______________________________________________________________ VOLUME 2, ISSUE 3 THE INTERPSYCH NEWSLETTER DEC, 1994 ______________________________________________________________ SECTION B: NEWS ********* * INDEX * ********* 1. INTERPSYCH TO MOVE TO NETCOM 2. RORSCHACH CONFERENCE REPORT 3. ANOTHER ONE ON THE MOVE: EVALUATION CENTER LISTS 4. DSM IV CONFERENCE REPORT 5. IPN LISTSERV AVAILABLE 6. SZASZ "PSYCHIATRIC NEWS" ARTICLE AND IP DISCUSSION LOG AVAILABLE 7. CHARLES FIGLEY RECEIVES PIONEER AWARD: NOVEMBER 1994 ============================================================== 1. InterPsych to move to Netcom ============================================================== Sometime between December 23rd and 31st, InterPsych's mailing lists will be relocated from Mailbase, InterPsych's current sponsor in England, to Netcom, a commercial Internet access provider. InterPsych's lists at Helsinki will also be moved to the same location. This move is viewed as an interim step while InterPsych sets up its own permanent location. This move was caused by the announcement from Mailbase early this fall that they were withdrawing their support at the end of the year. Mailbase's rationale for doing so was that the majority of members on InterPsych's lists were not from the UK. In particular, Mailbase officials noted that the majority of list members were from the United States, putting what they deemed as an unnecessary stress on the trans-atlantic computer link. The move should be "virtually transparent" for list members, Ben Goldhagen, InterPsych's Executive Director states. All mailing addresses will be transferred directly over to Netcom so that members will not have to resubscribe to groups they are currently on. The only significant change will be in the address that messages are sent to. An announcement providing this address will be made on the superlist once the move is complete. One possibility is that some members names might not be properly transferred. In the event any member finds their mailing list uncharacteristically silent around the time of the move, he or she might want to try re-subscribing to the group. Such problems however are expected to be minimal. If all else fails, mail sent to interpsych@netcom.com will get a response from InterPsych's maillist team. While the announcement that Mailbase was withdrawing its support was originally met with panic and pronouncements that "InterPsych would cease to exist", this change has turned out to be to the great benefit of InterPsych and its many members. Goldhagen states that the move from Mailbase has caused InterPsych to become more organized in its thinking, leading to the creation of many new lists and services once the move is complete. InterPsych had the option to be sponsored by many different universities and organizations. The decision to move to Netcom, a commercial provider, was based on the organization's desire to maintain independence and autonomy. Messages sent to the Mailbase address will continue to be forwarded for 2 months after the move. List members should, however, attempt to send messages to the new address immediately after the change. [SPS] ============================================================== 2. Rorschach conference report ============================================================== The InterPsych/PsyComNet conference held on Dec. 4, 1994 was entitled, "The validity of Dr. Rorschach's Test" which was prompted by a discussion that began 2 weeks prior in one of InterPsych's groups. Unfortunately for participants, attendance was one of the smallest for these conferences, with only between 4 and 6 people on-line at a time. Dr. Ivan Goldberg, M.D., was the moderator. Dr. Goldberg began the conference with the same question that he posed in the original discussion, namely to see the sensitivity and specificity statistics of the Rorschach system. Some confusion regarding these statistics may have been due to some participants being unaware that, in general, the Rorschach is no longer being used to predict individuals' behaviors or to diagnosis mental disorders, especially using Exner's Comprehensive System, which was discussed. It appeared that conference participants were generally hesitant to concede that some studies (independent of Exner's own citation of research in both Volume 1 & 2 of his Comprehensive System) have been performed that verify the Rorschach, using Exner's system only, can be a reliable and valid measure. (See, for example, two meta-analytic studies: Parker, 1983 and Parker, Hanson, & Hunsley, 1988). Discussion ensued over whether other professions, such as psychiatry, were in any better shape with regards to studies showing that, for instance, medications are prescribed on the basis of specific medical tests or not. The usefulness of the Rorschach was also discussed, with some ambivalence as to what type of additional information it could provide. It was noted that the Rorschach is probably not a good predictor of treatment responsiveness, and a discussion ensued over what could best predict responsiveness. It was also noted that the Rorschach is rarely used alone and is perhaps most useful when a part of a larger psychological assessment battery to confirm or disconfirm other tests' hypotheses about a patient. [JG] ============================================================== 3. ANOTHER ONE ON THE MOVE: EVALUATION CENTER LISTS ============================================================== The lists of the Human Services Research Institute have recently been moved from world.std.com to sjuvm.stjohns.edu. They are up and running. Current subscribers will already have received or shortly receive an acknowledgement on subscription to the new site and software version. They will be "moved" automatically, i.e. there is no need to unsubscribe- resubscribe. Normal mail traffic on the lists can continue after management's acknowledgement, around December 14. Commands to the listserver will change, as the software has been changed from majordomo to listserv. A special improvement may be the format of the digest option. Old subscribers will be sent notice of changes. New subscribers will get full documentation once they subscribe. Address questions to Sharon Shea (postmaster@hsri.org). [Jonathan Steven Hurwitz, SK] MORE in the research section. ============================================================== 4. DSM IV Conference Report ============================================================== After a series of e-mail messages regarding the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM IV, APA, 1994) that sounded more like MTV's Beavis and Butthead ("DSM IV sucks") than scholarly discussion, Ivan Goldberg held an electronic conference on November 20, 1994 to discuss what was at the root of this sentiment and to discuss "Medical and other models of psychopathology". Approximately fourteen attendees spent two and a half hours discussing the merits of the DSM-IV as well as the merits of diagnosis and diagnostic models in mental disorder. Ivan supplied for pre-conference perusal, an excerpted transcript of the previous several weeks mail lists discussions, and it proved useful to the conferees. The following are a sample: "I must disagree with the above. The medical model, the biopsychosocial model, of neurobehavioral disorders seems applicable to well over "five percent" of people seeking help from mental health professionals. Among the disorders to which the medical model seems especially applicable are: ADD / ADHD;Amnesic Disorders;Bipolar Disorder;Bulimia nervosa; Cyclothymia;Delirium;Dementia;Dysthymia;Generalized anxiety disorder; Major depressive disorder;Obsessive-compulsive disorder;Panic Disorder; Post concussion syndrome; Schizophrenia; etc, etc. Why do I include these disorders? Because they resemble medical disorders such as multiple sclerosis, or a fractured skull, or rheumatoid arthritis, or peptic ulceration or tuberculosis, at the "molecular, genetic, biological, psychosocial, or sociocultural" levels of observation." Or: "The DSM IV (or DSM III, DSM IIIR, DSM-anything) has little, if anything, to do with science. It has to do with bureaucracy, government requirements and insurance requirements. In that respect, it takes on an entirely different relevance. One could sit at the word-processor and come up with something =much= simpler to satisfy the number- crunchers and pencil-pushers." The discussion quickly began by focusing on the politics of diagnosis. The APA's financial stake in publishing the DSM-IV manual, the impact of third party payments and justification for same, as well as "turfing" issues between professionals were raised as possible determining factors in the DSM-IV's development and implementation. Ivan Goldberg's attempt to stop the publication of the DSM-IV was pointed out and Ivan reported on his "petition drive" to force the American Psychiatric Association to hold a referendum on the publication of the DSM-IV. According to Ivan, "...we lost...but many of the folks who voted against us now say they are sorry." Later in the conference, Ivan noted that, "I did not start the drive to block its publication because of any specific dissatisfaction with its structure... the chief objection was that the USA and the rest of the world should use the same system (referring to the ICD-10, and noting that it would not be the case until an integration of both systems was completed). Discussion moved to psychiatric models in general and the role of descriptive versus explanatory models quickly gained the floor. Is the DSM-IV merely a descriptive categorization of behavior(s) or does it have greater utility. Some argued that while it may essentially be only descriptive, it offers a common language for discussing clinical issues. In addition, "the DSM-IV gives us a starting point to investigate causality", according to one conferee. Discussion also dealt with the use of diagnosis in the clinical process, and whether diagnosis artificially even speciously informs the therapist patient relationship. Repeatedly, the influence of non- scientific factors were pointed out. The increasing influence of insurance companies, and managed care entities in demanding more "efficient" treatments coupled with more specific diagnosis was debated. Though often diametrically opposite, almost all views suggest dissatisfication with the present DSM-IV system, yet few alternatives were discussed. For a copy of the transcript send the following command to mailbase@mailbase.ac.uk: send psychiatry-superlist dsm4.doc [JL] ============================================================== 5. IPN LIST SERVICE AVAILABLE ============================================================== To allow people to receive the InterPsych Newsletter (IPN) without being a member of one of InterPsych's electronic conferences, IPN has set up its own subscription list. The list is meant primary for people who have previously read the newsletter on Usenet or non-InterPsych lists. The resources necessary to run the list are donated generously by the University of North Dakota. The list is owned by Joseph Plaud, Ph.D., managing editor of the newsletter, and Ric Ferraro, documents manager for the newsletter. To subscribe to the newsletter via the listservice, sending a message to: listserv@vm1.nodak.edu with the body of the message: SUBSCRIBE IPN yourfirstname yourlastname. Please note that if you are currently a member of one of InterPsych's electronic conferences, you will receive the newsletter automatically without having to subscribe via this list. [SPS] ============================================================== 6. SZASZ "PSYCHIATRIC NEWS" ARTICLE AND IP DISCUSSION LOG AVAILABLE ============================================================== Starting December 3rd, 1994, InterPsych experienced one of the liveliest discussions ever experienced on the Psychiatry forum, with the lists Forensic-psychiatry and Psych-current issues also involved. The discussion was triggered by a Psychiatric News article concerning a lawsuit against Thomas Szasz ("Szasz settles suit for $650,000", Psychiatric News, Nov. 18, 1994). Dr. Jeffry Schaler offered mailing of two files - the original Psychatric News article and the log of the discussion - to members of the discussion forum. Due to an unexpectedly high number of requests, he had to withdraw his offer and the InterPsych Newsletter has volunteered to prepare the files for automatic retrieval. These files are now stored on the InterPsych Newsletter listserver and may be retrieved in the following fashion: Send a message to: LISTSERV@VM1.NODAK.EDU subject line empty and with the following lines in the body of the message: GET IPN SZASZ This is the Psychiatric News article concerning the lawsuit against Dr. Szasz. Send another message to the same address with the following subject line: GET IPN SZASZ2 This is the log file of the discussion, including all messages directly related to the Szasz discussion, regardless of side of the argument, compiled by Dr. Jeffry Schaler (9000+ lines!). IPN would like to thank Dr. Jeffry Schaler for his meticulous work on maintaining the log, for his collegiality in making both of these files available, and for his assistance in obtaining permission from Psychiatric News to redistribute their original article. [SK, SPS] ============================================================== 7. CHARLES FIGLEY RECEIVES PIONEER AWARD: NOVEMBER 1994 ============================================================== At the annual International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies Conference in Chicago, Dr. Charles Figley was presented with the society's highest honour, the Pioneer Award. This award is given to honour lifetime achievement in the field of traumatic stress. Dr. Figley was the founding president of the International Society of Traumatic Stress Studies. His role in the development of the field of traumatic stress research and practice is well recognized. His books and articles are required reading for those wishing to study and specialise in traumatic stress. His work has covered a variety of subject areas including the effects of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder on the family, family therapy and integrated approaches to PTSD, and most recently, he has been developing the concept of Compassion Fatigue to describe the reactions experienced by mental health practitioners who work with traumatized people. Dr. Figley is a professor at Florida State University and is Director of the Psychosocial Stress Research Program. He is listowner of IP's traumatic-stress list and a member of the IP board of directors. His most recent research project is called the Active Ingredient Series which is examining four methods of treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder to discover what parts of the treatments work to help sufferers recover. [LB]