Category Archives: counseling

January 18, 2012 · 12:27 pm

Ministry to Sex Offenders? post on www.biblical.edu blog site


I have another post on our Seminary’s faculty blog site today. You can read it here. In it I give a few very initial steps a church might take when considering starting a ministry to sex offenders.

Such a ministry is good, sorely needed, but should not be taken without concern for the entire church, including victims of abuse. as well as the family members of the offender. Any ministry we undertake should put spiritual protection–the very soul of our ministry targets–as a primary objective. Thus, helping an offender to limit access to vulnerable peoples would be seen as part of their spiritual care. As I have said on this site before, the grace of limits is a very good thing. When I accept boundaries, I am accepting God’s grace.

2 Comments

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, church and culture, counseling, pastors and pastoring

Tagged as , ,

January 16, 2012 · 12:05 pm

King to psychologists: Some maladjustment is necessary!


Dr. Martin Luther King at a press conference.

Image via Wikipedia

Recently, someone forwarded to me an email from Ken Pope (see his fabulous and informative website: www.kenpope.com) containing excerpts of Martin Luther King’s address to psychologists in September 1967. I pass on excerpts for your enrichment and encourage you to read the entire address available for download here.

Here’s King on the necessity of being maladjusted to some things:

On creative maladjustment

There are certain technical words in every academic discipline which soon become stereotypes and even clichés. Every academic discipline has its technical nomenclature. You who are in the field of psychology have given us a great word. It is the word maladjusted. This word is probably used more than any other word in psychology. It is a good word; certainly it is good that in dealing with what the word implies you are declaring that destructive maladjustment should be destroyed. You are saying that all must seek the well-adjusted life in order to avoid neurotic and schizophrenic personalities.

But on the other hand, I am sure that we will recognize that there are some things in our society, some things in our world, to which we should never be adjusted. There are some things concerning which we must always be maladjusted if we are to be people of good will. We must never adjust ourselves to racial discrimination and racial segregation. We must never adjust ourselves to religious bigotry. We must never adjust ourselves to economic conditions that take necessities from the many to give luxuries to the few. We must never adjust ourselves to the madness of militarism, and the self-defeating effects of physical violence.
…
Thus, it may well be that our world is in dire need of a new organization, The International Association for the Advancement of Creative Maladjustment. Men and women should be as maladjusted as the prophet Amos, who in the midst of the injustices of his day, could cry out in words that echo across the centuries, ‘Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream’; or as maladjusted as Abraham Lincoln, who in the midst of his vacillations finally came to see that this nation could not survive half slave and half free; or as maladjusted as Thomas Jefferson, who in the midst of an age amazingly adjusted to slavery, could scratch across the pages of history, words lifted to cosmic proportions, ‘We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. And that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’ And through such creative maladjustment, we may be able to emerge from the bleak and desolate midnight of man’s inhumanity to man, into the bright and glittering daybreak of freedom and justice. (emphases mine)

Leave a comment

Filed under counseling, Great Quotes, Psychology, Race

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 6, 2012 · 9:42 am

How to evaluate a counseling model or technique: Step three


In my two previous posts I suggested that the best way to evaluate “the next best thing” in counseling models or techniques is to start with a healthy dose of suspicion and then to read with an open mind as you try to enter their world and see what they see. Now, moving on to step three, I recommend that you take a look under the hood.

Step Three: Evaluate Assumptions

Whether you are considering adopting a whole model of counseling or merely a technique, you want to step back a bit and assess what assumptions and presuppositions color the author’s view of the world. If you adopt any portion of the model, you will be likely to adopt some portion of their assumptions. In evaluating assumptions, I find it best to ask yourself a few questions,

1. What presuppositiong, worldview, beliefs, etc. bleed through on their pages? Do they focus most on nature? Nurture? Individualist? Communitarian?

2. What ideas and values seem to be most prominent for this author, especially about human nature, health, healing, struggle, etc.

For some authors (especially model builders) assumptions are handed to you on a platter. When Carl Rogers said that he believed that humans had a drive to find health and wholeness, he made his assumptions quite well known. However, during the 80s and 90s, many psychologists stopped trying to build models. They hid behind “eclectic” and focused on “what works.” Well, “what works” (aka utilitarianism) is an assumption that we ought to be aware of. Many current authors have returned to try to build a better explanatory model for human flourishing. For example, Mark McMinn has penned an integrative psychotherapy model (reviewed here in past years) attempting to bring together cognitive and affective and spiritual models. Despite the return to model building, most popular trade book authors rarely discuss their own assumptions.

Still sound fuzzy? Just what are we looking for and what do we do with it once we find it? Consider these made up examples.

Author one: “…her problem? Her love tank was empty, had a huge hole in it from the way she was treated by her father.” Assumptions? You can see a little Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and a statement that present problems are the result of victimization from the past. This will surely impact the author’s ideas for treatment.

Author two: “…her problem? She struggles to connect her whole brain when processing emotions. Neural networks need to be developed and used to cool down her hypothalamus. she…” You can see here that the focus is on neural networks, possibly brain chemistry issues, and an overactive hypothalamus. You might not hear anything about will, choice, right thinking or experiencing. This client is a product of her brain. This will surely impact the author’s ideas for treatment.

Now, a word of caution. Just because we discover assumptions that we don’t agree with, it doesn’t mean we have to chuck the model or technique. Rather, we are merely trying to understand some of the straggler assumptions that might cling to the parts we buy into. I used to start all of my model evaluations with this step. However, I found that I was more likely to wholesale reject their observations if they were wrong in their assumptions. But everyone sees—even if poorly. And observations can be very helpful—even if fixated on one small aspect of life.

In our next step we will seek to let their assumptions challenge, correct, or refine our own (rather than just believing what we have always believed is airtight correct).

Leave a comment

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

January 1, 2012 · 5:22 am

Top 2011 reads at wisecounsel? Oldies rule!


WordPress sent me a synopsis of my blog’s stats (where are readers coming from, what do they read, etc.) for the year 2011. So, I thought I would look at what posts got the most attention this year. Surprisingly, of the top 12 posts, only one was written this year! Despite having an all-time readership number this year, it appears that older posts get the most attention. I can interpret this in two ways: my writing used to be better (or had more appealing titles? ) or, my writing has staying power.

Hmm. which interpretation is psychologically more appealing to me?

Anyway, here are the 12 top clicked posts in descending order (and their year first posted) of 2011. Each title is a hotlink to the post. [It doesn’t count those posts read through social networks or my homepage. Mostly this counts those posts read by clicking the right hand “top posts” list or by search engine results]

Top Posts for 365 days ending 2011-12-31

2010-12-31 to Today

Title

Year
Where is my wallet? Why we find it hard to learn some really important lessons  2007
Serious Mental Illness and faith: what to do?  2007
Psychiatric vs. Psychological evaluations: What is the difference?  2009
The art of counseling: Why interpersonal process is (almost) everything  2006
What is the proper response to Bin Laden’s death?  2011
Bonny and buxom? The answer to yesterday’s trivia  2008
Are you a humble person? 7 habits to consider  2007
How long should you keep clinical records?  2007
Frederick Douglass on American Religion  2007
Grief brings ‘wisdom through the awful grace of God’  2006
Mindfulness and meditation  2008
The practice of unlicensed counseling  2009

2 Comments

Filed under "phil monroe", counseling, writing

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 , , ,

December 14, 2011 · 12:00 am

New post on creation v. fall approach to relationships


I apologize for the absence here of late. Somehow, my “free time” has been eaten up, this despite my having not taught a class since October 25. Little meetings and assignments add up to a boatload of work! I’m looking forward to getting back into the classroom just so I can have a regular schedule. However, I have a new post up on the Biblical Faculty blog site on the impact of our “glasses” on our relationships. What do you look for most? The good (creation) or the bad (fall) in those around you?

1 Comment

Filed under christian counseling, Christianity, counseling, Relationships

Tagged as ,