NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/talk/abortion/36358

Text File | 1992-09-14 | 3.6 KB | 105 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!acd4!TEFS1!wdo
From: [e-mail] (Bill Overpeck)
Subject: Re: Stranded on an Island
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:38:50 GMT
Lines: 94

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
   (James G Keegan Jr) writes: >
In article <[e-mail]>
   [e-mail] (Bill Overpeck) writes: >>
In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
   (James G Keegan Jr) writes: >>>

>>> perhaps. i suggest that we wait for you to take a
>>> further peek at the data before you jump to any
>>> conclusions. you wouldn't want to appear
>>> capricious, would you?
>
>> I am not the one who has jumped to any conclusion at
>> all.
>
>> did you not speculate, wrongly, i might add, about my
>> motivations and then criticize them in this and related
>> threads?

I don't think my speculations are/were wrong.

> did you not argue my motivations with others?

Susan Garvin and Dean Kaflowitz decided to jump in, so I
responded to them.  Was I not supposed to?

> perhaps this just slipped your mind.

Nope.  The only thing I've concluded is that you don't have
enough information to assess Doug's (or anyone elses) mental
status via Usenet correspondence.  And unless you've been
holding out on us, you also lack the background.

>> My contention remains that there is too little
>> available information upon which to base any
>> reasonable inference of psychopathology.
>
> and mine is that therapy might help the lad(s).

Help him with what, Jim?

>>> if, after you do that, you still think that
>>> neither chaney, DODie or the others could be
>>> helped by therapy, well that's ok.
>
>> Many people use therapy as a vehicle for
>> facilitating personal growth, even in the absence of
>> any identifiable pathology.  Your comments (re
>> denial) suggest that Doug suffers from some type of
>> disorder, though.  I hope you see the difference.
>
> yes, i do. demonstrating one (denial) might cause one
> to suggests that the other (therapy) might be of help.
> if DODie's posts suggest that he might suffer from some
> type of disorder, why have you been debating this point
> for so long

So, are you about to unveil the basis of your inference
that Doug is in denial?  I'm looking forward to this.

>>> several people posted to explain DODie to you. and i
>>> provided a list of chaney articles and even offered to
>>> email them. they contain all the information i need to
>>> form my opinion.
>
>> I see.  What symptoms seemed most prominent to you?
>
> you're the professional, bill. why don't you tell me.

I already have: his posts don't contain enough information
to infer any pathology.  You, however, are contending that
there is some pathological process at work here.  It seems
reasonable to assume you have some criteria for your assess-
ment.  I'm asking you to provide it.

>>> why are you so opposed to therapy, bill?
>
>> An odd question to ask of a practicing
>> psychotherapist, but your assumption is incorrect.
>
> then you'd be better of making your point clearly
> instead of arguing against my sussestionthat therapy
> might be of help, wouldn't you?

What makes you say that therapy might be of some help?

> so what is your point, bill?

Again?  One, you don't have enough information to determine
that Doug suffers from a mental disorder; two, your comments
to him were malicious, and three, the nature of your comments
is offensive to those who truly suffer from mental disorders.

Bill