Talk:Trauma model of mental disorders

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Trauma model article

Before writing this article I asked Dr. Colin Ross, whom I have met personally, if he would be interested to write the article. He suggested me to write it. —Cesar Tort 03:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Nice work. I have made a few changes (mostly copyedits). I also made the introduction a bit clearer, summarising key facts and added a single sentense at the end stating the opposing view. If i have misrepresented something, the please do say so. As you well know, i'm not an expert. I would also strongly suggest reducing the very long quote from Ross' literature. Its usually frowned upon to have such long quotes in Wikipedia, and certainly not so prominant in a relatively short article. Also starting off with "The problem of ‘attachment to the perpetrator’..." is a little more complex than is required for the description of the trauma model, i would have thought. I think either a much shortened version of the same quote, or perhaps a succinct summary of how Ross describes his theory would be better. If you really wish to keep a length block quote then i would move it further down and kick off the article with "Before Ross, in the 1940s, 50s, 60s and 70s...". Other than that, i think its the beginnings of a nice article. Well done. Rockpocket 05:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I really like this article, Cesar, and would like to see it expanded, if possible. I'm sure you will continue to add to it and tweak it as time allows. Ande B 00:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deleted introduction

Rockpocket has just reverted this intro:

According to some researchers child abuse at home plays a causal role in depression, PTSD, eating disorders, substance abuse and dissociative disorders (Kendler et al 2000). The more severe the abuse the more probability symptoms will develop in adult life (Mullen et al 1993). In the psychiatric field it is assumed that child abuse is less related to the most serious psychoses, such as schizophrenia. However, some mental health professionals maintain that the relationship is stronger in psychoses than neuroses (Read et al 2004; Davis and Burdett 2004).

This is what Rockpocket wrote in the edit summary: ”please make yourself familiar with WP:MOS before rewriting introductions, it fails on numerous criteria. Reverted intro only”. Rockpocket could have relocated the paragraph in the text. But he simply deleted it.

As stated elsewhere, I am very busy in real life. I won’t discuss anymore with some editors because the way disagreements are handled in Wikiland is a colossal energy sink. However, if someone believes the deleted intro has some value and is familiar with “WP:MOS”, whatever that means, I would appreciate if s/he either rewrites the intro or inserts the paragraph in the proper place.

Thanks! —Cesar Tort 03:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Cesar, if you read the history properly you will note i did move the sourced content further down in the article [1], with an explanation, but you removed that when you tried to reinsert it as the opening paragraph, with complete disregard for WP:LEAD and no justification in policy. I didn't want to revert the content back, otherwise i would have removed much more content that you added at the same time, so i simply removed the intro. This was under the rationale that you do not want the content where it was in the article previously (or else you wouldn't have moved it) and that i'm not convinced it adds anything to the article anyway. But should you wish to, please feel free to contribute your sourced content in a suitable place.

Note also, that I at least left a summary explaining what i removed and why, you didn't. If, we are in the business of requesting edits of others, i would appreciate it if you reinserted the paragraph that you moved, to its proper place. That would solve both our problems. Thanks. Rockpocket 03:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not aware I moved a paragraph. Which one? --Cesar Tort 04:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Since the late 1940s several psychological trauma researchers have postulated that the relationship of childhood trauma with psychoses is stronger than neuroses (Read et al 2004).

You moved and reworded to:

However, some mental health professionals maintain that the relationship is stronger in psychoses than neuroses (Read et al 2004; Davis and Burdett 2004).

Its no big deal. The point is that i'm not trying to remove your content, its just there is specific requirements for what should be in an introduction (not least the title of the article should not be bounced to the 5th sentence!) and that content fails most of them. My second removal wasn't the most elegant, but it was difficult to revert back to the previous version with the content in an appropriate place, because you has made other edits at the same time that i did not wish to disturb. Had i done that you would have been unhappy also. I also fully expected you to revert again (as you didn't accept my very same reasoning the first time i moved it), so what was the point? If you are willing to leave this content back where it was in the body of the article, i'll happily put the effort into putting it back, or you could do it yourself. If you wish to change the intro that is fine also, but please make sure it follows the guidlines set out in WP:LEAD and WP:MoS. Let me know. Rockpocket 04:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I follow you. Do you mean it's ok to reinsert the paragraph as long as it's done somewhere below the introductory para? --Cesar Tort 04:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thats exactly what i mean. It appears to be referenced and relevent to the difference between the trauma model and mainstream thinking, so i have no problem with it being in the article. It just shouldn't be the opening paragraph. Rockpocket 06:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for providing those sources, also. Rockpocket 06:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is it necessary?

Re the demand by Rockpocket of adding a citation to the following phrase —:

In the psychiatric field it is assumed that child abuse is less related to the most serious psychoses, such as schizophrenia ^{[citation needed]}

—is it necessary? I mean: the above is taught even in High School psychology courses. Everybody with little knowledge of the mental health field knows it. Also, too many citations interrupt the reading flow of the article unnecessarily.

If no objections I may remove the citation tag later this Sunday. --Cesar Tort 07:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it is so ubiquitous, it should be pretty simple to source such a statement, no? My concern was more with the phrasing "it is assumed". I would imagine it is "hypothesized" or "proposed" or "demonstrated". In my experience, professionals in biomedical fields do not "assume" such factors in scholarly writing. Therefore i do object and would still like a source that reflects the wording as it is, please, per WP:RS - Unattributed material. Thank you. Rockpocket 08:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

What about replacing it for "it is hypothesized"? --Cesar Tort 08:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

That is good enough for me (again, taking your word for the fact that "Everybody with little knowledge of the mental health field knows it"). Rockpocket 08:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)