Abstract
AbstractIn this chapter, clinical psychologist Tobias Gustum Lindstad questions the scientific paradigm underlying the so-called Medical model of psychotherapy. Within such a model, Lindstad explains, psychotherapy research has lost its focus on critical dialogue and philosophical reflection, while psychotherapy has implemented treatment models supported by statistical evidence. Treatment interventions are tested with the same procedures as medicines, and thus the interventions are expected to work as ‘miracle drugs’, he argues. The Medical model commits the therapist to focus on implementing these specific interventions, which may effectively lead the focus away from the actual and unique needs of individual patients. In line with the philosophical framework presented in Part I, the chapter gives a philosophical diagnosis of this situation, by arguing that it is based on one specific and questionable view of causality: the Humean one. Lindstad argues here that an effective and constructive critique of the Medical model must start by revising its most basic assumptions about causality. The chapter shows how a switch to a dispositionalist view on causality is an indispensable step toward a psychological practice that is pluralist and relevant for the single person.
Highlights
Being educated as a clinical psychologist, I am grateful for having had the opportunity to work with unforgettable patients and colleagues
Though this book promotes an account of causality relevant for all health sciences and professions, the focus of this chapter is on how dispositionalism may improve upon the foundations of clinical psychology, psychotherapy research and mental health care services
Philosophers have often considered it a virtue to be informed by psychology
Summary
Being educated as a clinical psychologist, I am grateful for having had the opportunity to work with unforgettable patients and colleagues. Lindstad their tiptoes needlessly worrying about whether they conform sufficiently to standardized procedures thought to have had results on an average level This runs the risk of dehumanizing mental health care services by not taking sufficiently into account the context-bound complexities of clinical encounters and by being an obstacle for a sufficient focus on the unique needs of individual patients. Though this book promotes an account of causality relevant for all health sciences and professions, the focus of this chapter is on how dispositionalism may improve upon the foundations of clinical psychology, psychotherapy research and mental health care services This is important for psychologists, but for all clinicians providing psychotherapy or related services (nurses, physiotherapists, psychiatrists, physicians, social workers etc). Will the recent advancements of dispositionalism (see Anjum, Chap. 2, this book) provide resources for a refreshingly new foundation for psychological science and psychotherapy research, and for more humane mental health care services
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
