The benefits of psychodynamic therapy

[ActionGirl]

I thought it would be interesting to have a thread specifically about the benefits of psychodynamic therapy. I know don't know much about it, so I look forward to learning from the discussion.

I'll start by asking to what extent this therapy is based on the ideas of Freud.

[shtriemel]

The last thread ran amuck. I agree. But this is a GTD BB afterall, and a posting about the benefits of therapy, regardless of type, seem ill placed.

[ActionGirl]

Let's give it a try anyway. :) If the moderaters think it's too far off the purpose of the board, they can close the thread. That's their decision and I'll certainly respect that, but let's allow them to make the call.

I think it is relevant though, as there seemed to agreement in the other thread that GTD (though not therapy) makes assumptions about human beings that are similar to those of CBT. If many of us are accepting cognitive-behavioral principles without being sufficiently aware of alternative perspectives, I think it's worth discussing.

[mackenzie]

To answer your question, Actiongirl, yes. Psychodynamic therapy, simply put, relates everything back to childhood, which is very Freudian. CBT is more Jungian. The two "schools" have been at war since the advent of Jung.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy concentrates more on getting a person to recognise how their behaviours contribute to their situation, and to think about changing them.

I'm not sure why Shtriemel thinks of this as a "quick fix", it isn't. The results can be relatively fast (compared to psychodynamic therapy), but the therapy itself can be ongoing for many years.

I suffer from depression because of a series of unfortunate events, so to speak. Nothing can change that, psychodynamic therapy cannot help that. What is, is, and I must live with it, but it ain't easy. CBT helped me to learn how to cope, it is, in essence, a therapy of learning strategies. GTD is also about learning strategies, or habits. That is where the similarities arise.

Shtriemel is right, there are deep seated, underlying causes of problems which GTD will not "cure". In reality, nothing can "cure" the basic structure of our society except the will of the people in a concerted effort. Unless and until that time comes, the only answer is to cope. Looking at your life and recognising the problems/triggers/issues therein (cognition), and then adjusting how you deal with these things (behaviour) is what CBT is all about. It's also what GTD is about.

Psychodynamic therapy is more about delving deep into your psyche, uncovering the hidden truths there. I'm not really sure what the next step then is, or even if there is one. Maybe Shtriemel will help with that one.

[TesTeq]

Shtriemel is right, there are deep seated, underlying causes of problems which GTD will not "cure".
I am sure that GTD is not the cure for a deep depression since it is meant for people who want to improve their productivity.

In reality, nothing can "cure" the basic structure of our society except the will of the people in a concerted effort.
Even for this effort (to change the basic structure of the society) the GTD approach is suitable. First we should determine the successful outcome (the desired society structure) and then the first action to do.

[mackenzie]

you are absolutely right TesTeq, I stand corrected.

This seems like a suitable project for this BB. Lets have at it! Anybody have any suggestions what the first next action should be?

[ActionGirl]

When I think of Jung, I think archetypes. I'd imagine CBT is probably at odds with both Freud and Jung, but I couldn't give you a source offhand for that.

I don't think GTD is suited for solving big structural problems in society because a next action is something an individual can figure out and do him or herself. I haven't a clue what MY next action would be for getting "society" to agree about what a successful outcome looks like. It sounds so hopeless that I choose to focus on things I think I have some degree of control over, like my own thoughts and behavior.

But what about the benefits of psychodynamic therapy?


Psychodynamic therapy is more about delving deep into your psyche, uncovering the hidden truths there. I'm not really sure what the next step then is, or even if there is one. Maybe Shtriemel will help with that one.
Is understanding yourself the whole point, or is there a next step once you uncover the hidden truths?

[shtriemel]

Is understanding yourself the whole point, or is there a next step once you uncover the hidden truths?

The best book on the market describing:

a) the very serious problems of SSRI medication for general symptoms
b) the ineffectiveness of brief therapies i.e. CBT
c) the unconcious and how it factors into our behaviors, feelings, etc
d) the way psychodynamic therapy heals

is....

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00008MNVD/qid=1124060075/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-8474146-2348815?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

tiny url...

http://heh.pl/&1jf

The author is a psychiatrist and analyst. It's a wonderful read, complex at times, but a breath of fresh air. He takes on his own profession (biological oriented psychiatrists), our culture of excess as well as the ineffectiveness of CBT and brief therapies. And he does this with depth and many case illustrations.

[shtriemel]

When I think of Jung, I think archetypes. I'd imagine CBT is probably at odds with both Freud and Jung, but I couldn't give you a source offhand for that.

100% right. Jung and Freud split hairs over the importance of sexuality/aggression impulses during childhood and how they manifest themselves in problems during adulthood. Freud's ego couldn't bear Jungs criticism and ended the relationship. Silly Freud.

In general, Jungian therapists choose to work with dream material as the most reliable data from the unconcious.

I don't know of a single CBT therapist that:

a) would know what to do with a dream
b) would spend more than 15 min working with a client's childhood experiences...alas, it's not what they were trained to do.

[ActionGirl]

Thanks for the book recommendation. My library has it, and I plan to check it out soon.

[Arduinna]

I am still not understanding the connection between GTD and therapeutic treatment of mental illness and personality disorders. It seems to me something akin to trying to restore a house using the rules of backgammon as practical guidelines. It's a misapplication of a behavioral structure that has a very different objective than does psychoanalysis. GTD can, by mobilizing energy and fostering momentum and achievement, help someone overcome some of the symptoms of depressive behavior. But secondary benefits don't qualify it as a healing tool.

I like Adam Phillips's thoughts on analysis, from Promises, Promises:

Most psychoanalytic theory now is a contemporary version of the etiquette book; improving our internal manners, advising us on our best sexual behavior (usually called maturity, or mental health, or a decentred self). It is, indeed, dismaying how quickly psychoanalysis has become the science of the sensible passions, as though the aim of psychoanalysis was to make people more intelligible to themselves rather than to realize how strange they are. When psychoanalysis makes too much sense, or makes sense of too much, it turns into exactly the symptom it is trying to cure: defensive knowingness.

Whether its supporters will own up to it or not, psychoanalysis supports specific cultural values; compared to which, GTD is value-neutral and provides a structure most specifically geared to improve the activity economy of a certain type of Western lifestyle. IMHO.

[TesTeq]

It seems to me something akin to trying to restore a house using the rules of backgammon as practical guidelines.
Yes, yes, yes. I like this. This is the best punch line for this thread.

[shtriemel]

I am still not understanding the connection between GTD and therapeutic treatment of mental illness and personality disorders.

There is little to no connection. By original point was that GTD, and many time-management style type books, promotes and encourages lifestyles that are inherently flawed and unhealthy...leading to a sick culture...leading to symptoms like anxiety, depression, etc.


I like Adam Phillips's thoughts on analysis, from Promises, Promises:

I just found some of his books...very interesting. Thanks for the reference.



GTD is value-neutral and provides a structure most specifically geared to improve the activity economy of a certain type of Western lifestyle. IMHO.

You must be joking. GTD is "value-neutral"? You're kidding right?

[clairenyc]

I'm torn about whether to post because I don't want to add to divisiveness in the conversation. On the other hand, I am a therapist (and a psychoanalytically trained one at that!) and I'd like to contribute what I believe. Not every analyst would agree with my view. For those who are familiar with these terms, my orientation is contemporary relational analysis although I have a background in emperical research and I'm probably more of an integrationist than other therapists.

It's easy when articulating what you believe to say what you do not. That makes sense, but it tends to exaggerate small differences between positions, which feeds the considerable animosity between more psychoanalytic and more behavioral camps. I believe that cognitive behavioral therapies and psychoanalytic therapies are more similar in practice than their practitioners often want to admit. (I say that from reading books and journal articles about CBT and from talking to colleagues who practice it – not from personal experience as a CBT client or therapist.) Both types of therapeutic styles are based on the belief that talking to a therapist one trusts and respects can create changes in well-being and behavior over time. That may sound like a minor similarity but research on therapy effectiveness shows that for most problems, different therapeutic styles are equally effective. That is, across most diagnostic categories, talk therapy works for about 80% of those who try it. Further, the most important impact on the outcome of therapy is the working alliance, the sense of a close, productive relationship between the client and therapist.

That research has been somewhat humbling for therapists of all stripes. How do you defend the way you've chosen to practice if no one school has a leg up on the others? Instead of ignoring the obvious point that many different styles of therapy can achieve a useful working alliance, the camps quibble about the research. The CBT people say that the research shows that some problems lend themselves to CBT interventions. The analysts say that therapeutic outcomes aren't captured well with quantitative measures of symptom reduction. I think they're both right. Moreover, I believe that the most important factor in choosing a therapist is not that person's orientation but your sense that the person is intelligent, attentive, respectful, and makes you feel as safe as possible in discussing your problems.

That said, when I decided to become a therapist I was more compelled by contemporary analytic therapy because I feel the training is more comprehensive and nuanced than many other varieties. I felt that analytic work provided a better base from which to learn other techniques.

Contemporary analysis has come a long way from Freudian technique and even theory, although they share the basic principle that there is a large part of our mental life that influences our behavior but is outside of our conscious awareness. An analyst listens for unconscious themes in the client's relationships or beliefs about the self and the way the world operates. The process of therapy involves investigating those beliefs and ways of relating. This is a collaborative process in which client and analyst discuss the nuances of the beliefs and how they arose. Although there is an assumption that the patterns of relating arose largely out of early relationships, one of the elegant aspects of analysis is that the work can shift back and forth from what the client remembers about these early patterns to his or her current relationships. Indeed, another hallmark of analytic therapy is the focus on a client's transference to the therapist. We “transfer” our desires, expectations, fears, and assumptions that were formed in our childhood relationships to the complex, adult relationships we have today. The therapist and client examine the client's experience of this transferential relationship to understand how the client relates to other people and how s/he might do so differently. Of course, the therapist has his/her own transferences, and tries to stay aware of the “countertransference” that s/he experiences for the client, both as a way to learn what the client evokes in others and to understand what the therapist might be bringing from his/her own past to the work.

We've all had different experiences of love, joy, sexual desire, loss, rage, jealousy, and sometimes even devastating trauma. Analytic therapy honors the unique ways that people experience these events, and gives the client the opportunity to understand his or her way of seeing the world so that s/he can make conscious decisions about whether to continue with a formerly unconscious way of being. This is what I find most compelling about analytic therapy: the privileging of the client's uniqueness and his or her own responsibility for making choices that are appropriate for him or her.

Whew! If you've read this far, thanks for reading!

[Jeff K]

You must be joking. GTD is "value-neutral"? You're kidding right?


In what specific ways do you see GTD as value-laden? Could you illustrate only with direct references to source material (as in writings by David Allen and company)?

I see GTD as simply a set of principles to track and organize all the "stuff" in one's life - if you happen not to like the "stuff" that many people organize in today's world, then those are your values, not those of the GTD principles.

Whether it is a white-collar worker applying the principles to become a better "drone", as you would say, or a musician to doing their work and life, or a grandmother keeping her annual gardeing chores and other retirement activities in order, you cannot blame the GTD method if your value-system is offended by any of the above activity.

[shtriemel]

I'm torn about whether to post because I don't want to add to divisiveness in the conversation.

You didn't do that. Your post was clear and explained, much better than I could, why I've always been partial to analytic forms of therapy...both as a client and practitioner.

I'm curious...how are using GTD? Do you find his system helpful i.e. allows you to focus on the important things...get things done...and reduce stress and anxiety?

[shtriemel]

In what specific ways do you see GTD as value-laden? Could you illustrate only with direct references to source material (as in writings by David Allen and company)?

When you supplement your book, with tapes, cds, more cd's (I believe there are 2-3 different variations of GTD on cd/tapes for consumers to purchase), another book detailing the same information as the first book (Ready for Anything), wallets to purchase ($99), Outlook add-in, seminars...it's clear that his ideas are founded upon doing more, changing less i.e. lifestyle, and in the end, making a lot of money (nothing wrong with this, but most of my friends who are caught up in this game are suffering...greatly) and not spreading a message of peace and tranquility a la Siddartha. Not that there's anything wrong with biz self-help books. But every system is predicated on certain values, I appreciate the one's that are clear about this.

[Arduinna]

When you supplement your book, with tapes, cds, more cd's (I believe there are 2-3 different variations of GTD on cd/tapes for consumers to purchase), another book detailing the same information as the first book (Ready for Anything), wallets to purchase ($99), Outlook add-in, seminars...it's clear that his ideas are founded upon doing more, changing less i.e. lifestyle, and in the end, making a lot of money (nothing wrong with this, but most of my friends who are caught up in this game are suffering...greatly) and not spreading a message of peace and tranquility a la Siddartha. Not that there's anything wrong with biz self-help books. But every system is predicated on certain values, I appreciate the one's that are clear about this.

I was talking about Getting Things Done, a system, when I used the term "value neutral." You are confusing that with the larger commercial marketing system in which the conveyances of GTD (books, CDs, tapes, seminars) are disseminated.

One of the great values of the more popular types of therapy, like CBT/DBT, is to the therapist himself. They enable him to more effectively help the patient because he can respond directly, actively, responsibly. He also risks being shown to be wrong, openly. In short, he becomes human.

I believe this must have a benefit in the therapist's non-professional life. All things being equal, a person so engaged would tend to be more fair to others, less didactic and authoritarian in his communications, and more equably engaged with other human beings.

Gosh, that seems appealing.

[GJR]

"When you supplement your book, with tapes, cds, more cd's (I believe there are 2-3 different variations of GTD on cd/tapes for consumers to purchase), another book detailing the same information as the first book (Ready for Anything), wallets to purchase ($99), Outlook add-in, seminars...it's clear that his ideas are founded upon doing more, changing less i.e. lifestyle, and in the end, making a lot of money (nothing wrong with this, but most of my friends who are caught up in this game are suffering...greatly) and not spreading a message of peace and tranquility a la Siddartha. Not that there's anything wrong with biz self-help books. But every system is predicated on certain values, I appreciate the one's that are clear about this."

Here is my take on GTD and what you seem to overlook:

The lists are not an end in themselves. Yes, they enable you to become more efficient by grouping tasks by context, but this is only two of the six levels of work in Allen's model. Getting a handle on the first two levels (next actions and projects) allows for more creativity for the other four levels. The weekly review provides the context to explore the very issue you bring up "lifestyle changes"(Allen's 40,000 ft level). In the FAST CDs, Allen points out the best thing you may need to do is "get your paper out on the street" after reviewing the lower levels of work.

As for the optional products offered by the Allen Company, they are NOT needed to implement the GTD system. Allen clearly indicates that a fully acceptable implementation of the system can be done very cheaply. Allen has said you could write things on napkins so long as they wind up in your inbox. As I see it, the only product needed to set up GTD is the book. If you choose to buy the other stuff, its your money.

[shtriemel]

I was talking about Getting Things Done, a system, when I used the term "value neutral." You are confusing that with the larger commercial marketing system in which the conveyances of GTD (books, CDs, tapes, seminars) are disseminated.

I don't think I am. A system is the sum of it's parts. I like authors/rabbis/leaders who walk their talk. That's all I'm saying. Clearly I had/have a vested interest in implement some parts of GTD. Perhaps it's the language, perhaps it's the "you can do it all only if..." and/or the zealotry on this bb that wigs me out. Regardless, some kind sir from TO has agreed to walk me through some of this stuff...so I'm giving it another go.


One of the great values of the more popular types of therapy, like CBT/DBT, is to the therapist himself. They enable him to more effectively help the patient because he can respond directly, actively, responsibly. He also risks being shown to be wrong, openly. In short, he becomes human.

Huh? Where are you getting this from? Any therapist that doesn't "risk being show to be wrong" is a therapist that needs more training, more therapy or needs to leave the profession.

And as Perry Farrell so eloquently stated about popularity and quality: "The Backstreet Boys are immensely popular...but their music sucks".

[ludlow]

Hmm... clearly the issue of whether someone makes money out of a set of ideas is only tangential to evaluating the merits of the set of ideas. (If throwing money into a pit for years on end is the criterion for judgment, anecdotal experience suggests psychoanalysis has rather more to answer for than GTD...)

However, IMHO, the bottom-up nature of GTD, like the solution-focussed nature of CBT, *does* imply a set of values, because in choosing to implement either you are opting not to radically overhaul your life but to reduce the tensions, conflicts and disturbances that arise in the course of your current lifestyle, thus making it easier to maintain that lifestyle and disincentivising you to make any radical changes to it. (Both GTD and CBT can reach beyond this to the broader, deeper level, but David Allen's approach inevitably puts the emphasis on the smaller daily level, I think.)

Where I disagree with shtriemel is in the idea that there is necessarily something wrong with that.

There is a doctrinal belief within much of psychotherapy (a belief that is, among other things, in tune with therapists' own profit motives) that everyone comes to the therapeutic encounter burdened by deep unsolved issues borne of inherent psychological conflict. But what if I'm broadly happy with the life I've chosen and just want to improve aspects of it with CBT and GTD?

[shtriemel]

(If throwing money into a pit for years on end is the criterion for judgment, anecdotal experience suggests psychoanalysis has rather more to answer for than GTD...)

Wrong. The number one group of psychotherapists getting training in psychodynamic psychotherapy is psychiatrists and family doctors (at least within the last 5-10 years...and at least on the East Coast). Hence it's the state/province footing the bill not the client. And the $$$ stays the same for the therapist regardless if they see the same client 6 times a week or once. And how do I know this? My girlfriend is a psychiatry resident.

BTW...Freud spent time raising money for clients who couldn't afford his services. Anna Freud provided free analysis for children/adolescents.

There are crooks in every profession. One has to be careful which rabbi/priest, lawyer, accountant and therapist they choose.



There is a doctrinal belief within much of psychotherapy (a belief that is, among other things, in tune with therapists' own profit motives) that everyone comes to the therapeutic encounter burdened by deep unsolved issues borne of inherent psychological conflict. But what if I'm broadly happy with the life I've chosen and just want to improve aspects of it with CBT and GTD?

Congrats. But you're not describing my clients. Nor a majority of the clients who are trying to resolve a repeatition of problems in their lives that are not easily dismissed with breathing exercises and "correct" thinking. There is an intelligent post, a few up from this one, that describes the process quite well. Until then, I suggest you read Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain for a wonderful description of why psychodynamic therapy works and why it is more effective than CBT for persistent emotional problems.

[TesTeq]

You must be joking. GTD is "value-neutral"? You're kidding right?

In what specific ways do you see GTD as value-laden? Could you illustrate only with direct references to source material (as in writings by David Allen and company)?
shtriemel,

Please, give us the examples that will prove your statements just as Jeff asked. If there is something wrong with GTD that I cannot see your arguments may open my eyes.

[shtriemel]

shtriemel,

Please, give us the examples that will prove your statements just as Jeff asked. If there is something wrong with GTD that I cannot see your arguments may open my eyes.

It values unhealthy living. Some may consider "having it all with a cherry on top" to be healthy. I don't, nor do my friends or clients. But we buy the myth, swallow an SSRI and get on with it. Things have to get worse to get better...I have faith in that.

Allen states this (GTD CD's) by telling his listerns that they "can have it all". I think this is dangerous thinking, and it's so pervasive in North America that you'd have to be blind not to see/feel its effects.

Again, I think there are some interesting ideas in GTD. But the problems I have with the system (which I've detailed in many of my posts) outweight the benefits so far. But i'm giving it another shot, so we'll see..

[Suziloo]

It values unhealthy living. Some may consider "having it all with a cherry on top" to be healthy.

It doesn't value unhealthy living. It gives one a way to process all the stuff they need to get done. It isn't GTDs fault that we live in a world that according to you values unhealthy living. I like making a living at my chosen profession and I don't need to pop a pill to cope. I do need to make sure that I have all my information in a trusted system so that I can make my customers happy. I don't need to hire a therapist to help me cope when manilla folders & 3x5 index cards do the trick.

Also, re the zealotry snip, you are at a GTD BB. Wouldn't you expect a certain amount of zealotry?

I can look up the specific reference if deemed absolutely necessary, but I remember DA writing something to the effect that "you CAN'T do it all... you need to decide of all things you could be doing what is most important & do that." (paraphrasing of course).

[TesTeq]

Allen states this (GTD CD's) by telling his listerns that they "can have it all". I think this is dangerous thinking, and it's so pervasive in North America that you'd have to be blind not to see/feel its effects.
I haven't noticed that David said "you can have it all"!

I think that he rather says "you can do anything but not everything".

In "Ready for Anything" he also says that:

Not be the best - do your best. Attempting to be the best can easily have struggle, ego and self-recrimination as baggage, with win/lose as a format. But doing your best is a dynamic, ever-changing experience that is possible anytime, by anyone
I do not think it is dangerous thinking.

[shtriemel]

I haven't noticed that David said "you can have it all"!

I think that he rather says "you can do anything but not everything".

In "Ready for Anything" he also says that:

I do not think it is dangerous thinking.

Tes,
Breathe. We can disagree.

[Arduinna]

It values unhealthy living. Some may consider "having it all with a cherry on top" to be healthy. I don't, nor do my friends or clients. But we buy the myth, swallow an SSRI and get on with it. Things have to get worse to get better...I have faith in that.

Joylessness, punishment and pain seem to be emerging as a theme here. And profit. If people are happy, if they order their lives by their own hands and take possession of their own happiness, then they may not feel the need to spend $200 an hour recalling childhood memories to a tiki in a den. And to anticipate the inevitable response, the satisfaction people have with their lives by employing GTD is just as genuine and valid as a similar outcome authorized and authenticated by the tiki. GTD just takes a heckuva lot less time and money.

Having it all with a cherry on top is one of limitless objectives a person can plug into the GTD system. There are people on this board who really are in the helping professions, like pastoring and teaching, and they're using the increased ability to Get Things Done to do more for others. It's rather culture-deviant to encounter someone here who feels compelled to condemn fellow board members for their positive views of a system to which this entire board is dedicated. It's not constructive, and among lesser mortals, you'd already have been called a troll. But gosh darn it, we're unhealthy have-it-allers, and I guess you're the cherry du jour.

If another reading of GTD can crack this nut, DA deserves a complimentary license from the APA.

[shtriemel]

then they may not feel the need to spend $200 an hour recalling childhood memories to a tiki in a den. GTD just takes a heckuva lot less time and money.

Something I'd expect from the quick-fix generation. But I'm sure GTD will fit it all. Ahem.


It's rather culture-deviant to encounter someone here who feels compelled to condemn fellow board members for their positive views of a system to which this entire board is dedicated.

Actually, if what I saying was so out of this world, no one would care would they? For example, if I stated that staring at the moon was more effective than using GTD, than people would most likely ignore me. But since I'm a therapist, working in the helping profession, I guess my observations are taken a little more seriously...actually forget my credentials, the fact that other's are so quick to defend GTD against any criticism speaks volumes, no?

Again, I've just moved, have time on my hands, and thought I'd get some stuff off my chest visavis the whole GTD thang. Like tin-foil on a cavity...ouch.

Healthy ideas and systems are able to absorb critique.

[Tetsujin]

It values unhealthy living.

Just wishing to clarify: Do you think that any way of living in which:

1) there are one or more outcomes you wish to bring about,

2) at any given time and place there may be more than one action you can choose to take to move toward those outcomes, and

3) you cannot necessarily take every potential action at the moment it comes to your attention

...is inherently unhealthy? As far as I can tell, these points represent the threshold at which Allen's GTD model become applicable.

I'd agree that many of the people who are drawn to GTD are living in an unhealthy way, trying to do too much with too little and possibly for the wrong reasons, but it does not follow that the system itself values such a way of life.

As others have pointed out, none of Allen's writings seem to suggest that "can have it all" -- indeed, the system and its proponents seem to encourage the realization that you can't have it all, and therefore tools to help make good choices may be useful. I'd be very interested to hear about contrary examples from any of the GTD materials.

-T.

[shtriemel]

Just wishing to clarify: Do you think that any way of living in which:

1) there are one or more outcomes you wish to bring about,

2) at any given time and place there may be more than one action you can choose to take to move toward those outcomes, and

3) you cannot necessarily take every potential action at the moment it comes to your attention

...is inherently unhealthy? As far as I can tell, these points represent the threshold at which Allen's GTD model become applicable.

I'd agree that many of the people who are drawn to GTD are living in an unhealthy way, trying to do too much with too little and possibly for the wrong reasons, but it does not follow that the system itself values such a way of life.

As others have pointed out, none of Allen's writings seem to suggest that "can have it all" -- indeed, the system and its proponents seem to encourage the realization that you can't have it all, and therefore tools to help make good choices may be useful. I'd be very interested to hear about contrary examples from any of the GTD materials.

-T.


I've already discussed his introduction to GTD on CD. Anyway, I'm running out of steam debating the faithful. If it works for you great, hell even I'm trying to implement some of the ideas. But my practice as a therapist tells me that people can do much, much more with a scaled down lifestyle, than more efficiency experts telling how you can live the dream and do it stress-free. It's a lie they're selling, and it's one we lap up every chance we get.

[Arduinna]

Actually, if what I saying was so out of this world, no one would care would they? For example, if I stated that staring at the moon was more effective than using GTD, than people would most likely ignore me. But since I'm a therapist, working in the helping profession, I guess my observations are taken a little more seriously...actually forget my credentials, the fact that other's are so quick to defend GTD against any criticism speaks volumes, no?

First, the fact that people respond doesn't necessarily demonstrate "caring" or respect. You may not have been here at the time, but there was a lively discussion that was initiated by a post from a lady in the Eastern Bloc who was looking for friendship or trying to sell flowers or something. In terms of you being a "therapist" and your observations being taken "a little more seriously" as a result, I assure you: I can see no evidence in anything you've said that you're a therapist of any stripe. I am responding to what you're saying on its own merits. "Forget my credentials..." no problem, they weren't there to remember. You are a name making claims and assertions and accusations on a board. That's it. You could be a 15 year-old kid who has yet to learn to use the spell/grammar checker. You've been given the benefit of a steadily eroding doubt. That's all.

I'll agree with you on one thing, though. "Healthy ideas and systems are able to absorb critique." Indeed, and healthy systems process the valuable nutritive materials and discard the rest. I think we've gotten some insights from one person who has issues with the entire idea that people can help themselves, and is highly irritated that a whole community of individuals is exploring the use of GTD for just that purpose. However, given the germ-to-chaff ratio, I'd consider further processing a waste of time I could be using in the lofty pursuit of the cherry of life, aka

GETTING THINGS DONE.

[shtriemel]

na]First, the fact that people respond doesn't necessarily demonstrate "caring" or respect.

Actually I disagree. I have seen odd postings on this BB - clearly selling one thing or another - that were entirely ignored. And though cognitive dissonance proves to be a heady barrier for most folks to admit their problems with this system - or you've done such a good job running the critics out of town - their responses to my posts indicate that they fear something. Could that be that GTD, CBT and other tweaks aren't enough? Perhaps even causing more problems than they're worth? Could it be that the underpinnings are faulty? I believe so.

[sablouwho]

It values unhealthy living.

I did not get anything at all like this from the book. I speculate, shtriemel, think that you are being triggered in this way because of things that related to your set of beliefs, life experiences, and values about what constitues healthy living.

FWIW, having met David, Kathryn, and staff--I can say that I think you would be pretty surprised if you were to meet them. Very down-to-earth, normal folks--and they were genuine, it wasn't BS. Not what I think you would expect from them given your previous posts.


Some may consider "having it all with a cherry on top" to be healthy. I don't, nor do my friends or clients.

And a lot of people agree with you. This is fine. So don't aspire to have that kind of life. No one here is requiring you to do so. Not even GTD or David Allen. One thing that occurs to me is that, because of your line of work, where you hear about people's problems for a living, you may be getting stressed out a lot, and may need to de-compress. Both of my parents as well as some friends of mine are MDs, and I know that at different times they have all needed to take a find ways to "decompress" from the stresses of their work, as diagnosing someone with cancer, telling them that they are losing their eye sight and nothing can be done, or having a patient die on the operating table are all very upsetting things that happen to them, respectively, on a regular basis.

The other thing I would note is that I think you are assuming that those of us who use GTD haven't examined our lives or priorities. I cannot speak for anyone else on this BB, but I assure you, I don't live the a pretentious or shallow life, and my life is anything but unexamined. I have no idea why you have assumed that we are all automatically mindless drones who have bought into a system that you seem to despise, and that each time someone on this list tells you that they are not a CEO type, but a single mom, or whatever, that you sweep such data under the rug.

Please, shtriemel, give us a little more credit than that. We are not dummies! What I am getting from your posts is that you think we are mindless drones, worker ants, and that we are stupid and foolish to follow this system (GTD) because it is dangerous and leads us to some false promised land that is actually very bad for us. And that unless we live our lives the way you think we ought to be living them, then we are WRONG.

Perhaps you might consider what is it about GTD, this BB, your life, or whatever that:

*causes you to be sarcastic and call other people on this board, (who are only trying to help you and don't want to fight with you--with perhaps some exceptions) drones, worker ants, and be so sarcastic as to suggest that we need to determine or NA or decide if, in trying to get a mind like water we should go and flush a toilet?

*has you feeling the need to be RIGHT regarding your continued insistence that that psychodymamic therapy (your way) is far better than CBT when another therapist who practices the same modality as you do freely admits that each therapy camp likes to insist their "Way" is better, and that the reality is that the relationship between therapist and patient seems to be more of a key factor to success than the specific modality used?

*has you keep insisting that CBT is only a short-term modality when others on this board have indicated that they have done it long term with good results?

* has you insisting that GTD is bad because it encourages us to lead an unhealthy lifestyle?

Just some food for thought--I do not suggest that you answer these questions for us here on this BB--rather I suggest that you need to answer them for yourself. The answers are more important for you than they are for us.


Again, I think there are some interesting ideas in GTD. But the problems I have with the system (which I've detailed in many of my posts) outweight the benefits so far.

Aside from your philosophical/lifestyle concerns (for lack of a better term) I haven't seen specifically what problems you are having with it? From what I have read, you haven't actually implemented yet, or at least not very much (though I may not have the correct data, I freely admit). From my own experience, I can tell you that reading the book and actually doing what is says are two very different things. I didn't start to "Get" it until I started "doing it". It was only then that I began to see the benefit. I am unsure how far along you are in the book, or with trying to implement, but what I would suggest is that you give it a shot.

I would also suggest that you consider ignoring posts from people who ask questions that you find to be ridiculous or overly simplistic, perhaps from someone whose mind isn't as bright and intelligent as yours? I have no idea if you *really* read a post about someone asking where "brush my teeth" goes on the list, and trying to figure out whether or not it was a project, but if that was true (and wasn't just you being sarcastic), then I would suggest you just show some compassion and empathy (afterall, you are a therapist) for the person's lack of trust in themselves (or insecurity, naivete/mis-reading of the book, or whatever) that they would ask a question that you consider to be too simplistic instead of making fun of them in a public forum.

If you can ignore those posts, and post some of your own PRACTICAL questions, rather than philosophical complaints, I think you would find you would probably get a lot more out of this BB. There are people here that would REALLY like to try and help you, possibly even "befriend" you, but you keep on fighting with us, insulting us. It would have been easier to just write you off as an "angry guy" and move on, but we are trying to help. Granted, you are more open now than you were a few days ago, and I am glad to see that. I hope the trend continues.


But i'm giving it another shot, so we'll see..
I am glad to hear that someone in Toronto is going to help you out w/GTD, and that you are giving it another chance, and that your "I dare you to teach me something that could be useful" approach is softening a little bit.

I hope that you know that I sincerely am trying to help, and that you don't take anything in my post as a personal attack, as that is NOT the way in which it is intended.

[mcogilvie]

[T]hough cognitive dissonance proves to be a heady barrier for most folks to admit their problems with this system - or you've done such a good job running the critics out of town - their responses to my posts indicate that they fear something. Could that be that GTD, CBT and other tweaks aren't enough? Perhaps even causing more problems than they're worth? Could it be that the underpinnings are faulty? I believe so.

I believe my informal research, which indicates that 80% of programming problems can be solved by explaining them to a stuffed penguin. This is a testable, i.e., falsifiable, belief. GTD is pretty empirical, and seems to work well for a broad cross section of people. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder, though. Do you want to talk about it? :)

[sablouwho]

[snipped] their responses to my posts indicate that they fear something.

The above is only one of many interpretations, and it happens to be one that supports your stance. You state you opinion as if it is fact quite frequently in your posts, the above quote is but one of many examples of this.

Notable is that several times when anyone here post anything that doesn't fit in with your viewpoints, you generally ignore those comments, but sometimes you have taken it one step further and have been sarcastic or rude to the poster. Fortunately, these incidents seem to be decreasing in number and intensity. As a posted above said, [paraphrasing] you will get less and less benefit of the doubt as time goes on.

The same poster was also probably not aware of the therapy credentials you had told us about on another post, but honestly, I don't think that this really matters all that much when talking about GTD and not talking about therapy.

Every therapist is a human first, with human weaknesses just like the rest of us. The fact that you are a therapist, IMO, doesn't really give your particular opinion more weight than that of others.

Actually, I think that you have used your credentials in a way that hurts you, and possibly, also, some people's trust in therapy (regardless of modality), as I speculate that many people would not want to go to a therapist if they thought the experience would resemble anything like the conversation people are having with you on this board. Indeed, sometimes therapy is hard and it is a therapist's job to point out things a client isnt' "seeing", but there are other times when compassion and empathy are necessary.

Going back to your being human, FIRST, just like the rest of us, and not a "Therapy God" with THE answers, the reason that I think that you are getting the types and numbers of replies that you are is because you raise people's defenses by:

* Insulting or arguing with posters who disagree with your viewpoint, or in more lay terms, you hurt other people's feelings and it makes them feel bad. They want the opportunity to let you know "hey, I doesn't feel good when you hurt my feelings, I didn't like that when you said X about me."

* Displaying a "know-it-all" attitude that says "I dare you to teach me anything." Well, you dared people--some are taking you up on your challenge despite your sometimes difficult attitude

* Ignoring posts from others that refute your assertions.


On *any* BB, such posts are likely to get replies. Sorry, I just don't think your "status" as therapist is what is making people reply to you.

And deep down, I think you know you are being intellectually dishonest with yourself by pretending it is the latter when you know that it is the angry, arguementative nature of your posts, some sarcastic, and some not, that are getting your posts this kind of attention.

And, many people, in my opinion, have been very patient with you when you have really begun to wear out your welcome. Not because of your beliefs, but because of the way you condescend to others by the attitude and mood of your posts.



[Could it be that the underpinnings are faulty? I believe so.

Yes, you have stated this over and again in a number of different ways. Others have a different view point.

Speaking for myself, I don't fear you, or what you have to say.

Rather, I see you as someone who is, for reasons unknown to me, angry and feels like an outsider, and who wants to get a rise out of people any way he can. In that, you have succeeded.

I suggest that you might give GTD a try with the Toronto fellow you mention, you might learn something that is useful if you are able to give it a fair shot and not be so defensive.

[shtriemel]

Wow...wow...wow. So that's what happens when you poke a stick into a hornet's nest. Anyhoo, I'm not here to increase the number of clients seeking therapy...I'm not here to merely argue (though it's, in a twisted kinda way, enjoyable) with the GTD elite...my posts represent a belief that getting things done isn't the issue, not even close. But we want to believe it is. And so we'll consume, purchase, anything that nourishes the illusion that more is accessible. But of course, and we all know this, the increase in anti-anxiety/depression medication, divorce rate, and all the other social ills that keep us up at night (oh that's right, and all the sleeping medication being consumed), are just a smidgen of what I'm referring to.

Again, I believe many of the responses to my posts/comments reflect the truth of my observations. Not THE TRUTH, but the truth nonetheless.

[sablouwho]

Wow...wow...wow. So that's what happens when you poke a stick into a hornet's nest. Anyhoo, I'm not here to increase the number of clients seeking therapy...I'm not here to merely argue (though it's, in a twisted kinda way, enjoyable) with the GTD elite...my posts represent a belief that getting things done isn't the issue, not even close. But we want to believe it is. And so we'll consume, purchase, anything that nourishes the illusion that more is accessible. But of course, and we all know this, the increase in anti-anxiety/depression medication, divorce rate, and all the other social ills that keep us up at night (oh that's right, and all the sleeping medication being consumed), are just a smidgen of what I'm referring to.

Again, I believe many of the responses to my posts/comments reflect the truth of my observations. Not THE TRUTH, but the truth nonetheless.

Not too hard to predict what would happen when someone upsets a hornet's nest in this manner. It is uncomfortable, at least for me, to watch others be insulted, called names or have their buttons pushed in a way that seem nothing less than meanspirited, and then to watch those same people say "please stop" in a variety of ways, yet the person keeps doing it nonehtheless?

While this style or arguing may be enjoyable for you, perhaps you could consider others feelings too?

Why is this so hard?

[ceehjay]

Originally Posted by shtriemel
. . . my posts represent a belief that getting things done isn't the issue, not even close. But we want to believe it is. And so we'll consume, purchase, anything that nourishes the illusion that more is accessible.

Gettting things done really IS the issue for me. The cherry on top was being able to leave work on time, spend the evening with family or friends without thoughts about unfinished work intruding, more time for my favorite pastimes, sleeping soundly at night without waking or dreaming about the work sitting on my desk.

I don't have a six-figure income or a McMansion. I live in a middle-class house, drive a middle-class car, take vacations when I want, and work at a job I like. I am of the age and have enough years of service that I could retire, but the work I do is fulfilling and meaningful to me. I am contented with what I have.

I am a psychologist in a state psychiatric facility. We treat people (most are indigent) who have severe mental illnesses. Hospital stays are short, so there is no time for in-depth therapy - that's for the outpatient therapist. Many of the patients are too ill or impaired to respond well to CBT. The relationship with the treating staff is more important than school of therapy in this setting, and it has been my observation that patients decide who is trustworthy pretty quickly.

I have never experienced David Allen as pushing products on me. Not in the book, not in this forum, not on the CDs. It was my personal choice to buy the GTD Fast CDs, and they have been most helpful in my further streamlining my approach to my tasks.

I do hope you give this process a sufficient trial to determine whether or not it can help you manage your tasks more effectively/efficiently. It took me a little time to get most of the pieces in place, and I still have pieces that need more work. I love that the process is flexible enough to fit my style, my needs, my situation. I, too, had tried other systems, but none really worked for me. This one seems to suit me well. It isn't that this system is the "best," but that it is helping me accomplish what I wanted.

I did want more. More personal time in the evening. I do want less. Less waiting on my desk when I get to work tomorrow, and GTD is helping me achieve just that, and that particular less is giving me the more that I so wanted.

Carolyn

[ActionGirl]

OK, I checked out the book recommended on the first page of this thread, Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain, by Elio Frattaroli. So far I have read part one (the first 78 pages). It’s very interesting--there’s a lot there for those interested in philosophy, religion, and literature, and I think I have a better idea now about where shtriemel is coming from. There’s a lot I could I ramble about, but let me first quote Frattaroli on his basic concept of what it is to be human:

“I believe that humans possess a spiritual as well as a physical dimension, and that there are very real differences between brain, mind, and soul. I think of the soul as the experiencing self, the “I,” an ineffable whole that integrates processes happening at four different levels of experience—body, brain, mind, and spirit.” (6)

Frattaroli answers the question posed by this thread fairly explicitly at the end of part one:

“I am convinced that all psychiatric symptoms originate in the way I have just described—as adaptive mechanisms to relieve the anxiety generated by inner conflict—and that they are appropriately and effectively treated by a psychotherapeutic process (with or without medication) aimed at resolving inner conflict. The symptoms will no longer be necessary (and chemical balance will be restored) once the unconsciously conflicted, anxiety-provoking emotions have been fully accepted into consciousness, that is, once they are no longer provoking unmanageable anxiety.” (78)

Also: “What dynamic psychotherapy offers that all these methods lack is a unique synthesis of private inner experience and interpersonal process: a specific focus on inner conflict as the nexus of change combined with a method that takes advantage of transference as the vehicle for change.” (78)


[I happen to agree with his assertion that materialism is an inadequate philosophy to explain human experience. I don’t know yet to what extent he fleshes out these distinctions, and to what extent effective psychotherapy requires agreement about the exact nature and relationship of the parts of the self.]

[clairenyc]

Shtriemel, I tried to respond to ActionGirl's original question by posting a description of analytic therapy because it was a constructive response to the previous thread. When I said that I didn't want to add to the divisiveness of the conversation, I was referring to your posts. You said you're not trying to add to the number of clients who seek therapy. Well, I am. I care deeply about the reputation of the profession because I believe in what I do. I don't believe that everyone needs therapy, but I want people who are suffering to see therapy as a promising option and certainly a source of safety.

So for that reason in addition to all the others that have been mentioned, add me to the list of people who are unhappy with the way you've treated others on this BB. And yes, I have found GTD extremely helpful in reducing stress and allowing me to focus on important things.

[TesTeq]

Again, I believe many of the responses to my posts/comments reflect the truth of my observations. Not THE TRUTH, but the truth nonetheless.
Discussion with you is a complete waste of time because you do not listen - you already know that you are right and we are wrong.

I do not think you are right. Besides it is dishonest to criticize GTD using false quotations or your own opinions treated as facts.

I have many exciting and satisfying things to do in my life and I can do more of them using GTD.

Do not expect any more posts from me concerning your posts.

Bye, bye...

[ActionGirl]

Hey Cosmo, I was just trying to quote a few lines that clarified for me where the psychoanalyst school was coming from. I will say that the overall tone of author was far different than this board's most representative of psychoanalysts. I would recommend the book (though certainly not endorse everyting in it).

The cognitive revolution has been so influential that the book is largely a reaction against it. There's been a similar trend in philosophy. With all the new science about the brain, many think that the role of the brain has been over-emphasized, and other aspects of personhood undervalued.

I've also checked out a Yale Univ Press book called "Does Phychoanalysis Work?"
(Multiple authors) http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0300065272/002-3257247-0199221?v=glance

It attempts to consolidate and evaluate the empirical evidence about psychoanalysis. It's very dry and I have no intention of reading the whole thing, but it seems to express a good understanding of the difficulty of studying the question. Sorry the following quote is a bit long, but it seems to cover the overall findings (last page of book):

"Polular descriptions to the contrary, psychoanalysis is by no means lacking in empirical studies. As our review shows, in addition to the far-reaching clinical experience of the analytical community, there is ample systematic evidence for the efficacy of psychoanalysis in aiding many patients for whom it is an appropriate treatment. These systematic findings carry with them the characteristic stamp of good empirical investigation--negative findings that run contrary to the wishes and beliefs with which investigators started their study. These negative findings include that systematic investigation does not support the effectiveness of psychoanalysis when it is used to help otherwise untreatable patients and that within the range of ordinarily analyzable disturbances it is currently impossible to predict at the beginning of treatment which patients will do well in analysis and which poorly. The available empirical findings about the efficacy of psychoanalysis all have substantial methodological limitations. In addition, many of them reflect clinical practices of years ago, although many analysts believe that analytical practice has changed dramatically."

[ActionGirl]

At the risk of injecting a little humor into this thread, I want to recommend a novel by one of my favorite authors, David Lodge. The book is called "Therapy."

The protagonist pursues several different forms of physical and psychological therapy, all the while uneasy that one of his therapists would be offended to learn that he was seeing other therapists as well. There's a good bit on cognitive-bahavorial therapy in which he is instructed to make a list of both the positive and negative things in his life. His comes up with a healthy list of good things, and only one bad one: "feel unhappy most of the time."

Please don't go read the reviews of the book as most give away too much of the plot without really conveying how funny the book is. Below is the only half-decent one I could find:

David Lodge's novels are proof that contemporary mainstream fiction doesn't have to be depressing, sterile, or plotless. It doesn't have to leave you wondering why the author bothered. Heck, it can even have a happy ending and still be worth reading.

Therapy has it all. The sometimes self-deluding but always likeable Tubby is an intelligent and interesting main character, and Lodge keeps the reader turning the pages to see what will happen to Tubby next. (That last may sound like cliched praise, but it is nevertheless high praise: there are plenty of writers who CAN'T keep the reader's interest.) Lodge uses several writing styles in this book and he's so good he can make everything from philosophical musing to rather broad comedy work. He can go from the hilarious police statement by Brett Sutton to the near-poignancy of a remembered first love and make it all come together in one delightful whole. Bonuses: along the way we get a glimpse of the making of British sitcoms, a somewhat satirical portrait of our societal compulsion to therapy, a funny mid-life crisis, several surprises, and as much information about Kierkegaard as most readers will ever want to know. And, yes, there's even an upbeat ending.

Do something good for yourself already: forget the latest self-help book and its "twelve steps to recovery from all that ails you" pablum and read a David Lodge novel. If not this one, another one. (Read one and you'll want to read the others anyway.) Lodge will do more for your heart and mind than any amount of twaddle about inner childishness.

[mcogilvie]

Do something good for yourself already: forget the latest self-help book and its "twelve steps to recovery from all that ails you" pablum and read a David Lodge novel. If not this one, another one. (Read one and you'll want to read the others anyway.) Lodge will do more for your heart and mind than any amount of twaddle about inner childishness.

I'd also like to endorse David Lodge's books. Each one is a minor masterpiece of fiction. Honest, humorous, and kind.

[ActionGirl]

I'd also like to endorse David Lodge's books. Each one is a minor masterpiece of fiction. Honest, humorous, and kind.
Yes, if someone reads David Lodge, all the nonsense in this thread has been worth it! ;)

[CosmoGTD]

This brouhaha reminded me of a little checklist put out by the psychologist Arnold Lazarus, for helping to figure out if a therapist is any good for you. The points being made in the questions are very interesting.

There is also a book about this by Dr. Albert Ellis called, "Why Some Therapies Don't Work: The Dangers of Transpersonal Psychology".
http://www.prometheusbooks.com/catalog/book_594.html

There is plenty of research that shows that some people are harmed by the wrong type of therapy and bad therapists. There is even something called "therapist-caused deterioration", and I have actually seen this happen to people. One of the cardinal sins of any therapist, is when they claim "I am the therapist, you must listen to me, and you are just resisting me" and things of that nature. Its very important to simply fire a therapist who is making you worse off, but sometimes this is difficult to see.



It looks like I can attach a JPEG attachment, so I will give it a try. (thie file was 100KB and too big, but I found it online)
http://www.familynow1.com/chooseatherapist.htm

To do this questionnaire, you score it by....

0=never or not at all
1=slightly or occasionally
2=sometimes or moderately
3=a great deal or most of the time
4=markedly or all of the time

Then you add them up, and follow the guidelines at the bottom.


How To Choose a Therapist

In his book, I CAN IF I WANT TO by Arnold Lazarus, Ph.D., Dr. Lazarus provides an excellent guide.


1. I feel comfortable with the therapist. 0 1 2 3 4
2. The therapist seems comfortable with me. 0 1 2 3 4
3. The therapist is casual and informal rather than stiff and formal. 0 1 2 3 4
4. The therapist does not treat me as if I am sick, defective, and/or about to fall apart. 0 1 2 3 4
5. The therapist is flexible and open to new ideas rather than pursuing one point of view. 0 1 2 3 4
6. The therapist has a good sense of humor and a pleasant disposition. 0 1 2 3 4
7. The therapist is willing to tell me how he or she feels. 0 1 2 3 4
8. The therapist admits limitations and does not pretend to know things he/she doesn't know. 0 1 2 3 4
9. The therapist is very willing to acknowledge being wrong and apologizes for making errors or for being inconsiderate, instead of justifying this kind of behavior. 0 1 2 3 4
10. The therapist answers direct rather than simply asking me questions what I think. 0 1 2 3 4
11. The therapist reveals things about himself/ herself either spontaneously or in response to my inquiries (but not by bragging and talking incessantly and irrelevantly). 0 1 2 3 4
12. The therapist encourages the feeling that I am as good as he/she is. 0 1 2 3 4
13. The therapist acts as if he/she is my consultant, rather than the manager of my life. 0 1 2 3 4
14. The therapist encourages differences of opinion rather than telling me that I am resisting if I disagree him/her. 0 1 2 3 4
15. The therapist is interested in seeing people who share my life (or at least is willing to do so). This would include family, friends, lovers, work associates, or any other significant people in my life. 0 1 2 3 4
16. The things that the therapist says make sense to me. 0 1 2 3 4
17. In general, my contacts with the therapist lead to my feeling more hopeful and having higher self-esteem. 0 1 2 3 4

Now add up all the numbers you circled to get a total score.

[ActionGirl]

Thanks for posting that. It's always difficult to evaluate a specialized service, but it seems especially difficult with therapy--just when you most need some sort of counseling, you may be least able to evaluate the therapist.