Religious people

SLUSK

What is the different between deeply religious people and people who are labeled "schizophrenic". There are deeply religious Catholics who still believe in very strange things such as demonic possession. What is the difference between these people and people who are labeled "schizophrenic"?

"If you talk to God, you are praying; if God talks to you, you have schizophrenia."
-Thomas Szasz

dlofnep

People of faith are indoctrinated from a very early age to believe what they believe. I don't think you can compare it to schizophrenia.

Kooli

I do think it's a tricky one.
If I had a client who told me that God or an angel appeared to them or spoke, I'd definitely be having alarm bells going off in my mind. But a more religious counsellor probably wouldn't.

Myksyk

Some people believe weird and wonderful things despite being generally in touch with reality (religious people and scientologists are good examples). Others believe in weird things because they are not in touch with reality (mental illness). The former reflects generally normal functioning and sound cognitive faculties which are demonstrably able to assess most things reasonably but are willing to embrace supernatural or unusual explanations of certain life experiences/events. The latter have widespread disintegration of their perceptual, cognitive and psychosocial faculties and have difficulty separating out reality from interpretation and perception.

Odysseus

Kooli wrote: »

I do think it's a tricky one.
If I had a client who told me that God or an angel appeared to them or spoke, I'd definitely be having alarm bells going off in my mind. But a more religious counsellor probably wouldn't.

I a few clients who are deeply religious, it is a difficult one for myself. However, I'm not there to challenge their faith, but I think you have to draw the line when the delusion [if you view them as such which is of course debatable] become severe. This current belife in angles helping people is one I find very difficult.

MonkeyBalls

Well, I believe theism is a mental disorder, one that's simply unrecognised due to the fact that most of the world have it.

tmccar

MonkeyBalls wrote: »

Well, I believe theism is a mental disorder, one that's simply unrecognised due to the fact that most of the world have it.

Would you consider yourself an atheist than?

MonkeyBalls

Yes.

MysticalSoul

During my training I had a client who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. I am a spiritual person myself, and from my point of view, it was easy to tell when she was talking about her own faith versus what was part of the condition. Usually the mental illness took over when she forgot to take her meds. Her faith gave her hope, whereas when it was the mental illness part of her that was speaking, she became fixated on certain ideas.

Black Swan

"The study examined how religious beliefs and practices impact upon medication and illness representations in chronic schizophrenia... Two thirds of the total sample considered spirituality as very important or even essential in everyday life. Fifty-seven percent of patients had a representation of their illness directly influenced by their spiritual beliefs (positively in 31% and negatively in 26%)."

Source: L Borras, S Mohr, P-Y Brandt, C Gilliéron, A Eytan, and P Huguelet (January 2007). Religious Beliefs in Schizophrenia: Their Relevance for Adherence to Treatment. Schizophrenia Bulletin, Volume 33, Number 5, pp. 1238-1246.

Stephentlig

Odysseus wrote: »

I a few clients who are deeply religious, it is a difficult one for myself. However, I'm not there to challenge their faith, but I think you have to draw the line when the delusion [if you view them as such which is of course debatable] become severe. This current belife in angles helping people is one I find very difficult.

Maybe it would be a good idea for you to tell them your not religous and dont believe in angels etc etc, and stop wasting their time and money, be a good kind person and help the person find another Psychologist who is Catholic/religious, this way their faith will not become affected in the process.

Pax Christi
Stephen

JuliusCaesar

Stephentlig - count this as a warning. You seem to know nothing about psychology.

Stephentlig

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Stephentlig - count this as a warning. You seem to know nothing about psychology.

What did I get a warning for? tell me what it is I said wrong and we'll take it from there.

In the Catholic church we have pshychologists trained to see if someone who thinks God is speaking to them or not, or if they think they are demonically possessed to rule out whether or not its a pshychological matter before they proceed to the next step. A psychologist who is not religious in any way cannot help the person in that respect because their is a barrier of belief there.

A poster Kooli just a few posts up said that if a client came to her with such things alarm bells would be going off in her head but pointed out that a more religious counsellor wouldnt be so alarmed.

I know enough about psychology to realise that many of them are in need of one themselves, my friends mother went to one for years and when she told her pshycologist she was having relationship problems with her mother, what was the psychologists solution? ''dont speak to your mother ever again for the rest of your life, cut off all connection with her.'' wow would you be willing to pay $250 for advice like that? from someone who has studied and professed to be a psychologist? I dont think so.

Pax Christi
Stephen

JuliusCaesar

Stephentlig wrote: »

What did I get a warning for? tell me what it is I said wrong and we'll take it from there.

This is a SCIENCE Forum, for the discussion of psychology, mental illness, and behavioural science. Read the Forum Charter.

Faith does not come into treatment. We are bound to be culturally sensitive. I have seen your other anti-psychologist posts. Nor do we perform exorcisms on people suffering with schizophrenia. Do not argue with mods here, it is way off-topic.

Stephentlig

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

This is a SCIENCE Forum, for the discussion of psychology, mental illness, and behavioural science. Read the Forum Charter.

Faith does not come into treatment. We are bound to be culturally sensitive. I have seen your other anti-psychologist posts. Nor do we perform exorcisms on people suffering with schizophrenia. Do not argue with mods here, it is way off-topic.

If faith doesnt even come into treatment, then why even have this thread or discuss it? I am not anti pshychology, I think its great and there are a lot out there who help people but there are a lot of pshychologists out there who are intelligent in such a profession and yet dont help people.

What I was pointing out was that if clients come to you with such problems you should put them on to a psyhcologist who deals in such an area.

Edit: again I am not arguing with you just taking part in the discussion

krankykitty

Stephentlig wrote: »

If faith doesnt even come into treatment, then why even have this thread or discuss it? I am not anti pshychology, I think its great and there are a lot out there who help people but there are a lot of pshychologists out there who are intelligent in such a profession and yet dont help people.

What I was pointing out was that if clients come to you with such problems you should put them on to a psyhcologist who deals in such an area.

Edit: again I am not arguing with you just taking part in the discussion

I don't know what you mean by "a psychologist who deals with such an area" - do you mean a priest?

As far as I was concerned psychologists get trained the same no matter what their religious beliefs are, so are you suggesting that a religious client should only see a professional with the same beliefs? So going by that theory, I probably like football as much as you like religion, so does that mean if I go to a psychologist who follows Liverpool they should refer me on because I don't support them and therefore have different views? They won't understand when I'm going on about Rooney and whatnot

I really don't think the psychologists personal beliefs have anything to do with the client.

Stephentlig

I don't know what you mean by "a psychologist who deals with such an area" - do you mean a priest?

If they be Christian/religious then yes, many priests are trained in pshychology.

As far as I was concerned psychologists get trained the same no matter what their religious beliefs are, so are you suggesting that a religious client should only see a professional with the same beliefs? So going by that theory, I probably like football as much as you like religion, so does that mean if I go to a psychologist who follows Liverpool they should refer me on because I don't support them and therefore have different views? They won't understand when I'm going on about Rooney and whatnot

of course, but the difference is belief can be a barrier to them getting help, whereas someone who is religious and trained in the same area will understand them and not view them as deluded. the reason it can be a bad idea ( and I speak as a religious Catholic ) for people to go to secular psychologists can be demonstrated by the following story, I know a persons whos parents had her see a psychologist at the age of 16 and the psychologist suggested to the 16 year olds parents that out of fear of their daughter being sexually frustrated and going to do the real thing with a boy, that she should masturbate, when masturbation is completely wrong and had the girl gone to a different psychologist ( catholic one ) he wouldnt of suggested her to do that thats for sure, her parents were recommended by a priest to go see a different psychologist right away. These are the problems religious people face when confronted by secular psychologists who claim to have all the answers.

krankykitty

With all due respect, that's your opinion with regards to masturbation being completely wrong. It is considered a natural part of people learning about their sexuality.

I don't know the rightness or wrongness of a psychologist suggesting to a person's parents that they should do this, however I think perhaps it does more psychological damage to encourage people to think of their natural urges as "wrong", which is where a secular psychologist (or indeed a religious one that doesn't impose his/her beliefs on the client) may actually be neutral and do their job as opposed to preaching beliefs which could actually be harmful to the person.

A therapist/psychologist/*enter professional here* may hear lots of things from clients they don't agree with and wouldn't do themselves, however they have a professional responsibility not to impose their own values and morals on a client. Its unethical to do otherwise in my opinion.

Stephentlig

krankykitty wrote: »

With all due respect, that's your opinion with regards to masturbation being completely wrong. It is considered a natural part of people learning about their sexuality.

I don't know the rightness or wrongness of a psychologist suggesting to a person's parents that they should do this, however I think perhaps it does more psychological damage to encourage people to think of their natural urges as "wrong", which is where a secular psychologist (or indeed a religious one that doesn't impose his/her beliefs on the client) may actually be neutral and do their job as opposed to preaching beliefs which could actually be harmful to the person.

It's not just my opinion, buddist monks do abstain from masturbation and are capable of not lashing out sexually by not masturbating, we are not taught that the natural urge is wrong, but we are taught that by acting it out it is wrong and sinful but you need faith to believe in that one.

masturbation is a habit, there was once a documentary on t.v of a guy who was tormented with it and he wasnt religious in anyway, so tormented with this habit was he that he attempted suicide many times and had to be treated, so much for the natural urge eh?

krankykitty

I don't know what you're getting at by saying the monks dont "lash out sexually by not masturbating"? Are you insinuating that I am suggesting that people have to masturbate in order to refrain from sexual violence?

It might not be just your opinion, but the point I'm making is that if one is to go to a professional, they deserve neutrality where their PERSONAL CHOICES with regards to their relationship with their own sexuality are not being branded "wrong". In fact, I believe branding stuff like this as "wrong" is damaging psychologically and is probably why as a nation we're so fcked up.

Stephentlig

krankykitty wrote: »

I don't know what you're getting at by saying the monks dont "lash out sexually by not masturbating"? Are you insinuating that I am suggesting that people have to masturbate in order to refrain from sexual violence?

It might not be just your opinion, but the point I'm making is that if one is to go to a professional, they deserve neutrality where their PERSONAL CHOICES with regards to their relationship with their own sexuality are not being branded "wrong". In fact, I believe branding stuff like this as "wrong" is damaging psychologically and is probably why as a nation we're so fcked up.

I mean ''act out actual sexual intercourse by not masturbating'' my choice of words could of been better I suppose.

Because the client in questions parents were suggested to that their child masturbate to refrain from doing the real thing, when studies show that by masturbating it acutally leads them on to do the real thing, and as I demonstrated above leads them to more psychological problems.

The Client who goes to see a psych who is Catholic would already be wanting help in the area of masturbation and wouldnt want their choice of not masturbating being affected by some secular imposing his own belief upon the client that its a natural urge to be carried out, when the evidence is against such a belief, the belief that carrying out masturbation relieves sexual frustration when its acutally what creates it.

But masturbation is not even our conversation here, the point I'm trying to make is that a truly practising Catholic who is being brought up practising Catholic either under the guardianship of his/her parents or just themselves independently, would seek someone who is not going to speak to them and tell them things that are contrary to their faith.

How can a person who believes that angels are speaking to them actually be taken seriously by a secular psychologist? the answer is a resounding NO they would not be taken seriously and viewed as deluded. such a thing wouldnt happen with a religious pshyc.

krankykitty

Stephentlig wrote: »

a truly practising Catholic who is being brought up practising Catholic either under the guardianship of his/her parents or just themselves independently, would seek someone who is not going to speak to them and tell them things that are contrary to their faith.

How can a person who believes that angels are speaking to them actually be taken seriously by a secular psychologist? the answer is a resounding NO they would not be taken seriously and viewed as deluded. such a thing wouldnt happen with a religious pshyc.

What if what the psychologist is telling them is contrary to their faith but is actually information that is sound in science and related to their condition? Surely if you have faith you are able to make a personal choice as to what the psychologist is telling you, for example, if the psychologist says to stick your hand in the fire you wouldn't do that, so if something suggested goes against your beliefs you have the power to reject it. I personally don't see that psychologists would "impose" something on you unless it was backed up by proper scientific research, and certainly not their own personal beliefs unless they are acting unethically.

I wonder if someone is presenting at a psychologist saying they are hearing angels, does that imply that they themselves think there's something going on with them psychologically, otherwise why would they go to the psychologist at all? Unless of course they are there for some other issue and the angels are mentioned, in which case it may or may not be relevant to the case.

Stephentlig

krankykitty wrote: »

What if what the psychologist is telling them is contrary to their faith but is actually information that is sound in science and related to their condition? Surely if you have faith you are able to make a personal choice as to what the psychologist is telling you, for example, if the psychologist says to stick your hand in the fire you wouldn't do that, so if something suggested goes against your beliefs you have the power to reject it. I personally don't see that psychologists would "impose" something on you unless it was backed up by proper scientific research, and certainly not their own personal beliefs unless they are acting unethically.

I wonder if someone is presenting at a psychologist saying they are hearing angels, does that imply that they themselves think there's something going on with them psychologically, otherwise why would they go to the psychologist at all? Unless of course they are there for some other issue and the angels are mentioned, in which case it may or may not be relevant to the case.

but thats the thing the science is against the fact that masturbation releives frustration and actually worsens the problem, the evidence that people of all religions can abstain from masturbation and not actually carry out sexual intercourse is in its abundance. and also many people like the man I mentioned who acquired such a habit ended up having suicidel tendencies and attempted it on many occasions.

Pshy: you should masturbate as I fear that if you dont, you'll go sleep with someone for real

Client: I dont want to its against my belief. cant you come at me from a different angle?

Psych: ummmm no I cant, science says its natural therefore you should do it.

Client: why are you imposing upon me your system of belief?

Psych: your right I should stop wasting your time and money and direct you to a Catholic pshyc

Client: thank you

The pshychologist should be clever enough to let the people know that they dont believe in angels or is not religious and that the client should seek someone else who would be more understanding instead of wasting the persons time and money.

krankykitty

Well for one, the psychologist doesnt/shouldnt care if you sleep with someone for real??

Also can you point us to a link for that research please?

That vignette you wrote is extremely simplistic as well, with all due respect.

Stephentlig

Well for one, the psychologist doesnt/shouldnt care if you sleep with someone for real??

but thats the thing how does a Catholic come for help to someone who obviously views pre-marital sex as not wrong? the catholic pshychologist doesnt judge the person or impose upon the person, he understands we are all sinners but he does his best to remedy the problem rather than judge.

Also can you point us to a link for that research please?

I cannot as its something that is implanted in my brain from past documentaries and lectures

That vignette you wrote is extremely simplistic as well, with all due respect.

Whats wrong with simplicity? why does an explanation of something have to be complicated?

krankykitty

Stephentlig wrote: »

but thats the thing how does a Catholic come for help to someone who obviously views pre-marital sex as not wrong? the catholic pshychologist doesnt judge the person or impose upon the person, he understands we are all sinners but he does his best to remedy the problem rather than judge.

But in that case, how does anyone go for help to anyone else who has different views and beliefs than them? Why should it matter, if they're sticking to the science of psychology?

How is it any less judgemental for a secular psychologist not to view what you're doing in terms of premarital sex to be wrong, and therefore wont judge you about it, than someone who thinks you (and everyone else) is a sinner and thinks that premarital sex is wrong? Surely that's a judgement in itself. A professional will more than likely do their best not to judge anyway.

I cannot as its something that is implanted in my brain from past documentaries and lectures

grand, was genuinely curious. Its probably true but to be honest I don't see anything wrong with it making you want to actually have sex, but then again, I personally don't see anything wrong with sex.

Whats wrong with simplicity? why does an explanation of something have to be complicated?

I meant simplistic from the point of view that i don't think it actually represents accurately the work a psychologist does, merely illustrates your own agenda

Kooli

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Faith does not come into treatment.

I can't say I'd agree with that. Even as an atheist, I would never say that a client's own faith does not come into treatment.

I can still treat someone who holds completely different views to me, as can most psychologists. If everyone seeking therapy had to go to a therapist with the same views and beliefs as them on all important issues, then it would make the search for a therapist very complicated indeed.

Xluna

Stephentlig wrote: »

I know enough about psychology to realise that many of them are in need of one themselves, my friends mother went to one for years and when she told her pshycologist she was having relationship problems with her mother, what was the psychologists solution? ''dont speak to your mother ever again for the rest of your life, cut off all connection with her.'' wow would you be willing to pay $250 for advice like that? from someone who has studied and professed to be a psychologist? I dont think so.

Pax Christi
Stephen

Thank you,from an athiest.

I'm appalled by the amount of people who claim they were given likewise advice given by some psyche people.

krankykitty

Xluna wrote: »

Thank you,from an athiest.

I'm appalled by the amount of people who claim they were given likewise advice given by some psyche people.

You know, I've heard a few myself.. eg, "my therapist told me to break up with my boyfriend" but I sometimes would be dubious as to whether the professional actually came out with those words. Sometimes its easier to put the "blame" on someone else than taking responsibility for your own decisions. For instance, if I felt that I needed to pull back from my relationship with my parents for my own health, it might feel more "kind" to tell them that someone else told me to do it rather than it being my own decision, and all the ramifications that might bring.

Having said that, like all professions, there are good and bad, competent and incompetent.

However, I'm talking about psychotherapy in which from training I would be very aware of the pitfalls of telling a client what to do and giving them such direct advice. I would imagine psychology would be the same, that there'd be a respect for the autonomy of the client, but maybe one of the psychologists here could fill you in better.

Xluna

krankykitty wrote: »

You know, I've heard a few myself.. eg, "my therapist told me to break up with my boyfriend" but I sometimes would be dubious as to whether the professional actually came out with those words.

In the cases I've experienced there was little ambiguity.

krankykitty wrote: »

Sometimes its easier to put the "blame" on someone else than taking responsibility for your own decisions. For instance, if I felt that I needed to pull back from my relationship with my parents for my own health, it might feel more "kind" to tell them that someone else told me to do it rather than it being my own decision, and all the ramifications that might bring.

You're correct. However it's important to take into context that many people see psyche people as virtually infallible. They're like the priests of the modern era.( In fact talking to a psyche probably gives for many people a similiar effect as a confession would to religious person.)
Also many people who visit them will feel vunerable and insecure regarding their own capacity for adequete self determination. I think that some psyches just say this as a safe bet,which is myopic imo.

JuliusCaesar

Xluna wrote: »

In the cases I've experienced there was little ambiguity.

This is hearsay, and there's a good reason why it's not admissable in courts. Duirt bean go bhean eile....

Anecdotes are just that. I've been misquoted by clients back to myself!

Xluna wrote: »

However it's important to take into context that many people see psyche people as virtually infallible. They're like the priests of the modern era.( In fact talking to a psyche probably gives for many people a similiar effect as a confession would to religious person.)
Also many people who visit them will feel vunerable and insecure regarding their own capacity for adequete self determination. I think that some psyches just say this as a safe bet,which is myopic imo.

Which is why we have a sticky on how to find accredited psychologists and counsellors and psychotherapists, and explain the difference between the various professions etc. Accreditation isn't failsafe, but it's better than no regulation.

The topic posted by the OP was how religious beliefs differ from psychotic delusions, which has been answered.