infections, lacerations, and a prolapsed anus? Don't you think a doctor feels something towards another professional who affects their practice, patients, and income?

Dissed doc, you've told a lot through your post. Is it wrong on my part to say doing 4 years MD training in comparison to minimum 8 years Psy training is silly? Jokettle is right in that interest is an important decider, and I understand the road is hard in Medicine, the work also very demanding. Of course I have respect for the work done by a doctor, however in my experience it doesnt work both ways in the surgery. Unfortunately its a well known issue in prescribing anti depressants within the surgery that a doctor will prescribe before recommending talking treatments, there are many reasons for this, again touchy subjects, firstly free holidays from the drug companies, bonuses, quick fix solution (even though they take a few weeks to kick in) that is addictive, and not trusting the work of a CBT therapist or psychoanalyst (there is no legislation to assist this trust).

you want to be paid as a doctor, without actually being a doctor or meeting the standards of education required to practice as a physician. Length of study is not the issue (despite it taking ~ 14 years to be able to work as a general psychiatrist).

Salary and status? Are you mad of course they are incentives to become interested in something. What do mean the standards of education required to practice as a physician you pompous twat, are you saying the standards of education in Psychology are somewhat below medicine? Clever dock!

Has it occured to you that those other people (because doctors are people as well right) dislike those psychologists (who are also people too) because they think they are a55holes? And just don't like their personalities? Nothing to do with career, status, or money or what letters your have after your name

Of course Ive considered that do you think I live in a bubble? When it comes to mental health within the doctors surgery a doctor is not qualified to offer advice, this is my stance on the matter, pumping people with mental issues full of drugs only makes matters worse. Accept it doc. A psychiatrist is qualified to offer advice however.

I honestly thought Psychiatry involved 4 years med school followed by a masters in psychiatry and a 3 year internship. I was wrong. They deserve their ferrari's

JuliusCaesar

curadh wrote: »

Psychiatry involves psychotherapy, and working with mental handicaps, it is not completely different to Psychology. Psychology career path is quite diverse. Mainly the difference is prescription.
................
When it comes to mental health within the doctors surgery a doctor is not qualified to offer advice, this is my stance on the matter, pumping people with mental issues full of drugs only makes matters worse. Accept it doc. A psychiatrist is qualified to offer advice however.

I honestly thought Psychiatry involved 4 years med school followed by a masters in psychiatry and a 3 year internship. I was wrong. They deserve their ferrari's

I've spent most of my working life in multi-disciplinary teams.

There's always been a disparity of income between individual members of the team- psychiatrists, social workers, nurses, psychologists etc. There's also a huge difference in insurance levels; some of us pay little or none. In terms of responsibility, it's often been annoying on a minor level that the psychiatrist is the de facto team leader. BUT most teams work fairly well by the individuals having respect for each others' expertise and skills. In fact psychologists are quite well paid compared to other team members. Registrars aren't that well paid, nurses are at the bottom compared with others, SWs do ok etc. Jockeying for status can be very destructive to the overall team. I've liked some members, and disliked others. I can think of very few who I really hated working with.

The only non-medics who prescribe are nurses.

And guess what? curadh - life isn't fair. You want more status, more pay? Work away. But don't make it personal.

curadh

Julius Caesar, what do you mean by making it personal?

Are you saying that when making a career choice status and pay didnt have anything to do with it?

Btw status and pay are not the point of my post. Re-read.

Of course working as a team is important, I'm talking about MD's in surgeries and general hospitals, you're talking about a mental health clinical setting?

krd

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

The only non-medics who prescribe are nurses.
.

Well, nurses are medics. And some nurses are very highly trained medics.

I don't know about Ireland.

I'm pretty sure in the US, certain psychologists are allowed write prescriptions from a limited list. They can't write scripts for antibiotics, but I think a registered child psychologist in New York can write a script for Ritalin.

TrollHammaren

krd wrote: »

What does a psyhologist do?

Well done. Gold star for you for being so clever and perceptive. Four more of those and I'll send a letter home saying what a good boy you are.

krd wrote: »

But hey, aren't there some therapists allowed to write prescriptions for psychiatric meds without having a medical degree?

No. Not in Ireland.

curadh wrote: »

Psychiatry involves psychotherapy, and working with mental handicaps, it is not completely different to Psychology. Psychology career path is quite diverse. Mainly the difference is prescription.

There's definitely overlap, but you still have to go through med school to become a psychiatrist.

curadh wrote: »

Usually when someone does not know much about something that intrudes on their normal activity, they dismiss or mock it out of fear. This is a basic fear response. Are you dismissing my post out of fear?

This sounds like pop psychology to me.

curadh wrote: »

Of course doctors care about the psyche of their patient don't you know what stress does to bacterial infections, lacerations, and a prolapsed anus?

Yes I do, but promoting absolutely perfect mental health in a patient won't get rid of any of those ailments. Medicine and psychology can be highly complimentary, and you'll find it very often happens that a GP will refer you on to a psychologist. For example, a GP can't diagnose someone with ADHD, so they'll refer them to a psychologist or psychiatrist.

curadh wrote: »

Don't you think a doctor feels something towards another professional who affects their practice, patients, and income?

I think you have an inaccurate view of the healthcare system.

curadh wrote: »

its a well known issue in prescribing anti depressants within the surgery that a doctor will prescribe before recommending talking treatments, there are many reasons for this, again touchy subjects, firstly free holidays from the drug companies, bonuses, quick fix solution (even though they take a few weeks to kick in) that is addictive, and not trusting the work of a CBT therapist or psychoanalyst (there is no legislation to assist this trust).

Firstly, it definitely can and does happen that a doctor just isn't arsed recommending anything beyond a few anti-depressants, but that's not out of fear of psychologists, it's just lazy practice. Any good GP will refer on if necessary.

Secondly, the whole pharmaceutical free holiday thing is chiefly an American issue, and we don't have to put up with as much of that shíte in Ireland. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but you can be pretty sure your local GP isn't being put up by Pfizer in a 5 star hotel in Dubai. Conspiracy theorists hate pharmaceutical companies

curadh wrote: »

Salary and status? Are you mad of course they are incentives to become interested in something.

Are you saying someone who isn't in it for ego and personal gain is mad? I want to get into research, not because of salary or status, but because I want to contribute to the growing bofy of cognitive neuroscientific knowledge.

krd wrote: »

I'm pretty sure in the US, certain psychologists are allowed write prescriptions from a limited list. They can't write scripts for antibiotics, but I think a registered child psychologist in New York can write a script for Ritalin.

I doubt it. I wouldn't put it past them (it being America and all), but I would have to verify it before I believe it.

curadh, if you don't mind me asking, did you do a psychology degree, and if so, where?

curadh

Yes I do, but promoting absolutely perfect mental health in a patient won't get rid of any of those ailments. Medicine and psychology can be highly complimentary, and you'll find it very often happens that a GP will refer you on to a psychologist. For example, a GP can't diagnose someone with ADHD, so they'll refer them to a psychologist or psychiatrist.

Stress through poor mental health can cause these ailments, including psychoneuroimmunology, and poor lifestyle.
Also, you'll find younger doctors more willing to recommend psychological therapy rather than the older generations. Hopefully in the future the effectiveness of therapy will be more completely recognised.

I think you have an inaccurate view of the healthcare system.

I think you may be young and naive.

it's just lazy practice

come off it.

Secondly, the whole pharmaceutical free holiday thing is chiefly an American issue, and we don't have to put up with as much of that shíte in Ireland. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but you can be pretty sure your local GP isn't being put up by Pfizer in a 5 star hotel in Dubai. Conspiracy theorists hate pharmaceutical companies

Sorry pal, it happens on a regular basis. Turn off the x-files.

Are you saying someone who isn't in it for ego and personal gain is mad? I want to get into research, not because of salary or status, but because I want to contribute to the growing bofy of cognitive neuroscientific knowledge.

Ok I respect that, can you tell me if contributing to the growing body of neuroscientific knowledge paid a maximum of 25k euro a year would you still want to spend your career in research? How can you say that salary and status have nothing to do with it...well I am openly saying that I am somewhat propelled by juicy things like status and money...I am a firm believer in Lacanian desire and don't believe in altruism for one second. Having said that if Im going to be doing something for the rest of my life Ill need to be interested in it first.

Trollhammaren, I'm sorry but I wouldn't feel comfortable discussing my personal life over the internet. I did my degree at a top Irish university however with lectures by some of Irelands finest.

Also, pop psychology? more psychoanalysis. ...of course a lot of pop psy had to evolve from somewhere....

Velvety

Either stupid or trolling.

JuliusCaesar

TrollHammaren wrote: »

Medicine and psychology can be highly complimentary,

Sorry TrollH, I know it's unfair to laugh at a typo, but I did LOL here:


Psychologist: Oh Doctor (of medicine), you're just wonderful!

Medical Doctor: Well, D. Psych, you're not so bad yourself!

Both ride off into the sunset....


(I do appreciate your contributions here, to be genuinely complimentary!)

curadh

Thats helpful velvety, thanks for the input. Better still the +1 from the psychology forum moderator.

What is it that scares you into cheap remarks? Why dont you offer comment on what is being said instead. Clarify things for us.

Odysseus

I think we need a bit of balance here, I don't see curadh as trolling. Well as a Lacanian I would hold that position aroud desire, but I acknowledge I just skimmed this thread. I personally don't argge with every words, but the are point there I have encountered. Just play nice lads people eh?

krd

TrollHammaren wrote: »

I doubt it. I wouldn't put it past them (it being America and all), but I would have to verify it before I believe it.

In reference to non-medics prescribing psychiatric drugs.


I'm trying to remember who I first heard it from. It's been a long time since I've heard it. And the most recent time I've heard of it, was a work of fiction where a child in New York tricks her doctor, her psychiatrist, and her child psychologist into all prescribing her Ritalin. Ritalin is dished out like candy in the US - an it is just common or garden speed.

I know that's fiction - I have heard it from someone before, and I was surprised to hear it. It's basically a very limited list.

A thing is though, I imagine a psychotherapist, without a medical degree, might know more about the drugs than a GP.

I think some GPs only have the barest grasp of what the drugs do. And they may not have a good idea what the subjective experience for the patient might be. My personal experience with anti-depressants has been with Zyban and Champix - the stuff for stopping you smoking. I believe my GP didn't have clue about the side effects - people have committed suicide and gone on murder rampages on those drugs. All my GP asked me before letting me have them was had I ever been depressed - I have never been "clinically" depressed, as in getting certified as being depressed. He didn't warn me about the side effects (he may think all that stuff is just in the imagination) - I did read up on them, and experienced them to a degree. And going on what I could find out the side effects were very common, in that it might be a rarer experience not to experience any.

I do wonder about some of the drugs. Can they make people crazier? Is the action of antidepressants an attempt at giving a patient a low level euphoria that you might get from drinking or smoking a little weed - or taking a little speed.

I remember back in the 90s, a med student I was living with was given Prozac samples for his personal use by a sales rep from Eli Lily - the sales reps were encouraging him to use it. They said they were all on it. That was in Ireland.

I know in the US, American drug company reps are always giving doctors free samples of Viagra and Nuvigil (I know this as an American doctor has shared some of his Nuvigil with me

---

didn't give me any Viagra though....Nuvigil is pretty good though - A doctor can do some dope without feeling like a dope fiend.)


I don't know. Do they get people working in psychiatric clinics to try the drugs to get a feeling for the experience?

Another question: Should someone who's never used an illicit drug ever counsel people with drug and alcohol problems. There is a moral argument, but it might be immoral for them not to have.

I for one would like to load my GP up on Champix and then ask him how he's feeling after a few days. Or Zyban - and ask him if he's been thinking a lot more about death while he's been on it - even experiencing the odd bit of suicidal ideation. Sudden rages - peculiar thoughts - the odd hallucination.

I think someone working in mental health could learn a lot about the subjective experience of someone going through a psychotic episode by experimenting with drugs themselves. On the other hand that can be a bad idea. An anaesthetist I know is terrified of his own drugs. As a few of his colleagues dabbled in them and then went on to become raging psychotic junkies - literally running naked through the streets, pursued by real and imaginary police.

TrollHammaren

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Sorry TrollH, I know it's unfair to laugh at a typo, but I did LOL here

Oops! It's like a joke I know: A man walks into a bar and puts money into the cigarette machine, which tells him to fúck off. He then makes his way to the counter and starts eating peanuts, which begin to praise him for his good looks and sense of style. The barman says "sorry about that, the cigarette machine is out of order, but the peanuts are complimentary."

curadh wrote: »

Stress through poor mental health can cause these ailments, including psychoneuroimmunology, and poor lifestyle.

Thanks, but I already completed my 2nd year psychology modules.
Anyway, you go ahead and book yourself in for a session with a psychologist next time you break your leg or come down with the flu, I'm sure he'll prescribe you some positive mental health and well being; you'll be fixed up in no time.

curadh wrote: »

I think you may be young and naive.

Thanks for that, oh venerable one. I'm glad such erudite pillars of the psychology community such as yourself are willing to dispense such knowledge on us naive youths of today.

curadh wrote: »

come off it.

Sorry, I wasn't aware I was on it. I'm sure you have a good, solid argument as to why I should "come off it", but you're choosing not to share it with me lest I consider you promiscuous.

curadh wrote: »

Sorry pal, it happens on a regular basis. Turn off the x-files.

I'm sure you appreciate the irony of the guy who believes doctors are being paid off to get people addicted to drugs telling the skeptic to turn off the X-Files.

curadh wrote: »

Ok I respect that, can you tell me if contributing to the growing body of neuroscientific knowledge paid a maximum of 25k euro a year would you still want to spend your career in research?

I probably wouldn't want to spend my entire career doing research for 25k, no, but money isn't my primary motivator. Status and prestige are not motivators at all; I'm not a snob.

curadh wrote: »

How can you say that salary and status have nothing to do with it...

That's not what I said.

curadh wrote: »

well I am openly saying that I am somewhat propelled by juicy things like status and money...

Good for you.

curadh wrote: »

I am a firm believer in Lacanian desire and don't believe in altruism for one second.

That doesn't surprise me at all. I believe in altruism, and it shows in my every day deeds. If I wanted wealth and status I could have dropped out of college and accepted the place I was offered at another career I won't discuss on this board.

curadh wrote: »

Trollhammaren, I'm sorry but I wouldn't feel comfortable discussing my personal life over the internet. I did my degree at a top Irish university however with lectures by some of Irelands finest.

Fair enough.

curadh wrote: »

Also, pop psychology? more psychoanalysis. ...of course a lot of pop psy had to evolve from somewhere....

Pop psychology doesn't "evolve", it's so-called because it's not written to stand up to academic scrutiny. You could write a book tomorrow on how carrying a pineapple in your pocket is the secret to happiness and it would be consider pop psychology.

dissed doc

curadh wrote: »

Of course Ive considered that do you think I live in a bubble? When it comes to mental health within the doctors surgery a doctor is not qualified to offer advice, this is my stance on the matter, pumping people with mental issues full of drugs only makes matters worse. Accept it doc. A psychiatrist is qualified to offer advice however.

I honestly thought Psychiatry involved 4 years med school followed by a masters in psychiatry and a 3 year internship. I was wrong. They deserve their ferrari's

Eh no! 5-6 years medical school (unless you already have done a degree, so 8 years of undergraduate university), then: 1 year intern, 3-4 years basic training, 1-2 years lecturing or research, then 3 more years specialist training.

By your talk of surgeries, I think you are confusing general practitioners with psychiatrists. And, 95% of medication is prescribed by people with no psychiatric training. That is how the HSE choose to run things.

curadh

Dissed doc, yes its a long road alright. For me, I think experience is everything therefore the longer someone has spent developing schema on something the more expert they will be, and I also equate this expertise with pay sometimes. That is why a part of me feels peeved that a GP can possibly (through graduate entry med) do 4 years, only touching on mental health issues, then begin firing out mental health advice and anti depressants etc. when a psychologist who has a vast expertise in mental health is only considered as supplementary or auxillary to the process.
I am also starting to believe I may be from a different generation of thought, the generation when psychologists were almost taboo.
Also, dissed doc I'm aware of what a psychiatrist is, and what a GP is. What gave you the impression I was confusing these?

Thanks, but I already completed my 2nd year psychology modules.
Anyway, you go ahead and book yourself in for a session with a psychologist next time you break your leg or come down with the flu, I'm sure he'll prescribe you some positive mental health and well being; you'll be fixed up in no time.

Trollhammaren are you being picky because I was a bit picky? That was purely because I considered your first reply to be offensive. At what point did I say people with broken legs or acute illness or injury should be recommended a psychologist? All the other 'titbits' you've highlighted I have already explained my stance on.

Also, 'pop' psychology that you have brought up to explain something I have talked about, can come from many places, and 'evolve' in some bright sparks head into a nice little bestseller. A lot of these ideas have come from actual pscyhological theories, except, as Ive said 'evolved' into the authors own theories, such as Freud's Oedipus complex, which has been chewed up and spit out in many different ways in the popular media. Whilst Im on the topic would you consider a pioneer of neuroscience and father of Psychoanalysis' literature to be up to academic scrutiny? You wont find Freuds papers on Metapsychology in the 'pop' section.

I like the joke though

krd

dissed doc wrote: »

By your talk of surgeries, I think you are confusing general practitioners with psychiatrists. And, 95% of medication is prescribed by people with no psychiatric training. That is how the HSE choose to run things.

Is there any other way to do it?

And I wouldn't be surprised if the actual percentage was more around the 98% mark.

GPs prescribing these drugs may be no better than charlatans with their snake oil and pop psychology.

The receptionist at psychiatric hospital might be more qualified to prescribe these drugs than the average GP. That's an exaggeration but these drugs aren't like antibiotics or blood pressure medicines.

Odysseus

krd wrote: »

Is there any other way to do it?

And I wouldn't be surprised if the actual percentage was more around the 98% mark.

GPs prescribing these drugs may be no better than charlatans with their snake oil and pop psychology.

The receptionist at psychiatric hospital might be more qualified to prescribe these drugs than the average GP. That's an exaggeration but these drugs aren't like antibiotics or blood pressure medicines.

GP's will have done a psych rotation as part of their training. Most psych will agree that the can treat mild depressive disorders medically. Ypu can't just become a GP now their is along training for it.

dissed doc

Odysseus wrote: »

GP's will have done a psych rotation as part of their training. Most psych will agree that the can treat mild depressive disorders medically. Ypu can't just become a GP now their is along training for it.

There is absolutely no evidence that mild depression should be treated medically (i.e., with medication, prescribed by a GP). 6 months of rudimentary work should teach GP trainees to NOT prescribe, but instead seems to propagate the massive overprescribing.

Like I said, this is the way the HSE chooses to do things: employ minimal psychologists, bare minimum psychiatrists and gain state income through VAT receipts from pharmacological treatments - it's like stamp duty for healthcare. If mental health treatment was the primary concern, then we would not be seeing the HSE endeavouring to reduce access to mental health services.

Odysseus

dissed doc wrote: »

There is absolutely no evidence that mild depression should be treated medically (i.e., with medication, prescribed by a GP). 6 months of rudimentary work should teach GP trainees to NOT prescribe, but instead seems to propagate the massive overprescribing.

Like I said, this is the way the HSE chooses to do things: employ minimal psychologists, bare minimum psychiatrists and gain state income through VAT receipts from pharmacological treatments - it's like stamp duty for healthcare. If mental health treatment was the primary concern, then we would not be seeing the HSE endeavouring to reduce access to mental health services.

I don't like the system, I have worked within for 14 years now. However, I'm quoting one of our own pysch's here Sam on the above.

krd

Odysseus wrote: »

GP's will have done a psych rotation as part of their training.

How long is that rotation? It's a few weeks, isn't it?

And there is another problem. A senior doctor in an A&E, can take a junior doctor around, and show them things like "Here is a broken leg. See the X-ray. See the bone is broken." Whereas, a senior psychiatrist takes a junior doctor around a psychiatric hospital, "Here is a schizophrenic. They have a broken mind. ..."

My grandfather. Grew up in a remote part of the countryside. People did not have much money and there were very few doctors around. My grandfather practised bone setting and dentistry. I don't really think he could do anything for a troubled mind. He could fix bones without the need for an X-ray.

Most psych will agree that the can treat mild depressive disorders medically.

Well, for mild depression, the efficacy of antidepressants may be irrelevant. I don't have the links, I believe there have been recent studies that question the effectiveness of antidepressants for treating mild depression. Being no noticeable difference between the control group and and the group on antidepressants.

And to demystifiy the action of an antidepressant: is it just something that gives an mild euphoria, a cloudiness, a fug where you have difficulties locating your problems, and they have difficulties locating you.

Ypu can't just become a GP now their is along training for it.

Yeah, I know. It still doesn't stop quite a few from being really crap. Some GPs are magicians, some can't even do a ping pong ball trick.

Odysseus

OK I will add if meds are required I thought everyone here would be against just dishing out anti-d's but clearly it needs to be articulated. Of course if they are not need, they should not be prescribed. I know it happens we all do, but it is outside our remit as therapists or psychologists we are not medics.


I see some terrible therapists too, it is in every profession.

krd

Odysseus wrote: »

OK I will add if meds are required I thought everyone here would be against just dishing out anti-d's but clearly it needs to be articulated.

Some GPs are very liberal in their prescriptioning. And this goes back a long way. Anyone who wanted, could buy tinctures of Laudanum from Moore street vendors up to as late, as I think, 1916. Doctors used to prescribe tranquillisers to any housewife complaining of stress. Then that shifted to antidepressants. At the height of the whole 90s Prozac marketing drive, my mother's GP gave her a script. And she took a really bad reaction to it, which put her in hospital for a few weeks.

All the present day pharma giants have their roots in snake oil merchants selling patent medicines (tonics containing stimulants and opiates - cough syrup does nothing for your cough - it just gets you a little high).

The antidepressants may really work. I worry about the more psychedelic ones. Tripping is just tripping - which may be fine for an experienced fiend. I don't think I'd like to do the same thing to a housewife from Termonfeckin.

I'm not sure about Ireland. But I know in the US, non-psychedelic amphetamines were once prescribed for mild depression. "potential for abuse" restricts the usage of many drugs in medicine these days. Someone I knew; an American housewife, who wrote something on her experience of her depression being treated with amphetamine in the 60s/early 70s. It really worked for her. You might get the same effect with a pseudofed and a cup of coffee.

Of course if they are not need, they should not be prescribed. I know it happens we all do, but it is outside our remit as therapists or psychologists we are not medics.

That could be an inappropriate priestly delineation. I think there are many good reasons, why the therapist should be allowed to prescribe and control the drugs. And I don't think medics are that safe with the drugs. I believe in the UK they've had thousands of antidepressant linked deaths (I'm not sure about that. My source would be articles that have appeared in the Guardian over time).

There is a mystification of medicine. I wouldn't like to see every child psychologist dishing out speed to every slow child (those drugs are being used by people to give their kids an edge). I think the therapist could be better at getting the patient to the right place - with the drugs. And the patient may be more honest with their "self-medicating" (alcohol and other drugs) with their therapist than their GP. (Your GP won't allow you have anything, if they think you're trying to save yourself with the forbidden chemicals).

I can't walk into a pharmacist and ask for an antidepressant off the shelf. I can walk into an newsagent and buy a packet of cigarettes. I can walk into a Spar and buy myself a six pack of beer. I would guess, for a therapist to be effective, they'd need a grasp of the tides of psychic alchemy within their subject. Every active chemical has its' demon - in Jack Daniel; there really is a genie in the bottle.

I see some terrible therapists too, it is in every profession.

As doctors say in private to each other : "Doctors differ... Patients die"

Or as a doctor once said to me about one of his colleagues "That b***** belongs in F******* prison."

TrollHammaren

curadh wrote: »

Trollhammaren are you being picky because I was a bit picky? That was purely because I considered your first reply to be offensive. At what point did I say people with broken legs or acute illness or injury should be recommended a psychologist?

What was offensive about it? The point I was making is that we will always need doctors because a psychologist can't treat physical ailments such as lacertations. Sure, psychologists can aid the recovery, but that can only happen with proper medical treatment. I'm pretty sure you more or less agree with me there, but you chose to argue against me anyway by talking about the brain's implication son the immune system etc. It just seems like you're trying to score points or something.

curadh wrote: »

Also, 'pop' psychology that you have brought up to explain something I have talked about, can come from many places, and 'evolve' in some bright sparks head into a nice little bestseller. A lot of these ideas have come from actual pscyhological theories, except, as Ive said 'evolved' into the authors own theories, such as Freud's Oedipus complex, which has been chewed up and spit out in many different ways in the popular media.

That's more or less what I'm getting at. Neuroscience has helped us understand that there are some functional hemsepheric differences in the brain, but pop psychologists have chosen to interpret that as "some people are right-brained, some left-brained" or some bollocks like that. There's also the other type of pop psychology: Amateurs claiming some sort of profound knowledge of the human psyche and writing a boom about it. Does anyone remember "The Secret"? Pop psychology that a lot of people bought into made someone a lot of money.

curadh wrote: »

Whilst Im on the topic would you consider a pioneer of neuroscience and father of Psychoanalysis' literature to be up to academic scrutiny? You wont find Freuds papers on Metapsychology in the 'pop' section.

Some would be, some not so much. Look at Chomsky, for example. He was/is a major pioneer of linguistics, and his concept of the language acquisition device was very much up to academic scruntiny at the time, but the research doesn't seem to support it anymore. Nowadays, if someone wrote a book about how we develop language using Chomsky's early concept of the LAD I would consider it pop psychology. I wouldn't have when it first came out, because back then it was the most plausable explanation for language acquisition in infants.[/QUOTE]

Molecule

krd wrote: »

But hey, aren't there some therapists allowed to write prescriptions for psychiatric meds without having a medical degree?

Yes, in a few US states and the US military clinical psychologists can do a post-doc qualification that allows them to prescribe certain medications: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_psychology

krd

Molecule wrote: »

Yes, in a few US states and the US military clinical psychologists can do a post-doc qualification that allows them to prescribe certain medications: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_psychology

Something people don't realise. In the US there is more or less a standing draft on qualified medics. That is if a conflict breaks out, they can be drafted immediately. Often they'll enlisted before being drafted - as it can effect their pay and entitlements if they wait to be called.


The US military employs lots of psychologists and psychiatrists because their most expensive problem is mental health.

During the war in Iraq, John Hopkins in Baltimore, the US navy pulled up a ship in Baltimore harbour and drafted doctors from John Hopkins - which was a real kick in the teeth - Doctors in JH could be earning a few hundred grand, after being drafted a few hundred yards away to the navy ship (like the fields of Athenry), their pay could fall to 45k or there abouts.


A field medic wouldn't even have the qualifications of a nurse - they're more or less selected on the basis of "yo, dude, you're going to be the medic" - they put the guy who can't shoot straight in charge of dishing out the ketamine.