presentation and critics

Resources: 
Robbins,B PhD (2009) Szasz Hates Laing retrieved at:http://societyforhumanisticpsychology.blogspot.com/2009/02/szasz-hates-laing.html The Society for Humanistic Psychiatry.  
GUTHEIL, T. M.D (2001) Letter in response to Szasz Under fire. Retrieved at: http://www.szasz.com/critics.htm. 
Shalev, A. (2001) Flawed Argument. Retrieved at: http://www.szasz.com/critics.htm.

When I said I would do a review of 'Sex by Pescription' I meant that I have to sit down and do it. It'll be done. But first I wanted to share some of the criticisms that I read about Szasz as well as my presentation on Tuesday. 

Lets start with the ladder and go from there. 

The presentation was on the life and basic doings of Thomas Szasz. I spent a good portion of the class talking about a lot of his theories and how they are seen today. Went o Szasz.com and I found something aptly named Critics Corner. It gives some pretty recent critics on Szasz as well as some feedback on the literature. A few of the critics were letters, but some were articles (or blog posts). So In no Particular order, I'll go through what some said and my reactions (I'll try to provide a bit of information on each person: 

Thomas G. Gutheil, MD. Says of Szasz that he and I quote "is simply no longer worth it." in reaction to a request to be a part of the book Szasz Under Fire. The book is  a look at some of Szaszian theories and responses/reactions form some noted individuals in the fields of Psychology and Psychiatry. 

Arieh Y. Shalev, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry said of Szasz that "Frankly, I find the Szasz argument flawed, superficial, demagogic and immoral." He goes on to explain that Szasz " assumes a yes/know type of biomedical knowledge, whereas the truth is that most knowledge is relative". Each paragraph explains why he finds the Szaszian argument flawed.

"Szasz Hates Laing"  Is an article written by Brent Robbins, PhD. The article is a criticism of a recent article by Szasz called Debunking Antipsychiatry: Laing, Law, and Largactil (2008) the full text is available online, just click the link. I'll post a review of it in the coming days. The Robbins piece goes on to say that "Szasz's article in Existential Analysis can be read as nothing other than a full-frontal assault on R.D. Laing's character and, by implication, his credibility as a clinician and scholar. He paints him to be an irresponsible, reckless and power-hungry monster." The piece in my mind is not exceptionally biased because it also takes a critical look at Laing and it's application and rejection of the term anti-psychiatry. The article is short but sweet, so take a look.

Below is my presentation, please feel free to go through it, read the notes. What I liked about the critiques was that it was opposition of theory and not just a means of slandering a person. I think that all of the critics made some very interesting points; of the points, the fact that a lot of new technologies have debunked a few of Szaszs' earlier works. I do think that Szasz is right about the separation of state and psychiatry. I feel that many people are so quick to give children medication without letting them work out their problems firsthand or looking at other factors that might cause the behavior. A shift in environment could be just the thing that some people need to reduce their symptoms of  disorders.




So next time we will take a look at the world of Sexology and it's implementations in the past and how it's used today.