Americans attitude toward counseling

Josiah said:

I didn't know that. Why would that be?

Click to expand...

tango said:

I must admit I feel somewhat uneasy at the idea that "millions of Americans" face mental illness each year. I tried clicking the link and ended up with a statement to that effect and a link, but the link took me to graphics too small to read and too fuzzy to zoom in.

Personally I have never felt the need for a counselor although have known a number of people who have visited a counselor (one of whom I suggested seek a professional counselor) who have had very good experiences. My concern with some of the numbers presented is that it seems increasingly common for numbers to be boosted as if to make a point, which results in the numbers becoming harder to believe.

In the context of this report, what exactly constitutes a "mental illness"?

Click to expand...

tango said:

I must admit I still find it hard to believe that 20% of people suffer like this. The article you linked described people enduring "conditions such as depression, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia" - with little more to go on it is hard to believe that 1 in 5 people suffer from these, unless "depression" in this context includes feeling depressed as well as the kind of clinical depression that can only be treated with pharmaceuticals.

Since this is your line of work you obviously come into contact with it in a more direct sense than I do, but would you estimate that 1 in 5 of the local population is beating a line to your door?

Click to expand...

tango said:

I must admit I still find it hard to believe that 20% of people suffer like this. The article you linked described people enduring "conditions such as depression, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia" - with little more to go on it is hard to believe that 1 in 5 people suffer from these, unless "depression" in this context includes feeling depressed as well as the kind of clinical depression that can only be treated with pharmaceuticals.

Since this is your line of work you obviously come into contact with it in a more direct sense than I do, but would you estimate that 1 in 5 of the local population is beating a line to your door?

Click to expand...

tango said:

In your experience, obviously without breaking confidentiality, what are you considering to be a "mental illness"?

The reason I ask is that I've seen so much drivel presented under the "me too" campaign where women were blaming things they experienced that they didn't like on their gender when the truth could easily have been something totally unrelated (and I say that because I also know men who have experienced the exact same thing on occasion but who don't get to blame it on sexism).

Are we talking about things that would readily be considered a "mental illness" or is it simply that people these days are less able to cope with uncertainty and pressure?

Click to expand...

tango said:

In your experience, obviously without breaking confidentiality, what are you considering to be a "mental illness"?

The reason I ask is that I've seen so much drivel presented under the "me too" campaign where women were blaming things they experienced that they didn't like on their gender when the truth could easily have been something totally unrelated (and I say that because I also know men who have experienced the exact same thing on occasion but who don't get to blame it on sexism).

Are we talking about things that would readily be considered a "mental illness" or is it simply that people these days are less able to cope with uncertainty and pressure?

Click to expand...

tango said:

ADHD is something that I find very curious. I fully accept that it is a genuine condition, as I've known a couple of people who were diagnosed and medicated and I could see a huge difference in how they lived. On the other hand I've also known people who seemed to be little more than teenage boys being teenage boys with parents who insisted they were "hyper" and needed medication. The kind of things that were expected of me when I was a teenage boy have, in some parents' minds at least, become grounds for drugging their children into compliance.

Likewise Oppositional Defiant Disorder sounds like little more than children testing the boundaries. At what point is a child who has never been required to obey instructions - usually it would appear by parents who are more interested in being their child's friend than their child's parent - considered to have a diagnosable condition that can and should be medicated? The reason I ask is to get your specific insight into it, rather than much of what is online that seems like little more than propaganda from one side or the other paired with the inevitable slanging match between supporters and detractors.

Obviously my experience is limited and not a substitute for scientific research but my personal observations are that children who are never required to sit down and be quiet have trouble sitting down and being quiet, children who are never expected to obey instructions have trouble obeying instructions, children who are never taught boundaries and the consequences of crossing them have trouble with boundaries, children whose parents allow them to use baby-talk long past the time other children are starting to talk more normally have trouble talking more normally, and so on. Part of this is caused by a curiosity as to why diagnoses like ADHD have rocketed in recent years.

Click to expand...

tango said:

ADHD is something that I find very curious. I fully accept that it is a genuine condition, as I've known a couple of people who were diagnosed and medicated and I could see a huge difference in how they lived. On the other hand I've also known people who seemed to be little more than teenage boys being teenage boys with parents who insisted they were "hyper" and needed medication. The kind of things that were expected of me when I was a teenage boy have, in some parents' minds at least, become grounds for drugging their children into compliance.

Likewise Oppositional Defiant Disorder sounds like little more than children testing the boundaries. At what point is a child who has never been required to obey instructions - usually it would appear by parents who are more interested in being their child's friend than their child's parent - considered to have a diagnosable condition that can and should be medicated? The reason I ask is to get your specific insight into it, rather than much of what is online that seems like little more than propaganda from one side or the other paired with the inevitable slanging match between supporters and detractors.

Obviously my experience is limited and not a substitute for scientific research but my personal observations are that children who are never required to sit down and be quiet have trouble sitting down and being quiet, children who are never expected to obey instructions have trouble obeying instructions, children who are never taught boundaries and the consequences of crossing them have trouble with boundaries, children whose parents allow them to use baby-talk long past the time other children are starting to talk more normally have trouble talking more normally, and so on. Part of this is caused by a curiosity as to why diagnoses like ADHD have rocketed in recent years.

Click to expand...

tango said:

These are good observations but also seem like things that could be learned. It reminds me of a fairly distant family member whose son refused to eat anything she fed him so eventually she'd take him to buy the McDonalds he wanted because, well, he had to eat something. So of course this young boy rapidly learned that if he dug his heels in long enough he'd get what he wanted. When he went to visit his uncle he learned equally fast that his uncle didn't play those games and if his options were to eat his dinner or go hungry, and if he refused to eat his dinner there was no point asking for snacks later because he wouldn't get any - his dinner would still be where he left it (and cold by then) and that was the option. Although this wasn't anything violent in any way, he learned he could defy his mother and get his own way and also learned he couldn't get away with it where his uncle was concerned.

My concern is that a learned behavior looks very much like things considered a specific mental illness, and a learned behavior would seem like something best treated by unlearning it rather than with medication.

I must admit I am also often concerned with the way counseling sometimes gets used these days. I have no problem at all if people want to see a counselor because they are struggling to process a major life event or a particularly traumatic experience. I have no problem at all if people want to see a "life coach" to help them achieve certain goals. My concern (again based on anecdotal evidence, because it's what I have to work with) is when people want help because they are struggling to cope with something in life but then find the counselor becomes little more than a prop that makes them feel better without actually addressing the underlying issues. I know a guy (I'm going to be deliberately vague in my wording here because I don't want to inadvertently say something that might identify him) who went through a very tough time in his life and went to see a counselor to help him get through it. Although the counselor obviously helped, in at least some ways the counselor has become a facility that is enfeebling rather than empowering because as time goes on he appears less and less able to cope with what are really little more than the ups and down in life. I sincerely hope he isn't going to become like a person I knew years ago who insisted counselors were good because she had been going to hers for 10 years and always felt so much better. Her counselor obviously made her feel better but if she was still needed after 10 years I would have to wonder whether she was very effective.

Click to expand...