Hi On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, Rod Hetzel wrote: > I would not use psychotherapy to convert anyone or direct anyone towards > or away from a religious worldview. That is not the purpose of > psychotherapy.
But what if the religious worldview appeared to be having a harmful influence on the person? You still would not try to change that worldview (either directly or indirectly, by guiding clients to reflect on the negative consequences)? I've never quite understood this "hands-off" attitude expressed by some therapists about religion, culture, or perhaps even values in general. > adjustment to life stressors. One of the problems is that many > psychologists are neither trained nor comfortable in dealing with > religious issues in therapy. This is supported by survey research > investigating training issues (cf Schulte et al, 2002). But lack of training about specific attitudes and values must be true for many areas, not just religious values (e.g., training in attitudes of poor to financial problems, attitudes of rural people toward the land, attitudes of gay and lesbians toward gender, ...). Is it necessary to have "training" in all possible values and attitudes, or is it possible to develop generic skills (e.g., interviewing skills, empathic understanding skills, ...) that make such specific and diverse training unnecessary? And to what extent is the discomfort because certain people in the profession and society recommend a "hands off" attitude toward religion? As a result, > many psychologists ignore religious or spiritual issues that may be very > important to their clients. The point of addressing religious issues in > therapy is not to evangelize or promote my own religious beliefs, but > rather to help clients explore their own religious or spiritual > worldviews and practices as they are related to their goals for > treatment. Sorry, but it seems to me that if you advocate some of the religious coping strategies (e.g., collaborating with god), then you are indeed lending your professional support to those religious beliefs. I can also imagine a scenario where people with certain beliefs find like-minded "psychologists" to help them "cope" without really challenging those beliefs (e.g., that everyone but people in their clique will go to hell for eternity, that women should be subservient to men, that parents are allowed to punish children and withhold medical treatment, ...). I've had many atheistic, agnostic, or non-religious clients > and the issue of religion or spirituality was never addressed. But I've > also had a number of religious client (primarily evangelical Christians) > for whom their faith was a central organizing framework through which > they conducted their life. And what have you done when you thought that their religious perspective contributed to their problems? ... > The results of these and other studies, both experimental and > correlational, show that religiousity can affect physical health > directly by two major mechanisms and indirectly by two other mechanisms. > And none of these mechanisms are based upon "supernatural" effects but > rather can be explained by known naturalistic and physiological > pathways. The two direct mechanisms are (a) earlier diagnosis and > better treatment of physical diseases, and (b) reduction in behaviors > that negatively affect health (reduced drinking, smoking, unsafe sexual > practices, etc.). The two indirect mechanisms are (a) enhancement of > social support, and (b) reduction of distress, depression, anxiety, and > other emotional disorders. > > What is the practical usefulness of all of this? I would hope that it > would be apparent. But if it's not, let me try to make it clear. If we > can understand the complex associations between religiosity and mental > and physical health, then we can better understand our religious > patients and we can design more efficacious treatment interventions. To > me, that is useful. And are you honest with your clients that although you are using "religious" strategies, those strategies do not in fact operate by supernatural (i.e., religious) means? And do you provide them with the non-religious explanations for their effectiveness? And, of course, if the non-religious explanations are correct, then there is really no need to adopt the religious orientation, except perhaps for purely pragmatic reasons (i.e., that is where they can find social support). Indeed, if you belief that you have truly identified the potent (non-supernatural) elements in these "treatments," would it not be better to purify those elements and find ways to meet them directly without the added impurities introduced by taking some approach that just conveniently happens to be available? Not being a therapist (although my wife is), I have long wondered whatever became of Rogers' idea of congruence? As I remember it, Rogers thought that mental health involved an accurate conception of external reality, and that incongruence resulted in psychological difficulties and even disorders. Some moderate degree of incongruity was associated with neuroses (this was some years ago), whereas marked incongruity was associated with psychoses. For me as a scientist, I find it somewhat strange that psychotherapists might actually reinforce or at least accept (tolerate) beliefs about the external world (including our social worlds) that could conflict with a well-founded worldview. Just as one example of this, an article in the newspaper here today noted that exorcisms continue to be conducted in the Catholic church, including several over recent decades by the Pope himself. They cited one example of a woman who's demon told her she would vomit radio parts. She proceeded to throw up parts of a transistor radio. The "treatment" was exorcisms by a priest (I forget whether this was one the "cases" "treated" by the Pope). Can my more religiously oriented colleagues explain how they can in good conscience NOT challenge a religious explanation and treatment for such conditions? Why this discussion on TIPS? There appears to be a well-orchestrated effort to intensify the role of religion and spirituality in psychological training and treatment, hence in education of therapists. For example, there have been a number of books published by APA in recent years, the clustering of which does not seem random. Much of the writing on culture and psychology also emphasises the importance of spirituality for the non-Eurocentric minded. Best wishes Jim ============================================================================ James M. Clark (204) 786-9757 Department of Psychology (204) 774-4134 Fax University of Winnipeg 4L05D Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED] CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark ============================================================================ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
