Everyone must be so excited when you tell them this about diagnosis. But you’ve known all this all along, haven’t you Karen. Because you certainly wouldn’t treat a pathology that you haven’t even diagnosed yet. That’d be absurd. No one does that. The treatment for cancer is different than the treatment for diabetes, you have to diagnose a pathology first, to know what the treatment plan is. Right, Karen?
Of course. That would be absurd. Right, Karen.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857
Well, I had so much hope that when Karen identified her “new pathology” as a Dissociative Identity Disorder (multiple personality) that she had finally returned to established constructs for describing pathology – you know, the ideas and terms that EVERYBODY else in professional psychology uses.
I was wrong. She’s wandering back into her grandiosity on her more recent blog, again. She is using professional terms incorrectly – not in their established definitions. In doing that, she is creating confusion. She needs to stick to reality. (Karen’s blog).
A fixed and false belief that is maintained despite contrary evidence. In the case of elevated self-opinion “without commensurate background” it would be considered a grandiose delusion. Did I mention that grandiose delusions are associated with two pathologies, a grandiose delusion is a “mood-congruent” psychotic delusion in mania, so a biplolar disorder with psychotic features is one place they occur, and…
View original post 6,058 more words