User talk:Psychologyofrecovery
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Needs updating http://members.cox.net/psychologyofrecovery/index.htm a work in progress http://members.cox.net/psychologyofrecovery/index.htm
Psychology of Recovery is a movement to push the authors of Abnormal Psychology Textbooks to talk about recovery and treatment, answers as well as questions, solutions when talking of problems...for that matter just to see the word recovery in relation to mental illness in a college text book would be nice. --Psychologyofrecovery 03:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Stigma Study of College Students
What would be an interesting study would to be to study the number of psychology students at a number of colleges, look for numbers of students who have enrolled in Abnormal psychology. From my own personal experience the average number of students in a Psychology class was approxiamately 30 students, in Abnormal Psych there was only 8 students in Biological Psych (which alot of material pertained to disorders of the brain) there was about 9 (and it was the same instructor)...In my Developmental Disability Psychology Textbook, there was a lot of discussion of "Adaptability" rather than "Recovery" however the American Association for the Mentally Retarded Persons (AAMR) and other similar orgs are mentioned; which is amusing however the word "Recovery" is not mentioned in six of the Abnormal Psychology Textbooks on my bookshelf, nor is the National Alliance for Mental Illness (NAMI) nor USPRAs nor other groups as such mentioned in Abnormal Psychology Textbooks...Which, leads to another question where is the academic support for the "Recovery Movement"? Is it the textbooks not mentioning it? Or is a collegiate policy? Or is the Psych Instructors who are not privy to the recovery model? If "Abnormal Psychology" and "Psychiatric Rehabilitation" are two seperate subjects then prehaps the best way to reduce stigma would be to have a recovery collegiate reform being that more students are enrolled in "psychology" courses where the illnesses are most likely to be discussed --Psychologyofrecovery 03:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)--Psychologyofrecovery 03:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
http://members.cox.net/psychologyofrecovery/index.htm
[edit] THE MOST IMPORTANT UNTAPPED RESOURCE IN RECOVERY OUTREACH
At one local, public or community junior college in the Phoenix, Arizona area; it has been estimated that around 400 students per year attend "Abnormal Psychology" courses. There are hundreds if not thousands of these small colleges where the majority of people learning about mental illness are getting their information from. Take into the consideration, the bottleneck of students who continue on to higher levels of education. Few students may be attending Boston University Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation or any of the few teaching recovery oriented courses, to rewrite the textbooks that teach about mental illness towards a recovery-orientation would be a major break through for psychosocial rehabilitation, consumer empowerment and the eradication of stigma. "Introduction to Psychology" textbooks when discussing mental illness are seen by an even wider audience of students than that of "abnormal psychology" texts; this is where a a few short sentences on recovery belong in the first place. Behaviorial Health Services, Psychology, Abnormal Psychology, Social Work and Psychiatry courses have webpages, displaying syllabi of instructors lectures and course materials...no mention of recovery-oriented materials any where...only the few Universities teaching Psychiatric Rehabilitation, this is what I see as demanding need for change. Read the USPRAs code of ethics, or just about anything in Psychiatric Rehabilitation literature and it is screaming out that the word "Abnormal" needs to be eradicated from college courses and replaced with "Recovery"
[edit] Recovery
Hi just a head's up about the NPOV issue raised with the recovery page. For now I've taken out the point about university educators that's been questioned as argumentation. Might be a good idea to clarify on the talk page if it is sourced and if a point about recovery approaches in education/training should be re-added in some way. Cheers, EverSince 10:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Interesting that it is a point of view issue, being that I have a certain point of view but if I qoute an actual person or persons who have made such a statement, and stated whom they are, and where such information can be found to verify it; I would assume that it is still factual, whether or not I agree or disagree with that particular person or persons statement; the fact such statement was made is still accurate...but again, I am just new at every, and keep getting reminded every time I get snotty enough to claim that I know it all...maybe the context of how it was stated was the problem, I felt the emergence of the statement may have been appropriate in explaining why if there is persons reading wikipedia who do not understand why they have never heard of "recovery" in the context of mental illnes...prior to 2003, had a person mentioned "recovery" to me, in the standard context it is used in American society, I would have assumed that person was speaking to me about alcoholism, A.A.,alcohilics, abstaining from drugs and alcohol or other drug abuse issues and never thought of it pertaining to mental illness...--Psychologyofrecovery 05:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure exactly what the issue was with the wording, perhaps it seemed to personalise it against 'university educators'? If you have a source that says recovery approaches are not yet widely covered in academic courses or professional training (or wider society - sad isn't it?) I think that would be great to include and you have the right to add it. Perhaps quoting the page number or saying "according to such & such..." would help. EverSince 12:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
