>>39952
>This dependency is obviously lucrative for the therapist but not amenable to improved mental health.
I never said that you can do nothing, but denying that there are limitations to even that is unrealistic and retarded. Not everyone will become a billionare, and not everyone will be cured. Not every problem can be fixed by putting more hard work onto that. You are attacking a strawman.
>Also, you're an idiot, psychologists do not prescribe medication
Psychiatrists, I literally put psychologist/psychiatrist so that you won't bitch about that.
>all psychotropic drugs cause side effects which negatively impact basic function
Which are lesser than the effects which negatively impact an uncured condition.
>and many castles (still standing to this day) were built on muddy grounds, the surrounding marshland served a defensive purposes.
Yeah, you get the idea though. It's a fucking figure of speech you cretin. The same as "building castles on sand". Are you so braindead that you do not realise what that means?
>You can not say you've cured a person if they can only function while medicated
You are an idiot because, no one intends for their patients to be on drugs indefinitely as that is not the point. But by the same logic, you should not take anti-biotics during a bacterial infection. And second of all, there are chronic diseases which we cannot cure, and yet still have to medicate for the sake of the patients. Of course that comes from not knowing what to do to fully cure it, but it's better than doing nothing and letting a person die or suffer.
Do you think that people who suffer from schizophrenia should stop taking drugs just because we do not fully know how to cure schizos? The drugs that they take do have negative side effects on them but it's still better than not medicating them until we can find a better way of curing it. That is true for any drug for any condition.
>if the final stage of any treatment is not the cessation of all medical processes save those typical maintenance procedures such as a yearly physical you are not doctoring anymore, you are pushing
This logic does not apply to chronic diseases, nor does it apply to many of the uses that psychiatric drugs have. Most of the time, people are being medicated with the expectation that it will help eventually. The problem being, that we don't actually have the science or technology
or at least do not have it avalible due to corporate fuckery for any other means of consistently fixing those issues, but we have proof that they are biological in form of for example brain scans.
If your logic was applies to any other sickness it would be seen as idiotic, yet it feels as if you are treating mental illnesses differently simply because of a bias. Tell me, what can a person do if they get cancer? I get that healthy living decreases the chances, but it is not impossible to get cancer even with a completely healthy person with a genetic predisposition. Would you say that they should "change their life" so that cancer disappears? Of course fucking not, because cancer is literally the thing that would be destroying their attempts to improve their life by literaly killing them. The first what you will be doing will be trying to cure it. Why are you treating mental illness differently then? Why do you think that a person who has a mental illness isn't inhibited in their life in a similar way, when we have proof that they are.