Pill Pushers vs Ignorant Smotherers
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.
Pill Pushers vs Ignorant Smotherers
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 incredibly dry and incredibly removed from the human experience.
I have had personal experience in being prescribed medication, and I may be personally biased against it. In my late teens and twenties, I was feeling depressed, so a general practitioner just gave me antidepressants during a 15-minute consultation, which I took on and off for years before deciding to stop. I wish the general practitioner had told me to see a psychologist for psychotherapy instead because it was not until I did get psychotherapy that I cured the underlying depression. I also had an experience when visiting a psychiatrist in an attempt to stop binge drinking and binge stimulant use; I was told during a 15-minute consultation I was bipolar and given a cocktail of drugs that tyrannized my life for several years. It was not until I stopped drinking alcohol and substances altogether (now nine years clean), again with the help of my therapist, that I no longer oscillated between happy and sad because I was no longer binging. Subsequently, I no longer needed medication, which I am so glad to be rid of out of my body.
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 a turf war, which makes me sad since all we presumably want to do is help people. The article also surfaced my bias that I believe a person is only truly healthy when they are not on medication, and medication should be used only in short-term and severe scenarios to get the person out of their dire situation and into a healthy biological, psychological, and social state. However, many people are on medication for life; they cannot stop taking it, so I need to play with my own ideas here and retire my idealism in this regard. Whilst dying without drugs or medicine in my body is my goal, it's not everyone else's and that is entirely okay. I do need to know about drugs and neuroscience and should not shy away from continuing education here and proactively partnering with the medical establishment. I do not see gains in me judging and ignoring medicine and those who create and promote pharmaceuticals. We need to all work together.
