3 ms·
My point was the breach of doctor-patient confidentiality. Which destroys the foundation of trust therapy requires. Being "legally compelled" to get help does n
by zer8k 3y ago
My point was the breach of doctor-patient confidentiality. Which destroys the foundation of trust therapy requires. Being "legally compelled" to get help does not mean that help will be received. Forced compliance has never worked. There's plenty of history to back up that statement. I don't understand if you're trying to show how much you know about mental health or something but it appears you missed the greater point.
- mvncleaninst 3y agoI'm not disagreeing with your point about confidentiality, it's good for people to have that kind of outlet where they can speak without consequences. The liquidation of that confidentiality is very very bad because it destroys an important outlet for emotional support The disagreement we have seems to be based on what the actual goal is of mental health intervention. It sounds like (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're saying the purpose is emotional growth. A neurotic is in more of a position to benefit from therapy than a psychotic. But I'm not considering things in terms of that, more so in terms of public safety