Medical vs Counseling Models
I wrote this reflection for my problem identification class at the University of Rochester. The professor asked us to reflect on a particular reading, the reading for this reflection was Chapters 1 through 3 of Basic Psychopharmacology for Counselors and Psychotherapists by Sinacola and Peters-Strickland (2011). I have included my reflection below.
Medical vs Counseling Models
This week, I am reflecting on the key concepts and insights presented in Chapters 1 through 3 of Basic Psychopharmacology for Counselors and Psychotherapists by Sinacola and Peters-Strickland (2011).
Chapter 1, "Why Study Psychopharmacology," opens with an explanation of some of the conflicts between medical professionals and other nonmedical helping professions. Nonmedical helpers may see medical professionals as hasty "pill pushers." In contrast, medical professionals may see other nonmedical helpers as offering a disservice to the client by monopolizing attention, being ignorant of medical science, and refusing to consider medical options. The chapter then implores nonmedical helpers to include the medical industry in their client's conversations. It uses the analogy of a nonmedical helper being like a washing machine repair technician while the medical professional is a washing machine manufacturing engineer, explaining that the two need to work together.
Chapter 2, "Basic Neurology," does as it describes and defines the basics of neurons and their transmission, including chemical and electrical communication, the stages of an action potential's movement, as well as an overview of the different kinds of neurotransmitters. Chapter 3, "Pharmacology and Pharmacokinetics," describes how drugs are taken, absorbed, and metabolized, as well as topics like tolerance, withdrawal, and placebos. The chapters also give examples of different types of drugs and how they work.
My initial reaction to this reading was that it was condescending. From the outset, it defines two camps of people: medical professionals and nonmedical. Defining the opposing group as "nonmedical" uses a negative definition. Essentially, the authors are implying that the medical profession is important, and then there is "everyone else" who lacks the knowledge that medical professionals have, the "nonmedical." Furthermore, the example of a nonmedical helper being like a washing machine repair technician (someone with low social status), compared to a medical professional being like an engineer (someone with high social status), I also found a little offensive as an aspiring “nonmedical,” and telling of the author's position.
I also found the educational parts in chapters 2 and 3, regarding how neurons communicate and how drugs work, very heavy in definitions. The chapters seemed to define syntax, maybe indoctrinating the reading into a technical language paradigm rather than talking about the human experience. Indeed, it felt like the authors defined parts of a washing machine instead of actual human beings. I would have preferred more examples of humans and situations and feelings where their brain may respond a certain way or in which situations a human would take certain medications; even case studies would be great. I recall learning about the brain and neurology in my undergraduate class, and I much preferred the style of writing used by the author Myers in his book, Psychology, that we used in undergraduate. This reading was dry and incredibly removed from the human experience.
I did question a few things: If the "medical professional" can be defined so easily as one who uses medicine and science to heal patients, then what is a nonmedical professional? What unified positive definition should we give ourselves, and what are our tools if they are not drugs and medical science? I also questioned how much knowledge is enough to help. I worry that so much knowledge is available that I could spend all the time stuck reading and not enough acting. I want to act, not just read. I want to be with humans, not books. I want to connect with them, not objectify, diagnose, and prescribe them like washing machines.
This article made me reflect and grow. It made me ponder the divide between medical and nonmedical professions and realize that I am stepping into somewhat of a turf war, which makes me sad since all we presumably want to do is help people. The article also surfaced my preference to avoid pharmaceutical medication and use it only when researched carefully and ideally for just a short term period. However, many people are on medication for life; they cannot stop taking it, so for people like this it makes sense to me.
