Category Archives: counseling science

New diagnostic categories for children?


Those who parent or counsel children with emotional troubles recognize how crude our current set of diagnostic categories are at the present time. Kids labeled ADHD, Bi-polar, and ODD all share similar symptoms. They all can be impulsive, easily angered, hyperactive, grandiose, irritable, etc. But a friend of mine sent me some literature from researchers at Johns Hopkins where they are beginning to distinguish differences between some of these children. They present information on a diagnosis they call “Severe Mood Dysregulation” where the presentation of chronic irritability differs from the episodic forms found in Bi-polar Disorder.

Check out these two links for more details if you are interested: http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/ADHD-ADD/tb/4978

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/164/8/1140

2 Comments

Filed under counseling science

JesusCreed on “Ex-Gays”


Starting on 10/2 Scot McKnight is going to start a post series at www.jesuscreed.orgon Stan Jones and Mark Yarhouse’s new book, Ex-Gays? Yesterday, he merely announced that he would start the series and it brought on the usual discussions that one encounters when talking about homosexuality, sexual orientation, etc. (e.g., is it right/wrong? Did Jesus say anything about the matter? What is orientation? Does it really change? Why do we give special attention to this particular activity and avoid things like gossip and adultery?). All good questions, but they may miss the actual issues raised by this particular book.

Personal experiences play a huge role in much of the public conversation about sexuality (we all have broken sexual experiences and friends and family with their own experiences). It will be interesting to see whether readers of JesusCreed will be able to consider the merits of the questions that Jones and Yarhouse ask: Is it ever possible for someone to change their sexual orientation using religious means? And, is it harmful to try?

Chapter one lays out the controversy (i.e., the scientific and political claims in the debate, whether sexual orientation is a thing or a construction) and articulates their view of the relationship between science and faith.

Chapter two provides an overview of a Christian/biblical view of sexuality (what it was designed to be and how it is broken). In short, they report that the biblical text gives sexual intercourse a fixed meaning (an good act between husband and wife) rather than have the act defined by the intent of the participants. “Nonreligious persons today are accustomed to thinking that the meaning of their sexual actions are conferred by their intentions for those acts….But the Christian tradition asserts the opposite: that sexually intimate acts have fixed meanings by their very nature” (p. 49).  God provides the boundaries, but given our fallen nature, every aspect of our personhood reflects humanity’s rebellion against God. They then detail both Christian ethical responses to homosexuality as well as pastoral responses by well-known agencies.

Chapters 3 and 4 are the defense of their rationale and methodologies. Of note is the small sample size. But remember, they want to know whether it is ever possible for someone to change orientation through religious means. They do an interesting discussion of what kind of study they wanted to do and what they actually did in the end (chapter five) and why. They also address matters of researcher bias here. Chapters 6-9 explore how one might measure sexual orientation change and report their results.

Whether you agree or disagree with their sexual ethic, agree or disagree with their interpretation of orientation or their view of what makes for a robust empirical finding, you ought to agree that this is a well-written book that attempts to very slowly walk through the issues (scientific, biases, change, identity and orientation) without slandering opponents and yet maintaining their apologetical stance.

A worthy book to read by anyone. Stay tuned to JesusCreed to see how readers there respond to the issues when it gets to the details of the chapters.   

2 Comments

Filed under counseling science, Identity, sexual identity

Your negative mood and how you view your loved ones


When you experience negative emotion in your most intimate relationships, what do you do? A recent study published in the Journal of Counseling Psychology (54:4, 2007) suggests that we are inclined to place much of the blame on our loved ones. Instead of attributing the problems to external factors (as we tend to do when feeling good), many tend to attribute the cause of their unhappiness to their spouse’s character or behavior. The researchers suggest that when we feel happy we broaden our cognitive focus and when we feel unhappy, we narrow it down to the most salient (convenient?) factors–our spouse’s behavior.

A couple of other interesting factoids that came out of this study. When either partner is unsatisfied in the relationship, the woman engaged in more demanding behaviors (blaming, discussing, putting pressure on the other) as opposed to withdrawing behaviors. When couples improved their relational mood by attributing the positive change to either individual, they were less satisfied than when couples improved their relational mood by attributing the positive change to environmental factors.

Does this make sense to you? Why would couples have more satisfaction if they think external factors account for their positive mood than if they attribute positive change to one or the other? Are we suspicious of our spouse’s motives? Don’t really believe their good behavior will continue?

Here’s why this matters for therapists. As the authors say, we are generally trained to explore a couple’s presenting problem, investigate the history of the problem, and then intervene. They suggest that this will INCREASE the couple’s negative emotions and tempt them to choose a bad solution such as blaming the other or withdrawing. This may suggest that therapists begin couples counseling by increasing positive mood before jumping right into the problem. The authors also remind us of some of Gottman’s research that how a conversation begins has a huge impact on the rest of the conversation and influences the particular problem-solving skills a couple uses.

Leave a comment

Filed under counseling science, counseling skills, marriage

Research that brought me to tears


I confess, the other day I got teary over someone’s research (we New Englander men don’t really cry–its a disorder caused by enculturated individualism). Truth be told, I didn’t get choked up by the research but by the man who was reporting it. Mark Yarhouse closed out the annual conference of the Society for Christian Psychology by reporting the history of his research in the area of sexual identity (and its change) and sexual orientation. 9 years ago he began explore these areas. First he and Stan Jones critiqued the pro-gay psychological research and pointed out serious flaws. At the heart of the matter he was concerned about those who acknowledged same sex attraction but because of their deeply-held theological beliefs, did not wish to identify with the gay identity. Mainstream psychology has argued that these folks are suppressing their identity or being suppressed by fundamentalist culture. Isn’t it possible, Mark wondered, that these seemingly healthy individuals could acknowledge their sexual desires and choose not to make their identity or behavior based on desire. In the talk he told us of his attempts to dialog with pro-gay psychologists and psychiatrists. He took some heat, of course, but also gained the respect of others. Most recently, he has been constructing a model for helping clients explore the many facets of their sexual identity and changing what is in their power (how they interpret and respond to same sex attraction) and allowing what they cannot change to be.

Okay, you are probably wondering why this moved me. I was moved because here was a man showing great compassion to these faithful, struggling christians–double minorities in both the world and in the church. He has done this at great cost to himself and has had to hang on to the Lord under significant spiritual warfare. Here is a man not willing to get stuck in the political speak but willing to dialog with those many would consider enemies and to try to hear and understand–even when he knew it wouldn’t change the world. Here is a man willing to explore how people remain faithful to God while trying to understand their brokenness. Finally, I was moved by the love and wisdom shown to Mark in a letter from his sister. She encouraged his faith and reminded him what was true in language fitting of a classic pastoral care author.

Okay, I still can’t express why I was moved. But I wasn’t the only one. The speaker who came up to close the conference was also choked up. It is possible that scientific endeavors show us the hand and face of God. 

Mark’s latest book, Ex-gays? A longitudinal study of religiously mediated change in sexual orientation (IVP) is hot off the press (first author is Stanton Jones).   

3 Comments

Filed under christian psychology, church and culture, counseling science, sexual identity, sexuality

Science Monday: Coping Style and PTSD and Complicated Grief


Just got the latest issue of Journal of Counseling Psychology (2007:54, 3, pp 344-350). In it Kimberly Schnider and her professor, Jon Elhai, and Matt Gray have examined the relationship between coping style (skills) and the severity of PTSD and/or complicated grief (CG). To study this relationship they surveyed 123 college students who had experienced an unexpected death of a close loved one. They hypothesized that active coping skills would serve students better than avoidant ones.

So, what did they find? Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under counseling science, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

Science Monday: Sexual attraction in the counselor’s office


Today’s ethics class is going to cover the area of misconduct. Unfortunately, misconduct means here the illicit sexual contact between the counselor and counselee. In 2004, sexual misconduct played a role in 35% of complaints to the APA committee on ethics (2005 American Psychologist, 60:5, p. 526). How are pastoral counselors doing on this matter? Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Abuse, counseling science, sexuality

Science Monday: Confidentiality and Teens


Tonight in my ethics class we will be discussing the concepts of privacy, confidentiality, and privileged communications. Such fun topics to scare the students with :).

Counseling teens presents a higher order of stress and confusion when it comes to confidentiality. When should a counselor break confidence with a teen and tell his/her parents something revealed in a session? If she smokes cigarettes? Crack? If he is having unprotected sex? Continue reading

3 Comments

Filed under confidentiality, counseling science, ethics

Science Monday: What is the best way to teach ethics to counselors?


Saturday marked the first class of my Ethics class. In honor of that, I want to use this space to talk a bit about the teaching of ethics. What is the best way to teach aspiring counselors the ins/outs of ethical care of their counselees. Here are some options: Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under counseling science, counseling skills, ethics

Science Monday: Stress and Aggression


On Friday I was listening to a local show on public radio about stress and its relationship to aggressive driving. It got me thinking about the connections between stress and aggression in other areas of life.

What does stress do? Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under counseling science

Science Monday returns


Snow on April 16???? Now I love snow, but this is a bit much, especially following the rain that is finding all the cracks that lead to my basement. Because of this, the science end of science Monday is a bit thin today.

Today starts our new semester and my class on Emotionally Focused Therapy begins tonight. EFT’s primary goal is to enhance the marital bond. A strong bond weathers all sorts of conflicts and basic human self-centeredness. What two things help us maintain healthy bonds? Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under counseling science, marriage