Does anyone here “get” Dr. Phil. I have to admit I have watched this steaming pile of a show a couple of times. Each time I felt like I was rubbernecking at a car wreck. Here are the questions:
I know this is supposed to be entertainment, but the man pretends to be practicing psyciatrist. Is what he does on the show even remotely good medical practice?
Does bringing your teenage daughter on tv and calling her a slut and a whore in front of millions of people ever bring about a desired behavior modification?
This one is the biggy. I greatly respect Oprah most of the time, but what the hell was she thinking?
Don’t know what HRM Oprah was thinking (not even sure I’d want to try), but I gotta agree with you. That man seems to be dangerous. Publically humiliating and scolding people for behavior that reputable mental health care professionals classify as disorders/diseases can’t be acceptable. It falls right in line with those religious groups that profess to be able to “cure” homosexuality.
I join you in the much-deserved Pitting of this unqualified ass-clown.
**Dr. Phil has a B.S, M.A. and Ph.D. in clinical psychology from North Texas State University with a dual area of emphasis in clinical and behavioral medicine. He has been a board-certified and licensed clinical psychologist since 1978.
**
He’s probably more qualified than you.
I think Dr. Phil is great. I wish I could be Dr. Phil. He tells people they’re stupid and they actually listen to him and change. That’s great! He doesn’t let them get away with stupid shit and idiotic excuses for their bad behaivor. He makes them face their actions and why they do it. He’s not swayed by tears or whining and people who try to negotiate themselves out of trouble.
Re: the slut and whore. Was it a part of the Dr. Phil family? If so, you really have to watch the whole series for context. She’s not a slut and a whore, but her parents are crazy motherfuckers, and Dr. Phil has been working valiantly to make them a little less crazy.
Oh, bullshit. It’s television. You only see what they want you to see. You have no idea what these people are actually like, or if “Dr.” Phil’s “treatment” actually has any lasting effect on them (hint: probably not). Unfortunately, good therapy doesn’t make good television. :rolleyes:
He does follow-up shows on a regular basis, and the people the producers choose to follow and showcase have all changed for the better. shrugs
I don’t get why people get so rabid when it comes to Dr. Phil. Can anybody name one instance where he bullied and tormented somebody with a real clinical disease? ie, told somebody with depression to just snap out of it? Told somebody with agoraphobia to suck it up?
This show is no better than any of the countless Maury clones but he pretends he is doing medicine. I would like to see some psyciatrist come here and say what he is doing with the public humiliations is good practice.
The last time we did this ( a pitting started by me about two years ago or so), you actually opened my eyes to the possibilties that perhaps he is indeed effective. Not finding anything to the contrary about that, I still don’t like him.
Why? I, like probably most people who ‘have a problem’ with him, simply dislike that kind of style. He is rude and abrasive, even outside of his own show and on the talk show circiuit. Yelling and spewing platitudes does not engender trust when that’s all you see about this person.
Still, some people like that style of TV. More power to them. And maybe, just maybe, some people need the Phil type of therapy. Fine. I still don’t like what I’ve seen about him, and even though I tried to watch some of his shows with an open mind, as you suggested, I still find them distasteful.
For me, it all a matter of opinion and taste.
Now, to come in and lambaste it all as simply bullshit is showing both ignorance and arrogance, as I myself learned. But to say one dislikes either the man or the show is not very debatable, as it is an opinion.
There’s your key words (bolding mine). Of course the producers are going to the ones who show (at least short-term) improvement.
I think the problem that people have with him is his smarmy, judgemental, self-righteous attitude. I don’t know about anyone else, but when I see bits of his show (clips from advertising teasers), I just want to backhand him into next week. He seems the antithesis of the good psychotherapist, IMO and IME.
See, here’s another thing I can’t figure out. Dr. Phil actually has a doctorate in clinical psychology–which makes him a doctor. So why do people snipe at him by putting “Dr.” in quotes, or insinuate that he’s fraudulently claiming to be a doctor?
I have a doctorate myself, although I don’t usually sign myself “Dr. Duke” (it’s not a medical degree, so I have no reason to). But I’d be pretty offended if someone suggested that my degree was a fake.
I don’t particularly care for Dr. Phil; I don’t watch his shows, and the few times I have seen him “in action” I haven’t liked him. But that’s no reason to question his degree. Tell me, Q.E.D., what are your credentials, and how can you question those of Dr. Phil’s?
I have wondered that many times myself furlibusea … in fact I have watched him and read about him more than I really care to just to figure out if I am missing something because Oprah usually has a pretty good bs detector.
But all I see is crap. He gives standard little pat answers for complex issues. Case in point was his “black and white” response to obesity,declaring that there is absolutely no metabloic reason for people to have a weight problem. Apparently he was blissfully unaware of PCOS or polycystic ovarian syndrome which plagues many young women and is often not diagnosed because of such ill-informed idiots like “Doctor” Phil. My daughter’s best friend was not diagnosed with PCOS until she developed uterine cancer in her early twenties after struggling for years with a weight problem and hearing that kind of crap. Now that she has been diagnosed and treated she has the same advantage of weight control as others and she is normal body weight and healthy (and a stunner, I might add!)
I have also wondered what happens to these people he picks apart as I doubt seriously he sticks around to help them do the lengthy hard work of putting themselves back together.
Yeah, I think he is a real jerk. Glad to see him here in the pit.
I agree here. Dr. Phil does seem to do good work. I’ve stuck up for the guy several times in RL versus people who despise him. I understand though, why they do hate him so.
He spouts off idiotic platitudes that any moron could make up. The thing is most of his guests who he yells at or cliches to death are morons who wouldn’t understand their child is about to committ suicide or their wife is about to divorce them. They need to be shocked out of their zombie-like contentment.
He yells at people who are at emotional crossroads or have problems. Yelling is bad for emotionally disturbed people. People also might be about to be hit by a train, but we should talk real soft and nice to them, in case they get hurt feelings. Straw people with straw feelings aside, I think some people won’t get it unless you confront them with the BS they live in. People on his show many times just want to go on with their lives without confronting their issues.
He always confronts people and doesn’t let them be. He should back off of someone who is having a problem on their show. Which is how many of these people get away from their problems. They cry, yell or pout and everyone leaves them alone. Then they get to go back to their horrible behavior, horrible mindset, zombie-like contentment. Dr. Phil won’t let them get away with that. These people need to be confronted and made to understand that what they are doing or not doing is bad and harming their loved ones.
Some people need his kind of therapy. Some would do horrible with it. I would do well with it. I know I can end up content with walking stiff and eating brains, even if I am hurting or destroying relationships. Dr. Phil is a decent reply to the super touchy feely, don’t have any possibility of ever even remotely harming self-esteem psychology of the 1970s to 1990s.
I am not questioning his degree. Clearly he has one. I am questioning his ethics, his behavior and methods. First do no harm, and all that. He has more in common with the street-corner snake-oil salesman than with a good practicing psycotherapist. He’s a showman, not a shaman. Hence the quotes.
My post was a simulpost with yours so I just read it. I also put “Doctor” in parentheses for Phil and I mean no disrespect for you in doing so…and for the same reason you explained in your post. You do not use your title frivolously but with the respect that it deserves. Phil uses his for ratings and at the same time misleads people by skimming the surface of issues and then laying them out as the gospel. Many people do respond to “Dr.” and probably give way more credence than he deserves. He misuses the title you worked hard to get.
My daughter has a doctorate in microbiology and she, like you, only uses her title when it makes sense. She also understands that because people listen to her because she has expertise in a certain field she owes it to them to be thorough about what she tells them.
I think Phil is an insult to people like you and my daughter who use their titles and knowledge more appropriately.
But not more qualified than my girlfriend, who calls him a dangerous quack.
Actually, not so great. Despite the followup footage that you see, calling someone stupid is hardly a responsible way to affect real and constructive change. I’m betting it’s either superficial or staged.
I, too, am thrilled to see a pitting of Dr. Phil. The guy does have credentials, and I’m sure that he does help some people. But I still think he’s a jackass.
Also, I hate that sort of television. I’ve asked a lot of people why they watch Dr. Phil, and few of them actually do it because they’ve got a similar problem to that being discussed on the show. Most of them actually enjoy watching this guy screaming at others, then watching them cry. Maybe that says something about the people I know. Or perhaps it says something about people in general and what they consider entertainment. Still, I don’t like television that attracts people because its entertainment value includes watchers getting kicks out of others’ pain. That’s why I don’t watch it, and that’s why I don’t like Dr. Phil.
I suspect it’s due to “Dr. Laura” billing herself as such when her degree is in physiology. People are either confusing the two, or simply suspicious after hearing that about Dr. Laura.
Which might well explain his style, hearkening to the old Nike slogan “Just do it.” But just as someone who’s an overweight couch potato with exercise-induced asthma shouldn’t just jump up and run several miles, so one might also suggest that you can’t just order people to change and expect it to not occasionally backfire in an ugly manner.
Relating to overlyverbose’s issue with it, I worry that this is being used in a sideshow carnival fashion. A lovely, respectable veneer over the freakshow viewing, so to speak. For instance, in the SDMB thread I linked above, he’s promoting a show where supposedly some kid has “9 of 14 characteristics of a serial killer.” Um, OK… now by reading the linked thread it appears that he’s probably using John Douglas’ list gathered from his profiling work, but regardless, the cited lists are good for profiling but not necessarily predicting - as pointed out there, plenty of people who aren’t serial killers fit any given list of those “characteristics” if “kill people” isn’t a required item. What, exactly, are they expecting to accomplish by parading this poor kid on TV and telling him/her and the family that their kid is acting like a serial killer? If they’re that worried, get a psychiatrist in ASAP!
I am astounded that some generally well-informed folks in this thread actually think Dr. Phil makes some kind of lasting contribution to those people’s lives. I don’t care one bit about any daytime TV show – except for Texas Justice and Judge Mathis, of course – but the idea that Dr Phil solves ANYTHING in a 51 minute program is absurd.
I don’t think any non-quack doctor would claim that a one-hour session with someone will solve emotional or behavioral problems. I have no idea if Dr Phil claims that he has invented some sort of 15-minute emotional oil change, but anyone who thinks that a TV show run by a psychologist does any real help to the guests is deluding themselves. It would be my hope that Dr. Phil would invite them on his show, and yell at them for not being realistic, or whatever.
No offense to Cecil and all the SDSAB members, but I think years of research, writing a dissertation, a couple more years of residency in the case of medical degrees, and a dissertation defense rather trump the SDSAB designation. Unless QED and company had to write a 300-page dissertation, then got grilled on it by Ed Zotti for three hours…hmmmm, maybe I should suggest it to the Powers That Be!
As for disrespecting the profession and thus putting one’s credentials in jeopardy, I can dig that angle of attack on Dr. Phil. In my own field we’ve got certain low characters like the Holocaust-denier David Irving*–unfortunately, there’s no “Professional Association of Historians and Historical Researchers” that we can throw him out of. I suppose if the American Psychiatrists’ Association denounced Dr. Phil, or stripped him of his license, that would be something, but, unless that happened or will happen, I myself won’t question his credentials, even though I don’t like the guy.
Well, I wrote a doctoral dissertation on the English Bible in 16th-century East Anglia, and I’m now starting work on a book about cricket in America between 1890 and 1939…I can’t think of a less appropriate use of my knowledge
*Not to suggest Dr. Phil is as bad as David Irving. Irving is close to sub-human.
