Psychologist says yes, psychiatrist says no

Post Reply New Topic

That is really really not true. Psychiatrists are medical doctors who specialise in mental disorders. That means not only do they have the advantage of a medical degree but they also have the additional 3 years (sometimes up to 6 years) of Psychiatric specific study (the same or longer length of a full course in Psychology). And with Autism/AS being a biological disorder involving the physical wiring of the brain (that manifests emotionally) this would make Psychiatrists even more qualified to make these diagnosis because of the medicinal background.

It isn't true that most psychiatrists simply dole out medication, they offer medication as a way of alleviating symptoms (such as intense anxiety or rage) so that a clear dialogue can be initiated, it is offered only when seen as necessary. Psychologists don't have this advantage, and I'm sure if they did, they would use it. It isn't a psychiatrists goal to get people medicated, it is to heal them, which is what a doctor does.

Last edited by hush6 on 19 Oct 2009, 8:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Psychiatrists won't diagnose anything they can't throw pills at.

It certainly IS true that MOST psychiatrist just hand out pills. There may be some who also provide therapy, but the vast majority are about medication. That's what they do, and if you need psychotherapy, they refer you to a psychotherapist. Almost no insurance will even cover therapy with a psychiatrist; just the 15-minute med-checks once a month or so.
Likewise, their education in psychiatry is based around prescribing medication.
Depending on the people, most don't even know anything about autism spectrum disorders at all, whether psychologist or psychiatrist-- you have to go to a specialist. My psychiatrist told me quite clearly that she is a general psychiatrist, not a developmental psychiatrist, so she has no knowledge of ASDs whatsoever.
Psychiatrists are medical doctors who do medical treatment. They know drugs, they know drug interactions, they know how to treat psychiatric and psychological issues on a physiological basis. Most are not therapists. Some are; some are certified in psychoanalysis or other therapeutic techniques. Most, however, are not.
Since there's not currently much in the way of biological treatment for autism spectrum disorders, the majority of psychiatrists won't even have studied them.

Psychologist says yes, psychiatrist says no. What does neurologist say?

(It is, after all, a neurological disorder, not a psychiatric one...)

Maybe Psychiatry is different in my country, because what you've described is pretty much the opposite of everything I know and have experienced with Psychiatrists. Over here they use drugs, but only if necessary, and like I said, only to alleviate symptoms. They don't believe that drugs cure mental illness. I don't even think we have 'psychoanalysts' here, just psychiatrists.

I have never had an appointment with a psychiatrist that lasted under 50 minutes. I have never had one of these so called 15 minute med checks. Therapy with my psychiatrist (which happens on a weekly basis) is fully subsidised by my countries public health system, and this is because of that medical degree. Psychologist appoinments are not subsidised because they are not considered medical professionals.

Also, over here, psychiatrists are obligated to continue learning and advancing their education and knowledge of their specialty.

I have seen psychiatrists and psychologists and I find psychologists to be very uninformed, misinformed or generally unprofessional. I don't like going to an appointment and feeling like I have more knowledge than the person I am paying to help me, I have never had that feeling with a psychiatrist.

Besides, most of the research and advancements in the areas of mental illness are done by those who have that elusive medical degree, psychiatrists.

But yeh, it must be very different in America, that sucks!!

You clearly do not know the truth about pharmaceuticals. It's about prescribing as many drugs per person (DPP) so that the companies who manufacture them make BILLIONS of dollars...Then a portion of those funds goes back to the doctors who prescribe them. Basically, the doctors who prescribe the most drugs, get the most money back from the pharmaceutical companies. Do a Google search, you'll find a lot of info about it.

For neurology, I was told that the only way to determine Asperger's is by autopsy.

But I wonder if we're all discussing the same thing? I think that since Asperger's is defined in the DSM, then any "official" Dx would have to be in line with that, and the only people who are authorized are psychiatrists.

I'm not saying psychiatrists are better or worse, just that according to law, the psychiatrist outranks all the others.

I'm curious though - all these people who glibly diagnose - do they give it to you in writing?

I do know about that, and have spoken with my (previous) psychiatrist about it (after seeing a doco), and I have been assured they don't offer drugs that aren't necessary simply for money. At least she and her colleagues don't.

Again, this might be an American thing that doesn't go on over here.

Then it most certainly is.

I just want to add one thing;

My previous psychiatrist who I saw for 4 years offered my medication once very early on when we started to help me with anxiety. I declined as I don't take psychiatric medications. For 3 years we worked together, just through talking and I found it very helpful. The only other time she offered me medication was when I had an episode and she offered me calmatives for obvious reasons. I didn't take the packet, but I took a single pill in her office, which did make me calm down.

My current psychiatrist who I have been seeing for just over a year also offered me medication after seeing me for about a month to help with anxiety, again I declined. It was not bought up again until I bought it up about 6 months ago because my anxiety was getting out of control. We discussed at length if I should try medication and what I should try. I tried something for about 4 months, but I didn't like it (it did have it's benefits, but I found I couldn't write music properly on it), so I went off it. There was no problem with this and we have continued with the talking.

Wait, what? How are they supposed to do that? I'd like to see the science for that one.

OP, is either of them more qualified than the other? My psychiatrist said flat out that he knew nothing about ASDs, and he wasn't interested in it because there was no medication specific for it.

If neither of them are particularly knowledgable about it, maybe a third opinion would be in order.

Hush, what country are you in?? I think I'll move there! LOL

Yes, and most of that info will be tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory. For one thing, doctors taking kickbacks for prescribing medication is considered to be extremely unethical. Most of the time, doctors get things like free samples, coffee mugs, notepads, and occasionally a free dinner. It's not some kind of huge bribery, though even a free coffee mug does slightly bias the doctor--though the bias is in favor of prescribing that particular medication rather than a competitor, not in favor of prescribing any medication at all (doctors make the decision to prescribe or not mostly based on their own inclinations).

Yes, the drug companies make billions of dollars. So does Microsoft. So does McDonald's. So does any major company. Your point?

If you think about it, if there were a conspiracy, drug companies wouldn't benefit from killing you with too many medications. They benefit most when their drugs are successful and people live longer, because the longer you live, the more chances you have to get sick and buy medication. They don't want to kill people; they want to keep people alive. Drug companies have an ulterior profit motive, yeah, but it doesn't interfere with producing a good product. Every time they manufacture a bad drug, they lose huge amounts of money. Billions, in fact. Some have gone belly-up after that kind of scandal. If a drug company executive is a savvy businessman, he'll make that medication as safe as he can possibly make it.

And for some nice accurate anti-pharmaceutical-company info, there's lots of info here: http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/
The writer is a psychiatrist who I'm fairly certain doesn't advocate tin-foil hats, but does thoroughly despise pharmaceutical company BS.

Edit: But don't go to that site if you have high blood pressure! Every time I read something on there, I can feel an actual physiological response from how pissed off I get. It details the whole Seroquel scandal, complete with the sex-for-studies fiasco.

my experience with psychiatrists, or any professional with a medical degree for that matter, is that if present with symptoms of depression, anxiety, or poor coping skills they push you onto antidepressants. if one doesn't work, they have a hard time letting go of the theory that drugs will work, so they switch you to another. and another. and another.

until you're so sick you can barely walk.

unless someone specializes in dx'ing autistic spectrum disorders, they don't have the expertise to rule it out, either. that's why even though my therapist dx'd me, I'm going to a neuropsychologist.

This forum is typically anti-psychiatry (and anti-doctor in general) so the opinions you receive here will be far from objective.
Your options are pretty simple. You could...
1) Choose the Dx that suits your whim best
2) Ask the two individuals to collaborate on your Dx
3) Find a 3rd opinion