Bobbing Around
Volume Eleven, Number Two
October, 2011
bobswriting.com/ anxietyanddepression-help.com/ mudsmith.net/ other issues
Bobbing AroundVolume Eleven, Number Two
|
|
*About Bobbing Around
Bobbing Around is COPYRIGHTED. No part of it may be reproduced in any form, at any venue, without the express permission of the publisher (ME!) and the author if that is another person. You may forward the entire magazine to anyone else. I am responsible for anything I have written. However, where I reproduce contributions from other people, I do not necessarily endorse their opinions. I may or may not agree with them, but give them the courtesy of a forum. |
Letter to the Prime MinisterDear Hon. PM, I am a counselling psychologist, which is one of the 9 specialties, on the same level of expertise as for example clinical psychology. My specialty is with adult survivors of childhood abuse or neglect. Many of my clients are too traumatised to earn a good living, so Medicare has enabled them to get effective help for the first time. I bulk bill most of my clients. These people typically don't qualify for services designed for disorders such as schizophrenia, but are among the 13% of Medicare users your cuts to Better Access will deprive of more than 10 sessions. Today I had a client on her 9th session. She was sexually abused by her brother, with her father's encouragement. It took her 6 sessions before she started trusting me enough to open up. We are just starting effective therapy. 18 sessions, the maximum until now, is only enough for people like this by being ingenious: after the first few months, 3 or 4-weekly sessions to span the year till the next referral. Evidence-based therapy for them takes 2 years +. I cannot abandon her after the next session. She cannot afford to pay for therapy. Psychiatrists have very long waiting lists, and none bulk bill in my area. In any case, you can't just substitute psychotherapists like you can, say, surgeons, because therapy vitally depends on the personal relationship between two unique individuals. So, I will continue with clients like her pro bono. But then, I deserve payment for my training (14.5 years full time uni equivalent), + 20 years experience. I have to live too, and my practice has costs. A huge sum has been allocated to Headspace, which an American commentator called the biggest publicly funded experiment ever. It has little evidence base. In contrast, the recent Medicare evaluation study has shown Better Access to be highly effective, and very cheap compared to other options. You must of course balance the mental health budget, but why at the expense of some of the most damaged, vulnerable people of society? The saving from cutting 18 sessions to 10 is a modest proportion of the total mental health budget. As a matter of urgency, please defer this cut, and investigate other ways of keeping expenses in check. Sincerely,
Any therapy is based on two hearts touching and sharing their wisdom. Alfredo Zotti |
Arianna is two years old. She calls my wife Oma and me Grandbob. Here is an email she sent us while chaperoning her parents around Europe:
dear oma zan grandbob
i llove you.
love
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar9uiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
The Contradiction of Sustainable Growth by Andrew Gaines
Business coach Anthony Howard recently posted an article entitled Creating Sustainable Growth. He said
I recently had the privilege of attending The Performance Theatre--an exclusive gathering of around 80 world leaders from business, academia, government and the social sector, together with world class thinkers--which meets each year in a city of global importance. This year we met in Beijing, in the context of China's new 5 year plan. If this plan is achieved China will contribute 30% of the world's growth over the next 5 years, and by 2020 consume all of the world's current exports. These are staggering numbers which have significant implications for business, but even more profound implications for the environment.
Anthony's observation is very important. He went on to ask
Will China--and the rest of the world--be able to adopt the necessary sustainable practices that will stop us using too much of the world's resources?
What will we do to mitigate the looming global crisis in food, water and energy?
My response is to challenge the notion of 'sustainable growth' in today's world.
Hi Anthony,
It seems that we have -- not a paradox, but a real contradiction. On the one hand people ask: what will we do to mitigate the looming global crisis and food, water and energy? This could be generalised to ask: what will we do to reverse the present trends to ocean acidity, land degradation, deforestation, cancer producing industrial toxins in the food chain and -- now beginning -- self-escalating global warming? Currently all of these trends show a 'hockey stick' escalation. Things are getting worse faster.
Viewed through the lens of ecological sustainability, it appears that we have a self-destructive global civilisation devoted to economic growth. Since the physical manifestations of economic growth are closely coupled with environmental degradation -- the more stuff the more degradation -- the contradictions is between economic growth as currently constituted and the ongoing continuation of civilisation itself.
Many would regard this as a strong and unpleasant assertion. To deal with it rationally, and not just respond with emotionally driven labels such as 'Greenie, socialist, demented...' we need to be clear about what ecological sustainability actually involves.
I think Karl Henrik Robert's The Natural Step gives the best scientific reality-based approach to understanding ecological sustainability. The short version would be that an ecologically sustainable society will not use nature's resources faster than they can replenish or regenerate. One example is the depleting water tables that both cities and agriculture depend on in many areas.
It is not hard to see that what is happening with water is simply one example of a much larger trend. For decades now World Watch Institutes State of the World reports have chronicled cumulative environmental degradation. The Stockholm Resilience Institute shows that we are over the red line in key areas. And Overburdening Australia spells out the resource and environmental implications for Australia.
Conclusion? In today's world "sustainable growth" is an oxymoron. It is understandable that a global forum of business leaders would not be talking about intentionally slowing growth in order to transition to a civilisation that works within the earth ecological parameters. But they should. Or at least they should be investigating whether the assertions of the 'environmental doomsayers' have some truth in them, and mentally testing whether proposed solutions to becoming 'more sustainable' (another oxymoron) will be sufficient.
As responsible people, we should all be doing this of course. I have done my homework, and my conclusions are evident here. My response has been to form Transform Australia, a new group devoted to healthy whole system change such that we become an ecologically sustainable and socially healthy society that is pleasurable for most to live in.
Transforming Australia by Professor Bob Douglas
Coal is not so cheap by Giles Parkinson
Geo-engineering: should we change
the face of the planet to combat climate change? by Graeme Pearman
Coffee-Powered Car Shatters World Speed Record by Beth Buczynski
Last weekend in Geelong, I attended a National Summit on "Transforming Australia." This was a three-day meeting of 60 invited activists from various civil society groups around Australia. We were united by a common concern that Australia will not be able to deal effectively with the problems that now confront the human world without transformative change in the way we manage our institutions, and especially our economy. The firm view of this group was that simply tinkering around the edges of "business as usual" is a formula for national catastrophe. The starting point for most of the participants was that we must urgently transform our governance, our economy and our culture in ways that will permit our descendants to live within the limits of nature's economy.
Australia's political system is largely ignoring the seriousness of the gathering storm that includes climate change, peak oil, disastrous loss of ecosystems, increasing world hunger and inequity and continuing growth in the human population. It is currently incapable of addressing these issues because it is being corrupted by the special interests of the status quo. If our children are to survive to a ripe old age, we must transform our political institutions, including especially the way they are funded.
The Geelong Summit was the 5th meeting I have attended on this topic in the past 18 months. The Transform-Australia movement is still in its infancy but it is a growing network of thinkers, researchers, environmentalists and social policy activists. The summit was an opportunity for sharing understanding and assets and to explore together the process of building a radically new way of thinking about Australia's future.
Of course, similar movements are developing in other countries around the world. Ours is not the only political system that is proving incapable of dealing with the realities that threaten our habitat. But the consequences for Australia if we do not do so are more disastrous than in many other parts of the world. Already it seems from evidence presented by a national expert on the matter, our marvellous coral reefs are almost certainly doomed.
There was much discussion about the factors that motivate change. Fear for the future is a strong stimulus to denial. Genuinely believing that a better and more attractive future is achievable is more likely to result in openness to radical change than lots of doom-saying. That being said, we can no longer ignore the scientific evidence that our human world has already crossed a number of critical natural boundaries, which means that we have exceeded already by about 50% the Earth's capacity to sustain us in our current use of resources and release of waste. Yet, still our population and the global economy are growing and eroding these precious resources.
So, where to next? We are a smart species; too smart I hope to hasten our own extinction. Smart enough also I think to recognise that there are greater satisfactions in being alive then simply possessing more "stuff." Realistic enough to understand at last that limits to growth have been reached and that we are capable of designing a stable state economy that will work, not just for some people, but for all of us, and the planet's health as well. All of this will clearly take some time and those who are frightened of change will resist it if they can.
A number of groups now exist in Australia, committed to the transformative task. The Transform-Australia Group, which helped to convene the summit, has a website www.transform-australia.net and a Manifesto, which it invites ordinary citizens and community groups to endorse. The Transform Australia Manifesto spells out a vision, mission and values as well as aspirations for the evolving movement. Its current supporters include a group of 10 catalysts who see their task as promoting broad scale community understanding of systems thinking and the shift in mindset that is required in the special circumstances that we now face.
The Vision for the Manifesto reads: "Our vision is for a Transformed Australia, where the well-being of all humans and the health of the planet are synonymous; where we accept that nature is our provider and we are its stewards; where we acknowledge that our economy, ecology and ecosystem are interdependent; and where a sustainable future for our descendants exists."
If you have read this far, I hope you will visit the website, consider the manifesto in its entirety and append your name as a supporter of the principles espoused there. Essential change will only come as a result of the will and insistence of people in the community. Leadership will not come from our politicians on this matter but they will respond to the community's lead.
Bob Douglas is Chair of SEE-Change ACT and a catalyst with the Transform Australia group.
34 Nungra Place Aranda 2614 Telephone 02 62533138 or 0409233138
A new economic analysis published in the highly prestigious American Economic Review has made a damming assessment of the costs of pollution from fossil fuel industries, and concludes that coal is doing more harm to the US economy than good -- and that doesn't take into account its climate impact.
The paper by respected economists Nicholas Muller, Robert Mendelsohn (Yale) and William Nordhaus (Yale), models the physical and economic consequences of emissions of six major pollutants (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, ammonia, fine particulate matter, and coarse particulate matter) from the country's 10,000 pollution sources. It is an update of a previous study concluded in 2009.
It concludes that the "gross external damages" (GED) from the sickness and death caused by the pollution is larger than their value add in several key industries -- coal- and oil-fired electricity plants, solid waste combustion, sewage treatment, stone quarrying, and marinas.
The most damning assessment is of coal, which is fingered for about $53 billion in damages a year. This estimate does not include climate change and uses a conservative estimate of health risks. The authors say that coal's damages bill ranges from 0.8 to 5.6 times value added.
Instead of being cheap and affordable, the study finds coal is likely the costliest source of electricity. This is not to suggest that it immediately be shut down, they say, but that it should be understood that for every one-unit increase in output, the additional costs are higher than the revenues.
The paper is timely in the context of the US political debate, where the Republican right and business groups have been attacking the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate those emissions -- which in the absence of a cap-and-trade scheme or a carbon tax is about the only method available to reduce greenhouse emissions. The EPA and the White House reason that if you cut back on major pollutants, you can cut back on greenhouse emissions by default.
And it also puts an interesting perspective on any cost/benefit analysis. As New York Times columnist Paul Krugman noted in a column this week:
"At one level, this is all textbook economics. Externalities like pollution are one of the classic forms of market failure, and Econ 101 says that this failure should be remedied through pollution taxes or tradable emissions permits that get the price right.
"What Muller et al are doing is putting numbers to this basic proposition -- and the numbers turn out to be big. So if you really believed in the logic of free markets, you'd be all in favour of pollution taxes, right?"
And then Krugman laughs, noting that today's American right "doesn't believe in externalities, or correcting market failures; it believes that there are no market failures, that capitalism unregulated is always right. Faced with evidence that market prices are in fact wrong, they simply attack the science."
Interestingly, the lobby groups seeking to limit the scope of the EPA's power are now questioning the EPA's assumptions on electricity reliability -- a common theme in the debate about the future of coal-fired generation in Australia. The coalition's petition contends the EPA is rushing to judgment and questions the EPA's assumptions on electric reliability.
As another aside, Bloomberg's monthly Markets Magazine has an interesting and detailed insight into Koch Industries, the secretive US conglomerate controlled by the wealthy Koch brothers (each worth around $US20 billion), which has been underwriting the Tea Party campaigns, the fights against government regulation, as well as the work of many climate sceptics, denialists and delayists.
Here's the conclusion of the Bloomberg article: "For six decades around the world, Koch Industries has blazed a path to riches -- in part, by making illicit payments to win contracts, trading with a terrorist state, fixing prices, neglecting safety and ignoring environmental regulations. At the same time, Charles and David Koch have promoted a form of government that interferes less with company actions." Bloomberg, remember, is a staid publication. It's worth a read.
Messing with climate systems is a dangerous step to take.
In the past few years, there has been growing interest in geo-engineering our climate. Geo-engineering means making sometimes planetary-scale physical or chemical changes to alter the amount of heat coming into, or getting out of our atmosphere.
It's a serious step. Should we even be looking into it?
We have increasing evidence that human activities are changing the climate in ways that may have serious consequences for natural ecosystems and human economies.
Despite that knowledge, there are significant delays in global action to limit future climate change. We are not significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and this is exacerbating the potential for greater climate impacts.
Targets exist for cutting greenhouse gas emissions -- Australia is aiming for a 5% cut by 2020. But we don't know enough to accurately assess the probability of future exposures or their impact if they occur (that is the risk).
For example, will the functioning of natural ecosystems be more sensitive to what we currently perceive as small climate changes, than we thought, or will these "small" changes trigger more rapid responses such as the de-glaciation of Greenland or the release of more greenhouse gases from under the sea or ice?
It is not that we know if these outcomes will occur, but simply that there is a risk they might. If they do, our targets for reducing emissions to avoid exposure may turn out to be too conservative.
We now have some capacity, though limited, to anticipate what will happen if we intervene in the climate system. But geo-engineering interventions -- as with climate change wrought through greenhouse gases -- are likely to result in unanticipated outcomes. And different regions will respond differently.
There are many ways to modify the radiative budget of the planet; generally these methods try to stop sunlight getting in to the atmosphere.
They include:
Another approach is to modify the biogeochemical cycling of radiatively important gases, specifically carbon dioxide, in order to reduce their levels in the atmosphere.
Examples include:
Entrepreneurial interests are aware of the potential commercial gains of geo-engineering. Many are encouraged by the introduction of carbon pricing, which promises to create a market for those who can demonstrate they have avoided or reversed the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
But entrepreneurs are often narrowly focused on a particular technology -- they may just be interested in developing space mirrors, for example, without looking at the wider context.
Such endeavours may inadvertently create outcomes that do not lead to long-term benefits for the natural world, or to the interests of the wider community or future generations.
Governments are developing policies to institute geo-engineering solutions, often without properly assessing the limits to these possibilities.
Individual nations -- with their distinctive economies and environments -- are exposed to unique natural and unnatural climate variability. A nation may want to embrace attempts at climate modification that may not respect wider regional or global interests.
With so many groups interested in pursuing geo-engineering, and so many risks involved, we must continue to develop knowledge through scientific and technical research. This knowledge can underpin future climate modification or, indeed, argue strongly against it.
There are great potential dangers if this research if not sensitively undertaken. We need widely accepted guidelines for both its conduct and, if appropriate, its application.
Such guidelines are largely absent and they are urgently needed. There is a serious danger that nationally or sectorally driven interests will succeed at the expense of the wider global community, or indeed intergenerational interests.
Guidelines need to consider the possible inequity of potential responses -- how will other societies and species be affected if Australia decides to put sulphates into the atmosphere, for example? They must look at moral and ethical considerations, not just technical ones.
The need to look more closely at geo-engineering has been recognised in the work of NASA, the Royal Society, the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee and the US Climate Institute.
The American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society have prepared formal position statements on the issue.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has also commenced its own assessment of the topic.
So should Australian researchers get involved?
The challenge to improve knowledge is always tempting. But it shouldn't be confused with any commitment to undertake geo-engineering.
Taking an interest in this issue does not mean avoiding the very important tasks of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and planning for adaptation strategies.
All geo-engineering approaches are often placed in one basket. In reality, they are so enormously different each needs to be considered on its own merits using a rigorous and systematic assessment against a set of criteria.
When looking at any geo-engineering plan we should ask:
Geo-engineering is not an engineering problem; far from it. It includes physical science, but above all, issues of equity and ethics, legal considerations, and human responsibilities with respect to each other and to the biosphere in general.
Before Australia gets involved in geo-engineering, we need guidelines nationally and globally.
Graeme Pearman discussed the risks of geoengineering at "Geoengineering the climate: a southern hemisphere perspective", held at the Australian Academy of Science on 26 & 27 September.
This article was originally published at The Conversation. Read the original article.
For the most part, humans are the only ones that "run on coffee," but some ingenious designers in the United Kingdom are looking to change that.
The original Coffee Car was constructed for a 2010 episode of the BBC television show, "Bang Goes the Theory." The theme of the episode was vehicles that could run on organic waste, and since there were lots of coffee shops around throwing away piles and piles of spent coffee grounds, that was the material the team chose to work with.
The initial version was such a hit that the team decided to try for a Coffee Car 2.0. After removing around 550 pounds of excess weight from the interior of a Rover Sd1, the Teesdale Conservation Volunteers of Durham, England were able to install a "gasification" system that burns wood and coffee grounds at a high temperature to produce fuel.
The result is a synthetic gas, or syngas, made of carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and methane capable of powering an internal combustion engine.
Earlier this month, the car reached an average speed of 66.5 miles per hour (it topped out at 77.5 mph), breaking the Guinness World Record for landspeed for vehicles running on organic waste. The previous speed record in this category was 47.7 mph, set by the wood-burning Beaver XR7 in 2010.
From Care2.com.
New Indigenous mental health resource launched
Meeting the social and emotional wellbeing and mental health needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people has become easier following the launch of a new website at the 46th Australian Psychological Society (APS) Annual Conference in Canberra.
The web resource is a new initiative that showcases 'promising practice' principles and methods and features examples from existing programs and services in order to assist service providers seeking to develop, or improve, a culturally appropriate service for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Site users will be able to search an extensive database of Indigenous-specific social and emotional wellbeing services and programs across Australia, and access information on culturally-specific tools that have been developed, or adapted, for use with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Heather Gridley, Manager of Public Interest at the APS, said: "There is growing recognition of the need for programs and services to address social and emotional wellbeing and mental health issues in many Indigenous communities. However, if such issues are confronted or dealt with in a culturally inappropriate way, well-meaning service providers can unwittingly do more harm than good."
The website -- Social and Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Services in Aboriginal Australia (SEWBMH) -- was developed following a comprehensive review of 46 indigenous-specific services in remote, rural and urban settings across Australia. This review was conducted for the APS by a group of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander psychologists, who went on to form the Australian Indigenous Psychologists Association following their involvement in the project, which was funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing.
Ms Gridley said: "The site hopes to increase policy makers' understanding of innovative, best-practice models that work in indigenous communities. Some of the Indigenous-led programs have been operating 'under the radar' for some time, but they work because they are what their communities asked for."
Humour therapy is as effective as widely used antipsychotic drugs in managing agitation in patients with dementia -- and avoids serious drug side effects, a new study to be presented this week at the National Dementia Research Forum shows.
The first major study of the impact of humour therapy on mood, agitation, behavioural disturbances and social engagement in dementia patients found both short term and persisting decrease in agitation, according to lead researcher, Dr Lee-Fay Low, a Research Fellow at UNSW's School of Psychiatry.
The SMILE study across 36 Australian residential aged care facilities involved the recruitment and training of a staff member to act as a "LaughterBoss" who worked with a humour practitioner with comedic and improvisation skills -- not unlike "Clown Doctors" used in hospitals to aid recovery and lift mood in children.
Jean-Paul Bell, the key humour therapist in the SMILE study, has set up the Arts Health Institute (AHI) to train humour practitioners and aged care staff. The AHI's core program, Play Up, provides a playful relationship with residents and staff in aged care, focusing particularly with people with dementia. The AHI is now focused on translating the knowledge of the SMILE study into residential aged care and continues to work with UNSW's Dementia Collaborative Research Centre to roll out the program nationally.
Dementia rates are expected to double to in the next 20 years in Australia to about 450,000, mainly due to an ageing population. About 6.5 per cent of people over 65 and 22 per cent of people over 85 have dementia -- an umbrella term used to describe up to 60 different conditions causing similar neurodegenerative changes in the brain.
Between 70 and 80 per cent of people suffering from dementia are troubled by agitation, a problem for both patients with the disease and their carers.
"Agitated behaviours include physical and verbal aggression, wandering, screaming and repetitive behaviours and questions. This is challenging for staff and often indicates unmet needs and distress in the residents of aged care facilities," says Dr Low.
The SMILE study found a 20 per cent reduction in agitation using humour therapy, an improvement comparable to the common use of anti-psychotic drugs.
"This shows humour therapy should be considered before medication for agitation, particularly taking into account its side effects."
A major 2009 study for the UK Department of Health found serious side effects of antipsychotics, including thousands of deaths and strokes, linked to the use of these drugs in dementia and recommended a reduction in medication rates and specialised training for carers in non-drug therapies.
In the SMILE study agitation decreased not only during the 12 week humour therapy program, but remained lower at 26 week follow up. Happiness and positive behaviours rose over the 12 weeks of the program, however, dropped as soon as humour practitioner visits ceased.
http://www.unsw.edu.au/news/pad/articles/2011/sep/SMILE.html
Pro bono email therapy
I have just returned from a week in Canberra, where I attended the annual conference of the Australian Psychological Society. I ran a 90 minute workshop on "Mindfulness and CBT" with my friend Michael Anderson, and was one of the presenters in a forum on volunteering in psychology.
I have posted the transcript of my volunteering talk at my psych web site. Have a read, to find out how you can make your life a better place to be in.
A report in New Scientist provides additional evidence that humans are not unique, but part of the web of nature we share with others who experience emotions. I have addressed this issue many times previously.
Two research teams, in Italy and Greece, have reported behaviour in cetaceans that is very hard to understand unless we attribute the ability to grieve the death of a loved one to them.
I don't know why this is so difficult to accept for some people. It is arrogant to think that only humans are capable of emotions, logical thinking, remembering and the like.
My lead to the source is Care2.com
British Psychological Society on DSM-5 by Will Meek, PhD
Some of you may be following the development of the forthcoming fifth revision to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the major book used for psychiatric diagnosis. There has been a lot of criticism due to the secrecy of the process this time around, but the British Psychological Society (BPS), the major mental health organization in the UK, is taking an even more interesting and refreshing angle: criticizing the entire current framework of diagnosis.
The DSM takes a medical approach to diagnosis. In short, this means that a 'patient' is assumed to have an underlying 'pathology' that manifests as various 'symptoms' that are assessed to make a 'diagnosis' and then apply a 'treatment' to said diagnosis. This approach basically makes various human conditions into 'illnesses' that need 'interventions' like medication or cognitive behavioral therapy. In a recent paper, BPS has criticized this framework as harmful to individuals and the public.
"The Society is concerned that clients and the general public are negatively affected by the continued and continuous medicalisation of their natural and normal responses to their experiences; responses which undoubtedly have distressing consequences which demand helping responses, but which do not reflect illnesses so much as normal individual variation. (p.1)"
"We believe that classifying these problems as 'illnesses' misses the relational context of problems and the undeniable social causation of many such problems. For psychologists, our well-being and mental health stem from our frameworks of understanding of the world, frameworks which are themselves the product of the experiences and learning through our lives. (p.4)"
As a practicing psychologist who also teaches a class on diagnosis for master's level therapists, I could not be more excited reading this paper. BPS essentially takes a more humanistic and social constructivist approach to the problems of living. The benefits of this include reducing stigma, a larger focus on the interpersonal dimensions of mental health, and normalizing the experience of having problems during life. Cheers to you BPS, now if only your American counterparts would get the message...
Dr Will Meek is a counseling psychologist practicing in Vancouver Washington. Will is a native of Cleveland Ohio, and he attended Baldwin-Wallace College, University of Missouri - Kansas City, and the University of Delaware for his training. He specializes in integrative approaches to psychotherapy and diagnosis, and the psychology of men and masculinity. Will writes regularly at his website Vancouver Psychology.
Liana is one of Australia's foremost Buddhist psychologists. She spends much of her time running workshops in many places. She is the Director of Mindfulness Centre, specialising in teaching and supervising mindfulness to health professionals across Australia. Liana's special interest is in integrating Clinical and Health Psychology, Relationship Counselling, and meditation for complex presentations. In private practice for 20 years, she believes that life can be joyful and inspired.
Millions of people can't figure out relationships, because they have brains that are wired to be reactive in a relationship. We are strongly influenced by neural pathways in our brains, formed from when we were very young. Some of us had really healthy, attuned relationships with our parents/caregivers. Our neural connections and expectations were founded in the experience of people: paying attention to us in meaningful ways; being interested in who we were; and responding to us based on what was happening for us, not on their own feelings.
But, being a mindful, wise parent at all times is not that easy -- even for the most well-intentioned loving parents. Consequently, for many of us, our childhood experiences generated some unhelpful neural connections of fear and longing etc., that have led us to being reactive in ways that do not serve us, or those we care about.
This early relationship wiring is deep in the brain, not subject to logic and insight, and not readily accessible through the usual thinking, problem-solving and behavioural change strategies.
So, in the face of this, how do we invite and support healthy, emotionally satisfying relationships? Research over the last 5 years is showing the neurobiology of how mindfulness training can help in many different ways to rewire the brain, build new neural connections and nourish the heart in human relationships.
Mindfulness training stimulates and develops new connections in key integrative areas of the brain (for example, the middle prefrontal cortex), laying the foundation for new patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving. Neuroscientists believe this area plays an important role in integrating our higher, "intellectual" brain areas (for example, your frontal cortex) with those down below in our more raw, "emotional" brain area (for example the amygdala).
If you want to sow seeds of compassion and wisdom, rather than "busying-up" your intellectual, rational frontal cortex any further, I invite you to practice mindfulness meditation, and see for yourself.
I don't understand it at all. Why is it that whenever I try my best to fit in with other people, none really do care of my existence? It is as if I was there but then no one even cares. You see I grew up different from the other kids: I am always alone, I am always quiet and so on so forth. But when I began to socialize people and become confident of myself, I did become a great conversationalist due to the fact that I am truly observant of how my mother talks to other people. In fact I really am become a very friendly person who is confident to her words once she sees the person is actually listening to her. In fact, I remember everything a person tells me: name, birthday, situations, etc. And also I became a very helpful friend who comes in need. I knew myself as a friend who cares truly.
However, I always have this kind of experience. Even after I befriended people and whenever they see my weird side, they tend to treat me as if I was not in their circle at all. Even despite we get to know each other together but I feel like I wasn't a part of the circle. And that wasn't the first.
Actually it also happens to me in my father's side of a family who will never accept me since I was born and it also made me wonder. Asking them why won't solve anything at all.
And even in elementary, highschool and right now college.
So please tell me what's wrong with me that makes me think that I am not accepted to the society? I feel like I don't belong to anything at all. Even in organizations that has my hobbies on it or even the church organizations didn't make me feel so welcome. When I did ask someone about this he just said that it might be probably because I am weird and I know that I can't actually help being weird after all. it's because it's already in me. And I can't pretend that I am not is because I want to be true to myself.
Why is it that I feel like an awkward person even though I have never done any hurtful things to others? (if there is, I will know that straightaway).
My dear,
You are not weird. You have the privilege of being different. This is a strength rather than a weakness. The problem is not that something is wrong with you, but that you believe that something is wrong with you.
Because you think poorly of yourself, you send out the energy "I am not worth being friends with." People then respond to that, without realizing it. When you become pleased with being different, and proud of it, people will respond to the energy you send out with liking and admiration.
How do I know this?
Because it happened to me. Until I was about 23, I seemed to have "Kick me" written on my forehead. Wherever I went, someone victimized me. Then things changed, and I started being treated with respect by most people. When someone didn't, I could shrug it off as their problem, not mine.
Of course, I don't know what behavior patterns "weird" means to you. But if you now look on whatever it is as potential for doing things in a novel way, you can use your difference to find new solutions to problems people are stuck in, to amuse and entertain, to prevent mistakes by seeing pitfalls others don't... there are all sorts of possibilities.
Think of it this way. It takes an ordinary person to go where others have gone. It takes an extraordinary person to lead the way, to break a new path, to go where no one has gone before. Einstein was a shy boy who did poorly in school. Famous comedian Spike Milligan was suicidally depressed for most of his life. Columbus was thought to be crazy when he proposed to sail to India by going west from Spain. Alexander the Great was presented with a knot no one could untie. He whipped out his sword and CUT it open.
I have also done many things no one else thought of. So can you. Look in the mirror and say, "She is different. How wonderful." Then analyze the ways your difference gives you opportunities to shine.
You have already found one, although you don't realize it. Because you've been an outsider, you've become very good at observing people, and learning by copying them. This is the kind of skill I also developed, which is why I am good at psychotherapy and creative writing.
What will you become excellent at?
:)
To Dr. Bob Rich
Thank you for your inspiring words and advice. Although I still can't say that I am fully recovered but little by little I will continue to make that a strength rather than a weakness. I will make sure that I will keep your words in mind. But I knew it is still a faraway journey ahead of me. But I won't give up, Doc. I will be strong.
Bob
...It's strange.
I find myself writing to you in the vague hope that you may listen or even have the time to listen. I don't wish to burden you with my issues and feel the same guilt for even writing this as many have done before me. I have read through most of the information on your page in the attempt to convince myself this bump in the road is something I am able to move on from like others who have visited you site.
I have always struggled with my 'mind'...I feel continuously tormented in many ways, not being able to 'MOVE ON' from things that happen to me...etc. the list is endless...this is even though I earn fantastic money in a very respectful job, with great responsibilities. I work for a very large business and hold a senior position at my current age of 23.
I am obviously blessed in some way to have such success? I have worked so hard and sacrificed so much that it often brings me to tears in moments I actually have to think how I am / have treated others along my journey.
I have a girlfriend who loves me and idealises me, my family are waiting for me and I find myself lost...lost in it all. I crave direction yet strive to be free of restraint, clearly now this is affecting me to the point where I'm desperately looking for help.
..I think I have met the cross roads in my path of life, one I've been avoiding for years... It may be time to either deal with this head on or take a different route. I am to tired to battle my own daemons any longer and fear its of no use anyway.
I wake 10 times a night with a racing heart, I feel that I never sleep but I never under perform at work... I'm too scared to go to my doctor and say how I feel. I'm too scared to tell people in general how I feel. So many look to me for strength and direction and I'm in a position I cannot control.. I am also not worthy of this, at all.
sorry, I'm going on here. Ill get to the point and save your eyes and time. What would your advice be? and I mean -- do I need to speak with someone? can it actually help me? ...what on earth do I do? is there a book or tape / CD you may be able to advise to help me cope? Am I even normal?
I feel sick at the thought of leaving all those who love me so much and I love equally. I cant help but think I wasn't meant to be here and in this world with such caring people, I just don't deserve it. I hope you understand just how hard this is for me to write, I'm a very quiet person and no-one really knows this much about me so I would appreciate your confidentiality in this matter.
I am sorry. Sorry for emailing you in what could be the dead of night with my worries.
If you get a chance to come back to me I would be very grateful.
Regards
Marc, I'd like you to read two books:
"Man's Search for Meaning" by Viktor Frankl, and
"The Rugmaker of Mazar-e-Sharif by Najaf Mazari.
Also, read http://bobswriting.com/essay.html.
My guess is that you are NOT depressed. Your self-assessment is strong and positive, without the kinds of distortions one sees with people who have a damaged perception of themselves. Also, you are probably not suffering from anxiety per se.
I think the problem is that you have accepted the myths of society without question, and have striven for the goals these myths state we should chase: happiness through material wealth, status, power. You've got it all -- and so what?
You have pretty well arrived at the destination so many seek without success. Having reached there, now you have nowhere to go. Some people make the mistake of chasing the same mirage with more and more without limit, but you are intelligent enough to see that if there is no satisfaction in this much wealth, status and power, then more of the same will be... the same.
So, if I am right, you are in an existential crisis. "What the hell am I doing on the planet anyway?"
John Kennedy once said, "Do not ask what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country."
Generalize that, and you have your answer.
I have a friend who became a top level executive at BHP at about your age. He made heaps of money, and decided there had to be more in life. He stopped work. Instead, he started working with people dying of cancer and their relatives. He has done a lot of good, and got a great deal of joy out of it. His life is full of meaning and purpose and love. In 2005, he gave that away too, and went to Africa, where for 5 years he worked with AIDS orphans: kids dying of AIDS after having lost their parents to the disease. He is now back home in Australia, as the head of an organization that works with cancer sufferers.
I am not saying you need to follow his example. A Shintoist saying is: "There are many mountains to God, and many paths up each mountain." Find your mountain to God, and break a path up this mountain.
The essence is in being of service to others, like I am of service to you now.
I hope this is enough to kick-start your new approach to life. If not, you might consider doing email therapy with me. See http://anxietyanddepression-help.com/intercouns.html.
Most of the cries for help come from people who are in no position to pay for therapy. Many of them are from teenagers. So, I have the pleasure of guiding them pro bono. Since you do have a good income, instead we can have a more professional relationship.
But even if we don't, I'll be happy to have an email conversation with you.
I'm a teenager, 15 going on 16, and I'm going through a really hard time. I don't know where else to go, I feel trapped so I thought this would maybe help. I've always had OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Dissorder), I've seen a psychologist for them but really nothing worked. I'm also a very nervous and anxious person. 4 weeks ago, a guy I like a lot left for school. I was very upset but it turned into something more. Not necessarily just because of him, but I've been feeling extremely depressed lately. Also, I've always had pretty low self-esteem, but lately its dropped a lot. I've always felt like I can't succeed, like i'm not good at anything, and that nothing ever comes easy to me. I always feel sad now, and even happy things can rarely make me smile. I cry myself to sleep most of the time, and I spent half my time listening to sad music. I look in the mirror and see an ugly girl, although many people tell me I'm very pretty, I could never see it. I used to have the occassion when I looked in the mirror and thought I looked decent but now I look at myself with disgust. I feel like everything bad happens to me and I feel like I have every issue. I even feel like I have an issue of thinking I have every issue, if that even does make sense. My horrible self esteem, this depression, my anxiety issues, it's all just so much. I feel like no one likes me, even though I'm surrounded by so many friends. I'm in the more popular crowd at school yet I still feel like such a loser lately. I feel empty and sad, I feel like I'm trapped in this sadness and I feel like I'm a constant failure. What's wrong with me? I just don't understand how somebody can have so many issues? Please help me
My dear, you are not alone. Your sad story is all too common.
But other sufferers have climbed out of this deep pit. I am one. I now work as a counseling psychologist precisely because I have suffered in the past, so it gives me joy to lead others toward a good life.
In your question, you have presented two contradictory views of yourself.
In one, you've "always had" OCD, and are ugly, and no one could possibly like you, a loser and a constant failure.
At the same time, you are aware of the outside view: how others see you. That's very different, isn't it?
Believe the second one. People like you and I have a distorted, irrational view of ourselves. The inner view is a pack of lies. The outside view is objective evidence that proves this.
For a start, you don't "have" OCD. You have chosen to DO OCD. Only, until now, you haven't realized that you made a choice.
OCD is a form of superstition. "Terrible things will happen unless I have my clothes packed exactly like this... or wash my hands exactly 17 times after touching a door handle... or I don't touch every fifth brick in a wall I am passing... or whatever.
It doesn't matter when you formed these beliefs. You were a little girl then, and the original little rituals kept your anxiety at bay. But because they worked in doing that, they grew, and when you encountered new threats you applied the method of dealing with them until now they seem to have taken over your life.
The O part is obsessive thinking: thoughts going round and round and round till you want to scream to stop them.
Look up on the internet Professor Edna Foa. She devised a way of beating OCD that works, provided only you are brave enough to do it.
You beat the compulsions by disproving the superstition. Refuse to do whatever the OCD tells you. Face the fear and do it anyway. For example, if you MUST avoid stepping on cracks on the pavement, then make sure you step on them deliberately, and imagine you are grinding the monster OCD into the ground. Nothing terrible will happen (or even if something unpleasant happens that day, it is independent of having stepped on cracks). So, then you can feel powerful for having starved the monster of fear (which is what OCD eats).
The way to beat the obsessions is to wear them out. Set aside an hour of private time. Then say aloud the worst repeating thoughts, over and over and over. At first, they will have the usual emotion, which is awful. But by the 4th time, or the 20th time, or the 100th time, they will have lost all meaning, and after this they will fade away. If one does return, it will be boring and not at all upsetting.
Again, when you do this you'll get a feeling of power.
Everything goes around and around, but it's a spiral. Until now you have been spiraling down, till you got this point of depression and hopelessness. When you beat OCD, or even improve it slightly, you will have started spiraling up, and then nothing can stop you!
It will take you years of work, as it did me, but you can end up where I am: in a life of contentment and self-respect.
Remember, believe the outside view.
Show or tell
A cliche of many people who offer advice to writers is to "show not tell." This is not quite right: there is a place for both telling and showing.
Some scenes (as many as possible!) are full of tension. Something important to the plot is happening. Perhaps a character is in trouble. Two lovers-to-be kiss for the first time. The detective is presented with a clue. Whatever it is, such plot elements need to be presented vividly, so they come to life for the reader. This is the place for showing. You as writer need to become the character, and record what you experience. Blah statements like "John felt angry" are no good. We don't need a lecture or explanation, but a direct report of what the character sees, hears, smells, feels in the body, thinks, remembers.
Here is an example:
The first time I saw my love, she had long dark hair with a red band holding it in place, pansy-blue eyes, and a long elfin face that was quick to flash into a shy smile.
We were watering our sheep at a sizable creek, before descending to the next village. We followed this route every year of course.
She came striding up the path, a little bit of a girl, a yoke over her shoulders holding two wooden buckets that bounced around at every step.
Here is another:
If I wasn't an old girl of eighty-two, I'd be dead too.
Not that I care -- I'd be better off dead than the way I am. I haven't slept at all since it happened. Every time I close my eyes, I see the horribly mutilated little bodies, and Naomi's white crossing supervisor uniform covered in deep red blotches and bits of her brain, and I see his gloating face as he flashes by.
It was on purpose. I could see it in the leer of his eyes, his half-open mouth. I could even see that he was leaning forward in his seat, the seatbelt a little pulled away from the side. He looked like a naughty kid snatching a chocolate bar off the shelf before he runs out of the shop.
If I've done my work right, you can BE there. These two passages happen to be in first person, but that is incidental.
Other passages, necessary as they may be, are low in tension. Showing them can become laborious to write, and worse, laborious to read. You need to skip over them in the minimum number of words possible, using them as bridges to the next bit of excitement. Telling is the way to do it. Telling is a summary from outside the action, but not outside the reality of the story. It is not done by the writer, but by a character, although possibly this is implicit.
For example,
The days passed uncounted, measured only by the increasing heat of summer. This morning, the men had managed to get a drifting log out of the river and dragged it ashore, then chopped most of the branches off with a couple of rusty axes white men had thrown out, supplemented by the old stone axes most people still used. So, Mick was tired but feeling good. As Old Mother the Sun reached the top of the sky, he called to his children, "Go and wash your hands," and Atan led his two little sisters to the river. Smiling, Mick watched as they splashed each other, screaming and laughing, then ran back to the hut. He noticed that some of the flattened kerosene tins making up the wall were loose. He'd have to find something to rebind them into place with before the winds of winter came.
So, show what brings the story to life, tell what would otherwise slow it down.
We're accepting entries for New Voices Young Writers Competition until 10:00 PM Central Time U.S. on October 31, 2011. Feel free to send folks to the New Voices website to have a look. The NV brochure is there for download and you can send that wherever you'd like to promote this, the best thing that EPIC does. The NV website is linked from EPIC's homepage.
If you haven't dropped by to see the wonderful new website, go have a look.
Please consider serving as a judge for NVYW. I promise you, it's the best time you'll ever have judging a writing competition.
http://bitly/NVYW_JudgeApplication.
Betty Kasischke
Be an author panelist for Faith and Fiction Retreat 2012 to be held in June 29 - July 1, 2012 Dallas, TX. The door is yet open, but shall be closing soon. Either October 15th or until we have ten paid author panelists whichever comes first. We will also be doing the Pitch Session Panel again for 2012, so if you're looking to switch houses or get traditionally published, you want to be in the place!
The featured authors for 2012 are ReShonda Tate Billingsley, Michelle Stimpson and Vanessa Miller -- read on to find out how YOUR costs could be covered by the Faith and Fiction Retreat! Author Panelists (only ten slots) -- Kimberly Cash Tate, Shelia Lipsey, Shelia Goss, Rickey Teems II.
To pay your Author Registration fee, visit www.faithandfictionretreat.com/authorpanelists.html . If you have any questions, please email me at tiffany@tiffanylwarren.com. If you are a self-published author, you are welcome, however your book must be reviewed by the retreat panel (readers & authors). Email me for more information. Please forward to your author friends!
Author Panelist Registration -- Option 1 $99; Option 2 $149
Option 1 includes
Option 2 includes
As always, the Faith and Fiction Retreat recognizes when authors invite their readers to the retreat! Here are the details of the Faith and Fiction Retreat Reader Referral Program:
Second edition of Frugal Book Promoter
The second edition of Carolyn Howard-Johnson's The Frugal Book Promoter is an updated version of the multi award-winning first edition. It has been expanded to include simple ways to promote books using newer technology--always considering promotion and marketing techniques that are easy on the pocketbook and frugal of time. It also includes a multitude of ways for authors and publishers to promote the so-called hard-to-promote genres. The award-winning author of poetry and fiction draws on a lifetime of experience in journalism, public relations, retailing, marketing, and the marketing of her own books to give authors the basics they need for do-it-yourself promotion and fun, effective approaches that haven't been stirred and warmed over, techniques that will help rocket their books to bestselling lists. You'll also l earn to write media releases, query letters and a knock 'em dead media kit--all tools that help an author find a publisher and sell their book once it's in print.
When you buy the book today, you'll receive more than a dozen great bonuses for writers.
September:
Subjects this month: Slowing down, Global ebook award for Doggie Biscuit!, Book reviews, Progress Report, I wonder about this, Series: State of America: Our crazy medical care system, Excerpt from Alien Seeds.
October:
Media/Politician perfidy, Quote, Medicaid fraud in Texas, The movie Contagion and my book, The melanin Apocalypse, Special price for The Melanin Apocalypse, Book reports, Progress report, Continuing series, The State of America: Teachers, Schools and Education, Free short story from Oops!: Cure For An Ailing Alien.
Darrell Bain
I belong to many groups that work toward a sustainable future. A good one to check out is http://climaterealityproject.org/
The secret to a long life
A doctor on his morning walk noticed the old lady pictured above.
She was sitting on her front step smoking a cigar, so he walked up to her and said, "I couldn't help but notice how happy you look! What is your secret?"
"I smoke ten cigars a day," she said.
"Before I go to bed, I smoke a nice big joint.
"Apart from that, I drink a whole bottle of Jack Daniels every week, and eat only junk food. "
"On weekends, I pop pills, have sex, and I don't exercise at all."
"That is absolutely amazing! How old are you?"
If you received a copy of Bobbing Around and don't want a repeat, it's simple. Drop me a line and I'll drop you from my list.
You may know someone who would enjoy reading my rave.
Bobbing Around is being archived at http://mudsmith.net/bobbing.html, or you can forward a copy to your friend. However, you are NOT ALLOWED to pass on parts of the newsletter, without express permission of the article's author and the Editor (hey, the second one is me.)
If you are not a subscriber but want to be, email me. Subject should be 'subscribe Bobbing Around' (it will be if you click the link in this paragraph). In the body, please state your name, email address (get it right!), your country and something about yourself. I also want to know how you found your way to my newsletter. I hope we can become friends.
Contributions are welcome, although I reserve the right to ecline anything, or to request changes before acceptance. Welcome are:
It is a FALSE RUMOUR that you need to buy one of my books before your submission is accepted. Not that I cry when someone does so.
Above all, contributions should be brief. I may shorten them if necessary.
Content should be non-discriminatory, polite and relevant. Announcements should be 100 to 200 words, shorter if possible. Book reviews, essays and stories should be at the very most 500 words, poems up to 30 lines.
Author bios should be about 50 words, and if possible include a web address.
Humour therapy for dementia
New Indigenous mental health resource launched
Humour therapy for dementia
Deeper Issues
Dolphins mourn?
Pro bono email therapy
Dolphins mourn?
Psychology
Liana Taylor on relationships
Why am I so weird?
Success, but where to now?
Everything bad happens to me
British Psychological Society on DSM-5
by Will Meek, PhD
Liana Taylor on relationships
How come very bright, insightful people still struggle with relationships?
Five 'Mindfulness in relationship' tips that help
Why am I so weird?
Bob
Success, but where to now?
Marc
Everything bad happens to me
Writing
New Voices Young Writers Competition is open
Be an author panelist
Show or tell
New Voices Young Writers Competition is open
EPIC President
Be an author panelist
Invitation from Tiffany Warren
What my friends want you to know
Bainstorming*2
Join the climate reality project
Second edition of Frugal Book Promoter
Bainstorming*2
Fictionwise Author of the Year
Multiple Dream Realm and Eppie awards
See all my books at http://www.darrellbain.com.
Join the climate reality project
Have a laugh
Alfredo's latest cartoon
The secret to long life
About Bobbing Around
Submission Guidelines