Talk:Psychiatry/Archive 3

message: I may have missed it but could anyone clarify what specialist training psychiatrists receive? This would seem to to be part of the core of what modern psychiatry is. I know the article mentions the different areas of practical experience. But, for example, how much teaching is there on the various lines of work on mental health (e.g. genetic, neurological/psychological, social). How much teaching and training on medication, how much on psychosocial interventions esp. particular ones like Cognitive Behavioural Therapy? How much on general counselling skills? Who does the training? Franzio 11:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, Franzio -- the article could include more specifics about the training. I'm actually in a psychiatry training program in the US now, so I'll see if I can dig up my copy of the ACGME (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) requirements for US psych residency programs and summarize them briefly.  Scot →Talk 07:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: One of the peculiarity of the psychiatry is that psychiatrists are thought how to treat patients when they are not in agreement, in a specific course called "patients management". The very strange part is that psychiatrists are thought to fraud the patients, lie at them and to use the force, instead of searching the better therapy for the patients. -- 82.54.154.105 20:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teaching/training details  

message: I think the introductory statement about only doctors (incl. consultants) being able to prescribe in the UK isn't accurate, not clear if it's referring only to psychiatric drugs. Qualified and registered nurses and pharmacists have had limited prescribing powers for a number of years, which are currently being extended - I'm not sure on the exact situation with regard to psychiatric drugs so will leave any amendments to others who are.  Franzio 18:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nurse & Pharmacist prescribing 

message: What's going on, this page isn't existing at the moment? --Horses In The Sky 23:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted page?

message: For the sake of consensus, I am happy to agree to any of these statements;
* “Complete response does actually occur in psychiatry, although admittedly not as often as one would like.” or
* “Cure is a rare commodity in psychiatry." or
* “Psychiatry believes that these conditions will eventually be curable, but only if (1) a treatment is found serendipitously that completely reverses the disease process, (2) new understandings of the disease lead to the development of new treatments that may cure the conditions.” or
 
* “Psychiatry believes that these conditions will one day be cured. And is working actively towards that goal.”
These are your own words. I can not able to give any greater concession for the sake of consensus than to agree completely with your own statements. --WikiCats 12:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about "Most psychiatric illnesses cannot currently be cured." Scot →Talk 01:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with ScotG. JFW | T@lk 07:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment(cont.)

message: That section is rather a mess.  I hacked a t a bit of the beginning, but I get the sense that what is really meant by the later parts is more like:-  "some psychiatrists are badly trained and use worthless techniques".  If that is verifiable then say it.  "Problems also exist" is weasel wording, and innuendo and better lost.  I'd say that one of the things about the use of drugs is that knowing how they affect a range of people, and what to look out for is part of the technique and knowledge.  Although we are a much less variable species than other apes, particularly those of us whose ancestors left Africa early, it would be very optimistic to expect drugs whcih do not produce different levels of effect on people with different alleles.  And yes, it will be nice to have better drugs one day but is that truly encyclopedic?  Needs a severe prunign and re-writing, with a clear idea fo what it is about  Midgley 18:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I did some pruning, and some rewording and re-working of this section.  At least it reads somewhat better, I think.  I also went through the article to standardize the reference format, and in the process realized that several of the refs in this section are not clearly cited -- one can't just say (McGuffin et al, 1999) without an endnote to give the full reference.  I marked all these instances with the  tag, and if the references aren't fixed by someone who knows them then statements will be subject to deletion. Scot →Talk 04:14, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements and Criticisms 

message: Too often victims of prolonged rohypnol abuse become labeled as mentally ill. As far as I have been able to tell Mental Health Professionals are not trained in this area and are not helping the patients and actually putting them in a position where they will continue to be harmed.  There are many sites including one by the Drug Enforcement Agency that will give information letting doctors of psychiatry know symtoms including delusions, moments of extreme agitation, and even hallucinations.  Benzodiazapines should not be prescribed unless necessary, so they may be detected by vitims of this crime through urine samples.  Consider unexpected urine test on patients so that the predators will not be prepared and disrupt an accurate analysis and diagnosis.  URGENT ATTENTION is needed to combat this problem.  PLEASE examine this issue with complete desire to help patients in need of mental recovery and safety.
Psychiatry will be a more notably recognized profession if this problem is addressed properly.
Please respond with a reply to Anthony K. Ammons  [email address removed]
Thank you for taking the time to read this and in advance for your consideration.
:What exactly are you planning to contribute to the psychiatry article? Do you have any figures on the prevalence of chronic flunitrazepam administration, and why should a whole field be trained to recognise this? Delusions, hallucinations and agitation are more likely a result of withdrawal of benzodiazepines. I agree that benzodiazepines should not be dished out like sweets, but I suspect your view of "unless necessary" may not coincide with that of many health professionals. I have removed your email address. Wikipedia is popular, and that includes spambots. JFW | T@lk 22:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  rohypnol abuse misdiagnosed