Psychology Vs. Psychiatry

[GregoryJoseph]

Dearest Wisened Oracle,

What are your feelings on psychology as a whole, and psychologists in general? Are they like astrologers compared to astronomers, or is there some science to their ways?

[spoon]

Dearest Wisened Oracle,

What are your feelings on psychology as a whole, and psychologists in general? Are they like astrologers compared to astronomers, or is there some science to their ways?

Fucked that up, round two.

Your title doesn't match your question.

[IamFogHat]

Psychiatrists give you drugs. That's about the only difference.

[yojimbo7248]

do you want to start a discussion about whether psychologists or psychiatrists are more useful? I always thought that the difference between the two is psychiatrists prescribe drugs and psychologists don't.

[spoon]

And the answer to the question is no.

The comparison in the title pertains to a WHOLE lot of difference in mind set, schooling and abilities.

In areas where psychs are in major need, psychologists can rx if they go through a pretty intense training program.

[GregoryJoseph]

do you want to start a discussion about whether psychologists or psychiatrists are more useful? I always thought that the difference between the two is psychiatrists prescribe drugs and psychologists don't.

I just want to know if there is any real science to the ways of a psychologist or if each one uses his or her own method of what they think is wrong with their patients.

I know psychiatrists have medical knowledge and prescribe drugs whereas psychologists don't, but I don't know if that means they're any less qualified to help someone.

[spoon]

I just want to know if there is any real science to the ways of a psychologist or if each one uses his or her own method of what they think is wrong with their patients.

I know psychiatrists have medical knowledge and prescribe drugs whereas psychologists don't, but I don't know if that means they're any less qualified to help someone.

They both have their role. One is more therapy based, while the other has a more medical focus. Also, both have boards and organizations to help rater reliability in most universal scales used for evaluations as do LCSWs and others in the field.

[GregoryJoseph]

Fucked that up, round two.

Your title doesn't match your question.

Yes it does.

[yojimbo7248]

I just want to know if there is any real science to the ways of a psychologist or if each one uses his or her own method of what they think is wrong with their patients.

I know psychiatrists have medical knowledge and prescribe drugs whereas psychologists don't, but I don't know if that means they're any less qualified to help someone.

I was just talking to someone about this. have you seen In Treatment? the Gabriel Byrne psychologist character talks to his therapist about whether their profession is a shame. He struggles over whether therapy's success or failure simply rests on the quality of the connection he makes with a patient rather than the actual theory and practice. He gets along well with a teenage girl patient and she gets better but he has problems with a naval officer and the therapy fails. It is such a great show and this question is central to what the GB character goes through.

A few years ago my brother died. I needed to go to a grief counselor to help deal with it. The therapist tried to get to the heart of my feelings about my brother, myself, my parents, life, by asking me a lot about childhood experiences. Ultimately I didn't find her useful and stopped. I soon found I still needed help so I found a therapist who integrates Zen practice and it helped me tons. I have found there needs to be a practice or method for actually dealing with the emotions rather than just saying you feel such and such a way because of a childhood experience.

[ShowerBench]

The whole industry is a racket full of cranks whose paycheck depends on making people believe they are defective. They have a vested interest in not recognizing that people vary and unhappiness is part of life and universal. "It's difficult to make a man understand something when his paycheck depends on his not understanding it" - Upton Sinclair

There is hard science behind the drugs a psychiatrist prescribes but not much behind his own determination of what a patient would benefit from. There usually aren't lab results that can be viewed under a microscope that inform his decisions.

Psychologists are even worse. They pretend to rely on science, but it's soft science at best (which isn't science), and there isn't much that "training" in the form of college education can do to make someone effective in helping someone else with mental problems.

That isn't to say that the hit and miss approach of drugs can't hit sometimes and help, or that people don't get a benefit from "talking" to people they hire to listen to them, but that's about as far as it goes. They are suspect at best because of their interest in making sure you continue to believe you're sick.

[boosterp]

do you want to start a discussion about whether psychologists or psychiatrists are more useful? I always thought that the difference between the two is psychiatrists prescribe drugs and psychologists don't.

Basically.

Psychologists aree therapy oriented, use more education materials, can do multitudes of measures to get to the problem, lend advice, and can aid the psychiatrist in treatment options.

Psychiatrists are physicians who can prescribe, diagnose, perform titration of medicines, and in areas that allow psychologists to prescribe the psychiatrist is ultimately responsible.

Each though is part of a larger care team that provide a vast array of mental health care.


In areas where psychs are in major need, psychologists can rx if they go through a pretty intense training program.

Depends greatly on state laws.

The whole industry is a racket full of cranks whose paycheck depends on making people believe they are defective. They have a vested interest in not recognizing that people vary and unhappiness is part of life and universal. "It's difficult to make a man understand something when his paycheck depends on his not understanding it" - Upton Sinclair

There is hard science behind the drugs a psychiatrist prescribes but not much behind his own determination of what a patient would benefit from. There usually aren't lab results that can be viewed under a microscope that inform his decisions.

Psychologists are even worse. They pretend to rely on science, but it's soft science at best (which isn't science), and there isn't much that "training" in the form of college education can do to make someone effective in helping someone else with mental problems.

That isn't to say that the hit and miss approach of drugs can't hit sometimes and help, or that people don't get a benefit from "talking" to people they hire to listen to them, but that's about as far as it goes. They are suspect at best because of their interest in making sure you continue to believe you're sick.

You're dumb as hell.

[ShowerBench]

You're dumb as hell.

Great argument.
The trappings of science isn't science. The industry is a racket, by and large.

[Fez4PrezN2008]

Psychologist are for crazy people.

Psychiatrists are for REALLY crazy people.

:tongue:

[biggirl]

Psychologist are for crazy people.

Psychiatrists are for REALLY crazy people.

:tongue:

so what if you have a see a psychologist and a psychiatrist? Are you a REALLY crazy, crazy person? :tongue:

I might go into psychology next semester in college. I am hoping to work with kids with autism. I am excited.

[PapaBear]

Psychiatrists are almost terrible, unless someone has something (like schizophrenia) that MUST be treated with drugs. I saw a few many years ago, and there was very little discussion about my life. I basically filled out a few forms, they spoke to me for 5 minutes, then gave me prescriptions that I didn't need.

[RhinoinMN]

so what if you have a see a psychologist and a psychiatrist? Are you a REALLY crazy, crazy person? :tongue:

I might go into psychology next semester in college. I am hoping to work with kids with autism. I am excited.

Somebody needs to take care of my crazy ass!

[boosterp]

Great argument.
The trappings of science isn't science. The industry is a racket, by and large.

After nearly 17 years in the field, most of it is evidence based and we continue to build on that. Like any profession you'll have bad eggs, I had even been seen by one, but there is certainly a need for their care.

How's that for a rational argument smarty?

[ToiletCrusher]

The two fields were so close a few decades ago.

Now they feed off one another.