kajarainbow: (old wolfie icon by unknown)
Okay, here's the story. My dad, a psychologist, found and suggested a nearby (as in the same town) therapist who supposedly worked with gender issues. My experiences with this therapist were unsatisfactory, he seemed to get off track onto my supposed passive-aggressiveness issues (and took my snapping at him about it as validation that I was finally venting some supposed repressed anger). Also, I got the impression he'd only worked with transvestites and the like, not transsexuals.

Now, the real issue: this therapist worked with a psychiatrist in the same building--they shared an office suite. He referred me to his psychiatrist friend for evaluation. The psychiatrist prescribed antidepressants, which I felt were getting entirely besides the point. I could trace most of my depression to specific problems, often caused by my great difficulties in focusing. I tried taking the antidepressant anyway, but ended up not really taking it very faithfully due to lack of confidence in it being the right course. The psychiatrist then told me he didn't want to see me again until I showed he could trust me to take his prescribed medication daily.

This was a couple of years ago. I haven't seen any therapists since.

I was telling [livejournal.com profile] goji about this, and when I got to the part about them sharing the same office building, she told me this sounded like what the industry calls a "tag-team approach". Basically, the therapist refers the patient to his psychiatrist friend, who prescribes an expensive medicine, and then the therapist receives under the table kickback from the psychiatrist.

The medicine the psychiatrist prescribed? Lexapro. I don't know much about medicine prices, but my parents remarked on its high price.

Rather circumstantial evidence for that scam. But at best, the psychologist and psychiatrist I saw didn't really listen enough to realize my actual issues. At worst, they teamed up to scam me.

I don't think my dad was involved in the scam if there was any. I'd have to agree with [livejournal.com profile] goji's description of my dad as kinda idealistic.
kajarainbow: (Anisha by Pixel)
And remember, it's not thought-vs.-emotion. It's about different styles of thought (rational, intuitive, etc.).

A clear demonstration of this is that in the medical cases where people've lost their emotions: they also lost all ability to make even the most simple decisions such as choosing which socks to wear. They simply couldn't make choices. At all. They had to have those choices made for them. Otherwise, they functioned perfectly fine.

Hell, emotion factors even into the most rational decisions, as it's the emotional appeal of rationalism (or any rewards gained though it) that makes people choose it, ironically enough.
kajarainbow: (old wolfie)
"We urge the [Palestinian] authority to open the way for resistance fighters to deter the continued aggressions of the enemy against the Palestinian people," [a Hamas figure] said.

Uh, but they're doing that, too. You know, killing your people to deter you from attacking them, so you decide to kill them to deter them from attacking you. And you're killing them to deter them from attacking you, so they decide to kill you to deter you from attacking them.

I guess that's why vicious cycles happen. That, plus both sides wanting the same pieces of land to be theirs and theirs alone.

A significant number of people seem to think this way. I couldn't really say how large that number is, though, but it at times seems far, far, far too many.

It's a failure to comprehend other people, I suppose. The petty little self-centered madnesses seemingly wired to differing levels into most or all human brains.
kajarainbow: (Default)
Using my laptop in the front room, I catch glimpses from the television more often than I used to. (This and other reasons, including the tendency for it to be filled with vibrations just from people moving through, are why it's bad for me to be doing it here. I should move operations to somewhere more quiet yet not my own room which I tend to shut myself into. Like the den.) Most of the time those glimpses from the TV are shit. This particular time excepted.

This time it was Malcolm in the Middle. I saw a brief scene-fragment in which it is discovered that Malcolm has done a bad thing to his brother because someone in a lab coat had told him to. The teacher showing the video of it said, "We can't know whether we would betray someone that trusts us that much if someone in a lab coat tells us to. What we do know, however, is that Malcolm did."

That scene was perfect. It encompassed so much. The tendency of humans to think that negative things do not apply to them, simply because they have not experienced those particular situations that causes the negative effects (whether it is health problems or improper actions). The lack of full self-awareness. The wonderful, wonderful irony. As someone who's been picking up tiny bits of knowledge of psychological studies, I find it particularly entertaining.

Many, even most, people are more susceptible to pressures from their peers and from authorities and from situations in general than most. That, in fact, is why, for example, Al Ghraib happened. The Stanford Prison Experiment is a very good example of one out of the many research studies showing that perfectly average persons are capable of having their senses of morality highly distorted by the right conditions. Just the very conditions in Al Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and other such highly secretive places to detain people labeled as bad and less worthy of humane treatment cause abuses. It is not a case of a few innately bad apples. It is the case of the very barrel itself writhing with worms, the barrel itself corrupting the apples within it.

That was more of a political digression than I initially intended, heh.


kajarainbow: (Default)

September 2018

16 171819202122


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 24th, 2019 02:07 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios