Dr Phil promotes "Satanic Ritual Abuse" conspiracy theory

On the subject of willful deceit it might be good to look at what environments allowed this "book" to get the play it has.

--The Publisher
Tate Publishing, a Christian vanity publisher, regularly charges naive kids and elderly folk $4,000 to publish their works. Ryan, their CEO, was caught in a whooper recently.
http://journalrecord.com/2012/05/31...es-25-as-outsourcing-rumors-fly-general-news/

--The Author
In addition to all the inconsistencies within the book Doug Mesner has detailed there is the endorsement of the book. Robert Kroon's endorsement of Judy's book has a history with Christian vanity publishers in two countries. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8779144&postcount=877

When challenged on Kroon Byington blurts "Robert Kroon gave me the kudo before he passed away". That would have meant he endorsed the book five or more years ago when there was no book.

It's disturbing that Byington maintains this position. I found it rather bizarre behavior for a woman who cites all sorts of religious beliefs, but then I came across this and wonder. http://www.religiondispatches.org/d...7/does_mormonism_encourage_lds_people_to_lie/

--The Media
What I found even more disturbing is the number of media outlets in UT that gave her play including several newspapers, an NPR affiliate and an ABC affiliate. When I questioned a college reporter who did a story on the book as to why she was so easily taken in by Byington, she cited the other media.

The college reporter had the intelligence to see what had happened and admitted she should have done some research. Not so with ABC-4 to whom Doug wrote and outlined in detail the bizarre inconsistencies. He addressed the anchor BEFORE the story ran. It ran anyway and ABC-4 took down all critiques to its site and Facebook page. This station is called a "News" organization in Utah.

Now Byington is attempting to take this beyond UT. But not so fast. Unlike other similar stories that have eked onto daytime talk shows, the facts are preceding the narrative retelling now.
 
Last edited:
THE USE OF NOVEL UNSUPPORTED AND EMPIRICALLY SUPPORTED THERAPIES BY LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKERS
A Dissertation submitted to the College of Social Work in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/avail...unrestricted/Pignotti_M_Dissertation_2009.pdf
In recent years there has been a growing interest regarding the integration of evidence based practice into social work curricula and practice (Howard, McMillen, & Pollio, 2003; Thyer, 2004). However, there has also been a growing concern about the proliferation of novel interventions that lack empirical support and yet make claims of efficacy in the absence of evidence (Thyer, 2007) as well as conventional social work interventions that lack empirical support and yet remain unquestioned (Gambrill, 2006). Although studies have been conducted that have examined the theoretical orientations and other practice patterns of clinical social
workers, to date, with the exception of the pilot study (Pignotti & Thyer, 2009) that preceded this dissertation, no study has systematically examined the intervention choices of licensed clinical social workers (LCSWs) including the use of novel unsupported therapies.

The present dissertation examined the reported usage of novel and conventional unsupported and empirically supported therapies by 400 LCSWs from 39 different states who responded to an Internet survey. The purpose of the study was to determine what interventions were reported currently being used by LCSWs, reasons for choosing interventions, and their attitudes towards evidence-based practice. Prior to data analysis, the list of the therapies reported being used by LCSWs was presented to a panel of expert reviewers and therapies were classified as empirically supported therapies (ESTs), novel unsupported therapies (NUTs) or conventional
unsupported therapies (CUTs). The study hypotheses were that: 1) females would be more likely than males to use CUTs and NUTs; 2) respondents who report an affiliation with eastern/new age or ondenominational/spiritual religions would be more likely to use NUTs; 3) clinical experience would be more highly rated than empirical evidence as a reason for selecting a therapy; 4) LCSWs with a theoretical orientation of cognitive-behavioral would value evidence from research more highly than LCSWs of other orientations and 5) LCSWs who use NUTs and/or CUTs will score higher on the Divergence subscale of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitudes Scale (EBPAS; Aarons, 2004) than those who did not use such therapies.

The results showed that although an overwhelming majority of the sample reported using ESTs (98%), three-quarters of participants also reported using at least one NUT and 86% used at least one CUT. The hypothesis that females were more likely to use NUTs and CUTs was supported and females also used a higher number of NUTs. The hypothesis that participants reporting eastern/new age and on enominational/spiritual religious beliefs use a higher number of NUTs was also supported, although they were not more likely to use any NUT. It was found that participants, as hypothesized, valued clinical experience over research evidence and LCSWs with a theoretical orientation of cognitive-behavioral were found to value research evidence more highly than those of other theoretical orientations. The hypothesis that LCSWs who use NUTs and/or CUTs will score higher on the Divergence subscale of the EBPAS was not supported.

This study offers preliminary evidence that the use of NUTs is widespread among
LCSWs, although the limitation is noted that the present sample may not necessarily be representative of all LCSWs. It also appears that given the fact that actuarial judgment has been shown to be more accurate than clinical judgment (Dawes, Faust & Meehl, 1989) LCSWs may be under-valuing research evidence. It is also evident that the use of ESTs and NUTs are not necessarily mutually exclusive and although the EBPAS indicates that overall our sample had a positive attitude towards EBP, future research needs to examine a fuller definition of the term that includes their understanding of the term and specific practices
Click to expand...
 
This is my favorite part so far after clicking that link to Monica Pignotti's doctoral thesis:

http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/avail...unrestricted/Pignotti_M_Dissertation_2009.pdf


CHAPTER 1 CONCEPTUAL OVERVIEW AND PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.1 Introduction

Clinical social workers comprise the largest number of psychotherapy providers in the United States, outnumbering psychologists 34:26 and psychiatrists 34:11 per 100,000 in the U.S. population although specific ratios may differ by region (Hartston, 2008). Although the profession of social work appears to be moving more towards an evidence-based practice orientation, concern has been expressed about the proliferation of interventions being practiced by clinical social workers and other mental health professionals that lack empirical support and yet make unsubstantiated claims (Thyer, 2004; Lilienfeld, Lynn & Lohr, 2003a). The social work profession has been characterized as largely authority-based, employing the strategy to “simply pronounce what is and what is not even though there is no evidence for claims” (Gambrill, 1999, p. 341) which may result in highly undesirable consequences for clients and for social work as a profession.
Specht and Courtney (1994) have noted that some social workers have lost sight of the mission of the profession to help the poor and the vulnerable and have replaced this with an entrepreneurial focus, using questionable approaches with mainly middle-classed and wealthy clients.
 
From the conclusion section of the dissertation

Today, some schools of social work are putting more emphasis on evidence-based practice and are teaching interventions with empirical support, so practices may be changing with more recent graduates of social work programs. However, many students are still practicing 71 in field placements settings that may not be considering the empirical support of interventions being used and that may be reducing the impact of emphasizing EBP in the classroom.

Additionally, social workers today who spend time on the internet are bombarded with advertisements and testimonials for various novel interventions. Although many such interventions lack empirical support, they offer workshops and certification programs accompanied by unsupported claims for efficacy, often based on nothing more than testimonials and anecdotes. Social work students, as well as currently practicing LCSWs could benefit from learning to critically evaluate such claims, rather than relying upon word of mouth from colleagues or what seems to be working in their practice.* Such judgments can be subject to biases such as expectancy and confirmation bias (Lilienfeld, Lynn & Lohr, 2003), that no human beings, including social workers, are immune to.

Moreover, many mental health professionals greatly overestimate their ability to learn from experience and may be unaware of the large body of evidence that supports the superiority of actuarial judgment to clinical judgment (Dawes et al., 1989; Garb & Boyle, 2003). Dawes and his colleagues’ review demonstrated that “individuals may have considerable difficulty distinguishing valid and invalid variables and commonly develop false beliefs in associations between variables” (p. 1671). Additionally, these authors point out that clinical judgments in the absence of empirical evidence can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. That is, “prediction of an outcome often leads to decisions that influence or bias that outcome” (p. 1671). Also, predictions based on clinical judgment can be remembered as more consistent than they actually were. Another problem with clinical judgment is that the samples clinicians are exposed to may not necessarily be representative of the population as a whole and thus a given problem might become over-pathologized when the clinician sees only people who are seeking help, and would not be likely to see people who were able to resolve the problem on their own. The present study results suggest that clinical social workers may be overvaluing clinical experience, while viewing research evidence as less valuable in making decisions regarding selection of interventions. While the experience of seasoned clinicians claiming various areas of expertise does have value and ought not to be dismissed entirely, years of experience is no substitute for critical thinking nor should it give the expert carte blanche to make unsupported assertions immune from challenge.** Critical questioning and evaluation of claims made by 72 experts who are considered authorities in various specialties is also necessary. Clinical social workers need to learn how to evaluate such claims and research.


*My emphasis. If Ms. Byington is reading, she should pay close attention to this part.

** Note especially thie last part of that sentence. Science works because people challenge ideas, outcomes, and methods. The challenged don't insult the challengers; they let their work stand or fall on its own (Fleischman and Pons notwithstanding).
 
Last edited:
xterra said:
*My emphasis. If Ms. Byington is reading, she should pay close attention to this part.

** Note especially thie last part of that sentence. Science works because people challenge ideas, outcomes, and methods. The challenged don't insult the challengers; they let their work stand or fall on its own (Fleischman and Pons notwithstanding).
Click to expand...



Exactly :cool:
 
xterra said:
** Critical questioning and evaluation of claims made by 72 experts who are considered authorities in various specialties is also necessary. Clinical social workers need to learn how to evaluate such claims and research.


*My emphasis. If Ms. Byington is reading, she should pay close attention to this part.

** Note especially thie last part of that sentence. Science works because people challenge ideas, outcomes, and methods. The challenged don't insult the challengers; they let their work stand or fall on its own (Fleischman and Pons notwithstanding).
Click to expand...

Hate to say it, but people like Ms Byington are TEACHING social workers! How do you think this meme lives? Social workers get credit to learn this stuff!

Multiple Personality Formation and Functioning Webinar
This event is on 17 November 2012
“Multiple Personality Formation and Functioning”
Webinar by Judy Byington, MSW, LCSW, ret
An online webinar for survivors and professionals
Presented by: www.survivorship.org/webinars.html
CEU Credits available
 
xterra said:
Ouch. There's one born every minute, isn't there?


Thanks for posting that, Altus.
Click to expand...

It's mindboggling when you start looking at what constitutes "therapy". It's really gotta be cleaned up for the sake of good therapy and good therapists.

I too thought that a hell of lot more critical thinking went into therapy than it does. I didn't know that this whole social worker continuing ed thing can amount to the blind leading the blind among a class of folk who make up the bulk of therapists. There is just no oversight of the CEU (continuing education unit) process I can find. Judy claims to have been pumping her story out at the ISSTD annual conference which does offer continuing ed credits.

Then you got this schmoe, Richard Schwartz, hitting every new age gathering there is with his "parts" therapy. Look at all the CEU listings! http://www.selfleadership.org/appearances.html

The center where he is in residence swears by this therapy...they have 4 lawsuits pending against them for Satanic Ritual Abuse and false trauma memories. The 4th hit last week. http://phtherapies.wordpress.com/20...enter-lawsuit-other-ex-patients-come-forward/ (I have no idea who Scott is *hi, Scott* but this site is maintained by one of the authors of the social worker survey. Monica Pignotti has been calling for critical thinking in therapy for years! Not many listening, it seems)
 
Last edited:
Emma Woods, a woman who was led to believe, by way of Recovered Memory Therapy, that she had been abducted by aliens just posted a remarkable article about her experience on Dysgenics.com:
http://www.dysgenics.com/2012/11/24...mories-of-ufo-abduction-a-personal-testimony/

The SRA scam and alien abduction are both exactly the same in every way -- in method of "evidence" gathering and in the nature of their "proof" -- and any shoddy retrospective surveys used to "prove" DID's relationship to abuse should be compared against the surveys of same standards used by Dr. John Mack and Kathy Marden to "prove" the alien abduction phenomenon...

"While I was under hypnosis, Dr. Jacobs implanted hypnotic suggestions in my mind that I had Multiple Personality Disorder rather than being an “alien abductee”. In addition, he told me to send him my unwashed underpants and not to remember doing it, and suggested that I wear a chastity belt that he would send to me [...]"
 
Hi all! I'm essentially without Internet at the moment, but I haven't forgotten you. Keep up the good work, wonderful people!

Love

Orph.
 
Scott Sommers said:
And that exactly is the point. Judy Byington has claimed that I am you...and who's to say she's wrong?
Click to expand...

I beg your pardon, Sir, she claimed both my "Altus Avatar"? and Amazon CritThink identities were Doug.

Maybe she is claiming we are his alters. In which case, Scott, I believe it's your week to pick-up the dry cleaning.

Geeze, I've been watching "Inception," over the last couple of nights.

Whose nightmare is this, anyway?

(*waves* to Orph.)
 
Last edited:
Slightly off topic, but relevant:

I have a friend several years younger than I. Frances is, for the most part, a rational person leading a normal lifestyle. She pays her bills, doesn't spend money she doesn't have, doesn't live an extravagant lifestyle. She loves her children and grandchildren, enjoys arts and crafts, plays the fiddle in a musical group, lives a normal ordinary life as a retired person.* She was a social worker, and is quite politically liberal in the US sense of that term.

Several years ago, during the beginning of the Tea Party movement, she said to me, meaning every word, “Those [Tea Party] people are mentally ill.”

I looked at her in disbelief. “Frances, just because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them mentally ill.”

She repeated it: “They are seriously mentally ill. No one who is normal could believe that stuff. They need help.”**

After thinking about this for some while, I have come to the conclusion that if Frances is typical of social workers, FSM help me. I don't want to have to go to one.

xterra



* However, she's a terrible driver. I grit my teeth as her passenger. She will do things like stop when she has the right of way; or when she doesn't have it, wait for a car that is two blocks away to pass before she crosses the intersection. She doesn't have accidents, but I'm betting that she makes people so frustrated that they have accidents. But that's another story; sorry for the digression.

**As someone said on this or another thread, she is a friend and so I can overlook things. I have never again mentioned politics.
 
douglas mesner said:
Emma Woods, a woman who was led to believe, by way of Recovered Memory Therapy, that she had been abducted by aliens just posted a remarkable article about her experience on Dysgenics.com:
http://www.dysgenics.com/2012/11/24...mories-of-ufo-abduction-a-personal-testimony/

The SRA scam and alien abduction are both exactly the same in every way -- in method of "evidence" gathering and in the nature of their "proof" -- and any shoddy retrospective surveys used to "prove" DID's relationship to abuse should be compared against the surveys of same standards used by Dr. John Mack and Kathy Marden to "prove" the alien abduction phenomenon...

"While I was under hypnosis, Dr. Jacobs implanted hypnotic suggestions in my mind that I had Multiple Personality Disorder rather than being an “alien abductee”. In addition, he told me to send him my unwashed underpants and not to remember doing it, and suggested that I wear a chastity belt that he would send to me [...]"
Click to expand...



So aliens can build space ships that travel across the universe but they can't open a chastity belt ? :alien011:
 
Scott Sommers said:
And that exactly is the point. Judy Byington has claimed that I am you...and who's to say she's wrong?
Click to expand...

Perhaps funny, given Judy's concern for screen names and real names, "Byington" is her maiden name. Her married name, the name she uses now, is Judy Weindorf.
 
douglas mesner said:
Perhaps funny, given Judy's concern for screen names and real names, "Byington" is her maiden name. Her married name, the name she uses now, is Judy Weindorf.
Click to expand...

She might do this for business reasons, but I do see the irony. Most of the people posting on this thread are posting in their real names. Monica Pignotti posts and works in her real name. It's the same thing over on the 9/1 subforum. almost all the Truthers use screen names, and some of them are leading figures in their conspiracy movement. Only Tony Szamboti posts in his real name and he's always whining how JREF members don't use their real names. It's a strange manifestation of cowardice.
 
douglas mesner said:
Perhaps funny, given Judy's concern for screen names and real names, "Byington" is her maiden name. Her married name, the name she uses now, is Judy Weindorf.
Click to expand...

Well then, that might account for this curious post under Judy's YouTube video:

"Mr. Seeker...That inspires me to go on because I'm risking my life to tell my story. May God bless you, too. Jenny
Fred Weindorf in reply to MrSeeker42 (Show the comment) 3 months ago"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F626Lsrdwg4

Not only is this not Jenny's story, neither are Jenny's comments replying to her story hers. Gotta love social media noobs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom