PTS | Free Workshop: The Nightmare of the Biomedical Approach to Mental Health in Slovenia

A Case for the Biopsychosocial Model

One case study will be presented in which the adolescent and her family was treated according to the biopsychosocial model. The main differences will be highlighted between the biopsychosocial and the biomedical model, which is dominant in the field of mental health in Slovenia.

Shortcomings of the Biomedical Model

The shortcomings of the biomedical approach are reflected in:

• encouraging the reification of psychological problems and viewing them as unchanging rather than dynamic,
• misdiagnosing and excessive diagnosing because of lowered thresholds for diagnosis,
• spreading of new psychiatric ‘disorders’ and iatrogenic diseases,
• excessive prescribing, use and side effects of psychiatric drugs,
• assumption that neuroscience has all the answers for psychiatry and mental health problems,
• discrimination and stigmatization and defining persons with psychological problems as being fundamentally different from others,
• ignoring the unique needs of the individual client,
• imposing decisions about how to describe and classify a person’s behaviour and experience as an objective fact, rather than shared in a transparent and open manner,
• suboptimal expenditure and loss of public or private money.

The Psychotherapeutic Alternative

Despite the nightmare of the biomedical approach to mental health in Slovenia, we have a dream that keeps us from despairing over the deteriorating mental health situation in Slovenia and worldwide. In this dream we see psychotherapy as an independent profession and an autonomous scientific discipline, which refers to the common factors, the Dodo bird verdict, the biopsychosocial / contextual model, the transdiagnostic, transtheoretical, integrative systemic, personalised approach in psychotherapy. We see how psychotherapists use process-based methods of assessment and individualised idiographic diagnosis (in the context of personalised psychotherapy), on the basis of which treatment can be effectively guided and tailored to the client’s needs.

Univ.-Prof. Dr. Miran Možina, MD received his doctorate from Sigmund Freud University Vienna with a dissertation entitled: “The Development of Psychotherapy Regulation in European Countries and Slovenia: Towards Psychotherapy as an Independent Profession and an Autonomous Scientific Discipline.” He completed his master’s degree at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, specializing in psychiatry. He worked as a psychiatrist (Vojnik Psychiatric Hospital near Celje), completed his studies in systemic psychotherapy at the Faculty of Medicine in Zagreb, worked as an assistant at the Faculty of Social Work, University of Ljubljana, and led charitable projects providing psychosocial assistance to children, adolescents, families, and users of psychiatric services (ODMEV). He completed his training as a teacher of systemic family therapy (VFT, Munich) and obtained ECP. He also runs a private psychotherapy practice. He is a former president of SKZP and editor-in-chief of the first Slovenian psychotherapy professional and scientific journal Kairos. Since 2006, he has been leading a faculty study project in PST science with SFU Vienna, and since 2013 he has been the director of SFU Ljubljana, a lecturer, and the head of the Unit for Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy.