In the 20s, Vygotsky wrote about the
crisis in psychology. In the 70s Leontiev was telling about it.
In 1992, was a conference about the problems in psychology . On it, many participants expressed the same view that psychology is in a state of crisis. The reasons for this have been called an ideology, not enough professional skills of psychologists, not clear place of psychology in the sciences, loss of interest in fundamental schools, the ratio o
f theoretical knowledge and practice, as well as not successful attempt to construct a psychology of the image of the natural sciences.
Let’s see what has changed and what has remained the same in such area as clinical psychology. What led to the crisis and at which point we are now.
There are two directions, which may belong to science: natural sciences and humanistic. On a cinference V.M. Rosin told “many psychological concepts are not than a knowledge of existing man, it is more about possible and desirable human.” The same happens in clinical psychology, when we are choosing the method and direction for the work, we rely:
a) on what we know (there are many new techniques that are quite well-known. And also there is a constant exchange of experience with foreign colleagues. )
b) from things wich we know we are choosing what we like, each with his own criteria.
Most of the research are oriented to the practice, and not to enrich or clarify the theoretical foundations. Health care and the doctors themselves are guided only by the efficiency or effectiveness of the treatment. And the proportion of drug treatment is much higher than treatment through psychotherapy. Thus it is less and less places for clinical psychologists in clinic. When there is an opportunity to work in psychotherapy and some positive result , you still have difficulty with the evidence, since man has variability, and we do not have enough techniques and measurement tools that we could bring the proof, as in natural science approach and provide data.
There are also difficulties wich are associated with the boundaries in clinical psychology. When the psychologist has the right to help man, and when not. As part of the Mental Health Act, one of the points compulsory hospitalization suggests that the person hospitalized involuntarily, if it may harm himselves or others. Before this, in many areas there is a word of humanity. If a person, without the presence of any mental disorder, commits suicide true, he need to be hospitalized? I think the answer to this question everyone decides for himself . If person entitled to dispose of his life? This is one of examples of the dilemmas facing clinical psychologists in their activities.
Wha is also not clear status isa place for clinical psychologist in the health system. According to the National Classification of Occupations (OKZ), psychologists (code 2634, in which also includes medical psychologists) are the highest skill level in the art (code 2), in the field of law, humanitarian and cultural professionals (code 26), specialist of the humanitarian sphere and religion (code 263).
Theoretical studies wich were conducted in clinical psychology, not consistent with the practice. Or research is not possible to make, for the reason that it is impossible to establish a causal link or to separate one phenomenon from another.
Approaches are not complementing each other, but rather trying to show who is “correct.” Also there are new trends that are rapidly becoming obsolete. There are also approaches to stagnate. Many fundamental areas with a lot of representatives focused more on practice.
The level of education, standards, and hours are reduced, scientists have to work overtime just because they like what they are doing and also to grow receivers. But unfortunately, these professors and teachers are not so a lot, so people who completed training or higher education offer its customers a complete meaning, without going through further training and supervision.
Society still in scientism traditions and positivism. People experiencing trauma or, for example, depression are still in the concept of the “other” rather than “we.” Often there is a desire of society to fix or correct them. But it may be worth to give people the right to their own self-control, because it is the only thing that they have.