|
In Reply to: A question for Windy posted by Oldtimer on October 05, 2005 at 21:33:14:
I feel, too, that the show did a great job of staying on focus (the parent/offspring thing) which was the purpose of that particular show, which is the purpose of the Dr. Phil Show to begin with, imo. Sure, the show worked in a bit about the Fam and it's doctrines, some history, etc. But they stayed true to form, imo. I feel Jim did well to bite his tongue on camera and stay focused too.
I didn't see him being portrayed in a bad light. What I saw was, "Hey Jim, your daughter wants to be heard, hear her." That's pretty simple! Had Jim resisited that counsel on camera and pushed the greater good agenda he surely would have portrayed 'himself' in a bad light. If the mother got up and portrayed herself in a bad light, she may need some therapy, too, and she may end up being thankful that she wasn't aired.
The aftermath? Well, I think that if the two of them go and stay with the therapy, however long it takes, and it 'takes', a wonderful relationship can grow from this. Therapy that takes does work well, very well in fact, and a two fold cord (the two of them united) is not going to be easily broken when it comes to exposing the Family and pursuing personal justice.
In the meantime, the Fam may be praying like a house on fire that the vandari exer's personal problems never get resolved.
