What's new

Psych Dilemma for the Church of Scientology

TheRealNoUser

Patron with Honors
There is a very sad story on CNN about a psychology experiment on a young boy who was showing effeminate tendencies and was experimented on to stop him from becoming gay. He eventually committed suicide.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/07/sissy.boy.experiment/index.html

I bet the Church Of Scientology is in a dilemma with this one. After all, they hate Psychology - so this would be a perfect vehicle for them to attack the psychs once more. But then again, they hate gays too (apparently LRH thinks they are suppressive persons - 1.1 on the Tone Scale) - and the CoS have their own programs to "help" stop people becoming gay.

Unless of course you are a rich celebrity.
 

Petey C

Silver Meritorious Patron
I can't help but feel that had his parents understood and tolerated his "effeminate" behaviour more, the poor boy would not have had to undergo the treatment. If the guy was 38 when he died recently, the treatment program would have taken place maybe 30 years ago. I don't know what human ethics regulations existed then, but experimental treatment like that would never be approved by any research facility's human ethics committee nowadays. Not that that is any comfort for the family. Most suicides are tragedies (I'd only exempt the willing suicides of people with terminal diseases and chronic, agonising pain). I'm not defending the program -- it seems crazy to me -- but I do wonder why the parents even thought about it.
 

LongTimeGone

Silver Meritorious Patron
I can't help but feel that had his parents understood and tolerated his "effeminate" behaviour more, the poor boy would not have had to undergo the treatment. If the guy was 38 when he died recently, the treatment program would have taken place maybe 30 years ago. I don't know what human ethics regulations existed then, but experimental treatment like that would never be approved by any research facility's human ethics committee nowadays. Not that that is any comfort for the family. Most suicides are tragedies (I'd only exempt the willing suicides of people with terminal diseases and chronic, agonising pain). I'm not defending the program -- it seems crazy to me -- but I do wonder why the parents even thought about it.

It'd be foolish for the cult to jump on this wagon considering the number of Scientologists who have committed suicide.

From the article we can see that the punishment was ridiculous but we have no idea why he committed suicide 30 odd years later. It may have had nothing to do with his homosexuality or the treatment - Perhaps he tried Scientology?

As to the parents' attitude; well, times change.

LTG
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
Psychologist name ==> George A Rekers

Southern Baptist Minister

Against gay and lesbian marraige

And this from Wiki

"Rekers has published numerous journal articles on gender roles among children,[15] with articles on "cross-gender identified boys" and "child gender disturbances".[16][17][18] His work has been criticized by other scholars for reinforcing sex-role stereotypes and for reliance on dubious rationales for therapeutic intervention (e.g. parents' worries that their children might become homosexuals).[19][20]"

So it does not appear that he had a lot of peer support from the profession.

The Church could be making a risky endeavor to bring it up and point fingers.

The gay and lesbian movement might agree with them but only until they find out the Church's stance.

And if they did they could not term "Psychology" as the culprit. It was primarily this Doctor advancing his theories, albeit in what seems a non-scientific manner.

Kind of like Hubbard only this is Reker's idea of "standard tech"

Rd00
 
Last edited:

uniquemand

Unbeliever
there's also a commonality: both are pretenses to being science.

Sorry you disliked this, Dart, but it's a fact. Neither psychology nor psychiatry are sciences. They are at best protosciences, with very little in the way of operational definitions, predictive capabilities, corrective capabilities, and agreed explanatory frameworks. Additionally, their categorization of disorders suffers from extreme errors involving set theory: the members of one set are not exclusive to it, and therefore multiple "disorders" contain the same symptoms, with differing resolutions. Courses in "differential diagnosis" become necessary to make use of badly defined "disorders", so that insurance forms can be filled out with pseudo-scientific language.
 

AnonKat

Crusader
predictive capabilities ----> consumer marketing



Sorry you disliked this, Dart, but it's a fact. Neither psychology nor psychiatry are sciences. They are at best protosciences, with very little in the way of operational definitions, predictive capabilities, corrective capabilities, and agreed explanatory frameworks. Additionally, their categorization of disorders suffers from extreme errors involving set theory: the members of one set are not exclusive to it, and therefore multiple "disorders" contain the same symptoms, with differing resolutions. Courses in "differential diagnosis" become necessary to make use of badly defined "disorders", so that insurance forms can be filled out with pseudo-scientific language.
 

AnonKat

Crusader
Lol, Kat. That's not prediction, that's promotion (and suggestive sales).

suggestive sales -------> tyrying to trigger the unconsious mind


5 P's Product, Promotion, Presentation, Placement, Price


Alsoo for the Bigger picture Maslows Pyramide of Needs
 

DartSmohen

Silver Meritorious Patron
Sorry you disliked this, Dart, but it's a fact. Neither psychology nor psychiatry are sciences. They are at best protosciences, with very little in the way of operational definitions, predictive capabilities, corrective capabilities, and agreed explanatory frameworks. Additionally, their categorization of disorders suffers from extreme errors involving set theory: the members of one set are not exclusive to it, and therefore multiple "disorders" contain the same symptoms, with differing resolutions. Courses in "differential diagnosis" become necessary to make use of badly defined "disorders", so that insurance forms can be filled out with pseudo-scientific language.

Hi Uniquemand,

Do you have any background in Psychology?

Not only was I Hubbard's top auditor at one time but I later on earned an honours degree in psychology.

I would agree that there are large portions of that body of study that are either obtuse or plain daft, but there are several aspects which are very pertinent.

My wife is currently doing a doctorate study in neuropsychology into matters concerning MS. This is groundbreaking work and will made a serious contribution to the ability of the medical profession to identify symptoms at an earlier stage.:clap:

Therefore to make a sweeping dismissal of it, linking it to psychiatry as a pseudoscience, is a disservice.:no:

I would agree that the early techniques in psychiatry are indefensible. My father died as a result of psychiatric atrocities.:angry:

Hubbard embarked on a campaign against psychiatry for two reasons, firstly he applied for psychiatric treatment after the war and was turned down. His theories were dismissed and lampooned as nonsense. Hubbard was humiliated and he felt slighted.

Hubbard embarked on a campaign against anyone who spoke against him. He has written on this and what he would do.

Secondly, psychiatry was a "soft" target to attack. It gave an opportunity to deflect attention and criticism away from Scientology. This has been a continuing program in the cult.:yes:

I know this is the case because I have sat and talked with Hubbard about this very matter. He was quite open and expansive about how and why he had directed this program.:ohmy:

He never talked about his rejection by the medical and psychiatric circles, but his application for psychiatric treatment is well documented.

I trust this helps you modify your general assessment.:biggrin:

Dart.
 

AnonKat

Crusader
http://www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS/Theology/barwell2.htm

Hi Uniquemand,

Do you have any background in Psychology?

Not only was I Hubbard's top auditor at one time but I later on earned an honours degree in psychology.

I would agree that there are large portions of that body of study that are either obtuse or plain daft, but there are several aspects which are very pertinent.

My wife is currently doing a doctorate study in neuropsychology into matters concerning MS. This is groundbreaking work and will made a serious contribution to the ability of the medical profession to identify symptoms at an earlier stage.:clap:

Therefore to make a sweeping dismissal of it, linking it to psychiatry as a pseudoscience, is a disservice.:no:

I would agree that the early techniques in psychiatry are indefensible. My father died as a result of psychiatric atrocities.:angry:

Hubbard embarked on a campaign against psychiatry for two reasons, firstly he applied for psychiatric treatment after the war and was turned down. His theories were dismissed and lampooned as nonsense. Hubbard was humiliated and he felt slighted.

Hubbard embarked on a campaign against anyone who spoke against him. He has written on this and what he would do.

Secondly, psychiatry was a "soft" target to attack. It gave an opportunity to deflect attention and criticism away from Scientology. This has been a continuing program in the cult.:yes:

I know this is the case because I have sat and talked with Hubbard about this very matter. He was quite open and expansive about how and why he had directed this program.:ohmy:

He never talked about his rejection by the medical and psychiatric circles, but his application for psychiatric treatment is well documented.

I trust this helps you modify your general assessment.:biggrin:

Dart.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Hi Uniquemand,

Do you have any background in Psychology?

Not only was I Hubbard's top auditor at one time but I later on earned an honours degree in psychology.

I would agree that there are large portions of that body of study that are either obtuse or plain daft, but there are several aspects which are very pertinent.

My wife is currently doing a doctorate study in neuropsychology into matters concerning MS. This is groundbreaking work and will made a serious contribution to the ability of the medical profession to identify symptoms at an earlier stage.:clap:

Therefore to make a sweeping dismissal of it, linking it to psychiatry as a pseudoscience, is a disservice.:no:

I would agree that the early techniques in psychiatry are indefensible. My father died as a result of psychiatric atrocities.:angry:

Hubbard embarked on a campaign against psychiatry for two reasons, firstly he applied for psychiatric treatment after the war and was turned down. His theories were dismissed and lampooned as nonsense. Hubbard was humiliated and he felt slighted.

Hubbard embarked on a campaign against anyone who spoke against him. He has written on this and what he would do.

Secondly, psychiatry was a "soft" target to attack. It gave an opportunity to deflect attention and criticism away from Scientology. This has been a continuing program in the cult.:yes:

I know this is the case because I have sat and talked with Hubbard about this very matter. He was quite open and expansive about how and why he had directed this program.:ohmy:

He never talked about his rejection by the medical and psychiatric circles, but his application for psychiatric treatment is well documented.

I trust this helps you modify your general assessment.:biggrin:

Dart.

Yes, I have a good background in the subject. I do not possess masters or phd degrees, but it was my primary study for my bachelor's degree. It's also been a lifelong study.

The point was not to attack those subjects, but to attack the idea that they are sciences. Please see Dr. Niall McLaren's "Humanizing Madness", an excellent book which expresses my exact position.
 
Top