I'm not sure what to think of this. I'm still digesting it.
Choice quotes
Saying that one is inclined to skepticism while simultaneously acknowledging their presence and participation in a documented, national, arational, panic founded in religious paranoia strikes me as deeply odd and troubling. Doubly so when coming from a practicing and influential child psychologist at a respected national university. There is nothing shameful in admitting that one lacks understanding or knowledge. It's in fact a valuable act of humility that helps science and medicine progress to better the human condition.
Saying 'I don't know, gotta be the devil tho' is essentially an evil act because it is thought terminating. If the patient is experiencing a possession no amount of Haldol or Seroquel or talk therapy is going to help, only God.
Again something deeply epistemologically troubling. Neil Tyson has said 'The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.' and I haven't seen any proof to the contrary.
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Edit*
Found a rebuttal - Haven't finished reading it yet.
https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/a-psychiatrist-falls-for-exorcism/
From the rebuttal you linked:
The author is not acting as a scientist when he consults on demonic possession. He's acting as a healer. Primum non nocere on this one is "are there any psychiatric treatments that will help the patient?" There may not be. If the patient is Catholic, living in a Catholic environment, a Catholic treatment may be the most effective course of action.
Further, the author is putting forth his anecdotes as anecdotes and his beliefs as beliefs. He has not convinced me in the reality of demonic possession. He has, however, convinced me of his belief in demonic possession, which is of greater pragmatic value in the solution-space of "devout Catholics whose loved ones think they're possessed".
A quote of yours, if I may:
I think that's unnecessarily dismissive. He's not saying "I don't know, gotta be the devil tho." He's saying "I've ruled out everything but the devil." A secular psychiatrist would probably not make that statement. She would probably blitz right through Beelzebub and move on to whatever else looked promising. But the thing is, clinical trials and useful effects in the field don't overlap all that great, particularly when it comes to psychoactives.
Here's the question: is there potential harm from a religious ritual? I'm trusting that a clinically-trained psychiatrist does not condone exorcism rituals that have the potential to make things psychiatrically worse but that's trust, not knowledge. If my trust is well-placed, is there any harm from shaking a bible at a crazy person?