If you want an up to date survey of PTSD therapies, and which ones are supported by research, get a copy of Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology
, edited by Lilienfeld and Lohr.
This URL may give you the beginning of the chapter in which current and some controversial treatments for stress related disorders are reviewed. It starts on page 243 when viewed on Googlebooks and you can click forward and see how far the program allows you to go.
Here, this same book offers a chapter on "Commercializng Mental Heatlh Issues" by Nona Wilson
And, thanks to Google, here is text from an article Lilienfeld wrote on how to teach in such a way as to assist students to understand and discern the difference between scientific and pseudoscientific modalities.The 10 Commandments of Helping Students
Distinguish Science from Pseudoscience in Psychology
By Scott O. Lilienfeld
(one tiny quote)
....remember that pseudoscientific beliefs serve important motivational functions. Many paranormal claims, such as those concerning extrasensory perception, out-of-body experiences, and astrology, appeal to believers' deep-seated needs for hope and wonder, as well as their needs for a sense of control over the often uncontrollable realities of life and death. Most believers in the paranormal are searching for answers to profound existential questions, such as "Is there a soul?" and "Is there life after death?" As psychologist Barry Beyerstein (1999) noted (in a play on P.T. Barnum's famous quip), "there's a seeker born every minute" (p. 60). Therefore, in presenting students with scientific evidence that challenges their paranormal beliefs, we should not be surprised when many of them become defensive. In turn, defensiveness can engender an unwillingness to consider contrary evidence.
One of the two best means of lessening this defensiveness (the second is the Eighth Commandment below) is to gently challenge students' beliefs with sympathy and compassion, and with the understanding that students who are emotionally committed to paranormal beliefs will find these beliefs difficult to question, let alone relinquish. Ridiculing these beliefs can produce reactance (Brehm, 1966) and reinforce students' stereotypes of science teachers as close-minded and dismissive. In some cases, teachers who have an exceptionally good rapport with their class can make headway by challenging students' beliefs with good-natured humor (e.g., "I'd like to ask all of you who believe in psychokinesis to please raise my hand"). However, teachers must ensure that such humor is not perceived as demeaning or condescending.
"...we must distinguish pseudoscience from metaphysics. Unlike pseudoscientific claims, metaphysical claims (Popper, 1959) cannot be tested empirically and therefore lie outside the boundaries of science. In the domain of religion, these include claims regarding the existence of God, the soul, and the afterlife, none of which can be refuted by any conceivable body of scientific evidence. Nevertheless, certain religious or quasi-religious beliefs, such as those involving "intelligent design" theory, which is the newest incarnation of creationism (see Miller, 2000), the Shroud of Turin, and weeping statues of Mother Mary, are indeed testable and hence suitable for critical analysis alongside of other questionable naturalistic beliefs. By conflating pseudoscientific beliefs with religious beliefs that are strictly metaphysical, instructors risk (a) needlessly alienating a sizeable proportion of their students, many of whom may be profoundly religious; and (b) (paradoxically) undermining students' critical thinking skills, which require a clear understanding of the difference between testable and untestable claims.
Metaphysical. There is no way to prove or disprove that Byron Katie 'woke up' and 'dropped her story' and was freed from suffering. We cannot prove or disprove that the incident occurred, nor that a cockroach actually ran over her foot while she was laying on the floor of a room in a halfway house. We cannot prove or disprove that. This part is metaphysical
Scientific: Does The Work work better than a placebo effect in 1) relieving major depression as DXed by tests, and given the expense of attending School for the Work, or 28 day Turn Around House, does this give better relief from depression than curren therapies that justify the financial expense, and are the benefits acceptably greater and longer lasting than the risks. (Risk benefit ratio)
These are the kinds of questions than CAN be proved or disproved--these kinds of questions are not metaphysical but scientfic and can be dealt with using research design.
Double blind testing by different research teams in different settings, can be used to determin whether BK's The Work actually works any better than a placebo in healing depression and whether, one year later, the persons still report relief. (Double blind means persons who test as depressed according to commonly accepted measures such as Hamilton Depression scale, MMPI, and more recent tests, and are assigned, randomly (coin toss) to a BK Work group or to a group where people just sit and talk (one has to find a way to ensure that the Work group is not in any way identified with Byron Katie which means her face, her name cannot in any way be mentioned--which would make this a very interesting matter. Real medical psychological methods are not usually tied to the personality of their proponent)
And the researchers and subjects would have no way to know which of them have been assigned to the Work group and which to the control group. (This would have to be done possibly within an inpatient setting so that friends of the subjects could be prevented from saying, "Hey, the stuff you are working on sounds just like Byron Katies Four Questions. Here, I ran a google search and its identical. Cool. I hear all these great things about Katie, she was on Oprah!!". Bang, the double blind study protocol would be shot to smithereens unless some way could be found to request and ensure that subjects not dicuss the materials outside of their group with anyone--part of the challenge of doing objective research on a fame/charisma driven venture)
"Many paranormal claims, such as those concerning extrasensory perception, out-of-body experiences, and astrology*, appeal to believers' deep-seated needs for hope and wonder, as well as their needs for a sense of control over the often uncontrollable realities of life and death. "
*(And stories of how someone was suddenly awakened and dropped his or her 'story' and was freed from suffering)