Monthly Archives: September 2014

September 19, 2014 · 8:23 pm

Roger Goodell wants to “get it right”: What has to change in the NFL to stop domestic violence


In a press conference today  Roger Goodell apologized for mishandling recent domestic violence scandals and provided specific ways he and the NFL planned to rectify the situation (e.g., education, training, funding national domestic violence and child abuse prevention organizations).

“I got it wrong in the handling of the Ray Rice matter. I’m sorry for that. Now I will get it right.”

Some of the intended efforts should have a positive effect, both for the NFL and for the larger society. However, if Goodell is serious about changing the culture of the NFL and society, he needs to take a step back from these good ideas and start by identifying the roots of the problem. Without getting the root, this problem will not be solved.

What is the root that has to change? Let me list two that must be addressed:

  1. We have to stop treating women as objects to be sought after and conquered. An object has no feelings and can be used however I wish. It has no rights, no value…unless I give it value. When we treat women as objects, then we only give them value when we chase them. And when they displease us, what is the big deal if we attack and treat without regard to their personhood? Last summer I heard an African man say that his wife was property because he had paid a dowry for her. Sure, she was special property and he took great care of her. But still, she was property and he could do with her as he wished. We in the West may think we are enlightened, but when we engage in domestic violence (and DV is more than physical!) we agree with this man–that our wives and girlfriends are property, something to be controlled.
  2. We have to stop treating top athletes as having special privileges, as individuals who do not need to conform to social rules. When you believe the rules do not apply to you, then why not get revenge when someone irritates you? You won’t be held accountable. When you see an attractive woman, why not do everything you can to get her into bed? Faithfulness, self-control, respect for others…those don’t apply. I have been told that women working for the NFL are nearly tortured by efforts to get them into bed; that it is nearly impossible to do their job due to the sexual harassment. Some may suggest that any woman working for the NFL ought to know what she is getting into and so has no right to complain. Others might acknowledge the problem with a sigh but point out that the warfare culture of football, the lure of fame, youthful temptations brought on by sudden riches, and the insatiable competitive spirit are to blame for these misdeeds. Baloney. Youth, money, fame, and testosterone may make it more difficult to do the right thing but the problem started long before these young men got their first football check. They were treated as gods and allowed to keep playing their sport when they acted out. Winning and being associated with winners tempted us to look the other way. How do I know this happens? Because I’ve been in a locker room before. Inappropriate speech was ignored, even laughed at. If you learn that rules don’t apply as a child, why will you behave when you are older?

How about a new institutional organizing principle? Out with self-promotion (and self-protection) and in with… 

In the past, organizations, including religious ones, often made decisions about mis-deeds of members by delivering consequences when it hurt their image (or more accurately, hurt their bank accounts). If we want to put a dent in the number of cases of violence (that is all we can do, keep offenders from re-offending under our own watch), we will have to stop being so concerned about image and start putting the care of the most vulnerable as job one.

Want to change the NFL and the world about domestic violence. Let us each start with ourselves and let us adopt this often repeated line of Jesus

“Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.”

That is all there is. Die to self, love others more than yourself. Thank goodness Jesus didn’t merely give us sage advice but led as an example thereby giving us his power to love beyond measure.

3 Comments

Filed under Abuse, Christianity, Christianity: Leaders and Leadership

Tagged as , ,

September 16, 2014 · 9:27 pm

Institutional betrayal: Secret ingredient to PTSD


We live in the world where human frailty and pathology is viewed in individual terms. When we see sickness we imagine that the person must have some weakness in biology, faith, or behavior. Rarely do we think about the role the system or community has played in the development of that person’s pathology. This is true when we think about a person diagnosed with PTSD. We therapists hypothesize about individual factors (personality factors, early childhood experiences (a slight nod to external causes) and neurobiological risk factors) and situation factors (the frequency, duration, and intensity of overwhelming trauma events) when we try to answer the “why” of the development of PTSD in a person.

The problem with this kind of thinking is that it fails to take into consideration of known research that suggests that environmental response to an individual’s trauma experiences may be a determining factor in whether PTSD or chronic traumatic reactions form.

In the most recent American Psychologist (2014, 69:6, 575-587), Carly Parnitzke Smith and Jennifer Freyd write about the concept of institutional betrayal. Traumatologists recognize Freyd’s name as the researcher who developed “betrayal trauma theory”, pointing to the especially toxic form of PTSD caused by those who were supposed to be safe and protective. These begin to examine “institutional action and inaction that exacerbate the impact of traumatic experiences…”

How can an institution betray a victim?

When a person trusts that a system designed to defend, respond, protect, or seek justice will do its job after an interpersonal trauma, and when that system either chooses not to respond (omission) or worse, chooses to lay blame at the feet of the victim (commission), institutional betrayal occurs. Examples include law enforcement accusing rape victims of “asking for it” with their clothing, church leaders allowing offender clergy to “leave with their reputations” or refusal to investigate a case of date rape when the reported offender is an important leader in the community.

In summarizing a couple of studies, Smith and Freyd point out that institutional betrayal after a trauma experience leads to higher rates of dissociation, sexual problems, and health difficulties. This is even more likely when the trauma takes place in an environment where protection of the members is trumpeted (i.e., church or military).

What are the common characteristics of betraying institutions?

Smith and Freyd note several characteristics found in institutions at greater risk for betraying members.

  • membership requirements to define in group identity. This produces a need for members to act in ways to maintain such an identity
  • Prestige (both leaders and institutions). Prestige produces both trust and fear, dependency and power
  • Priorities. “Institutional betrayal may remain unchecked when performance or reputation is valued over, or divorced from the well-being of members.” As the authors note, maintaining reputation as a priority will lead to neglect or attack of those who challenge reputation
  • Institutional denial. Blame a few bad apples, avoid institutional blame or responsibility

Those institutions that do make efforts to prevent abuse within its community may still yet fail to respond well. They may fail to use adequate screening procedures, normalize abuse, fail to utilize or follow appropriate response procedures, punish whistleblowers, and aid cover-ups.

What to do?

Smith and Freyd argue that transparency (about past actions/failures to act as well as power structures) and priority to protect the well-being of all members will move institutions away from the risk of betraying individual members. I would argue that the shift to protect moves from the institution as a whole to protection of the most vulnerable.

Let me recommend a few resources that have appeared here in the past:

  1. Diane Langberg’s 5 part video about narcissistic leaders and the institutions they lead. She too describes systemic narcissism.
  2. Why some spiritual leaders abuse (and systems allow it)
  3. Narcissistic systems
  4. Resources to combat narcissism one person at a time

10 Comments

Filed under Abuse, personality, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Psychology

Tagged as , , , , ,

September 8, 2014 · 9:15 am

Criticism of Biblical Counseling: Are Joyce’s Concerns Valid?


Katheryn Joyce has recently published a long post about the rise of Biblical counseling and the concerns some have about the movement [read it here].

Most people who have thoughts about counseling and Christianity tend to fall into one of to categories: Those who oppose biblical counseling as dangerous and those who oppose the various versions of Christian psychology as shallow and full of humanistic ideology. Very few people try to maintain identity in both worlds. If you have read my “about me” you will find I’m one of those who does accept the label of biblical counseling and Christian psychology (more on this below)

I encourage both proponents and opponents of Biblical Counseling to read her essay. Let me even take the liberty to suggest some starting questions to keep in mind as you read. While the essay may not answer the questions, having them in mind will keep you from solidifying stereotypes of either sides.§ If you are inclined to reject biblical counseling, consider these questions:

  1. Where might I find a more thorough history of biblical counseling and its various permutations?
  2. What main biblical counseling author voices are missing in this piece? [Note that the mentioned ACBC was, until recently, known as NANC (National Association of Nouthetic Counselors)]
  3. What failures in Christian psychology movement(s) led to the need for a biblical counseling movement?

If you are inclined to defend biblical counseling, consider these questions

  1. Even if some of the bad examples of biblical counseling do not represent you or the heart of the movement, what aspects of the movement may support or encourage some of these distortions?
  2. How might you better communicate “sufficiency of Scripture” to outsiders?
  3. Does biblical counseling seek to eliminate symptoms or improve spiritual responses to symptoms? How might it better acknowledge the body when talking about the causes of mental health problems?
  4. Where does fear of “integration” hinder the maturation of biblical counseling as a movement?

Indeed, these questions have already been asked and answers given in a variety of locations. Readers unfamiliar with biblical counseling should start with websites such as this one, CCEF, ACBC, BCC, and the Society of Christian Psychology to find further and deeper readings on related topics.

Where the Concerns are Valid

Not acknowledging benefits from psychological research. Joyce notes that a good biblical counseling session looks a lot like a good professional counseling session. Why? Well, it is obvious that change happens best in the context of kind, compassionate relationships. Why the similarity? While it is true that psychotherapists didn’t discover empathy, it is true that psychotherapy research has expanded our understanding of the best way to encourage trust relationships in therapy. In addition, some of the cognitive, affective, and dynamic interventions developed from these models are used within biblical counseling. I have absolutely no problem from biblical counseling deriving benefit from interventions developed in other models of therapy. I only desire biblical counselors or acknowledge that benefit. It is clear Jay Adams benefited from Mowrer (and said so to boot). We can do the same. We can admit that Marsha Linehan has revolutionized our understanding of how we work with people exhibiting symptoms of borderline personality disorder.

Emphasizing false dichotomies. Joyce quotes Heath Lambert in this piece (near the end),

“I’m concerned [that] if we say, ‘Oh my goodness, people with hard problems need physicians and need a drug,’ we’re going to lose much of what the Bible has to say about hard problems.”

The quote above is in the context of dealing with difficult or serious mental illness. He worries that if the church creates two categories of problems (normal and special), those with serious problems will no believe that the bible has things to say about those suffering with suicidal ideation or schizophrenia. It seems that some biblical counselors take a negative stance on psychiatry and medical intervention because they fear doing so will hinder the work of the Spirit through the bible. I would argue that this dichotomy does not need to exist. I agree that the bible speaks to everyone, whether they are having difficulty or easy problems. I don’t think that use of medications or medical practitioners has to hinder pastoral care. The message that others get when we suggest that medical intervention need to be avoided is that somehow it is less spiritual to seek a medical intervention. This is patently false. Now, not every medicine is worth taking. Some may create more problems then they solve. But that fact should not cause us to lump all professional/medical care into the same category.

Where the Concerns are Overplayed

Heath Lambert gets it right when he claims that all counseling models will fail, due primarily to the quality of the practitioner. Biblical Counselors do much work that is commendable and successful. Joyce’s piece may suggest that most biblical counselors are ineffective and incompetent. This is not true. Matthew Stanford suggest he has never seen a biblical counselor do well with difficult cases. That may be the experience of my friend, but I can attest to seeing biblical counselors working well with people with serious personality disorders, delusions and other difficult mental illnesses. Now, the truth is, these counselors have succeeded because they did not follow the stereotype and reject learning from professional psychology. Further, these same counselors did not take “sufficiency” to mean that they could only use the bible in considering how to respond to their clients.

Take a moment and read her piece. Review the questions above and keep an open mind to both sides of this story.

[§ I have written on the relationship between Christian psychology and biblical counseling in the Journal of Psychology and Theology, volume 25, 1997. You can buy that essay here.]

Leave a comment

Filed under CCEF, christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling skills, Psychiatric Medications, Psychology, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , ,

September 2, 2014 · 4:45 pm

Does living in urban settings increase the risk for mental illness? A complex answer with more questions


I think most recognize some of the inherent stresses of urban life, especially if you add poverty and racial discrimination to the mix. Of course, there are stresses that exist in rural and suburban settings, but some parts of urban life can be quite hard. Being anonymous in a crowd, the amount of violence, the pace of life, higher cost of living are just a few of these stressors.

So, are those who live in urban settings more prone to mental illness? Some doctoral student in Sweden looked at the association of Schizophrenia, population density, and neighborhood deprivation. What did he find?

Our results therefore suggest that it is not the adverse neighborhood conditions that cause the morbidity. Instead, it seems as if there are familial selection effects that draw high-risk individuals into densely populated/socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods. In other words, the same factors that explain residence in such neighborhoods also explain the increased risks for psychiatric morbidity. link to article here.

Does this make sense to you? Certain factors draw (or keep?) some families in deprived settings and those same factors explain increase mental illness risk? What would these factors be?

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized