My latest peer-reviewed article was published yesterday in the September 2019 issue of Clinical Psychology Forum (as with many peer-reviewed journals, this one often appears before the stated publication date). My latest paper is something of a sequel to my May 2019 paper in the same journal, “Becoming Hope-Free: Parallels Between Death of Individuals and Extinction of Homo sapiens.”
I posted a draft of the paper in this space shortly after I submitted the paper to the journal. The published version differs from the submitted draft primarily with respect to organization and writing style; the original ideas are retained in the published version.
I have earned no money, nor will I earn money, for this paper. On the other hand, there were no page charges, so the article did not cost me money, contrary to the customary approach with peer-reviewed articles. I explained the process of peer review in April, 2018.
The full paper is not freely available. The abstract is posted below, and a copy of the paper can be purchased at a nominal cost from the publisher. It is also available in libraries on most college campuses.
Going Halfway: Climate Reports Ignore the Full Evidence, and Therapists Ignore Grief Recovery, by Guy R. McPherson
Abstract: This paper draws a parallel between climate-science reporting and “grief” work. The corporate media, governments, and paid climate scientists report only a portion of the evidence with respect to climate change. Similarly, many practitioners of the grief trade fail to propose grief recovery on behalf of their clients. In both cases, the transfer of fiat currency from the ill-informed to the better-informed serves as potential motivation.
CITATION: McPherson, Guy R. 2019. Going Halfway: Climate Reports Ignore the Full Evidence, and Therapists Ignore Grief Recovery. Clinical Psychology Forum 321:28-31.