Having read your very evocative, extensive efforts to deal with the
issues of whose constructs shall prevail -- particularly in an applied setting
-- I will beg off from trying an elaborate response. Overall, I would endorse
the kind of careful thought which you reflect in your efforts to deal with
these issues, and I could not claim that I -- trying to act as a total
constructivist -- would object to the kinds of solutions you seem to be
evolving.
The important point that I want to make: A person working in an
applied setting would do well to engage in careful analysis of these issues. I
would tell my students -- "Those are my relatives, out there, who come to the
clinics and institutions for help. Don't give them bullshit. I would hate to
think that you leave the university with credentials which allow you to give
bullshit to my relatives."
Bob, have you elaborated your thinking on these issues to the point at
which you have set them out in some sort of lengthy text? If so, would you
give me a reference so that I can track it down?
I am particularly interested, at this point, because there is a move to
set up an SIG devoted to positions which offer alternatives to construing
unwanted, yet not illegal, behaviors in terms other than "illness" terms. Also
there will be an Amer Psych Assoc symposium on Kirk and Kutchins book, THE
SELLING OF DSM: THE RHETORIC OF SCIENCE IN PSYCHIATRY. Your thoughts and the
positions you attempt to formulate appear to be very relevent.
Jim Mancuso
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%