Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
sleepy_lioness said:
But the poor old GP, in particular, has been getting utterly panned in this thread with suggestions made that he's not doing his job properly, and I felt like pointing out that it's quite possible, indeed likely, that he is doing it exactly as he should be.
Click to expand...

Or, as I pointed out earlier in the thread, the GP could be completely nuts himself. Doctors are just people, and many of them believe in all kinds of silly things. No-one here has any idea how seriously the GP takes flaccon's claims, so trying to claim that flaccon's account is wrong and that we know what he really said and/or thought is utterly pointless. He might think she's nuts and be doing exactly what he should. He might think she's nuts and be doing something completely inappropriate because he is nuts and/or incompetent. He might think she's perfectly normal but happens to have a few inconsequential silly beliefs. He might believe every single thing she has ever said and right now be in the process of sending her all his money so she can investigate further.

The point is that we have absolutely no idea what the GP thinks, what he's doing about it, or what would be best medical practice given what he knows. He could be anywhere from a sceptical superhero to the second coming of David Ike. All this speculation about what he really thinks is just as pointless as it was last time I pointed this out.
 
Absolutely. I agree. I was just trying to present an alternative viewpoint to all the posters who were arguing that, because the GP apparently didn't aggressively challenge flaccon and immediately have her taken in for psychiatric treatment, he must be incompetent. As you say, he might be incompetent. However, there's also every chance that he isn't. And that was all I wanted to point out. None of us can know what he actually thinks or was trying to do, from the little information we have. That's precisely what I was arguing.
 
More to the point, we don't know what the GP really did. We have flaccon's version of what she thinks happened, but flaccon's retelling of things have proven suspect and had to be revised under scrutiny. We have scrappy's version of one visit, but that, too, appears to be suspect.

I think the whole GP thing is best put off to the side until there is some tangible evidence one way or the other.
 
While I don't feel flaccon's GP is by any means uncapable of his job position, I do feel she needs a GP with more of a Doc Martin disposition.
 
trustbutverify said:
Then why can't either of you tell me what kind of results would indicate your ghost in the machine beliefs might not be true? Why can't either of you suggest a reasonable test for which a "fail' result would falsify (or at least weaken) the claim?

What's the problem?
Click to expand...
I truly don't think the question makes any sense to them.

TheDoLittle said:
While I don't feel flaccon's GP is by any means uncapable of his job position, I do feel she needs a GP with more of a Doc Martin disposition.
Click to expand...
:newlol

Donn said:
What is the church "hood" stuff?
Click to expand...
Here's a church hood - well, a church wimple, actually.
 

Attachments

  • Zoot.gif
    Zoot.gif
    31.1 KB · Views: 194
sleepy_lioness said:
I'm a bit bemused, to be honest, by all the people here who insist that the GP and priest should be disagreeing fervently with flaccon and telling her she's deluded or mentally ill and needs treatment. Or even that the GP should be struck off for not so doing. Two points:

1. Weird behaviour and strange beliefs do not necessarily equal mental illness. It might well be that flaccon's right that her GP says psychiatry is inappropriate, and who knows, he might well be right too, according to proper diagnostics. There's a huge range of behaviour and belief that is not considered socially normal or even acceptable, that still isn't evidence of mental illness. If her beliefs are interfering with her life to a strongly detrimental extent the GP might take notice, but otherwise s/he might well be perfectly correct in not attributing flaccon's statements to mental illness. In fact, referring to psychiatry every time a patient comes in displaying beliefs or a worldview at variance with one's own is a great way to be in conflict with medical ethics.

2. EVEN IF the GP or the priest suspect mental illness when they see someone exhibiting delusions, the way to deal with this is not to challenge the delusions directly. All guidelines I am aware of say this. You see what happens in this thread, and myriad like it, when someone who has firm unusual, possibly deluded, beliefs is challenged head-on. The GP needs to establish a relationship with their patient, a 'therapeutic alliance', and to do this s/he has to tread the difficult line between encouraging delusion and not making the patient instantly walk out (and shop around for a more sympathetic doctor). They might even seem to encourage the delusions by finding a way to get the person help that makes sense to them and thus improves their health and wellbeing (for example, I can't help you with the spirits, but perhaps a nice priest might give you a blessing to make sure they can't harm you?). This is hard, and of course many patients come out of such a consultation thinking that the doctor agrees with them, but it has to be done.

As a final point, we only have flaccon's perception of what went on, and what her GP and priest are/were doing. If they are doing their jobs correctly she will feel that there's a door open for her to go and talk to them again, while they are gently pushing her in the direction of ensuring her beliefs don't negatively impact her life. But it's not their job - especially not the GP's - to 'prove' to her that spirits don't exist.
Click to expand...

Excellent post!!

This is my 1st post in this thread, but I've read the entire thing. Is there any possibility Alderbank could video the meeting between flaccon, scrappy and the two Revs?
 
torifrog said:
Excellent post!!

This is my 1st post in this thread, but I've read the entire thing. Is there any possibility Alderbank could video the meeting between flaccon, scrappy and the two Revs?
Click to expand...

I doubt it.

1. Everyone would have to agree, including public release afterwards.
2. The presence of a camera will affect behaviour
3. Alderbank may not be suitably equipped.
4. Flaccon will claim the camera scared the spirits off, or whatever.
 
abaddon said:
I doubt it.

1. Everyone would have to agree, including public release afterwards.
2. The presence of a camera will affect behaviour
3. Alderbank may not be suitably equipped.
4. Flaccon will claim the camera scared the spirits off, or whatever.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, well that kinda sucks. 'Twas just a thought.
 
abaddon said:
I doubt it.

1. Everyone would have to agree, including public release afterwards.
2. The presence of a camera will affect behaviour
3. Alderbank may not be suitably equipped.
4. Flaccon will claim the camera scared the spirits off, or whatever.
Click to expand...

Or 4. The spirits will tell Flaccon they are not a circus and will not perform for entertainment purposes. Any one else listening to the message will not hear anything but buzzing unless they have been told exactly what it says- when it becomes very clear if listener is gullible believes enough.
 
abaddon said:
Hey, I don't disagree. It would be nice. I just don't think it will be possible.

OTOH, Scrappy reports that flaccon and her GP were quite happy for him to attend a consultation, so who knows.
Click to expand...

GPs (and other doctors) are generally fine with letting you bring whoever you want into the room with you, at least here in the US. It benefits them to have a second set of ears listening to their instructions and it may help to keep the patient calm. I'm not sure of the legal ramifications but they may have to let you bring in anyone you want provided that there's room. They don't have to let you bring the whole family in with you of course. They may not allow two observers due to space and time considerations.

Taping the interviews may be a separate issue as well. I'm pretty sure I could get my GP to let me tape my appointments, but I'm also pretty sure he wouldn't be required to allow it. Nor do I think he'd be wild about letting me tape if I already had someone else attending. I think it would make my chronic pain management specialist paranoid tbh.
 
Just an audio recording would be helpful, to avoid the standard problem of different memories/interpretation of what was said of which we already have experience with the previous meeting, but I agree we shouldn't expect it. It's entirely up to flaccon whether to even suggest it.
 
Apology said:
GPs (and other doctors) are generally fine with letting you bring whoever you want into the room with you, at least here in the US. It benefits them to have a second set of ears listening to their instructions and it may help to keep the patient calm. I'm not sure of the legal ramifications but they may have to let you bring in anyone you want provided that there's room. They don't have to let you bring the whole family in with you of course. They may not allow two observers due to space and time considerations.

Taping the interviews may be a separate issue as well. I'm pretty sure I could get my GP to let me tape my appointments, but I'm also pretty sure he wouldn't be required to allow it. Nor do I think he'd be wild about letting me tape if I already had someone else attending. I think it would make my chronic pain management specialist paranoid tbh.
Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't suggesting taping a doctor's appointment! Just the arrangement previously discussed to be held in flaccon's home with scrappy and the two Reverends she mentioned and which she invited Alderbank to (and he accepted).

Here in Australia we can take maybe 3? people to a GP appointment (I've never taken more than one, but I've had up to 3 people present for ward visits in hospital - I was in ICU though, which I think is very probably different), and I would never suggest tapings of such.

I note Pixel's comment and agree. Basically, any evidence would be of assistance here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom