Grounding

So, you’re anxious. It happens. There are basically two things to do with anxiety. You can face it or avoid it. Avoiding it is often the sensible thing to do if it’s a thing you are not likely to encounter very often; like snakes, for instance. I’m afraid of snakes. If I got a job as a snake charmer, I would have to do something about it; otherwise, I just avoid them.

Now, if I did become a snake charmer, I would have to face my anxiety. I wouldn’t just go and grab the first snake I found and say, go ahead bite me, I dare you. No, that freaks me out just to write about it. A better method would be face my fear systematically, little by little, in circumstances in which I was likely to be successful. And, and this is most important, I would keep myself grounded.

When you are grounded, you are most alert, yet calm and in control. You can get grounded before you step into a difficult situation and it will help you keep your wits about you. If you’re already in a difficult situation, you can ground then, too. If you just left the hard situation and your nerves are still jangled, ground and you will begin to settle down. You can ground anytime, anyplace, anywhere, and no one has to know. Grounding puts healthy distance between you and negative feelings.

No, grounding is not the same as relaxing, being cool, or mellowing out. It’s not a form of meditation. It’s getting a grip on the obvious, that’s all. The general idea is to get out of your head, at least the part of your head that’s like a broken record. It’s a little like breaking a spell.

If you know how to ground, you don’t need that stiff drink, or that pill, or that cigarette, reefer, or that bag of dope. If you know how to ground, you can go anywhere, do anything, and deal with anyone, within reason.

Here’s a few general tips on grounding:Continue reading “Grounding”

Love: The Prisoner’s Dilemma

Old Posts

I can guess how this sounds, but love relationships remind me of the Prisoner’s Dilemma.

Two conspirators are arrested and brought into separate interview rooms. They are both given the opportunity to turn state’s witness against the other. The one that takes the deal goes free, and the other gets ten years. If both confess, each gets six years. If they both refuse, they both get six months.

If I was in this situation, my answer would depend on the nature of the alliance I had developed with my partner in crime. In every relationship there are multiple opportunities in which we choose to either cooperate with the other or go our own way. Most of these occasions don’t have the consequence of being sentenced to prison for ten years, but you get the sense of a person’s loyalty if they pick up the check at the diner when you plan the crime, bring their own burglary tools, and take off in the getaway car before you get in. You also get an idea of the cost of betrayal when you scarf up the tip he left, bend his best lock pick, and arrive late because you couldn’t decide on a color for a ski mask.

Every one of these tests is a miniature prisoner’s dilemma and every one of these tests is found almost continuously in every kind of relationship. Temptations abound, no matter where you are, especially in love. Do you steal the blanket? Put the seat down for her? Do you give her the first piece of toast in the morning? Do the dishes? Get up to answer the phone even when you know it’s for her? When she tells you about that dress she’s going to buy do you really pay attention, or just nod and smile? When she’s not listening do you talk about her with respect? Do you flirt when she’s not looking? Are you adult enough to admit there’s adultery afoot?

We form alliances because we get a better reward when we both cooperate, but it’s inevitable that every alliance is going to be violated in some way. It is impossible to go along with every little thing your partner wants. How are these inevitable violations handled? When you tug the blanket, does she tug back? Does she go all ape shit when you pee on the seat? When you put the seat down for her, does she put it up for you? Does she put the flirting in perspective, forgive the adultery? If she does, does it make her a patsy? If she doesn’t, is she just being a bitch?

Scientists have studied the prisoner’s dilemma by having players adopt certain strategies to see which win most often. Some will always cooperate, no matter how strong the temptation. Those players end up exploited. Their partners have no reason to play along since there is no penalty for failing. Others never work together with their partners, they give in to temptation every time. No one ends up trusting them. They say the winning strategy is called Tit-for-Tat: cooperate every time until your partner fails to, then punish him by withholding cooperation at the next opportunity. This will teach him a thing or two.

There’s one problem with that, though. We believe we are much better at detecting when we lose our partner’s engagement than we really are. The next time you are having a conversation with someone, watch her and you will see there are moments that she does not appear to pay attention, a minor violation in the alliance that could really piss you off. The thing is, she might actually be paying attention, or she might be the kind that can pay attention to two things at once. Ask her what you just said and you might be surprised that she can repeat it word for word.

There are times, though, that she can’t. You lost her; she tuned out, spaced out, went blank. It happens. If you taped it, hit the rewind, and play it back, you might discover something. You were boring. You went on and on and were inattentive to non-verbal cues that she wanted to participate in the conversation. Or you made your point in such a way that she couldn’t follow. Each of these errors is a violation of the alliance. You broke faith before she did.

We have built in, exquisite instruments that detect betrayal so sensitively calibrated that we are always chasing false alarms. What’s more, the instrument does not work on the operator. You don’t know when you are doing it. There’s a moral to the story. When you believe that your partner is violating your alliance, look to see if maybe you did so first.

 

 

Why I Don’t Specialize in Anything

As a therapist, I could’ve had a specialty. I did some post grad work in family therapy and some more in substance abuse. I sought for ways to address the desire my clients had to quit using tobacco back in the days when few others were doing so. I ran therapy groups for sex offenders. For almost twenty years I had a caseload full of victims of trauma, depression, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorder. I sought clients with borderline personality disorder, when most thought they were untreatable. I could have specialized in any one of these conditions and turned away clients without them, but I’ve always resisted specializing in anything.

This is why.

When a person has a psychological problem, it takes a long time before they’ll get help for it. Sometimes it takes several fretful days, sometimes much, much longer. The average, I’m told, is seven years. They don’t get help at first because they think they should be able to handle things on their own or they’re ashamed to admit there’s a problem. At last, they seek help, not because they want to, but because they have to. The problem just overwhelms them. Friends and family can’t handle the problem either. So, they find a counselor and tell him their story. Whatever happens next is crucial.

The person with the problem might get lucky and bring his problem to just the right person with the right specialty, but it seldom works out that way. Often people can’t pinpoint what their problem is, or they’re mistaken, or there are multiple, overlapping problems. Sometimes the counselor has not advertised their specialty well enough, or there aren’t enough counselors. Most of the time, when counselors specialize, it’s hard to get the right match.

When I began in this field, there were a lot of suffering people who would go to the substance abuse programs and get told that their problem was their mental health. Then they’d go to a mental health practitioner and get told that they had to stop using drugs, they needed to be in a substance abuse program. Few stuck with the merry-go-round long enough to get help, most just went back to their problem. It was easier that way. The luckier ones got two therapists, one for substance use, one for mental health, as if they really needed two, as if the two issues could not be addressed together and the treatment goals combined.

This, I thought, was insane. The two conditions overlap almost two thirds of the time. That’s a lot of people getting the run around. There’s just no reason for it. There had to be a better way. I developed a program that integrated mental health and substance abuse treatment, one of the first in the country.

I vowed that when a client shares his problem with me I would not give it back or re-gift it to someone else. I consider it a sacred trust, not to take lightly. I would never tell her that her problem is too big or too difficult for us to handle together. I’ll encourage them to enlist additional supports and I might consult with experts myself, particularly if it’s a problem that is new to me, but I won’t just send them away.

Incidentally, this attitude towards problems is the reason why I’ve done so many things in the course of my career, the reason why few things are new to me. The counselor who, for instance, refers out all of the drug addicts she encounters, never learns a thing about drug addiction and is forced into an ever more narrow specialty. Almost everything I know I’ve learned from clients; they’ve taught me what works, what doesn’t and what it’s like when it doesn’t.

This is what they’ve told me works. When we sit with our problems, rather than deny them, run from them, or overreact. When we listen to what our problems are trying to tell us, not so they can be the boss, but so we can learn from them. When we tame our problems, rather than evict them or tie them up with duct tape and lock them in the cellar.

My job is not only to pass on this knowledge, but to embody it. I can’t espouse it if I contradict it by sending people away. They learn to sit with the problem by watching me sit the problem and learning all about it. That is why I don’t specialize in anything, so I can represent a willingness to accept life on life’s terms.

Because I don’t specialize in a single kind of client, I also can’t specialize in any one school of psychotherapy. I could have become a Rogerian, a Beckian, or gotten a longer couch and taken up psychoanalysis. I could have read everything ever written by Bowen, or Freud, or Jung, or Lacan and turned myself into a copy of those great psychotherapists. I’ve learned to do CBT, DBT, ACT, EFT, REBT, MET, and many other combinations of the letters of the alphabet, all ending in T. I’ve taken classes in them all, and then some. But I couldn’t specialize in any one approach because I never specialized in any one kind of person. When you throw your doors open to seeing whoever walks in and commit yourself to dealing with whatever they bring you, then you learn pretty quickly that no one approach works for everyone. You have to be flexible.

This is why I call myself eclectic. The only way that works is every which way. It’s always better to have choices, than to have none. So, I became like a mechanic with a whole chest of tools in my garage. The thing is, I have to know how to use all of them and what works best. That’s why I’m a reflective eclectic: because it’s necessary to think about what I’m doing.

Here’s another reason I don’t specialize: I can’t because I’m not just one thing. I’m not only a counselor, I’m also a lifelong learner, a tennis player, a small businessman, a writer, a philosopher, a gardener, an author, as well as a husband, father, son, patient, parishioner, customer, consumer, citizen, and all the rest. I’ve been a student, caddie, Fuller Brush salesman, dishwasher, football player, cook, hockey player, referee, homesteader, grape trimmer, school bus driver, sawmill worker, cow milker, egg packager, newspaper deliveryman, construction worker, bouncer, child care worker, boss, chairman of the board of a non-profit, and one of those guys at the public market, selling cider. I’ve driven truck, delivered milk, preached sermons, put out fires, put on roofs, and had a very important position at a dairy farm as the vice president in charge of manure. I have more stories than I can remember and have lived more lives than your average housecat. And I’m still hungry.

How can a person like that specialize?

The Gumbo of Grief

Old PostsThese days, no one can shed a tear without someone mentioning the five stages of grief. I’m convinced that when people sit with the bereft, they bring up the stages just so that they can have something to say. Anything is better than the delusional denial, the bitter anger, the useless bargains, the hopeless dejection, and the maudlin acceptance that grievers come up with. Anything is better than the silence of the dead.Continue reading “The Gumbo of Grief”

The Rock Tumbler

Old Posts

Back when my son was a child, he used to dig holes in the back yard. He would adopt stones that he liked and would line the shelves of his room with them. His mother used to complain of the grime he brought into the house, until, noting a sustained interest in geology; we got him a rock tumbler.

You may have had some dealings with a rock tumbler. It’s basically a drum attached to a small motor by way of a belt that rotates incessantly all the live long day. Put a few dull, brown, craggy, soil caked rocks in the drum, add a bit of water, shut the hatch, turn on the motor, and you can keep the whole family from sleeping for a week. When your Dad yells at you to turn the damn thing off so he can get some rest, you open it, reach in, and your unremarkable stones have transformed into smooth, radiant gems.

There’s a rock tumbler for people, too; a people tumbler. We call it love.Continue reading “The Rock Tumbler”

How Big is the Brain?

shrinbks-links-photo1

The Brain—is wider than the Sky—

For—put them side by side—

The one the other will contain

With ease—and You—beside—

 

The Brain is deeper than the sea—

For—hold them—Blue to Blue—

The one the other will absorb—

As Sponges—Buckets—do—

 

The Brain is just the weight of God—

For—Heft them—Pound for Pound—

And they will differ—if they do—

As Syllable from Sound—

 

Emily Dickenson wrote this. She had a big imagination, even though she lived a very restricted life, rarely leaving her bedroom in her parent’s house in a small town in Western Massachusetts.

To read more poems by Emily Dickenson, click here.

 

The ACE Study

shrinbks-links-photo1Bringing you the best of mental health

It makes no sense, but one of the most remarkable and important findings in recent psychological research hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves and still has not had much impact on the practice of psychotherapy. I’m talking about the ACE Study.

In the 1990’s, the CDC and the health care giant, Kaiser Permanente, teamed up to recruit more than 17,000 adult research subjects, who filled out a short questionnaire, asking about their adverse childhood experiences. That’s what ACE stands for: adverse childhood experiences. They then compared their answers to a list of common ailments. They found a very strong correlation between the degree of adverse childhood experiences and a decline in both physical and mental health for the person later in life.Continue reading “The ACE Study”