Merry Christmas all. Hope you are enjoying winter white if you are in a cold environ or the warm glow if elsewhere. We are looking forward to seeing Maine at Christmas–where you want plenty of snow (like below)! Will be back to posting in January 2010.
Filed under Random musings
Just got my December issue of the American Psychologist (64:9). In it is an article but Brenda Major (and others) entitled, “Abortion and Mental Health.” These authors wrote a report in 2008 for the APA task force on Mental Health and Abortion (available at here). What I find interesting in the article is the discussion of the research on the association of mental health problems with abortion. Set aside, just for a moment, your strong feelings about the topic and consider this question: how would you go about studying the effects of abortion on women using robust measures?
You cannot do a randomized, double-blind study (you subjects get an abortion while you other subjects have your baby). Thus, you cannot fully control pre-existing or co-occurring risk factors. So, what do most researchers do? Try to indicate risk markers–correlations–that may point to possible but not proven causes. The writers of this article point out that the downside of correlation or associations is that folk tend to mistake them as causes. They give one specific example: If age is the “most important known risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease (AD)” one might assume that age causes AD. But it does not. Similarly, one can do a study that shows 100% of convicted sex offenders have their own sexual victimization and wrongly assume that sexual abuse leads to sex offending. Not so.
These authors emphasize the benefits of asking two other questions (on p. 865):
1. What is the relative risk of mental health problems associated with abortion compared to the same risks associated with having an unwanted baby (whether keeping or adopting out)?
2. What predicts individual variation in women’s psychological experiences following abortion?
The authors go on to say that the hypothesis of the researcher really impacts the kinds of research questions asked (and thus conclusions). Some research focuses on traumatic experiences, others on stress and coping, still others on the sociocultural context.
By the way, it is a long article but concludes this way (p. 886):
Mental health among women who experience an unwanted pregnancy reflects a number of factors. It reflects preexisting and co-occurring conditions in a woman’s life that place her at greater or lesser risk for poor mental health in general regardless of how she resolves her pregnancy. It reflects her appraisals of the meaning of a pregnancy and abortion and her appraisals of her ability to cope with either option.
There’s more to their final thoughts but you get the point. How you look at pregnancy, abortion, adoption is likely to have a big impact on your immediate mental health. Sadly, I suspect the research also reflects the biases of the researcher (how could it not?).
I found this article interesting because it does a great job illustrating the benefits AND drawbacks of research. Researching mental health of women with unwanted pregnancies is a good idea but will fail to address the moral and ethical questions that, in my mind, take precedence in the public debate.
Filed under counseling, counseling science, Psychology
Went to log onto my Biblical Seminary course site from my laptop and somehow it no longer had my ID and password saved. Since it wasn’t one that I made myself I couldn’t remember either one. Called Eric, our registrar, for help. Wouldn’t you know it, both came back to me as I was talking to him and had fingers poised to type. I’m pretty certain my fingers remembered my password but not my brain. Now, technically, that isn’t true. What is more likely is that I had implicit memory of the password but not explicit recall. Something in the phone call made it come back to me. Ever had that happen? Weird.
Filed under memory
What is the difference from selling truth to a population and selling propaganda? A razor’s edge so it seems. I suppose another response would be, “I know it when I see it”–the response made about pornography. But what may be truth to you is propaganda to another.
Why am I thinking about this? My recent trip to DC included a trip to the holocaust museum. There, the curator of the new propaganda exhibit took us through his amazing assemblage of Nazi propaganda. Let me give you a flavor:
Propaganda as defined in the museum is, “biased information designed to shape public opinion and behavior.” They go on to say that propaganda is identified as that which
As we went through, here’s what I noticed as well. A propaganda machine works to re-write history; makes the enemy comical (caricatures of Jews evident); emphasizes oration skills; uses media, fine arts, art, color, pictures, emphasizes a logo; targets different audiences in different ways; doesn’t mind opposition but builds on it; keeps people terrified; encourages even demands grassroots involvement; gets the youth involved; portrays self as victim and minority; creates fictitious events (e.g., calls war by another name (retaliation for prior aggression); connects with known trusted and wise individuals or labels (Hitler was alluded to as the Great Physician!); encourages passivity so that the inner circle may act in their stead; and encourages skepticism and cynicism about the criticism they will receive (the Nazis told the people near the end of the war that the Allies would say evil things about them that were going to be untrue. Such activities plant seeds of doubt to encourage those to believe that the holocaust didn’t really happen).
Now, let me tell you about the reactions we had as we went though the exhibit. The Rwandans with us gasped and gaped at times. They realized that someone(s) masterminding the Rwandan genocide must have read the Nazi playbook. They reminded us that one such mastermind in Rwanda was a PhD in history and was behind the use of the Radio propaganda. They repeated over and over, “this is what happened to us.” Several of us also realized that in child sexual abuse, many of these same behaviors are used (whether consciously or not) to avoid detection. The perpetrator grooms the victim, rewrites history, tells half-truths, makes themself the victims, and even may try to plant seeds of doubt about the truth.
One more thought? Could we also say that sometimes Christian organizations use some of these tactics. Scare a population by making a caricature of the government, report only half the truth, make self as victim, excuse unchristian behavior as necessary.
While I don’t think the answer is that we ought to all become horrible skeptics in order to avoid propaganda, I do think we ought to be highly sensitive to those behaviors and attitudes that do not reflect the proper character of Christianity. We must not use tactics unbecoming of Christ–even if for a good end.
I leave you with this thought: Isn’t there a good use of propaganda? I believe so. Can you give some examples where you are getting “good” propaganda?
Filed under Abuse, christian counseling, Cognitive biases, deception, Rwanda
Spending today at the Rwandan Embassy in DC. Discussing best ways to memorialize without further traumatizing the population. Yesterday we spent a good portion of the day at the National Holocaust Museum. Believe it or not, it was a wonderful experience. I intend to blog about it in the coming days. But for now, back to our meetings.
Filed under Uncategorized
This coming week I have the pleasure of meeting up with several folks interested in the next step in our Rwanda efforts. We will be meeting with Rwandan church and gov’t officials to discuss possible training efforts before next Memorial period. Along with meetings in the DC area, we will tour, together, the Holocaust museum. I understand this will include a behind the scenes interaction with curators, holocaust survivors and others. Cool!
Hopefully, we will come out of these meetings with a clear plan for our next, yet-to-be scheduled trip. I don’t know if I’m alone in this experience, but meetings seems to drag on when I would rather start doing something. I know, at one level, how important listening is. But brainstorming and planning are way more fun! I hope we’ll get to that!
Filed under christian psychology, Historical events, Rwanda
Have you caught any of the public (media) controversies about whether President Obama really likes the U.S.? You have sound bytes of Americans saying that Obama doesn’t even like the country and even the former Vice President Cheney making a similar accusation. It is not a new controversy. Certainly, the comments of his then pastor didn’t help him…The bruhaha about wearing a flag pin…and Michelle Obama’s comments about her first time feeling proud about the U.S.
Without debating Obama’s feelings about the country, I’d like to consider the issue of our uniqueness. Is there something special or unique about the US that places us in a special category different from the rest of the world? Is it okay to even ask this question or does it automatically indicate a disrespect for our forefathers, for democracy, for the Christian roots of the country?Is it tantamount to saying that God has not had his hand on this country in some special ways?
Stating that we are not unique may be one of the remaining heresies of our time.
But, should it be a heresy to suggest that in the eyes of God and others, we aren’t so different. This does not mean that we wouldn’t choose every time to still live in this country. This is not to suggest that we have blessings that few others have. This is not to say that God isn’t carrying out his purposes via our country either.
But are we special? We have flawed individuals making up a flawed government who are seeking both personal good and, yes, the good of others (for the most part). Isn’t that true of other governments as well? Maybe not all governments seek this, but certainly many do.
Is America great? But could it be better? Yes. And so, being willing to criticize, even publicly, this country is one of the evidences of its greatness. Even further, being willing to criticize and demand better care for all is a sign of our greatness.
Seems the debate is not really about our pride in the US but in demanding no honest criticism. Sounds like the, “I can criticize my family all I want, but I’ll never admit to you that they have any flaws” mindset.
So, are we special and unique? Is it so bad to admit our flaws? Our failures? To even note that other countries have done a better job at certain things? What do you think? If your family emigrated to Canada instead, would you really be less of an individual? Would you be jealous of Americans?
Filed under Christianity, News and politics
Just heard a story-teller talking about his transformation from disregard of marriage to wanting to marry his longtime girlfriend. Looking back to the time when he thought marriage offered him nothing he said his private reaction to the question, “When are you two going to get married?” was something like this,
How come you never hear someone say, “ooh, I can’t wait to get a piece of that (meaning long-time monogamous relationships).” No, we only see them as portrayed as a ball and chain.
We all are aware of the negative connotations to monogamy in our current culture. This particular person couldn’t see any benefits and only drawbacks to marriage. It took a life-threatening crisis to bring him to another perspective.
Closing in on 20 years of marriage, I can attest that it isn’t glamorous but it is good. Marriage isn’t really about ecstasy (well, there IS some of that) it is about commitment. And commitment doesn’t give highs, it moderates the highs and the lows into something far more long-lasting pleasurable than a momentary mountaintop experience.
As I said in my recent talk on this topic, lust may begin a relationship, romance may continue it, but something more (unity, IMHO) provides the motivation to finish the race.
Believe it or not, not all of grading is drudgery. It can be if you have to read 20 papers summarizing the same stuff. But, reading response papers actually teaches the professor. You learn what the students actually heard, you see connections even you failed to make, and more.
We faculty groan when we grade, but mostly because we want what the students already have–an end to the semester.
Filed under Biblical Seminary, teaching counseling
Looking at a stack of papers I need to grade and yet not feeling the energy to do so. Late night classes take more out of me than I care to admit. My physiology class ended with student presentations and a look at bipolar disorder. As we concluded the class, I asked them to remember that,
On this last point I am pondering a bit and so let me be hyperbolic. Most people who come to see me for paid counseling come because they think (naively) I have some expertise that will shed light on their situation and a solution to their problems. They want me to do something. Why else pay that kind of money? And yet much of what I have to offer isn’t rocket science. Beyond a few fun techniques, what I have to offer is a listening ear, a willingness to walk with the other person in their travail, and encouragement to keep going back to the basics. Most people like the first two but balk at the last one. Why do we balk at going back to the basics? Two reasons: (1) we want something that will fix the problem NOW, and (2) we’ve tried the basics and they didn’t seem to work (see reason 1).
Examples of what I mean.
In physiology, we see that care for the body includes mindful meditation (My friend and former professor says a substitute word would be “watchfulness”) on the world as God sees it, developing and maintaining good circadian rhythms, watching food intake, exercise, maintaining healthy relationships and social supports. In every mental illness, these things are shown to decrease the severity of symptoms and delay relapse.
Here’s the problem: we forget the basics and because they don’t give immediate results, we go searching for other fast-acting mechanisms. For example, I want to feel safe. Instead of engaging in centering prayer over the long haul, I fall prey to the temptation to act in such a way to avoid all possible danger–thereby increasing my fears of danger.
If I don’t exercise (and I don’t much) I rarely get immediate feedback that my body is falling apart. If I don’t eat right, I don’t immediately gain 10 pounds. If I don’t pray, I don’t immediately get embittered. So, I assume that these basics aren’t all that important. Or, I know they are important but since they don’t pay off now, I don’t do them. I only do what demands I do it to avoid a crisis.
How do we stay on track with the basics? We need another person(s) willing to keep us on a short leash. As a kid I ran because I had a friend who was going to wonder where I was. As a doctoral student, I played basketball at 6 am because my peers would ask me where I was. I lost some weight a couple of years ago because my wife and I worked together. Notice that the social accountability is a key facet to help us build the disciplines long enough to see that the pay off is more than can be delivered by an exciting new technique.
Musings on Faith and Psychology 