Dr. Phil

Social Forums Non-Philosophical Chat
1

does anyone watch Dr. Phil? I caught his show yesterday, never watched it before but, the subject was interesting I will have to watch the second part today.
A menonite father kidnaps his daughters to live in Belize in a Menonite colony that speaks German and spurns Technology. Mother wants daughters back and daughters so far, don’t want to come back. Mother wants the girls to live in normal society and the girls do not wish to. Girls are in their teens 13 and 15 I think. Father may go to jail for kidnapping and or running from the courts.

I am siding with the father so far because, his girls seem bright happy, and very articulate. they do not strike me as brainwashed or abused.

There is nothing wrong that I can see with the way they live. father was wrong only by trying to save his girls by kidnapping them.

Anyone else watch this? Or comment about menonite society vs technology

2

I often watch Dr Phil, while working. Some of his shows are very interesting (although his producers seem to be turning it into an entertainment show with reality style contests and prizes which has made me tune out recently.)

We’re about six weeks behind what you see (I have no idea why) so the show you’re referring to has not yet been screened here yet so I can’t respond.

I like Dr Phil and his famous practical, down-to-earth, ‘no nonsense’ approach. It cuts through the winging, whining, navel gazing, victimisation models most talk shows adopt.

Dr Phil’s had some really good shows but perhaps my favourite was a series of shows he did on one family who were in denial about their neighbours claims that their 17 year old son had sexually abused their children. The boy outright denied it over and over again, until Dr Phil broke through and got the boy to admit he was not only sexually abusing his neighbours children, but he was also sexually abusing his 6 (?) year old sister. You can imagine his parents’ reaction.

3

That must have killed the parents, it would send most parents over the edge that is for sure.
I watched the last part of the show yesterday, I was amazed that the audience was totally against the father who was doing only what he thought would protect his daughters. Ok sure he took them to another country, but he voluntarily came back to settle the issue, the mother promised she would not prosecute and she ended up doing that . The audience cheered for that. It was rather sad.

The girls wished to be with both parents but, now they can not even see their dad.
I think some reasons the audience was against him, he did run with the girls, he took them to another country illegally, he is a strict menonite and he is male. I think if it was the mother the audience would have been more sympathetic, she is mainstream and female. He is of a religous belief that is way conservative and male. the girls or at least the younger one wishes to remain menonite the older one now that she is back is wavering. But still wishes to be with her Dad too.

The first questions I can think of; would it have been different for the mother if she ran, would she have gotten sympathy taking her kids from a strict but, obviously loving father. And would the father have gotten more sympathy if his beliefs were mainstream.

4

Yes it would have been different. My mum kidnapped us (3 kids - I was about 6) then we hid out for about 18 months till the custody case was decided. She was frightened he would run off with us because he had very little change of winning so she (and our step dad) made a pre-emptive strike. They won hands down (none of us wanted to live with our father, which didn’t help him :imp: )

Yes. He may have even won the case if he was a good, practicing maninstreamer believer and she was not.

Some of the things that go against him:
he kidnapped the kids (OK, legally that’s ‘bad’. She has a good point)
he is a man (bias towards female)
he took them out of the U.S. (unpatriotic)
he took them to a 3rd rate country (perhaps the point that concerns me most re legal issues. If anything were to happen to the kids, addressing it may be hard or impossible?)
Mennonite: (weirdos)
Mennonite: (German speaking luddites: anti capitalist)
One of the things I most like about Dr Phil is his ‘children-first’ priority. He has a saying “Children would prefer to be from a broken home than live in one” which he invokes when parents cannot address their issues and fight in front of their kids. I can’t agree more.

5

I’m sure Phil is a very nice man but you and I both know that his material is amateur and mediocre, suited for, well…have a look at the audience. Put him in front of a group of psychology graduates and he would look like ass.

There are many ways in which problems can appear to be ‘being solved,’ but there are just as many ways to accidentally frame false problems and, in the least, believe that the cause of what one has mistaken is a problem is in fact acceptable and not a problem itself.

Give me five minutes with Phil and I will get him to admit that he is a flake. Five minutes. That’s all I need.

It is quite possible that we have people with issues, issues which are issues because of a problem of the people who have them, claiming that the problem is not them but the issue itself, seeking the counsel of a person with issues, issues which are issues because of a problem of the person who has them, who will claim a solution to a problem that doesn’t even exist, and pretend as if progress is being made.

Either Phil knows that his arguments rest on the weak, convenient assumptions of folk psychology, and he is purposely making blanket statements and ambiguous conclusions-- “Sharleena needs to learn how to love her husband and share her feelings”-- just to move the theme of the show along and let it appear as a formal and credible authority in matters of psychology, or he truely does believe that he has it all figured out.

In either case, he is inappropriate for public television. Science and psychology are serious matters and should not be likened to forms of entertainment, ESPECIALLY in a consumerist society full of idiots and flake TV doctors.

I often see these people on the show who are weeping. What? What did he say that was so earth shattering? Did I miss something? Next thing you know, Jack has a great epiphany and suddenly decides to stop boozing it up after work rather than coming home to his vomitous wife, and, in front of a live audience and cameras, he embraces Sharleena and promises to “rekindle that lost love.” (Of course she weighed fifty pounds lighter when he met her at the soda-pop stand twenty years ago, but its a bit late for that. There’s no turning back. Till death does them apart, apparantly.)

Did it take Dr. Phil to get this idiot to realize that both his drinking and his wife are a disaster?

Who cares.

6

That Phil dude sometimes he makes sense by tryin to show the connects between thoughts an actions an such. If ya notice it’s mostly young people on his show because young people sometimes aint got no philosophy and so they have trouble thinkin. Anyway he tries to spell out the right way to think about problems, but theres one way thing that buggs me about him. Suddenly, after a great explaination hell say something like you have to look inside and open the door. What the fuck does that mean. Speakin in metaphorical riddles and such aint helpin nobody that confused about how to think. You have to explaine what things like opening a door in your mind means for a person to be able to do it.

That stupid.

7

they give a tv show to a guy who has a PhD in gas station attending…

“what a country” -Smirnoff

-Imp

8

Dr. Phil was in scrary movie 4…

yea…

9

Um guys I don’t care about his qualifications I am more interested in the topic itself. Father vs mother/ mainstream vs. off beat /kids parents very diverse and pulling the kids in two directions. Mother getting the sympathy even though the father is good but, just made the mistake of panicing and running to protect kids. What Dr. Phil says is moot, his audience sympathized with the mother which to me when she broke her word about not arresting him, made me sympathize with the Dad. Yes he broke the law but, he did it out of paternal love and protection. Is that so wrong that he must be punished?

10

I agree kids come first and I too was happier when my parents split up.
We were very happy getting to live with Dad.

I have nothing against the mennonites they actually are a religion I can get behind and support, Why?
1. They don’t come knocking on your door recruiting.
2. They don’t bother anyone and they don’t want to be bothered by anyone.
3. They are passives
4. They don’t practice wierd things only antitechnology.
5. They on the average,don’t shun their kids should they choose another way of life.
6.Sure they don’t encourage formal education past the 8th grade but they do encourage learning, even the girls.
7. The women do keep with traditional roles but, they are not viewed as second class beneath the men. It is more like a divideing line of responsiblities.

  1. they don’t come knocking on your door recruiting ( that one is worth repeating)

Really they are pretty much harmless and have a good past of helping and caring for others even outsiders.

So while they are cultish I think they are one of the good ones. They do not condone passively family crimes, like the Amish or the Quakers do. That is a big positive for me. They are known to punish severely rapists, incestual people, abusers, and they have no problems turning criminals over to the gov’t. unlike the Amish. The Quakers I am not to sure about.

I guess though most people believe that mainstream is the best way to go even if it is against the kids happiness and well being. That I can’t believe in. Since these kids are old enough to decide, parents should respect their choice I think kids ages are important when it comes to giving them a voice with in a reasonable balance though.