Category Archives: counseling science

February 15, 2012 · 10:12 am

Benefits and liabilities of a benign dictator


I have been thinking about the value and danger of a benign dictator. No, I don’t have secret plans to take over the world. Well…maybe I do but I am well aware of the fact that no one will let me. The real reason I am thinking about this is the result of a book I am reading, called, The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty, by Simon Baron-Cohen (Basic Books, 2011). In addition, I have been thinking about a couple of situations where systems revolved around one person, a cult of personality. These systems worked well and though no one would have referred to the leader as a dictator, the leader held the vast majority of the power and control of the system and, in fact, did dictate how others would function.

Benefits

When you think of a dictator, few positive images come to mind. Maybe you think of Hitler or one of the recently dead world leaders. Not too many warm fuzzies, right? However, dictators or system controllers do have positive value.

  • Things get done. When you don’t have to rely on a committee or a popular vote, you can get things done. The person in power decides something should happen…and it happens. No need for it to get balled up in red tape. If you have ever watched good ideas die in committee you probably fantasized about being given the power to make stuff happen.
  • Legalism can be avoided. We’ve all seen times where  the strict application of a law doesn’t make sense. One law-breaker should get leniency and another should receive the maximum penalty. Statutes and rules rarely give us the kind of wise latitude to make these decisions but a person in power can make decisions that are in the best interests of individuals and communities.
  • A little fear may motivate. Knowing that you serve at the pleasure of the president (or leader) may help you keep alert to slippage. If you know that your leader demands results and if you know that you can’t just lie around and get results, you will likely work a bit harder.

But of course with efficiency, wisdom, and power located in one person, liabilities become obvious,

  • Dictators rarely think their decisions are wrong. If you are inclined to trust your own wisdom, you are less likely to seek out opposing viewpoints. The inner circle of “friends” may not choose to point out when you are wrong for fear of losing status or more. The person in sole power believes they are making the right decisions for the right reasons and will not notice when wisdom fails–as it always does with human frailties.
  • Utilitarianism may not be a good long-term strategy. Powerful leaders may start out with good ideas: raise the status of the poor, achieve safety and stability, efficient production, etc. But finite human wisdom often leads to utilitarian decisions–doing what works or what gets the best result now. So, a president may decide to shut down opposition viewpoints because in doing so people stop bickering and start doing other things that might be more productive. A pastor may decide to coverup a date-rape by his cherished youth pastor. In doing so, he may maintain a sense of comfort for the whole church community. Parents may feel at ease around this leader, the youth group may grow, the media may see the church in a positive light. But, there will be collateral damage. Utilitarian decisions rarely weigh the consequences of those decisions.
  • Empathy erosion will happen. When minority voices are squelched and when groupthink of the inner circle helps a dictator continue to make utilitarian decisions based on short-term goals, the first thing that will die is empathy. The Science of Evil book gets at this issue of empathy erosion. The author explores empathy from biological and sociological perspectives. A worthy read as this author has looks at differences between zero empathy (positive) in individuals with autism and zero empathy (negative) in individuals with personality disorders. He explores how some are able to move from desire to demand and so ignore the impact of our actions on another.

4 Comments

Filed under Abuse, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , ,

February 13, 2012 · 1:45 pm

Summer counseling courses announced!


Biblical is offering 2 fantastic summer counseling courses for your consideration.  In both classes, you will walk away with practical tools! Both classes are hybrid (meaning you have both online and in person portions) and can be taken for 1 or 2 credits or for continuing education. Click the attached PDF  for more details: BIB-0112-BFINAL. The classes are:

One Session Coaching: Action Focused Change

Taught by Pam Smith, VP for Student Advancement and Coach

When? July 6-7 at Biblical Seminary: Who should take the course? Counselors and church leaders.

Abuse in the Church: Biblical, Legal, & Counseling Perspectives

Taught by my self and Boz Tchividjian (Liberty Law School, founder of GRACE, and a former child abuse prosecutor)

When? July 20-21 (at BranchCreek Church, Harleysville, PA) Who should take this course? Anyone who wants to see the church a safer place. Breakout sessions will focus on counselors and also church leaders.

Both courses are expected to fill up fast given their practical focus. Sign up ASAP by contacting either,

Leave a comment

Filed under Abuse, biblical counseling, Biblical Seminary, christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling, counseling science, counseling skills, pastors and pastoring, Psychology, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , ,

January 27, 2012 · 1:34 pm

Translating EFT into Christian Psychology? Publication notice


My friend and colleague Mike McFee (Eastern University) and I recently had an article published in the latest edition of the Journal of Psychology & Christianity (v. 30, pp 317-328). In it we tried to tackle how someone from a Christian Psychology perspective might interact with Emotion-Focused Therapy, a popular treatment protocol.

Here’s how we started our paper,

Emotion-Focused Therapy (EFT) is a rapidly growing treatment system offering empirically based treatment for couples and families. As with many current secular theories of psychology, EFT is embedded in humanistic assumptions which propose a few challenges to the Christian practitioner…. Using the methodology of Eric Johnson…this essay explores the practices of translating EFT into a Christian Psychology.

Next we identify a problem for counselors. We say that being christian and thinking christianly is supposed to influence all that we do. But, the truth is much of what goes on in Christian counseling doesn’t look that much different from counseling from markedly different ideologies. Both are compassionate and use similar techniques. The problem isn’t always bad integration but that we haven’t defined well the various levels of translation between two languages (i.e., humanistic founded EFT and Christian psychology).

The rest of the essay explores the two languages and 3 kinds of translation possibilities depending on the context and need, rather than is a one-size-fits-all approach. We conclude with a case example and actual dialog to show one kind of translation work.

What are the 3 kinds of translation? You’ll have to read if you want to know? There has to be SOME mystery, right?

7 Comments

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling, counseling science, counseling skills, Psychology, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , ,

January 13, 2012 · 5:43 am

The trick to tolerating that which you cannot change?


Some things can’t be changed. You just have to endure them. There are “little” endurances such as waiting for a line in the grocery store, a dentist to finish drilling your tooth, for a boring speech to end. Then there are much larger endurances to suffer through like living in unabating poverty or under a dictator.

Some of us are better at enduring things than are others. Ever wonder what their tricks they have?

In a word–some variant of dissociation.

If the unpleasantness is likely to be short we may choose to fantasize about a lovely place we’d rather be. We may focus our senses on some other stimuli (temperature, light, color, smell, etc.) in an effort to “quiet” the urge to run. If the unpleasantness is much longer and if we have little sense that we can bring about a change in our situation, then we may lose connection with our current surroundings and our self. While this adaptive feature allows us to survive unimaginable pain, a habituated dissociation will take on a life of its own and begin to change our sense of self and our sense of the world.

In short, we lose faith. We may even stop trying to change what can be changed.

I find this quote by Richard Grant (“Crazy River: Exploration and Folly in East Africa”) about his experience in an overcrowded bus in Tanzania most instructive of the need to dissociate and the long-term impact,

After ten minutes, my right foot was numb and throbbing, and I wanted desperately to shift its position, just by an inch or two, but an inch or two was impossible in the squeeze of other feet and bags, and there were people sittings on the bags, and others standing hunched over at right angles under the roof….The danger and discomfort endured by the passengers was of absolutely no concern to the driver and the assistant, and the passengers endured it with a calm, patient, well-mannered grace. This was normal, everyday life, and the only kind of bus journey they knew. There was an hour to go. I tried to will myself into a blank, passive, indifferent, fatalistic state of mind, which I had come to understand as a basic survival mechanism for the poorest people in this world, although not necessarily helpful for their future. (p. 45-6, emphasis mine)

 

3 Comments

Filed under Abuse, christian psychology, counseling, counseling science

Tagged as , ,

January 12, 2012 · 5:52 am

How to evaluate a counseling model or intervention: Step four


Picking up on this series that was started last week, we come to the next-to-last step. Thus far I have suggested that whenever you are exploring the next best thing in counseling, you should

  • start with a healthy dose of suspicion about the motives and goals of the author. What are they trying to sell you?
  • Read with an open mind. Can you see what they observe about life?
  • Evaluate the author’s assumptions, worldview, etc. Be willing to be challenged!

Now we come to step four.

Step Four: Let yourself be critiqued

How might their observations and assumptions challenge your own? Sit with this a bit. Don’t worry that you will lose your faith. It never hurts to have our beliefs and values refined and challenged by our critics. Maybe some of your values are uncritically formed. How might these assumptions cause you to refine and renew your own? Can you eliminate some faulty logic?

Be willing to state some of the weaknesses within your own system of beliefs and assumptions. I wish every model builder would start with their own flaws. But, most of us are better at pointing out the speck in our brother’s eye than addressing the log in our own.

Finally, our next step will be to possibly adopt some portion of the model or intervention into our own repertoire.

Leave a comment

Filed under biblical counseling, christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling, counseling science, counseling skills, Psychology

Tagged as , , , ,

January 11, 2012 · 5:55 am

Health effects of traumatic stress on infants


In Rwanda we hear that children born after the genocide exhibit signs of trauma–even though they did not experience it firsthand. You could hypothesize a number of reasons for this:

  • Hearing of the stories of lost loved ones; being told that their neighbors were killers
  • Having peers in school stigmatize: “You are Hutu, you are a killer. You are Tutsi, you are a cockroach.”
  • Seeing pictures of genocide

Notice that all three have to do with the child’s internalization of trauma through their environment.

But what if their trauma began in utero and biologically altered their capacity to handle stress? Consider these words by Maggie Schauer (available to be seen in context here),

Exposure to significant stressors during sensitive developmental periods causes the brain to develop along a stress-responsive pathway. The brain and mind become organized in a way to facilitate survival in a world of deprivation and danger, enhancing an individual’s capacity to rapidly and dramatically shift into an intense, angry, aggressive, fearful, or avoiding state when threatened. This pathway is costly and non-adaptive in peaceful environments. Babies born with a deformed stress-regulating system (HPA-a) experience higher and faster arousal peaks, longer intervals of crying and irritability, and impaired affect regulation (Sondergaard et al., 2003). (p. 398, emphasis mine)¹

How might this information help us better understand how “the sins of the fathers” (or whoever is the abusive individuals or communities) extend beyond primary victims to those victim’s children? How might this help us train survivors to understand what might be happening in their children and support parenting strategies that will encourage healing. Might it also help survivors to feel less guilty for the struggles of their children? Survivors don’t ask to be abused and can’t help the impact on their children while in utero.

Now, not every child with a “deformed stress regulating system” is that way due to the mother’s stress. We just don’t know why one child has a good stress regulation system and why another does not. But we can say that those whose stress regulation seems broken (or different) likely need different parenting strategies and a different paradigm in understanding volition (will) when it comes to their outbursts.

 ¹ Schauer, M., & Schauer, E. (2010). Trauma-focused public mental-health interventions: A paradigm shift in humanitarian assistance and aid work. In E. Martz (ed.) Trauma Rehabilitation after War and Conflict (pp. 389-428). Springer

Leave a comment

Filed under counseling, counseling science, Psychology, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , ,

January 4, 2012 · 5:01 am

How to evaluate a counseling model or technique: Step two


In my last post, I discussed the importance of evaluating the next “great” counseling method or technique with a good dose of suspicion. What is the author (or disciple) trying to sell us? Why? What is the basis of their model?

However, I do not want you to think that we ought to dispatch every counseling intervention with a snooty once-over. Rather, I want you to immediately follow-up your suspicion with an opening of your mind!

Step Two: Read with an Open Mind

Even the shakiest of ideas, models and techniques provide opportunities for us to grow. No matter our wisdom and intellect, we will always see life (reality) from a particular vantage point. Every human vantage point contains bias. This is why we should read outside our own disciplines and family groups. I especially encourage readers to listen to their loudest critics. They will have a point or two that we ought to take to heart.

So, find the originators of the model or technique you want to explore (often, original authors praise their ideas a bit less than their disciples do). As you read, ask these questions,

  1. What does this author observe about their world, the way it works (or doesn’t)?
  2. How do they envision the purpose and goal of life?
  3. What human problems are most significant to them?
  4. What solutions do they seek? What techniques or interventions are most prominent?

While you may disagree with their interpretations (save that for a later step), work hard to view the world through their eyes. Can you see what they see? You want to make this effort because you recognize you do not see the world entirely as it is. You see in part. Your humility here will help raise to your mind questions that you mint not thought were all that important.

Let me give you an example. In my first semester at Wheaton College (PsyD program) fresh out of the biblical counseling world of CCEF, I wrote a paper for Stanton Jones defending/critiquing a model of biblical counseling. At the end of the paper, Dr. Jones asked me to conduct a thought experiment,

Would [this] model urge medical research forward? After all, if worship is our primary end, and we can give glory to God with a serene death, why try to eradicate disease? If suffering is a human trial that gives us opportunity to glorify, should the concrete contributions to the suffering be addressed? I know this can be answered, but oh the subtleness of emphasis!

I have to tell you that these words were powerful to me at the time (and still are!). He knew I would say, “of course we should eradicate suffering.” But, in promoting the human end of enjoying God, even in suffering, I had emphasized suffering well to the point of de-emphasizing concrete helps that often come through psychological and medical research.

The goal of step two is to challenge our own assumptions to see if they need tweaking. Once we have concluded exploring the observations of the model builder, next we move to evaluating interpretations and assumptions.

Leave a comment

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , , ,

January 3, 2012 · 10:26 am

How to evaluate a new counseling model or technique: Step one


Being a professor of counseling I get lots of questions like this: “What do you think of _____ (a new or popular counseling model/intervention)? These days, I’m being asked about coaching models, neurofeedback, EMDR, EFT, brainspotting, the use of SPECT scans, the use of psychiatric medications, nutritional supplements, and the like. In past years, I might have been asked about theophostic ministry, DBT, or ECT.

To be honest, I haven’t read every counseling model to the nth degree. I know a bit about a lot of models and a whole lot about some models. So, I try to be careful not to offer too much critique on what I don’t know first hand. That said, I do think there are good ways to go about evaluating any new model and proponents’ claims of efficacy. Over the next few posts I plan to show you how I try to investigate any new (to me) model:

Step One: Start with Suspicion

What? Shouldn’t we give them a fair shake? Yes, of course. And we will. But first, I do think it is helpful to ask yourself, a few key questions about what you are being sold.

  • Who is promoting this model/intervention? What financial benefit are they seeking?
  • What claims or promises do they make about their successes? Do they seem reasonable? Overly optimistic?
  • What supporting evidence is offered? Anything other than anecdotes from the inner circle of disciples? Any empirical evidence?
  • Do supporters distance from everything that has gone on before? How do they connect to mainstream models?
  • How transparent are the authors about what is being done?

None of these questions will answer our ultimate question of the value of any new model. There are excellent new models with almost no empirical evidence. Conversely, there are those who connect their intervention to a piece of mainstream research but do so only tangentially (thereby giving the appearance of scientific support but lacking validity and reliability (i.e., much of the change your brain popular models)).

A model that starts in the popular sphere may turn out to be good. Yet, we still want to gather the data about the motives and purpose of the new model. Take coaching for example. There is good evidence that coaching techniques work. However, much of what you find in popular places (bookstores and the Internet) is about someone trying to make a buck, either to coach you or to sell you a certification to become a coach. Thus, it is important to look at “packaging” to see what we are being sold. We may well want to buy the “product” but buyers need to know that sellers don’t usually talk about the weaknesses of their product.

Watch out for those models that over-sell their results, especially in the area of “complete freedom” from suffering. These are almost always unsupported by empirical evidence and certainly do not line up with good theology. We want complete removal of mental pain. This isn’t a bad desire, but it does set us up to buy the “next best thing” without proper critical evaluation. And well-meaning friends may tempt us to try out some new technique because it worked for them.

And yet, we need to be open to the possibility that there is something new on the horizon. Truthful anecdotes still have some merit. And so, tomorrow I will suggest that step two includes “reading with an open mind.”

4 Comments

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , , , , ,

December 21, 2011 · 12:20 pm

Sex Offenders v. Sex Abusers: Is there a difference?


Justin Smith (Phoenix Seminary) has written a helpful chapter in The Long Journey Home: Understanding and Ministering to the Sexually Abused where he discusses the characteristics and types of sexual offenders. While we tend to lump everyone who commits a sexual offense into one (despised) category, it is better to differentiate between types of offenses and those who might commit them. More differentiation helps us (a) understand causes of abuse, and (b) treat those who commit them with more competent and compassionate care.

He believes we need to distinguish between those who have abused and those who are sexual offenders. Why? Because if 20-25% of females report abuse along with 10-20% of males, then our current stats that offenders make up 1-2% of the population cannot be accurate. The number (given that abuse is often not reported) must be higher.

If the number of perpetrators of sexual abuse is 20-50 percent of the male population, as opposed to 1-2 percent, then sexually abusive behavior is not that unusual and neither is the sexual abuser. (p. 44)

Not sure I would venture the 50% number in the above quote but the point about abusive behavior isn’t as unusual as we would like to believe.

Before we look at the differences between offenders and abusers, let Dr. Smith set the stage:

If all persons have sexual impulses and the capacity to be manipulative and potentially violent, perhaps the question should be: “Why don’t people offend”? instead of, “Why do people Offend?” “What constrains some people and fails to constrain others?” (p. 45)

Smith suggests 3 main requirements for those who abuse. First, they must disregard boundaries. They disregard social and moral prohibitions, turn off empathy and compassion for the victim, change meanings of words (to coerce), etc. Second, they disregard or deny the distress of the victim. Third, the person must struggle to regulate internal impulses.

Now to our question. Is there a useful way to differentiate offenders from abusers? Is there any value to those of us who work with those who have committed sex crimes?

Having established that sexual abuse covers a wide range of behaviors and undoubtedly involves a significant portion of the population, what can be said about sex offenders? Offenders are a subset of sexual abusers. They have not only committed sexual abuse but they have committed a specific sexual crime as defined by society.  (p. 47)

So, his primary differentiation is this: offenders are those who are caught. Abusers are those who did an offense but weren’t caught.

Now to the question: is this helpful? My answer is yes and no. Yes. When we describe the research on offenders (as Smith does) we are able to differentiate offenders in subsets: those who rape, those who are sadistic, those who offend against family members, children, or strangers. These differences do matter when considering incarceration and treatment. And likely those who get caught are different from the many who may abuse one person or who have more self-control or other factors that keep them from continuing the abusive behavior.

But the answer is also no. Because so many sexual abusers do not get caught, we can’t really say that there is much difference between an offender (one who is caught) and an abuser (one who did not get caught). I doubt it would be possible to gather a population of individuals to study them in comparison to the offenders. Who would sign up for that study?

That said, this chapter and the entire book is a great resource for those wanting more help in their quest to minister and treat survivors of sexual abuse. I am especially pleased with chapter 13 (mine!).

4 Comments

Filed under Abuse, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , , ,

December 15, 2011 · 5:02 am

Characteristics of a competent counselor?


I’ve published another blog post on the Seminary’s faculty blog site. This time, I’ve written a bit on 7 characteristics of a competent counselor. Readers here may remember there was a famous book  by Jay Adams by the title, “Competent to  Counsel”. I’m not trying to compete with that title but rather to focus on the character of the counselor. Too often we worry about the beliefs of the counselor. While beliefs, assumptions, models are very important, they are secondary to the character of the counselor. Having the right model but unable to be kind is a counseling fail. Frankly, choose the kind and humble counselor over the “right” thinking counselor if you have to make the choice between the two. The humble counselor is more likely to keep out of the way of the Spirit’s work in your life.

What are the seven characteristics I look for in my students and that I hope I exude in increasing measure? Read on here.

3 Comments

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling, counseling science, counseling skills

Tagged as , , ,