TV News

(Continued)

From Beth Shapiro:

The reason your thoughtful critique on Dr. Phil does not work: his repetitive disclosure that he is not licensed, not doing "therapy," his consistent use of qualified professional advisers, and his referrals to professionals. It would appear that he is opportunistic, but that is not quite a crime in our culture. He does breach ethical standards if he were practicing. But he is not "practicing" -- or is he?? His talk-show participants appear to be informed volunteers. One assumes they will be given a different perspective and perhaps an empathic hearing, Dr. Phil style. That is what they signed up for. I suppose the real sham is in billing himself as "Dr." Phil, although he does have the Ph.D., even though he is not licensed to use it.

Loved your article. But you failed to mention his all-time gaffe: I actually saw him tell a distraught mother whose teenage son was out of control that the son was almost certainly going to wind up a serial killer. Yes! He said that!

My problem with Dr. Phil has always been that he makes himself look bigger than life at the expense of the misery of ordinary people. It is easy, so easy, to learn about body language and to ridicule others with one-liners and snide comments. It is also very, very cheap.

I totally agree with your commentary on Dr. Phil. Several years ago our son and his fiancée were guests on his show. The topic was "My fiancé looks at pornography on the Internet." Dr. Phil told them they should not get married under these circumstances and our son was showing total disregard for his fiancée, although he gave him credit for being honest. He arranged for him to get counseling and sent them on their merry way.

The problem I have with the show is that the audience only hears part of the story. Most stories can't be told in 15 minutes to a total stranger. We live in a small community and our family was the talk of the town for many weeks. Just as things were beginning to settle down, the rerun appears! What goes around, comes around. Dr. Phil's new daughter-in-law posed in Playboy. How admirable! Dr. Phil is out of touch with reality and should take his own advice and "Get Real!"

Why does Barbara Card Atkinson have such an ax to grind? He removed references to porn from his Web site after his son married a Playboy playmate? Who cares? We're not talking about an elected official's stance on an issue or anything. Celebrity news is never about important issues but this piece reaches a new level of irrelevance.

Dr. Phil is an a--hole and a danger to society. So many people can't manage their own lives and look to so-called "experts" for advice on how to live. The moral judgments and labels that Dr. Phil attributes and attaches to people are appalling. It is apparent that Dr. Phil does nothing but exploit the suffering of others for ratings, money and fame. He is the classic, textbook definition of a "psychopath."

Dr. Phil does more good than bad. It is so easy to criticize people. Stop criticizing him.

You went much too lightly on this fraud.

I was somewhat OK with the article until she mentioned Dr. Laura being a dingbat. I have listened to Dr. Laura for over 10 years, read many of her books, and seen amazing results with my life and others who follow her advice. I just went through a horrible divorce three years ago. Sometimes as much as we try -- we fail. Does this give me more or less wisdom to advise others in marital areas and divorce? Does my failure make me more qualified or less? I think the answer is obvious. Experience breeds wisdom. I also know that much of the advice Dr. Phil gives out is good, sound advice regardless of his personal life. I think Ms. Atkinson has an issue with advice or practicality. Wonder what her personal story would look like written for my scrutiny and public review.

I have my B.A. in psychology and my master's in social work. Like many Americans, I initially liked Dr. Phil's "no-nonsense" approach to trying to help people. However, as time marched on I lost respect for him and what he represents. Treatment of most mental illnesses or behavior issues is usually a long, sometimes arduous, road that involves the client's readiness and willingness to receive help.

Appearing on a talk show and getting in-your-face advice along with a "snap out of it" mentality only demeans clients and promotes resistance. Shame on Dr. Phil.

["Dr. Phil"] McGraw expressed indignation at one guest, a woman who claimed she was unmotivated to engage sexually with her husband because he had no interest in foreplay. A second woman was chastised by McGraw because she wanted too much sex, which he extrapolated into a charge that she was, through stress, driving down her husband's sperm count.

Well before the information published by MSN, it was very evident to many that another Oprah "discovery" was nothing but an utter and complete fraud.

AMEN! When Dr. Phil first exploded on the scene, I watched, listened and very much appreciated his candor about all matters life-related. To be brutally honest, I've often wanted to e-mail him and ask his advice in regard to my own personal issues. However, after watching his show on a regular basis, a host of things trouble me.

For starters, he should be called Dr. Pimp Daddy because his show is an advertising whore. I'm constantly annoyed at the "I'll tell you what I think after the break" references. In my opinion, if you truly care about helping people solve their problems, you'd spend more time actually ADDRESSING people's problems and less time trying to make money FROM their problems.

Finally, it troubles me that a man with a revoked psychology license can call himself a doctor (even if he plays one on TV), especially when it comes to the issues he deals with and the lives he impacts.

Very few of these TV actors who call themselves mental health professionals are what they seem. If they were true professionals they would be helping individuals, day-in and day-out, rarely getting paid what they are worth. It's the people who should never have been in the field to begin with who turn to TV and become pop psychologists for the money and fame and because they couldn't cut it in the real world of psychology.

Barbara Atkinson obviously is a liberal with an ax to grind. If her allegations are true, Dr. Phil has screwed up in his past much like many of us. Regardless, his advice is sound. Perhaps if Dr. Phil began promoting moral relativism, abortion, gay marriage and promiscuity, Atkinson would approve. Articles like this should be in the editorial section.

Enjoyed your article! Just wish you had also mentioned the following:

1. Dr. Phil consistently demeans, insults and bullies his vulnerable guests -- a definite faux pas for anyone working with clients as a psychologist/therapist/counselor! (I'm not a Ph.D., but I do have a master's in psychology.)

2. His show has degenerated to the level of "Jerry Springer."

If Oprah is displeased with him, to my dismay she didn't show it a few months ago (after the Britney fiasco) as she sat beside Phil as his guest on his anniversary show. I think Oprah's been "losing touch" (with the average viewer) the last number of years herself. It seems she's turned "Hollywood" on us. I'd love to see someone write an article on her, but ... I don't think anyone dares. But that said (despite her inflated ego and her apparent sense of being "The Anointed One") she does still do some good.

Lastly, referring to Dr. Laura as a "dingbat" was off the mark, IMHO. Granted, she's a "character" in her own right, but the woman makes good sense!

In light of all the "crap" on TV nowadays, I find it interesting that Dr. Phil is being bashed so badly. Dr. Phil NEVER states on his show that the problems of his guests will be solved on an hour-long show -- in fact he states all the time that his show is merely a starting point. He always hooks up his guests with help in their local areas from licensed professionals.

I think it's important to keep things in perspective here: Dr. Phil is a television show host and the MSN article is an "entertainment news" article written by an "entertainment" writer who is clearly biased. Is it really relevant to state a dispute with the Texas attorney general that happened in 1973 and another dispute because in 1989 he hired a former client? So, he attempted to pay the bail for one of the Florida teens -- maybe not the best decision, but IT'S A TELEVISION SHOW!