Clumsy Solutions

For many years now, I’ve noticed something that I think is pretty interesting.

We all have similar problems.  Problems of love, death, loss, fears, mistakes, power, our bodies, work, school, relationships, resources, abuse, abandonment, depression, addiction, self worth and the like.  In one way or another, most of these touch all of our lives.  Our responses to them too, seem common between us- we all have “bad” feelings and “good” feelings associated with these experiences.

It appears to me, that we also have solutions in common.  But what’s strange about it, are the solutions themselves.  If we just look at the “problems” (for shorthand purposes) we have in our lives, and our response or “reaction” to them (or as I’m calling them here, “solutions”, though we may not see them as such in the moment), the way we deal with them from this perspective is tragically ineffective.

Here’s what I mean, more specifically.  The way I see us (and of course, have done myself in many cases), is that we respond to perceived problems with (in no particular order):

  1. Avoidance, procrastination.
  2. Using our limited human intellect, and our limited human will, coupled together as a salve we cover everything with.
  3. Drugs, alcohol, food, spending, money, property, prestige, gambling, etc. ad nauseum.
  4. “Codependent” behaviors (oversimplifying: doing things for others that they can and should do for themselves, so that we don’t have to feel bad for one reason or another).
  5. Lying (or, in addict nomenclature, “manipulating”… insert tongue-in-cheek emoticon here), often, when telling the truth would be easier.
  6. Perfectionism.
  7. Control.
  8. Enduring untenable circumstances or relationships.
  9. Isolation.
  10. Ruminating.
  11. Reasoning with “unreasonable” people, or in circumstances that may not always be subject to such (there’s a large philosophical question here that can’t be addressed in a blog, hope the spirit of the thing comes through…).
  12. Self obsession.
  13. Being critical.
  14. Thoughts or attempts of suicide or related self harm.
  15. Worrying (the behavior… not to be confused with being afraid- as John Bradshaw once opined, “Worrying is like beating the drums to keep the evil spirits away.”).
  16. Pride or ego.
  17. Lashing out verbally or physically.
  18. Intellectualizing…

Et cetera.  This is clearly a truncated list, but am hoping most of us can see our most frequent responses here.  What I’m hoping to get across (at the risk of reiteration) is that these are our responses to perceived problems, and arguably, when observed, appear to be solutions that we employ to a whole host of life’s difficulties.

More striking to me is what’s absent from the list:

  1. Emotional availability, disclosure, and the like.
  2. Asking for help (having a “responsibility partner”, other similar ideas).
  3. Responsibility.
  4. Having “boundaries”.
  5. Kindness.
  6. Critical thinking skills.
  7. Service focus on others.
  8. Writing (and preferably, sharing that writing with one or more people).
  9. Art (painting, sculpture, music, performances, poetry, etc).
  10. Honesty.
  11. Support groups, 12-step meetings, or other types of community.
  12. Amends.
  13. Mindfulness.
  14. Meditation.
  15. Diet, exercise, natural healthy sleep.
  16. Being self supporting through one’s own contributions mentally, emotionally, physically and “spiritually” (for lack of a better term).
  17. Acceptance.
  18. Therapy, counseling, coaching.
  19. Community, relationships.
  20. Intimacy.
  21. “Non intervention”, being still.
  22. Forgiveness, “letting go”, and other similar solutions.
  23. Gratitude…

Seems I’m laboring the point here (hopefully in a continued effort to be helpful).  Have long looked at my own old behavior (though it still shows up sometimes!), and of course the behavior of others, and as I see “problems” come up, inevitably, I see the first set of responses above.  Often, repeatedly and perpetually for the same problem and/or new ones.  Have also observed that these responses almost inevitably make things worse, or create new problems.

While the second set of ideas don’t always “solve” things (sometimes, when honest, simply in the shadow of our own limited perspective), when practiced, my experience is that we all start to feel better about things, and certainly act better.  Very rarely, do I see the second set of  ideas create or perpetuate more problems.  Making a practice of replacing our first responses in the first section with the ideas in the second section, has been life changing for me, and lots of my clients.  If the theme rings any bells for anyone, would love to hear/see other ideas.

Advice for New Therapists… and Longtime Ones.

A week ago, my longtime friend Stan Smith MSW asked me to do some talks at USC.  The students were fantastic- they were really attentive, experienced, knew a lot of stuff, and so cool for me to see- were really into being of service in a climate that often doesn’t support our efforts.

The talks were focused on the idea of “legitimate suffering”, mostly.  It’s an idea stolen from Carl Jung, an idea near and dear to my heart for a bunch of reasons.  As I always do, we spent some time addressing questions that came up from students about doing The Work.

In both classes, the question came up, “What advice do you have for someone new in the field?”  This question mirrors too what a lot of our clients come in with.  I think the underlying theme of this for both mental health professionals and clients is, what do we do to give/get help?

It can be a complicated question, on both sides of the office/clinics etc.  As relates to depression, abuse, loss, addiction, anxiety, self esteem, relationships… whatever, if we intend to serve people suffering with it, we have a responsibility to an organized body of material that we think can be helpful.  My experience is that if it is used, it’s often helpful, when it’s not used, it is not.  Rarely is it simply not helpful at all.  The biggest mistake in my view, is simply not having a philosophy and principles for such things.  They should be agreeable both for client and caregiver, and of equal importance- they should be practical, empirical… things we can point at, that someone can do to improve the quality of their life, relationships, and decrease suffering from the things it is in our purview to treat.

We get some practical information as clinicians, some ideas framed by some “theoretical orientation” (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, psychodynamics, Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, Jungian Psychoanalysis, etc).  Often though, it reaches what some patients need, but usually in the context of that orientation specifically.  It’s not to say that this information can’t be generalized, but it misses some of the fundamental aspects of what I think I’m being asked by a new clinician when they ask me what advice I have for someone new in the field.  This is talked about even less with “seasoned” or experienced clinicians.

More specifically, I think I’m being asked things like;

“How do I develop my style?”

“How do I provide great service?”

“How do I avoid burnout?”

“What can I do to develop my skills in an ongoing way?”

“How do I set and problem-solve boundary issues with clients?”

“What should I do to pass my licensing exams?”

“How do I set fees/schedules/obtain clients/deal with insurance companies/etc?”

“What can I do to get a job, and to stay busy in this as a career, when the economy is bad, insurance companies are difficult, agencies and hospitals are few, and there’s little funding available?”

“How do I deal with difficulties with specific clients, or colleagues?”

And etc.

As these are big questions to be tackled, and there’s certainly more, it’s better served to answer them in a book (or in school, but that happens little).  Sadly, there’s really only two practical guides for therapists that specifically address these kinds of considerations.  Finally getting to the point, here’s a truncated list of ideas that we discussed in these classes that I think might be helpful in some of these areas.

1.  Make sure you’ve endeavored to work through your own stuff. We’re already notorious for “going into the field to figure out ourselves and our own families”.  Get therapy.  Go to support groups or twelve step meetings.  Write, and share it with other people.  Have a meditative practice…

2. Focus on putting yourself out of a job, and the rest is easier- surviving, avoiding problems like job loss or getting referrals or whatever.  High quality patient care is the best way to do anything, as far as I’m concerned.

3.  Spend time mulling over what a high quality of attention is, and use that everywhere in your life.  Kids don’t just equate love and attention, they also feel the quality of that attention.  Same with our partners, and clients.  In our world, it’s one of our most-taxed commodities, and one of the greatest sources of creating or perpetuating problems.  It might be argued then, that it’s one of our most viable means of solutions.

4.  Read Sheldon Kopp- particularly “If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him!” and “Back To One”. The former has the subtitle, “The Pilgrimage of Psychotherapy Patients”.  Would argue as much as it’s great for them, it’s better for us.  The latter is one of the two books I know about that are a practical guide for clinicians.  In it, he talks about a lot of the questions above- even how he deals with running into a patient in an elevator.

5.  Have principles you live your life by, and share ’em with clients.  One of the things I tell my clients the first day is, I have a responsibility to try to be the healthiest person in their life.  For me, that comes from principles.  On a totally unrelated note, since many ask, this is also part of the source of the pet name “April 30th” for my practice.  It helps as an anchor to remind me of what those principles are.  It’s also a great means of putting me out of a job- if my clients leave with principles, they have methods of problem-solving, so that they don’t need to stay with me to solve them as they come up.  At least, until they get good at using those methods.

6.  Survive school. It’s a place to learn, not get straight A’s.  There’s nothing wrong with that in and of itself, except for the fact that many of us with self esteem/perfectionism problems of our own, this can become a terrible handicap.  School, in my opinion, is designed to expose us to what legislative and regulatory bodies see as the most fundamental body of material we, and they, have a responsibility to, that insures we provide service safely and ethically.  It therefore almost can’t be a place where we really learn how to put ourselves out of a job.  That, in part, is why I think our ongoing efforts are called a “practice”.  Doing school in a way that is unhealthy (feeds perfectionism, supports us trying to fix a flagging self esteem, etc) makes us less useful long-term.

7.  Remember why you got into the field in the first place.  This one elegant idea can get us out of a lot of emotional, ethical, and practical scrapes.  On a related note, I’ve seen some of us get so fearful of our ability to stay busy that we forget and/or compromise this idea, to the detriment of not only our clients, but in maintaining a base of people to care for.  If we operate in the spirit of helpfulness, my experience has been that we can more effectively stay in jobs and clients to take care of- more than any “marketing strategy”.

8.  Have a life outside of The Work. This is also a responsibility to our clients, I’d argue.  Nature seems to reward diversity in most every environment.  This is true too, in being a mental health provider.  It keeps us culturally aware, maintains our own health in different areas of our lives, and asks us to use skills we try to teach clients.  Hobbies, activities, intellectual curiosities, responsibilities, and of course relationships- but more on those below.

9.  Accept that the licensing exam is unlikely to make sense, in light of what you intended for the field. Referring back to #6, my experience with MSWs, PhDs, PsyDs, MAs/MSs and etc, few of us felt like the licensing exams really asked us to know what we thought we should when we took them.  This was true too, of my licensure as a Psychiatric Technician (all the way back in 1988 or so).  They help regulatory bodies insure that we are safe to work, and little else.

10.  Have relationships, first by working on how to be worthy of them, and make them matter.  So often, I have people ask me how I’ve not just survived, but been passionate about doing The Work since 1984.  That is a deep question, and really goes to how I deal with all of my feelings about all my life… hence, too big for a blog.  Having relationships though, is a huge part of that.  We all want love, fun, humor, depth, responsibility and etc, but my experience is that we often focus on getting these things more than we do being these things.  Being these things I think makes us more likely to have them in a way that has quality, and certainly, enables us to live more gracefully with living a life where we often have to wade through human suffering.  This does more to prevent “burnout” than any amount of exercise, hobbies, and etc (though I of course think these things are important too.

As per usual, this is a really truncated list, and certainly doesn’t address all of the relevant dynamics of these considerations.  They do though, reflect a lot of what I wish I had as a basic framework to operate from when going through a lot of getting to mental health, and working in it since 1984.  Sure gives me some parts of another book I feel a responsibility to work on…

7400 Hours, Psychology, Clinical Supervision

About three years ago, my friend and colleague Judy McGehee LMFT (Partners in Recovery) began a supervision program for Marriage and Family Therapist interns (people that have completed their coursework for Masters degrees) and trainees (those who are about to complete Masters degree coursework).  Borne solely out of a desire to be helpful, and pass on the ability to provide effective human service, for fun and for free, Judy took on supervising 8 or so trainees and interns.  We were joined also by a visiting therapist, Ted Aaseland, Psy.D.  A little over two years ago I joined her in this endeavor, as I care deeply about passing on how to do “The Work”.

Over the course of those years, those interns provided services to the Glendora School District and elsewhere to children and adolescents for free.  Some of these turned into outpatient clients, individuals and families, also for free.  There were also public speaking engagements for adults and adolescents, professionals and non-professionals.  After all was said and done, over 7400 hours of free therapy (not including the speaking/community education efforts) were provided, all for free.

Interestingly and tragically, there are several stories that run in parallel with this one.  Before I get there though, it would be instructive to tell you a little about this process, both from the perspective of the licensed folk/interns/trainees, and from the folk we hope we were helpful to.

Will start with the experience of the trainees/interns/licensed folk.  Most universities require several hundred hours of internship/clinical experience for graduation.  The processing of these hours is supervised by a licensed therapist (who can be a supervisor, as regulated by the Board of Behavioral Sciences), and the student must pay for this process.  Most universities, in an uncomfortable wrenching of common sense, either don’t have someone to organize/and or set up/maintain these supervision placements, or they’re simply not updated for various reasons.  The student/trainee however, is still required to do this.  To add insult to injury, the trainee when in supervision, if they can find an agency, is rarely given a real experience of being supervised at their work.  It seems flabbergasting to consider this, yet it’s tragically true.

Similarly, interns (therapists just out of school) have to complete over 3000 hours of work with patients/clients, just to sit for the two licensing exams.  They have six years to complete this process, requiring continuing education to reset their chance to sit for the exams.  That means that they have to see clients, and that those hours also have to be supervised.  Related to both this issue and Judy’s (Ted’s, and mine) efforts, we were completely unable to get other clinicians to volunteer for either of these processes (for trainees or interns)- not even a couple of hours a month, let alone the minimal 2-4 hours a week.  In light of the complaints of most people we know not feeling like they received quality supervision, this is no small issue.

The second body of material that is really important here is the students and families.  There were of course the predictable experiences with clients who struggled with behavioral problems, substance use/addiction, depression, stress, bullying, pregnancy, self esteem, eating disorders, anxiety and the like.  It was also really common to have active suicidality, reports of abuse, the precursors of “thought disorders” (schizophrenia, and the like), violence, abandonment, PTSD, mood disorders (bipolar disorder and related problems) and more.  There was psychoeducation, crisis intervention, abuse reporting, ensuring of safety, documentation, creation and use of materials, referrals to resources, interfacing with administrators/Department of Children and Family Services/other clinicians/teachers/families and more, interviewing, showing up for IEP/planning meetings and more, and oh yeah… individual and family therapy.

The interns (and will give a little credit to us as well) braved all of these issues and more.  All for free.  Seven thousand, four hundred hours of it, and the attendant signing off of supervision hours.

We met weekly for all this time, as individuals and as a group, to meet the requirements for the relevant university, and for the Board of Behavioral Sciences.  We met in between to take care of paperwork.  To problem-solve.  To handle questions.  We met for lunches, at each others’ homes, in restaurants, in parking lots.  We celebrated birthdays, mourned losses, processed issues, checked one anothers’ heads.  There was a lot of happiness, crying, efforts to glean resource support to continue the work, discovery.

There’s certainly more to be said, and obviously, more work to be done.  Though this cycle of supervision is over, we still have a lot of passion and ideas for what might be next.  The whole point of writing this though, is simply to honor the work of Michael Cardenas, Eryka Gayoso, Elva Cortez, Jessica Wilson, Jeffrey Craig, Melissa Lamoureux MS, Ted Aaselund Psy.D, and most of all, Judy McGehee LMFT.  Thanks so much for making all this matter, and letting me participate.

Difficulties, Diagnoses, the DSM.

In a New York Times Op-Ed piece from today, one of the leads on the DSM-IV (the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual”, the current edition of an industry standard tool for mental health, primer here) task force wrote about the upcoming changes in the DSM-V (likely to be released in early 2013).  Summarizing, Allen was suggesting in part, “…after the changes approved this week, it will introduce many new and unproven diagnoses that will medicalize normality and result in a glut of unnecessary and harmful drug prescription.”, and that the American Psychiatric Association was  arguably no longer in a place to be singularly in charge of the meting out of diagnoses, calling it a “monopoly” (offering that an agency akin to the FDA or National Institute on Mental Health might be examples of ways to provide oversight in the efforts to insure some science around diagnosing emotional and mental problems).

Am with Allen on quite a bit of this.  What comes to me often too, is that we have equally large fish to fry with the DSM and the profession than just the pathologizing and monopolizing he suggests.  We have been over-diagnosing ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) and bipolar disorder, among others.  Our differential diagnosis (rationalizing one diagnosis vs another) has also been resulting in much harm to people by way of treating issues unneeded, and/or incorrectly.  We are also arguably guilty as a discipline of using interventions that are more “intrusive” than necessary (for instance, medicating a problem before efforts at traditional talk therapy and/or other interventions have yet to be tried).

It seems to me that in reviewing the DSM, we are more currently in need of insuring the accuracy and value of our diagnoses, in terms of insuring that those so suffering are treated more appropriately.  We do know ways to treat depression, anxiety, addictions, bipolar disorders and etc.  We do have means of helping people through grief/loss, communication problems, abuse, suffering with stress and etc.  As the saying goes though, the “cure” (a dubious word to begin with) is only as good as the diagnosis, and with the numbers of the diagnosed only increasing in the US year after year, either our diagnosing or treatment (or maybe a bit of both) are not faring as well as they might.

A quick aside here- not all of the missed treatment opportunities are about the above issues.  Some of them are due to the influence of Big Pharma (an intense imposition by the pharmaceutical industry), access and funding of mental health treatment, the insurance industry and more.

Specifically related to the DSM though, my hope is that we’d simply be better at a lot of the material we already have.  Adding diagnoses, or simply separating them into finer and finer constellations of symptoms seems both unnecessary and unhelpful, philosophically speaking.  Part of what I’m getting at above is that I think we have some good ideas about how to help many ills- I just wish we spent more time treating them, and less time diagnosing new ones.

PTSD, Euphemisms, and George Carlin

The famous American standup philosopher George Carlin has a fantastic piece about euphemisms.  Paraphrasing and simplifying, he offers that he’s against euphemistic language.  Part of what I’m with him on is that euphemisms tend to conceal the truth.

May 5th, there was this article in the Washington Post indicating that there are a group of psychiatrists hoping to change the term “Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” (AKA “PTSD”) in the upcoming DSM-V (the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th Edition”, the industry standard for all things psychiatric diagnosis… quick primer on my website here) to “Post Traumatic Stress Injury“.  The change, they hope, will make it easier for people, particularly military personnel, to more readily seek help.  They are citing that the term PTSD has a stigma attached to it.

While it arguably does, “Post Traumatic Stress Injury” might also be an equally unhelpful euphemism.  Non-military personnel frequently get the symptoms of PTSD as well.  Victims of crimes, violence, sexual abuse and more often have sufficient symptoms to justify being diagnosed with the disorder (Wiki here, for a quick look).

My concern about this is not simply haggling the diagnosis.  In all candor, the tome (the DSM) is a convention (with some real science too, but arguably still a convention)- a means of shorthand for mental health professionals to communicate.  My interest in the book is mostly about how it helps us guide treatment, and obtain treatment from the relevant funding sources.

Back to Carlin, he specifically addresses PTSD.  He takes us through the historical context- that the problem began with our recognition of the symptoms post war.  A condition we used to refer to as “shellshock” gave way to “battle fatigue”, then “operational exhaustion” (probably the grossest evasion of the depth of the severity of the symptoms of the problem), eventually leading to the current “PTSD”- arguably in light of the awareness that lots of things besides war can cause the aforementioned symptoms above.

We need a shorthand.  This will be the 6th shorthand (if we count “combat stress”) we’ve endeavored to come up with.  What we need more though, is an honest representation (and advocacy of awareness) of the consequences of these horrific events.  I’m less worried as a professional about whether or not someone suffering needs help than I am about whether we can actually get them access to it- and our evasion of these truths, often through our language, prevents us from getting legislation, funding, and other resources necessary that we can serve all victims of trauma in the ways that they need and deserve most.  Sadly, my experience of the last 28 years (at this point) has led me to feel that how we communicate about these problems has led largely to desensitization, in part, due to a euphemistic way of communicating such problems.

On a related note, often, a lot of the language in my discipline serves the individuals and the discipline itself, rather than the sufferer.  Pharmaceutical companies are served, occasionally a “new” theorist is served in terms of marketing their ideas, insurance companies are served, but rarely is it people that are suffering who are served.  It’s a source of consternation for me, both personally and professionally.

Some might say I need to come up with a more accurate term.  Maybe I should, but it’s not really the part of this that I’m invested in.  It takes longer to talk about someone suffering flashbacks, avoiding situations and experiences, fears, hypervigilance, poor regulation of their feelings, struggling with being overwhelmed by sadness or shame, having their ability to function in their responsibilities and relationships diminished (and much more), and explain what these things are to people, specifically.  But seeing how these folk are so suffering, it’s clear that doing so is worth it.  Taking the time to live with these words and feelings means much not just in terms of understanding the suffering, but honoring it.  If we’re truly going to care for people who are suffering, it will take at least that.

Therapy, Counseling, Mental Health: Some Things that Keep Us in Work

As I’ve said before, I try to work in the spirit that it’s my job to put me out of a job.  There’s some things I see pretty often though, that seem to be both counter intuitive and appear to keep me and my type in work.  My experience with therapists is that we often see these things, but rarely talk about them in a semi-organized way.  As much as loss, abuse, and abandonment cause depression, sadness, shame, low self esteem, anger, pain, addiction and etc, there are things we do that perpetuate our suffering in this way.  Some of these are survival or coping skills and thus necessary, but don’t really go very far to help someone get, and stay out of places like my office.  Here’s a list of some of those things off the top of my head:

  • Absence of critical thinking.
  • Responding to struggles by simply “staying busy” or just “trying harder”.  AKA, operating as a “human doing” instead of a human be-ing.
  • The kind of thinking that “Time heals all wounds…”, “It’s water under the bridge…”, “You’re just giving __________ power over you…”, “The past is in the past…”, “Just stay positive…”…
  • Using ideas and principles that got us suffering in the first place, to resolve that suffering.  Drugs, alcohol, isolation, shopping, food, gambling, etc.
  • Simply not knowing, and/or avoiding feelings.
  • Thinking and/or behaving as if the only answer to our suffering is for someone else to change or stop their behavior- even if their behavior was the cause.
  • Money, property, prestige.
  • Carrying the torch (or stick, if you will) of someone else shaming or diminishing/devaluing us.
  • For those that can and should, not being self supporting through one’s own contributions mentally, emotionally, physically (food, clothing, shelter…), and “spiritually”.
  • Perfectionism- both imposed on others, and ourselves.  Same is true for managing and controlling everything.
  • Going where the love “should be” in our lives, instead of going where the love is.
  • On a related note- staying in abusive or emotionally unavailable relationships.
  • This one is a little backwards from the context in the opening paragraph: took me a while to realize that I don’t have to do everything I think.
  • Blame.
  • Poor boundaries.  More specifically, not knowing where one person “stops” mentally, emotionally, physically, and/or “spiritually”, and another “starts”.
  • Operating as if our feelings are facts.
  • Euphemistic language.
  • Behaving or thinking as if we have to not be, or stop being afraid, before we can accomplish a task.
  • Same as the above, but instead of stop/not be afraid, that we have to be “motivated”.
  • Being an “island”.  Meaning, not having closeness with other folk, using ourselves as a sole resource for support or perspective or interpretation or encouragement, etc.
  • An inability or unwillingness to be “present”.
  • Can’t emphasize this one enough: not knowing who we are, and how we are.

Am guessing I’ll be adding to this list as time goes on.  The ideas above certainly warrant a deeper look/discussion to both understand and make them practical.  It appears to me that there’s a lot of fairly simple myths that might be dispelled that could help us all reduce chaos, and “increase the signal to noise ratio” in terms of our perspective and thinking.   The ideas above, I think, are a pretty great start at doing that.

Depression, Shame, Community, Intimacy

Though depression, shame, fear, anger, pain and the things that cause them (abuse, abandonment, loss) keep me in a job (some of you know I think it my job to put me out of a job), another thing that keeps me in work are ideas and terms that are ill-defined.  One of these terms is “intimacy”.

I was told once of a rumor that someone had asked Confucius what he would suggest doing to help society, and he replied “I would revamp the language.”  A lot of my work is about what we speak about, how, and how we define things between one another.  According to Alexa.com, Facebook is currently the number two most visited site on the internet.  For many years before that, MySpace was most frequently visited website.  It seems to me that these are about two things- being known and knowing/connection others.  Intimacy and community.  I think we all want intimacy and community, and the presence of these sites are great evidence to support this idea.

As I started to mention above though, the terms we use are rarely common between us.  At the suggestion of my partner, the woman I call “The World’s Most Dangerous Librarian”, I use Wordnik (www.wordnik.com) as my internet reference source for words.  “Intimacy” is most frequently/commonly defined as (using Webster’s here):  “n. The state of being intimate; close familiarity or association; nearness in friendship.”

What’s “close” though?  Association?  Friendship?  Am only tackling “close” here though, and think I can offer something that might be a helpful principle.  When describing intimacy to my clients, I suggest that intimacy is “me having feelings about your feelings about your life”.  Frequency, disclosure, and intensity of course mediate the depth of that intimacy, but I think this is a pretty principled way of defining that closeness or “intimacy” we’re most often talking about.

As Tom Waits said though, “The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away.”  This capacity for depth in closeness is largely dependent on both parties being in touch with their own feelings to begin with (see my previous blog “You Can’t Heal What You Can’t Feel“).  How clearly, presently, and transparently we both have our emotional experience affects our ability to be intimate with one another.

These also obviously affect our capacity for community.  Without a sense of my place and my purpose on this planet, a sense of purpose and community, we all suffer.  Absence of this breeds shame (low self worth/low self esteem), loneliness, sadness and depression.  As confusing and difficult and even painful as it might be, us having our own feelings, giving others access to them, a willingness to risk and be intimate with one another, seems to be our best shot at avoiding these things.

You can find out more about Petar at: April30th.org

“Show Your Work!”

When “solving problems” in addition to good “issue identification”, “diagnosis” (or whatever), it’s really important to examine methods/means to diminish or solve these problems, and have those methods be principled.  As Huxley opined:

“We are so anxious to achieve some particular end that we never pay attention to the psycho-physical means whereby that end is to be gained. So far as we are concerned, any old means is good enough. But the nature of the universe is such that ends can never justify the means. On the contrary, the means always determine the end.”

But even principled means don’t go far enough.  I have been discussing with a couple of clients and friends in the last week about getting from “point A” to “point B” as relates to The Work.  With these discussions in my head, have also come across a couple of psychology related blogs addressing resolution of specific problems.  What these conversations and blogs have in common, is my friends/clients complaining that when they’ve mentioned a problem to someone (anxiety, impulse control issues, depression, for example), and when given advice by some folk about how to resolve them, we have found essentially that at worst the suggestion amounted to “stop being __________ (anxious, impulsive, depressed)”, or simply suggesting that the opposite behavior/idea be employed.  Even from professionals.

Of course, the “middle part” here is really important.  There should be attention to the steps taken in the middle.  Those steps should specifically address the issue at hand, not simply be something rationalized as “good” or needed or healthy.  As some of my heroes have suggested, these ideas often amount to “activity instead of action”.

For instance, exercise arguably helps depression, anxiety and the like, but seems that in many cases does not specifically address the concerns identified that might be causing such in the first place (loss, abuse, etc).  In addition to that, the steps taken from anxiety to “calm” or “groundedness”, sadness/depression to happiness/serenity/gratitude (or somesuch) etc should be principled.  Meaning, they should be rooted in ideas that are repeatable, work for different kinds of problems, and preferably don’t create new ones in their wake.

Much of this is intuitive, but what keeps coming to me about these ideas is when observing “problem solving” from the outside, it’s often difficult to point to the work that is done.  Just like we’re encouraged in most math classes, we should be able to “show our work”.  When dealing with issues/problems/concerns, problem identification is really important.  So are means of problem solving- but what seems a good test of the effectiveness or value of such is the ability to point at the work done that specifically addresses the problem at hand.

As a simple example… telling someone to “calm down” rarely helps them behave differently, let alone feel differently.  There’s no steps to show, it’s difficult to see any principles this idea of “calming down” is based on.  While problem-solving emotional or relationship problems and the like it’s tempting to simply give advice and/or lean on philosophy, but there’s a lot of value in making such practical- something we can “point at”.

In our martial arts training group, if one of us has or is taught an idea/principle, we test that idea out in real time with a resisting opponent.  We also try to “break the idea”- see what conditions or problems it will not work with.  In some circles this is referred to as “pressure-testing the material”.  The same ideas might apply when solving other real world problems.  Clearly identifying the issue/context, having a principled means of intervention or “problem solving”, having a practical (empirical) means of determining the usefulness of the idea… showing our work and evaluating its utility.

Am advocating here for critical thinking when it comes to the utility of tools or ideas for problem-solving.  It seems that one of the places this utility is revealed is in whether or not we can show our work- make use of an idea in a way that is repeatable and observable (what we say/don’t say, do/don’t do).  As a therapist, I really endeavor (and hope other professionals) to give ideas that can be used by anyone, ideas that are practical enough to show the work that specifically addresses an identified problem, not something that simply gives us the feeling that we are doing something.

You can find out more about Petar at: April30th.org

Recognition for Partners in Recovery

Last Monday (9-26-11), Judy McGehee MFT, Melissa Lamoureux MS, Erika Gayoso MA, Ted Aaselund PsyD, Michael Cardenas, Jeffrey Craig, Jessica Wilson, Elvia Cortes MA and myself were recognized by the board of the Glendora Unified School District at their monthly meeting.  Formally, the agency is called “Partners in Recovery”, a nonprofit organization of clinicians providing services in Glendora and surrounding communities.

Judy, and I have been providing clinical supervision (a necessary component for grads and soon-to-be grads to get their “hours of experience” to sit for licensure as therapists or social workers) for the above mentioned interns and trainees.  Trainees are obtaining hours to graduate with their Masters degrees, interns are working on their hours (3000 hours of service over 104 weeks) to sit for the licensing examination with the Board of Behavioral Sciences.  In turn, the supervisees (the ones above and others from previous years) have provided thousands of hours of free services to the Glendora Unified School district, from elementary thru high school.  The supervisees from Partners have been assisting with issues of depression, abuse, family discord, eating disorders, suicide, addiction, grief and loss, bullying, self esteem, anxiety problems and more.

The program has been running since 2009 with Judy at the helm, and will continue at least through this year.  Judy, Ted, and the interns/trainees are all highly skilled clinicians.  It is a fantastic way for people to get services that might not have otherwise.  Nicely done everybody.

Who’s To Blame?

Much of my time is spent here, and in my therapy/counseling practice, attempting to get folk to honor how they feel.  That’s an oversimplification, but will leave it for brevity’s sake.  This is a daunting task because of the intensity and availability of our distractions, but I keep trying anyway.

One of the things that oft keeps this from happening is that when someone “hurts” us (shames, takes something away, etc), we find ourselves (understandably) making sense out of why they’d do such a thing.  We think more about the person in question “doing their best”, “having had a hard time” etc than we ever do simply saying “Ouch, that hurt…”, or some variation on that theme.  It’s safe to say that many of us, often don’t honor how it affected us at all.  Working on problems of low self esteem, depression, addiction, abuse and more we don’t want to “blame” anyone (nor should we), and oft go so far as to think our therapists are prompting us to “blame” that person, our parents, etc.

As for my sense of this, I think we could safely remove the word from our vocabulary entirely.  Maybe even replace it with considerations of “responsibility”.  In terms of a solution, will offer something I hope is very simple: we’re only blaming someone else for our feelings or problems, if we do nothingwith our feelings about it.

Previous Older Entries

Flickr Photos

Available Tuesday through Saturday

626-676-0541
Hours vary, depending on the day.
%d bloggers like this: