Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

weeklystandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 51 posts

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#11

Post by paulie_a »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #2

Q: What qualifies this group for the position of beacon to the masses? A: Not a blessed thing. If you pay a psychiatrist, you have to worry that they have a conflict of interest. If you really get well, you won't need them anymore. They have an inherent motive to help you only enough to take credit for things going better, not enough to set you free from needing their services. If you turn to family, coworkers, or fr…

Granted it is anecdotal, but I've seen a psychiatrist. After a short time he said he didn't think there was any need for future appointments. The original reason for seeing him had been resolved. I do continue to go on a less frequent basis because it is helpful.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#12

Post by lordCarbonFiber »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #7
lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That line of thinking is so alien to me. Does it apply to any time you go looking for goods or services? Do you go online for advice in complying with tax codes because your accountant wants you to get audited and need their services, do you make all your own food because the restaurant chefs want you to leave hungry so you have to order another serving, do you avoid the doctor since if you get better you won't come…

Does it apply to any time you go looking for goods or services? No, of course not. I eat at restaurants all the time. People will be hungry again shortly, even if fed wonderfully well. There are other things to worry about more, like if they are meeting food safety codes, which some don't. I did therapy with a military chaplain. I had a really positive experience there. He wasn't being paid by me to deal with me. He…

I don't want to invalidate your experience, but, jeez, I really feel awful for anyone that has to live in a world where they're constantly wondering if their friends are trying to take advantage of them. Most situations in life aren't zero sum, what's good for them may very well be what's good for you. Even less situations are zero sum and material; one patient's business is not likely to make or break a psychiatry practice so why not give good advice (misery loves company after all, healthy outcomes probably exponentially generates new customers).

This is especially apparent when the alternative is often some faceless person(s) on the internet who may very well bring their own (unknowable to you) biases to the table.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#13

Post by chickenfries »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #9
sjg007 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are overly worried that a psychiatrist would have a conflict of interest. A psychiatrist is an MD, they practice psychopharmacology. Even a psychologist would have no reason to keep you untreated. There are plenty of patients who need help and a shortage of mental health professionals in general.

They don't have a great track of curing people. They tend to help people "manage" their mental health issues. Color me unimpressed.

I think it's more likely that we're just not that great at "curing" mental illness (whatever that means) than it is that the entire industry has a conflict on interest where they COULD be helping people get better faster but they don't.

I've never had a therapist bat an eye when I tell them I'm doing well and I don't need to come in for a while. My last therapist went on maternity leave and recommended me to a colleague who they thought I might enjoy working with. It's been great and I'm not going back to see my original therapist. I guess they should've sent me to a bad therapist so that I would come back and be their client again, but the person they recommended me to is great.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#14

Post by criley2 »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #2

Q: What qualifies this group for the position of beacon to the masses? A: Not a blessed thing. If you pay a psychiatrist, you have to worry that they have a conflict of interest. If you really get well, you won't need them anymore. They have an inherent motive to help you only enough to take credit for things going better, not enough to set you free from needing their services. If you turn to family, coworkers, or fr…

A psychiatrist that behaves as you describe is literally engaging in malpractice.

You are a perfect example of what the article describes: your rationalization process for mistrusting experts seems rational at first glance, but upon closer examination it falls apart as quite simply an irrational fear used to rationalize not trusting an expert.

The thing about free advice online is that... you didn't go to school for 4-6 years and practice under an established expert for years further to learn how to give good advice the right way.

The idea that some jack in an online forum will provide better advice than a licensed psychiatrist simply because you're irrationally afraid that the psychiatrist will engage in malpractice -- frankly it's ludacris! It's literally insane to me.

But this is how we end up with an America where multiple doctors diagnose you with cancer but your Facebook Group swears by essential oils and power crystals....

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#15

Post by [deleted] »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #9
sjg007 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are overly worried that a psychiatrist would have a conflict of interest. A psychiatrist is an MD, they practice psychopharmacology. Even a psychologist would have no reason to keep you untreated. There are plenty of patients who need help and a shortage of mental health professionals in general.

They don't have a great track of curing people. They tend to help people "manage" their mental health issues. Color me unimpressed.

[deleted]

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#16

Post by DoreenMichele »

lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #12
DoreenMichele wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it apply to any time you go looking for goods or services? No, of course not. I eat at restaurants all the time. People will be hungry again shortly, even if fed wonderfully well. There are other things to worry about more, like if they are meeting food safety codes, which some don't. I did therapy with a military chaplain. I had a really positive experience there. He wasn't being paid by me to deal with me. He…

I don't want to invalidate your experience, but, jeez, I really feel awful for anyone that has to live in a world where they're constantly wondering if their friends are trying to take advantage of them. Most situations in life aren't zero sum, what's good for them may very well be what's good for you. Even less situations are zero sum and material; one patient's business is not likely to make or break a psychiatry p…

I've had the following college classes: Intro to Psychology; Social Psychology; Negotiation and Conflict Management. I had a corporate job for over five years. Part of that job was looking for "red flags" and referring it to the fraud department if it looked fishy enough. I also was taught proper procedure for how to handle a file where I had conflict of interest in order to protect the company legally (Answer: You don't. You leave note and send it back to the queues and let someone else handle the file.)

Framing this as opinion based on "my experience" is basically hanging an awful lot of baggage on me and acting like I've simply had a sucktastic life surrounded by people I can't trust, etc. It's a pretty ugly suggestion and not only serves to invalidate me, it invalidates the point entirely by presuming it has no real basis other than "Wow, that woman must have the worst life ever. Sucks to be her, I guess." And that's really not a good faith means to engage the point.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#17

Post by Domenic_S »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #2

Q: What qualifies this group for the position of beacon to the masses? A: Not a blessed thing. If you pay a psychiatrist, you have to worry that they have a conflict of interest. If you really get well, you won't need them anymore. They have an inherent motive to help you only enough to take credit for things going better, not enough to set you free from needing their services. If you turn to family, coworkers, or fr…

If you pay a programmer, you have to worry that they have a conflict of interest. If they finish the job, you won't need them anymore.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#18

Post by DoreenMichele »

criley2 wrote: post #14
DoreenMichele wrote: post #2

Q: What qualifies this group for the position of beacon to the masses? A: Not a blessed thing. If you pay a psychiatrist, you have to worry that they have a conflict of interest. If you really get well, you won't need them anymore. They have an inherent motive to help you only enough to take credit for things going better, not enough to set you free from needing their services. If you turn to family, coworkers, or fr…

A psychiatrist that behaves as you describe is literally engaging in malpractice. You are a perfect example of what the article describes: your rationalization process for mistrusting experts seems rational at first glance, but upon closer examination it falls apart as quite simply an irrational fear used to rationalize not trusting an expert. The thing about free advice online is that... you didn't go to school for…

A psychiatrist that behaves as you describe is literally engaging in malpractice.

Not if he is giving the standard advice everyone in the industry gives. There are lots of conditions where the standard expectation is that "people like you don't really get well" and "symptom management is the name of the game." It would be considered malpractice to even tell people with certain diagnoses that you will shoot for curing them.

But if you don't even try to get someone well, if you only shoot for muddling through, don't you think that has bearing on the kind of results you get? If actually getting them well isn't even a goal, no, of course, you won't get them well.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#19

Post by DoreenMichele »

chickenfries wrote: post #13
DoreenMichele wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have a great track of curing people. They tend to help people "manage" their mental health issues. Color me unimpressed.

I think it's more likely that we're just not that great at "curing" mental illness (whatever that means) than it is that the entire industry has a conflict on interest where they COULD be helping people get better faster but they don't. I've never had a therapist bat an eye when I tell them I'm doing well and I don't need to come in for a while. My last therapist went on maternity leave and recommended me to a collea…

Conflict of interest means you can never be sure why they recommended X, not that X was recommended with malice aforethought. That's precisely why it's such a thorny issue. People with malice aforethought are relatively easy to root out compared to people who mean well, but can't quite get it right for reasons no one can quite put their finger on.

Re: Help Wanted: America’s love affair with amateur advice

#20

Post by criley2 »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #18
criley2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A psychiatrist that behaves as you describe is literally engaging in malpractice. You are a perfect example of what the article describes: your rationalization process for mistrusting experts seems rational at first glance, but upon closer examination it falls apart as quite simply an irrational fear used to rationalize not trusting an expert. The thing about free advice online is that... you didn't go to school for…

A psychiatrist that behaves as you describe is literally engaging in malpractice. Not if he is giving the standard advice everyone in the industry gives. There are lots of conditions where the standard expectation is that "people like you don't really get well" and "symptom management is the name of the game." It would be considered malpractice to even tell people with certain diagnoses that you will shoot for curing…

Not if he is giving the standard advice everyone in the industry gives. There are lots of conditions where the standard expectation is that "people like you don't really get well" and "symptom management is the name of the game." It would be considered malpractice to even tell people with certain diagnoses that you will shoot for curing them.

This is not a fair summary of your previous point. You previously implied that a psychiatrist will maliciously give information they know to be against the patient's interests purely to continue a financial relationship.

In this second post, you have walked back your irrational and ridiculous claim from "a psychiatrist will give you bad advice so you pay them forever to" "a psychiatrist will offer you evidence and science based advice that doesn't lie to you about your condition or future and instead seeks to give you the best options or advice that evidence teaches us can help"

Sure, that sounds great to me. That's why you trust an expert.

Now you seem to be mostly upset that a specific mental illness or condition isn't curable and may be permanent as the result of damage or pathology, and are blaming humanity's best experts for not having a panacea for your troubles.

Post reply on HN