The Road to Reconciliation: Get out of the middle of the picture

Let’s say you are deeply disappointed in your mother, who never was the mother you needed her to be when you were a child. You want to get past this because, after all, you’re not a child anymore, right? The story, as you tell it, goes like this:

My mother divorced my father when I was young and she had a series of relationships with men throughout my childhood. None of them were any good. They were drunken, violent louts. Nonetheless, she always chose them before me. She would do whatever they said and moved me in and out of different homes before she really knew any of them. None of these men wanted me around and I got the feeling my mother didn’t, either. I was just an inconvenience to her.

This is a heartbreaking story that is all too common. If this happened to you, the effects go deep and can persist a lifetime. You would really rather they didn’t. What can you do to let it go?

Here’s a place to start. Stop calling her My Mother. I don’t mean you have to stop calling her My Mother or Mom, or Ma, to her face. Nor, do you have to renounce her forever. She still is your mother. I mean, when you tell the story, refer to her by name instead of title. If her name is Alice, call her Alice.

My Mother is a being who came into existence when you did and exists only in relation to you. Alice was born long before you and has a life distinct from you. My Mother is so close to you that she’s an extension of yourself and you’re an extension of My Mother’s self. Alice is another person. You can connect as an equal to someone named Alice in a way you can never to My Mother. When Alice chooses the company of men over you, it might hurt a little, but when My Mother does it, it’s catastrophic.

It was catastrophic when you were a child, but you’re not a child anymore, so it’s not, not anymore. Now it’s as if someone named Alice did it.

Some people resist this exercise because they think it is disrespectful. I think it’s more respectful to understand someone as a whole person, independent of yourself, who is trying to play with the hand she is dealt.

The second step is take a look at Alice’s life, from the beginning to the end. Tell the story from her point of view; the whole story. How was Alice’s childhood? What were her parents like? How might Alice have been shaped by her relationship with her first husband, George, whom you know as Dad? What were the social and economic forces of her early adulthood, the period of time when you were a child? What were Alice’s dreams and aspirations?

I’m often amazed by how little adult children know about their parents, except the parts that directly pertain to them. You may be able to ask her to tell you these things. If not, then guess. You will probably be right. You probably know more than you know you do.

I’m going to go ahead and guess that Alice’s dad, your grandfather, was distant, hard working, but emotionally unavailable. A lot of fathers were, in those days. When she was a kid, Alice dreamt of going to college and traveling around the world, but she got pregnant in high school and married George, your dad. That’s what people did those days when they got pregnant. Shackled with a kid, little education, and in a shotgun marriage, she didn’t have a lot of choices. George had no respect for her and, when she never lost the weight she gained in her pregnancy, he ran off with his secretary. Now, she was really screwed economically and worried about raising her child without a male role model. She started to date, to find a man who would support her and her child. The prospects of an out-of-shape single mother in the marriage market were not good. She soon found herself scraping the bottom of the barrel. No matter how much she might have loved her child, she regretted ever getting pregnant.

See how different the two stories are when you are not in the center of it? You are seeing the context. You could conclude that she did the best she could. Maybe not. You could still be angry with her. That’s your prerogative, but now it’s an adult being angry with another adult, not a child being angry with his mother.

The third step is to calculate how old Alice was at the time in question. Let’s just say she was twenty-five. Now, look around at the people you know who are twenty-five. How mature, wise, and altogether are they? Some are, granted, but most haven’t got all the kinks worked out. Twenty-five year olds might actually be younger than you are right now. If that’s the case, then remember how much maturity, wisdom, and know-how you had. That’s what Alice had to work with. Now calculate how old you were at the time. Let’s say eight. Look at eight year olds you know today. How much maturity, wisdom, and understanding have they? Do you really want to look at the situation from an eight-year-old’s point of view?

It’s impossible to gain any of those insights about My Mother but entirely possible with someone named Alice.

You can use this method with all the disappointing people who have titles in your life: husband, wife, sister, brother, friend, leader, colleague. When you are no longer at the center of the story, blocking the view, you are better able to see and, if appropriate, genuinely forgive.

The Shrink’s Links: Spanking

Bringing you the best of mental health every week.

Being the father of four children, I completely understand the urge to spank. My children are all adults and I still, from time to time, want to take them over my knee and give them a good one. So, there is the urge, but beyond the urge, there’s also the perceived duty to spank. You might have heard this, too. I was told I had to spank, even when I didn’t want to, for the good of my children. You know, spare the rod and spoil the child, and advice like that. So, there’s the urge and there’s the supposed duty, but then there’s science.
The Journal of Family Psychology recently published a paper by Elizabeth T. Gershoff and Andrew Grogan-Kaylor. It analyzed fifty years of research on spanking.

“The evidence against spanking is one of the most consistent findings in the field of psychology,” said Gershoff.

This type of paper is a meta-analysis. It analyzes other analyses, studies other studies. Presumably, the results are more accurate. A single study could be flawed, but a summary of dozens of studies is less likely to be flawed. When a psychologist says that something is one of the most consistent findings in the history of psychology, that’s about as close to iron clad truth as anything in the behavioral sciences ever gets.

She says there are three things wrong with spanking. It doesn’t work, it’s harmful, and it violates human rights.

The strongest argument against spanking, I believe, is the first. It doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do. Spanking is supposed to teach children the difference between right and wrong. The paper shows it’s less effective than time out. Moreover, spanking alone does not teach children why their behavior was wrong or what they should do instead.
Hitting, by its nature, causes physical pain, and it can be confusing and frightening for children to be hit by someone they love and respect, and on whom they are dependent. Children report fear, anger, and sadness when they are spanked, feelings that interfere with their ability to internalize parents’ disciplinary messages.

Secondly, spanking probably causes more problems than it solves.

… spanking was associated with increases in mental health problems in childhood and adulthood, delinquent behavior in childhood and criminal behavior in adulthood, negative parent-child relationships, and increased risk that children will be physically abused.

Then there’s the fact that spanking is totally illegal in thirty-three countries and has been condemned by the United Nations. It may not surprise you that one of the countries in which it is illegal is Denmark. It might surprise you that another is the Democratic Republic of Congo, hardly a bastion of progressive thought. The United States is increasingly isolated in that it permits corporal punishment by parents. If you believe there is such a thing as human rights, you’ve got to say that the rights of a weaker, dependent person to be protected from violence by a stronger, not self-disinterested person, albeit a parent, is a significant one. Seldom does punishment by spanking respect due process.
If you’d like to read the article, click here.

The Road to Reconcilation: Stay on the Road

First, I had you acknowledge your feelings, then set them aside. I had you recognize that you were a victim, then I urged you to stop playing the victim. I told you to not forgive cheaply, then I said you were a fool not to forgive. So, which is it? You ask. What do I want?

I want you to stay on the road to reconciliation. Here’s the thing about roads. You can drive off of a road on either side. In order to get anywhere, you’ve got to keep moving. As you move, the road changes. When you fail to recognize the changes, you go off the road, hit a tree, and stop.

There are lots of ways of going off the road to reconciliation. One way is by sticking with an official story.

As any conspiracy theorist can tell you, there’s a big difference between the official story and the real one. The official story is the corporate or governmental public relations bullshit that’s repeated so many times that it begins to pass for truth.  It’s designed to tidy up the mess, reassure the public, establish the narrative, and maintain the status quo. It’s what you tell your mother after a hot date or the explanation given to a prospective employer after you walk out on your last job. It’s often not an outright lie, just a highly varnished one. It contains elements of the truth, but it’s not the truth. The truth is usually much more awkward. The official story is meant to be the last word. It’s something people tell, not to answer questions, but to stop questions from being asked.

It’s not just corporations, the government, frisky children, or disgruntled workers that employ official stories. The person who injured you does it, too. You’ve heard them. He hit you because you made him so mad. He hit you, but you hit him first. He couldn’t help but hit you because his father did it to him, too. He hit you, but he’s sorry and it taught him not to do it again. These may have all been true. What makes them official stories is when they are meant to be the last word. When they are used to shut you up.

As the victim, you have your own official story, too. You may have adopted one of his and have been perfectly content to admit that you made him so mad he hit you, or he hit you because you hit him first. You might want to let him off the hook and say that he only did what his father did. You might accept a premature apology just so you don’t have to deal with the whole thing anymore.

Or, maybe your official story is that you’re a victim, subject to a paternalistic society, without rights, resources, or recourse. You may be correct in this, but it’s an official story if you stop there and make it the last word. If you look at what happened and examine its context, then you can see the cracks and patches in the official story. You see that the official story glosses over significant exceptions and inconsistencies. The official story is not the whole story. Even a genuine truth is not the whole truth or the only truth.

You’re not just the victim and he’s not just the perpetrator. In fact, the word, just, should no longer be in your vocabulary, at least not used in a reductionistic manner that conceals the details. Remember that, while I want you to hold the offender accountable, I also want to avoid seeing you getting stuck in just being a victim. There’s more to you than that.

There’s something about us humans that makes us want to take vibrant life and engrave it in stone. We do it so we can handle it, manage it, put it in a box, and carry it without dropping it. We fixate it and then we fixate on it, trying to keep it fixed on a pin. But life is not like that. You are not like that. Life is meant to be, well, lively. So keep it moving and be suspicious of the last word on anything.

Let me say one more thing and it’ll be the last word on having the last word. I promise.

Go to your cupboard and find a single piece of simple food: a Cheerio, say. Before you pop it in your mouth, think about what it took to bring that single Cheerio to you, the context of the Cheerio, in order words. There were farmers, truckers, warehouse workers, and grocers, as well as the tractor manufacturers, fertilizer salesmen, oil rig workers, agribusiness executives, box makers, etc, that support them. Then there’s the parents, the partners, and the children of those farmers, truckers, warehouse workers, grocers, tractor manufacturers, fertilizer salesmen, oil rig workers, agribusiness executives, and cardboard box makers, as well as their teachers, doctors, lawyers, barbers, and accountants. And that’s only the people involved in the Cheerio. Don’t let me get started on the chemical properties of the cereal and the history of the elements involved. Get the point? It’s infinite. You could spend all day looking at the context of a single Cheerio, and it’s just a Cheerio.

The official story is it’s just a Cheerio. Well, if there’s a lot to a Cheerio, then imagine what there might be regarding you, the loved one who hurt you, and an incident between you.

As you can imagine, it could take you all day to eat a single Cheerio. Similarly, you could spend the rest of your life thoroughly appreciating the context of any incident between you and your loved one; you’d never be any closer to the end. That’s no good, either. Life goes on. Seeing the context is a good thing, but, at some point, you’ve got to chew and swallow the damn thing. There’s lots of ways of getting stuck on this road. One way is by thinking too much and never settling on anything.

So, here I go again, talking out of both sides of my mouth. I want you to see the context and be open to multiple interpretations; but I also want you to figure things out and close around some conclusions and resolutions, be decisive, in other words. Which is it? You ask. What do I want?

I want you to stay on the road. When you start veering over too far to one side, veer over to the other.

The Shrink’s Links: Being and Nothingness

Bringing you the best of mental health every week.

If you read my last post, entitled Avoid Playing the Victim, you would have come across this example. I stole it.

The fourth sign [of playing the victim] is hard to explain. Imagine going to a restaurant and getting a waiter who is so attentive, so obsequious, so unctuous, so over-the-top in his waiter-like flourishes that he seems to be a caricature of a waiter. When he praises you for the entree you selected from the menu, you wonder if he’s being sarcastic. You don’t trust him because he doesn’t seem real. He actually is a waiter, but he still seems to be playing a part. There is something inauthentic about him, something that seems faked or forced, something of bad faith.

So, the fourth sign that you are playing the victim is when you are more intent with keeping up the part you play than in just being yourself. You’ve got a mask on so no one can see who you really are.

I ripped off the bit about the waiter from the French philosopher, Jean Paul Sartre. I owe a lot to Sartre. Of all the philosophers, he probably has influenced my thinking more than any other. It’s time I gave him his due and his own link within these pages of the Shrink’s Links.

To Sartre, this waiter was an example of a person reducing himself to an object, rather than simply being as he was. Sartre believed that the waiter had to play at being a waiter as a way of denying that he, at that moment, had other possibilities. For instance, the more annoyed he was at the customers, the more perfect a waiter he had to be. The waiter said to himself, I can’t be rude right back to that rude customer, I have bills to pay. I have no choice.

That’s not true, says Sartre. Of course he has a choice. We all have choices, always; but we want to trick ourselves into believing we don’t. Sartre, who wrote his magnum opus, Being and Nothingness, in the middle of France in World War II, had a radical belief in human freedom, a strange thing to have as people were being strafed by planes and led away to concentration camps. Perhaps that is a testimony to the freedom he asserted. We can believe what we want, despite evidence to the contrary.

You can imagine that, in my work as a therapist, I come across many people who think they are not free. People who put up with a lot of terrible situations, who are horribly victimized, simply because they believe the have no choice. People who accept the part of victim as their identity, precluding the possibility they could be anything other than a victim. Then there’s the folks who believe that they have no choice but to take that drink, shoot that dope, hit that wife, be depressed, or act like an ass simply because circumstances or genetics dictate that they do so. It’s my job to show them there’s another way. Sartre comes in handy then.

I will admit that Sartre’s book, Being and Nothingness, from which I stole the waiter, is a tough read and, in a therapy sessions, the less that is said about cranky incomprehensible French philosophers the better. In fact, philosophy is seldom something that can help people feel better or even do better. People often need real human connection, rather than rationale and abstract arguments, and the ones inclined to turn to philosophy need real interaction more than the others. That is not to say, though, that therapists shouldn’t have their thoughts grounded in the thinking of people who had the time, talent, and inclination to think things through.

So, if you are a therapist, or if you just want to think like one, read Sartre before you tell anyone that they just can’t help themselves. Read Sartre if you want to recognize self deception.
Click here to read Sartre.

The Road to Reconciliation: Avoid Playing the Victim

So far, I’ve been urging you to bear right on the road to reconciliation. There’s a good reason for this. To the left are all the hazards that come from not taking your injuries seriously enough: cheap pardon and being out of touch with feelings and uncommitted to values. Now I want you to slightly change direction. If you continue the bearing you are going, you’ll go over a sheer cliff. You’ll go from being someone who is speaking out against injustice to someone who is playing the victim.

You’re playing the victim when you fabricate or exaggerate your suffering so that you can cope, seek attention, or justify abusing and manipulating others. You deserve an Academy Award if you act like you played absolutely no part in what happened to you. You’re being a drama queen if you use your injury to extract unfair concessions. Indeed, go down this Playing the Victim road far enough and you will no longer be the victim; you’ll just be another perpetrator.

Sometimes I ask people who have been victimized by something: who would you rather be, the person who had suffered the injury, or the person who had committed it? No one wants to suffer the injury, but in the aftermath, practically everyone would rather be the victim than have to live with themselves after having committed some crime or betrayal. This is what motivates people to play the victim.

People play the victim the same way other roles are played. Certain traits are emphasized and inconvenient contradictions ignored. You become histrionic and dramatic, possibly operatic. You’re certain that your version of events is the only possible version and everything else is lies. You cling to your script and don’t know what to do when the footlights are off. You assign blame and forget that when you point a single finger at someone else, three more are surreptitiously pointed at you. You so strongly believe in a convenient fiction that you have lost touch with the truth.

Early on the road to reconciliation, it is necessary to get a clear picture of the damage done by the person who hurt you. I’ve talked a lot about the pitfalls of cheap pardon and losing touch with your feelings. It’s necessary to acknowledge the hurt and speak out against oppression. The problem comes when you begin to believe your rhetoric too much or become too strident in an effort to be heard.

People might falsely accuse you of playing the victim if they don’t want to hear what you have to say. How can you tell if they’re right? How do you know if you’ve gone too far?

There are four signs that you are playing the victim. Four signs that result in at least four negative consequences.

First, you are playing the victim if it is impossible for your offender to make any meaningful restitution. I’m not saying you have to accept any half hearted apology, I’m saying that you can’t complain about something without giving the person a chance to make it right. She can never meet your terms for reconciliation because you have elevated them to an unattainable level. You require a down payment no one can afford when you expect someone to accept all the blame.

Second, you are playing the victim if you do not see that you have some power to change the situation. One consequence of playing the victim is that you end up feeling powerless because you refuse to see the extent to which you have power. This powerlessness is incompatible with being able to take action on your own behalf. You fail to recognize your own efficacy. You victimize yourself through inaction and indecisiveness.

Third, you play the victim if you have lost your humility; if you fail to admit that there is often a very fine distinction between the abuser and the abused, between the perpetrator and the injured party. You forget that, if not for the grace of God, or random circumstances, you could’ve been him.

Let’s take a marital argument, for instance, an ugly confrontation that results in yelling, name calling, throwing dishes, slamming doors, and sore feelings for days afterwards. Someone started it, someone yelled first, called the first name, threw the first dish, and slammed the first door. One person held on to their hurt feelings longer than the other. It’s seldom the same person who escalates or de-escalates things at each step. The person who called the first name may not have been the one who slammed the first door. It’s often hard to say who started it, or even, when it started. When one person throws a dish; we’ll never know, if she didn’t, that the other might have thrown a dish a minute later.

The fourth sign is hard to explain. Imagine going to a restaurant and getting a waiter who is so attentive, so obsequious, so unctuous, so over-the-top in his waiter-like flourishes that he seems to be a caricature of a waiter. When he praises you for the entree you selected from the menu, you wonder if he’s being sarcastic. You don’t trust him because he doesn’t seem real. He actually is a waiter, but he still seems to be playing a part. There is something inauthentic about him, something that seems faked or forced, something of bad faith.

So, the fourth sign that you are playing the victim is when you are more intent with keeping up the part you play than in just being yourself. You’ve got a mask on so no one can see who you really are.

It comes down to this: you don’t need to play the victim if you are the victim, but you might end up doing so, anyway. You then lose touch with yourself, your feelings, and values, again. You have confused yourself with the part you are playing.

In some cases, when you stop playing the victim and get real about your contribution to the problem, you may just find that you’re really an abuser, all along, and all your complaints were just distractions for the harm you have done. This can be disconcerting, to say the least. No one wants to admit they behaved badly, much less that they are guilty of covering it up. However, when you stop playing the victim, then you are able to see the problem clearly and do something about it.

So, get real and avoid playing the victim. Don’t take yourself so seriously that you lose yourself in the process.

The Shrink’s Links: Book Review: Boredom

Bringing you the best of mental health every week.

People go crazy because they’re bored. Workers hate their jobs because they are bored. Partners cheat on their spouses because they are bored. The leading reason why addicts tell me they relapse is they are bored. Also, writers write, painters paint, players play, and inventors invent because, if they did not, they would be bored. Boredom can lead to everything from wasted, whiney days to searing insights and helpful inventions, from depression to mania, from a dull, laggard apathy to a determination to escape.

Boredom is such a powerful and common emotion, you would think we would understand it better, but it’s hard to study emotions, or any subjective state. Patricia Meyer Spacks came up with her own way of looking into what boredom is, what it means, and what it does. Since she’s an English professor, she looked at how the word boredom is used in literature and language. Continue reading →

The Road to Reconciliation: See the Context

The world may have been created out of nothing, out of a nameless void, they say; but since then, anything that has happened has arisen out of something else. We call this context. If you want to come to some peace over something that has happened to you, then see the context from which it emerged.

Notice I carefully used the word context, not reason. Don’t look for the reason something occurred. Many things just aren’t reasonable. Much happens for no reason, or, at least, no good reason. Similarly, don’t look for justifications; and if anyone offers them, don’t accept them. Justifications are closely related to explanations, rationalizations, and vindications. Stay away from all of them. They all contain too much of that quality by which we sort things out into good or bad, loving or hateful, healthy or unhealthy. I want you to just stick to the evidence without drawing too many conclusions about it. Just the facts, ma’am.

If you don’t like the word context, then look for factors, conditions, background, or the scene. The point is to disengage the judging apparatus in your mind long enough so you can take in all the needed information. Remember, I value feelings and, if you’re a victim, I especially value your feelings as things that can tell you something is wrong and re-connect you to your values. Once feelings do that for you, their job is done and they should be quieted, in much the same way as, once you have woken up and leave the house, you have no more use for a fire alarm. Indeed, a loud and insistent alarm can get in the way of being able to think straight.

Let’s look at an example. Let’s say your husband cheated on you. You’re trying to come to peace with it because you’ve decided to stay with him anyway, for the kids’ sake. If you looked at the context, you might see, for instance, that he came from a broken home and married the first time when he was young. His first wife cheated on him, they split up, and he met you shortly thereafter. He quickly got a divorce and married you after you got pregnant. You love being a mother and had two more children in quick succession. They don’t like to sleep alone, so, every night, at least one of them migrates to the bed you share with your husband. Needless to say, you barely have sex anymore. You actually seem to miss it more than he does. He says he doesn’t like to ask because you always seem tired and distracted. He works in a large company with many women. He travels for business and it was on a trip that he began an affair with a colleague. They were out celebrating, having made an important deal, when one thing led to another.

I could have gone on and on, describing the context in which this affair occurred. Obviously, I just included factors that could be related somehow to his unfaithfulness. I could have also said that your eldest son won a competition at a science contest and your husband’s best friend is battling cancer, but those facts are less likely related. Maybe not, though. Maybe his best friend having cancer reminded him that life is short; so he wanted to grab for all the gusto he could. Maybe your husband’s ego was threatened by his son, who is so smart; so your husband wanted to prove he was desirable to someone. Sometimes it’s hard to tell what factors are related. Motivations often come from unexpected directions.

Notice, when I described the context, I tried to keep a neutral tone. I didn’t say, for instance, it’s no wonder your husband had an affair, you guys weren’t having much sex. I also didn’t say, he came from a broken home and didn’t have positive role models, so he didn’t know how to be a good husband. We are looking for correlation, not causation; and remember what I said about justifications, explanations, rationalizations, and vindications. We’re not trying to say more than the evidence can bear.

If you really want to look for the cause of the affair, you can see, in my description of the imaginary husband, that there are a number of factors that could have contributed. He had poor marriage role models. He never had a chance to sow his wild oats. He was cheated on before, so he may have thought it was normal. Your marriage was almost accidental. He may feel left out of the alliance you have with the children. Then there’s the lack of sex and privacy.  He believes he cannot ask for what he wants. Paradoxically, you have poor communication because he tries to protect you or is afraid of rejection. He’s around a lot of women, with some opportunities to be unfaithful. He may be able to be more open with them because there’s less at stake. Presumably, there was alcohol involved when he and his colleague were celebrating and the affair began under its influence.

You can see how all these factors might put a hapless husband on the path to being unfaithful. The context is quite powerful. However, there is one thing missing in our formulation. He made a choice. All of these factors could just as well have put him on guard, watching for just that thing. That’s not what happened, though. He let down his guard and made a choice. That’s why you want to stay away from causation, justification, explanation, rationalization, and vindication. All of them forget that there is a choice.

Another thing to keep in mind when looking for the context, is that not all of the context resides in the past or present. Sometimes the most relevant context is the hopes and dreams the person has. Let’s take this husband, for instance. He strikes me as a very isolated person, abandoned many times over, first by at least one parent and then by his first wife. Even in his present family, he’s the odd one out. He thinks he cannot express his desires to you because he fears he would be too demanding and will be rejected. It’s not too much to believe that he desires affirmation, recognition, and respect and may have gotten embroiled in an affair in an attempt to get it.

I admit that having an affair and putting his marriage, as well as his relationship to his children, at risk is hardly the best way of gaining affirmation, recognition, and respect; but people adopt desperate, reckless measures when they are, well, desperate. Again, we’re not looking for excuses, we’re looking for context.

What is the value of looking at context? How can this help you? Let me tell you a story.

I was walking around in Manhattan once. I turned the corner and saw a man with a gun, shooting another man. Blood spurted out everywhere and the victim fell. I reacted quickly, ducking behind a car before I got shot; but I was curious and peered out. Then I saw cameras, lights, microphones, and a director, sitting in one of those director chairs. I had come upon a movie set, not an actual shooting.

When you see the context you see more and understand more. Look at the context.

The Shrink’s Links: The Defensive Functioning Scale

Bringing you the best of mental health every week.

It’s not a question of whether or not you use psychological defenses. Everybody does. It’s really a question of what they are. Some, you see, are better than others.

The first defenses we develop are the primitive ones, cheap and dirty, the barrel bombs of psychological defenses. Later, we acquire more finesse. The most mature defenses do a fine job of protecting our tender psyches from attack with far fewer side effects.

Click on this link and look over the menu. They are listed from best to worst. Pick out the psychological defenses you most often use, then choose some better ones. You may be due to upgrade.

The Road to Reconciliation: How to Re-Traumatize Yourself

First, a bad thing happens. Rape, murder, combat, abuse. You don’t have a lot of control over it. That’s the point. Something happens way, way out of your control. You barely make it. Now you’re left with the memories. That’s the trauma.

Second, the memories come up. You don’t have a lot of control over them, either. They come up when you come across something you associate with the trauma. A plastic bag on the highway that looks as if it may be an IED. A dark alley like where you witnessed the murder. A program on TV too similar to the incident. I knew someone who had a hard time every Saturday throughout her adulthood because, when she was a kid, her step-father would creep into her room Saturday nights. You find yourself caught up in the memory and start feeling as though it’s happening all over again. It’s like a trance you are in, a spell you are under. Continue reading →

The Shrink’s Links: Constructive Conflict

Bringing you the best of mental health every week.

Constructive ConflictMy book, Constructive Conflict, has just been published in print and in Kindle.

Conflict in relationships is inevitable.
If you haven’t had a conflict yet, you haven’t been paying attention.

Communication increases conflict.
If you haven’t had a conflict yet, you haven’t really been talking.

Conflict is the beginning of a real relationship, not the end.
If you haven’t had a conflict yet, you haven’t been real.

Violence is not conflict.
Violence is conflict avoidance.

Conflict is like electricity, it can turn on a light, power change, or burn down the house.
To enjoy the benefits of conflict, you need to know how to regulate it.

A short book, packed with wisdom, disarming humor, and refreshing directness, Constructive Conflict shows how you can manage your conflicts.

Click here to buy from Amazon.