Ask Dr. Helen: When Being Professional Means Being PC

Thursday, June 5, 2008
By Dr. Helen Smith

Are you a doctor, lawyer, or other professional who belongs to an organization that you resent sending money to every year? I was until this year, when I decided it was better to quit the organization than spend money (hundreds of dollars at that) on one that promoted knee-jerk politically correct activity that I did not believe in.

I had belonged to the American Psychological Association (APA) since 1994 but did not rejoin this year. Why? Because their pet political projects are nothing I wish to fund.

Instead of improving the science and practice of psychology, the APA spends its time playing political advocate with resolutions ranging from defending abortion (I am not necessarily anti-abortion, but the APA should respect psychologists who are) to equating Zionism with racism. It supports research that bashes conservatives yet rarely, if ever, prints any countervailing views in its journals. One past APA president thinks so highly of men that he wrote an article entitled, “How to raise sons who won’t create sex scandals.” Where is the article about “How to raise daughters who won’t make false sex abuse claims?” I’m sure I won’t see that anytime soon as the APA puts ideology over science, which sadly is typical of most professional organizations these days.

The American Academy of Pediatrics is just as bad — they encourage doctors to act as nanny staters who feel justified in meddling in the lives of their patients’ parents to find out whether they keep a gun in the home or how much alcohol their parents consume. It would be more prudent for pediatricians to ask the parents if the child has access to a swimming pool or bike (more kids die from drownings or bike accidents than from gun accidents) if they were really concerned about Johnny’s health. But alas, this would not fulfill the need to act as political activists with the correct moral posturing.

Speaking of moral posturing, it seems that the American Bar Association (ABA) is getting in on the act  with a flyer that it promotes on domestic violence. This flyer was developed by the ABA’s Commission on Domestic Violence and highlights a series of 10 purported myths. The flyer, titled 10 Myths about Custody and Domestic Violence and How to Counter Them, is full of myths itself, yet because they are PC myths, they are rarely questioned.

One group that is questioning this flyer is RADAR — Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting — a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation’s approach to solving domestic violence. RADAR is in the process of writing a special report that refutes many of these myths — naturally most of the myths take the position that women are always victims of domestic violence and men are the perpetrators. The ABA ignores the research that says women are at least as likely as men to engage in partner aggression — for example,  their website flashes this “fact:” “84% of spouse abuse victims were females, and 86% of victims of dating partner abuse were female.” Research shows otherwise.

For example, a recent Centers for Disease Control survey of young adults found that in cases of one-way partner aggression, women were the instigators in 71% of cases. Fewer than one in five cases of female violence are explained by the woman acting in self-defense.

I do have to give the APA some credit here. The president of the organization, Gerald P. Koocher, spoke up in a somewhat non-PC way about domestic violence in this article:

Several studies of domestic violence have suggested that males and females in relationships have an equal likelihood of acting out physical aggression, although differing in tactics and potential for causing injury (e.g., women assailants will more likely throw something, slap, kick, bite, or punch their partner, or hit them with an object, while males will more likely beat up their partners, and choke or strangle them). In addition, data show that intimate partner violence rates among heterosexual and gay and lesbian teens do not differ significantly.

At least Koocher acknowledged that women can be participants in domestic violence. This acknowledgment, along with their stance that psychologists can continue to work at U.S. detention facilities, has warmed my heart to the APA just a little.

So my question to you is, do I join back up and throw away over $400 doing so or do I go straight to Amazon.com and buy the Kindle that I’ve had my eye on (especially after reading Charlie Martin’s review on it) and never look back?

Along the same lines, have any of you had a similar experience with your professional organization? Did you quit, or just resign yourself to their views?

If you have a question you would like answered, please leave it below or email me at  askdrhelen@hotmail.com. Your questions may be edited for length and clarity. Please note that your first name only or no name at all will be used to identify your question — if you want me to use your name, tell me; otherwise you will be referred to by your first name or as “a reader,” etc.

| More from Dr. Helen Smith

Stumble It!

Share/Save/Bookmark

How to survive the coming food shortage.

4 Responses to “Ask Dr. Helen: When Being Professional Means Being PC”

  1. 1
    DcFather Says:

    Did you quit, or just resign yourself to their views?

    This is a very important issue. The organizations go along with whatever will make their group the most money rather than what is right or wrong. Then members go along with the group out of their own self-interest.

    Therefore, powerful forces, many “professional opinions”, and lots of money, are all devoted to ensuring the ubiquitousness of “wrong”. Then other groups go along with the corrupt groups, because aligning themselves with other powerful forces benefits them.

    Fatherless children is a huge business. Lawyers, shrinks, social workers, and others align themselves with male=perpetrator, female=victim, women have rights, men have responsibility feminists because it’s money in their pockets. You take an average dad, turn him into a villain, and you make a few grand. Why care if his rights are violated and the children’s lives are damaged or worse, it’s money that matters. Do it enough times and you get rich.

    If all of the decent folks who are members of the ABA and the APA decided to quit, and maybe even speak out, rather than inflict harm on children for a profit, eventually these groups would be forced to have some ethical standards. Meanwhile, too many of them are just cashing in while society crumbles.

  2. 2
    shivers4 Says:

    Going with the recent stream of ’statistical reports’ that say that women are perpetrators of DV is an empty argument. There seems to be too many readers who now believe that the actions of an oppressed woman (one who throws a plate, slaps, kicks and punches) invalidates the men who choke, strangle, seriously maim and murder their female partners. Anyone who aligns these actions together is just not comparing apples with apples, and for people who use it to JUSTIFY the actions of men are showing a blatant misunderstanding of the issues of DV. As for criticisng the Pediatrician society who at least attempt to help speak up for an innocent child is just plain irresponsible. Dr Helen Smith, I sincerely hope that you and your children are never subjected to the power, control and oppression that some men dish out at their whim to their families. Or perhaps you should, then instead of quitting the APA you’d be a useful advocate. But with your current blinkered attitude, the APA and others are better off without your membership.

  3. 3
    amfortas Says:

    I refused to renew my APS (the Oz version) menbership many years ago for the same reasons. A fee saving ! Fortunately one can practice ones profession (your’s and mine) without having membership. Unfortnately one has to have ‘Accreditation’ by a Grubment body here – The Registration Board. A different one for each and every State ! More fees. Boo. Moreover, while the ‘professional’ body has a code of ethics which are sensible and sensitive, the Registration Board has ‘Rules’ backed by misandric as well as PC laws which are neither sensible nor sensitive and can land you in Jail if you disregard them.

    My answer. Get knotted. I have retired from the business. My Doctorate is better employed raising pigs.

  4. 4
    Joi Says:

    “The ABA ignores the research that says women are at least as likely as men to engage in partner aggression — for example, their website flashes this “fact:” “84% of spouse abuse victims were females, and 86% of victims of dating partner abuse were female.”

    Startling statistics shape our thinking about social issues. But all too often, these numbers are wrong. Statistics are pretty much worthless due to the advocates and activists behind them.

    “Lies, damned lies, and statistics” is part of a phrase attributed to Benjamin Disraeli and popularized in the United States by Mark Twain: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” The semi-ironic statement refers to the persuasive power of numbers, and succinctly describes how even accurate statistics can be used to bolster inaccurate arguments.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics

    Only after someone measures the extent of a predicament and trumpets the findings does society decide it has a problem. Take anorexia, of which 150,000 young women were said to die each year. Unfortunately, the statistic involved in that case was bad, a misrepresentation of an estimate that 150,000 may suffer from anorexia. Such mangling is just one of the most dramatic ways of making statistics bad that people should watch out for. Others are poor definition of what is to be measured, sampling that inaccurately reflects the constituents of what is measured, and guessing instead of measuring.

Leave a Reply

International Mens Day and Fathers Day in Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden

Search MND

Introducing MRm: A New Men's Rights Magazine in PDF format

Download PDF Here

Support Our Sponsors!

Please support MND

Subscribe today:

SUSTAINER: $5/mo.


CONTRIBUTOR: $20/mo.


SUPPORTER: $50/mo.


Or Donate Any Amount

Archives

privacy policy | terms of service


Site Meter

MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!