I can accept that some therapists may have worked for you, but most therapies are based on poisonous pedagogy.
Have you considered the possibility to use your knowledge in Wikipedia? There are some articles that need attention, such as Biological psychiatry, Biopsychiatry controversy and more.
It would be lovely for example is you place this comment in the talk section of the Skeptical Inquirer article, just after my comment.It turns out your friend John Modrow hit the nail on the head for virtually all skeptic websites on the net.... "a bunch of intellectual cowards who spend their time beating up fringe beliefs and marginal crackpots." Easy targets. I haven't seen skeptics look deeply into controversies between scientists about poor quality evidence for whatever theory is currently in vogue. Most skeptics seem to be the kind of fluffy-headed bimbos who say if it's orthodox among "real" scientists it must be correct. Anyone who's not ignorant of the history of science knows that orthodoxies come and go....