I take your point. I meant for my own edification. Not that he or his article need to be researched. The topic is what warrants my research.
I do not trust charlatans any more then I trust some one to form an opinion of me based on a fifteen minute interview.
Regression and the means of accomplishing it are what I question. Shrinks are reputed to be trust worthy but I personally don't think so.
My opinion, such as it is, is that quacks and charlatans abound in the field. When you meet one go to the wall and look at his diploma.
The last one i had anything to do with asked me, as I was existing the room, have you considered suicide? What kind of person would ask that. She had me pegged totaly wrong. I would be 'more inclined to go postal and take a few with me. Thank god those days are long gone.
Would you willingly trust one of them to tell you it was safe to cross the street?
I am, with out the research, to say the mr. vaenis article is correct in his assment.
Over the years, I have on several occasions, seen the results of thier near sighted manuplation of weak people, who have made the mistake of trusting them. I had a nephew, in the 82 airborn, who experienced having his best friend falling to his death. He came out the door just behind my nephew. He watched helplessly as his friend fell to his death. Rather then helping him get over it, they turned him into a physco.
Thank God he finally died.
So you see, I am more then prejudiced against the quacks.
sorry leslie time to put my soap box away and quit railing about them.