Here's pretty much what we are not:

http://psychservices.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/56/9/1160

I suppose the perceived threat of mechanism might be a deterrent to
some clients in taking a deterministic view.

One double-edged reassurance: since there's no one in charge of the
mechanism, it tends to behave itself pretty spontaneously, from
the "owner's" standpoint. Problem: how do I ensure that my
spontaneous acts are good, productive, life-enhancing? Answer:
learn, with the therapist's help, what works for you and enjoy the
spontaneity that still remains within the boundaries of what works.

Also, I imagine some clients would rather end up as a reliably happy
(and vastly complex) mechanism rather than a anxious/depressed
freely willing agent.

How the heck is everyone, anyway? Any insights/reports from the
field?

Tom
CFN

BTW: I can hardly believe what Dartmouth neuroscientist Michael
Gazzaniga said about the insanity defense. Just shows yet again in
this administration the triumph of ideology over science, see
http://www.naturalism.org/criminal.htm#brain .