Clinical Psychologist vs Psychiatrist
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Dr.Psych
The quality of the studies that comprise these reviews is terrible. A lot of them have poor control groups, or no control groups at all, and many of them had dependent variables which were based on clinician's opinions about how much the client improved. Many of the studies which have used good control groups and valid outcome measures have poor evidence of effectiveness relative to controls. Add that to the horrific side-effects ECT can cause and the poor knowledge of the mechanisms underpinning it, and it's fair to say that in other areas of medicine, such a poorly understood, evidenced and potentially damaging treatment would not be approved. Frankly, I know of way too many instances whereby ECT was not used as a last resort, and where psychological therapy could have been, but wasn't used.
The exact same criticisms can be easily levelled against the majority of 'psychological interventions'. Pseudoscientific approach, poor design and sampling etc. The truth is doing nothing is often as good, if not superior to the majority of psychological interventions especially if follow-up is 6 months or longer.
Though you highlight another difference between psychiatry and psychology - psychologists (and estate agents) have clients, psychiatrists have patients.
(edited 10 years ago)
Medical model = treats physical diseases. Psychiatry = assumption that mental health problems arise from pathological physiological antecedents and are treatable via physiological interventions.
Treatment of mental health is based on differential diagnosis (process of elimination by identifying diagnostic criteria in the subject). Then treatment with medication (often again by the process of elimination to find one that works).
Clinical Psychologists have a special term "formulation" which is a story that explains the problems of the individual and what is maintaining that problem. The psychologist then intervenes to break unhelpful thinking or intersectional patterns that maintain the "problem".
I've worked in inpatient psychiatry for 5 years as a HCA with ambitions of studying clinical psychology.
I start graduate medicine in Sept.
My reasons for doing so are as follows.
-Clin psychs are unappreciated by the NHS. So under-utilised.
-psychiatrists are often positioned as team leaders.
-pay protection. Psychologists are constantly being downgraded.
-Future career prospects.
-the pay off. Clinical psych is more competitive than medicine the doctorate is really difficult. And u get low job security and slightly more money than a nurse.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Treatment of mental health is based on differential diagnosis (process of elimination by identifying diagnostic criteria in the subject). Then treatment with medication (often again by the process of elimination to find one that works).
Clinical Psychologists have a special term "formulation" which is a story that explains the problems of the individual and what is maintaining that problem. The psychologist then intervenes to break unhelpful thinking or intersectional patterns that maintain the "problem".
I've worked in inpatient psychiatry for 5 years as a HCA with ambitions of studying clinical psychology.
I start graduate medicine in Sept.
My reasons for doing so are as follows.
-Clin psychs are unappreciated by the NHS. So under-utilised.
-psychiatrists are often positioned as team leaders.
-pay protection. Psychologists are constantly being downgraded.
-Future career prospects.
-the pay off. Clinical psych is more competitive than medicine the doctorate is really difficult. And u get low job security and slightly more money than a nurse.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by king117
Medical model = treats physical diseases. Psychiatry = assumption that mental health problems arise from pathological physiological antecedents and are treatable via physiological interventions.
Treatment of mental health is based on differential diagnosis (process of elimination by identifying diagnostic criteria in the subject). Then treatment with medication (often again by the process of elimination to find one that works).
Clinical Psychologists have a special term "formulation" which is a story that explains the problems of the individual and what is maintaining that problem. The psychologist then intervenes to break unhelpful thinking or intersectional patterns that maintain the "problem".
I've worked in inpatient psychiatry for 5 years as a HCA with ambitions of studying clinical psychology.
I start graduate medicine in Sept.
My reasons for doing so are as follows.
-Clin psychs are unappreciated by the NHS. So under-utilised.
-psychiatrists are often positioned as team leaders.
-pay protection. Psychologists are constantly being downgraded.
-Future career prospects.
-the pay off. Clinical psych is more competitive than medicine the doctorate is really difficult. And u get low job security and slightly more money than a nurse.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Treatment of mental health is based on differential diagnosis (process of elimination by identifying diagnostic criteria in the subject). Then treatment with medication (often again by the process of elimination to find one that works).
Clinical Psychologists have a special term "formulation" which is a story that explains the problems of the individual and what is maintaining that problem. The psychologist then intervenes to break unhelpful thinking or intersectional patterns that maintain the "problem".
I've worked in inpatient psychiatry for 5 years as a HCA with ambitions of studying clinical psychology.
I start graduate medicine in Sept.
My reasons for doing so are as follows.
-Clin psychs are unappreciated by the NHS. So under-utilised.
-psychiatrists are often positioned as team leaders.
-pay protection. Psychologists are constantly being downgraded.
-Future career prospects.
-the pay off. Clinical psych is more competitive than medicine the doctorate is really difficult. And u get low job security and slightly more money than a nurse.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Welcome to the club. I'm going to be applying for GEM entry for 2015 also.
Did you ever apply to the DClin? If so, what was the outcome?
What GEM programme have you been accepted on?
Original post by J1mmy
Welcome to the club. I'm going to be applying for GEM entry for 2015 also.
Did you ever apply to the DClin? If so, what was the outcome?
What GEM programme have you been accepted on?
Did you ever apply to the DClin? If so, what was the outcome?
What GEM programme have you been accepted on?
I have been accepted to Warwick.
Without Chemistry a-level I could only apply to about 7/8 of the GEM courses. I applied to Newcastle, Leister and Kings as well. I was confident if I made it to interview is get an offer but was only interview by Warwick. Newcastle and Kings will interview you if your personal statement is half decent and you get a UKCAT in the 93rd percentile (although they don't say this their UkCat cut off is usually around there). I was in the 90th so no interview. Leicester has broader criteria the UKCAT only forming part of it. In they preliminary marking I got 15/25. They emailed to say 16/25 would be invited for interview. I didn't apply to the other courses I was eligible for (Nottingham, st George's and Swansea) as I didn't want to donate GAMSAT.
I have a clinical interview coming up as I applied to clinical simultaneously. If medicine rejected me it would make sense to continue as I planned. I'll still go for the interview. If they ask me a load if CBT questions I'll just throw in the towel though. My pet peeve is the over selling and utilisation of the CBT approach in psychology.
I'm not a repeat applicant as i wanted to apply when I was ready and stood a strong chance of being invited to interview. I made the Essex interview reserve list (4th) rejected by Oxford and didn't reach the 80th percentile in Salomons entry exam.
If your in London If be keen to meet up and share my experiences with you as it's a significant transition to make from psychology to medicine. Otherwise you can private message me if you'd like any advice about the process and probability of getting interviews for clinical.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Asclepius1
The exact same criticisms can be easily levelled against the majority of 'psychological interventions'. Pseudoscientific approach, poor design and sampling etc. The truth is doing nothing is often as good, if not superior to the majority of psychological interventions especially if follow-up is 6 months or longer.
Though you highlight another difference between psychiatry and psychology - psychologists (and estate agents) have clients, psychiatrists have patients.
Though you highlight another difference between psychiatry and psychology - psychologists (and estate agents) have clients, psychiatrists have patients.
I wouldn't go around bragging that 'psychologists have clients, psychiatrists have patients' as that is a bad indictment of psychiatry, not psychology. The fact that you compare CP to estate agents shows a childish need to feel superior, and a lack of respect for the profession of CP, not to mention an ill informed attempt to place Psychiatry as superior to CP on that basis. In fact, the notion that Psychiatry 'has patients' demonstrates a power imbalance that has been shown to ultimately be bad for the individual receiving our services in a variety of ways, not least of which is the unequal relationship, lack of empowerment of the client to engage with and manage their own problems, and one way passing of information which completely disregards the knowledge and experience of the individual. This is a bad thing, so don't flaunt it as a badge of superiority.
Secondly, psychological therapy is hugely more effective than 'doing nothing'. In fact, compared to the medical intervention prescribed in the NHS which you appear to happy to embrace, psychological therapy is more effective than roughly 97% of them, in terms of number needed to treat to gain a significantly better outcome. Also, please do inform you ignorance with a little bit of reading about research methodology. Many of the methods used in medical science to analyse data were conceived by psychologists, and the belief that psychological studies use bad methods and 'pseudo-science' is crap. The fact is, we tend to have the same use of rigorous methods as a lot of other sciences out there.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Dr.Psych
The fact that you compare CP to estate agents shows a childish need to feel superior
psychological therapy is hugely more effective than 'doing nothing'.
Also, please do inform you ignorance with a little bit of reading about research methodology.
and the belief that psychological studies use bad methods and 'pseudo-science' is crap.
psychological therapy is hugely more effective than 'doing nothing'.
Also, please do inform you ignorance with a little bit of reading about research methodology.
and the belief that psychological studies use bad methods and 'pseudo-science' is crap.
I never mentioned how I felt about estate agents. I was completely neutral- I simply made a statement of fact. How you interpreted it says a lot about how you view psychology though...
The inescapable truth is that Psychology is not a science. It is not falsifiable nor reproducible, and suffers from a series of internal biases . It is akin to practising alchemy in a world where chemistry is well understood. A relic of the past of increasingly limited influence. That you don't agree is not important, I am not trying to convince you - I'm just making a statement of fact.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Asclepius1
I never mentioned how I felt about estate agents. I was completely neutral- I simply made a statement of fact. How you interpreted it says a lot about how you view psychology though...
The inescapable truth is that Psychology is not a science. It is not falsifiable nor reproducible, and suffers from a series of internal biases . It is akin to practising alchemy in a world where chemistry is well understood. A relic of the past of increasingly limited influence. That you don't agree is not important, I am not trying to convince you - I'm just making a statement of fact.
The inescapable truth is that Psychology is not a science. It is not falsifiable nor reproducible, and suffers from a series of internal biases . It is akin to practising alchemy in a world where chemistry is well understood. A relic of the past of increasingly limited influence. That you don't agree is not important, I am not trying to convince you - I'm just making a statement of fact.
I don't know what you're background is, but you seen to take that understanding that psychology just exists to offer some kind of talking-type therapy, which you've mentioned earlier. You really need to do a lot more exploration into what sub-specialities exist under psychology to get a better grasp of what the discipline is all about and how areas of cognitive, social, clinical psychology etc cumulate into what is now termed the biopsychosocial approach
I like to think I have a neutral position since I am in fact moving away from psychology and taking on the medical-model. Psychiatry doesn't sit on-top of CP as a discipline or profession, but rather rather runs alongside it and contributes to addressing the chemical-balancing theories that go hand in hand with cognitive malfunctions that arise in a series of mental disorders.
The whole idea of the CP training is foster scientist-practitioners, so as they graduate as CPs they know how to not only deliver effective interventions, but also draw upon their knowledge of research based methods to explore, and formulate strategies. They know what to do with a hypothesis and how to execute an experimental study, more so than your average psychiatry consultant.
I think you need to read more upon the intricate workings of the brain from a psychological stand-point, and learn how powerful, something simple as low self-esteem and bring upon a lifetime of depression, for example. In some ways, the points you've put across presents you as a prime example of how the 'chemical' theories have become so mainstream that the idea of possibly having poor psychological health is incomprehensible.
Original post by J1mmy
I don't know what you're background is, but you seen to take that understanding that psychology just exists to offer some kind of talking-type therapy, which you've mentioned earlier. You really need to do a lot more exploration into what sub-specialities exist under psychology to get a better grasp of what the discipline is all about and how areas of cognitive, social, clinical psychology etc cumulate into what is now termed the biopsychosocial approach
I like to think I have a neutral position since I am in fact moving away from psychology and taking on the medical-model. Psychiatry doesn't sit on-top of CP as a discipline or profession, but rather rather runs alongside it and contributes to addressing the chemical-balancing theories that go hand in hand with cognitive malfunctions that arise in a series of mental disorders.
The whole idea of the CP training is foster scientist-practitioners, so as they graduate as CPs they know how to not only deliver effective interventions, but also draw upon their knowledge of research based methods to explore, and formulate strategies. They know what to do with a hypothesis and how to execute an experimental study, more so than your average psychiatry consultant.
I think you need to read more upon the intricate workings of the brain from a psychological stand-point, and learn how powerful, something simple as low self-esteem and bring upon a lifetime of depression, for example. In some ways, the points you've put across presents you as a prime example of how the 'chemical' theories have become so mainstream that the idea of possibly having poor psychological health is incomprehensible.
I like to think I have a neutral position since I am in fact moving away from psychology and taking on the medical-model. Psychiatry doesn't sit on-top of CP as a discipline or profession, but rather rather runs alongside it and contributes to addressing the chemical-balancing theories that go hand in hand with cognitive malfunctions that arise in a series of mental disorders.
The whole idea of the CP training is foster scientist-practitioners, so as they graduate as CPs they know how to not only deliver effective interventions, but also draw upon their knowledge of research based methods to explore, and formulate strategies. They know what to do with a hypothesis and how to execute an experimental study, more so than your average psychiatry consultant.
I think you need to read more upon the intricate workings of the brain from a psychological stand-point, and learn how powerful, something simple as low self-esteem and bring upon a lifetime of depression, for example. In some ways, the points you've put across presents you as a prime example of how the 'chemical' theories have become so mainstream that the idea of possibly having poor psychological health is incomprehensible.
Like I said, I'm not trying to convince anyone. It is widely known psychology fails as a science.
In any case there is no mind, there is only brain and the brain is a biological, chemical, physical organ - best understood in biological, chemical and physical terms.
With such effective disciplines as biology, chemistry and physics already at work within neuroscience, psychology offers nothing new, important or useful. In fact there are certainly movements from within psychology to mimic the much more impressive attributes and approaches of standard neuroscience...although then it could be argued it isn't psychology any more- it is neuroscience.
And that is probably how psychology will end - by being replaced entirely by neuroscience in a similar way that alchemy was replaced by chemistry so long ago.
But as I said, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything - it is all common knowledge, but I suppose the alchemists were equally reluctant to see the writing on the wall.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Asclepius1
Like I said, I'm not trying to convince anyone. It is widely known psychology fails as a science.
In any case there is no mind, there is only brain and the brain is a biological, chemical, physical organ - best understood in biological, chemical and physical terms.
With such effective disciplines already at work within neuroscience, psychology offers nothing new, important or useful. In fact there are certainly movements from within psychology to mimic the much more impressive attributes and approaches of standard neuroscience...although then it could be argued it isn't psychology any more- it is neuroscience.
And that is probably how psychology will end - by being replaced entirely by neuroscience in a similar way that alchemy was replaced by chemistry so long ago.
But as I said, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything - it is all common knowledge, but I suppose the alchemists were equally reluctant to see the writing on the wall too.
In any case there is no mind, there is only brain and the brain is a biological, chemical, physical organ - best understood in biological, chemical and physical terms.
With such effective disciplines already at work within neuroscience, psychology offers nothing new, important or useful. In fact there are certainly movements from within psychology to mimic the much more impressive attributes and approaches of standard neuroscience...although then it could be argued it isn't psychology any more- it is neuroscience.
And that is probably how psychology will end - by being replaced entirely by neuroscience in a similar way that alchemy was replaced by chemistry so long ago.
But as I said, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything - it is all common knowledge, but I suppose the alchemists were equally reluctant to see the writing on the wall too.
Experimental Psychology was only founded within the last century, and has made great strides since. You're making some big claims, which aren't common knowledge, of course - I certainly haven't come across any of the comments you've mentioned whilst I've been in the field since my A-levels. Present to me your evidence, otherwise you're just making statements about a discipline your probably haven't studied, and know nothing about. What is more, I don't think you fully understand the definition of what psychology actually is.
And there is no mind? I think you need to watch a few Deepak Chopra lectures.
Original post by J1mmy
And there is no mind?
There is definitely no evidence for such thing as 'the mind', only evidence that there is brain.
Biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics are definitely more difficult and rigorous than psychology, so I can see why it puts people off but really no excuse in this modern age to be walking around peddling an equivalent to alchemy - pure pseudoscience!
Original post by J1mmy
I think you need to watch a few Deepak Chopra lectures.
The alternative medicine guy? This? That brings this discussion to a close.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Asclepius1
There is definitely no evidence for such thing as 'the mind', only evidence that there is brain.
Biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics are definitely more difficult and rigorous than psychology, so I can see why it puts people off but really no excuse in this modern age to be walking around peddling an equivalent to alchemy - pure pseudoscience!
The alternative medicine guy? This? That brings this discussion to a close.
Biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics are definitely more difficult and rigorous than psychology, so I can see why it puts people off but really no excuse in this modern age to be walking around peddling an equivalent to alchemy - pure pseudoscience!
The alternative medicine guy? This? That brings this discussion to a close.
Because you can't quantify the mind. Do you think the human being is that simplistic that you whip up any hypothesis and scientifically measure it? How do you quantify consciousness or determine that even one exists? What makes you human? Where do your emotions originate from? Read into psychosomatic disorders, conversion disorders, dissociative identity disorders conditions where the 'mind' pulls the strings of the intricate physiological systems - understand that the human being is one entity, successful treatments are holistic. Your clinical medicine can't find the organic cause of depression, psychosis, affective or personality disorders. Are they looking in the wrong place? Probably.
And that link. From the first sentence I can see that the article is surely a bias perspective.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by J1mmy
Because you can't quantify the mind. Do you think the human being is that simplistic that you whip up any hypothesis and scientifically measure it? How do you quantify consciousness or determine that even one exists? What makes you human? Where do your emotions originate from? Read into psychosomatic disorders, conversion disorders, dissociative identity disorders conditions where the 'mind' pulls the strings of the intricate physiological systems - understand that the human being is one entity, successful treatments are holistic. Your clinical medicine can't find the organic cause of depression, psychosis, affective or personality disorders. Are they looking in the wrong place? Probably.
And that link. From the first sentence I can see that the article is surely a bias perspective.
And that link. From the first sentence I can see that the article is surely a bias perspective.
Original post by Asclepius1
There is definitely no evidence for such thing as 'the mind', only evidence that there is brain.
Biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics are definitely more difficult and rigorous than psychology, so I can see why it puts people off but really no excuse in this modern age to be walking around peddling an equivalent to alchemy - pure pseudoscience!
The alternative medicine guy? This? That brings this discussion to a close.
Biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics are definitely more difficult and rigorous than psychology, so I can see why it puts people off but really no excuse in this modern age to be walking around peddling an equivalent to alchemy - pure pseudoscience!
The alternative medicine guy? This? That brings this discussion to a close.
I also believe that you are wrong, sorry, but I do. You can't measure what it is to be a human by just the biological terms of the brain. Of course there are neurotransmitters that controls it, but why is it that everyone is so different then? And these are the things that I want to study, and that is why I have applied for pscyhology, and not medicine. I of course now that it is a long and hard route to go, but what can I do if it is what I want? I just have to fight for it.
Personally I do not believe that you can fix mental illnesses like depression with just drugs, sometimes I even think that it is better to not make yourself rely on them. I have personally come out of a long time of depression without taking anything at all. I just had to start thinking in a different way, and that is what people need help to do, and that is NOT biological. And also, for many of these illnesses there has also been triggering events in the past that often make them ill, and that needs to be talked about and faced. Not covered up with medicine which makes you feel indifferent.
And I know that at least here in Norway, the demand for psychologists are huge, even though it seems like its not in the UK. But I also have to study this for 6 years or more, and things can have changed. Maybe I even go into research.
And I am sorry for barging in on your discoussion, and I don't know if what I have said makes any sense to you at all, but here you go!
Original post by Popolopolix
As the title says I suppose, what's the difference?
What's the route towards each of them? What do they consist of/how many years? Are there guaranteed prospects of a job? What kind of pay?
Sorry for so many questions, I'm just in an inquisitive mood
Thanks in advance to whoever answers.
What's the route towards each of them? What do they consist of/how many years? Are there guaranteed prospects of a job? What kind of pay?
Sorry for so many questions, I'm just in an inquisitive mood
Thanks in advance to whoever answers.
This discussion has moved into epistemology which is great!
In response to the original Q I just want to say. I had my clinical psychology interview at UCL last week. It was one of the worst experiences of my life and has completely put me off doing clinical psychology. I know each course has different interview styles but I really don't like the way I was made to feel and I think it's quite mean. Contrast to my Warwick interview / selection centre day which was the most pleasant interview / selection experience I've ever had.
If I had to choose a course based on how it felt to be interviewed by the course heads and tutors. Definitely medicine. Ironically the psychologists made me feel bad about myself...
Other +ves of medicine
More money.
More job security.
More overseas job options.
Nobel prize chance (there isn't one for psychology).
More executive responsibility in teams and healthcare in general.
Better class and gender mix (psychology is 90% middle class Caucasians of whom 70% are female) I prefer to work with a metropolis of colleagues.
-ves
Unsocial hours
More responsibility
Mistakes are life or death
More expensive to train
(These last two aren't negatives if you enjoy studying)
Longer training period
Ongoing revalidation
Just my recent thoughts.
Posted from TSR Mobile
The ' talky talky' stuff is therapeutics.it does work and is painful.just thought I'd add that.
Hello. I'm applying to university next year and I am extremely interested in mental health and I think psychology/CP looks like a better fit for me than medicine and then psychiatry because I am more interested in 'the mind' rather than 'the brain' like don't get me wrong, I LOVE science and biology and everything, I am not like oh-I-believe-in-souls-and-spirits like that's not what I mean - I just think approaching mental health/illness with the mindset of 'fix the machine of the brain' and its neurons etc is just not going to work and consciousness and human brains are way way more complicated than a series of neurotransmitters and right now, we absolutely can't begin to examine the brain and its illnesses and coping mechanisms without thinking of it as an abstract mind instead of a chemical biological process because neuroscience just is not that advanced yet. And with what people are saying about alchemy=psychology, chemistry=medicine like first of all, the brain, as yet, has not been quantified and what it does does not 'make sense' in terms of numbers and chemical reactions like you have to put it into abstract concepts and things to try and make sense of it I think. I know I have zero qualifications and I probably sound very arrogant thinking my thoughts add to this conversation at all but oh well. ...anyway my point is I think CP would be a way better degree and career for me and I'm willing to work hard for it but also like even just judging from this conversation it is clear how much CPs are looked down on and disrespected and to be honest, I have always been told how a psychiatrist does amazing scientific real work and a psychologist writes unfounded self-help books and of course I'm not really worried about if my friends and family respect my profession but if my superiors in the field think my input is useless how am I supposed to make any impact as a CP and get any good job? I guess I have been very scared off by this whole post so can anyone reassure me like being a CP is actually worth it in the day to day job and if you work hard enough people do listen to you and value your input? I know in the UK being a doctor is basically being a saint/God/genius but in other countries are CPs more respected? other CPs, do you regret it and if you do, is it because you don't like your day to day job or because the job security/pay sucks?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Psychiatry or psychology?
- psychology in the future?
- Psychology or Psychiatry?
- psychiatry through psychology
- How realistic to be a psychologist?
- help with future jobs
- About a course advise
- What can u do with psychology?
- Psychology buddies lets talk
- Masters vs Diploma: justifiable impact on opportunities as a self-employed therapist?
- Can you become a psychiatrist when doing psychology as your undergrad?
- Medicine at university
- Thank you!!
- alevel options to be a therapist
- how can i get into mental health work?
- Can I do psychology at university with my A-level choices?
- 5 careers for mental health nursing graduates
- neuroscience vs psychology
- BSc Psychology or BSc Mental Health Nurse?
- How to choose a Psychology degree?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
I hate pharmacy, shall I quit my pre-reg? Trainee pharmacist.Last reply 1 month ago
2 year MSc Occupational Therapy course or 3 Year Bsc Adult Nursing?Last reply 2 months ago
Apprentice Pre-registration Trainee Pharmacy TechnicianTrending
Last reply 1 week ago
I hate pharmacy, shall I quit my pre-reg? Trainee pharmacist.Last reply 1 month ago
2 year MSc Occupational Therapy course or 3 Year Bsc Adult Nursing?Last reply 2 months ago
Apprentice Pre-registration Trainee Pharmacy Technician
