now, why would scott alexander siskind not want his patients to find that he used their cases for general entertainment of his blog readers? that's somewhat a mystery to my, but perhaps you have some insight here…
-
-
It is fully consistent with APA guidelines to publish anonymized cases. If you have information that he didn't do so, you should report him to APA. But surely you are just a troll.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @_amtiskaw and
It's not about whether he committed a formal APA violation, it's about whether his patients might have been offended if they'd known the way he talked about patients on his blog, and if they'd have had a right to know about him doing so before going to him for treatment
3 replies 2 retweets 99 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @_amtiskaw and
The APA standard doesn't require consent or approval, so this is irrelevant. Any patient can read the APA guidelines and is at risk of being published about anonymously by any psychiatrist. If you have an issue with that, you should take it up with APA, not Scott.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @arthur_affect and
I don't think this is true. Lori Leibovich's book went into it a bit. (She's a psychologist who wrote about her patients.)
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @espiers @NotoriousAapje and
Scott's vivid description of both his contempt and *envy* of the convicted domestic abuser who'd had more girlfriends than him certainly crossed what most people would consider to be some sort of line, regardless of what the APA thinks
2 replies 1 retweet 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @espiers and
So do you believe that psychiatrists should be banned from sharing any negative beliefs about certain behaviors or beliefs? Do you believe that anti-racist psychiatrists are in the wrong? Or does this only apply to the 'other?'
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @espiers and
If I ran the APA, sure, I'm a ban-happy Stalinist as we all know But I don't and I wasn't really advocating that Just, you know, the "free marketplace of ideas"
2 replies 1 retweet 16 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
The argument I'm making here isn't that Scott is a racist, or even that being a racist makes him a bad psychiatrist I'm saying at the very least, HIS PATIENTS GET TO MAKE THAT DECISION
2 replies 2 retweets 32 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
His Black patients deserve to be able to read his "controversial blog posts" and make up their mind about them Being adult human beings with the right to autonomy, however low-IQ and crazy you may think they are
2 replies 1 retweet 32 likes
I'm not even saying that "They have a right to know if their doctor is racist" You can't enforce that You can't MAKE a racist doctor write blog posts about it or keep them from burying their secrets deep in their hearts
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
You can't even force them to make patients privy to their private conversations or their locked Facebook posts or their journal or the private notes they've written ABOUT THEIR PATIENTS All of that falls under their own right to privacy
1 reply 1 retweet 19 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
And that's, you know, just life It sucks but probably tons of people have had racist doctors - and suffered for it - and they'll never know and there's no easy way to do anything about it immediately
1 reply 1 retweet 21 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.