Saturday, December 10, 2011

Love and Forgiveness

Excerpt from my book "Healing Secrets":

The first step in truly loving yourself is to become familiar with positive affirmations. There is power in intently looking into your eyes in a mirror and saying “I love you… You mean a lot to me… etc.” So often, we do just the opposite. If a person attempts to give himself positive affirmations continuously for two weeks, that person will notice a drastic change in the way he perceives himself and his environment.

When a lawyer asked Jesus, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” he answered, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” (Matt. 22:36–39.) Notice that Jesus said you are to love your neighbor as yourself. God wants you to love yourself just as much as he wants you to love others. Dr. Clark Swain stated, “If you truly love yourself, you will remember that you are a physical, mental, and spiritual being. Loving yourself as God wants you to means that you use wisdom in protecting your life and conserving your health.”

Loving yourself also means to be grateful for yourself and your abilities, and to be grateful to God. It has been shown in research that attitude of gratitude can significantly increase a lasting sense of well-being. In an experimental comparison, those who kept gratitude journals on a weekly basis exercised more regularly, reported fewer physical symptoms, felt better about their lives as a whole, and were more optimistic about the upcoming week compared to those who recorded hassles or neutral life events (Emmons & McCullough, 2003). Also, it has been shown that a related benefit of the attitude of gratitude was observed in the realm of personal goal attainment: Participants who kept gratitude lists were more likely to have made progress toward important personal goals (academic, interpersonal and health-based) over a two-month period compared to subjects in the other experimental conditions. Moreover, daily gratitude interventions (self-guided exercises) with young adults resulted in higher reported levels of the positive states of alertness, enthusiasm, determination, attentiveness and energy compared to a focus on hassles or a downward social comparison (ways in which participants thought they were better off than others). There was no difference in levels of unpleasant emotions reported in the three groups. It was also found by Drs. Robert A. Emmons and Michael E. McCullough that in a sample of adults with neuromuscular disease, a 21-day gratitude intervention resulted in greater amounts of high-energy positive moods, a greater sense of feeling connected to others, more optimistic ratings of one’s life, and better sleep duration and sleep quality, relative to a control group.

Forgiveness of self and others

This section is a little longer than the former, because this concept is essential to healing. There are two principles all people need to learn to overcome the shadow identity. These are repenting and forgiving. Repenting is essential, because this action leads to an understanding that we make mistakes, we are not perfect, and that we are “okay.” When we do something wrong, say sorry and make restitution. Asking God for forgiveness is liberating and evokes healthy shame and guilt, which as John Bradshaw states “safeguards the soul” because we will conceptualize that we have limits and boundaries, and truly we are good people who perform badly at times. Again, it is “okay,” we must not be so hard on ourselves. The danger of the shadow identity is that an individual can become dichotomous in thought, action and belief. On one extreme a person may need to be “perfect,” achieving extremely in everything. They also are compelled to show little-to-no emotions, because this is weakness. These people “have to” and “have no choice” in their need to achieve. On the other side of the spectrum of the shadow identity, an individual sees himself as a “no-good sinner” not worthy of “redemption.” Both sides of the spectrum are toxic and can lead to personal destruction.

The Greek word for which the English term “repentance” was derived denotes a change of mind, or in effect, a fresh view about God (Bible Dictionary, p. 760). This idea is truly at odds with the notions of punishment and pain, with which many people associate the term of repentance.


Forgiveness of ourselves is important and forgiveness of others is essential for our healing. Anyone who has ever been victimized—and that includes survivors of crime, accidents, childhood abuse, political imprisonment, warfare, and so on—must decide whether or not to forgive those who made the violation, even if that person is not repentant. There can be no way around this choice: either you decide to forgive the person who hurt you, or you hold on to bitterness and anger until it consumes you. Holding on to bitterness and anger can perpetuate further bitterness and anger. One example I witnessed was an individual who had been molested by a grandfather, who had passed away without ever acknowledging his wrongdoing. The survivor’s anger and desire for revenge became an obsession. She so focused on the crime that she completely missed the opportunity she had been given to learn about real love, forgiveness and letting go. In its place, she seemed to believe that hatred would satisfy her thirst for vengeance and would somehow bring healing. As a result, this individual repeated over and over, “I’ll never forgive.” One of my favorite examples to use with children and adults of a character who didn’t forgive was that of Darth Vader. He was so preoccupied with those who trespassed against him that his hatred and revenge turned him literally into a machine. What a powerful archetype Darth Vader is of vengeance.

To forgive can be a problem for some to conceptualize because it can be a concept that is obscure, especially to our Western perspective, simply because we have been bombarded by the ideas of “getting even” and “mercy is for the weak.” And many times, the concept of forgiveness gets confused with the concept of reconciliation, which is related to forgiveness. Tangentially, reconciliation and restitution are even more closely related than forgiveness and reconciliation, although all three terms are orbital. Restitution “denotes a return of something once present, but has been taken away or lost.” (Bible Dictionary. P. 761) Reconciliation comes from the Latin words re-, meaning “again,” and conciliare, which means “to bring together.”

Again, the difficulty surrounding forgiveness is an understanding of the difference between reconciliation and forgiveness. And in many instances persons who have wronged another do not “own up” to their mistakes, especially when pride is involved, thus restitution does not happen and reconciliation doesn’t take place. And when reconciliation is not present, then what is the victim to do? Most victims don’t realize that forgiveness is a choice on their part, no matter what the victimizer does, or does not, do. Furthermore, if the victimizer seeks reconciliation, that action and healing can only occur if the victim is willing and able to forgive. Forgiveness is always the victim’s, or the survivor’s, decision. Again and in addition, reconciliation is impossible except the victim/survivor is willing and able to forgive and the victimizer apologizes or restores that which has been taken or was lost. Now I have been using the verbs “willing and able” because there is something problematic concerning forgiveness—you can’t fully forgive until you can allow yourself to feel the pain you were caused. And in our Western society, it seems that everyone attempts to avoid pain, or any other emotion for that matter. This is why forgiveness can be tricky. And if we don’t feel that pain, something much more toxic will take its place—anger and revenge! This occurs because a person who does not allow the expression of pain unconsciously builds resentment. This resentment, as it builds, needs to find an outlet. This outlet may be a physical one, such as hypertension or headaches, but usually the outlet is a more psychological one, such as depression or anger (turned outward or inward towards one’s self).

I once worked with a gentleman who, after twenty years of work, was fired because of office politics. He came in to see me because of an addiction to pain pills. He was a very sophisticated individual and saw himself as an enlightened and intellectual individual. In groups, this man would make many wonderful insights into other group members. He revealed one day that he felt he was addicted to anger. Anger began to fill the void that drugs had occupied. He began to say in group, “Those bastards who took away my job… I did nothing wrong, they were intimidated by me and because of their power issues they fired me.” Of course, his former employer made no restitution, so therefore he could “never forgive them,” although at the time of his firing he had said to his wife, “Oh well, it’s not that big of a deal, I’m just going to forget about it.” He had prematurely forgiven his employer, which leads to resentment, which led him to become addicted to pain pills. Psychologically, the concept of “forget” is called “repressed.” And when something is repressed, it hangs around, under the surface, needing expression somehow, physically or emotionally. When pain is repressed, it drags down all the emotions associated with that pain, thus making forgiveness impossible, because on some level you are just “keeping score.” Forgiveness is not the same thing as forgetting. To forgive is simply to stop wishing for revenge or to stop wanting to see the other person suffer in some way. But forgiveness is not blind. Because trust has been violated you cannot just forget what happened or else the same thing might happen again.

Friday, December 9, 2011

Adults Abused as Children

The outcomes of early sexual abuse last well into adulthood, affecting relationships, work, family, and life in general. Individual symptomatology tends to fall into four areas:

1. "Damaged goods": Low self-esteem, depression, self-destructiveness (suicide and self-mutilation), guilt, shame, self-blame, constant search for approval and nurturance.

2. Betrayal: Impaired ability to trust, blurred boundaries and role confusion, rage and grief, difficulty forming relationships.

3. Helplessness: Anxiety, fear, tendency towards re-victimization, panic attacks.

4. Isolation: Sense of being different, stigmatized, lack of supports, poor peer relations.

Adult incest survivors may demonstrate some of the following symptoms:

Fear of the dark, fear of sleeping alone, nightmares, night terrors
Difficulty with swallowing, gagging
Poor body image, poor self-image in general
Wearing excessive clothing
Addictions, compulsive behaviors, obsessions
Self-abuse, skin-carving (also addictive),
Suicidality
Phobias, panic attacks, anxiety disorders, startle response
Difficulties with anger/rage
Splitting/ de-personalization, shutdown under stress
Issues with trust, intimacy, relationships
Issues with boundaries, control, abandonment
Pattern of re-victimization, not able to say "no"
Blocking of memories, especially between age one and 12
Feeling crazy, different, marked
Denial, flashbacks
Sexual issues and extremes
Multiple personalities
Signs of posttraumatic stress disorder

Certain issues appear repeatedly. For example, victims typically blame themselves for the abuse, even if they were two or three years old at the time of the event. Guilt and shame are expressed, along with intense feelings of rage

If the rape or molestation was committed by an individual of the same sex (i.e., a man abusing a boy), questions regarding sexual orientation tend to arise in the patient ("I must be gay; after all, a man raped me!"). Female victims will frequently develop sexually promiscuous lifestyles in an effort to "conquer" the situation and bring it under their control. In other instances individuals will largely withdraw from any social or sexual interactions in order to avoid the feared stimuli, and turn toward extremely isolated lives.

The connection that is made for victims between sex and pain (love and humiliation, closeness and betrayal) is a particularly disastrous one. Frequently cleints will express and/or demonstrate the belief that the only way to be loved or cared for is if they are also being abused ("I knew if I didn't let him keep beating me, I'd always be alone"). Often, in the extreme, physical and sexual abuse are even viewed as a normal part of everyday life. Healthy boundaries do not exist for these individuals, and therefore, healthy relationships are impossible. Victims will actually respond to feelings of loneliness or sadness by abusing themselves (e.g., self-mutilation) if the "significant other" is not available to do so.

One of the more difficult issues that arise is the recollection, by some individuals, of experiencing a certain amount of physical pleasure during a molestation or incest. This adds enormously to the sense of being at fault and "dirty." Thus, one of the aims of treatment is to educate survivors as to normal physiological responsiveness. The realization that their feelings are/were normal helps tremendously toward alleviating the sense of shame.

Even when individuals have spoken of their abuse prior to group treatment, any pleasurable aspects have typically been denied. The opportunity to relate to others who have shared these feelings, as well as the experience, is part of the healing power of this form of therapy. The sense of isolation, of being "different from the whole world," quickly begins to subside. It is only in revealing the secrets and dealing with the pain that survivors of sexual abuse can and do go on with their lives.

References

1. Incest Survivors' Resource Network, International. (1990). Manual. N.Y. Yearly Meeting, Hicksville, NY.

2. Calam, R.M., (1989) Sexual experience and eating problems in female undergraduates. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 8, 391-399.

3. Blume, E. Sue, (1989). Secret Survivors: Uncovering incest and its aftereffects. John Wiley & Sons, NJ.

4. Koopmans, M., (1990). Yeshiva University/Einstein College. Personal Communication.

5. Op. Cit., Incest Survivors Resource Network.

6. Heiman, M., (1988). Untangling incestuous bonds: The treatment of sibling incest. In M. Kahn & K. Lewis (Eds.), Siblings in Therapy, Norton & Co., N.Y.

7. Ibid.

8. Hartman, M., Finn, S.E., & Leon, G.R., (1987). Sexual abuse experiences in a clinical population: Comparisons of familial and non-familial abuse. Psychotherapy, 24, 154-159.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Denied the Right to Heal

The following was written by one of my clients. His post gives great insight into how our society needs to have more compassion on individuals who struggle with different addictions, especially with addiction that our society does not want to understand--and the danger of failing to understand leads to a perpetuation of the problem. If we want a sickness to end, we, as a society need to not be afraid to look at the sickness and those who struggle, on all sides of the issue. As you read this post, please understand that this individual has paid "his debt to society", but is still being stigmatized and haunted by his past--not because of his lack of therapeutic progress, but because of a society who will not accept and reintegrate an adult who was also molested as a child and now can not find a place in this world. This client uses a pen name:

We as a society are failing to do our duty to help those children who were sexually abused. The problem is they don’t stay children for ever and eventually grow up to be adults who were molested as children. A child living everyday with an abuser has an effect on that child.

A good number of these people were afraid to speak out when they were children. They were afraid they would get into trouble or afraid they would be hurt and punished more if they tried to get help. Some feared being killed. Some feared if they didn’t continue trying to please the abuser then their younger brother or sister would become a victim, so they continue to sacrifice and please to protect the younger. Some abuse started at such a young age that they didn’t know what was happening was wrong for a very long time. And when they learned and knew it was wrong they could not understand how something that felt so good physically could be so wrong.

All to often these kids grow up holding all these horrible events they’ve experience to themselves. They feel an immense amount of shame and guilt for the things that happened to them. They live with many regrets of things they were coerced, manipulated or forced to participate in.

As they become teens and adults they seek ways to manage and deal with these overpowering thoughts and feelings of shame and regret. They end up acting out in some way to deal with the stress of the things that happened to them and the social shame they feel surrounding the topic of sexual abuse. Some turn to drugs, some become work-a-holic’s. Some turn to pornography. Most have an unhealthy sense of sex. Some grow up to hate sex, sex becomes such a negative force in their life that its easier to just hate sex and anything associated with it. Some turn to doing the only thing they have ever know to deal with the stress and that is sexual abuse.

Trying to get help or finding help is next to impossible. They think they can manage to make it. But regardless of what has happened to them as children if they had ever initiated or acted out by abusing another they are automatically labeled as a child sex offender, gay, rapist etc. Then it is too late. From that point on none of their history matters. And seeking help is analogues to seeking imprisonment. Them acting out is their best attempt of dealing with the pressures of their life and is their attempt to seek help given the legal and social environment. The longer this cycle continues the more difficult it becomes for them to actually get any help and to begin to heal.

Because our laws force mandatory reporting of sexual abuse. And the general societies views on sexual abuse is still to just lock them up and cut off their nuts/penis. There is no hope for these children who are sexually abused and then become adults before they find a path to help. On top of that is the constant fear that those they have abused will one day seek help and press charges. This is a disease much worse than cancer as there is no escape from what has happened and there is no escape from the regret and shame of the actions and things we have done to others.

So these adults who were molested as children and are now acting out abusing themselves with drugs, pornography, or acting out themselves against other children will continue another generation of children who are molested. As long as we as a society continue to shame those and lock them up and hope they come out of prison fixed or at least scared enough to abstain from getting caught. We will never be able to help those children who are abused and crying for help.

I’ve sought help for most of my life, always afraid of losing everything good in my life. Never being able to really heal because there are some things I’ve done that I can not talk about because I fear they would place me in prison and end any help I may be getting. I’m not willing to give up living. I’m not willing to give up trying to do what is right. I’m not willing to give up overcoming the horrible events of my childhood. I’m not willing to give up striving to become a better man. I am not the man I was supposed to be, I am not the man I wanted to be. I also never got to be the kid I wanted to be.

And I will NO longer be denied my right to heal.

I still have many faults. I regret many of the things I’ve done in my past. I regret them because each one of those acts killed a part of the spirit of those who were involved. Each one of those acts destroyed a great relationship. Each one of them filled the hearts of those I knew with shame, disgust and hate.

Anthony Taylor Carden

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Reflections about Therapy from a Client

All over the news we have heard of the recent sex abuse scandal at Penn State. There have also been recent allegations of sex abuse at Utah State. The schools struggle to restore the integrity of their school and athletic programs.
If you would have asked me 3 months ago what I thought about the Penn State incident, I would have thought about the football program. But, today, my answer would be so different. Why the change of heart?

I grew up in a loving LDS home. I was one of 7 children and I always believed that my childhood was PERFECT! I married young and had 4 beautiful children and truly believed that I was living the dream. I was trying to live a PERFECT life. We all know that life is not perfect, but I was going to do everything in my power to achieve it. Slowly my life became very overwhelming because I could not live up to my standards.

Thru the loving guidance of my LDS Bishop, I was referred to LDS Family Services where I met Jade.

I had been to a therapist before and she gave me ideas to help me handle the stress and sent me on my way. After my first visit with Jade he gave me homework and told me he would see me in a couple of weeks. I started with Healing the Child Within, pretty simple for a person that had such an awesome childhood right?

One Sunday after meeting with the Bishop to follow up with my homework, I still struggled with what I was to be learning. So, I prayed for answers. Nothing could have prepared me for the answer that I was about to receive. As I sat on my bed, memories of abuse at the hands of my brother came flooding into my mind. How could this be happening? Why was this happening? What happened to my perfect life?
I tell you this because after hearing about the situations at both Universities, all I could think of is how brave those victims were to come forward. So many times the victim becomes the one that gets put on trial. I can tell you from personal experience, those victims thought about every possible scenario that could be thrown at them. They questioned their own character and judgment; they didn’t need the press to do it for them.

I asked Jade to post this on his blog because this is all so new to me. I am still going thru all of the possible scenarios and have not told anyone in my family. I have started using EMDR to help process my memories. I wish I could tell you that it is the best thing I have ever done, and maybe when I am done, I can say that. It is the hardest thing I have ever done. Jade once told me to “Believe in the process!”

If you find yourself in an abusive situation, please find someone you trust and find the courage to get the help that you deserve. Trust is something that comes very difficult to someone that has been abused. “Believe in the process!”

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Letter to Weakness

I have asked a few of my clients if they would be willing to post their stories and other writing they thought would be helpful to other individuals. The following is a copy of M.D.'s "letter to my enemy":

To my countless enemies – Satan and your fellow demons,

You entered into my life just as I became a teenager, taking advantage of my naive nature, tense upbringing, and uncommunicative family. You provided a numbing release that at first seemed harmless and natural. As the weeks turned into years and my childhood passed by, you always stuck around. Many times you weren’t openly aggressive in your tactics, and many times I even thought I had already defeated you just as you undoubtedly wanted me to believe. Yet eventually I always silently slipped back into your grasp. I was often able to resist you for periods time – such as before and after priesthood ordinations, my brother's death, and entering college - yet you always found a way of forcing your way back into my thoughts and actions. Through it all, you always were there – a manufactured way of letting go of my persistent anxieties and promenaded expectations and feeling what I mistakenly thought was a dependable pleasure and release.

Yet ultimately, you have only provided a stinging sorrow instead of pleasure and imprisonment rather than release. If you were supposedly “helping me” in some distorted way, why do I now see you have only caused me emotional and spiritual grief? Through consistent relapses, you continually have gashed away at my self-esteem, making me feel completely disconnected and isolated from others, even those who I love and desperately have wanted to trust. Rather than turning to others for help, I gradually emotionally detached myself from those who mattered most. You turned me into a hypocrite and a liar, teaching me to conceal my problems from others and to put on the mask that everything is perfect and under control. You impaired my relationship with the Lord, and filled that hole inside me where the Spirit should have been with a harrowing emptiness that often made me afraid to simply be alone and think for too long. I’d try filling that void with worldly things such as music or school, yet the despair always reared its head. You contorted and twisted my self-image to a point where I hardly recognized who I was anymore, acting completely contrary to the gospel-oriented life and goals I’ve wanted my entire life. Too many times I have felt like the elephant in the sacrament meeting, the sinner among my friends, and the deceiver within my family. Every time I’d been cheerfully and harmlessly asked why I had not left on my mission yet, I would either want to throw up or just blatantly walk away and skip the rest of church. And now as I progress into adulthood, you have restricted me from continuing on with the only things I want in my life. I couldn’t continue to walk down the halls of BYU knowing you’re still in control of me and that someone else should deserve my place if I can’t live the established high standards, I couldn’t serve a mission because of the amassed crippling shame you had singed into my identity, and I couldn’t even begin to think of being married in the temple with the way you crippled my relationships with others I care for. After seeing my own parent’s marriage crumble before me, all I want in my marriage is to be honest to my wife and the Lord, and with you that simply won’t happen.

But now I declare unto you, Satan and all others who are pitted against my salvation, NO MORE. The satisfaction you seemingly have in destroying and enslaving my life at first makes me furious, but then I realize how sad and pathetic I feel for you, because the one thing you and your countless followers have wanted and have fought for so desperately – to destroy my relationship with our Heavenly Father – ultimately is what will strengthen my relationship with Him to the point when I am one day ready to return to His loving arms, confident with the disciple and saint I have become. I’ve lost to you so many times, yet those lost battles will only make my success in overcoming you that much more sweet and empowering. By tying me down with this addiction, you have forced me to become dependent on my Heavenly Father and my Savior Jesus Christ, preparing me to become a humble and worthy Priesthood Holder, Missionary, Husband, and Father.

It is through the Atonement of Jesus Christ that I will completely overcome you. I have learned the hard way that I am not strong enough to defeat you on my own. That road has only led me deeper into your web of lies and deciet. Yet I will continually draw upon the power and love offered through Christ’s great Atoning Sacrifice, something you cannot defend against and I know is always extended to me if I will only humble myself to ask for it. You are powerless to the infinite effect of the Atonement and the Priesthood, and as I continue to get off my high horse of pride and get to work in living a Christ-centered life, you will have no power to influence my decisions or what stays in my mind. I will continue to educate myself on both your inaudible tactics in order to fortify myself, and, more importantly, on the tools provided by my God that I may use to expel you from all aspects of my life. You’ve had your run, but in the end you will only provide me with more spiritual endurance and acuity than I could have developed otherwise. Leaning on the power and support of my family, friends, fellow Sons of Helaman brothers, and most importantly on Christ, I will eradicate all the doubt and fear you have insinuated within my mind, and filling it’s void will be the love and confidence offered from Christ and His Atonement. I now fight not only for me, but for my future wife and children. Together we will live a happy, spiritual, and probably a difficult life, knowing how much you hate and will fight against my decisions, and through the ordinances of the gospel we will be worthily united and one day enter together into the Kingdom of our Father, sealed for eternity and redeemed through my Brother, Savior, and Redeemer – Jesus Christ. I will never give up or allow you to once again inflict the fear, doubt, and devastation you are so quick to deal.

So go ahead Satan, try your hardest. Rally your troops and amass all hell against me. Because I now fight with the full armor of God, and will always stand victorious as I fight alongside my Savior.

Stress and Family During the Holidays

The holidays can be a difficult time for most people. Many individuals feel depressed and stressed during this season, and often people identify their families as being a major source of stress surrounding the holidays. Here are some ideas help with the stress of the holidays and handle potential conflicts that may arise.

1. Don't be surprised if some conflict arises. If it is typical that arguments occur in your family, expect it to happen again! Prepare yourself by practicing or re-reading the four agreements (see post dated November 11th: "Are you living the four agreements). These agreements will help you handle your father's criticism, your mother's passive aggressive statements and your brother's dirty jokes!

2. Rotate which families you will visit. If you and your spouse both want to celebrate with your extended family, or their is a divorce situation to consider where not everybody wants to celebrate together or if you just have a lot of family, it can be aggravating to decide who to see, and when. Taking turns is an easy solution. Celebrate Thanksgiving with one family and Christmas with another.


3. If your family is going to cause you too much unnecessary stress, it is okay to turn down invitations to participate. It is reasonable to say, "We've decided to spend this year with our kids and keep the holiday simple, but thanks for the invite!"

4. Make sure that you spend some time with friends. Talking about your stress to a safe person you can confide can help immensely!

Good luck!

Saturday, November 12, 2011

EMDR: a New Service offered through AAIM Counseling

Just recently we started to offer EMDR at my clinic to help with anxiety and trauma. Many clients have asked me what EMDR is and how it can help. The following is an explaination of EMDR, the history and how it can help:

What Is EMDR?

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing, or EMDR, is a powerful new psychotherapy technique which has been very successful in helping people who suffer from trauma, anxiety, panic, disturbing memories, post traumatic stress and many other emotional problems. Until recently, these conditions were difficult and time-consuming to treat. EMDR is considered a breakthrough therapy because of its simplicity and the fact that it can bring quick and lasting relief for most types of emotional distress.

EMDR is the most effective and rapid method for healing PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) as shown by extensive scientific research studies.

The EMDR therapy uses bilateral stimulation, right/left eye movement, or tactile stimulation, which repeatly activates the opposite sides of the brain, releasing emotional experiences that are "trapped" in the nervous system. This assists the neurophysiological system, the basis of the mind/body connection, to free itself of blockages and reconnect itself.

As troubling images and feelings are processed by the brain via the eye-movement patterns of EMDR, resolution of the issues and a more peaceful state are achieved.

How Does It Work?

The therapist works gently with the client and asks him/her to revisit the traumatic moment or incident, recalling feelings surrounding the experience, as well as any negative thoughts, feelings and memories. The therapist then holds her fingers about eighteen inches from the clients face and begins to move them back and forth like a windshield wiper. The client tracks the movements as if watching ping pong. The more intensely the client focuses on the memory, the easier it becomes for the memory to come to life. As quick and vibrant images arise during the therapy session, they are processed by the eye movements, resulting in painful feelings being exchanged for more peaceful, loving and resolved feelings.

What problems are helped by EMDR?

The studies to date show a high degree of effectiveness with the following conditions:

loss of a loved one
injury of a loved one
car accident
fire
work accident
assault
robbery
rape
natural disaster
injury
illness
witness to violence
childhood abuse
victims of violent crimes
performance and test anxiety
trauma depression
anxiety or panic
phobias
fears
childhood trauma
physical abuse
sexual abuse
post traumatic stress
bad temper
overwhelming fears
panic attacks
low self-esteem
relationship problems
brooding or worrying
trouble sleeping

The EMDR technique is most effective when used in conjunction with other traditional methods of therapy in treating these and many other emotional disorders.

EMDR therapy can help clients replace their anxiety and fear with positive images, emotions and thoughts.

What are the Symptoms that can be helped by EMDR?

High anxiety and lack of motivation
Depression
Memories of a traumatic experience
Fear of being alone
Unrealistic feelings of guilt and shame
Fear of being alone
Difficulty in trusting others
Relationship problems
What is the History of EMDR?

Since the initial medical study in 1989 positive therapeutic results with EMDR have been reported with the following populations:

People who have witnessed or been a victim to a disaster (rape, accidents, earth quakes, fires, murder, gang related violence)
Clients suffering from PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder)
Suffers of panic disorders and anxiety attacks
Suffers of phobias
Chemically dependent clients

Persons exposed to excess loss ( loss by death, divorce, loss of a house by fire)
Crime victims and police officers who were once overcome with violent memories
Accident or burn victims

Although a fairly new therapeutic technique, EMDR is meeting with much success all across the county. EMDR is a natural process. The client and the therapist become partners on a journey to help move traumatic and blocked energy. Together they work to transcend and free up the energy, so the client can return to their natural grounded state of being. The goal of this work is to help the client heal, so they can return to their life in peace.

How do I know if EMDR is right for me?

There are a number factors to consider when evaluating the appropriateness of EMDR therapy for a client's particular situation and history. During your initial consultation with a trained EMDR therapist, all the relevant factors will be discussed in full to help you both come to a decision to move forward with EMDR.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Are You Living by The Four Agreements?

What are the agreements you are living by? One of my favorite books is a little book named “The Four Agreements,” by Don Miguel Ruiz. The book talks about the source of self-limiting beliefs that rob us of joy and create needless suffering. This little book (only 138 pages) offers a powerful code of conduct that can transform our lives. It is not a religion. As with anything you read, you may not agree in total, but if nothing else, it is definitely great food for thought! Agreements #2 (Don’t Take Anything Personally) and #3 (Don’t Make Assumptions) were really eye-opening. They talk about about other people, ourselves, and our relationships with others. The following is an excerpt from the book.

In his book, “The Four Agreements,” Don Miguel Ruiz says…

“There are thousands of agreements you have made with yourself, with other people, with your dream life, with God, with society, with your parents, with your spouse, with your children. But the most important agreements are the ones you made with yourself. In these agreements you tell yourself who you are, what you feel, what you believe, and how to behave. The result is what you call your personality. In these agreements you say, “This is what I am. This is what I believe. I can do certain things, and some things I cannot do. This is reality, that is fantasy; this is possible, that is possible.”

One single agreement is not such a problem, but we have many agreements that make us suffer, that make us fail in life. If you want to live a life of joy and fulfillment, you have to find the courage to break those agreements that are fear-based and claim your personal power. The agreements that come from fear require us to expend a lot of energy, but the agreements that come from love help us to conserve energy and even gain extra energy.

Each of us is born with a certain amount of personal power that we rebuild every day after we rest. Unfortunately, we spend all our personal power first to create all these agreements and then to keep these agreements. Our personal power is dissipated by all the agreements we have created, and the result is that we feel powerless. We have just enough power to survive each day, because most of it is used to keep the agreements that trap us in the dream of the planet. How can we change the entire dream of our life when we have no power to change even the smallest agreement?

If we can see it is our agreements which rule over our life, and we don’t like the dream of our life, we need to change our agreements. When we are finally ready to change our agreements, there are four very powerful agreements that will help us break those agreements that come from fear and deplete our energy.

Each time you break an agreement, all the power you used to create it returns to you. If you adopt these four new agreements, they will create enough personal power for you to change the entire system of your old agreements.

You need a very strong will in order to adopt the Four Agreements — but if you can begin to live your life with these agreements, the transformation in your life will be amazing. You will see the drama of hell disappear right before your very eyes. Instead of living in a dream of hell, you will be creating a new dream — your personal dream of heaven.

The Four Agreements:

1 – Be Impeccable With Your Word – this is the most important agreement and also the most difficult to one to honor. It is so important that with just this first agreement you will be able to transcend to the level of existence I call heaven on earth.

This agreement sounds very simple, but is very, very powerful. Your word is the power that you have to create. Your word is the gift that comes directly from God. Through the word you express your creative power. It is through the word that you manifest everything. Regardless of what language you speak, your intent manifests through the word. What you dream, what you feel, and what you really are, will all be manifested through the word.

The word is not just a sound or a written symbol. The word is a force; it is the power you have to express and communicate, to think, and thereby to create the events in your life. The word is the most powerful tool you have as a human. But like a sword with two edges, your word can create the most beautiful dream, or your word can destroy everything around you. One edge is the misuse of the word, which creates a living hell. The other edge is the impeccability of the word, which will only create beauty, love, and heaven on earth. Depending on how it is used, the word can set you free, or it can enslave you even more than you know.

2 – Don’t Take Anything Personally – Whatever happens around you, don’t take it personally. If I see you on the street and say, “Hey, you are so stupid,” without knowing you, it’s not about you; it’s about me. If you take it personally, then perhaps you believe you are stupid. Maybe you think to yourself, “How does he know? Is he clairvoyant, or can everybody see how stupid I am?”

You take it personally because you agree with whatever was said. As soon as you agree, the poison goes through you, and you are trapped in the dream of hell. What causes you to be trapped is what we call personal importance. Personal importance, or taking things personally, is the maximum expression of selfishness because we make the assumption that everything is about “me.” During the period of our education, or our domestication, we learn to take everything personally. We think we are responsible for everything. Me, me, me, always me!

Nothing other people do is because of you. It is because of themselves. All people live in their own dream, in their own mind; they are in a completely different world from the one we live in. When we take something personally, we make the assumption that they know what is in our world, and we try to impose our world on their world.

Even when a situation seems so personal, even if others insult you directly, it has nothing to do with you. What they say, what they do, and the opinions they give are according to the agreements they have in their own minds. Their point of view comes from all the programming they received during domestication.

When you take things personally, then you feel offended, and your reaction is to defend your beliefs and create conflicts. You make something big out of something so little, because you have the need to be right and make everybody else wrong. You also try hard to be right by giving them your own opinions. In the same way, whatever you feel and do is just a projection of your own personal dream, a reflection of your own agreements. What you say, what you do, and the opinions you have are according to the agreements you have made — and these opinions have nothing to do with me.

Others are going to have their own opinion according to their belief system, so nothing they think about me is really about me, but it is about them.

You may even tell me, “Miguel, what you are saying is hurting me.” But it is not what I am saying that is hurting you; it is that you have wounds that I touch by what I have said. You are hurting yourself. There is no way I can take this personally. Not because I don’t believe in you or don’t trust you, but because I know that you see the world with different eyes, with your eyes. You create an entire picture or movie in your mind, and in that picture you are the director, you are the producer, you are the main actor or actress. Everyone else is a secondary actor or actress. It is your movie.

The way you see that movie is according to the agreements you have made with life. Your point of view is something personal to you. It is no one’s truth but yours. Then, if you get mad at me, I know you are dealing with yourself. I am the excuse for you to get mad. And you get mad because you are afraid, because you are dealing with fear. If you are not afraid, there is no way you will get mad at me. If you are not afraid, there is no way you will hate me. If you are not afraid, there is no way you will be jealous or sad.

If you live without fear, if you love, there is no place for any of those emotions. If you don’t feel any of those emotions, it is logical that you will feel good. When you feel good, everything around you is good. When everything around you is great, everything makes you happy. You are loving everything around you, because you are loving yourself. Because you like the way you are. Because you are content with you. Because you are happy with your life. You are happy with the movie that you are producing, happy with your agreements with your life. You are at peace, and you are happy.

If someone is not treating you with love and respect, it is a gift if they walk away from you. If that person doesn’t walk away, you will surely endure many years of suffering with him or her. Walking away may hurt for awhile, but your heart will eventually heal. Then you can choose what you really want. You will find that you don’t need to trust others as much as you need to trust yourself to make the right choices.

3 – Don’t Make Assumptions – We have the tendency to make assumptions about everything. The problem with making assumptions is that we believe they are the truth. We could swear they are real. We make assumptions about what others are doing or thinking — we take it personally — then we blame them and react by sending emotional poison with our word. That is why whenever we make assumptions, we’re asking for problems. We make an assumption, we misunderstand, we take it personally, and we end up creating a whole big drama for nothing. It is always better to ask questions than to make an assumption, because assumptions set us up for suffering.

We make the assumption that everyone sees life the way we do. We assume that others think the way we think, feel the way we feel, judge the way we judge, and abuse the way we abuse. This is the biggest assumption that humans make. And this is why we have a fear of being ourselves around others. Because we think everyone else will judge us, victimize us, abuse us, and blame us as we do ourselves. So even before others have a chance to reject us, we have already rejected ourselves. That is the way the human mind works. We also make assumptions about ourselves, and this creates a lot of inner conflict.

4 – Always Do Your Best – Under any circumstances, always do your best, no more and no less. But keep in mind that your best is never going to be the same from one moment to the next. Everything is alive and changing all the time, so your best will sometimes be high quality, and other times it will not be as good. When you wake up refreshed and energized in the morning, your best will be better than when you are tired at night. Your best will be different when you are healthy as opposed to sick, or sober as opposed to drunk. Your best will depend on whether you are feeling wonderful and happy, or upset, angry, or jealous.

In your everyday moods your best can change from one moment to another, from one hour to the next, from one day to another. Your best will also change over time. As you build the habit of the four new agreements, your best will become better than it used to be.

Doing your best, you are going to live your life intensely. You are going to be productive, you are going to be good to yourself, because you will be giving yourself to your family, to your community, to everything. But it is the action that is going to make you feel intensely happy. When you always do your best, you take action. Doing your best is taking the action because you love it, not because you’re expecting a reward. Most people do exactly the opposite. They only take action when they expect a reward, and they don’t enjoy the action. And that’s the reason why they don’t do their best.

If you do your best always, over and over again, you will become a master of transformation. If you do your best in the search for personal freedom, in the search for self-love, you will discover that’s its just a matter of time before you find what you are looking for.”

http://lifelessons4u.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/are-you-living-by-the-four-agreements/

Article – Four Agreements http://www.sairegion24.org/fileupload/ditto/14/FourAgreements.pdf

Book Review – The Four Agreements http://www.nderf.org/4AgreementsReview.htm

Book Summary – The Four Agreements http://www.bizsum.com/thefouragreements.htm

Monday, October 31, 2011

Why Zombies eat Brains

Much of my research focused on physical and psychological needs for zombies to eat brains, as well as habitat needs.

One study found that the undead have a significant reduction in the pineal gland. Perhaps Zombies are compensating for a lack of this significant area of the brain, and by eating brains they feel they will make up for the lack of theirs.
Brains are also very high in protein/nutrients.

Recent studies have shown that glial cells, which make up the bulk of a brain, have the ability to act as stem cells, at least as far as being able to replicate other brain cells. Zombies are probably going after the glial cells to help restore some of their brain function.

Brains are also rich in cholesterol, which is essential for maintaining cell membrane pliability, which is a particular problem at the low body temperatures typical of zombies in non-tropical climates.

Psychologically, the act of eating brains can ease the pain of being dead (see movie "From Beyond")This would actually make more sense, when one considers some studies which note that zombies probably don't eat for nourishment, and perhaps the act of brain-eating represents an unholy, instinctive attempt on the undead's part to regain their lost minds.

Also we need to consider that by being dead, many zombies are missing teeth, and prefer eating something that's easy on the gums.

One last idea is that zombies eat brains as a matter of managing their habitat. As is well-known, a zombie's bite will infect a normal human and turn him or her into another zombie within a matter of minutes or hours. This, of course, assumes that the attacking zombie or its pack do not completely consume the victim. Now, you figure that a solo zombie or even one or two attacking in conjunction cannot eat all of the meat parts of a given victim in one sitting. This means that if a zombie just eats an arm, pretty soon it will be joined by a one-armed zombie that is also now on the hunt. Therefore it must now compete with the nub zombies in the pursuit of tasty human flesh. Eating the brain is both satisfying and prevents the rise of new zombies, so the zombie population does not increase to unsustainable levels.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Are you Addicted to Technology

Some people may be as addicted to computers and other personal electronics as junkies are to drugs, according to John O'Neill, director of addictions services for the Menninger Clinic in Houston.

These over-wired people are so focused on their gadgets, they neglect relationships with other people, O'Neill said. Communication aids such as texting and e-mail may actually hamper our abilities to have more important face-to-face conversations.

But some experts object to labeling the techno-savvy as addicts without verifying that they meet the precise psychological definition of addiction.

* In 2006, psychiatrists at Stanford University surveyed people over the phone to try to determine how compulsively they used the Internet. They found a sizable portion of respondents displayed troubling tendencies, but could not determine whether their use merited a medical diagnosis and said more research needed to be done.

* A 2006 article in the journal Perspectives in Psychiatric Care said the Internet can "promote addictive behaviors" and advocated formally recognizing its use as a possible addiction to improve treatment.

* Another research paper, published in 2007 in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology by a psychiatrist at Tel Aviv University, recommended that Internet addiction be regarded as an extreme disorder on par with gambling, sex addiction and kleptomania.

O'Neill admitted that there is not enough research to establish whether excessive technology use qualifies as addiction, but cited people who can’t sit through a movie without checking their cell phones or make it through dinner without peeking at their Blackberries as potential addicts.

"Technology can become more than a passing problem and more like an addiction," he told LiveScience. He listed some danger signs: "You become irritable when you can't use it. The Internet goes down and you lose your mind. You start to hide your use."

He said he can see corollaries between drug and alcohol addiction and the way some people use technology.

But some experts object to calling any excessive behavior "addiction."

"People use the term 'addiction' pretty indiscriminately, without considering the formal criteria that need to be met," said Robert A. Zucker, director of the Addiction Research Center at the University of Michigan.

He said patients must display certain behaviors including craving, compulsive use, neglecting other responsibilities, withdrawal when the addictive object is not available, and other habits to be considered addicts.

"I am not aware of any work that has formally examined whether persons who make heavy use of cell phones, Blackberries and the like meet these criteria, but until that happens, I remain skeptical of the characterization," Zucker said. "It is trendy but not scientific."

Whether or not it qualifies as addiction, O'Neill said, our all-consuming relationships with technology are getting in the way of more important relationships — with people.

"I believe that technology has benefited us greatly," O'Neill said, "but my concern is that many of us have taken it too far, and it's become a substitute for those necessary face to face conversations."

Some experts agree that people who are over-wired may experience similar brain processes as people who are addicted to other things, such as drugs.

Eugene Samoza, director of the Addiction Research Center at the University of Cincinnati, said that addiction hijacks the brain's natural reward center, the nucleus accumbens. This center rewards humans for acquiring things they need biologically, such as sex and food, by releasing dopamine, a neurotransmitter associated with happiness.

"If it causes a release of dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, it acts like addiction," Samoza said. "That’s true of lots of things that people end up liking to do. So basically I think probably one could become addicted to technology."

But even if you are a techno-junkie, it is possible to change, O'Neill said.

"The first thing to do is take a long, hard look at how you are using technologies, and then to start to set some limits," he said. "You have to take off a couple hours and make those hours important enough that you don't allow yourself to be interrupted. I think we should have certain rules. We don’t break up, fire people or break traumatic news to people via e-mail or text message."

http://www.livescience.com/9556-addicted-technology.html

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Groups

Here are the groups were are offering at AAIM Counseling:

AMAC (Adults Molested as Children) Men's Group. Cost: $35. This will be a 16 week male specific AMAC group, starting Oct 19th @ 7pm. Because of the intimate nature of this group, it will close after four weeks and will be restricted to 8 group members, so please refer soon. The group will be lead by Rick Frank PhD. You can contact him directly @ 801-425-5559

Marriage Growth Group. Cost: $35. This will be an ongoing open group to help build skills and resolve dysfunctional interpersonal problems in a marriage. Group begins November 17th @ 7pm. This group will be lead by Rick Frank PhD.

Dialectical Behavioral Therapy - Skills Group. Cost $40 (two hour group). This will be an open DBT skills group, focusing on increasing interpersonal effectiveness skills, mindfulness skills, distress tolerance skills and emotional regulation. Group begins November 30th @ 7pm. This group will be lead by Danielle Schnieder. You can contact her directly @ 801-808-6626

If you have any questions for me, please contact me @ 801-808-6516.

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Towards a Theory of Human Agency - Reflections on research from Allen E. Bergin

Control and agency (choice) has been a reoccurring theme in my practice as of late. I have noticed that many of my clients have been struggling with choice and have been attempting to avoid it as much as possible, b/c of the responsibility that comes with it. However, their lack of self-regulation, control and responsibility has lead to many of the issues that they have been trying to avoid.

For example: I notice avoidance of agency is especially true with addiction. I have been running the Sons of Helaman group for some time now, and I have observed in this group that the lack of self-regulation is the greatest contributing factor to relapse. The following insights came from much of the research done by Allen E. Bergin (Toward a Theory of Human Agency):

The topic of agency provides enough substance for several books. Lets simply examine self-regulation. Because this is a complicated topic in itself, it will be subdivided further to self-control, which is but one aspect of self-regulation.

Self-Control (Bergen)

Self-control would not be a matter for scrutiny if it were not for the pervasiveness of its opposite, namely, a lack or loss of self-control. Today, we are often taught and we too often act as though everything controls our behavior except the self or the conscious will. Within the Church this is less often so, but then we are too often guilty of the reverse error, that is, assuming that people are always 100 percent responsible for their own acts.

I thus find myself the man in the middle—trying to persuade my professional colleagues that there is such a thing as self-control while at the same time attempting to convince my fellow Saints that human agency has limitations and, in some cases, is nonexistent.

Determiners of Behavior at a Choice Point (Bergen)

All human acts are determined by multiple influences. We may identify six broad classes of influence as: (1) cultural, social, or environmental controls; (2) biological factors; (3) habits of response that have been conditioned, especially by childhood experiences; (4) feelings or emotions; (5) thoughts, ideas, or beliefs; and (6) spiritual inspiration.

It would be preferable if human beings acted upon the latter three factors primarily, but unfortunately their behavior is too often dominated by influences outside of their control. If we are to be wise, receive the truth, and take the Holy Spirit for our guide as suggested in D&C 45:57, we must learn to optimize the influence of higher processes in our actions. Otherwise, we lose our power of independent action and are “encircled about by the bands of death, and the chains of hell” (Alma 5:7) and then “are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction.” (Alma 12:11.) We shall deal first with the latter state—a loss of power to act independently.

Absence of Control (Bergen)

As we consider the absence of control, it must be noted that this is a relative statement. Rarely does self-control descend to a zero point; on the other hand, instances of complete self-control are rare. Our degree of control varies between 0 and 100 percent. Some people have much more control than others. Within the same person, the degree of control also varies in different situations. In one area, say eating, one may have low control while in another, say anger, he may have high control.

Loss of control has become a pervasive problem of the modern world. It may be observed in violence, drug addiction, alcoholism, sexual excesses and deviations, obesity, indolence, crime, neuroses, insanity, and myriads of other manifestations, most of which have been clearly described or condemned and foretold in the scriptures. (2 Tim. 3:1–7.) Each of these excesses has its more moderate forms, and they are common among us—surprising as this may seem.

Inhabitants of nineteenth-century western culture were dominated by the problem of overcontrol, as Sigmund Freud so brilliantly perceived, whereas modern culture is plagued by undercontrol, as we see every day in our prisons, hospitals, clinics, and streets.

Undercontrol may follow from cultural norms such as are found in some tribal customs and in the codes of slum street gangs. It may arise from biological defects such as brain damage or hormonal disorders; it may emerge from a particularly traumatic childhood; or it may derive from the consistently bad choices made by otherwise normal individuals. The degree of personal responsibility for actions thus varies in terms of internal and external conditions impinging upon the person.

The most obvious cases of loss of control are found among psychologically disturbed persons. Indeed, one of the hallmarks of psychopathology is that the person reports being out of control. This may take several forms, and I shall describe two of the most common types. One consists of impulse disorders, of which excessive or deviant sexual behavior would be an example. Such behavior is often propelled by strong inner drives such as the need for affection, a feeling of dependency, or biological tension. This is an instance of powerful internal stimulation overwhelming the person’s conscious controls and dominating his behavior. Some homosexuals, for example, seem to be compulsively driven to frequent and sometimes bizarre acts that they say occur without the mediation of conscious intent. The act once repeated, the motivation behind it can become so powerful that one is literally in bondage to the demands of biological impulses and related stimuli. The “chains of hell” is an apt metaphor for such cases.

Another cause of loss of control involves the influence of external stimuli. A phobia is a good example. Persons with classical phobias experience from specific sources a degree of dread and an anticipation of harm that are incomprehensible to normal individuals. Such avoidance reactions may occur in response to stimuli as simple as the sight of a spider or as complex as proximity to members of the opposite sex. In these cases, external stimuli have gained control over behavior and evoke automatic fear and avoidance reactions. In such cases there is a good deal of control over behavior, but it is external control; the person feels “out of control” in the sense that withdrawal occurs whether he prefers it or not. This is a classic illustration of how psychopathology reduces freedom by eliminating the possibility of alternative courses of action; in other words, choice is absent. If you have extreme claustrophobia, you have no choice. A closet is such a threatening stimulus that you cannot enter. If you do not have claustrophobia, you may choose to enter or not, as reason and circumstances require. Your range of available alternatives at a choice point is greater, and in that sense you are freer; you have more self-control, or a greater degree of agency.

When self-control is diminished in some measure or in some areas of one’s life, one of several specific mechanisms may be the cause. I will mention only three of many, and I will merely name them, since the limitation of space will not permit ample definitions. They are: (1) Conditioning. This occurs most often in childhood when traumatic experiences become paired with certain people, places, or things. Phobias are often products of traumatic emotional conditioning. Conditioned responses are automatic and outside of one’s control. (2) Repression. This is a sister mechanism to conditioning and involves the pressing into the unconscious of threatening thoughts, impulses, and feelings, which, however, persist in influencing behavior. Responses elicited by unconscious motives thus often seem to occur autonomously and seem to be irrational even though there is a reason behind them. Unconscious forces are some of the greatest challenges to man’s rationality and self-control. (3) Transgression. Willful or conscious disobedience to moral laws is a misuse of agency; for each such act a measure of agency is lost, and one gradually succumbs to the power of habitual sin. The scriptural reference is “being in the bondage of Satan.”

It may seem heretical to propose that for some of mankind agency is extremely limited or nonexistent, but I submit that the processes and examples I have given are based upon valid observations of a worsening human condition and that they are scripturally confirmed as well. I have already cited several scriptural references to this effect and add here the following supporting views:

Brigham Young asserted his views on willful disobedience to God’s laws:

A man can dispose of his agency or of his birthright, as did Esau of old, but when disposed of he cannot again obtain it—those who despise the proffered mercies of the Lord … have their agency abridged immediately and bounds and limits are set upon their operations … evil, when listened to, begins to rule and overrule the spirit God has placed within man. (Cited in Widtsoe, 1954, pp. 63, 65.)

Talmage noted that in the Judgment the various forces that can limit agency will be taken into account in evaluating one’s life on earth:

The inborn tendencies due to heredity, the effect of environment whether conducive to good or evil, the wholesome teaching of youth, or the absence of good instruction—these and all other contributory elements must be taken into account in the rendering of a just verdict as to the soul’s guilt or innocence. (Talmage, 915, p. 29.)

In reply to the question of why God has caused civilizations to be destroyed, it may be asserted that the Lord’s actions were acts of mercy in that these nations or peoples had become so wicked that the children growing up among them had no possibility of developing true agency. Their only opportunity was to choose evil and perpetuate it; therefore, they were destroyed. In support of this Joseph Fielding Smith (1960, p. 55) cites the following comment by John Taylor in his book, The Government of God (p. 53):

Hence it was better to destroy a few individuals, than to entail misery on many. And hence the inhabitants of the old world and of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, because it was better for them to die, and thus be deprived of their agency, which they abused, than entail so much misery on their posterity, and bring ruin upon millions of unborn persons.

Further evidence that agency can theoretically be entirely lost is that Satan’s plan was a real possibility. This must mean that under the right conditions it is possible to totally control human behavior. We know that men can come under the bondage of sin if they choose evil. To the extent that they do they are under Satan’s power, and his plan is implemented to that degree, albeit in the opposite direction of his original proposal. It should be noted here that when we speak of Satan’s control we do not necessarily mean that he or his assistants are personally present or directly involved, for he must operate through lawful processes just as the Lord himself does. The loss of one’s agency may thus mean that Satan has obtained control over a person by the management of natural processes that the person willfully permitted himself to get hooked into, or that he was conditioned into during childhood.

A final evidence that agency can be severely limited and that this can occur without the person himself making wrong choices is indicated by our knowledge that child-rearing events can shape future responses so powerfully as to virtually eliminate personal responsibility. This is supported by scriptures that declare that small children are not responsible for their acts and cannot be held accountable for them and that if parents do not properly teach them, the eventual sin is put upon the heads of the parents. If the parents are responsible, they must have instituted negative control over the child’s behavior—control with long-lasting effects. It is interesting that no such parental control is implied in relation to positive behavior. This is logical in that positive child rearing induces agency, that is, self-control in the child; whereas negative child rearing induces the bondage of Satan, which eliminates choice unless there is outside intervention. There are numerous scriptures supporting this view. (D&C 29:47; D&C 68:25; D&C 74:4; D&C 93:39.) One of the more interesting is Deuteronomy 5:9: “… for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.” [Deut. 5:9] Joseph Fielding Smith interpreted this as follows: “The real meaning of this visiting of the iniquity is that when a man transgresses he teaches his children to transgress, and they follow his teachings. It is natural for children to follow in the practices of their fathers and by doing so suffer from the parents’ iniquity. …” (1957, p. 83.) The term natural in the foregoing sentence probably can be interpreted as natural psychological processes such as imitative learning, conditioning, and repression.

The existence of such losses of control or agency have been brought forcefully to my awareness during long hours of counseling as a psychotherapist and as a bishop. I have been convinced by many years of experience that every human being suffers defects of agency and control to some degree and that in a minority of cases the level of control has been so seriously reduced by biological defects or malignant childhood training that they are, in effect, not responsible for their behavior. I am not speaking here of the normal cross-section of human weaknesses, even though they limit agency to some degree; because if we had perfect agency, it is doubtful that this life would be a test for us. Certainly, no one should be encouraged by these remarks to justify his misbehavior. Our goal should be to resist the history of evil, to reverse the sins of our fathers, and to initiate a benign cycle that will traverse the generations and help people establish new levels of self-regulation. There is nothing more pitiful than the person who wants to control his behavior but is unable to do so. Such individuals are buffeted by their own fears and impulses; their behavior is dominated by Satan. In such instances self-effort alone will not suffice.

I would like to share with you two examples from my own experience. In both cases the presenting problem was compulsive or uncontrollable homosexuality.

I found that a complex set of factors was operating in each of these cases. Not only was there a compulsive symptom but there were common underlying predispositions. Of great importance was the fact that each suffered from a phobia—an intense fear of the opposite sex. As personal involvement with a member of the opposite sex increased, anxiety increased until feelings of panic ensued and the relationship was disrupted. In addition, each of these persons lacked an adequate repertoire of social skills appropriate for engaging in normal male-female contacts and for deepening such relationships. And finally, each person had made the error of seeking warmth, security, and intimacy exclusively with members of the same sex and had permitted this pattern to develop into a powerfully reinforcing biological relationship. In doing so, their behavior became dominated by the immediacy of needs for affection and bodily satisfaction to the point that the ability to consciously choose was virtually obliterated. We thus had three factors contributing to a serious diminution of agency: a phobia, a deficient social repertoire, and weakened impulse control.

Our treatment of these cases cannot be documented in detail here, but it consisted first of reducing fears of the opposite sex by means of a technique called systematic desensitization. This consists of reversing the old childhood conditioning of avoidance responses to heterosexual stimuli by manipulating the clients’ feeling states so that positive responses are repeatedly paired with and associated with the feared object. This gradually increases control, in that panic is no longer the invariable and automatic response to the formerly phobic events. Secondly, we trained these persons by means of role playing or behavioral rehearsal in appropriate social skills because we soon learned that the removal of the phobic symptoms merely brought about the possibility of heterosexual adequacy. That is, systematic desensitization reduced an inhibition but did not provide a program of positive approach behavior. Once the new skills were learned, a third problem remained, namely, that there was still a compelling sexual impulse that persisted due to a lack of self-control and the strong biological reinforcement inherent in the act that made the arousal of control difficult. We therefore instituted a self-control training procedure to assist in the agonizing struggle with the impulses which these clients had determined to overcome. Everything we had done up to this point prepared the way by gradually developing new controls and effectiveness in previously weak areas, but the critical difficulty still lay before us.

Before proceeding, I should parenthetically point out that if attempts at self-control of impulses had been initiated without these other changes, they probably would have failed; failure is the usual result when self-effort responses alone are implemented. Self-effort is admirable but ineffective in severe cases where so much control has been lost. In these instances it is essential to reduce the strength of factors maintaining the undesirable behavior before proceeding directly to enhancing will power. This usually requires the assistance of others who temporarily aid the person in establishing new levels of control that could not be achieved by self-effort alone. At the same time, it is equally important to build up positive behaviors that can provide prosocial satisfactions as alternatives to the negative behavior that is being inhibited. Simply telling such a person to “go control himself” will not do.

We next proceeded to develop and apply a method of direct training in control (Bergin, 1969). This technique involved, first, a careful assessment of the events immediately preceding a loss of self-control. It was explained that failures in self-control often occurred because the effort to control was applied late in the sequence when the impulsive pattern had already reached a high level of intensity. Thus, the unexercised and undeveloped control ability was weak compared to the strength of the impulse, and it had to be applied early in the sequence to insure success.

The clients were then instructed to pay close attention to environmental situations and to personal reactions that might set off the undesired chain of events. It was evident that in the past they had not been aware of these events until they had reached an intermediate or high intensity; therefore two or three therapy sessions were devoted to repeatedly going over the chains and making them as explicit as possible.

Techniques for interrupting responses to stimuli early in the chains were discussed and, in imagination, practiced during the sessions. These included methods such as immediately switching to thoughts or activities unrelated to the chain, but it was always emphasized that this be done promptly so as to apply the greatest strength of control to the weakest strength of impulse. This procedure of shutting off impulse-related reactions and immediately engaging in another activity (reading, walking, thinking) was very much a simple act of will motivated by the client’s desire for change and by the hope and compliance engendered by the therapist’s instructions.

Following this procedure was difficult for the clients at first, presumably because it totally reversed a strongly reinforced habit, but by persistence and encouragement they were soon able to practice it regularly. The clients reported their experiences in much the same terms in which addicts do. They described it as a feeling of climbing a very steep hill with a large pack on their backs. Each effort at control was like another step up this impossible incline; but almost unexpectedly they seemed to reach a crest and the effort was then downhill and easy the rest of the way.

The potency of this technique seems to lie in applying it to a specific problem that arises from an inadequately developed self-regulatory system. The emphasis here is on the assumption that there are such things as primary developmental defects in self-control that are responsive chiefly to techniques that emphasize the self in self-control, namely that the defect lies in the unpracticed will, in the self that does not consciously and vigorously regulate.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of these cases is the phenomenon of impulse weakening as a direct result of consistent exercise in self-regulation. The result of this effort was that the clients soon gained control of their behavior in the presence of formerly compelling stimuli.

It appears that active resistance to the undesirable response to a stimulus tends to break the stimulus-response chain and the stimuli lose their power to compel or control the individual’s behavior. It also appears that the feelings and fantasies formerly associated with this range of stimuli actually disappeared as responses to them.

Another way to describe the results of the self-control method is nicely exemplified by President McKay’s advice: “Resist temptation and Satan will flee from you.” He declared that this is exactly what happened during the Savior’s three great temptations. According to President McKay, because of the Savior’s resistance Satan’s power had been broken by the time of the final temptation, and he was merely pleading. Then the Savior turned his back on Satan with finality and commanded him to get hence.

Such insight led the prophet to declare eloquently: “The greatest battles of life are fought within the silent chambers of our own souls.” This is the battle for self-control, and there is nothing more majestic than the quiet confidence of one who has achieved it.

The management of self-effort responses has been applied in a number of additional cases, both normal and pathological, with relative success. The process seems to follow a regular pattern that permits theoretical interpretation, although the notions I will now offer should not be dignified by the term theory. Mini-theory will suffice.

Toward an Idea of Self-Control (Bergen)

Our thesis is that when a person consciously selects a behavioral goal and then finds his pathway to that goal obstructed by habits, impulses, or feelings over which he has little control, he can overcome these obstacles by the exercise of self-effort. Technically it may be stated thus: The power of a consciously perceived stimulus to evoke an undesired response is directly proportional to the frequency with which the undesired response occurs. Decline in the power of such a stimulus complex is a direct function of the frequency with which the individual consciously and effectively resists acting out the usual response. A corollary hypothesis is that stimuli early in the chain of behavior will evoke a weaker response and that responses of that order will be more readily inhibited than those of a higher order. If inhibition occurs more frequently at that level, breaking of the main, over-arching stimulus-response connection will be more frequent and more successful.

Characteristics of Positive Self-Control (Bergen)

A growing substantive literature provides us with an increasingly useful picture of what it means to possess and maintain positive self-control within the context of an effective life-style. This moves us beyond the specific details of clinical pathology into the broad sweep of everyday life where control responses are harmoniously blended with expressive behavior into a balanced, self-regulated life.

The first quality of self-control is that it consists of voluntary action, and voluntary behavior requires a choice situation in which at least two incompatible acts are possible. The scriptures tell us that if there were no opposition, no law of opposites, there could be no agency. “And it must needs be that the devil should tempt the children of men, or they could not be agents unto themselves.” (D&C 29:39.)

A second quality is the prominence of awareness or consciousness in self-control and the mediation of this control by language or other symbolic processes. “An action is truly voluntary only when it can be begun or can be checked by verbal cues.” (Guthrie, 1938, p. 174.) A person is responsible when his behavior can thus be guided by symbols. Children, for example, acquire responsibility as they acquire control of action through language. A similar process occurs in all forms of psychotherapy. Freud stated this succinctly in his epigram, “Where Id is, there shall Ego be.” In other words, in the course of therapy the ego gains control over the passions of the id by making the unconscious conscious. (Parenthetically, it is important for students to know that Freud stood for such ideas rather than the libertinism with which his name is associated. He was a great man and one not to be ignored by LDS scholars.)

The aspect of self-control role of beliefs or convictions. Terry has said that “character is the ability to inhibit instinctive impulses in accordance with a regulative principle.” That is, there is a time and place for expressiveness, but it must be regulated in terms of internal guides such as goals and ideals. Convictions imply a concept of something beyond self, beyond individual need that regulates the processes of goal direction, achievement, and management of a positive life-style. Convictions differentiate those who will behave in the “natural” way from those who aspire to the higher planes of civilization and righteousness.

A large number of research studies permits us to outline additional specific dimensions of self-control and self-regulation. (Bergen) These include:

(1) The ability to delay gratification, to resist the temptation of immediate rewards or pleasures in favor of more distant and often higher satisfactions, in accordance with abstract principles of right and wrong. This includes the ability to tolerate tension, discomfort, and frustration.

(2) The ability to discern clearly the connections between means and ends, between behaviors and their immediate and ultimate consequences. It is the inability to maintain awareness of means-ends sequences, that is, to anticipate consequences, that commonly characterizes the impulsive behavior of delinquents and criminals.

(3) The ability to frame one’s life and behavior within a future time perspective. The briefer one’s time span, the greater is the difficulty with self-control. The more one is capable of long-range planning, the better is his control.

(4) An internal locus of control. Self-regulatory deficiencies often arise in persons who feel that they are the passive subjects of the forces of fate surrounding them. Their external locus of control leads them to behave in ways that only reinforce their belief in fate.

(5) A sensitive guilt response Guilt is a signal to us that something is wrong and, in that sense, it is friendly. Guilt aids us in preserving the integrity of our controls just as pain assists us in preserving the integrity of our bodies. If pain did not alert us to physical dangers and diseases, we would soon die. If our guilt mechanisms are not alert to moral dangers, we die just as certainly in a spiritual sense. While it is possible to overdo guilt and become neurotically obsessed with seeming misdeeds, this is not usually the case. Cultivating a positive guilt response is therefore adaptively in the service of effective self-regulation.

A number of additional factors influence degree of control, and I will merely list some conducted at Teachers College, Columbia University.
Combined Concept List (N=20)

1. Mood or affective tone and its intensity affect degree of control.

2. Regulation is influenced by the subjectively evaluated importance of the task.

3. Subjectively evaluated liking or disliking for task influences regulation.

4. Existence of external deadlines or other concrete demands affects regulation. Formally structured role requirements are similar and affect self-regulation.

5. Self-imposed plans and structure affect control:

1. a.

Short-range schedules, lists, goals, deadlines, routines. This can yield over-control and eventual loss of control due to unadaptive rigidity.
2. b.

Long-range planning that imposes structure on the general course of life and task behavior.

6. Overcoming inertia to perform a task diminishes difficulty in performing or resisting the task on later trials.

7. Positive or negative social reinforcement influences control in either direction, depending on whether approval or disapproval is involved and which behavior it is contingent upon. (Control or expression may be involved.) How important the social evaluator is influences the potency of this variable.

8. A sense of responsibility and obligation to others influences self-control.

9. Feeling loved, accepted, and nurtured by significant others influences degree of regulation.

10. Material reward versus deprivation influences regulation.

11. The degree of confidence, competence, self-esteem, assurance, and security with regard to tasks and decisions influences regulation.

12. Organismic variables influence degree of regulation:

1. a.Fatigue lessens control.
2. b.Physiological withdrawal symptoms lessen control.
3. c.Degree of sickness-health or good-bad physical feeling influences control.

13. Interludes of diversion, relaxation, self-expression, or gratification during periods requiring regulation may facilitate or restrict self-regulation, depending on circumstances.

14. Feeling in control and being able to control seem to increase with age (although there appear to be individual developmental fluctuations).

15. Withdrawing or escaping from the situation may increase control or affect control in a difficult situation.

16. The length of delay of gratification is a function of—

1. a.

the subjective importance or magnitude of the situation;
2. b.

the amount or power of immediate gratification;
3. c.

greater gain or sense of challenge by the delay.

17. The degree of awareness of emotion or impulse influences ability to control.

18. Awareness of a tendency to lose control or of having lost control leads to greater ability to regain control.

19. Understanding the realities of the situation enhances ability to control. Cognitive belief that the situation can be changed is a factor here.

20. Knowledge and understanding of oneself is a factor in regulation.

21. The effect of perceiving others out of control may increase one’s own ability to control.

22. Repetition of irritating, frustrating stimuli may lead to loss of control.

23. Experience and practice in control may enhance degree of control.

24. Undesirable or inappropriate impulses may be channeled by means of substitution, displacement, or fantasy.

25. Awareness of legal sanctions can be an incentive to control.
Subjects of Study

1. office worker 2. college undergraduate 3. alcoholic 4. commercial artist 5. neurotic 6. policeman 7. female graduate student 8. housewife 9. male graduate student 10. female mental patient 11. male mental patient 12. small proprietor 13. singer-actor 14. artist 15. dancer 16. secretary 17. male homosexual 18. weight watcher 19. assaultive prisoner 20. addicted prostitute

Summary (Bergen)

To summarize the characteristics, we may phrase self-control as the ability to direct one’s behavior toward general, satisfying goals rather than to be pushed by needs (Murray, Freud, Hull) or pulled by stimuli. One may define self-regulation by stating what it is not. It is not a push-pull theory. One regulates his own behavior; his behavior is not regulated for him by social reinforcement, parental conditioning, authoritarian power, libidinal instincts, or hormonal cycles.

It is the ability, first, to make a choice, to evaluate the consequences of that chosen course of action, and to prize the outcomes, and then it is the capacity to marshal one’s energy in effective pursuit of the consequences or goals subtended by that choice.

It is the ability to reflect when the impulse is to act, especially when the impulse to act runs counter to valued habits or when it presents a new course of behavior. It is the ability to act effectively when the course is clear, the ability to force upon oneself consciousness of consequences and the facing of reality when the inclination is to submerge awareness and give the self immediate gratification, that is, the ability to widen perception when the tendency is to narrow it. It is to resist persuasion and to judge for oneself in the sense of Emerson’s “Self Reliance.”

It is the ability to modulate, to rule feeling, passion, habit, and inclination, not with an iron hand, but rather with a sense of timing and regulation that maximizes outcomes for oneself and others. It is the ability to submerge oneself in feeling when it is useful, appropriate, or right, thus to enrich one’s existence. It is thus the ability to delay gratification, but not to avoid it entirely. Like the steam regulator, it permits expression, but only in useful or safe channels.

In general, it is the ability to increase one’s freedom in terms of the valued alternatives available, and it merges into the subjective experience of feeling free and self-determined.

Today’s most prominent academic psychologist, B. F. Skinner of Harvard, has declared that “behavior is determined not from within but from without.” He argues that all human behavior is controlled by external contingencies of reward and punishment, and that the goals of psychology are (a) to understand how the mechanisms of external control operate and (b) to manage these mechanisms so as to obtain maximum control over human behavior in the service of creating a benign society. While much of Skinner’s experimental work must be considered of great value, his philosophical pronouncements regarding the nature of man are offensive and, fortunately, unsubstantiated.

Unfortunately, his views epitomize a dominant theme of twentieth-century psychology, which is the embracing of psychological phenomena within a schema of laws, statistical and mechanical, having the purpose of achieving the goal of controlling and predicting human behavior. The primary scientific paradigm for psychology has thus been that of the biological and physical sciences.

My own counterthesis is that human behavior cannot be accounted for within the framework of physicalistic natural laws, even statistical ones, and that the main premises upon which these views are based are false. This may appear to be a dramatic apostasy by a person so deeply involved with and committed to the field of psychology; however, I see it more as a call to reform than as a rejection.

It is my thesis that human behavior may be and often is controlled by the individual himself and that any hypothetical “mechanisms” that enter into this behavior process are self-regulatory mechanisms.

The idea of self-regulation necessarily carries with it a rejection of the usual psychological theorizing as to the “lawful determination” of behavior. It does not, however, preclude the possibility of establishing verbal or mathematical descriptions of behavioral regularities. It only assumes that the individual’s habitual manner of making choices and of regulating his behavior must be a crucial ingredient of these formulae. This commitment to the notion of self-generated behavior means that while understanding and prediction may be possible, control of behavior is not possible except in extreme cases of pathology, such as those described, or in unusual instances of environmental control, such as concentration camps or prisons. Thus, while the individual may assist the scientist’s theorizing by reporting his style of choosing and self-regulating, this does not give the scientist control of that style.

None of the foregoing should be construed as a repudiation of the field of psychology; many of its observations and techniques are of great value, and I personally make my living promoting and implementing them. I am instead calling for a radical reform of the ideological assumptions that lie behind much of this work. I hope that I and many of you will be allied with all of those who are calling for the infusion of a new spirit into this field and for the formulation of new theories that square more precisely with our perceptions of human nature as distinct from physical and animal nature. This paper is one step in that direction, and hopefully it is consonant with the following, slightly paraphrased, revelation: “Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be … all intelligence is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself; otherwise there is no existence. Behold, here is the agency of man …” (D&C 93:29–31.)

In conclusion, I have three brief messages for those of you who are students. First, let me say that while I do not look to psychology for my salvation or that of mankind, I do view it (together with the related behavioral sciences) as one of the most exciting and potentially useful fields of inquiry that exists. While some of its practitioners promote bizarre theories and engage in unethical behavior, the major thrust of the field is a positive and progressive one. I suggest in all candor and sincerity that psychology is as fundamental to the implementation of the principles of gospel living (the Christian life-style) as medical science is to the implementation of the Word of Wisdom. Just as biomedical research reveals to us the mechanisms underlying the principles of the Lord’s code of physical health and thereby provides us with a more positive control over the health of our bodies, so also, behavioral science informs us of the processes underlying revealed principles of living and provides us with improved power to promote the health of mind and spirit. Psychology is thus as basic to the study of living as biochemistry is to the study of life. It is, in my estimation, the most important secular subject matter for Latter-day Saints to know.

Second, some personal advice. The ideal of self-control is supreme. This life is a test—is a test—is a test. You have not passed until you have endured to the end and are dead. You will be tried every day of your life, whether you know it or not.

Today we are all bombarded by stimuli toward the loosening of moral controls. The provocation is enormous. You must practice self-control and have a strong repertoire of such abilities so that when stress comes, you can cope. We must all be tried, and let me assure you that means a real trial, before we are fit for the Lord’s Kingdom.

If you are to err, do it on the side of overcontrol—that can be redeemed—but the excesses of undercontrol can have fatal, irredeemable consequences. Therefore, stay close to the Church, follow its leaders, and seek the guidance of the Spirit.

As for me, you may wish to know where I stand with respect to the gospel. I believe it is especially important for those of us in psychology to declare ourselves on this matter because we have too often been the pariahs of our own subculture.

I am a thoroughly converted, 100 percent supporter of the doctrines and principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I believe completely in the spiritual realities and divine manifestations that undergird and reinforce the sweeping fabric of Mormon culture and commitment. I have experienced the indescribable, witnessing communication of divine knowledge, and it has transformed me from humanist to disciple. I do not apologize for nor equivocate in my conviction that the God of heaven is a living, personal reality and that I have an eternal relationship with Jesus Christ upon whom I am dependent for salvation and exaltation. I know that he lives, and I declare in all solemnity as a witness to all men that I know he walked and talked with the Prophet Joseph Smith, that through the Prophet he reestablished the Kingdom of God on earth, and that he presides today over this great Church, inspiring our modern prophet and all associated with him.

References

Bergin, A. E. “A Self-regulation Technique for Impulse-Control Disorders.” Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice 6 (1969): 113–18.

Guthrie, E. R. The Psychology of Human Conflict. New York: Harper, 1938.

Smith, Joseph Fielding. Answers to Gospel Questions. Vols. 1, 3. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957, 1960.

Talmage, J. E. Jesus the Christ. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1915.

Widtsoe, J. A., ed. Discourses of Brigham Young. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954.