There seem to be a few wannabe psychologists gererously dispensing diagnoses and recommendations on this forum. PLEASE STOP! It is unethical and can be very dangerous. If you are not a trained psychologist, you are not qualified to determine if someone on here or a third party (spouse, family member, ward members, etc) has any psychological issues, to act as a therapist, and so on. If you are a psychologist, then you already know that the APA Code of Ethics clearly states that commenting in online forums does not establish a professional relationship.

So what should you do if you come across someone who genuinely needs help in a difficult situation? (a very frequent occurance on this site) The first thing to do is to remind yourself that a lack of professional training coupled with the undeniable impact of individual biases inherent in all of us (especially due to the nature of our past experiences) makes giving definitive recommendations highly risky. The responsible thing to do is to acknowledge that you are not in a position to act definitively, and to recommend that the person in distress contact a trained professional who is qualified to take an objective look at the situation and give an opinion as removed from personal biases as possible.

If someone is clearly in a dangerous situation (e.g. domestic abuse) then of course it is incumbant to urge them to remove themself from the situation and seek appropriate help from authorities, therapists, etc. However, if someone reports that they had an argument, no one on this forum is qualified to extrapolate that into an abusive relationship or not, and to make a definitive statement one way of the other and base relationship advice on such is in grave error. In such a case it would be wise to recommend the person in distress find a more reliable and objective source of relationship counseling than what is available here on RFM.

I believe our role on RFM in these situations is to show empathy and moral support, but beyond that we need to leave the professional work to actual professionals.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2014 03:17PM by zarahemlatowndrunk.

Excellent advice. Sometimes, also, we focus on a couple of key words or phrases and define the situation by those while glossing over other points not taking account what was left unwritten. Discussions per media rarely yield enough information and can never replace face to face communication with observing facial or body cues and having opportunities to point out misunderstanding quickly.

Agree, agree & agree. Support & encouragement. Even commiserating. Armchair psychology directed at a person in crisis can be dangerous. Usually it's an ego problem indicative of somebody who could use therapy themselves.
As you very well said, professionals know better.

We have had a lifetime of actually living through that Hell. We can still relate our experiences, and at least give a heads up to the poster to be aware of various traits and behaviors that make up various disorders with which we are intimately familiar.

Domestic abuse is NOT the same thing as a psychological disorder. While I agree that second-or-third-hand diagnosis of psych disorders is beyond the scope of RfM, I strongly disagree that no one other than a trained professional is capable of recognizing very clear signs of domestic violence and verbal and emotional abuse -- especially since many of us here have been targets in such situations and have experienced abuse ourselves.

Experts in the field, including the National Coalition on Domestic Violence, advocate the position that yes, individuals who have/are experiencing domestic violence are capable of recognizing it.

http://www.ncadv.org/

For anyone who is interested in learning exactly what domestic violence is and how to recognize it, please visit the National Domestic Violence Hotline's website: http://www.thehotline.org/

The wheel of violence is also a useful tool for recognizing the cycle of domestic abuse: http://www.domesticviolence.org/violence-wheel/ (This entire website is also very helpful).

For those who may be experiencing non-physical domestic violence: http://www.verbalabuse.com/

For many who are targets in such situations, the recognition of abuse initially comes FROM OTHERS to whom the target turns for support. Under such circumstances, the refusal to recognize and identify domestic abuse could itself be unethical.

"Diagnosis" is a term properly applied to diseases or psychiatric disorders, not situations of domestic violence, which may ethically and properly be recognized, especially within the context of referring possible targets to resources where they may learn more.

As I said, if you recognize that a person is in a dangerous sitiation it is incumbant to urge them to remove themself from that situation and seek help from proper places. But all too often someone will get into an argument with their spouse, parent, etc. that is NOT indicative of an abusive relationship, and a chorus of advise to cut and run often arises. This may often cause unnecessary harm which we need to be careful to avoid.

You have just contradicted yourself. In the original post, you claim none of us are qualified to "diagnose" whether someone is in a domestic violence situation.

Yet here you are, saying: "...an argument with their spouse, parent, etc. that is NOT indicative of an abusive relationship, and a chorus of advise to cut and run often arises..."

How is it that YOU are qualified to decide that it "is NOT indicative" of an abusive relationship -- but somehow none of the rest of us are allowed to say that it IS?

The OP is not contradicting himself, he is reiterating what he said.

He you are also adding content to what he said. The OP talked about extrapolating an argument into an abusive relationship. He is correct, one can not extrapolate an argument into an abusive relationship.

Also, there is a big difference between saying "Person A is abusive>" or saying "What is did seems to me to be abusive". Everyone is capable of exhibiting occasional abusive behavior without being an abusive person.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2014 06:17PM by MJ.

I (ALMOST totally) disagree...and for a number of reasons.

For most "regular people" (and for many, or most, people here on RfM), the one single thing they need MOST in these kinds of situations is INFORMATION. The problem is: even with the Internet, it is difficult or impossible to get "information" if you don't know what you're looking for.

The LDS Church does its best to keep people in a state of ignorance about most everything, so people who are BIC or have been Mormon for long periods of time likely don't have any idea of what the "possibles" might be.

In non-LDS society, and Internet or not, most people just don't have the curiosity or interest to keep up with things outside of the usual interests of their lives. When they face serious problems (like the ones we are talking about here), they frequently have NO IDEA "what" might be happening, or what it may MEAN.

It is of IMMENSE value to EVERYONE when you have a forum like this one which can generate a number of different opinions, because not only does that generate a sort of "natural" selection process in itself ("Yup...that sounds kind of right," or "Nope...no way at all could that be me/my spouse," etc.)

But what this kind of online discussion DOES do, and what it does SUPERBLY well, is to offer a range of possibilities/potentials that, ONCE LABELED ("verbal abuse," "narcissist," "toxic," "bipolar," borderline personality disorder, sociopath, etc.) then CAN be Googled, and the results will be extremely informative in deciding what might, or might NOT, be occurring...or how serious the situation is...or what MIGHT happen if it is, or is not, dealt with.

After some actual information about what actually MIGHT be happening, a formerly unknowing person can begin to get the help they need (and if this includes professional help, some real idea of "where" they need to go to get that specific help).

No one is "diagnosing" via RfM. Even when someone says: "That's a narcissist," what they're REALLY saying is: "This sounds EXACTLY like narcissistic behavior to me, so check out whether YOUR spouse, etc. MIGHT be a narcissist."

Despite the verbiage, NO ONE here on RfM is making "definitive statements."

Advising that "a person in distress," instead of asking for help here, instead contact "a trained professional" is asking for the impossible in many people's lives, UNLESS they have good reason to believe that they are in THAT serious a problem, and that this is the (relatively only) thing to do. You're acting like no one has to pay a "trained professional" for what could be a complete fishing expedition...and like no one has to juggle their kids food or clothing expenditures to finance such an exploratory jaunt.

The spectrum of information offered here (complete with the personal opinions of those who have been through something very similar first hand) are INVALUABLE. They provide a SPECTRUM of possibilities which can then be either promoted to the "possibles" list, or eliminated as potentials.

I think that this is one of the most stunning accomplishments of RfM...and I have thought this since the very first day I happened by as the result of...a Google search.

P.S. It is NOT "unethical" for people here to offer their opinions because they are NOT bound by professional ethics. Only licensed professionals are bound by professional ethics, and if (as sometimes happens) a licensed professional here DOES offer their opinion, they presumably know full well how to offer their opinion without breaching the ethics of their profession.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2014 03:39PM by tevai.

It's worth keeping in mind the purpose of RfM, as stated by Eric, Board Founder:

From the board Guideline (see sticky post from CZ at top of page 1):

"This site's purpose is to let people who are, or were, in Mormonism know that they are not alone in their feelings and experiences or in their quests to regain their lives after years in this religion. We have e-mail groups to join, bulletin boards, gatherings and individuals to help with a transition to a post-Mormon life."


That limits the purpose perhaps more than many posters realize, or remember.

I have read posts from Sus I/S, Admin, that "diagnosing" others' issues, either physical or mental, is not allowed, but I don't see that specific statement in the Guidelines. Of course, it is a great idea to avoid it anyway.

We have often heard from posters in the middle of a domestic abuse crisis, as mentioned above. I agree that it is fine to state our opinion about the reality of a situation like that, as outlined by the poster in trouble. We have often advised that people leave and seek safety, if they are at immediate risk, and then professional help. This is fine, imo. But yes, we as general readers and posters need to keep in mind the limitations of our view, in only reading one or a few posts about an IRL situation that is affecting someone's life. If a person is in immediate need of professional assistance they may not be thinking straight or may be misperceiving our thoughts or advice. This is not helpful to them. Of course, ultimately our decisions and behaviour are our own responsibility. But in crisis it's hard to be objective and make the best decisions and so we may inadvertently lean too much on the advice of others, even strangers, even online. I do think it's up to RfM posters to be somewhat aware of many of these factors and tailor responses to people in crisis accordingly.

However, that doesn't always happen. Hopefully, other posters will watch out for each other and so does Admin. Make them aware of anything that doesn't seem right to you (rather than, say, arguing about it on the board).

Calling a *poster* here a 'narcissist' or 'psychotic', etc comes under the "no name-calling" rule, I believe. So that is an extra reason not to "diagnose" a fellow poster. That kind of "help" may damage more than it assists. Plus, there are inherent dangers with diagnosing online, as stated by the OP in this thread.

Reading the purpose of the board again reminds me that there are limits to what Eric envisioned for the board, and that he stands by those to date. We're not counsellors, we're not professionals (and anyway, that doesn't mean we can or should diagnose someone online any more than anybody else should) and even "advice" may not hit the mark and be more damaging than helpful.

I don't think we should expect too much insight or knowledge from new posters, or newly exiting people, or even each other no matter how long we've been here. This reality will hopefully dictate how we respond to various types of problems that people write about. It's wise to avoid giving definitive "advice" and to make it clear, as mentioned above, that we are just giving our opinion, based on our own experiences and on the limited information given by the poster seeking help. Of course, it's also wise for any poster with serious issues to seek resources in their communities or among real life friends rather than to accept without question something someone wrote online.

Unfortunately, not everybody is wise and insightful all the time, especially in crisis. The best we can do as posters, I think, is to bear in mind the purpose of RfM and not go beyond it, to follow board Guidelines (which encourages others to do likewise so order is maintained) and to encourage people in need to seek help in the form of their GP or a therapist or other community resources. Of course, it can be unproductive or even insulting to cry "see a therapist" to every problem but, again, there are limitations to what we as posters can do to help or to what people should expect from this board.

That to me is the bottom line. Posting according to Nightingale.

Or something like that.

The biggest bottom line, for me, is to try and avoid seeming to run people off the board. If we see that occurring, it's best to hit the 'report' button and then step aside and let Admin handle it. Again, people in crisis may be ultra-sensitive and nothing we say is going to come across as right to them, in which case, we just can't help them.

Maybe the ultimate bottom line is that it's worth, in my opinion, being careful how we express our opinion. If we care how others perceive us or whether we help fellow posters or not. But we're not all in a place of control and peace and so it's not realistic to expect too much from each other. I emphasize that RfM is a discussion board. That leaves the idea of "therapy" or "recovery" right out of it, for me.

And if people are in search of discussion, there is no shortage of it here, and much of it is pretty damn good.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2014 04:13PM by Nightingale.

zarahemlatowndrunk, I agree. That thread was a real eye-opener. Just wow.

You're correct that all we have to go on is what a board member has posted. Sometimes when more information is forthcoming, the advice that we give changes. In order to give good advice, we need to have as much information as possible right from the beginning.

I agree with you that suggestions for certain mental illnesses being present are perhaps thrown around too freely at times. I often recommend professional counseling when it seems warranted.

The situation that you mention is more than one argument. It has been ongoing (the OP has 178 posts at this point in time.) When she first posted, I was not convinced that the situation was untenable. However, in situations where there is continuing belittling or verbal abuse, I always ask myself if that is something that I would tolerate in my own life. In this case, the answer is a firm no.

The OP of course is free to take our advice and give it as much or as little weight as she pleases. It's advice, it's not a series of commands. She can try to fix the situation. Or she can proceed with her plans to leave. It's entirely up to her.

Unless someone identifies himself/herself as a mental health professional, I assume any online diagnoses to be nothing more than something pulled out of someone's @ss. It's their opinion. Are opinions unethical? Or are they just misguided, inappropriate, uninformed and lacking in expertise? Is it unethical to say what you think the problem is with someone's car if you're not a mechanic and don't claim to be? Is it unethical to give religious advice if you don't have a divinity degree and don't claim to have one? (If so, then we should just shut down this forum, no?)

On the other hand, it would certainly be unethical for a professional to dispense any advice beyond "Speak privately to a qualified professional."

If someone has trouble distinguishing between professional advice and the opinion of some unknown person online, then, yes, they should talk to a qualified professional -- about their gullibility problem.

As long as you can distinguish "gullibility" and vulnerability. Some posts come from people who are legitimately fragile.

Okay, then my opinion for fragile people: 99.9% of the clinical advice you might encounter here is just other people's opinions.

+1

better to say that its ignorant for a non professional to make uip diagnostic term based on reading in a forum, but that's why they are non professionals- & they don't see pictures so they can't negatively impune individuals surrounding posters by using popular politically correct jargon with negative connotations such as obese or fat. It is apparent that posters are trying to support the original poster in most cases, and they are trying to use supportive words to give support in most situations. IT is also apparent that posters have good intentions because they are trying to expand on or explain or even assist by rephrasing or giving other examples of the the posters' complaints- you don't see many posters take the mormon's side or other family members' side. Posters try to be authentic for the most part supporting each other.

ok, that said, non professionals are not aware of surveys, screens, tests, interview tests, observations needed to assess an individual. AND, as a reading teacher in her second decade assisting teenagers to read, I have witnessed young adult and older children, whose writing, was NOTHING like them when they speak. (LOL) (oh God! how OBVIOUS is that!!!) Ask any parent!

So judging an internet forums' post - itself- the writing form, as the sole form of psychological assessment, is obscenely deficit in overall data needed to make an accurate diagnosis, its so incomplete.

for example,
In a conversation on the phone, with a phd researcher recently, they told me "your writing in nothing like how you speak" (I'm thinking well, DUH) LOL But the phd researcher has written in technical journals using only citation based writing for decades. LOL They can't see beyond themself anymore. They lecture and speak in (almost) memorized paragraph forms they've gotten from their data base getting ready to present, speaking with them is a tremendous collation of study after study author after author's research results, they only give opinion about research, or cooking strategies with proven results or nutrient reports in research. OMG so, I could speak that language (very well) but, and recognize the research with enthusiasm! But write like him? spspsppsps LOL

perhaps the APA ethical guidelines about forum communication is based on when they realized that formal evaluation methods must be comprehensive (survey, diagnostic interview, observation, tests) not based on anecdotal stories or someone else's story- to be a professional diagnosis.

I agree with Stray Mutt 100%.

Yeah, but mostly don't we just say things like, "You're nuts!" or "You're a loony!"? Other than just suggesting that somebody see a counselor and the like, I'm not sure that the medical stuff is too gratuitous. There are a lot of people here who have been helped by one thing or the other, and can freely suggest that, but it should always be qualified.

they won't be crazy to each other.

To the degree that posters share community assumptions then mormonism's delusional thinking will not be called crazy, people manifesting mormon thoughts or assumptions will not be called loco,

and people leaving mormon delusions, who are questioning mormon assumptions- and very very upset, their whole foundation for life has been shaken- will not be called crazy or loco.

Those people who are in a new community but transfer is not persistent and they are still mormon in some assumptions, may have fear or anxiety when their former mormon delusional assumptions which defined reality verge on the new community, which is not in all ways a new normal, will not be called crazy or loco.

Those people expressing anxious concern, contempt, standing on the bridge between a new world of being and thinking and feeling and responding to experiences and situations in their life dissecting mormon delusional thinking in those same situations experiences will not be hailed as crazy or loco when they type those feelings they encounter at this site, which is dedicated to identifying and exploring transitions out of mormon life.

those moments when people look upon their mormon past choice and mormon based delusional thoughts upon which they built their life or fought a great fight to tear apart the mist and see clearly- from across a vast chasm standing in a new world making new choices, new experiences. As they grapple comparing thought after thought, mormon or not, standing in the same situation comparing- posters on this board judge only themselves if they label others jeering crazy loco, for they stood there or they stand there or they will, leaving one delusional (mormon) world.

or personality types, the are going to interpret a situation from their perspective. That is not a diagnosis, but a suggestion or a clue to help the poster seek further information. In a forum, probably any poster will get a variety of perspectives and they they'll need to sort through that.

I don't think anyone here pretends to be giving professional advice. But online forums CAN help people seeking information and support. I wouldn't base my medical care on online information, but I have found useful information shared online forums, which I have then used to do further research and inform myself before appointments with medical professionals. Likewise, I have found useful information in books and online on dealing with abuse.

Doctors are not the only people who can or should learn about, recognize, or share information about symptoms of medical or mental conditions. But they should be consulted before any treatment is started for serious conditions or situations.

Just as regular members of society should recognize flu or heart attack symptions, regular people should be alert for symptoms of abuse or personality disorders. This is not to label people or diagnose them, but to protect themselves and know when to seek treatment and support.

Of course, any advice given should be taken with a grain of salt, and each person is responsible to sort out what to do for themselves or when to seek professional advice. Certainly in cases of abuse, people need to be careful, and work with a professional as they extract themselves from the situation.

I think it should go without saying that if I say someone sounds like a narcissist (which I have done before), is not the same as diagnosing them as a narcissist. Just like if I said "It sounds like acid reflux" it is not a diagnosis. A normal person would take that into consideration, look at their other symptoms, and consult a medical professional.

I would hate for people to be afraid to share their experiences because they don't want to be accused of giving medical/psychological advice. If people don't share, there will be less information out there. Particularly in the case of abuse, people are afraid to seek live support because of expense and anonymity concerns.

What do you expect?
This is a Recovery from Mormonism board.
Most of what people do here is give each other advise, or they give opinions.

If people don't want advise perhaps they should not ask for it.
Throwing tantrums because posters point out a problem is stupid.

So is beating around the bush when it's clear that a person needs professional help.

Pretending is the Mormon way. Blaming others is the Mormon way. Insisting on fables is Mormon way.
Most of us try to live a more honest existence.

Advice here is worth the same as the advice received over the back fence, in a bar, at a bowling alley, bishop's office, etc. Anyone who makes a life-altering decision based on any advice received in any of these places including here is probably going to make a mistake, IMO...

This used to happen to me years ago on RfM. I think it was mostly trolls who used to diagnose me in all kinds of medical/psychological terms and recommend therapies of all kinds. Why? Because of spraying mishies with the garden hose once. This went on for years and was a total waste of time and bandwidth.

The best professional therapist or doctor on earth is incapable of diagnosing strangers on the internet after reading a post or two. So complete amateurs need to remember that they can't even do that well and they might to serious harm.

While I obviously missed something since I can tell I am missing a lot of context here, I want to say that I disagree with the OP. Yes, diagnosing people is impossible over the internet, unethical, blah blah blah. However, people who take random opinions as fact obviously have much deeper problems than we as lay people are even equipped to handle. We can't walk on eggshells over every possible issue that might arise.

In fact, it was an 'armchair psychologist' diagnosis that finally woke me up out of my abusive familial cycle, and helped me to change my path to leave my horrid home, horrid church, and horrid girlfriend and finally start taking care of myself (and it encouraged me to actually seek out a real mental health professional).

So I would assert that there are cases where withholding an opinion could be equally damaging. Take it on a case by case basis, present opinions as opinions, and don't tell somebody that they themselves are mentally ill. Common sense.

Agree. Similar thing - someone told me my sister was a narcissist.

It opened my eyes to her tricks.

A psychiatrist has since clinically diagnosed her as that.

Nothing wrong with raising possibilities and suggesting further thought or saying a professional medical opinion might be helpful.

What is wrong is to state a medical diagnosis as fact.

Someone could say counseling and meds helped them and the poster might also benefit.

They shouldn't say the poster **is** paranoid and must take meds and therapy.

This is an anonymous online forum. I find it rather funny that someone finds it fitting to designate themselves responsible for "warning" others of the dangers of giving psychological diagnosis online.

but I'll repeat;this is an anonymous online forum. Anyone who would come here and take seriously a diagnosis from an anonymous individual is sufficiently imbalanced to render any such warning fruitless.

Yes, there are people that are new to the internet and do need warnings of the dangers.

Too judge a group of people as "imbalanced" without knowing a whole lot more about the demographic is rather arrogant IMHO.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2014 06:25PM by MJ.

We are all armchair shrinks and many of us know more about food and nutrition than any professional.

something that should be done only if the advice is substantiated elsewhere.

You would know better than to speak on behalf of everyone. Well, if you were a good one you would.

Sorry if I offended
My freako mean sil is dying from gastric bypass surgery 3 years and 3rd new husband later. (A RM at last!!!)

I am a professional. She has serious Iron and B12 deficiency. Major heart murmur and serious neuropathy. Nothing like gb and bad menopause.

Monster MIL says magic husband is really into nutrition. And there you go.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2014 06:30PM by laurel.

TBM sister told her to drink carrot juice, drink a tea from the health food store and pray really, really, really hard to be cured so she wouldn't need a stem cell transplant. That advice would certainly have killed her. I was furious about it!