From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Stranded on an Island
Keywords: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Date: 2 Sep 92 05:36:32 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Sep1.192252.368@acd4.acd.com> wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpeck) writes:
#In <BtvCwr.G94.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu 
#   (Susan Garvin) writes: 
#In article <1992Aug31.144107.23778@acd4.acd.com> wdo@TEFS1.acd.com 
#   (Bill Overpeck) writes: 
#
##Passive-aggressive behavior is also unhealthy, Jim.  
#
##When laypeople refer to someone else's mental problems on
##the net, I doubt that anyone takes them seriously.  (When
##I make such comments, I don't expect that anyone reading 
##them will say, "Hmm, that diagnosis must be correct.")  When
##someone who has claimed in the past to be a mental health
##practicioner does so, though, more weight might be given
##to the comments.  Just how ethical is it for you to practice 
##psychology in newsgroups?
#
#Observing the nature of a given behavior doesn't constitute a 
#diagnosis (passive agressive behavior is not the same as Passive
#Agressive Personality Disorder).  

Fine.  I was technically incorrect.

It does make you appear hypocritical, however, since you 
criticize Keegan for making an observation about Holtsinger
and denial, saying that he doesn't have enough information
to make that judgment while simultaneously making an
observation about Jim's behavior.

#Nor does it imply that I am 
#"practicing psychology" which, among other things, requires a 
#license to do so (I'm a clinical social worker), a mutually 
#agreed upon set of goals between provider and client (or his 
#agent), a signed consent to treatment, and a contract which
#describes the basis upon which services will be provided.

Again, I was technically incorrect.  I hope that you
understood my meaning anyway.

##Your implication is extremely prejudicial.  
#
##As is yours.
#
#How so?  My comments didn't characterize an entire group of 
#people in a negative way.  On the other hand, when someone
#says "see your therapist" in an obviously insincere and flip-
#pant manner, it implies that people in therapy are worthy of
#ridicule.

I disagree.  

I think Holtsinger should see a therapist.  I'm not sure
why you think Keegan doesn't agree with me.  Did you gain
telepathic powers when you got your MSW?

##Are people in therapy somehow unworthy of your respect?
#
##Do you treat your clients this way?
#
#With respect?  Yes.  It's offensive to imply that membership 
#in that population is somehow demeaning.

No, not "with respect".  Do you condescend to them like you
do to people on the net?  

Again, I think that someone who is apparently incapable of
telling the truth has problems and should get some help.
I don't think that this opinion implies that I don't
respect people who need help.  I'm still not sure why
you think "See your therapist" is an insult.  I'm
starting to think that you just wanted to flame Jim
and this was the only avenue available.

Susan,
who is grateful that she won't be getting any e-mail from
the "Never Argue with Overpeck" bomber this time
Newsgroups: talk.abortion