Religion and Therapy

[Jack Knave]

Nope - and I'm not getting sucked into this nonsense: you made the accusation so you cite your reasoning else we can reasonably conclude you don't understand this particular fallacy.   

"We"? This is between me and NS. He used the term previously in a wrong manner and didn't justify what he thought he was saying. You then butted in...

[Gordon]

"We"? This is between me and NS. He used the term previously in a wrong manner and didn't justify what he thought he was saying. You then butted in...

'We' - as in those reading this thread.

[Nearly Sane]

That's not what rolled eyes mean.

Isn't it? Works for me. Are all you posts only understandable from your own view point?

[Nearly Sane]

Another one who doesn't know what it means.

is that the way  you are it making up? And don't want to justify? And when someone does justify, you run around in a tiny tizzy?

[Nearly Sane]

Go on then explain it to show you do know what it means.

Shifting the burden of proof! How cute!

[Jack Knave]

is that the way  you are it making up? And don't want to justify? And when someone does justify, you run around in a tiny tizzy?

You need to learn how to write, mate.

[Jack Knave]

Shifting the burden of proof! How cute!

You're the one who is shifting....very shifty. And that is not cute at all!!!

[Nearly Sane]

You need to learn how to write, mate.

Too hard for you? Was it the commas?

[Nearly Sane]

You're the one who is shifting....very shifty. And that is not cute at all!!!

Aw diddums, the whole idea of shifting the burden of proof a bit hard for you?

[Jack Knave]

Well, after all that I need some therapy to get over the abuse I've had to put up with from the "We" on this forum.

[Nearly Sane]

Well, after all that I need some therapy to get over the abuse I've had to put up with from the "We" on this forum.

Is that cos you are a snowflake?

[Jack Knave]

Is that cos you are a snowflake?

Your English and mind is definitely going. How could a snowflake type on a computer? It would melt and seep between the keys.

[Nearly Sane]

Your English and mind is definitely going. How could a snowflake type on a computer? It would melt and seep between the keys.

Metaphor, dear child!

[Jack Knave]

Metaphor, dear child!

In what way?

[Nearly Sane]

In what way?

That's it is a metaphor, my lovely pumpkin.

[Jack Knave]

That's it is a metaphor, my lovely pumpkin.

Come again!

[Robbie]

Jack Knave it is obvious that NearlyS made a typographical error.
He meant to say either, "That's it, a metaphor, my lovely pumpkin", or
"That's a metaphor,...".

I'm off to bed in a minute but wanted to read this thread because I am in therapy and have been for a long time. I had session today and religion was mentioned by me, not my therapist.It came up because of pancake day and Iremembered Ash Wednesday followed. I said sometimes I missed church because there was a comfort in going. He said he understood that, the pattern, flow of seasons. And there our talk of religion ended because I have secular therapy which is what I want.
I read all the posts on the thread and agree that saying Saudis are pigs is a generalisation. Saudis are human beings and I have known good people from there. No-one should generalise about a race of people,or a religion.

My point is, what does that argument or bickering about typo mistakes have to do with the thread subject, Religion and Therapy? There;s no need for a war in exchange of views some shown in great posts earlier on.

Sorry for any spelling grammar or syntax (not Sin-tax or Cemtex) mistakes. Goodnight folks.

[Udayana]

Could be "Pumpkinification" ?

To me it seems obvious there must be a connection between peoples mental states, sense of identity, interactions with others and religious feelings or experiences.  Outlook too, optimism, pessimism. Stress .. . Though, apart from a bit of Jung (archetypes and collective unconscious) and some experience of gestalt I am mostly ignorant of the subject. I need time to get into it.

That is a problem with a lot of topics on here ... although perfectly worthwhile discussing in the absence of people contributing actual knowledge and information, they turn into nitpicking on wording and other more personal accusations.

Robinson, you say you have been in therapy for a long time .. does that mean it is working or not working well? Do you feel it is related to your religious outlook?

[ProfessorDavey]

Jack Knave it is obvious that NearlyS made a typographical error.
He meant to say either, "That's it, a metaphor, my lovely pumpkin", or
"That's a metaphor,...".

I'm off to bed in a minute but wanted to read this thread because I am in therapy and have been for a long time. I had session today and religion was mentioned by me, not my therapist.It came up because of pancake day and Iremembered Ash Wednesday followed. I said sometimes I missed church because there was a comfort in going. He said he understood that, the pattern, flow of seasons. And there our talk of religion ended because I have secular therapy which is what I want.
I read all the posts on the thread and agree that saying Saudis are pigs is a generalisation. Saudis are human beings and I have known good people from there. No-one should generalise about a race of people,or a religion.

My point is, what does that argument or bickering about typo mistakes have to do with the thread subject, Religion and Therapy? There;s no need for a war in exchange of views some shown in great posts earlier on.

Sorry for any spelling grammar or syntax (not Sin-tax or Cemtex) mistakes. Goodnight folks.

Good to get (sort of) back on topic.

What concerns me about the approach described in the OP is that religion is specifically introduced and developed as a theme by the therapist, regardless of whether the patient wishes it to be raised or feels it important. This contrasts markedly with your therapy experience, where you clearly indicate that it was you that raised it and you were in control of whether or not that line of discussion would be followed.

The other problem with the approach from the link in the OP, is that it appears directed, with a clear view that 'more religion' is always the answer, regardless of the patient's own attitude toward religion.

So for patients who feel religion is important and feel detached the answer is 'more religion' - perhaps fair enough.

But for patients who see religion as unimportant or are actually rather hostile the line is that their depression is linked to their lack of religious observation, so again 'more religion' is the answer.

This seems remarkably lacking in focus on the patients' individual circumstances and needs. So it seems entirely plausible that someone brought up in a faith but who has lost that faith may struggle with that realisation. Surely 'more religion' cannot always be the answer and more likely than not the answer lies in allowing the patient to recognise that not believing and not adhering to religious practices is OK and for them to rebalance their lives in a different direction.

[Rhiannon]

I e finally followed the links to get to the self help booklet and I share ProfD's reservations. It suggests religious practices which may not be possible for someone with MH issues and most worryingly emphasises what a 'good Muslim' should do - if you can't, are you a bad Muslim? There's some good stuff in there too about self compassion and looking at values - if it ended there then it would be ok but it doesn't. I'm staggered to see this as an NHS resource - and I don't believe that a comparable ones for Christians would be permitted, and tbh I would be appalled if it was.

[wigginhall]

Yes, it certainly runs against most of the therapy training in the UK, that is, advising a particular religious orientation.   To tell someone how to be a good Muslim or good Christian, strikes me as not therapeutic.   I trained in client-centred therapy, which means that the client is expected to discover their own needs and desires, and not have someone else's thrust on them.  Ironically, that is something that many clients are suffering from - having been told what to think and do.   You can't redouble on that.   

But this applies to many things - if a client is having an affair, most therapists are not going to express disapproval - how the hell is that therapeutic?   This is why gay conversion has been banned, because the therapists were often openly homophobic.

Actually, that brings up an interesting point - if you are telling people how to be a good Christian or Muslim,  would that involve telling them that you can't be gay, or divorced, or adulterous, or trans?    Again, that is about as therapeutic as a sermon from  the pulpit. 

[Udayana]

Yes, it certainly runs against most of the therapy training in the UK, that is, advising a particular religious orientation.   To tell someone how to be a good Muslim or good Christian, strikes me as not therapeutic.   I trained in client-centred therapy, which means that the client is expected to discover their own needs and desires, and not have someone else's thrust on them.  Ironically, that is something that many clients are suffering from - having been told what to think and do.   You can't redouble on that.   

But this applies to many things - if a client is having an affair, most therapists are not going to express disapproval - how the hell is that therapeutic?   This is why gay conversion has been banned, because the therapists were often openly homophobic.

Not quite sure what you mean with "most therapists are not going to express disapproval - how the hell is that therapeutic?" I am assuming you mean that expressing disapproval is not going to be therapeutic. -which is perfectly understandable. On the other hand maybe, at some point, the client needs someone to explicitly disapprove? 

Same with the Muslim self-help booklet. Maybe some people need things spelled out for them in the language of a framework in which they are already entangled? Ultimately, is there a right or wrong way or right or wrong end result or "cure"? Isn't it about a person understanding how their own mind works, getting there with some helpful hints or tips from the therapist?

[Rhiannon]

Not quite sure what you mean with "most therapists are not going to express disapproval - how the hell is that therapeutic?" I am assuming you mean that expressing disapproval is not going to be therapeutic. -which is perfectly understandable. On the other hand maybe, at some point, the client needs someone to explicitly disapprove? 

Same with the Muslim self-help booklet. Maybe some people need things spelled out for them in the language of a framework in which they are already entangled? Ultimately, is there a right or wrong way or right or wrong end result or "cure"? Isn't it about a person understanding how their own mind works, getting there with some helpful hints or tips from the therapist?

No, I don't agree. I've experienced a lot of group therapy and while it is important for someone in therapy to accept that their actions have consequences that doesn't come from disapproval, that comes from questioning and realisation.

But the kind of disapproval for religious people with MH isn't often even anything to do with behaviours that are damaging (affairs, addictions etc). I know within certain Christian circles having depression itself is seen as sinful - the gift of the Holy Spirit should be joy and not to have it is the result of unrepented sin. I intitally signalled approval for this scheme because I thought it was simply about helping religious people to accept that being mentally ill didn't mean that they were 'bad' at their faith or that their god was judging or forsaking them. Reminding a patient how to be a 'good' Muslim (or Christian, or Hindu, etc) is setting them up to fail - if you have depression or anxiety 'focussing on Allah (or God) during prayer' just might not be an option. And there is also a worrying element here that a 'good' religious person might not be able to escape from the bad marriage that is making it keeping them ill.

[wigginhall]

Not quite sure what you mean with "most therapists are not going to express disapproval - how the hell is that therapeutic?" I am assuming you mean that expressing disapproval is not going to be therapeutic. -which is perfectly understandable. On the other hand maybe, at some point, the client needs someone to explicitly disapprove? 

Same with the Muslim self-help booklet. Maybe some people need things spelled out for them in the language of a framework in which they are already entangled? Ultimately, is there a right or wrong way or right or wrong end result or "cure"? Isn't it about a person understanding how their own mind works, getting there with some helpful hints or tips from the therapist?

Interesting point about needing someone to disapprove.  I remember a friend of mine who was fiddling her fares on the Tube, and her therapist said 'so, you're a thief!',  which gave a big shock to her (my friend).   That's not how I would proceed, but I can see the point of shock tactics.    I would prefer to find out if they saw it as a problem or not.

But going back to adultery, if someone wants someone to disapprove, that suggests that they disapprove.   It's more useful probably to elicit that than have it projected onto the therapist.

In fact, a lot of the time, you are struggling with people's desire  to be approved or disapproved of over lots of things.   Just to give in and do it, is again, not therapeutic.   It's doesn't tell us anything about the client, just about me!

But as with the fiddling  example, there are different approaches, obviously.    A friend of mine's mother fell down stairs, and her therapist said, 'I bet you enjoyed it, didn't you?'   Shock tactics!

Times change as well.   Not long ago, many therapists would not see someone taking drugs, now if you did that, you would have no clients!

[wigginhall]

I think Rhiannon is right also, about depression and so on.   A religious-based therapy is a minefield really.   I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but it's not illegal of course.