Dr. Phil....Wake UP

Friday, March 11. 2005

I have to admit that I didn't have high hopes that Dr. Phil's second show on ADD would be any better than the first. Ok, confession. I didn't actually SEE the first one, but I read the transcript and heard lots about it.

I thought it was a lame attempt at helping three families with "possible" ADD. The first was a couple- the woman was diagnosed. Phil acknowledged she did have it, but his advice was only half-cooked: listen to a stress relieving CD, etc.

The second was sad. It showed an out of control 4 yr old. Since the boy could behave at school (though he was described as being socially withdrawn there), Phil said he couldn't have ADD, but rather was the victim of poor parenting. My heart ached for those parents who were clearly overwhelmed and ridden with guilt over their "inconsistant" parenting. Phil patronized them to the point that my stomach churned.

The last was a little girl whose mom did not want to medicate her. Phil said that if she does have ADD (it was never clear whether she did or didn't), then a trial of "safe" meds could sometimes be used.

The major theme of the show was to promote some guy's book on ADD- the same guy from the previous show. Phil kept referring to him as THE expert in the field of ADD. Funny, I never heard of him. Dr. Lawlis, I think it is.

I was so disappointed and angry, I posted a letter on his website. Wonder if it'll pass the scrutiny of their staff.

So, a little better than the first show, but clearly he still doesn't quite GET IT.

Here's what I posted on Dr. Phil's site-

Dr. Phil- wake up! Read the literature!

Though this show was an improvement over his last one, I still feel that Dr. Phil doesn't "get" AD/HD, nor does his author-guest. The people profiled on the show seemed almost secondary to the hype about the book.

As an expert in the field of ADD, I have never heard of Dr. Lawlis, so readers beware-If you want to read books from 'real' top experts in the field of ADD, look for these names: Dr. Edward Hallowell, Dr. John Ratey, Sari Solden, Dr. Patricia Quinn, Dr. Russell Barkley, Dr. Daniel Amen, Thom Hartmann.

Though Dr. Phil acknowledged that medications have their place in the treatment of ADD, I got a strong sense that those words were in reaction to people's comments from the last show, which leaned quite heavily on the incorrect notion that ADD is more a problem of poor parenting.

Which brings me to this episode.

I think he did a fair enough job with the first couple, accepting the fact that the wife did indeed have ADD. He could have been more helpful, though, in offering her some tips. Demonstrating that she was tense via her arm was downright silly. Who wouldn't feel tense in front of a live audience with hundreds of thousands more watching the show? Paleeez.

Though the relaxation CD probably would be helpful, it certainly isn't going to do much in the way of helping her concentrate, get organized, etc. The emphasis needs to be on a multi-modal treatment model: counseling, education, most likely medication, working with an ADD coach (something he consistently forgets to suggest) and a professional organizer. I was also bothered that he didn't call her husband on how he belittled his wife over and over again. If that was just a little snippet we saw, I can't imagine how he is in real life.

My clinical reaction regarding the 2nd profile- the little 4 year old who had uncontrollable tantrums- was that Dr. Phil really missed the mark big time. This is a child who may or may not have ADD, but he obviously has a major problem with self-regulation. To say that an ADD or Asperger diagnosis can be ruled out because his behavior is ok at school (which it's not, as he was described as being withdrawn) did such a disservice to those parents and the boy.

This was not a simple case of inconstant parenting, in my opinion. The parents were clearly overwhelmed by the intensity of his behaviors. I would have wondered about a differential diagnosis of a mood disorder- not poor parenting.

Finally, the last child, Savannah, didn't even get a shot at getting much help at all. The show ended before Dr. Phil could say much about what he thought was going on with her.

I had to laugh at how he said that a trial of meds- "safe" meds, can sometimes be considered. Is he implying that stimulants are NOT safe meds?

Underlying everything, I still feel that Dr. Phil is anti-medication, even though numerous studies have shown that meds are an integral part of a successful treatment plan for ADD.

Nice try, Phil. You came close to the mark, but not close enough, in my book.

Posted by Terry at 22:30 | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

AMEN!! It sure was a love fest for Dr. Lawlis.. who.. as you saw didn't even come up on the stage!! If he is the expert then why not get up there and give these people some ideas face to face!! I have heard of him, and his books, and I don't know whocan afford those CD's of his!! The prices are outrageous! I might give the book a chance but only if the library has it..
Also.. the underlying thing there was promoting Dr.Phil's book and did you catch the fact that Dr. Lawlis is Dr. Phil's old professer???

And you never know what will happen with letters you send. I sent one calling him on the carpet for being a mandated reporter of abuse.. and in a recent episode he did report to a state children's services and mentioned it on the show.. I can only hope my letter helped him take a harder look at when he should do that!
Keep it up Terry!!!

#1 Denise Layman (Homepage) on 2005-03-15 09:30 (Reply)

Hi Denise,

I'm with you 100% on everything you've pointed out. Every time the camera lit up Dr. Lawlis' face, I cringed at his facial expression. Like he was the Holy Man in the ADD world. Or was he calculating how many books he was going to sell that day?

Tell me more about the child abuse thing. Do you mean he reported on an event or he DIDN'T report?

Terry

#1.1 Terry on 2005-03-15 09:45 (Reply)

I had written that letter questioning how he got away with NOT 'doing his duty" as a mandated reporter.. and now that I think about it there was a show where he wouldn't even air the tapes they took of the family because it would be in his words 'prosecutable' It was only in a recent show (the one about a teenage sexual predator) that he went out of his way to point out that children's services had been to visit the family because.. the Dr. Phil show had reported the kid to Child services..
So I would hope my letter made him look at the law and see that he was needing to do that..

And speaking of the law.. they mentioined IDEA. but were sure ignoring the Child Medication Safety Act.. eh? Is that a slight push for these parents to use drugs.. cause you know once that mom tries them the school still will throw up their hands and say.. oh let's see if the meds will work!!! yeah where is the multi modal approach there?
UGH!

#1.1.1 Denise (Homepage) on 2005-03-16 15:15 (Reply)

Personaly ,Tery, you were too kind in the letter- I feel that "Dr" Phil is a step above Jerry Springer type TV- ,
as he seems to think he can solve a lifetime of problems in a neat 20 minute segment between commericals.
I shudder to think of the people whose entire conception of ADD and its related treatments are baised on this show.

#2 ChazzF on 2005-03-15 21:27 (Reply)

Chazz,

Yes, you are probably right. And did you notice that the commercials were also HIM pushing Dr. Lawlis' book and saying he was THE expert on ADD. Hoo boy-

Terry

#3 Terry on 2005-03-15 21:33 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_.
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry