In all seriousness, of the 3 terms you mention, I think "professional" is the only one that's patently false in this context.
I've been and probably will be among the first to note that you don't need professional certification or other credentials to decide what is and is not therapeutic. I'd rather drink meadowsweet tea to help w/ dyspepsia than to eat Zantac. I believe meadowsweet is therapeutic, so is the Zantac. But the meadowsweet has fewer adverse side effects.
The medical professional who I consult thinks it's probably just a placebo effect. That's fine. I rely on him to tell me what he knows about diagnostics and available treatments. But I decide for myself what I'll ingest or what "program" or regimen I'll follow.
In the context of the troubled parent industry, people seem to accept outrageously strange and suspicious "therapy" methods. Why? Is it because they believe in the claims of expertise made by industry participants? Even to the point of suspending their own good judgement?
To me, that's just crazy. In my view, whether you're dealing w/ a licensed, board certified doctor or just someone holding out some non-medically accepted "therapy", you should be just as critical and skeptical. After all, these definitons change w/ the times. It's up to each of us to protect ourselves.
There is something feeble and contemptible about a man who cannot face life without the help of comfortable myths.
--Bertrand Russell, British philosopher, educator, mathemetician, and social critic
