"Preserving religious freedom in the mental health profession"

[ttribe]

17 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

Yes I don't dispute any of that 

Uhhh, ooookkkaaayyyy.  Then why all the discussion on what constitutes a "mental health expert?"

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, MormonVideoGame said:

You a family and marriage therapist or a sex therapist? or are both the same thing? Sorry for so many questions, I am confused and a little skeptical because many therapists (with a PhD in Psychology) don't have your views. Or is it because you earned your LAMFT in BYU? I guess BYU is simply different? 

Maybe UT is why I am a little skeptical. Therapy is a soft science, and even the professionals can have a lot of confirmation bias.  

I'm both. I'm a licensed MFT who specializes and generally works with Sexual dysfunction and problems. There isn't a specific license to be a sex therapist. They're not the same thing. MFT is my license Sex therapy is my specialty. BYU has the #1 MFT program in the United States....so you're skepticism isn't exactly warranted. And different areas of study focus in different areas and have different perspectives. I have differing perspectives from my peers and boss. My boss has different views from many (most) in AASECT. We both have differing perspectives from a number in UT who largely focus in other areas of sexual concerns (such as out of control sexual behavior or porn/sex addiction....depending who's describing it). It's a myth that we all come to basically the same conclusions and understandings about the same topics. My views aren't inherently wrong/incorrect, they're from a different perspective. 

If you're skeptical because of UT or BYU that's your own bias. It doesn't change my credentials and validity as a mental health professional in the least. 

Many of the views that are easily accessed by the main public are not representative of all actual therapists. There's a wide range of beliefs and thoughts and theories floating about. Some of the most popular or infamous fall into specific camps of thoughts. This doesn't make them more valid because they've caught popular attention. It just means they're interpreting things from their own experience, field, biases, and interpretation of observations and research. It's not necessarily confirmation bias. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited June 21, 2017 by BlueDreams

[mfbukowski]

On 6/19/2017 at 8:56 AM, Calm said:

Is anyone suggesting quackery be allowed to be practiced?

Just this rabbit.

   But I guess it kind of matters how you see quackery.

Edited June 21, 2017 by mfbukowski

[MormonVideoGame]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

 I have differing perspectives from my peers and boss. My boss has different views from many (most) in AASECT. We both have differing perspectives from a number in UT who largely focus in other areas of sexual concerns (such as out of control sexual behavior or porn/sex addiction....depending who's describing it). It's a myth that we all come to basically the same conclusions and understandings about the same topics. My views aren't inherently wrong/incorrect, they're from a different perspective. 

I know counselors, therapists, and psychologists don't think exactly the same about all theories and topics. However, like you said, "most in AASECT" do agree on some things. Psychiatrists and Neurologists too. I am NOT saying there is an overwhelming consensus, but most of the experts I read tend to agree and contradict what you say. Perhaps selection bias on my part. 

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

Many of the views that are easily accessed by the main public are not representative of all actual therapists. There's a wide range of beliefs and thoughts and theories floating about.

True, I am very careful (most of the time) about propaganda on the internet. 

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

It doesn't change my credentials and validity as a mental health professional in the least. 

I don't doubt your credentials, I know you are a professional (with a profession), but I am just not sure if you are an expert. 

Are you an expert? 

Edited June 21, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[pogi]

12 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

Are you an expert? 

Compared to you? Yes.

[BlueDreams]

27 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

I know counselors, therapists, and psychologists don't think exactly the same about all theories and topics. However, like you said, "most in AASECT" do agree on some things. Psychiatrists and Neurologists too. I am NOT saying there is an overwhelming consensus, but most of the experts I read tend to agree and contradict what you say. Perhaps selection bias on my part. 

AASECT may have its own problems with group think. I hesitate to say this because I do so 3rd person from my boss. But the sort of people AASECT currently attracts are not neccessarily representative. It leans really really heavily one way. And because of that it's not balanced in perspectives and outlooks. So yeah, they agree on some things....but that's not saying much, because a good chunk of them are very like-minded already. And yes, you may definitely have problems with selection bias. People have point out other research or even the same research that contradicted your point and I've seen you not take that into consideration. Honestly the only reason I can think that you're consistently poking at my credentials, qualifications, or whatever you're doubting is because I'm not saying what you'd expect/like me to say on topics. 

 

Quote

 

True, I am very careful (most of the time) about propaganda on the internet. 

I don't doubt your credentials, I know you are a professional (with a profession), but I am just not sure if you are an expert. 

Are you an expert? 

 

 

 

It's not propoganda, it's just popular bias and leanings. This isn't you or anyone can escape.

Focusing on expert is a form of level shifting. That's not at all what I said in the first place. Secondly, as calm pointed out to you there's not exactly a set standard for what that means. There's no set of qualifications that equal "expert" in the mental health fields.  

The google definition of "expert" is this:

a person who has a comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area.

By that definition I probably qualify in the field that I work with. I am not an expert in certain fields of study in the mental health field. For example I've referred out for someone who needed specific treatment  for sexual offenses who needed court mandated therapy. I'm not an expert on that. 

 

I've answered your questions and this is probably a major derailment of the thread. So we should probably get back on topic

With luv,

BD

Edited June 21, 2017 by BlueDreams

[USU78]

43 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

The google definition of "expert" is this:

a person who has a comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area.

In my business an "expert" is somebody with a briefcase who traveled by plane and taxi to the courthouse.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

AASECT may have its own problems with group think. I hesitate to say this because I do so 3rd person from my boss. But the sort of people AASECT currently attracts are not neccessarily representative. It leans really really heavily one way. And because of that it's not balanced in perspectives and outlooks. So yeah, they agree on some things....but that's not saying much, because a good chunk of them are very like-minded already. And yes, you may definitely have problems with selection bias. People have point out other research or even the same research that contradicted your point and I've seen you not take that into consideration. Honestly the only reason I can think that you're consistently poking at my credentials, qualifications, or whatever you're doubting is because I'm not saying what you'd expect/like me to say on topics. 

 

It's not propoganda, it's just popular bias and leanings. This isn't you or anyone can escape.

Focusing on expert is a form of level shifting. That's not at all what I said in the first place. Secondly, as calm pointed out to you there's not exactly a set standard for what that means. There's no set of qualifications that equal "expert" in the mental health fields.  

The google definition of "expert" is this:

a person who has a comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area.

By that definition I probably qualify in the field that I work with. I am not an expert in certain fields of study in the mental health field. For example I've referred out for someone who needed specific treatment  for sexual offenses who needed court mandated therapy. I'm not an expert on that. 

 

I've answered your questions and this is probably a major derailment of the thread. So we should probably get back on topic

With luv,

BD

I thought the definition of an expert is one who came from more than 30 miles away and brought PowerPoint slides. 

Edited June 21, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, USU78 said:

In my business an "expert" is somebody with a briefcase who traveled by plane and taxi to the courthouse.

i saw yours after I posted mine. I think I like yours better. 

[boblloyd91]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It is clear you are in a sensitive position.

Your lot should not be made yet more difficult by governmental or societal forces that refuse to recognize and respect your right to personal religious freedom as you carry forward your professional practice.

It's true, thanks for the validation. I think I've found a way to successfully navigate this for now, though we'll see what the future holds.

[Meerkat]

12 hours ago, USU78 said:

Look ... I'm an attorney. In the xviiith-xixth centuries there were few ethical rules. In the xxth-xxist centuries those rules exploded and continue to explode.

After nearly 35 years in service, I've come to some conclusions that are relevant here.

1. There's no particular rightness or wrongness to the rules, and your moral/ethical sense is more valuable than the codified rules. The argument from their authority is inevitably circular, self-referential, and fallacious.

2. You leave your moral and ethical fingerprints on everything you touch.

3. Ethical rules are crafted as they are in order to protect entrenched interests.

4. Ethical rules are crafted to be used to punish the unpopular ... If Carolina cheats, VMI better watch out. The dangerous aren't particularly punished, only the unpopular.

5. Doing right is far more valuable than obeying arcane rules cynically adopted to benefit the entrenched and the popular.

 

Due to grief over two addicted children, my wife and I sought therapy.  We visited a few until we found one who was able to have an influence that worked for us.  That therapy, and a couple family support twelve step programs, have been invaluable restoring us to hope, happiness and the ability to cope with our lives.  I believe choosing a therapist is subjective. Not just any will do.  Fortunately, we were not so fragile that we accepted any influence from therapists we felt didn't understand or weren't empathetic to our issues.

Our two loved ones in addiction, on the other hand, shopped for therapists who supported their points of view.  They started on the path of Family of Origin work.  Their therapist (they both went to the same one,) gave them the support they sought to feel better about the lives they were choosing.  They became convinced they were not addicted. Their problems were caused by hyper religiosity in their family of origin (us.)  Their therapist gave them anti-Mormon materials that helped move them toward inactivity, divorce, leaving the Church and estrangement from their parents and siblings.  The therapist came out of a similar background as our loved ones and engaged them over a couple of years.  They became so confused and distraught that one attempted suicide and the both became so fragile and fearful, we weren't able to talk with them for three years.  We hope things are improving now.  But we are a little gun shy that it may be manipulation coming back.  The idea that hope springs eternal has worked against our sanity from time to time.

My point is that a person can find anything they want in the mental health arena.  Therapy can be helpful or dangerous, depending upon the motivation of the therapist, in my opinion. Whether it's good or right is in the eye of the beholder.  I believe it helps to have a functioning conscience and a strong moral/ethical sense going into it.  We love our therapist and twelve step facilitators and are greatful for their healing influence on us.

[USU78]

23 minutes ago, Meerkat said:

Due to grief over two addicted children, my wife and I sought therapy.  We visited a few until we found one who was able to have an influence that worked for us.  That therapy, and a couple family support twelve step programs, have been invaluable restoring us to hope, happiness and the ability to cope with our lives.  I believe choosing a therapist is subjective. Not just any will do.  Fortunately, we were not so fragile that we accepted any influence from therapists we felt didn't understand or weren't empathetic to our issues.

Our two loved ones in addiction, on the other hand, shopped for therapists who supported their points of view.  They started on the path of Family of Origin work.  Their therapist (they both went to the same one,) gave them the support they sought to feel better about the lives they were choosing.  They became convinced they were not addicted. Their problems were caused by hyper religiosity in their family of origin (us.)  Their therapist gave them anti-Mormon materials that helped move them toward inactivity, divorce, leaving the Church and estrangement from their parents and siblings.  The therapist came out of a similar background as our loved ones and engaged them over a couple of years.  They became so confused and distraught that one attempted suicide and the both became so fragile and fearful, we weren't able to talk with them for three years.  We hope things are improving now.  But we are a little gun shy that it may be manipulation coming back.  The idea that hope springs eternal has worked against our sanity from time to time.

My point is that a person can find anything they want in the mental health arena.  Therapy can be helpful or dangerous, depending upon the motivation of the therapist, in my opinion. Whether it's good or right is in the eye of the beholder.  I believe it helps to have a functioning conscience and a strong moral/ethical sense going into it.  We love our therapist and twelve step facilitators and are greatful for their healing influence on us.

Yup.

I weep for your pain. 

[CV75]

10 hours ago, USU78 said:

In my business an "expert" is somebody with a briefcase who traveled by plane and taxi to the courthouse.

In mine it's a has-been drip under pressure. [ex-] [spurt]

[MormonVideoGame]

19 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

AASECT may have its own problems with group think. I hesitate to say this because I do so 3rd person from my boss. But the sort of people AASECT currently attracts are not neccessarily representative. It leans really really heavily one way. And because of that it's not balanced in perspectives and outlooks. So yeah, they agree on some things....but that's not saying much, because a good chunk of them are very like-minded already.

You earlier told me therapists disagree with each other,  they disagree yes or no? Why does AASECT only attract liberal therapists? Isn't AASECT the leading 50 year old national body of sex therapists? Doesn't AASECT promote evidence-based therapy? 

Mormon BYU therapists not very like-minded? 

Quote

People have point out other research or even the same research that contradicted your point and I've seen you not take that into consideration. 

I do. However, I seen more research and evidence for the positions that you disagree with. 

19 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

Honestly the only reason I can think that you're consistently poking at my credentials, qualifications, or whatever you're doubting is because I'm not saying what you'd expect/like me to say on topics. 

No, I have no reason to deny evidence or good research. I follow the evidence wherever it leads. I already told you why I am a little skeptical. For example, if a Biologist tells me that Evolution is an unproven theory I won't quickly believe him. 

19 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

By that definition I probably qualify in the field that I work with. I am not an expert in certain fields of study in the mental health field. For example I've referred out for someone who needed specific treatment  for sexual offenses who needed court mandated therapy. I'm not an expert on that. 

For me an expert has a PhD, MD, or the equivalent. Simple. 

19 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

I've answered your questions and this is probably a major derailment of the thread. So we should probably get back on topic

Let Scott decide that, I am enjoying the conversation. 

19 hours ago, pogi said:

Compared to you? Yes.

i don't disagree. 

Edited June 21, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[thesometimesaint]

Believe me BYU  Mormon therapists disagree on almost everything. IE; I'm not Freudian in my modality. I am more of a Glasser Therapist. One of our axioms. Is what I am doing getting me closer to the people I need?

[pogi]

16 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

However, I seen more research and evidence for the positions that you disagree with. 

Instead of obnoxiously attacking her credentials, why don't you address what it is exactly you disagree with in what she said - you have not yet done so.  What research are you talking about?

22 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

For me an expert has a PhD, MD, or the equivalent. Simple. 

I know too many doctors to think that way!  Don't be blinded by the letters.  I think very few doctors would actually consider themselves "experts" in their field.  

Getting your PhD or MD doesn't make you an "expert" in how I use the term, it simply means that you have earned a license to practice.  You know enough to not kill your patients - hopefully!

[BlueDreams]

23 hours ago, boblloyd91 said:

So I'm glad this topic was brought up as I'm a therapist who works with those who have mental health and substance abuse issues. One thing that was reiterated over and over again in my schooling was the importance of respecting diversity and being culturally competent. I was expected to be sensitive to and aware of sexual diversity (LGBT). It has always been a tightrope for me to walk as their pain is real, and I don't want to be harsh or judgmental when they need someone to talk to (there is a very high risk of suicide in this group). However I also worry if I were to validate too much I would be giving them motivation to make lifestyle choices that would go against gospel principles and possibly put me at risk of condemnation. It's tough.

I think that's a fair struggle. Something that I find helpful is to think of oneself more as a way station. In the sense that I can help them reorganize/lighten their baggage a bit but I have no real say as to their ultimate destination. That's up to them. I also heard it described as helping them receive more light as they're willing. So if, in your example, they desire to have a same sex partner, helping them at least reduce overtly destructive patterns with drugs, or unsafe sexual behaviors, or excess meaningless sexual relationships, or choosing partners who fuel their own dysfunction would still be a monumental growth and receptionn of light and goodness. If they can get to a stable life practice that is ultimately more than they previously had it opens a doorway that one day, maybe, other forms of goodness and change may come in their lives. as well, I think it helps to recognize the limitations or the actual scope of my influence. I don't think I will be under condemnation if they choose whatever they choose. If I've done my best to introduce even a little more light or health or goodness into their life that is a good thing and of God. If they reject it, that's their choice to make. 

 

With luv,

BD 

[MormonVideoGame]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

I know too many doctors to think that way!  Don't be blinded by the letters.  I think very few doctors would actually consider themselves "experts" in their field.  

Okay I retract. What about an MD, PhD with a specialization or an area of research. What about actively publishing research papers.  Better? 

13 minutes ago, pogi said:

Instead of obnoxiously attacking her credentials, why don't you address what it is exactly you disagree with in what she said - you have not yet done so.  What research are you talking about?

On this thread I don't neccesarily disagree, but I am skeptical about her claim, "...Done right, religion can be a powerful ally in the therapy world". 

I thought it was best to keep religion out of professional therapy, except in special circunstancies. 

[mfbukowski]

10 hours ago, Meerkat said:

Due to grief over two addicted children, my wife and I sought therapy.  We visited a few until we found one who was able to have an influence that worked for us.  That therapy, and a couple family support twelve step programs, have been invaluable restoring us to hope, happiness and the ability to cope with our lives.  I believe choosing a therapist is subjective. Not just any will do.  Fortunately, we were not so fragile that we accepted any influence from therapists we felt didn't understand or weren't empathetic to our issues.

Our two loved ones in addiction, on the other hand, shopped for therapists who supported their points of view.  They started on the path of Family of Origin work.  Their therapist (they both went to the same one,) gave them the support they sought to feel better about the lives they were choosing.  They became convinced they were not addicted. Their problems were caused by hyper religiosity in their family of origin (us.)  Their therapist gave them anti-Mormon materials that helped move them toward inactivity, divorce, leaving the Church and estrangement from their parents and siblings.  The therapist came out of a similar background as our loved ones and engaged them over a couple of years.  They became so confused and distraught that one attempted suicide and the both became so fragile and fearful, we weren't able to talk with them for three years.  We hope things are improving now.  But we are a little gun shy that it may be manipulation coming back.  The idea that hope springs eternal has worked against our sanity from time to time.

My point is that a person can find anything they want in the mental health arena.  Therapy can be helpful or dangerous, depending upon the motivation of the therapist, in my opinion. Whether it's good or right is in the eye of the beholder.  I believe it helps to have a functioning conscience and a strong moral/ethical sense going into it.  We love our therapist and twelve step facilitators and are greatful for their healing influence on us.

GGGRRRRRRRRRRRRR.....

Man, I would have to work at being "gun shy" at this point, you are a strong and forgiving person.  My old self might be reaching for one.

But it is fascinating to me also that those who have been successful with therapy (me included, despite my above remark   ) really see it in almost a religious way, or at least the way I see religion.

It's Alma 32 and why I am a Mormon actually, no one else sees religion as something you seek after, try out, and see if the seed grows in your heart and gives you peace.

It is so sad that so many are frightened into their dogmatic faiths by fearing hellfire and damnation instead of seeing Christ as the forgiving Father of our salvation FROM fear, and the fountain of peace in our lives.

If we could only convey religion AS therapy to the secularists and help them understand that therapy is very much like religion, we could go far in spreading the gospel

The foundation in both is an adjustment in beliefs and world view.  It IS a subjective perspective of course, but in dealing with these questions, what else is there?

We must seek and find, as Alma suggests, the "seed" which is "sweetest" to us and grows in our hearts.   I am so sorry for what you have been through.  Where there is life there is hope, you just can't stop trying.  

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, MormonVideoGame said:

You earlier told me therapists disagree with each other,  they disagree yes or no? Why does AASECT only attract liberal therapists? Isn't AASECT the leading 50 year old national body of sex therapists? Doesn't AASECT promote evidence-based therapy? 

Mormon BYU therapists not very like-minded? 

I do. However, I seen more research and evidence for the positions that you disagree with. 

No, I have no reason to deny evidence or good research. I follow the evidence wherever it leads. I already told you why I am a little skeptical. For example, if a Biologist tells me that Evolution is an unproven theory I won't quickly believe him. 

For me an expert has a PhD, MD, or the equivalent. Simple. 

Let Scott decide that, I am enjoying the conversation. 

i don't disagree. 

OK as an expert in my field will you take my word on what religion is correct?

Can't you see the parallels?

I won't answer I just wanted you to think for once in your life about what is actually important.   Experts in what to believe, which is what therapy AND religion are, are not to be followed unless your heart identifies with their message.

It seems so obvious.  Beliefs about what makes you happy and gives you purpose are not subject to scientific investigation

It is like going to an expert to find someone to marry.

What kind of physical "evidence" shows whom you should marry?

Just absurd.  Think for your self, don't be a puppet for some "expert".   God gave you the answers in your heart and if you cannot see that there is not much hope for you to figure it out

Some experts may help you find what works for you, but following experts blindly is like joining a cult and surrendering your own will.   Not a good idea.

Edited June 21, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Judd]

20 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

On this thread I don't neccesarily disagree, but I am skeptical about her claim, "...Done right, religion can be a powerful ally in the therapy world". 

I thought it was best to keep religion out of professional therapy, except in special circunstancies. 

Considering the qualifier "done right," I'm not certain there's even an argument on that. In any case, the idea that you can't touch upon religion in therapy is not true. It's certainly promulgated by the most ardent of ideologues (they have the loudest voice and often interface more boisterously with the lay public than their more mild-mannered counterparts) and perhaps this influences people in peripheral fields or who are less experienced, but to say that some of the most personal beliefs that shape worldview and instill core values is off-limits because of a sociopolitical taboo really misses the mark. True, it's not the therapist's job to impose arbitrary values upon a patient (whether religious or otherwise -- though there are quite a few exceptions to this that are not religious in nature but more societal), but I think many people assume or conflate the idea of religion being brought up in therapy as being the same as a therapist proselytizing and it's kind of amazing that people can't see how this can come up where the therapist is (or is supposed to be) fairly neutral or indifferent.

[Judd]

On 6/20/2017 at 4:11 PM, thesometimesaint said:

No it isn't. The first was that as a mental health professional I can't tell my clients my religious beliefs, even if asked. The second one is reason behind the first.  Our clients comes to us in search of help with mental health issues. We occupy a privileged place. To use that privileged place in our clients life as a tool for our own purposes violates that privilege.

I'm unclear why you're assuming that telling someone your religious faith (even if asked) constitutes using them "as a tool for [y]our own purposes." If I'm remembering correctly from years ago (correct me if I'm wrong), but you spent most of your career as an inpatient social worker (?). In that realm and with addressing such larger issues of acuity than personal interaction, I certainly see managing that issue much differently. Time inpatient is brief. I'm much more aloof with patients in the hospital than those I see longitudinally in clinic. I'll avoid any personal questions inpatient as they're fairly irrelevant and often facilitate avoidance. However, I'd be really baffled if you carried this approach over to people you're seeing on any kind of continuing basis. You mentioned issues with transference (and counter transference) but if you're psychodynamically inclined, I'd imagine you'd recognize the utility of having transference issues to help inform treatment. To throw your arms up and go running the other way really neglects the reason why transference is emphasized or even why it's understood as a concept. 

I originally would approach the religious issue more discreetly, especially as whenever people would find out I was raised in Utah, half the time asking if I was a Mormon was the next question. When I realized there wasn't really much to this question I just started answering matter-of-factly, and this question would really only come up after we've developed a working professional relationship.

The bottom line is that you're a human, not cold cinder block wall with pre-programmed empathic statements.

Edited June 22, 2017 by Judd

[clarkgoble]

11 hours ago, Meerkat said:

Our two loved ones in addiction, on the other hand, shopped for therapists who supported their points of view.  They started on the path of Family of Origin work.  Their therapist (they both went to the same one,) gave them the support they sought to feel better about the lives they were choosing.  They became convinced they were not addicted. Their problems were caused by hyper religiosity in their family of origin (us.)  Their therapist gave them anti-Mormon materials that helped move them toward inactivity, divorce, leaving the Church and estrangement from their parents and siblings.  The therapist came out of a similar background as our loved ones and engaged them over a couple of years.  They became so confused and distraught that one attempted suicide and the both became so fragile and fearful, we weren't able to talk with them for three years.  We hope things are improving now.  But we are a little gun shy that it may be manipulation coming back.  The idea that hope springs eternal has worked against our sanity from time to time.

I think the fear of many is this sort of thing happening to people who don't seek it out. That is the diversity of approaches along with a bias towards certain secular views of acceptance entails a degree of unease with the entire arena of therapy.

[ttribe]

3 hours ago, MormonVideoGame said:

For me an expert has a PhD, MD, or the equivalent. Simple. 

Hmmm, I am frequently designated as an expert in my field by both state and federal courts, but have no PhD.  I have a number of professional certifications, however.

ETA: I'm beginning to think you have an incorrect idea of what constitutes expertise.

Edited June 22, 2017 by ttribe

[MormonVideoGame]

42 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Hmmm, I am frequently designated as an expert in my field by both state and federal courts, but have no PhD.  I have a number of professional certifications, however.

ETA: I'm beginning to think you have an incorrect idea of what constitutes expertise.

We are talking about mental health, not law or courts.