New Study Investigates The Negative Side Effects of Therapy

madinamerica
Rebecca Troeger August 15, 2018

A study led by Dr. Schermuly-Haupt of the Psychosomatic Rehabilitation Research Group at Charité University Medicine Berlin examines the prevalence of side effects for Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT). The researchers, whose results were published in Cognitive Therapy and Research, found that 43% of CBT patients in their sample experienced side effects, which they define as “negative reactions to an appropriately delivered treatment.”

“Knowledge about the side effect profile [of psychotherapy] can improve early recognition of side effects, safeguard patients, and enhance therapy outcome,” the researchers write.

Researchers have long recognized that psychotherapy has positive as well as negative consequences. Estimates of side effect (SE) rates for psychotherapy vary from 5% to 20% of cases. One such side effect — deterioration of symptoms due to therapy — has been found to occur in 3 to 10% of patients. Psychological distress and marital/family conflict are two common side effects of treatment; others include the appearance of new symptoms, suicidality, stigmatization, and tension or changes in a patient’s social relationships.

Despite historical recognition of psychotherapy’s side effects, there is currently little data on their features and rate of occurrence. Dr. Schermuly-Haupt and colleagues sought to address this gap. They interviewed one hundred CBT therapists, asking them to describe “unwanted events” (UEs) experienced by a recent patient who had undergone 10 or more sessions of CBT.

Therapists were prompted to distinguish between unwanted events (i.e., any unwanted event that occurs during therapy, which may or may not be related to the therapy), adverse treatment reactions (i.e., an unwanted event related to treatment), and side effects (i.e. an unwanted event related to treatment that met “professional standards”) through the use of an Unwanted Events-Adverse Treatment Reactions Checklist, which differentiates between these treatment reaction categories.

The researchers found a curious discrepancy between the percentages of side effects identified by psychotherapists who were first asked for a “spontaneous report,” versus the percentage later identified during interviews when the various categories of unwanted events were “systematically evoke[d]” through use of the checklist. Initially, 74% of therapists stated that they didn’t know of any UEs or SEs that had occurred during treatment.

After the structured interview, however, therapists reported that 43% of patients experienced one or more SE (Average .57, SD = .81). This difference in reported side effects may point to a blind spot on the part of psychotherapists, which perhaps owes to difficulty recognizing one’s ability to harm, as well as a lack of training and awareness about psychotherapy’s adverse side effects.

The most commonly reported side effects included “negative well-being/distress,” “deterioration of symptoms,” and “strains in family relations.” According to qualitative data, examples of “negative well-being/distress” included crying uncontrollably in session, discomfort, and fear when engaging in interventions in session (e.g., exposure activities, role plays), difficulty discussing specific topics, and strong feelings experienced in response to the therapist (e.g. anger, tension, stress, and anxiety).

Examples of family strain that emerged as a result of treatment included a spouse who was distressed after his wife became less attentive and took more time for herself after being in therapy and a client who felt guilt and sadness after choosing to distance herself from a parent.

The authors note that there is some debate regarding whether “ordinary reactions” to CBT, such as the distress reactions and changes in patients’ social relationships described above, should be characterized as side effects, particularly since they may be essential to successful treatment outcomes. They argue that even though these responses “may be unavoidable, justified, or even needed or intended,” they should nevertheless be categorized as side effects. These side effects, although “unavoidable” and even “intended,” should be studied and should serve as motivation to develop treatments that “are better tolerated,” they write.

The authors also note that although the majority of the side effects identified in their study were rated as mild to moderate (59.6%) and not lasting (89.6%), over 40% of side effects were classified as severe or very severe, and 8.8% were persistent. Reflecting on these findings, they conclude, “Psychotherapy is not harmless.”

The study has several limitations. As psychotherapists reported side effects, reports may have been influenced by therapist bias; the authors suggest that future studies use a blend of stories from patients, therapists, and outside interviewers. The study’s sample was composed of patients with various diagnoses, and as such, results would likely be different in a more homogenous sample, or with a different form of therapy. Additionally, as approximately half of the patients whose cases were reported on in the study were taking psychotropic drugs, and it is thus impossible to rule out the effect of medication on the observed side effects.

The authors hope that the results of their study will increase psychotherapists’ awareness of treatment side effects and that this will contribute to improved care. In alignment with the recent call for an enhanced psychotherapy informed consent process, the authors also state that their data can be used to strengthen informed consent in psychotherapy, as well as to support “risk monitoring” throughout treatment.


****

Schermuly-Haupt, M. L., Linden, M., & Rush, A. J. (2018). Unwanted Events and Side Effects in Cognitive Behavior Therapy. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 42(3), 219-229. (Link)


Thank You Ms Troeger and MIA, BUT, . . . .

With all due respect we Do realize people are trying to 'fix' this broken system.

It Can't be fixed.

Defund it, completely. Shut it down with a 6 week grace period for its practioners to Close up shop and quit the biz.

On Day One of week 7, write out the arrest warrants and indictments and round up everyone still engaged in it.

• 18C13 (1)
• 18C19 (1)
• 18C47 (1)
• 18C63 (3)
• 18C95 (4)

NYT Reporter Says She Knows People 'Still In Therapy' Over Clinton Election Loss

dailycaller
NICK GIVAS
Media Reporter
12:56 PM 09/13/2017

[Ed; Well of Course she does.

When confronted with the real world, those who believe in Collectivism's Triumph of The Will/Hope Over Experience are Naturally going to go into 'Therapy', . . . and STILL not wake up and Smell the Manure, and Remain in 'Therapy' . . . because the Collectivist Mindset is their Gestalt and they're Shocked and Unable to 'Don't Worry, be Happy' when that disaster is Rejected by others.]



New York Times reporter Yamiche Alcindor said Wednesday that she knows people who are “still in therapy” over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s election loss to President Donald Trump.

The “Morning Joe” panel was discussing Hillary Clinton’s new book, “What Happened” when Alcindor started listing those who were still having trouble accepting November’s election results.

“I think the intention of the book was two things. One it was to really, I think just vent and get it out there. Because there are so many people like Hillary Clinton who are still writing about this, who are still thinking about this, who are still in therapy, frankly. Sources I know who are still really upset about the election,” she said.

Alcindor also said that Clinton represents everything wrong with the Democratic Party, and said voters are still “reeling” from Trump’s historic upset.

“Hillary Clinton is the embodiment of all that’s still going wrong with the Democratic Party, and what they need to get through. So I think Hillary Clinton, I don’t think is opening any new wounds here,” she said. “Anyone who interviews Democrats, anyone who’s talking to activists on the ground, progressives and elected officials understand that people are still in some ways really reeling from the 2016 election. And really do not know how to go forward.”

You can Follow Nick on Twitter and Facebook

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org


Tags: Hillary Clinton, Morning Joe

Thank You Mr Givas and DC.

American Psychological Association (Here We Go Again) Claims Global Warming Is Making People 'Mentally Unhinged'

The Home Shopping Network on bad acid.

Buy Now! Limited Quantities!

Only 37 minutes remaining at this special price to Validate and Relieve Your Personal, Manufactured through Willfully Remaining Uniformed, Narcissistic Do-Gooder Guilt by Joining Our Cult.

Buy in NOW by sending Everything you, your children, everyone else and their children will ever earn!

weaselzippers

Al Gore unavailable for comment.

Via Seeker:

Climate change is making us mentally unhinged — and not because of the stress we might endure when squabbling with a family member or co-worker about its causes or possible solutions.

Global warming is already bringing about more extreme weather events, like powerful storms, which can cause devastating inland flooding or transform coastal communities into heaps of wreckage. The death, displacement, and personal injury brought about disasters are traumatizing survivors in the immediate aftermath and leaving some with long-term post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), according to a report by the American Psychological Association and ecoAmerica, a nonprofit focused on climate change.

The study, Mental Health and Our Changing Climate, is a follow up to a 2014 report.

Susan Clayton, a psychologist at the College of Wooster and co-author of the new report, said people who have been through disasters often used terms like “terrified” when describing what happened.

“So not surprisingly negative experience is a common denominator for the people who have been through this,” she said. “And estimates between seven and 40 percent of people who are experiencing natural disasters have some sort of mental health problem, such as anxiety or depression.”
 
Thank You Zip and Seeker. 

Anyone else for a shot of Mental/Junk Political 'Health'?

Climate Depot

• Bloomberg News: Obama ‘stashed’ $77 billion in ‘climate money’ across agencies to elude budget cuts
• Former Obama Official Mocks ‘Hottest Year on Record’ – Temps Within Margin of Error
• Load of bollocks: 2016 allegedly ‘hottest year’ by unmeasureable 1/100 of a degree – While satellites show ‘pause’ continues
• Climate Report to UN: Trump right, UN wrong – Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Medicare Considers Reimbursing Doctors Who Have "End Of Life Conversations" With Patients

Here's your Free Healthcare. 

"I'm sorry ma'am, but since your working days are over and the Govt. can't get any more money out of you, and it's long since pissed away what it Has already gotten out of you, it's time to die."

"Here, take these Psychiatric Drugs, because the fact that you're upset about the way you've been used is unmistakable evidence of your Incurable Mental Illness too, and have a compliant, and acquiescent day."

weaselzippers

Pre-death panel?

Via Yakima Herald

If medical students are entering the profession hoping to cure people, chaplain Laurie Oswalt likes to say, they’re going to end up with a zero percent success rate, because eventually, everybody dies.

But if their goal is to improve quality of life, she tells them, “They can have 100 percent.”

“It’s about how they helped the person live their life in the best way possible,” Oswalt said.

To address the challenge of providing end-of-life care that best suits patient wishes when most patients and even most doctors are reluctant to talk about the inevitable, Medicare has proposed reimbursing physicians for having end-of-life conversations.

The hope is that this will empower patients and providers to openly discuss questions such as who should make medical decisions once the patient is no longer capable, and what level of care they want to receive in a potentially life-ending experience — and to have those conversations before a crisis arises.

It’s a long time coming, doctors say, though it remains to be seen whether reimbursement levels will be enough to make a real difference.

“If it’s reimbursed significantly, that gives you 30 minutes to talk with patients about their desires,” said Dr. Joe Vickers, a family practitioner at Ahtanum Ridge Family Medicine and the interim medical director of Yakima Regional Medical and Cardiac Center’s hospice program.

Keep reading

Thank You Yakima Herald and Dapandico. 

There Are NO Proven Psychosocial Therapies That Reduce Self-Harming In Teens

madinamerica;
Another FAIL from the Collectivist, Junk Medical wing  of America's Political Collectivist Fraudsters.

There are no psychosocial treatments or psychotherapeutic methods that are proven to effectively reduce thoughts and behaviors of self-harm in youth, according to a review of the scientific literature by a team of Harvard University psychologists publishing in the Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology.

The researchers identified 29 studies published before June of 2013 that examined treatment interventions for suicidal or self-injurious thoughts and behaviors in children or adolescents. They then evaluated the studies using the evidence-based treatment evaluation criteria of the Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology. They found that not a single intervention met the Level 1 standard for "well-established treatments."

However, six types of treatment were found to be "probably efficacious" or "possibly efficacious" for reducing self-injurious thoughts and behaviors. "These treatments came from a variety of theoretical orientations," noted the researchers, "including cognitive-behavioral, family, interpersonal, and psychodynamic theories."

Since none of these methods were better than the others, the researchers speculated that the relative efficacy they did have was likely due to common elements among them. For example, most of the different therapeutic strategies involved skills training such as problem solving and emotional regulation, targeted interpersonal relationship dynamics, and included families in the therapy sessions. The strategies also tended to be relatively "intensive," in that they involved multiple meetings per week with therapists.

Glenn, Catherine R., Joseph C. Franklin, and Matthew K. Nock. “Evidence-Based Psychosocial Treatments for Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors in Youth.” Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 44, no. 1 (January 2, 2015): 1–29. doi:10.1080/15374416.2014.945211. (Abstract)

--Rob Wipond, News Editor

This entry was posted in Children and Adolescents, Featured News, In the News, Suicide, Violence. Bookmark the permalink.

Thank You Mr Wipond and MIA.

A 'Friend' Of Carl Jung Writes

A supporter of Carl Jung writes in response to our post “Carl Jung And Friends” which has been up since Feb 2008, and becomes the 1^st comment we’ve received defending Jung.

Anonymous said...

"JUng was a genius. He worked with the Allies and provided analysis of Hitler thatw ere very accurate including the prediction he would kill himself. Prior to the allied invasion of Europe, Eisenhower read his paper on how to get the German people to accept defeat.



Your web site is a strange mix of low IQ literacy with a profound hatred of that with is simply to challenging for you to understand because Jung defeats your intellectual capacity you make an enemy of Jung.



Your pictures and jokes are cude, faeces and dung, a crude and childish form of humour.



Your writing on young tells us nothing about Jung. Your strange attempt to make him a supporter of mein kamf, Hitler etc is just wrong and anyone who has read any Jung or studied his life knows that you are simply acting on your own compuslions and obsessions and projecting them on Jung (see Jung analysing Hitler for the Allies).

Jungian psychology is also behind the AA and the 12 steo program and his insights into the human psyche are profound and will be revelent for generations to come.

Sadly you are far to obsessed with Nazis and shit to begin to understand Jung and what you can;t understand you fear and hate.



Simply put, you come across as a moron.

We quote:

“Prior to the allied invasion of Europe, Eisenhower read his paper on how to get the German people to accept defeat.”

Obviously, Eisenhower was deeply affected by Jung’s paper, since He, Patton & Bradley pounded Germany into rubble in order to get the German people to accept defeat. Shows you pretty much what Ike thought of Jung and his paper.

“(see Jung analysing Hitler for the Allies)”

Jung – Agent #488 - went to Switzerland in 1943 to ‘analyze’ Hitler for Dulles. Let’s do the Timeline.

From Wiki’s page on Stalin:

“Hitler breaks the pact

During the early morning of 22 June 1941, Hitler broke the pact by implementing Operation Barbarossa, the German invasion of Soviet held territories and the Soviet Union that began the war on the Eastern Front.[139] Although Stalin had received warnings from spies and his generals,[140][141][142][143][144] he felt that Germany would not attack the Soviet Union until Germany had defeated Britain.[140] In the initial hours after the German attack commenced, Stalin hesitated, wanting to ensure that the German attack was sanctioned by Hitler, rather than the unauthorized action of a rogue general.[23]^{[page needed]}

Accounts by Nikita Khrushchev and Anastas Mikoyan claim that, after the invasion, Stalin retreated to his dacha in despair for several days and did not participate in leadership decisions.[145] However, some documentary evidence of orders given by Stalin contradicts these accounts, leading some historians to speculate that Khrushchev's account is inaccurate.[146] By the end of 1941, the Soviet military had suffered 4.3 million casualties[147] and German forces had advanced 1,050 miles (1,690 kilometers).[148]

Soviets stop the Germans

While the Germans pressed forward, Stalin was confident of an eventual Allied victory over Germany. In September 1941, Stalin told British diplomats that he wanted two agreements: (1) a mutual assistance/aid pact and (2) a recognition that, after the war, the Soviet Union would gain the territories in countries that it had taken pursuant to its division of Eastern Europe with Hitler in the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.[149] The British agreed to assistance but refused to agree upon the territorial gains, which Stalin accepted months later as the military situation deteriorated somewhat in mid-1942.[149] By December, Hitler's troops had advanced to within 20 miles of the Kremlin in Moscow.[150] On 5 December, the Soviets launched a counteroffensive, pushing German troops back 40–50 miles from Moscow, the Wehrmacht's first significant defeat of the war.[150]

In 1942, Hitler shifted his primary goal from an immediate victory in the East, to the more long-term goal of securing the southern Soviet Union to protect oil fields vital to a long-term German war effort.[151] While Red Army generals saw evidence that Hitler would shift efforts south, Stalin considered this to be a flanking campaign in efforts to take Moscow.[152] During the war, Time magazine named Stalin Time Person of the Year twice[153] and he was also one of the nominees for Time Person of the Century title.^{[citation needed]}

Soviet push to Germany

The Soviets repulsed the important German strategic southern campaign and, although 2.5 million Soviet casualties were suffered in that effort, it permitted the Soviets to take the offensive for most of the rest of the war on the Eastern Front.[154]

Germany attempted an encirclement attack at Kursk, which was successfully repulsed by the Soviets.[155] Kursk marked the beginning of a period where Stalin became more willing to listen to the advice of his generals.[156] By the end of 1943, the Soviets occupied half of the territory taken by the Germans from 1941–1942.[156] Soviet military industrial output also had increased substantially from late 1941 to early 1943 after Stalin had moved factories well to the East of the front, safe from German invasion and air attack.[157]

In November 1943, Stalin met with Churchill and Roosevelt in Tehran.[158] The parties later agreed that Britain and America would launch a cross-channel invasion of France in May 1944, along with a separate invasion of southern France.[159] Stalin insisted that, after the war, the Soviet Union should incorporate the portions of Poland it occupied pursuant to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Germany, which Churchill opposed.[160]

In 1944, the Soviet Union made significant advances across Eastern Europe toward Germany,[161] including Operation Bagration, a massive offensive in Belorussia against the German Army Group Centre.[162]"

Now, do we Still have a problem understanding Jung’s running off in 1943 to suck up to Dulles?

Count the casualties the Russians had already suffered, and the advances they were making against Jung’s “Truly Mystic Medicine Man” & “Demi-Deity” Hitler.

Even a séance sucker like Jung could see he’d backed a loser, and the price the Russians were willing to pay left No Doubt in his mind that falling into Stalin’s hands was not an option, (read the whole page. Stalin had his own Generals shot for losing, and his own soldiers machine gunned for retreating.) so he ran off to Dulles and offered up his Almighty ‘Opinion’ that Ike subsequently read, and dismissed. If the German Wehrmacht could have been talked into just dropping their arms and surrendering, it would have been a Hell of a lot less expensive than driving them back at gunpoint all the way to Berlin.

Face it, Anonymous, Jung jumped the SS Hitler only After he learned it was going down.

Why did the British Foreign Office – as Noll writes – want to hang him at Nuremberg as a Nazi pseudo-scientist?

Carl Jung: Aryan Christ: A Book Review

"How odd that the Swiss psychoanalyst, who considered himself the founder of a new religion to replace traditional Christianity, who wrote of his own "deification" as a lion-headed god from an ancient Aryan mystery cult, should achieve such pre-eminent status.

Odder yet, in our post-Holocaust world, that Jung, a virulent anti-Semite whom the British Foreign Office wanted tried at the Nuremberg war crimes trials as a Nazi pseudoscientist, should be embraced as a spiritual guide by millions of Catholics seeking psychological healing."

And let’s not forget what Jung’s fellow Psychiatrists in Germany were responsible for, which Jung tried to whitewash his own part in.

Psychiatrists & The Holocaust

“1933: Dr. M. H. Goring (relative of Hermann Goring, Nazi leader) founds the New German Society for psychotherapy. Jung assumes the presidency. The society officially adopts the Nazi viewpoint on race, mental hygiene and psychiatry. Their journal states, "This Society has the task of unifying all German physicians in the spirit of the National Socialistic government...particularly those physicians who are willing to practice psychiatry according to the 'Weltanschauung' of the National Socialists." Jung writes in the journal, "... The Jew, a cultural nomad, has never and probably will never create his own cultural forms because all his instincts and gifts depend on a more or less civilized host nation. The Aryan unconscious has a higher potential than the Jewish..." On June 21, 1933, Jung states on the Radio Berlin that, "Only the self-development of the individual, which I consider to be the supreme goal of all psychological endeavor, can produce consciously responsible spokesmen and leaders of the collective movement. As Hitler said recently, the leader must be able to be alone and must have the courage to go his own way."

Jung was as Full of it in 1943 as the very thought, today, of hiding behind his ‘Beyond Science’ astral plane psychoanalyzings to disable & poison/electrocute people still is.

Would anyone Else out there like to have a go at Shining up Carl Jung's reputation?

Alfred Adler: Marxist Crackpot, At a Glance

Since 'Depth Psychology' is considered to be founded upon the theories of Freud, Jung, & Alfred Adler, it's time to look at the 3rd of these Crackpots: Adler, who began as a Socialist, and like Wilhelm Reich tried to Distance himself from it.

Wiki has; (& remember that Wiki contributors are usually Fans of their subject material, ..... unlike us, ...... so Marxist Quacks will tend to get handled with kid gloves)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Adler

Alfred Adler (February 7, 1870 – May 28, 1937) was an Austrian medical doctor, psychotherapist, and founder of the school of individual psychology.[1] In collaboration with Sigmund Freud and a small group of Freud's colleagues, Adler was among the co-founders of the psychoanalytic movement as a core member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society. He was the first major figure to break away from psychoanalysis to form an independent school of psychotherapy and personality theory.[2] This was after Freud declared Adler's ideas as too contrary, leading to an ultimatum to all members of the Society (which Freud had shepherded) to drop Adler or be expelled, disavowing the right to dissent (Makari, 2008). Following this split, Adler would come to have an enormous, independent effect on the disciplines of counseling and psychotherapy as they developed over the course of the 20th century (Ellenberger, 1970). He influenced notable figures in subsequent schools of psychotherapy such as Rollo May, Viktor Frankl, Abraham Maslow and Albert Ellis.[3] His writings preceded, and were at times surprisingly consistent with, later neo-Freudian insights such as those evidenced in the works of Karen Horney, Harry Stack Sullivan and Erich Fromm.

Adler emphasized the importance of equality in preventing various forms of psychopathology, and espoused the development of social interest and democratic family structures for raising children.[4] His most famous concept is the inferiority complex which speaks to the problem of self-esteem and its negative effects on human health (e.g. sometimes producing a paradoxical superiority striving). His emphasis on power dynamics is rooted in the philosophy of Nietzsche, whose works were published a few decades before Adler's. However, Adler's conceptualization of the "Will to Power" focuses on the individual's creative power to change for the better.[5] Adler argued for holism, viewing the individual holistically rather than reductively, the latter being the dominant lens for viewing human psychology. Adler was also among the first in psychology to argue in favor of feminism making the case that power dynamics between men and women (and associations with masculinity and femininity) are crucial to understanding human psychology (Connell, 1995). Adler is considered, along with Freud and Jung, to be one of the three founding figures of depth psychology, which emphasizes the unconscious and psychodynamics (Ellenberger, 1970; Ehrenwald, 1991).

He was a social idealist, and was known as a socialist in his early years of association with psychoanalysis (1902–1911). His allegiance to Marxism dissipated over time (he retained Marx's social idealism yet distanced himself from Marx's economic theories).

[Ed: What? How does one retain Marx's 'Social Idealism' IE: Utopian Equality of Outcome, while Distancing oneself from the Means Needed To Produce it?]

Teleology serves another vital function for Adlerians. Chilon's "hora telos" ("see the end, consider the consequences") provides for both healthy and maladaptive psychodynamics. Here we also find Adler's emphasis on personal responsibility in mentally healthy subjects who seek their own and the social good (Slavik & King, 2007).

[Ed: Uh Huh. What's Your's is mine, and if you Don't agree, you have an Unhealthy mind.]

http://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/a/d.htm

Adler, Alfred (1870-1937)

Austrian Psychiatrist, creator of the system of Individual Psychology; first to describe the “inferiority complex”. He developed a flexible method of psychotherapy to assist people to overcome feelings of inferiority, focusing on the relation of an individual to the goals and values determined by their social environment.

Adler was born into a middle-class Jewish family, attending the same school as Sigmund Freud. He qualified as an eye doctor, but in 1902, joined Freud’s Wednesday Psychological Society and brought the idea of “organ inferiority” from opthamology to psychology. Adler argued that a person’s sensitivity to the weakness of an organ led a person to dwell on it and generate excessive cerebral activity.

Adler was married to Raissa Epstein, a Russian-born socialist; he was acquainted with Leon Trotsky when he was in exile in Vienna, was therapist to the Bolshevik Adolf Joffe and was a regular contributor to Arbeiter-Zeitung, the Vienna daily socialist newspaper. His first book dealt with the social causes of physical illnesses.

After his Study of Organ Inferiority and Its Psychical Compensation was published in 1907, his own views began to take shape independently, down-playing Freud’s insistence on the centrality of sexual conflicts in early childhood as the cause mental illness. For Adler it was a person’s striving for self-esteem and recognition that is central, and sexual problems were seen as expressing difficulties arising in this area.

In 1909, Adler was the first to argue that psychoanalysis supplied a complement to Marxism, and that sensitivity to slights provided a psychological basis for the development of class consciousness. Adler also tied the psychology of inferiority to the struggle for women’s rights. Influenced by his wife, the women’s movement and Social-Democracy, he reformulated his idea of organ-inferiority in terms of bisexuality. By “femininity,” he wrote, the neurotic “understands almost everything that is bad, certainly anything inferior.” Attempting to avoid what is pathological, that is, passive or “feminine,” the neurotic engaged in compensatory forms of self-assertion that Adler called “the masculine protest.” All neuroses “are derived and obtain their power from the battle between the feminine foundation and the masculine protest. ... one must assume the presence of the masculine protest in all women without exception ... since the devaluation of woman is the driving force in our civilization. ... There is no principle more generally valid for all human relationships than ‘on top of’ and ‘underneath’.”

From 1911, Adler broke from Freud and became publicly critical of him and in 1912, coined the term individual psychology to characterize his own views, as set out in The Neurotic Constitution.

Adler held that difficulties people encounter in gaining self-esteem and recognition, if not overcome by the normal means lead to compensatory behavior and resultant personality disorders which are now widely referred to as an inferiority complex.

The other important elements of Adler’s psychology are lifestyle – the particular system of values and activities which a person acquires in their upbringing, and the social interest drive – an urge to cooperate with other people for the common good, which Adler took to be inherent in human beings. The method of therapy he used is simply to direct the patient’s attention to the unsuccessful, neurotic character of the way the patient is dealing with their feeling of inferiority, and assist the patient in restoring a feeling of self-esteem and in working out a realistic set of goals.

In 1934 the fascist government in Austria closed his 30 child guidance clinics. Many of his later writings, such as What Life Should Mean to You (1931), were directed to the general reader.

Here's an excerpt from a Christian perspective. And we Care about the Christian perspective WHY? Because American LAW is Based on, and Comprised of it, That's Why. American Law is Not based on the writings of Karl Marx. (although These days it's becoming decidedly more difficult to Tell)

http://www.christiehunter.com/personality/alderian-therapy.htm

Adlerian Therapy

Named after Alfred Adler, Adlerian theory primarily emphasizes birth order, individual life styles, social interests, and concepts pertaining to inferiority and superiority as principle components of personality. For Adler, psychological health is determined by the level of social contribution beneficial to the greater community. To the degree, that one integrates and furthers the social context, thus the measurement of his or her mental health. Social contribution is increased through the reduction of mistaken beliefs, which frequently lead to maladaptive feelings of inferiority or superiority. This goal of combating false beliefs is attained through an understanding of family constellations, early memories, and dreams.

For psychologists, translating the goals of Adlerian theory into a therapeutic process has resulted in an approach to counseling that varies widely among practitioners. These goals are to bring about an increased social interest, modify self-destructive behavior, and solve problems more efficiently. To reach these aspirations in a clinical setting, psychotherapy provides a choice to counselors as a base for identifying and addressing incorrect thoughts and belief patterns. This influence of psychotherapy owes its’ origin to Sigmund Freud, an indirect contributor to Adlerian therapy.

Initial sessions provide Adlerian therapists with an opportunity to observe and assess clients in order to gauge their family dynamics, present lifestyle, and early childhood experiences. These assessments may be formal or informal using questionnaires or direct inquiry. Further to this, therapists also rely on dreams and the interpretive meaning for the client’s current situation and struggles.

Several practical techniques are used in Adlerian therapy. Immediacy asks the client to communicate events at the present moment. By focusing on the immediate here and now, clients are reoriented into a position conducive to a greater understanding of their situation. The technique of encouragement helps to build rapport between therapist and client. Counselors also use encouragement to assess client lifestyle to provide tools for overcoming inferiority and low self-concept. Acting as if requests the client to presume the successful result of a not yet attempted action.

Another technique, spitting in the client’s soup, requires the counselor to make certain behaviors less attractive to the client. Once a particular behavior is seen as repulsive, it is less likely to recur. The question tests the client in order to identify the existence of a psychological problem through the use of deliberately constructed questions by the counselor. If the client makes a connection between the answer to the question and another problem altogether, the therapist then presumes the root of the illness is to avoid the problem connected by the client. Finally, Adlerian therapists often assign homework as a means to assist clients in solving problems outside the counseling session.

In Adlerian therapy, the relationship between the client and counselor requires mutual trust and respect in order to maximize clinical success. Client and therapist should have similar goals to reach this end. When client goals do not match therapist goals, the Adlerian counselor will work to educate as to the more appropriate goals. To accomplish this, some Adlerian therapists have their clients sign a contract detailing the goals of their counseling process. The clear synchronization of goals in early treatment provides the framework for a healthy relationship between client and counselor, upon which the remainder of counseling objectives are built.

Adlerian therapy is diverse, both in practice and in theory. This flexibility is seen by many as one of its greatest strengths. Because of its emphasis on goals, the social leanings of Adlerian therapy are greatly beneficial to couples, families, and groups. Finally, the incorporation of psychoanalysis provides additional options to the counselor, bringing to the session room a wide range of techniques to cover numerous client issues.

Adlerian therapy is frequently criticized for its lack of depth. Seen by many as somewhat superficial, it lacks the constitution necessary to fully deal with the vast array of psychological issues clients bring to the counseling room. While its flexibility is wide in scope, its fortitude is frail, and many see it as a therapy that is akin to one who dabbles in everything but masters in nothing. Through its emphasis on birth orders and early recollection, untestable assumptions are made that many psychologists see as placing undue weight on concepts not critical to human growth.

Overall, Adlerian therapy focuses on applications in individual psychology with intent to provide prevention services designed to assist during growth. This educational focus is utilized with teachers and parent to identify the importance of social interaction and the development of social interests. Further, parents are taught the importance of family relationships and the legacy that is passed between generations through birth order and individual personality.

In the use of group work, Adlerian therapy works to develop group cohesion, which mirrors healthy functioning in social settings. Members of the group are able to develop a sense of belonging and community that may be unavailable in their present situation. Due to the flexibility and integrative nature of this theory, individuals, families, and groups are helped with the tools of this approach. Contrasting this however, Adlerian therapy has its limitations, as it does not provide immediate solutions to client problems with more of a long-term focus. With less of a simplistic approach, this therapy is suited more for individuals who are prepared to take the time to understand family of origin issues.

Personal Evaluation

Adlerian thought has at its base, a socialistic ideology. The pervasiveness of socialism in Adlerian theory owes itself to the inspirations of Karl Marx; one of Alfred Adler’s professed influences. A presupposition against capitalism, private property, and acquired wealth was, I believe, a driving force behind his theory. Because no part of his theory (that I could determine) conflicted with socialist philosophy, I believe that Adler used this ideology as a basis when forming his theory, forcing his theory of personality to conform to his communist philosophy. Because of this, I do not acknowledge Adler’s theory as scientific in an empirical sense, but rather a reflection of his personal views. While his views on the importance of birth order are interesting and certainly original, I do not see them as having a great deal of merit. If there is any effect that birth order has on an individual, I believe it is due to localized parenting factors at the microenvironment rather than some kind of objective truth about birth order at a macro level. Because I am a true capitalist, I hold little value for communistic thought and see it as a threat to my way of life.

Christianity is not compatible with socialism. Jesus discarded the abundant tithes of the pharisees and treasured the widows mites because she sacrificed, and gave from her heart. True Christian giving must always come from the individual. Socialism institutes a secular government that takes by force, and redistributes. When a government takes money by force and gives it to the poor, an individual should not assume he has "fed the poor" by proxy. God would rather an individual man give of his own free will to feed the poor, then a secular government taking money by force from the man to feed the poor. Every act of service in Christianity requires the individual heart. Socialism, by definition, purges the individual and replaces it with Big Government, and is therefore an antithesis to Christianity. When the church of Acts gave up all of its possessions, this was not socialism, because each individual chose freely to give. Jesus Himself said that even sinners take care of sinners, but that doesn't make a society Godly. A perfectly humanistic society where all the poor are fed and no one goes hungry is still in utter depravity and an enemy to God (note that plenty of people in this world who commit evil and despise God are well fed). God is about individual souls, not about making sure no one is poor. Remember it was "Big Government" that was brought down by God Himself at the tower of Babel. Because of this fundamental philosophy in my world view that utterly rejects secular socialism, I therefore reject the foundations of Adler's theories.

In a more positive light, I value his emphasis on family unity and group cohesion. Adler understood the difference between developing individual self esteem and fostering it within a group. I am a strong believer in the strength that teamwork can impart on an individual’s self worth. To belong to a group and functioning purposefully in that group is a strong motivator towards positive change. Of course, this requires that the agenda and mission of the group is conducive to growth and not void of moral recognition. As beneficial and powerful as group dynamics can have on an individual, equally dangerous is the possibility for mechanistic depravity as can be seen in the “mob mentality” that forms when the morality of a group erodes while its cohesion remains.