This is the start of week 3 and I've been keeping busy trying to stay on top of our coursework and prepare for the second honours school next week. (!!!!)
Just did an interesting exercise where we had to identify the different types of clinical reasoning in some case studies. When I first read the article by Fleming (1991) last week I thought I understood the different types of reasoning fairly well, but perhaps initial beliefs are not always true because when I finally managed to get into the wiki today (after hitting a brainwave and trying it out on Firefox instead of my usual Safari) and read other people's comments I thought hmmm maybe I don't understand it that well after all. Not that other people's comments did not make sense, but that they had interpreted the scenarios slightly different to mine. I suppose the point of the Fleming's article was that the three tracks or strands of reasoning are woven together and are not always easy to distinguish; I especially found the more I re-read the interactive and conditional reasoning descriptions the more I found it difficult to differentiate them. Both are about the person's experiences and about their lives and the meaning they find in their condition apart from the symptoms, both are about understanding the person as a person and not just a set of impairments, both have to do with broader therapy than just making up for dysfunction. The main thing I could find to help myself separate them (if they are indeed discrete) would be the temporal factor in conditional reasoning whereby the person is placed and understood in a broad context of time, past, present and future an a visualisation of what "could be" if therapy was "successful".
I need to read more about this perhaps written by others to see if that helps and maybe over time I'll get a better grasp of these concepts. Hopefully!
No comments:
Post a Comment