Just what is Dr. Phil?

[Stepupandpost]

Is Dr Phil still a practicing doctor who helps normal people with mental problems; or, is he now just a talkshow host who entertains others by making crazy people the butt of his entertainment? When Dr. Phil was a practicing doctor of others, he could provide them with confidential therapy with the hopes that such treatment might one day help them function better in a society of other normal people. With the crazy guests on his show, doesn't Dr. Phil create entertainment value by juxtaposing them to his mentally healthy audience? Isn't that what makes his show interesting? I mean, I certainly wouldn't find normal people with mental problems interesting enough, to not watch Oprah instead.
I'm not thinking of psychology here, but of the psychology of entertainment. Doesn't one need to have others with the willingness to laugh at themselves -- like dumb southerners who grow food for example -- in order to create entertainment? We all find a dumb hick funny and entertaining, simply because poor southerners are so willing to laugh at themselves about it. Such stereotyping isn't acceptable by society as a whole, but acceptible by the victims of the joke. In other words, dumb southern people who grow food are cool.
Because entertainment depends on making someone the butt of the horse, one should not try to avoid the offending of everyone. It all depends on economics. The trick is to offend either the uncaring person who will laugh at themselves or the ones who are so poor that they really can't afford to buy whatever it is the sponsor is selling anyway.
Isn't it also interesting how when it comes to entertainment value, some of us in society are disqualified from being considered as the necessary butt of the horse? We most certainly don't want to belittle a Jewish or African American person, not because these people have lots of political power, but simply because they are very sensitive and take themselves very seriously. Now they themselves are allowed to belittle themselves within their own scopes of entertainment and for some reason this is thought to be really hilarious. If an outsider happens to repeat this belittlement word for word, this is no longer entertainment.
Untimately I think we would all help ourselves tremendously, by not getting suckered into buying a nickels worth of entertainment for a buck.

[Twilly Spree]

Dr. Phil = AWESOME

My grandparents live near a couple that was on the Dr. Phil show. It was the couple where the wife gave more attention to her dog than her husband. Dr. Phil show not only got them counseling but built a dog kennel in the yard and gave them new furniture to replace ones the dog ruined.

[Stepupandpost]

Dr. Phil = AWESOME

My grandparents live near a couple that was on the Dr. Phil show. It was the couple where the wife gave more attention to her dog than her husband. Dr. Phil show not only got them counseling but built a dog kennel in the yard and gave them new furniture to replace ones the dog ruined.

I am from Texas, so I am actually proud that we have the world's greatest psychologist. My real concern here is whether or not he is still a practicing therapist or just an entertainer. Most mentally ill people are far more normal than people give them credit for and most people wouldn't find them interesting and entertaining. Let's remember that it is all about ratings, so certainly his show looks for the most extreme weirdos in order to make his show a success. Let us not forget that this fellow is having to compete with Oprah and Judge Judy -- two incredibly gifted women. I am not questioning his integrity whatsoever and I appreciate how well he has done under the circumstances. Because he is from Texas, bald with a very pronouned forehead and went to a superior southern university, I am quite certain he is a genius.

[Rahab]

I am from Texas, so I am actually proud that we have the world's greatest psychologist. Bonjour Stepupandpost (I like your screen name by the way).

IMO Dr Phil has contributed to the popularization of his type of psychology by the means of his show. Which does not mean I consider him to be close to even being a great psychologist. I find him at times to be way too theatrical to be a reflection of psychotherapists engaged in clinical private practice. I am also extremely concerned as to the extent of sensationalism he exploits to make his show entertaining.

If we were to view a tape of a counseling session between a psychotherapist and his/her patient, we might find it quite boring unless we happen to be intellectualy and academicaly equipped to appreciate the methods the therapist is using.

Dr Phil... (sorry Twilly) is like junk food. It's attractive, appealing, colorful, loaded with various tastes and smells, comes in eye catching packages but it has close to no nutritional value.




My real concern here is whether or not he is still a practicing therapist or just an entertainer. Most mentally ill people are far more normal than people give them credit for and most people wouldn't find them interesting and entertaining. I do not think he is qualified to deal with people who in fact suffer of mental illnesses. I would hope that he would refer any person he suspects to be mentaly ill to a psychiatrist.





Let's remember that it is all about ratings, so certainly his show looks for the most extreme weirdos in order to make his show a success. That is what I meant by his exploitation of sensationalism. He has to "feed" an audience starving for entertainment rather than academic and clinical studies.




Let us not forget that this fellow is having to compete with Oprah and Judge Judy -- two incredibly gifted women. I am not questioning his integrity whatsoever and I appreciate how well he has done under the circumstances. Because he is from Texas, bald with a very pronouned forehead and went to a superior southern university, I am quite certain he is a genius. The difference though with Oprah's show is that she is extremely versatile in her choice of topics. Ranging from educating audiences on which diets work to promoting her favorite people she believes may be a source of inspiration to her audiences. Judge Judy is a show just by herself!

Let me run thru you a couple of observations on Phil's methods of communication: (I am "stuck" seeing his show three times a week at one of my patients'home): I have noticed he dwells on inducing guilt and shame to control the outcome of some of those folks's communication back to him.

Have noticed he controls their environment on his show when he proposes they go to the "back room" to discuss their matter privately when in reality the camera keeps filming and a TV audience is attending such "private" communication. He is in essence inducing a false sense of security while the subject is in fact aware that a large audience is watching every response, body language and verbal communication.

None will convince me that such subjects are in fact responding spontaneously and naturaly in such context. They give the response they know the "therapist" expects of them.

[Abelard]

Psychologically speaking, the man is a Philistine.

[Soundsurfr]

Is Dr Phil still a practicing doctor who helps normal people with mental problems; or, is he now just a talkshow host who entertains others by making crazy people the butt of his entertainment?

The latter.

Anyone who thinks you can properly diagnose and treat psychological problems in a live TV show format needs treatment themselves.

[Pilgrim]

The latter.

Anyone who thinks you can properly diagnose and treat psychological problems in a live TV show format needs treatment themselves.

The man breaks every major rule of counseling. He never creates a safe place for people, that is, they must air their grievances on national TV and be judged by an audience. He does more talking than listening and ends up being more like a glam version of dear Abby than a therapist. And he is completely judgemental with the people he "counsels." It is impossible to say whether or not he is really helping because those three things assure that in almost all cases he is not getting an honest response from the people he hosts. (I say hosts because that's what he's doing. Not real counseling.)

People say he did such a great job in the wake of Katrina but let me quote Bono here: "It's not charity when the cameras are rolling, then it's just PR."

[Stepupandpost]

So do you think Dr. Phil is setting back psychology with the format of his show? I have noticed that people get made fun of, when society begins to accept them. Mentally ill people used to be untouchables when it came to being main characters in the story of civilization or their characters in the show were dipicted as deep and ominous on the psychological level. Now we see lots of shows which depict the crazy person as the protagonist -- 'A beautiful mind,' 'matchstick men,' 'As good as it gets,' and 'What about Bob (A show where the crazy guy and the psychologist battled to be the main character)' -- even to the point that all these crazy guys got the girl. Consider that Cervantes developed Don Quijote de la Manche -- the world's first modern novel -- with the lunatic Don Quijote as the story's protagonist!
If Dr. Phil is a true psychologist, he should either change the degrading format of his show or get out of show business altogether.

[Cynic Sage]

When Dr. Phil was a practicing doctor of others, he could provide them with confidential therapy with the hopes that such treatment might one day help them function better in a society of other normal people. With the crazy guests on his show, doesn't Dr. Phil create entertainment value by juxtaposing them to his mentally healthy audience?

You mistakenly assume that Dr. Phil's audience consists of mentally healthy individuals.

[Twilly Spree]

Hey now, some of us enjoy a little Dr. Phil.

[Cynic Sage]

Hey now, some of us enjoy a little Dr. Phil.

I present to the jury Exhibit A.

















:hehe:

[Jimmy Higgins]

The man breaks every major rule of counseling. He never creates a safe place for people, that is, they must air their grievances on national TV and be judged by an audience. He does more talking than listening and ends up being more like a glam version of dear Abby than a therapist. And he is completely judgemental with the people he "counsels." It is impossible to say whether or not he is really helping because those three things assure that in almost all cases he is not getting an honest response from the people he hosts. (I say hosts because that's what he's doing. Not real counseling.)Stuck in a hospital with the show on, I'm widdling away on my VBA project for work, with him in the background. I'm noticing problems with the guests that he isn't even picking up on, or is ignoring. He allows the people to lie to themselves, to him, to others.

It's all an act for him. Bravado for ratings! Real consuling would be boring as all heck. Who'd want to watch that. What really burned me was the previews he kept showing for his show where he alledges the guy sexually molests his children or at least one kid. The guy was using this for ratings! That stuff should be in court, not television!


People say he did such a great job in the wake of Katrina but let me quote Bono here: "It's not charity when the cameras are rolling, then it's just PR."Or worse... payday.

[Pilgrim]

Stuck in a hospital with the show on, I'm widdling away on my VBA project for work, with him in the background. I'm noticing problems with the guests that he isn't even picking up on, or is ignoring. He allows the people to lie to themselves, to him, to others.

It's all an act for him. Bravado for ratings! Real consuling would be boring as all heck. Who'd want to watch that. What really burned me was the previews he kept showing for his show where he alledges the guy sexually molests his children or at least one kid. The guy was using this for ratings! That stuff should be in court, not television!

Or worse... payday.

Sorry to hear you're in the hospital. Nothing serious I hope. I'll keep you in my prayers.

[shadowmaster]

Hey now, some of us enjoy a little Dr. Phil.

SM: NOT WHEN WE GET THROUGH WITH YOU.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sorry to hear you're in the hospital. Nothing serious I hope. I'll keep you in my prayers.
Oh gosh! Not me... not now. My Grandmother... back in September. She's doing dandy now.

[Pilgrim]

Oh gosh! Not me... not now. My Grandmother... back in September. She's doing dandy now.

Oh cool! Sorry about your grandmother though!

[Storico]

I was forced to (well, made to, as I was in the same room) watch an episode today. Wow. I've watched several in the past before, and sometimes his advice-column style and his catch-phrases (if you have watched, you know the favourites he drags out about someone needing to be a hero, or about getting real with him, or.. etc)... sometimes, they're manageable. And right on, occasionally, as far as glorified advice-columns go.

Today was terrible. First of all, the sensationalism. An emotionally abused woman with three little kids and a wingnut for a husband was on there... he'd monitored her every move, locked her in the basement, put recording devices in her car, did indecent things to her while she was asleep, emotionally abused her by telling her she was worthless and that she did nothing right, took away her finances, cut her off from her friends and family... short of actually HITTING her, she had one heck of an abusive spouse...

So what did Phil do? At the end of the show, he offered to arrange counselling for her husband who 'obviously' :ahem: had an obsessive compulsive problem, and asked her to hold off on filing for divorce until he got the man into counselling, so that they could try to save their marriage because there were kids to consider. 11 years of abuse apparently equals a marriage worth saving? I think not. I'd have been out the door calling an attorney that day to save myself and my kids. That's just not a marriage worth saving. Sorry. Even if my husband got mental help, I'd never trust him again.

Phil offered to set her up with an attorney and money for living expenses if she DID decide to leave... but then asked her not to.

Oh, and he did the dramatic 'drag the guy back to the private room so America can watch the guy have a panic attack and cry' thing.

Just lovely.

[Cynic Sage]

I was forced to (well, made to, as I was in the same room) watch an episode today. Wow. I've watched several in the past before, and sometimes his advice-column style and his catch-phrases (if you have watched, you know the favourites he drags out about someone needing to be a hero, or about getting real with him, or.. etc)... sometimes, they're manageable. And right on, occasionally, as far as glorified advice-columns go.

Today was terrible. First of all, the sensationalism. An emotionally abused woman with three little kids and a wingnut for a husband was on there... he'd monitored her every move, locked her in the basement, put recording devices in her car, did indecent things to her while she was asleep, emotionally abused her by telling her she was worthless and that she did nothing right, took away her finances, cut her off from her friends and family... short of actually HITTING her, she had one heck of an abusive spouse...

So what did Phil do? At the end of the show, he offered to arrange counselling for her husband who 'obviously' :ahem: had an obsessive compulsive problem, and asked her to hold off on filing for divorce until he got the man into counselling, so that they could try to save their marriage because there were kids to consider. 11 years of abuse apparently equals a marriage worth saving? I think not. I'd have been out the door calling an attorney that day to save myself and my kids. That's just not a marriage worth saving. Sorry. Even if my husband got mental help, I'd never trust him again.

Phil offered to set her up with an attorney and money for living expenses if she DID decide to leave... but then asked her not to.

Oh, and he did the dramatic 'drag the guy back to the private room so America can watch the guy have a panic attack and cry' thing.

Just lovely.

That is just messed up.

[Stepupandpost]

You mistakenly assume that Dr. Phil's audience consists of mentally healthy individuals.

So does the definition of 'mentally healthy' mean normal people with mental problems; or, does it mean those who pity the inward Dna of others who tend to have a disposition to act dysfunctional within society? How could this ever be interesting? What is so entertaining about a crazy audience watching a normal person with a mental problem? I just don't believe it to be entertaining and that is why Dr. Phil's producers have to go out and hire people from freak-shows to make it so. This of course stereotypes mentally ill people as abnormal.

[Cynic Sage]

So does the definition of 'mentally healthy' mean normal people with mental problems; or, does it mean those who pity the inward Dna of others who tend to have a disposition to act dysfunctional within society? How could this ever be interesting? What is so entertaining about a crazy audience watching a normal person with a mental problem? I just don't believe it to be entertaining and that is why Dr. Phil's producers have to go out and hire people from freak-shows to make it so. This of course stereotypes mentally ill people as abnormal.

I was joking.

[Rahab]

I was forced to (well, made to, as I was in the same room) watch an episode today. Wow. I've watched several in the past before, and sometimes his advice-column style and his catch-phrases (if you have watched, you know the favourites he drags out about someone needing to be a hero, or about getting real with him, or.. etc)... sometimes, they're manageable. And right on, occasionally, as far as glorified advice-columns go. It's funny you brought this specific show up as I was going to comment on it. I was absolutly outraged by the way Dr Phil handled that case.


Today was terrible. First of all, the sensationalism. An emotionally abused woman with three little kids and a wingnut for a husband was on there... he'd monitored her every move, locked her in the basement, put recording devices in her car, did indecent things to her while she was asleep, emotionally abused her by telling her she was worthless and that she did nothing right, took away her finances, cut her off from her friends and family... short of actually HITTING her, she had one heck of an abusive spouse... Not just long term abuse but also the mention in the first part that Jennifer's wedding day was a "sad day". She commented on how she accepted to marry Jeffrey because she was pregnant. And in the midst of those important revelations, Phil dismisses the reality that the initial relationship was not based on mutual love. He ignored the fact that the husband's obsession was very much "fed" by his knowledge that he married a woman who did not love him.

Whichever compulsive behavior ,he may have had, found a "channel" thru that emotionaly difficult situation.

The culminating point of such dysfunctional relationship being the husband's revelation that he undertook to get her pregnant twice more as he considered that each pregnancy would "save their marriage". Later to pretend to have had a vasectomy. The ultimate act of control, right there.


So what did Phil do? At the end of the show, he offered to arrange counselling for her husband who 'obviously' :ahem: had an obsessive compulsive problem, and asked her to hold off on filing for divorce until he got the man into counselling, so that they could try to save their marriage because there were kids to consider. What Phil "obviously" dismissed is that OCD or not, Jeffrey was in chosen denial that his wife did not love him and that from the start of the marriage. No psychotherapist has the power or "magic" to make anyone love anyone else. What Phil resorted to do is "damage control". One where he only "scratched the surface".

At no time , did he make any efforts to explore the past of that husband. To connect somehow his dysfunctional behavior to his upbringing. Like most hyper controlling persons, the roots of such obsessive need to control are often found in childhood.

Treating the symptoms will not resolve the main issues : How did Jeffrey become so dependent on controlling to expect to be loved? Which events in his early life led him to believe that he had to force affection to recieve it? Why did he become so manipulative?



11 years of abuse apparently equals a marriage worth saving? I think not. I'd have been out the door calling an attorney that day to save myself and my kids. That's just not a marriage worth saving. Sorry. Even if my husband got mental help, I'd never trust him again. The trust probably never existed between them. If any, it had to be damaged earlier on as she had a couple of affairs. From a woman, affairs mean " I am looking for love somewhere else". It really means " I do not love you".

I am not sure either if a marriage which was not based on mutual love qualifies as " a marriage worthy to be saved" considering also the abuse factor and her attempts to find some degree of sentimental/emotional wellbeing with other men.


Phil offered to set her up with an attorney and money for living expenses if she DID decide to leave... but then asked her not to. He totaly dismissed the reality she communicated in the first part. To include her reluctance to leave based on these : she is afraid of him and what he could do if she left. She did not want to separate the children from their father.(she knows that any custodial arrangements would mean constant communication with him. She would have to cope with his presence in her life regardless because of the children's legitimate need to have their father). Still a "bad deal" for her. She knows that the only "clean cut" would be to have full custody of the children which would mean total separation from their father. She feels trapped. The same way she felt trapped on her wedding day.


Oh, and he did the dramatic 'drag the guy back to the private room so America can watch the guy have a panic attack and cry' thing.

Just lovely. Undecent. Absolutly. Not a safe situation for the guy.No professional counselor would expose his/her patient the way Phil does.

[Storico]

Right on, Rahab. :thumb:

-- I didn't see the first episode. I saw the second half. I didn't know that about her wedding or why she married him. Wow. Ugh.

Also, I guess it's safe to say that we can all guess "Dr. Phil" likes hanging out behind his title, but it doesn't make him a professional -- or more to the point, it doesn't make him a GOOD professional. He's a decent entertainer. It's the voyeuristic nature we humans have. We like 'spying' on people, so a lot of us get a kick out of hearing about other people's problems. Maybe it makes our own problems easier to deal with, or maybe it makes our sometimes boring lives more exciting. I don't know. Another thing, though... real psychologists don't have cameras on them or their patients. They don't have thousands or millions of people (THANKFULLY) treating their words like gospel. They don't get television ratings. I'm very, very glad of that.

[Rahab]

So does the definition of 'mentally healthy' mean normal people with mental problems; or, does it mean those who pity the inward Dna of others who tend to have a disposition to act dysfunctional within society? How could this ever be interesting? What is so entertaining about a crazy audience watching a normal person with a mental problem? I just don't believe it to be entertaining and that is why Dr. Phil's producers have to go out and hire people from freak-shows to make it so. This of course stereotypes mentally ill people as abnormal. IMO Storico hit the nail on the head when she mentionned the "voyeurism" in human nature.

No differently than when a crowd will circle the victim of an accident, just to "see" how it looks... something different and proned to awake emotions. We can then move on with our lives with a sense of "gee... I am glad I am not like them".

It's possible that audiences who "faithfuly" attend his show or watch it are folks who need such reassurance to feel that they are somewhat functional. "gee... I am glad I am not like them". As they contemplate the extremes Phil parades on his show, they establish a comparison point based on those extremes.

[Rahab]

Right on, Rahab. :thumb:

-- I didn't see the first episode. I saw the second half. I didn't know that about her wedding or why she married him. Wow. Ugh. Like you, I did not have much choice but to watch the show. I certainly cannot tell my patient in his own home which TV programs he can or cannot watch. It's quite entertaining to him as he is totaly deprived from social interaction being bed ridden. On wednesdays, thursdays and fridays, you can be sure that we become an audience.


Also, I guess it's safe to say that we can all guess "Dr. Phil" likes hanging out behind his title, but it doesn't make him a professional -- or more to the point, it doesn't make him a GOOD professional. He also likes to make sure everyone knows of his professional ties with various mental health care programs and providers. He likes to show off his alleged influence in such medical milieu. Such as the way he was telling Jeffrey (the husband) about making a phone a call to the disorder treating center, telling the department head "I want you to...".Again, a very unprofessional manner to communicate with medical peers.




He's a decent entertainer. It's the voyeuristic nature we humans have. We like 'spying' on people, so a lot of us get a kick out of hearing about other people's problems. Maybe it makes our own problems easier to deal with, or maybe it makes our sometimes boring lives more exciting. I don't know. You hit the nail on the head. Phil knows to exploit those responses. He has specific punch lines he will use to provoke his audience into applauses.



Another thing, though... real psychologists don't have cameras on them or their patients. They don't have thousands or millions of people (THANKFULLY) treating their words like gospel. They don't get television ratings. I'm very, very glad of that. Absolutly, Storico. Pilgrim had made a similar point and that based on his experience as a counselor. Any counselee has to feel safe. Protected from ridicule and wide exposure. The trust factor between counselor and counselee is vital to trigger an honest and sincere communication from the counselee.

Even in the context of recovery/support groups mediated by a trained counselor, participants are urged to maintain confidentiality. Any information shared outside the group means a breech of that vital trust factor between the participants. In my group based on the program "Making Peace with your past" our mediator had to eliminate two people after the first session.