Election 2016 and the impact on Clinical Psychology

[deleted407083]

FACT: Looks like our 45th president of the United States will be Donald J. Trump.

Obviously I want to keep this thread civil and I know the country is deeply divided over the candidates. Many of us (including myself) are very upset and scared because of the results of the election, but I would like to have a discussion on how this will impact our field.

Just some questions to start off a discussion:

Repeal of ACA (Obamacare): What will this mean for mental health care? Our salaries?

What direction should this field go to ensure job security and competitive salaries?

Just wanted to get things started as I need to stay off my depressing Facebook feed.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...loses-trump-clinton-healing-america/93170124/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WisNeuro]

Looks like I'm planning on leaving federal employment at about the right time...

 

[deleted407083]

Looks like I'm planning on leaving federal employment at about the right time...

Interesting. I wonder how this affects private sector hospitals and non-profit hospitals. Obviously research may be cut affecting positions utilizing that funding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ollie123]

Its really tough to say what the future holds at this point. After every election, people on both sides catastrophize. The impact is never that extreme. We will continue to wake up and go to work. Jobs will continue to exist in this field and others. The stock market is already leveling out. Regardless of political affiliation, one has to acknowledge that a lot of Trump's "policies" are vague and not actionable. I think the jury is still out what will actually happen, but I'll be surprised if its anything too extreme. I think the greatest threat is international relations, but hopefully his cabinet will keep him from doing anything too stupid.

For all the discussion, exchange plans make up an almost laughably small portion of the overall insurance market. Even a straight repeal of ACA with nothing else in place (which I think is unlikely to happen) probably wouldn't have a hugely overwhelming impact on most hospital systems. Republicans have historically provided more NIH funding than democrats (though are far more likely to cut basic research). Trump is a wild card on most issues (was science funding discussed at all this election?) so who knows. My money is on priorities continuing to shift, but we will adapt. From a professional standpoint, I don't see an imminent collapse of the field. I'm scared, disappointed and catastrophizing with the best of em right now - but trying to at least label those for what they are.

My biggest concern and where I expect to see the most immediate effects is on my clients. Disenfranchised folks will be hit hardest. They will experience the most election-related distress in the short-term and are likely to be hit hardest by any policy changes. My wife and I were talking about this issue last night. We agreed that one of the greatest windows of insight either of us has ever regarding our own privilege was realizing just how little a Trump victory was likely to directly impact us (personally) relative to many others we care about. Which doesn't make this outcome even slightly easier for either of us to accept (and actually strongly motivates us to fight harder), but was a life-changing experience nonetheless.

 

[happy567]

-

 

[DynamicDidactic]

I think I just did my first "like" for Ollie. Is that the correct lingo?

I remember a similar "sky is falling" reaction to Bush winning in 2000. An unexpected consequence of his actions to start a war was the increased need for clinical psychologists in the VA and dollars for military research. Up until those wars, psychology was almost died in the VA.

So, you really don't know and, as Ollie points out, there doesn't seem to much of an impact on the field as a whole. Actually, his rhetoric seems to support services for veterans, which includes mental health services.

Also, lets not forget that Donald isn't like the typical Republican president. He is probably the most LGBT-friendly republican president or candidate. Despite his rhetoric he is a business-Republican and not a conservative-Republican.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Dismantling the ACA could be a good thing, though it is not without pitfalls (e.g. more restrictive, may leave the most vulnerable at risk). I don't think he'd cut the VA budget, he could even increase it. A lot of it depends on his cabinet, so it'll be wait and see.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'm not too worried about the immediate effects of Trump. 4 years won't be hard to get through. It's more of what he could do to the Supreme Court, which could push us closer to some Theocratic bent in interpreting the Constitution. That effect will last decades most likely.

As for the VA budget, you may start to see a slight move towards privatization of healthcare in that regard. It'll be easy. Underfund/staff many medical centers. Start pushing stories about inadequate care to garner more public support. Step 3: profit! I would laugh my ass off though, if that happens. Let's see what happens when our frequent flyers find out that private practitioners won't put up with anywhere near the same amount of **** that providers in the VA are forced to put up with.

 

[Sanman]

Well,
I think the frightening part is that Trump is largely unencumbered by party loyalty or working within the system as usual. So, we may all have to brace ourselves everything being not business as usual. I wandered over to Trump's website and did a little reading this morning after the news was official. His platform explicitly states that he supports increased mental health funding for veterans and increased hiring of mental health clinicians. Additionally, repeal of the ACA is not necessarily a bad thing in my book as it makes solo or small group PP more difficult. Increased funding of HSA accounts may actually help us as not dealing with insurance hurdles that want to reduce sessions and being paid directly by clients more often reduces overhead and increases possible self-pay clientele for those that may not participate in insurance plans. The real question is what actually happens. Candidate Trump proposed a whole lot of vague grand plans. We will see what all President Trump can accomplish within the confines of bureaucracy (since he is going to have a hard time if he wants to just dismantle congress and make all the decisions himself) as this is not a company, it is a republic.

 

[deleted343839]

A repeal of the ACA is neither imminent nor guaranteed given the composition of the incoming Congress. Instituting a public option might effectively strangle the ACA but it's unclear whether the political will is there. Trump has made a little noise about "mental health reform" but who knows what he's talking about specifically. I think it's premature to speculate about what might happen for third party payers. When it comes to health care reform Trump may make some strange bedfellows.

My VA friends are worried. I doubt much will change for academics, except possibly for those who work in politically sensitive areas (eg, HIV/STI prevention, etc.) - depends on how many old school culture warriors make their way into the administration.

Most of my private practice friends in urban areas seem to keep a steady business. They tell me that during recent economic downturns their clients tended to terminate sooner than average, but they still have new clients to fill slots, so there is a bit more of a revolving door but business doesn't dry up altogether.

Professionally, I'm not too worried. I am worried about civil liberties, nativism, and foreign policy.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Pence is my bigger concern because if he has a way in appointments....watch out. However, there is hope.

Trump literally waited until his last sentence to even mention Pence; that wasn't an oversight.

 

[cara susanna]

Trump's 100 day plan was revealed and one of his actions would be to instate a federal hiring freeze. Not good for anyone in the VA (or hoping to work in the VA). Unless they're included in the public healthcare exemption, but I highly doubt it?

 

[WisNeuro]

Trump's 100 day plan was revealed and one of his actions would be to instate a federal hiring freeze. Not good for anyone in the VA (or hoping to work in the VA). Unless they're included in the public healthcare exemption, but I highly doubt it?

It's unclear, he did exempt "public health" from the hiring freeze. So, it depends on what workers are defined under that vague term. I think you should worry more about the likely salary freezes that are likely to be in the pipeline. These 1% increases are going to seem like great deals after a few more 0% periods.

 

[WisNeuro]

Ah, here we go

"Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice;"

Yeah, my impending career change is looking better and better.

 

[PsyDr]

Business only increases during hard times. Time to hire more.

 

[Sanman]

Ah, here we go

"Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice;"

Yeah, my impending career change is looking better and better.

Out of curiosity WIS, why the exit? I actually have a few,federal applications out and have been weighing that and private practice.

 

[WisNeuro]

Out of curiosity WIS, why the exit? I actually have a few,federal applications out and have been weighing that and private practice.

Multifactorial. Partially due to a move back to a desired location. Partially due to an increasing demand for secondary gain type evaluations (my current PVT failure rate is >50%). And also perhaps the notion that the several jobs that I have looked into have a 15-30% increase in pay from what I make now, with similar benefits. It's a hard system to work in without becoming demoralized. Although, your mileage may vary depending on your clinic and referral sources, so take my experience with a grain of salt.

But, in all seriousness, as time goes on, they keep cutting benefits and your salary increases lag far behind inflation. And, I can't imagine any of that changing course in the next 4 years, at least.

 

[erg923]

Out of curiosity WIS, why the exit? I actually have a few,federal applications out and have been weighing that and private practice.

Multifactorial.It's a hard system to work in without becoming demoralized. Although, your mileage may vary depending on your clinic and referral sources, so take my experience with a grain of salt.

This is true. My 15% admin carve out (for internship and associated duties) really saves me from burnout some weeks. My productivity target itself is cushy compared to the private sector, but that doesn't mean the flood of patients ever stops and our general MH service (I'm part of ambulatory care service) is understaffed, even though the bean counters disagree. VA staff psychologist/clinical service positions are a great way t0 kick off a career, but it can lose many of its high points between years 5 and 10. I'm currently 4 years in.

One of the ironic twists, I think, is that when you're making above many ECPs AND not putting in over 40 hours, it makes you itchy to find even greener pastures that may be out there. And there are some, for sure. On the hand, it can keep people stuck as well-"golden handcuffs."

 

[neuronic]

So this came from his website under positions and VA reform:

"Donald J. Trump's 10 Point Plan to Reform The Department of Veterans Affairs

1. Appoint a VA Secretary whose sole purpose will be to serve veterans. Under a Trump Administration, the needs of D.C. bureaucrats will no longer be placed above those of our veterans.

2. Use the powers of the presidency to remove and discipline the federal employees and managers who have violated the public's trust and failed to carry out the duties on behalf of our veterans.

3. Ask that Congress pass legislation that empowers the Secretary of the VA to discipline or terminate any employee who has jeopardized the health, safety or well-being of a veteran.

4. Create a commission to investigate all the fraud, cover-ups, and wrong-doing that has taken place in the VA, and present these findings to Congress to spur legislative reform.

5. Protect and promote honest employees at the VA who highlight wrongdoing, and guarantee their jobs will be protected.

6. Create a private White House hotline, which will be active 24 hours a day answered by a real person. It will be devoted to answering veteran's complaints of wrongdoing at the VA and ensure no complaints fall through the cracks.

7. Stop giving bonuses to any VA employees who are wasting money, and start rewarding employees who seek to improve the VA's service, cut waste, and save lives.

8. Reform the visa system to ensure veterans are at the front of the line for health services, not the back.

9. Increase the number of mental health care professionals, and allow veteran's to be able to seek mental health care outside of the VA.

10. Ensure every veteran has the choice to seek care at the VA or at a private service provider of their own choice. Under a Trump Administration, no veteran will die waiting for service."

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Good on paper (just those above points, not anything else about him)...I'm willing to wait to see how he implements those points.

 

[therapist89]

As a queer person of color, I have never felt more unsafe in this country than right now, as Trump and his supporters have openly supported violence against ethnic and sexual minorities. I'm thankful that at least one person on this thread has mentioned the toll this will take on marginalized communities. Please validate and provide compassionate, effective coping strategies for your clients of color, your LGBTQI+ clients, your disabled clients, etc. There's a visceral fear knowing that about half of the country has voted against your right to exist, whether they intended to or not. And that marginalized individuals are already being shot at, spit on, sexually harassed... the list goes on:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656

 

[smalltownpsych]

As a queer person of color, I have never felt more unsafe in this country than right now, as Trump and his supporters have openly supported violence against ethnic and sexual minorities. I'm thankful that at least one person on this thread has mentioned the toll this will take on marginalized communities. Please validate and provide compassionate, effective coping strategies for your clients of color, your LGBTQI+ clients, your disabled clients, etc. There's a visceral fear knowing that about half of the country has voted against your right to exist, whether they intended to or not. And that marginalized individuals are already being shot at, spit on, sexually harassed... the list goes on:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656

Some of my patients are indeed scared by these election results. As a psychologist, I think very carefully about how to respond to this. I utilize a similar approach to how I work with family systems. I emphasize very clearly that it is not my role to take sides. I just had a kid seeking emancipation ask if they were doing the right thing. I emphasized that I supported their right to make a choice and pursue it, but that it is not my place to determine if it is right or wrong. That would be for them to decide and I will support them through the process. Same way with the election. I support them through the process and it is up to them to determine what to fear and what not to fear. I will ask questions to help them explore the likelihood of negative occurrences just like I would with any other fear, but I am not going to do that work for them. I will also help them to explore responses to this and estimate efficacy of the response. Same as i would with a patient approaching any situation in their life. Also, as a psychologist, I need to evaluate my own responses to this event and implement the same strategies. As far as marginalized communities go, that's who I have been fighting for day in and day out throughout my career. It's not like the powerful and privileged are lining up to see me.

 

[Grenth]

Would Trump's stated federal hiring freeze affect VA/BoP interns? At this time in 4 years I had hoped to have a VA internship and I wonder if those will still be a thing. Although, if they can't hire me after graduation anyway it might not be worth it anyway. I'm also concerned about PSLF (loans from my pre-PhD MA) although I was never counting on it. A recession starting while I'm in school/graduating would also be a bad thing but I'm not sure if the presidency/government affects that in an appreciable way.

 

[WisNeuro]

It won't likely affect the next cohort or two, since some of our budgets are appropriated in advance. Although, 4 years from now it's really hard to say. Luckily, you have some time and you'll be able to see what is happening in the VA. I'd worry less about the hiring freeze and more about what they do about pay stagnation and increasingly whittling away at the benefits in the VA. That's what is going to affect you more. Also, there is a huge push to re-configure the productivity requirements in many VISN's. SO I'm not sure how much longer people will be enjoying lower productivity targets than their colleagues in other areas.

Bottom line, try to stay abreast of the happenings and changes (check the sites Fedsmith and govexec for some of the news) to see how much of a career you may want to make the VA in the future. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

 

[cara susanna]

Well, if he wants to hire more MH providers, so maybe the federal hiring freeze wouldn't apply to us? That makes me feel a bit relieved actually. I think that I want a VA job.

I guess that increasing private options is risky, especially given the problems that we've seen with Choice.

Oh, and as a PTSD provider, I will never forget what he said about military sexual assault being inevitable when you combine men and women. I do not want that guy in charge of the VA system.

 

[erg923]

10

It won't likely affect the next cohort or two, since some of our budgets are appropriated in advance. Although, 4 years from now it's really hard to say. Luckily, you have some time and you'll be able to see what is happening in the VA. I'd worry less about the hiring freeze and more about what they do about pay stagnation and increasingly whittling away at the benefits in the VA. That's what is going to affect you more. Also, there is a huge push to re-configure the productivity requirements in many VISN's. SO I'm not sure how much longer people will be enjoying lower productivity targets than their colleagues in other areas.

Bottom line, try to stay abreast of the happenings and changes (check the sites Fedsmith and govexec for some of the news) to see how much of a career you may want to make the VA in the future. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Approximately 300 VA interns across the country currently make $24,000/year and provide thousands of hours of cheap labor for the VA. What possible incentive would trump or any other president have to cut such a negligible portion of the budget?

 

[WisNeuro]

Approximately 300 VA interns across the country currently make $24,000/year and provide thousands of hours of cheap labor for the VA. What possible incentive would trump or any other president have to cut such a negligible portion of the budget?

You've worked in the VA for how long and you don't think Congress or upper level leadership would make decisions that make no logical or economic sense?

 

[biscuitsbiscuits]

As these protests continue, consider:

Which party styles itself as the champions of the poor?

Which party needs for their to be racial strife?

The democrats.

So, why would the democrats actually want for their to be fewer poor people and less racial strife?

They wouldn't. Hmm.

What exactly is the gain for democrats when poverty and racial strife continue?

 

[futureapppsy2]

Also, lets not forget that Donald isn't like the typical Republican president. He is probably the most LGBT-friendly republican president or candidate. Despite his rhetoric he is a business-Republican and not a conservative-Republican.

His VP is Mike Pence, though--a guy who believes in conversion therapy and enacted a bill that explicitly allowed discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Honestly, I don't think anyone really knows what Trump's policies are at this point. He has no legislative history of any sort and rarely touched on policy in his campaign. Some of things in his 100 day plan are straight-up "not how this works" (e.g., deleting two regulations for every one new regulation written, which makes no sense whatsoever).

 

[LAPsyGuy]

As these protests continue, consider:

Which party styles itself as the champions of the poor?

Which party needs for their to be racial strife?

The democrats.

So, why would the democrats actually want for their to be fewer poor people and less racial strife?

They wouldn't. Hmm.

And now the partisanship rears its ugly head. I think many in the Democratic Party would be happy if social justice were actually implemented. I find your post to be deeply cynical.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

Anyway, I think deep cynicism is a reasonable position.

Sad. Is that universal for you, or just about politics?

 

[erg923]

Sad. Is that universal for you, or just about politics?

Anyone who isn't cynical about politics has their head in the sand.

Both "parties" in this election have been divisive and quite disgusting to me. I voted, but I've never registered with either party, and I doubt I ever will.

I also agree with Jon Snow, in that I did not allow my children to be around much of the TV/media coverage for most of the election. Both because I did not want them to think it was OK to sexually assault women, but also because I do not want them to start thinking about America in terms of race and socioeconomics spheres. I find this very sad.

I have also had a hard time understanding the economic anger in this election, on both sides, because I have never viewed politicians or government policy as barriers to achieving my life goals. My savings account is not as robust as I want it to be because of ME, not because of Democratic or Republicans policies. The sooner people come to terms with the fact the politicians do not care about you and that maybe YOU are responsible for not being where you want in life, the better off society will be.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

Anyone who isn't cynical about politics has their head in the sand.

Both "parties" in this election have been divisive and quite disgusting to me. I voted, but I've never registered with either party, and I doubt I ever will.

I also agree with Jon Snow, in that I did not allow my children to be around much of the TV/media coverage for most of the election. Both because I did not want them to think it was OK to sexually assault women, but also because I do not want them to start thinking about America in terms of race and socioeconomics spheres. I find this very sad.

I have also had a hard time understanding the economic anger in this election, on both sides, because I have never viewed politicians or government policy as barriers to achieving my life goals. My savings account is not as robust as I want it to be because of ME, not because of Democratic or Republicans policies. The sooner people come to terms with the fact the politicians do not care about you and that maybe YOU are responsible for not being where you want in life, the better off society will be.

It's always surprising to me when others defend cynicism. I get being disappointed and angry, but giving up on the possibility for change and improvement is a dead end. You're welcome to it, but deciding to be powerless and hopeless seems illogical to me. Have at it.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

Defending cynicism? As if it needs to be. I haven't given up on improvement. We've come a long way as a country. I argued that the democratic party is using a cynical strategy, stoking the fires of division for the purpose of maintaining power. They got 66 percent of people who identify as Hispanic and ~90 percent of people who identify as Black to vote for Clinton. . .and they lost. . . because they didn't get a high enough turn out in those demographics. I am not being cynical to point this out. Without racial division, the democrats don't win elections. The republicans have had their own demographic problem, namely the religious right who are not ideologically attracted, necessarily, to classical liberalism, but respond to things like opposing gay marriage (Pence). I believe republicans thought at one point they could get minority votes (which they desperately want) by campaigning against gay marriage because minority voting blocks tend to oppose it at higher rates. Note, this wasn't a huge topic in this election because it's not a winning issue. By and large, the gay rights battle has been won amongst the younger population. But, a bone was still thrown by sticking Pence in as VP. Politics is a cynical game. Both parties want to be in power and they will say what they think the public wants to hear in order to make that happen.

Sounds cynical to me. I would argue there is a difference between the cynicism in politics, which is instrumental, and cynicism in the electorate, which is powerlessness and hopelessness. You seem to be endorsing the latter while accepting the former.

 

[erg923]

It's always surprising to me when others defend cynicism. I get being disappointed and angry, but giving up on the possibility for change and improvement is a dead end. You're welcome to it, but deciding to be powerless and hopeless seems illogical to me. Have at it.

1. Why?

2. The highlighted statement doesn't follow from my position. I just dont agree that the process comes from politicians, however. And certainly not anyone who was is this year's race.

What was that famous Regan quote? Something like: "Hi! I am from the government, and I am here to help." Um...right! lol

 

[LAPsyGuy]

1. Why?

2. The highlighted statement doesn't follow from my position. I just dont agree that the process comes from politicians, however. And certainly not anyone who was is this year's race.

What was that famous Regan quote? Something like: "Hi! I am from the government, and I am here to help." Um...right! lol

The highlighted statement comes from the notion of cynicism, itself.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

1. Why?

2. The highlighted statement doesn't follow from my position. I just dont agree that the process comes from politicians, however. And certainly not anyone who was is this year's race.

What was that famous Regan quote? Something like: "Hi! I am from the government, and I am here to help." Um...right! lol

Perhaps there is some conflation between realism and cynicism? It's hard to believe psychologists would endorse cynicism on the side of the electorate and still be able to practice effectively.

 

[erg923]

It's hard to believe psychologists would endorse cynicism on the side of the electorate and still be able to practice effectively.

Lets not do this kind of thing, k.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

Lets not do this kind of thing, k.

Ok, but it seems like one of the most important things we can do.

 

[erg923]

Ok, but it seems like one of the most important things we can do.

I meant your attempt to correlate political views (or lack there of) with professional competencies.

 

[deleted106747]

Anyone who isn't cynical about politics has their head in the sand.

Both "parties" in this election have been divisive and quite disgusting to me. I voted, but I've never registered with either party, and I doubt I ever will.

I also agree with Jon Snow, in that I did not allow my children to be around much of the TV/media coverage for most of the election. Both because I did not want them to think it was OK to sexually assault women, but also because I do not want them to start thinking about America in terms of race and socioeconomics spheres. I find this very sad.

I have also had a hard time understanding the economic anger in this election, on both sides, because I have never viewed politicians or government policy as barriers to achieving my life goals. My savings account is not as robust as I want it to be because of ME, not because of Democratic or Republicans policies. The sooner people come to terms with the fact the politicians do not care about you and that maybe YOU are responsible for not being where you want in life, the better off society will be.

Here's where I think some will call it identity politics, but I think your identity has a lot to do with whether you can view politicians or government policy as barriers to achieving your life goals. I have no illusions that politicians care about me, but I also have no illusions that my gender has played a role in my ability to move forward in systems. I've seen it happen. I've seen it happen to others. I would like to challenge anyone who says there is no system, deliberate or not, in place that blocks achievement to look at their own workplace. Who is working the lowest paid jobs, who is working the highest? I already can predict that someone here will say, oh my job, you've got a woman in charge, etc. etc. But look at all your employment situations. Who's the janitor and who's the president? Who's the CEO? Who's the largest group in charge even if there is a woman or a POC in charge?

I am a huge believer in internal locus of control, and I take responsibility for my life choices. I have made bad choices (becoming a psychologist?) that have influenced my life. But that's not the whole picture.

 

[deleted106747]

I think who is in charge broken down by visually recognized categories is complicated. Personally, I believe it to be the wrong question.

Also, when the solution is force it. Make it about quotas and government contracts and grants that can only go to women or minorities.... this creates other problems.

It is both complex and simple.
and if it's the wrong question, what is the correct question?

I didn't say to force it. But I think it needs to be paid attention to.

 

[deleted106747]

I don't know. But even just looking at what you stated could be misleading. What was the available pool of applicants for each position? How and why were decisions made? Many things could account for asymmetries. In some domains, depending how you parse, white makes are actually under represented. To me this is not simple.

but then why is the available pool for the positions what it is? why are the decisions what they are? Indeed, many things account for the asymmetries. they aren't necessarily about that job, itself. They are nationwide asymmetries that cause those in the individual workplace.
I am sure there are some places where white males are underrepresented, but that is not the usual case in large, powerful systems. you might find that in a nonprofit but you're not going to find that in a large urban or suburban hospital.
so you are looking at a larger, systemic issue, and I think that is what people are troubled by.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

I meant your attempt to correlate political views (or lack there of) with professional competencies.

I think it holds, but not political views. Cynisim. It's hard to hold hope for clients when we have none ourselves.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

Right. So, is it wrong that in a particular hospital, the janitorial staff are black and the admins are white? Maybe. But, you couldn't simply have them swap roles. There are entire fields of study toward this. Take a look at the Ivies and their demographics or law schools such as the University of Texas. In my opinion, these are generational issues and promoting better opportunities will gradually take care of the problem. Part of the problem as I see it is how to do that. And, I think that some of our government programs perpetuate the issue.


What I was thinking of was tech and in some very large and powerful companies with the H1B programs being what they are where white males are now underrepresented by proportion of graduates in the field and available jobs.

The straw men arguments are never helpful, and I assume they're used to confuse the issues. Of course one would not swap doctors and janitors. Are you assuming people want to fix the problems of inequity in one generation?

 

[LAPsyGuy]

I really don't understand what you're referencing.

That's my concern.

 

[erg923]

I think it holds, but not political views. Cynisim. It's hard to hold hope for clients when we have none ourselves.

What are you talking about? Because I think Washington DC is corrupt and largely uncaring, I therefore have no hope for all humanity?

I was pretty explicit that I do place ALOT of faith in people's ability to change the course of their lives (internal locus of control). This factor seems essential to me in order to do effective psychotherapy. The other, not so much.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

What are talking about? Because I think Washington DC is corrupt and largely uncaring, I therefore have no hope for all humanity?

I was pretty explicit that I do place ALOT of faith in people's ability to change the course of their lives (internal locus of control). This factor seems essential to me in order to do effect psychotherapy. The other, not so much.

Hey, that's great to hear. This goes back to my question about whether the cynicism is universal or just about politics. I appreciate you finally answering it.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

That's my impression of some.

In guessing some things can be fixed sooner than others. The straw men

Yes. And this is the argument that most troubles relative to our big government entitlement programs. They don't promote internal locus of control.

In therapy, we get people to accept what they cannot change and take power over what they can. With that exertion of power, generally you have healing.

Do you have any evidence to back that up or is it just common sense? Some studies have shown that guaranteed income programs do not reduce productivity or participation in the work force.