Post-traumatic Stress Disorder and the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks

Courtesy National Geographic

Abstract

 September 11, 2001 was a day of tremendous loss and trauma.  Both people who were directly exposed and those who were indirectly exposed through media and second-hand accounts were shocked by what they heard and saw.  The effects of this tragedy rippled across the globe and have perpetuated an onslaught of post-traumatic stress disorder diagnoses based upon the stress that witnesses endured.  In this paper, post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, will be discussed as it relates to the events of 9/11.

POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER AND THE 9/11 TERRORIST ATTACKS

Key Words

Post-traumatic stress disorder

Direct exposure

Indirect exposure

September 11^th, 9/11

Ground Zero

Introduction

            The events that occurred on September 11, 2001 will be forever apart of history as one of the most traumatic and horrific days.  For those who directly survived the attacks, most are permanently altered, perhaps not physically, but emotionally.  And for those of us watched in horror as thousands of innocent lives were taken, we will forever have the images burned into our memories.  Many of us can not forget where we were that awful day.  For many people, this event was the first realization that this world is not the place they once thought it to be.  Rocked straight out of their comfortable self-portrait of harmony, suddenly everything was tainted with the possibility of violence and evil.  This event was one of the largest and most visible acts of violence ever carried out.  Because of the accessibility of technology and media, the world watched as violent, raw evil converged upon New York City, Pennsylvania, and Washington D.C.  As a result of the worldwide spread of images through television and internet, thousands of people suffered trauma.  For first responders, survivors, firefighters, police, and scores of innocent bystanders, their ability to easily move beyond their first-hand witness of the events became difficult in the extreme.  Amidst the physical injuries and the respiratory issues that plague many who were there at Ground Zero, there are wounds that are unseen.  Scars that have wounded the mind, dampened the spirit, and cast a shadow on the heart are common for those who were there.  When life as it once was, even in a new light, is unable to continue, the American Psychiatric Association (2000) calls this post-traumatic stress disorder.

Definitions

Post-traumatic Stress Disorder

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV(2000) defines post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, as:

the development of characteristic symptoms following exposure to an extreme traumatic stressor involving direct personal experience of an event that involves actual or threatened death or serious injury, or other threat to one’s physical integrity; or witnessing an event that involves death injury or a threat to the physical integrity of another person; or learning about unexpected or violent death, serious harm, or threat of death or injury experienced by a family member or other close associate. (APA, 2000 p. 463)

Some events that are considered traumatic include:  military combat, violent personal assault (sexual assault, physical attack, robbery, etc.), being kidnapped, being taken hostage, terrorist attack, torture, incarceration as a prisoner of war or in a concentration camp, natural or manmade disasters, and others. (APA, 2000) Criteria for a PTSD diagnosis include:

• The person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which both of the following were present:  the person experienced, witness, or was confronted with an event or events that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of self or others or the person’s response involved intense fear, helplessness, or horror.
• The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced, or re-lived, in one (or more) of the following ways:  Recurrent, distressing recollections of the event, through images, thoughts or perceptions.
• Recurrent distressing dreams of the traumatic event
• Acting or feeling as if the traumatic event were recurring (includes a sense of reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, and dissociative flashback episodes, including those that occur on awakening or when intoxicated)
• Intense psychological distress at exposure cues that symbolize or resemble some aspect of the traumatic event.
• Physiological reactivity when exposed to cues that symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.
• Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing of general responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as indicated by three or more of the following:

Efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or conversations associated with the trauma, efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that arouse recollections of the trauma, or the inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma.

• Marked diminished interest or participation in significant activities
• A feeling of detachment or estrangement from others
• Restricted range of affect or emotional responses
• Sense of a foreshortened future or feelings of doom
• Persistent symptoms of increased arousal as indicated by two or more

Difficulty falling or staying asleep

Irritability or outbursts of anger

Difficulty concentrating

Hypervigiliance

Exaggerated startle response, jumpiness

• Duration of the disturbance is more than one month (APA, 2000)

To be diagnosed with PTSD, the disturbance must cause “clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.” (APA, 2000)

Direct Exposure

Direct exposure is defined as someone who “experienced, witnessed, or was confronted with an event or events involved actual or threatened death or serious injury” (APA, 2000, p. 467).

Indirect Exposure

Indirect traumatic exposure is defined as “knowledge of an event through a first person account of actual or threatened death or serious injury (irrespective of the relationship to the survivor)” (Zimering et al, 2006).   Relief workers responding after the towers fell, received direct exposure to traumas at the disaster site and indirect exposure to trauma via survivor accounts of the terrorist attacks. (2006)

September 11^th (9/11)

September 11, 2001 also referred to as 9/11 is the day that a terrorist attack upon the United States of America resulted in the death of nearly 3,000 people.  New York City was attacked by two commercial jetliners that crashed into the Twin Towers, causing the fall of both buildings.  Two more airplanes were used as massive bombs, one hitting the Pentagon in Washington D.C. and one diverted by brave passengers, crashing into a field in Pennsylvania.

Ground Zero

Ground Zero is the common reference to the location of where the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center stood and ultimately fell, resulting in a massive loss of life and an enormous pile of rubble and steel.

Statistics

PTSD is a serious and debilitating disorder.  It is estimated that the prevalence of PTSD in the United States is approximately 8%. (Kazi, Freund, Ironson, 2008) Though this disorder was once thought to occur only in veterans, we now know that it also civilians of all ages and walks of life.  It has no limits to culture or socioeconomic groups and can arise from many different traumas.  September 11^th, was not exempt from these traumatic events.  Many of those who were directly and indirectly exposed to the tragic happenings of that day were traumatized, some resulting in classifiable PTSD.  In a speech given at Ground Zero, the speaker said, “Here we stand today as the Trade Center casts a shadow over all of us. (Kanarian, 2007, p. 121) An observer wondered what the speaker was talking about, noting that the World Trade Center was gone.

The speaker continued, “The World Trade Center will always cast a shadow over our minds for the rest of our lives; there is no getting over this one.” The observer then remarked, “His words were the truest I have heard relating to the World Trade Center attack and post-traumatic stress.” (p. 121)

Direct Exposure

            When talking about direct exposure as it relates to the 9/11 events, exposure characteristics such as:  injury, exposure to the dust cloud resulting from tower collapses, proximity to the World Trade Center or WTC site, personally witnessing specific horrific events, experiencing panic attacks during the attacks would qualify.  (Neria, DiGrande, & Adams, 2011Among retired firefighters, 22% were found to have symptoms of PTSD four to six years after the attacks (2011).  For those respondents who were at the WTC at the time of the attack, PTSD was almost twice as common compared with those who witnessed the attacks in person from outside the WTC (Bonanno et. al., 2006).  Individuals who were directly exposed to the terrorist attacks exhibited signs of PTSD at a rate of 20% (Zimering et al, 2006).

Indirect Exposure

PTSD was documented in individuals who were indirectly exposed to trauma that did not directly involve a family member or other close person. 4% of individuals living outside of the attack sites who were indirectly exposed to the tragedies via television were found to have symptoms of PTSD (Zimering et al, 2006).  These findings implore us to understand that health care providers should be sensitive to and aware of the enormous variability in response following a major national trauma. (Silver et al, 2004)  It is not only those who are directly exposed to traumatic events who suffer, though, obviously they are most gravely affected.  As Kazi, Freund, and Ironson (2008) state:

 Terrorist attacks may differ from the other traumas that are known to elicit PTSD, as in the case of 9/11, where survivors not only had to manage their own escape but had to witness a national disaster, fellow workers’ deaths, victims jumping out of high windows, physical ramifications of inhaling smoke and dust from the fire, and the demise of the entire buildings. This terrorist attack resulted in the American society’s questioning its fundamental belief of the world as a predictable, safe, and meaningful place to live. (p. 101)

In a national telephone survey of 560 adults three to five days following 9/11, 90 percent had one or more symptom of posttraumatic stress, with 44 percent to a substantial degree (Meisenhelder & Marcum, 2004).  Further, in another study, none of participants in a positive PTSD group reported a 9/11-related death or injury to a family member or close friend (Silver et al, 2004).  This finding supports the notion that PTSD from PTSD from indirect exposure can occur even in the absence of a personal connection a victim (2004).  The researchers state,

We have found significant psychological reactions across the U.S. after the September 11th attacks; our findings strongly suggest that the effects of these terror attacks were not limited to communities directly affected.  Instead, our data show that substantial effects of the events of September 11^th rippled throughout the country. Importantly, the degree of psychological response to the September 11th attacks was not explained simply by degree of exposure or proximity to the trauma. Many individuals who lived hundreds of miles from the attacks or had low levels of exposure (i.e., individuals who watched the attacks live on TV and those who reported no direct exposure at all) reported high levels of symptomatology. (pp. 138-139)

Immediately following the attacks, three national studies found posttraumatic stress symptoms throughout the U.S. population (Neria, DiGrande & Adams, 2011). In a national telephone survey conducted within the first week following 9/11 44% of participants reported substantial stress reactions (2011). In a similar internet survey study, with a nationally representative sample of 2,273 adults, 4.3% reported a prevalence of PTSD that was significantly associated with the number of hours of television coverage of 9/11 (Neria, DiGrande & Adams, 2011).

It is clear that the events of September 11^th had a tremendous, traumatic impact upon those who were directly exposed and those who were indirectly exposed. Until 9/11, little regarding indirect exposure to trauma has been studied, but is now, clear that there is a prevalent need of further study and examination.  Though it is certain that, naturally, those who were directly impacted by the events of that day were most traumatized, people who were indirectly exposed were also at great risk for tremendous stress and trauma.

Symptoms

            The symptoms of PTSD can be severely impairing to even normal daily activities for the sufferer.  Some symptoms are recalling or recollection, avoidant and numbing, severe, lasting emotional and affect change, hyper arousal or startle response, functional limitation, nightmares and intrusive thoughts, and survivor’s guilt.  (APA, 2000)  Many of these stress reactions are frequently caused by “triggers” that remind the sufferer of the events that were found to be traumatic (Kanarian, 2007).  Kanarian (2007) defines triggers as, “emotional trip wires that evoke memories of traumatic incidents.  They can be sights, sounds, smells, and feelings and are timeless, capable of making memories years later feel as if they occurred yesterday (Kanarian, 2007, p. 122).  When we are able to recognize what situations, sights, smells, or sounds trigger a stressful reaction within us, we are, thus, able to deal with them.  By learning the signs and symptoms of PTSD and strategies for dealing with the triggers, it is possible to become aware of a reaction within ourselves.  The severe affect change within people suffering from PTSD can manifest in edginess, irritability, nervousness, and easily startled (2007).  PTSD can also cause short-term memory loss that may result in repeating questions and trouble concentrating or focusing (2007).

Re-experiencing

Seeing the images that accompany that horrendous day in September can burn the memory into one’s mind, replaying over and over.  For those who were there at the site, stuffing the memories and pictures away is difficult.  As Kanarian (2007), “Even after you have forgotten an incident, one sight, smell, sound, or thought can bring you back to the moment and stimulate a vivid memory of a traumatic incident.” (p. 127)

In an online article about 9/11 survivors,

For about a year afterward [survivor, David Donovan] had nightmares and little appetite. The company hired psychiatrists, but he said he felt more comfortable talking with his colleagues who had been through the same experience. For a year and a half, he couldn’t fly and found being in a subway difficult. He said he still looks for the emergency exit when he’s in a large crowd.  (Ochs, 2011)

Another survivor reported feeling in a state of shock for weeks or months after 9/11 (Kazi, Freund, Ironson, 2008). She related feeling “dull,” had difficulty concentrating, and experienced visual hallucinations of objects falling. She was clinically depressed, crying daily, and felt “paralyzed,” after 8 months.

This survivor’s experience of re-experiencing was discussed,

Judy reported having post-traumatic stress disorder following this event. She admitted to having panic attacks when sitting in traffic on a bridge, overhearing stories about the tragedy, and at the thought of traveling by air. There was a time when the fire alarm was set off while she was in therapy, and she recalled having an overwhelming flashback of being on the 78th floor at the time of impact. She said that she thought that she might be thrown across the room. So she left therapy, walked 13 blocks until she found the subway, and then felt safe. She had difficulty watching the news or reading the newspaper for some time thereafter.  ‘There was all of this awful news coming out at me, so I had to focus only on healing myself and not to get caught up in it,’ she stated.(Squillace, 2003, p. 25)

Numbing

            In trying to cope with the traumatic events that one has witnessed, many times it is natural for a person suffering from PTSD to push the memories, emotions, fears, and feelings away.  Shutting down seems easier than continuing to relive the horror, thus they become numb and avoidant.  Because there are triggers that can continue to evoke a response in the traumatized, many times he or she will simply avoid any place, person, or situation that might bring about a stress-related response.  In the Newsday (Ochs, 2011) article mentioned prior, one survivor states that he simply could not function.  He began avoiding, even simple, daily activities, such as shaving.  He recalls staying in his bathrobe all day.  “I went into a total funk,” he had said (2011).  A first responder related his experience,

At first, it was discouraging to constantly pick up only parts, and after a while it stopped upsetting me. I realized that I was becoming numb to what would have been horrible to others. That is when I knew that I had to stop working and it was time to go home. (Squillace, 2003)

Survivor’s guilt

One survivor of the attacks of September 11^th, said that he learned to handle triggers that might prompt a panic attack, such as a car making certain noises, but “the hardest,” he said, “was the survivor’s guilt.” (Ochs, 2011)  Survivor’s guilt can lead a person to ponder why they were spared when others were not.  Guilt colors the elation that might be naturally felt for surviving a traumatic event.  Questions about what more could have been done, why they made it, if they should have done something different, even if it meant their demise, are common.  As one survivor related,

‘There’s always this nagging guilt,’ he said. ‘Should I have stayed to help? What could I have done? The rational part of me knows I did the right thing. I’m not trained to rescue . . . but there’s always going to be a piece in the back of my mind: Could I have done something?’ (2011)

Finding Faith in 9/11

            The days that followed September 11^th, 2001 were unique.  Many people, who ordinarily would not, flocked to churches across the nation.  Pews and benches were fuller than usual.  People were looking for reasons, safety, and solidarity.  This seemed to be a temporary comfort for many, but there are some whose faith was strengthened, who changed priorities and re-examined who they were, what life was about, and what purpose it had.  Genelle Guzman-McMillan (2011) is one who took her second chance at life and chose to make changes.  The last survivor pulled from the smoldering pile of Ground Zero, Guzman-McMillan (2011) was pinned under concrete and steel for over 24 hours.  During this time, she relates in her book that she drew near to the Lord, as her only source of survival.  She states,

I haven’t had any marked emotional ‘issues’ over the years as a result of being buried alive.  I mean it when I say that God was my psychiatrist, and still is today.  I have been blessed by never having a single nightmare about my experience.”  (p. 165)

Mental health professionals often remark about the tremendous benefits of “religious coping” with post-traumatic stress.  In particular noted are the feelings of comfort, collaboration, and connectedness evoked by faith and communities of faith (Meisenhelder & Marcum, 2004).

God may be a source of comfort and meaning in the midst of a senseless act. Seeking guidance and support through God decreases the sense of loneliness and isolation. Turning to religious faith brings an omnipotent and ever-present Partner into one’s life, lending a greater sense of control, which is a critical element to decreasing posttraumatic stress.  Lastly, connecting with a faith community entails a support system, a promotion of personal identity, and enhanced intimacy with others.  The combined benefits of positive religious coping result in lower perceived vulnerability, isolation, confusion, and, therefore, lower posttraumatic stress response (p. 157).

Witnessing a traumatic event often causes people to pause and reflect about the purpose of life and mortality.  Some people find tremendous comfort in their faith.  They have an assurance of control, even if they are not the ones who have that control, they know who does.  There are still others who are angry.  Rather than drawing toward their faith, they distance from it and some abandon it altogether.  They simply cannot process and find meaning in senseless tragedy.  But for those who remain faithful, they proclaim that they do not understand either.  That is faith, believing in what is unseen.  The bible gives great hope for those who have walked through a traumatic event.  Jesus said in John 14:27 (NIV),

“Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.”

There is great hope that in Christ we have assurance of peace.

 References

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental

disorders (Revised 4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Bonanno, G. A., Galea, S., Bucciarelli, A., & Vlahov, D. (2006). Psychological

Resilience After Disaster. Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell), 17(3), 181-

186. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Dwyer, J. & Flynn, K. (2005). 102 minutes: the unforgettable story of the fight to survive

inside the twin towers. New York, NY:  Henry Holt.

Friedberg, J. P., Adonis, M. N., Von Bergen, H. A., & Suchday, S. (2005). September

11th related stress and trauma in New Yorkers. Stress & Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 21(1), 53-60. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Guzman-McMillan, G. & Croyle, W. (2011). Angel in the rubble:  the miraculous rescue

of 9/11’s last survivor. New York, NY:  Howard Books.

Kanarian, S. (2007, August). The psychological aftermath of terrorism. Fire Engineering,

160(8), 121-122,124, 126, 128. Retrieved from

http://rx9vh3hy4r.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-

2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-

8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mt

x:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The Psychological Aftermath of

Terrorism&rft.jtitle=Fire Engineering&rft.au=Steven Kanarian&rft.date=2007-

08-01&rft.issn=0015-

2587&rft.volume=160&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=121&rft.externalDBID=UAJO&rft

.externalDocID=1331817461

Kazi, A., Freund, B. & Ironson, G. (2008, April). Prolonged exposure treatment for

posttraumatic stress disorder following the 9/11 attack with a person who escaped

from the twin towers Escaped From the Twin Towers Clinical Case Studies, 7(April 2008), 100-117. Retrieved from http://ccs.sagepub.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/content/7/2/100

Meisenhelder, J. B. & Marcum, J.P. (2004). Responses of Clergy to 9/11: Posttraumatic

Stress, Coping, and Religious Outcomes. Journal for the Scientific Study of

Religion, 43(4), 547-554. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Neria, Y., DiGrande, L., & Adams, B. G. (2011). Posttraumatic stress disorder following

the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks: A review of the literature among highly

exposed populations. American Psychologist, 66(6), 429-446. doi:10.1037/a0024791

Ochs, R. (September 7, 2011). Decade later, trauma haunts 9/11 survivors. Newsday..

Retrieved from http://www.newsday.com/911-anniversary/decade-later-trauma-haunts-9-11-survivors-1.3152854

Silver, R. C. (2004). Conducting research after the 9/11 terrorist attacks: Challenges and

results. Families, Systems & Health, 22, 47-51.

Silver, R. C., Poulin, M., Holman, E. A., Mcintosh, D. N., Gil-Rivas, V., & Pizarro, J. (in

press-a). Exploring the myths of coping with a national trauma: A longitudinal

study of responses to the September llth terrorist attacks. In Y. Danieli & D. Brom (Eds.), The trauma of terrorism: Sharing knowledge and shared care. Binghamton, NY:  Haworth Press.

Squillace, M. (2003). Biography of a Ground Zero firefighter. Occupational Therapy in

Mental Health, 19(3/4), 103-114. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Squillace, M. (2003). From the 103rd floor. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health,

19(3/4), 23-26. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

The Holy Bible. (1984). New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan

Publishing House.

Zimering, R., Gulliver, S., Knight, J., Munroe, J., & Keane, T. (2006). Posttraumatic

stress disorder in disaster relief workers following direct and indirect trauma exposure to Ground Zero. Journal Of Traumatic Stress, 19(4), 553-557. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

The Middle School Mentality of the Church

The Church, Men and Women, Behaves Much like Middle-School Girls.

I remember being in middle school.  Those were some of the roughest years of my life!  I was on the fringe of the “popular” crowd, only because some of my friends from elementary school were now in that group.  I didn’t have fashionable clothes.  In fact, we got hand-me-downs that a lot of the time were pants that so obviously looked as though I was prepared for a tremendous flood, if you know what I mean.  My mom was recently divorced.  We took what we could get!  I didn’t realize that I was “improperly” dressed until about seventh grade when those who were supposed to be my friends would make fun of me.  It wasn’t until I was probably a junior in high school before I felt somewhat comfortable to walk to the front of the class.  I was horrified, before this.  Kids would snicker and joke about my appearance.  I would try to hold the ends of my jeans down so they didn’t look so bad.

What’s so amazing to me that even now, in my thirties, is that I notice grown men and women behaving so similarly to those middle school years.  Talking about each other behind backs, playing the “silent treatment,” and avoiding deep, albeit, genuinely painful conversations, are all games that have been perfected in adulthood.

Sadly, this kind of mentality is thematic in the church.  Where we should be comfortable being real with each other, able to communicate when we are hurt, confused, or frustrated, we are shunned, talked about to everyone, but each other, and unsupported in vulnerability and humility.

What is wrong with this picture?

I’m not talking about pervading, sinful behavior that should be addressed amongst fellow believers which should be addressed in a specified way.  Here is what Matthew 18:15-17 says,

¹⁵ “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. ¹⁶ But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’¹⁷ If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.”

Ignoring these instructions when you feel you have been wronged is unbiblical and is divisive in the church.  It is necessary to pray for wisdom and discernment to know what things should be discussed and when there are issues that we are just to let go and move forward in a relationship.  This is something I have had to learn.  Understand, that not all people are meant to be kindred spirits.  We all have acquaintances, mentors, casual friends, and lifelong friends.  Throughout my life, I have learned that often there are seasons in friendship.  Through the passing of one season, another comes and fertilizes another friendship that is meant to bring us through that season’s particular highs and lows.

But, I am a firm believer in communication.  It is very difficult for me to let go if I truly believe that there is an issue between me and a brother or sister in Christ.  I don’t do “fake” very well.  I have had to plead for the Lord to help me know when I have a “hang up” or if there is genuinely a situation that needs addressing.

In all situations, I believe it most VITAL to go to the person directly!  This point cannot be stated strongly enough!!

I cannot understand where people in the church have gotten the idea that simply avoiding it or talking about it to everyone else is healthy.  It is wrong.  There is a time for mentorship and godly wisdom from another person, but most often people check their sensibilities at the door and share information that should be directly worked out with the “offender” personally and directly.  How often have I heard (or said, if I am being perfectly honest), “I’m not trying to gossip, but…”

At that point, it would do us all well and good to shut our traps or pinch the lips of the one talking!!!! 

If you have to preface what you are saying with the word “gossip,” justifying what you are about to say – Don’t. Say It.  If you can’t say something directly to the person with whom there is an issue – Shut. It.  (That’s from the Ferryman.I.V. translation, btw.)

Please don’t misunderstand, there are certain people in our lives who we need to be able to rely upon for wisdom and those who we need to slap us upside the head if we are in the wrong.  That is specifically why Matthew implores that we bring another person with us to the “offender” if they won’t listen to us.  This way, everyone knows and hears what is said.  No one has to guess what was said outside of our presence and without our “side to the story.”

That’s the term, “Can I get a witness?”

When we have an “unbiased witness” to the conversation there is no need to preface our words.  Further, prayer and working through the conflict can take place.  And finally, when we do this the way the biblical model lays out, we know that the person is genuine and wants to truly a.) work out a difference of opinion or agree to disagree OR b.) confront sinful behavior in the godliest, most loving way possible.

Without using this model for confrontation, we risk our reputation, our intent, and our motive for behavior. Anything else is unbiblical, unhealthy, uncaring, and unproductive. 

It’s no wonder the world often thinks we are nothing, but hypocrites and backbiters!!  If we can’t even treat each other with kindness and respect, how on earth, do you think that we can win someone over in the world?  Why would they want that in a formalized, legalistic institution when they can find that down on the corner, right now?

It’s time to grow up, people!

I’ve certainly had to do some of that in the last couple years.  If you have wronged someone – go to them and apologize.  Attempt to make it right!  If they refuse to listen, pray for them.  Trust takes time when it is broken.  If someone comes to you, genuinely to work things out and you refuse – the ball is now in your court.  Boundaries are certainly appropriate, but only in the context of the biblical model set forth here.  If you have skipped, ignored, or inserted your own steps, it has now become an unbiblical, unhealthy, unproductive, and uncaring model that is catering to your own wants.  The bible is meant for us to obey in and through all things.  It is a lamp unto our feet and a manual for appropriate, godly behavior.  We seek His truth – not our own.  Respect, vulnerability, and honesty are never easy, but we are commanded to move through conflict in the manner set forth in His word.  When we accept Christ we relinquish our personal rights for His way of thinking.

If someone has wronged you – go to them, in love.  Pray first for humility and wisdom.  Pray for the right time and venue for confrontation and pray for the Lord to reveal any wrong you may have committed in the situation.  So often, we want to point fingers at another person when in reality, the Lord is trying to prune out the maladaptive behaviors in our own lives.

“Lord, change him!!!”

How many times have we listened to a sermon, read scripture, or heard an inspirational word and thought, “Wow________________ needs to hear this!!!” Not that there are not times where we find something to encourage someone else.  Encouragement is one thing.  Blame and “guilting” someone is highly another.  Again, if there is just cause for biblical confrontation, there is a model for that.  See above in Matthew 18.

Here is what God’s word says about blaming another person,

Matthew 7

³ “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? ⁴ How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? ⁵ You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

I’ll have more to say on this topic, but for now I’ll leave it to the professional, inspirational writers.  He is challenging me as I read, study, and write.  Know that I don’t have it all figured out, I’m just highlighting what I see in Scripture, in the church, and in my experience.  May God add to the blessing of His word as it works to change our hearts and minds….

Galatians 6:10

Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

I Thessalonians 15:13-15

¹³ Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work. Live in peace with each other. ¹⁴ And we urge you, brothers and sisters, warn those who are idle and disruptive, encourage the disheartened, help the weak, be patient with everyone. ¹⁵ Make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always strive to do what is good for each other and for everyone else.

The Impact of Divorce Upon Children – A Thesis Study in Grief, Trauma, and Stress Children Face When Parents Divorce

The impact of divorce upon children is enormous.

 Abstract

 When a marriage ends in divorce all individuals connected to the relationship are impacted.  There are perhaps none so affected as children.  Because of their innocence and immaturity, children are unable to process stressful events as adults are.  Their reactions and behavior can range from subtle to explosive.  The purpose of this paper is to provide research that illuminates that various facets of impact upon a child with the demise of a marriage.  Relationships with parents, and sibling are all pivotal in the life of a child.  These, along with therapeutic interventions, statistics, future outlook, and biblical underpinnings will be discussed.  Finally, the author, an adult child of divorce, will provide personal reflection about the subject.

Introduction

            The ultimate end to a marriage is tragic and its affect ripples throughout the lives connected to that couple.  Chaos and stress, probably feelings that have been prevalent for some time prior to divorce, ensue and impact the now divided family unit.  Children are particularly vulnerable to the affects of divorce.  Unable to understand and process such complex matters of life, children resort to alternative ways of expressing their heartache and confusion.  The fact is that the divorce of parents remains with children, to some degree, all of their lives.  Any adult child of divorce can relay past feelings that accompanied the demise of their caretaker’s marriage.  Regardless of the passage of time, few children of divorce are unable to provide some recollection of pain.  Relationships are often strained, physiology and psychology is affected, and the future can seem bleak.  When we understand the gravity with which a child is impacted by divorce, the hope is that couples will devote energy toward any and all opportunities to salvage the marriage.

Statistics

            In the quest to understand the full impact of divorce upon children, one must examine current trends and statistics.  Consider some sobering data (Portnoy, 2006):

•     Around 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce.

•     Approximately one-half to two-thirds of those who divorce will remarry.

•     One in every six adults will divorce two or more times.

•     Half of all divorces involve minor children.

•     Forty percent of children in the United States will experience a parental divorce and half of those will reside, at least temporarily with a single parent.

•     One in three of these children will live with a step-parent before the age of 19 .

•     According to the 2004 U.S. Census, 1.1 million children lived with a parent who had experienced a divorce in the last year (Thomas & Woodside, 2011).

Ten years following a divorce, well adapted college students reported a continuance of pain and distress about their parents’ divorce (Kelly & Emery, 2003).  They reported more painful childhood feelings and experiences.  Feelings of loss were the most prevalent of the painful feelings.  Further, the majority of these students reported missing their father’s involvement, evening questioning whether they were loved by their father at all (2003).

Manifestations of Stress

Faber and Wittenborn (2010) report that on average, children in divorced families and stepfamilies, as compared to those in non-divorced families, are more likely to exhibit behavioral and emotional problems, lower social competence and self-esteem, less socially responsible behavior, and poorer academic achievement.  The fact is that the disruption of the family unit causes an inability to concentrate, remain emotionally stable, and move through daily activities without some form of distress.  As previously discussed, children are unable to comprehend the details of divorce and many result in false assumptions, such as “This must be my fault.”  When outward expressions of distress are not displayed, many children will exhibit physiological symptoms.  These can range from headaches, gastrointestinal upset, sleep disturbances, and inattention.  Depending upon the level of secure or insecure attachment, these manifestations may be more or less severe.  “Insecurely attached children have been associated with externalizing problems such as delinquent behavior and substance abuse as well as internalizing problems such as anxiety, depression, and other affective disorders (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010, p. 92).” Further, increased levels of parental conflict may lead to increased long-term vulnerability to cardiovascular and other illness (Luecken & Fabricius, 2003).  Parental conflict, perceptions of father caring, and time with mother are significant predictors of overall physical health (2003). “This is consistent with findings that adolescents from divorced families with low conflict reported fewer physical health symptoms and better overall well-being than those from high conflict, intact families (p.226).”  Divorce may also directly affect aggression, distractibility, behavior problems directed at parents, economic difficulties, and geographic mobility (Hodges, Tierney & Buchsbaum, 1984).

Behavioral reaction

The first few years following a divorce are typically a difficult and stressful period for most children and their parents (Faber & Wittenborn, 2010).  It is estimated that families typically re-stabilize parenting practices and pre-transition levels of children’s behavior about 2 years following divorce and 5 years following remarriage (2010).  After the divorce, children typically will respond in atypical ways.  The behavior variances are unique to the family and individual child, but often display symptomatic distress in their circumstantial change.  Verbal cues, play themes, transitional o jects and aggressive or withdrawn behavior may one or all be exhibited by the child.  A six year old child explained divorce in this way,

“It starts with love, then you don’t live together, then you get unmarried, then you love other people, go back and back and back and forth and back and forth.” As he chanted the last phrase, he picked up a Slinky from his own toy box and slowly stretched it, gesturing toward the playhouses on either side of him. With the Slinky fully extended, he concluded, “and then . . . you break.” With that, he let the Slinky snap close and crash to the floor between the houses. (Ebling, Pruett & Pruett, 2009, p. 672)

Children who are not as verbally expressive, often convey stress in imaginative play themes. During playtime, some themes that are often depicted by children are reunion fantasies, damage and conflict, security and protection, and back and forth travel between households (Ebling, Pruett & Pruett, 2009).  The most frequent play theme are reunion fantasies.

Another way that children display grief, loss, and stress is in that of transitional objects (McCullough, 2009). Children often respond to divorce with insecurity, loss of self-esteem, and repressed feelings of anger and loss, which may be manifested as aggressive or withdrawn behavior.

During periods of extreme stress, children may return to the use of transitional objects—more typically seen in the developmental period associated with an infant’s separation from his or her mother—as a way of coping with circumstances over which they feel little control (p. 19).

Transitional objects can be stuffed animals, blankets, dolls, etc.  Anything that provides the child with a sense of security and comfort can be transitional object.  Often times, transitional objects can become personified objects.  “As a child’s need for a security object decreases with increasing maturity, a transitional object may become imbued with personality and agency and emerge as a personified object.” (Gleason & Sebane 2000, p. 420) An object is personified when the child incorporates traits that are human personality oriented.  The blanket, doll, stuffed animal, or imaginary friends are animated and utilized for role-playing.  These can be a source of support and stress relief for children of divorce.  It should be noted that many children have transitional or personified objects who are not under stress.

Because feelings of shame, decrease in self-esteem, self-blame, anxiety and fear of abandonment may be prevalent for the child of divorce, children from divorced homes often perform academically worse than peers (Crow, Ward-Lonergan, 2003).  An inability or difficulty concentrating due to anxiety and worry is not uncommon.  Health issues that have resulted from anxiety can also cause a disturbance in sleep and ability to focus on school work.  Fortunately, with time and therapeutic interventions, most children are able to learn to cope with the grief and stress of divorce.

Therapeutic Intervention

With the tremendous influx of divorced families, therapeutic techniques have vastly improved in helping children cope with the stress and grief they face.  Therapies, support groups, role-playing, and picture books are all great resources to assist the child in coping.  Utilizing such tools gives children impacted by divorce an age appropriate view of the complex nature of divorce.  When a child begins to understand and is allowed to grieve, express emotion, and verbalize their anxieties, he or she has a greater chance to be relieved of the extreme pressure and stress that can impact for the duration of his or her life.

Fictional picture books provide children “an alternative channel of interpreting divorce by emotionally distancing themselves as story characters and expressing their feelings vicariously.” (Mo, 2007, p.23) Picture books allow children to understand the complexities of divorce at a visual level that is appealing and age appropriate in comprehension.  The illustrations provide children the chance to express feelings associated with divorce (2007).

Family therapy, psychotherapy techniques, play therapy and role-playing, art therapy and grief therapy are all models that have been incorporated into work with children of divorce (McCullough, 2009).  Each method has benefits and advantages, depending upon the individual and family.  Another form of intervention that has been found effective is group therapy.  Group therapy attempts to “communicate with children on issues of importance, providing support, enhancing their skill development, and promoting their mental health” (Rose, 2009, p. 227).  The three major advantages of group therapy in helping children of divorce are:

1. Most schools and human service organizations are faced with large numbers of children who can benefit from help, thus working in groups is an efficient use of resources.
2. The group work context normalizes the divorce experience and provides support to children who need it.
3. Divorce raises many uncomfortable issues for children. Many children are more comfortable discussing these issues with peers present than they are in dyadic interaction with social workers. (Rose, 2009, pp. 222-223)

One final element of therapeutic help for children can begin with parents.  Parenting education can equip parents in helping them meet the needs of their children during the stressful time during and following divorce (Kelly & Emery, 2003)

Relationships

One of the most visible results of stress in a divorce is that of relationships.  Obviously, there is a demise in the relationship between the parents, but the relationships directly with the children are now critical and must be recognized and supported.  Some of the less obvious strains upon such relationships are economic, concerns of loyalty, parental conflict, and the previous level of nurturance prior to divorce.  Children often feel they are caught in the middle of their parent’s conflict (Gilman, Schneider & Shulak, 2005). Children living with parents who seek to contain and/or resolve their conflicts, will fare much better over the course of time than children who live in the midst of parental conflict (2005).  At the same time, children who continue a warm and loving relationship with parents and feel that their parents understand their experience will also fare better than children who have a less nurturing relationship with their parents (2005).

Children’s responses should be considered during the aftermath of divorce, and how well a child is functioning or not functioning should not be based on a parent’s need or self-interest to perceive fewer negative effects. (Moon, 2011, p. 348)

Children want to be understood.  They want to be listened to.  And finally they want to be able to express their feelings, which are just as real and raw as their parent’s.

Mother

 Children are naturally indwelt with the need for both parents.  The mother figure fulfills a set of needs and the father figure likewise.  In the case of divorce, eighty-five percent of children from divorced homes live with their mothers.  (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010)  The mother-child relationship may be one of the few relationships which remains intact throughout the divorce and remarriage process.  Mom is primary caregiver in almost all cases of divorce.  This can be highly beneficial, but can also place tremendous strain upon the relationship with the child and the father.  The type of relationship children have with their fathers, following the divorce “can either contribute to children’s resiliency or add additional risk.” (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010, p. 90)

Due to this fact the mother plays the strongest part in meeting the child’s needs post-divorce.  But, considerations of sensitivity and security are often overlooked.

Faber and Wittenborn (2010) eloquently state,

Parents who are sensitive and responsive to the child’s needs induce feelings of support and felt security within the child. These children tend to be classified as securely attached; as such they appear confident that support is available from their caregiver during times of need. Parents who are inconsistent in their response to their child’s needs often have children who display feelings of anxiety, vigilance, and anger. These children are typically classified as anxious/ambivalent and are unable to readily receive comfort from their caregiver in times of distress. When parents are habitually rejecting or not emotionally responsive to their child’s needs, they often have children who are prematurely self-reliant and repress feelings of vulnerability. These children are usually classified as avoidant and do not trust their caregiver to be supportive during times of distress. Disorganized children often experience their caregivers’ behaviors as frightening or experience maltreatment and tend to exhibit inconsistent or incoherent patterns of interacting. (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010, p. 91)

It is absolutely essential for mothers to allow children the ability to express their emotions, fears, and concerns.  Further it is imperative that consistency, sensitivity, and openness are offered regularly.  Structure and security are foundational to the health and healing for children of divorce.

Father

It is an undeniable fact that the court’s preference for mother’s often limits the interaction with healthy, well-intentioned, caring fathers.  Fathers often relay a sense of discouragement regarding “legal practitioners and a legal child custody system which they perceived to be biased against fathers as the reason why they were unable to obtain what they desired.”  (Kruk, 2010, p. 164)

The responsibilities of social institutions to support fathers in the fulfillment of their parenting responsibilities is a largely overlooked issue in the child custody discussion, which has largely focused on the competing rights-based claims of parents; a child-focused framework of child custody determination, focused on children’s needs, parental responsibilities in regard to these needs, and social institutional responsibilities to support parents in the fulfillment of their parental responsibilities, may offer a fresh approach to the issue. A principal finding of the present study is that fathers who wish to maintain a responsible, active parental role in the care of their children are discouraged from doing so, as the most common legal determination in disputed cases is non-residential fatherhood.  (Kruk, 2010, pp. 173-174)

The separation of father and child often begins at the fall of the gavel.  What is tragic is that children are often used as pawns in a game of gotcha between parents.  Someone always loses, often mothers, sometimes fathers, always children.  The children’s level of contact with their father can vary greatly.  Some children are allotted regular weekly contact, others once a week, and still others only see their fathers every other weekend (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010).  And some children have little or no contact with their fathers.  Positive father involvement following divorce has been associated with higher psychological scores, higher self-esteem, and lessened behavioral problems (2010).  However, a sudden loss in daily contact with fathers may lead to feelings of abandonment and anxiety about separation.  Ultimately, the lack of involvement by a father may begin to force children to question and even alter their internal working model of their father (2010).  It seems that indicators of positive father involvement are immediately evident post-divorce.  A poor relationship is characterized by low contact and higher levels of conflict (Peters & Ehrenberg, 2008).   Though all children need their fathers, there is evidence to suggest that girls, in particular, are especially impacted by the involvement of their father.  Disruptions due to divorce may lead to an increase female’s interest in and dependency on males (McLanahan & Bumpus, 1988).  Studies also suggest that positive paternal involvement in pre-school age children also leads to flexible attitudes toward male and female roles (Kruk, 2010).  Attachment in either parent is only possible with a sufficient level of engagement, and changes in engagement after divorce affect accessibility and responsibility (Kruk, 2010).

And as paternal engagement is necessary for accessibility and responsibility, so quality of attachment is largely dependent on amount of contact. Strong and secure emotional attachments between fathers and their children are not possible without routine and meaningful contact, beyond the constraints of court-ordered “access” and “visiting.” There seems little doubt that current laws and social institutional policies and practices present barriers to responsible fatherhood involvement and father-child attachment after divorce. (Kruk, 2010, p. 176)

It is clear that with each increment of increased contact between children of divorce and their fathers, there is also an equal increase in young adults reporting closeness with their fathers.  At the same time, when there is a decrease in contact, feelings of anger also correspond. (Kelly & Emery, 2003)

Siblings

The relationship with siblings can be, both, stable and unstable for children of divorce.  Siblings from the same marriage can increase bonds following divorce and many older children “adopt a caretaking role for younger siblings prior to their parents’ separation and are identified as the closest of all attachment figures in a child’s life.” (Shumaker et. Al, 2011, p.46) In one fifth of blended families, children have both stepsiblings and half-siblings (Ahrons, 2006).  However, children often do not think of their stepsiblings as brothers or sisters (2006).   Closeness between siblings often increases from the experience of going through the divorce of their parents together (Thomas & Woodside, 2011).  The addition of siblings through remarriage can bring added joy to children of divorce, but can also increase feelings of abandonment for the new child.

New Home/Separation

One of the most traumatic elements of divorce for children is the constant change and lack of control in his or her surroundings.  Not only is there a change in who they live with, but most often there is a change in where they live and the duration of time spent at each location.  These are a few perspectives offered by children regarding the toll of transitioning between homes,

•      “Back-and-forth makes me sick. I want to throw up—both ways.” Another child repeated a mantra throughout the play: “Too long a drive, too long a drive.”

•   A 5-year-old girl transformed the toy Band-Aid into a tool to help the dolls figure out where they belonged: “This [Band-aid] tells you if you’re in the right house.”

• Another child focused so entirely on the ordeal of the travel process—stuffing each and every play item into the toy vehicle or her pockets, and then “driving” all over the house—that as soon as the dolls arrived at “dad’s house,” it was time to go back to “mom’s.” (Ebling, Pruett & Pruett, 2009, p. 675)

Children feel a loss of control about their situation.  They are often not adequately informed about the divorce and the implications for their lives.  Most often they are not consulted with about their living arrangements and often they don’t feel considered about their emotions and practical feelings (Kelly & Emery, 2003).   They often feel they live in a divided world.  “The lack of correlation between maternal and paternal involvement suggests that “Mom’s World” and “Dad’s World” are separate and disconnected (Finley & Schwartz, 2010, p. 516).

Remarriage

For children of divorce, it seems just as they are adapting to the new life beyond their parents marriage, new transitions arise.  Living in a single-parent household is a temporary situation for most parents and children (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010). Approximately seventy-five percent of men and sixty-six percent of women eventually remarry.  This can lead to further confusion and frustration for children of divorce as parents commonly respond to remarriage with a period of euphoria.  They become more focused on their new marriage than on their parenting.

Children may perceive the introduction of a new parent and possibly step-siblings as a threat to the attachment bond shared with their mother.  This threat may be further exacerbated by children perceiving their mothers as less supportive and available as well as more negative. These changes in the mother–child relationship have the potential to alter the child’s working models of his or her mother regarding her availability and responsiveness (Faber, Wittenborn, 2010, p. 94).

Future outlook

Most often children of divorce are able to adapt and move through the new normal of life following their parent’s divorce.  But, studies show that adult children of divorce tend to earn less income, obtain less education, have more troubled marriages, weaker ties with parents, and display more psychological distress symptoms (Thomas & Woodside, 2011)  One interesting conjecture about girls living with their single mothers was,

Daughters of single mothers learn that women are capable of managing a family alone. When faced with an unhappy marriage or a premarital pregnancy, they may be more likely than daughters from two- parent families to become single mothers (McLanahan, Bumpass, 1988, p. 133).

Parents must work to re-establish consistent rules, predictable expectations, and firm guidance and control (Johnston, 1990). Children feel out of control.  They need boundaries that they can expect to help give security and the feeling that they know what to expect.  This is true for children of intact families, but especially of children whose families have ended in divorce.  Parents, post-divorce, must work to restore warm and harmonious relationships with their children (1990).

Studies seem to suggest that adult children of divorce may also develop higher levels of acute and chronic health problems in middle-age (Luecken & Fabricius, 2003) This can also be correlated with current income, education, and family support, which report statistically lower than children of intact families.  It has been reported that  declines in physical health in older adults were related to the combination of early parental separation (by death or divorce) and high levels of current stress (2003).  Children of divorce also exhibit significantly more mental health issues than children from intact families (Strohschien, 2005).

Risk Factors

Portnoy (2006) highlights several risk factors for children of divorce which will cause more distress that may lead on to adulthood.  These include:

•      Continuing conflict between the parents

•      Diminished or incompetent parenting

•      Economic decline

•      Loss of non-parental supportive relationships

•     Remarriage and re-partnering

However, there are several characteristics that will lead children of divorce toward positive coping.  These include:

•     Positive coping

•     The presence of positive social supports

•     Competent custodial parenting

•     An involved and competent non-custodial parent (Portnoy, 2006, pp.129-130)

Biblical Insight

The Bible makes it clear that God is not partial to divorce.  While it is allowable in cases of infidelity, it is not to be used as a “first option.”  Even when all else seems to fail, God is always grieved with a broken covenant of marriage, and desires that the bride and groom reconcile whenever possible.  Mark 10:11-12 (New International Version) states, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”  God thinks divorce is a very serious decision.  With divorce rates on the rise and the rapidity of the process in today’s age, God still considers divorce much more than the “end of chapter in life”.  Western society treats marriage like a weekend at the movies; when the plot isn’t interesting enough or the characters lose their appeal, it’s time to walk out.  It is important to note the there are genuine cases of complexity in marital discord.  That is not a fact that the author wishes to undermine, but it is equally true that divorce is taken too lightly, both in society and, sadly, the church.

Though the Bible has much to say about divorce, there is nothing said about the impact of divorce upon children.  However, Ephesians 6:4 (New International Version) states, “Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.”  (emphasis added) If anything exasperates a child, divorce will.  The Bible is clear that man is selfish.  Almost always, divorce is a result of one or both parties not relinquishing his or her will about one or more issues.  While marriage is usually never considered easy, with work, humility, and a relinquishing of selfish rights, it is possible in many circumstances to work differences out.  It is vital to note that there are genuine, necessary cases that warrant a separation or divorce.  (Physical danger to one or more parties in the home, rampant chemical, physical, or verbal abuse, and cases of blatant, continued adultery, provide justifiable, understandable, and biblical support in the consideration of divorce.)

Personal Reflection

My parents divorced when I was eight years of age.  Though it was highly traumatic being initially separated from my father, he almost immediately proved to be an uninvolved father.  My mother remarried and has stayed married to my step-father, who for all intensive purposes is my “dad”.  My father, however, has married and divorced two more women after the demise of my mother’s marriage to him.  I am now thirty-two years old and have no relationship with my father.  I can report as an adult child of divorce, that my parent’s choices have impacted me, thus far, my whole life.  Though I am not hindered by their divorce, I have had to work extremely hard to overcome maladaptive attitudes and patterns of behavior.  It is only with the Lord’s help that this is even possible.  I have now been married for almost thirteen years and have my own children.  Throughout the various stages of my life I have been able to view my parent’s divorce in different ways.  I continue to process the impact it has had upon me and now hold a strong fervor for marriage.  Marriage is not easy.  It takes more work than any relationship mankind forges, but it is necessary for us to learn, grow, and foster health into our marriages for ourselves and the sake of our children.  I have no wish to make my parent’s mistakes.  I have certainly made my own, but I refuse to allow the patterns of divorce and broken relationships to continue.  With God’s help and the recognition of my past, I remain dedicated to my marriage and my children.  Children are adaptable, with therapy, support from solid friends and family, and my faith, I have risen above the grief and trauma I faced as a child, resulting from my parent’s divorce.  This should, however, never be used as justification for parent’s decision.  The gravity of stress a child faces when their parents end their marriage is immense.  That point cannot be stressed strongly enough.

References

 Crow, K. M., & Ward-Lonergan, J. M. (2003). An analysis of personal event narratives produced by school-age children. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ebling, R., Pruett, K. D., & Pruett, M. (2009). “Get over it”: perspectives on divorce from young children. Family Court Review, 47(4), 665-681. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Faber, A., & Wittenborn, A. (2010). The role of attachment in children’s adjustment to divorce and Remarriage. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 21(2), 89-104. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Finley, G. E., & Schwartz, S. J. (2010). The divided world of the child: divorce and long-term psychosocial adjustment. Family Court Review, 48(3), 516-527. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Gerber, L. E. (1998). The divorce culture. Magill’s Literary Annual 1998, 1-3. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Gilman, J., Schneider, D., & Shulak, R. (2005). Children’s ability to cope post-divorce: the effects of kids’ turn intervention program on 7 to 9 year olds. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 42(3/4), 109-126. doi:10.1300/J087v42n03_07

Gleason, T. R., & Sebane, A. M. (2000). Imaginary Companions of Preschool Children.  Developmental Psychology, 36(4), 419. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Hodges, W., Tierney, C., & Buchsbaum, H. (1984). The cumulative effect of stress on preschool children of divorced and intact families. Journal of Marriage andFamily, 46(3), 611-617. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Johnston, J. R. (1990). Role diffusion and role reversal: structural variations in divorced families and children’s functioning. Family Relations, 39(4), 405-13.  Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Kelly, J. B., & Emery, R. E. (2003). Children’s adjustment following divorce: risk and resilience perspectives. Family Relations, 52(4), 352-362. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Kelly, J. (2007). Children’s living arrangements following separation and divorce: insights from empirical and clinical research. Family Process, 46(1), 35-52. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Kruk, E. (2010). Parental and social institutional responsibilities to children’s needs in the divorce transition: fathers’ perspectives. Journal of Men’s Studies, 18(2), 159-178. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Lansford, J. E. (2009). Parental divorce and children’s adjustment. Perspectives on Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell), 4(2), 140-152. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01114.x

Luecken, L. J., & Fabricius, W. V. (2003). Physical health vulnerability in adult children from divorced and intact families. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 55(3), 221-228. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

McCullough, C. (2009). A child’s use of transitional objects in art therapy to cope with divorce. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 26(1), 19-25. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

McLanahan, S., & Bumpass, L. (1988). Intergenerational consequences of family disruption. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 130-152. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Mo, W. (2007). The divorce culture and picture books for young children. International Journal of Early Childhood, 39(2), 23-35. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Moon, M. (2011). The effects of divorce on children: married and divorced parents’ perspectives. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 52(5), 344-349. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Peters, B., & Ehrenberg, M. (2008). The influence of parental separation and divorce on father-child relationships. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 49(1-2), 78-109. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Portnoy, S. M. (2008). The psychology of divorce: a lawyer’s primer, part 2: the effects of divorce on children. American Journal of Family Law, 21(4), 126-134. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Rose, S. (2009). A review of effectiveness of group work with children of divorce. Social Work With Groups, 32(3), 222-229. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Shumaker, D. M., Miller, C., Ortiz, C., & Deutsch, R. (2011).  The forgotten bonds:  the assessment and contemplation of sibling attachment in divorce and parental separation. Family Court Review, 49(1), 46-58. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

The Holy Bible. (1984). New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan Publishing House.

Thomas, D., & Woodside, M. (2011). Resilience in adult children of divorce: a multiple case study. Marriage & Family Review, 47(4), 213-234. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Trohschein, L. (2005). Parental divorce and child mental health trajectories. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1286-1300. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Bada Bing! to a Swing

A swing set only works if the core structure is supported.

Earlier this summer, we decided that the kids needed a swing set. (I suppose need isn’t the right word, but you get the idea.) Rather than buy the flimsy set-up that most retail stores sell, we decided to look for kits and the materials needed to build a swing set. Trying to be the most economical and being tremendously blessed with a husband and father-in-law who have MacGyver skills, we determined that it was best to build the thing from scratch. Even the kits that provide most of the materials were way more expensive that simply piecing it out ourselves, a la carte style. (I can lump “myself” in, because I am lawfully married to Mr. Handyman. Other than that I can claim no credit.) Some lumber, chain, swing seats and stakes,

VOILA! We had fun for all ages under 12. Seems like a great, down home story right?

Then…

That’s right. Then happened.

Through no fault of my husband or father-in-law’s (and since I don’t get much credit, I’m not taking any blame either.) The stupid beam at the top began to warp in the elements after only a couple months. I never noticed it, because I’m just really observant when it comes to metal and wood, but my husband was concerned. So, after only a couple months the swing set was surrounded with yellow “caution” tape. (no, not really.) Kids were banned until further notice and inspection could occur. Even after we were pretty sure that it wouldn’t buckle, (again, we. I don’t know why…) my husband thought it would be safest to attach some 2×4’s (or was it 3×6?) beams to the middle of the structure with bolts.

Bada bing! Back in business. Fun ensues. Happy, happy, joy, joy!!

Last night, I read a passage in Psalms 18 –

Psalm 18:16-19
16 He reached down from on high and took hold of me;
he drew me out of deep waters.
17 He rescued me from my powerful enemy,
from my foes, who were too strong for me.
18 They confronted me in the day of my disaster,
but the LORD was my support.
19 He brought me out into a spacious place;
he rescued me because he delighted in me. (NIV)

I was struck with this passage and noticed a couple of elements. First, the author uses the words “my” and “me” several times. Obviously, he is writing about himself when he uses the word “me.”

“took hold of me,”

“drew me out,”

“rescued me,”

“too strong for me,”

“confronted me,”

“brought me out,”

“rescued me,” a second time,

“delighted in me.”

Eight times in four verses, he uses this word. However, every time he uses a word that typically denotes focus upon the author, he uses it to refer back to who rescued him.

God.

Though there is a lot of “me, me, me, me,” the author uses each and every mark for the glory of God and what He did.

Secondly, there is the word, “my.” This word is used as a possessive for the following word.

“my powerful enemy,”

“my disaster,”

“my support.”

If we took only these phrases of possession out from the passage, we get the clear idea that this dude is in trouble. He is clearly unable and incapable of overcoming some sort of task.  Anytime he refers to himself, he is conveying that he simply cannot continue alone as the situation stands.

There is the necessity of One more powerful to get him through, get him out, and get him to the place where he can stand the pressure.

I began to think of that swing set. Really we are very similar to a swing set. We go out into life and very soon the elements beat us down, warp us, and render us near inoperable, at times. The very material of our structure, our core, can cease to fulfill it’s purpose when we are shifty.

We are weathered and worn.

It’s not until the proper support is firmly attached to the very center of our being, that we are able to stand the pressure and weight of this world. Without it, we will certainly collapse at any unforeseeable moment.

When we firmly affix Christ to the center of our lives, we are able to withstand life.

Pushing and pulling, relationships, finances, jobs, kids, life, can weigh on us and if we are weathered, warped, and too worn out, we are unable to stand and fulfill our intended purpose.

Are you battered, uncertain about withstanding life’s pressures, and left without purpose?

Or are you clinging to Jesus, standing fast and firm, and have the certainty of pulling through, regardless of the weight of the world?

Where is the justice???

Caylee Marie Anthony, age 2, residing with Jesus

Sometimes I think that I have my moments of clear, God oriented thinking at the absolute end of my day.  This would usually occur around 1am.  It would be better, in my pea-sized brain to have these thoughts at the bright dawn of the day, but God didn’t wire me that way. 

I am grappling with the idea of justice these days.  The Casey Anthony trial has spurred on my feeling of necessity in confronting my pride, my views, and where the Lord needs to refine my thinking.  For several years, I have been at the place of deep turmoil when there is an injustice.  I try to be as firmly honest as possible.  And when I don’t feel that people are being honest or that they may be trying to “pull something over” on me, I get a little…inflated and prideful.  I can get angry and annoyed too.  These are all, obviously, fabulous character traits, I know.  Don’t you wonder why I don’t have a fan page?

In light of this trial and research that I have done into personality disorders, particularly sociopathy, I am trying to sort through the idea of “justice.”  Is it even humanly possible?  I went to the Bible. (my last source that I referred to, because I am still so brain-dead in my faith, at times)  The Lord guided me to a few passages.  The first was a reference to Isaiah 53:7-8

⁷ He was oppressed and afflicted,
   yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
   and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
   so he did not open his mouth.

This is a prophetic reference to the soon coming Messiah.  Flip forward in the Bible to Mark 15

 ¹ Very early in the morning, the chief priests, with the elders, the teachers of the law and the whole Sanhedrin, made their plans. So they bound Jesus, led him away and handed him over to Pilate.

 ² “Are you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate.

   “You have said so,” Jesus replied.

 ³ The chief priests accused him of many things. ⁴ So again Pilate asked him, “Aren’t you going to answer? See how many things they are accusing you of.”

 ⁵ But Jesus still made no reply, and Pilate was amazed.  (Emphasis added)

Jesus, being God in the flesh stands before the one man (other than God, himself, if Jesus asked) who can free and acquit him of all charges and he doesn’t respond!!  If there was ever an injustice in all the world, in all of history – THIS WAS IT!

A perfect, sinless, peaceful man is accused of crimes he didn’t commit, being punished in an inhumane and unjust way and Jesus didn’t even attempt to fight and maintain his innocence….what????

I, then, read again in Acts about the story of Saul’s (who became Paul) conversion.  The man who would be chosen to bring salvation to the gentiles, the man who would be one of the most quoted and followed leaders in the history of the church, had his beginnings torturing, jailing, accusing, and hating Christians.  What???

Didn’t God want some well-dressed guy with a clean sandals and a spotless record to bring the Good News?  Why would He want someone who had committed heinous, deplorable, unjust crimes on innocent people?

And then I realized.  God’s justice is not our broken down, corrupt vehicle used by an imperfect government.  His knowledge and perfect scope of purpose, of intent is so much more complex and complete.  The complexity of our system of laws and governing bodies are a dim, inaudible echo of His absolute perfection. 

Throughout this trial, and I watched most of it, I have prayed.  Prayed.  And Prayed some more.  I have prayed for Casey.  I have prayed for the prosecutors.  I prayed for the family members.  I prayed for the jurors.  I prayed that justice would be served, that this precious innocent little girl would have some sense of proper, justified memory and closure, here on earth, even as she dances with the angels and walks forever with the Lord. 

And then the verdicts were read.

Now, I’m mad.

I don’t see the justice.

I cannot fathom any sense out of the jury.

But, what I do know is this.  God knows.  God cares.  He allows us free will, but He also has His hand upon the situation.  Perhaps, He has plans far beyond what we can see or understand.

He uses the most bleak of situations to display the grandeur of what our minds could never conceive.

He transforms the filthiest of us to show His grace and power.

He loves the most unlovable to demonstrate his perfect love.

There are many times that things don’t turn out the way that I would have them, but more than often, that is the best blessing of all.  I don’t understand, but He does.

I am praying for the Anthony family.  I pray that the Lord would be glorified and that people would come to His saving grace. 

We can’t stand around with our pitchforks and demand justice when true, untainted justice lies outside of our realm of imagination. 

We still stand for what is right.

But, we accept that there are things that are beyond our control.  There are plans in motion that we cannot understand or comprehend. 

He cries more tears that the oceans will ever hold and He knows all.

His ways are not our ways. In our pride we think we know what justice looks like. Some things won’t make sense until we meet Him face-to-face.  Until that time we pray for one another and for those who seem violently unlovable. 

We do this to honor Him, the author and giver of Life.

Final note:  I cannot do this in my own strength.  I cannot.  I am depending upon His strength and faithfulness as I try to act upon His word.

Zechariah 7:9

⁹ “This is what the LORD Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another.

Isaiah 30:18

 18 Yet the LORD longs to be gracious to you;

   therefore he will rise up to show you compassion.

For the LORD is a God of justice.

   Blessed are all who wait for him!

Proverbs 16:5

The Lord detests all the proud of heart.  Be sure of this:  They will not go unpunished.

Proverbs 16: 8

Better a little with righteousness than much gain with injustice.

Isaiah 61:8

 ⁸ “For I, the LORD, love justice;
   I hate robbery and wrongdoing.
In my faithfulness I will reward my people
   and make an everlasting covenant with them.

Antisocial Personality Disorder – Psychos welcome.

Casey Anthony: Textbook Sociopath.

Evaluation of Anti-Social Personality Disorder 

Abstract

 Antisocial personality disorder is one of the most intriguing, yet controversial forms of mental illness.  It is also one of most widely used themes in media and literature.  With the ability to now view criminal trials live, fictional television depictions, and weekly news documentaries, western culture has obsessed over sociopaths and psychopaths.  The purpose of this paper is to examine antisocial personality disorder.  While there are many complex facets to this mental illness, an overview of symptoms will be discussed.  As well as the general overview, an in depth look will be taken into the following topics:  biological components, treatments, aspects of criminality, and spiritual implications. 

 Keywords: psychopathy, sociopathy

EVALUATION OF ANTI-SOCIAL PERSONALITY DISORDER

Introduction

            Antisocial personality disorder, also understood as psychopathy or sociopathy,  is a classifiable mental illness that has strong ties to criminal behavior, obsessive media attention, and questions of demonic influence.  While antisocial personality disorder, or ASPD, is widely understood to be firmly rooted in environmental influences, there are biological and genetic considerations.  High profile cases of violent criminals such as Ted Bundy and Casey Anthony have all dazzled the media and played upon the worst nightmares of society. 

Historical Terminology

            Over hundreds of years, there have been many terms for mental illness.  In the advent of behavior science and psychotherapy, antisocial personality disorder has been narrowed and specified from previous terms.  Psychopathy and sociopathy are still terms associated with ASPD.  In years prior, other labels for the psychopathic condition were used.  (Ogloff, 2006) Some of these are manie sans délire, moral insanity, moral imbecility, degenerate constitution, congenital delinquency, constitutional inferiority, psychopathic taint, psychopathic personality, psychopathy, and, of course, Antisocial PD and Dissocial PD. (2006)

Psychopathy   

The term “psychopathy”or “psychopath”, which will also be interchangeable in this article, has been described as,

a constellation of affective, interpersonal, and behavioral characteristics including egocentricity, impulsivity, irresponsibility, shallow emotions, lack of empathy, guilt, or remorse, pathological lying, manipulativeness, and the persistent violation of social norms and expectations’’ (Gunter, Vaughn, and Philibert, 2010, p. 151)

 “Psychopathy” was actually the first personality disorder recognized in psychiatry.  (Ogloff, 2006) Thus, this concept has had historic clinical tradition in its understanding.  To use this termed disorder meant that the individual displayed an extreme form of abnormal personality.  Psychopathy is a concept with overt negativity.  (2006)  Even used by the media, “psychopath” implies an impression of danger and unmistakable evil. (Lykken, 1996) This is the longest standing term and a subject of considerable research and scholarly writing.  (2006)  In comparison to ASPD, however, psychopathy is more defined and based more upon traditional personality characteristics.  (2006) The first to use this term was the German systematist, Robert Koch.  (Lykken, 1996) Koch coined the phrase in 1891 for what we now refer to as personality disorders.  Later Emil Kraepelin, used the term “psychopathic personality” to describe amoral or immoral criminals. (1996)

Sociopathy

            The term “sociopathy,” was the next in line of specified, maladaptive personality terms.  In 1930, an American psychiatrist by the name of Partridge pointed out that these people had a common disposition to violate social norms of behavior and introduced the term “sociopath.” (Lykken, 1996)  Lykken made the distinction between psychopathy and sociopathy using the term, “sociopathy” interchangeably to antisocial personalities whose “behavior is a consequence of social or familial dysfunction.” (p. 29) Lykken (1996) further went on to state that he used the term, “psychopath” to refer to “people whose antisocial behavior appears to result from a defect or aberration within themselves rather than in their rearing. (p. 29) However, most current psychiatrists believe that both genetic and environmental factors contribute to the development of psychopathy. (Furnham & Swami, 2009)

Antisocial Personality Disorder

            The criteria for ASPD, according to the DSM-IV-TR (2000) is as follows:

A.       A pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others since the age of 15 years, as indicated by three or more of the following:

1.         Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors, as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;

2.         Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;

3.         Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;

4.         Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;

5.         Reckless disregard for safety of self or others;

6.         Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations; and

7.         Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent

to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.

1. The individual is at least age 18 years.
2. There is evidence of Conduct Disorder with the onset before the age 15 years.
3. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia or a Manic Episode. (DSM-IV-TR, 2000, pp. 649-650)

Ogloff (2006) points out that the need for evidence of Conduct Disorder before age 15 reflects research that demonstrates that personality disorders are of long duration and have an onset that can be traced back at least to adolescence. 

Overview

            According to the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) manual, a diagnosis of ASPD requires at least three of the following: 

• A failure to conform to social norms
• Consistent deceitfulness
• Impulsiveness and failure to plan ahead
• Irritability and aggressiveness
• Consistent disregard for work and family obligations
• Consistent disregard for the safety of oneself and others
• A lack of regret or remorse (Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2000, p. 1)

The Model Sociopath

The Harvard Mental Health Letter (2000) further highlights the typical traits of one with ASPD.  The disorder is at least three times more common in males than females and, by and large, more serious in men than women. (2000) He is neither autistic nor displays any psychotic behavior, but his is indifferent to the concerns and feelings of others.  However, he is cognitively aware that others have wishes and concerns, but this information does not affect him, thus his behavior is not thwarted as a result.  (2000)  His narcissistic attitude leads him to do anything and everything that he wishes, often requiring elaborate manipulation by deception or intimidation.  Because he feels that he is a narcissist, he seeks to exploit the weakness in others and believes any harm that may come to them is deserved and easily justifiable.  Further, he may feel only contempt or indifference toward his victims. (2000) Generally, he is highly irresponsible and unreliable in any commitment that does not reflect his personal desires. He seems incapable of loyalty, shame, or guilt.  Though he can be quick to anger and rage, a sustained feeling of hatred is rare.  (2000) In speaking of love, he may mean sexual attraction, a desire for flattery, or physical and material support. When he expresses sadness, it is likely due to a failed scheme, getting caught, or a missed opportunity.  Due to this shallowness, even his sense of suffering and remorse is nearly non-existent.  However, he may display paranoia and sadism.  The Harvard Mental Health Letter (2000) states that the “model sociopath is likely to be hotheaded, as well as, coldhearted.”  (p. 2)

Some authorities maintain that there are two types of sociopaths.  In the first group, traits such as: glibness, selfishness, callousness, and deceit are prevalent.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2000) The second group includes: thrill seeking, irresponsibility, self-defeating impulsiveness, and lawbreaking.  Those in the first group are capable of long-range planning, contrarily to the impulsive nature of the second group.  They are more intelligent, less reckless, and are able to achieve a degree of social success, all the while, creating havoc in public and personal lives.  (2000)

As previously stated, one requirement by the DSM-IV-TR (2000) is evidence of Conduct Disorder in childhood and/or adolescence.  Some behaviors associated with CD are:  lying, truancy, bullying, fighting, cruelty to animals, arson, burglary, vandalism, malicious mischief, running away from home, consistent precocious aggression, deceit, impulsiveness, and rule violations.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2000) There is a possible comorbidity with learning disabilities, particularly Attention Deficit Disorder.  (2000)

            Another common trait of those with ASPD is addiction or addictive behaviors.  Chemical addiction, substance abuse, and sexual addictions are all common in sociopaths.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2000) It is important to note, however, that a person who typifies antisocial traits will change completely upon recovery from an addiction.  (2000) It is possible that the antisocial tendencies may be the cause or the consequence of addiction.  It is also possible that addictive behaviors and sociopathy may be the result of a common predisposition.  (2000)

Biological Components

            Clearly, the traits of those diagnosed with ASPD reflect an abnormality in behavior.  However, little is known about variances in genetic inheritability.  What is known and documented is the presence of antisocial tendencies in individuals who have damage to the frontal lobe area of the brain.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2001) One infamous example is that of a man named Phineas Gage, a 19^th century railroad worker, who was seriously injured in an accident.  An iron spike penetrated Gage’s frontal lobe, which amazingly did not reflect obvious permanent damage.  Although he recovered, others reported that his personality changed severely.  The once reliable, sober worker became an alcoholic, profane, unreliable drifter.  (2001)

The same social reasoning deficiencies that sociopaths demonstrate are often similarly indicative in patients with frontal lobe damage.  (2000) However, Gunter, Vaughn, and Philibert (2010) report that, “examinations of brain tissue are the facts that exact regions of the brain involved in antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy have not been identified and neurons only constitute 10% of the cells in the brain.” (p.153) Interestingly, however,  there have been several neuropsychological tests that seem to indicate biological abnormalities in those with ASPD.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2001)  One such finding is a “feeble stress” response in the autonomic nervous system, which is indicated by low heart rate and sweating of the palms, measured by electrodes attached to the hand.  (2001) In measurements of the skin conductance, when told that they are about to receive an electric shock or observe someone else who is to receive an electric shock, sociopaths do not show the typical surge of anxiety. (2001) In another psychological study, results of the experiment demonstrated that sociopaths have difficulty recognizing facial expressions of anger, fright, and disgust. (2001)

It is important to note that, thus far, there has been no “antisocial gene” pinpointed.  According to The Harvard Mental Health Letter (2001), this also means that  biological abnormalities in the brain region alone will determine if someone will be irresponsible, deceitful, or violent. There is the possible of vulnerability, which combined with an unhealthy family and/or social environment can lead to ASPD.  It is also possible that there is a biological component of an extreme temperament or subtle variation in the prefrontal cortex.  (2001)

Treatment

            Attempting to cure or, at the very least, treat ASPD can be an extremely difficult and overwhelming task.  Due to the prevalent deceit, manipulation, and abuse, the job of a physician or psychotherapist is highly complex.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2001)  A lack of responsibility for actions, blaming everyone else for failures, and possible anger are common threads.  The therapist must maintain a proper emotional distance, without being drawn into attacks.  (2001)  Overcoming feelings of repulsion and setting aside feelings of disapproval can be very difficult, but necessary.  On the other hand, the therapist must remember the strong abilities of the sociopath.  “Actions are louder than words” would be a highly appropriate saying.  The Harvard Mental Health Letter (2001) has this to say about working with sociopathy, “It is almost impossible to avoid being deceived at times, and the effort to uncover every lie is rarely worthwhile.  But even habitual liars sometimes tell the truth…” (p. 2)

Yet, it is often argued that there is no cure for adult sociopathy. ((Lykken, 1996) The most useful option according to Lykken (1996) is prevention.  Training high-risk parents to properly socialize children, revamping the adoption system, and providing healthy, successful rearing environments are all necessary preventative tactics.  Unfortunately, these tasks are overwhelming, highly expensive, and time consuming.  (1996) However, it is important to note that it is estimated that sociopathy will cost about $3 million in an average lifetime in society.   Lykken (1996) states,

That means that each million potential sociopaths now out there on the production line of our American crime factory will end up costing us $3 trillion by the middle of the next century. (p. 38)

Controversially, Lykken (1996) goes on to propose state licensure requirements for those wishing to procreate or adopt, positing

Such a licensure requirement would offend those who believe that people have an inalienable right to produce as many babies as they wish, no matter how incompetent, immature, abusive, or depraved they may be. Because I am more concerned about the rights of those helpless babies than I am about the alleged procreative rights of their feckless parents—and about the lives of crime, violence, and social dependency that most of these babies are doomed to lead when they grow up…” (p. 38)

Diagnosis

            There are several tools used to assist in diagnosing ASPD.  Some of which are:

Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire—4 (PDQ-4), Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory—III (MCMI-III), Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), Self-Report Psychopathy Scale II (SRP-II), Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP), Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI), Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) (2005), and The Hare Psychopathy Checklist. (Ullrich & Coid, 2010) However, there are strong concerns from some in the psychiatric community of over and misdiagnosis. (Ogloff, 2006)  Ogloff has this to say,

As currently construed, the diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder grossly over-identifies people, particularly those with offence histories, as meeting the criteria for the diagnosis. (Ogloff, 2006, p. 519) Far more people (particularly prisoners) meet the criteria for a diagnosis of Antisocial PD, than is warranted. (Ogloff, 2006, p. 521)

According to Ullrich & Coid (2010), ASPD disorder affects approximately l%-4% of the adult general population in westernized countries.  According to the authors, ASPD is more strongly associated with violence towards other persons at the population level than other psychiatric disorders. It is important to note, however, not all persons with ASPD are violent, “with approximately half in a community sample reporting no violent behavior towards other persons over a five year period.” (Ullrich & Coid, 2010, p. 172)

Ogloff posits that while it is true that people may possess psychopathy characteristics, very few people possess enough of the traits to be considered ‘psychopathic’, citing that approximately 15% of North American male prisoners, 7.5% of North American female prisoners, 10% of male forensic psychiatric patients, fewer than 3% of psychiatric patients and an estimated 1% or less of the general community display antisocial traits. (Ogloff, 2006, p. 522) The Harvard Mental Health Letter (2001), concurs with this estimate stating that many antisocial personalities are found in prison, estimating 15% – 20% of prisoners meet diagnosis requirements.

Therapy

            As previously discussed, psychotherapy with a sociopath can be very intense.  Behavior therapists have used token economies as a reward system, rewarding good behavior and punishing bad behavior.  (The Mental Health Letter, 2001)  Cognitive therapists try to change maladaptive thinking habits, hoping that feelings and actions with follow.  (2001) Overall, the goal of the therapist is to teach ASPD patients new ways to express needs, solve problems, anticipate consequences of actions, develop self-control, and resist false assumptions and expectations of hostility from others.  (2001) Often, sociopaths are encouraged to journal about situations that provoke anger and then compare these events to the immediate rewards with the long-term negative affects of impulsive acts.  (2001)

            One important note about therapeutic intervention in sociopaths is that the prospect of success is much greater with people who can be persuaded to change.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2001) “The model sociopath would never volunteer for psychiatric treatment.” (p. 2) Typically, he is coerced or required to attend therapy.  (2001) He may attempt to dominate a therapy group with fascination or intimidation.  The Harvard Mental Health Letter (2001) describes the possible scenario,

He can turn psychotherapy into a power struggle in which he alternates charm and flattery with intimidation – trying to enlist the therapist as an ally against his family, the law, the prison system, or society, and going on the attack if he is thwarted.  If he is intelligent enough, he can wield a psychiatric vocabulary to deceive therapists and parole boards. (p. 3)

Psychotropic medication

            Caution, when prescribing a sociopath medication, should always be used, due to possible comorbidity with substance abuse.  However, drugs that reduce irritability, aggressiveness, and impulsiveness may be useful.  (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2001) Serotonin enhancing anti-depressant drugs such as Prozac, Zoloft, and Lexapro, anti-psychotic drugs, anti-consultants, and Lithium are all common pharmacological drugs used to treat sociopathy.  (2001) However, it is important to note that a sociopath cannot be relied upon to consistently and voluntarily take medication that does not provide immediate, pleasurable results.  (2001)  Furthermore, as stated before, it is necessary to use strong discretion when prescribing medication due to abuse and combining medications with other substances.  (2001)

Effectiveness

            Although, treatment is a process fraught with a negative outlook, little is really known about the true prospective outlook for the sociopath.  It is encouraging to note that there is evidence to suggest that sociopathy begins to “fizzle out” around age forty. (The Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2001) Impulsive aggression and criminality seem to dissipate by this time. 

Criminality

            One of the most fascinating, albeit tragic aspects of ASPD is the link to criminal activity.  Due to the aggressive nature and impulsivity, combined with narcissism and a disregard for others, crime is extremely common among sociopaths, as discussed prior, however, not all sociopaths are violent criminals. With the advent of instant media, in court cameras, and a vast societal interest, obsession with violent, extreme sociopathy has captivated the Western world. Hollywoodnever ceases to produce fictional tales of horror or documentaries based upon real life events.  Television shows, such as CSI, Law & Order, and Criminal Minds all play upon the fascination with sociopaths.  

High Profile Cases

 Ted Bundy.  There is, perhaps, no sociopath as famous as Ted Bundy.  He eventually confessed to thirty murders, though many speculate that the victims were many more.  (wikipedia, 2011) Until the final given interview with James Dobson, the day before he was executed, he placed blame with many others, including

“his abusive grandfather, the absence of his biological father, and the concealment of his true parentage, alcohol, the media, the police (whom he accused of planting evidence), “society” in general, violence on television, and ultimately, pornography.  On at least one occasion he even tried to blame his victims: “I have known people who…radiate vulnerability. Their facial expressions say ‘I am afraid of you.’ These people invite abuse…By expecting to be hurt, do they subtly encourage it?” (wikipedia, 2011)

His crimes were all against women, all brutally violent, and equally appalling.  In the televised interview he gave he described the feelings he had when committing his crimes.  He used phrases such as, “some kind of horrible trance” and “possession by something alien.”  He stated that after a “brutal urge to act, then after he becomes himself again….basically a normal person.”  What is unbelievable is Bundy’s affect and countenance the day before he was set to die.  He seemed genuinely remorseful.  He seemed to fully accept responsibility for his actions and was very hesitant to relive the gruesome details of his victims.  These traits were not always described in observing Bundy, as alluded to previously.  So what could account for the change?  Either two things:  1.) Bundy was a very skilled, extremely charming, and highly intelligent individual who was manipulating any viewer.  This is quite possible.  These are the hallmark traits of the “model sociopath.”  Or 2.) There was a profound, life-altering change in his life that could only be supernatural. 

            In his final interview, Bundy specifically as for James Dobson of Focus on the Family.  He began to tell the story of what would end in horrific violence, stating, “People in towns around the country, just like me with dangerous impulses.”  He explained his profound addiction to pornography.  He went on to say that 100% of men in prison have a rooted addiction to pornography.  He claimed to be “half-drunk” at the time when he committed most of his crimes.  He discussed the desensitization affect in the addiction that lead to hard-core violence in feeding his impulses.  In that seeming humility and remorse, he expressed that he deserved “the most extreme punishment allowed by society.”  Finally, he told Dr. Dobson that he had accepted Jesus Christ as his Savior, but was also scared about “being in the valley of the shadow of death.”  Most people believe that he was simply manipulating his audience in an attempt at sympathy. 

Truly, only God knows.

            Outside of the interview that took place within, what were his final hours, the scene was described like this,

On the morning Bundy went to the electric chair, hundreds (from photographs of the event, the crowd seemed to be composed largely of men) gathered across the street from the prison. Many wore specially designed costumes, waved banners proclaiming a “Bundy BBQ,” or “I like my Ted well done,” and chanted songs such as “He bludgeoned the poor girls, all over the head. Now we’re all ecstatic, Ted Bundy is dead.” The most common journalistic metaphors for the overall scene were that of a carnival, circus, or tailgate party before a big game. (Journal of American Culture, 1990, p. 4)

What doesn’t make sense is the bloodlust for Ted Bundy, but millions flock to theatres paying millions of dollars to see “horror” films, such as Nightmare on Elm Street, Silence of the Lambs, Saw, and Friday the 13^th.

Casey Anthony.  Not since the O.J. Simpson trial, has there been such fanatic attention to a criminal trial as the Casey Anthony case.  From the flamboyance of the defense attorneys to the family drama that is noted in court, daily, worldwide attention began at the first glimpse of that angel-faced, Caylee Anthony.  Her mother, Casey Anthony is on trial for murder.  Habitual lying is the pervading undercurrent for the entire trial.  Accusations of sexual abuse, conflicting stories of accidental death, and shocking behavior have all crossed the lips of the defendant. 

In watching these amazing hearings, the utter narcissism and complete disregard for the feelings of others is immediately apparent of Ms. Anthony.  For thirty-one days, her child’s whereabouts remained unknown before Caylee’s grandmother, and, arguably, co-caretaker, demanded to know where the child was.  It was at this point that Casey admitted that she had been “missing.”  Cynthia Anthony called authorities immediately, when her mother, possibly never would. 

During the month that the defendant claims that her daughter was taken from her, shocking pictures were released, depicting her hard-core, party lifestyle.  Clubbing nearly every night, shopping nearly every day, grief and concern are completely absent from a mother, who claimed to be wild with worry for two-year-old daughter.  After being arrested and convicted on check fraud and theft, and then finally charged with the murder of her child, Anthony changed her story, being caught in a slew of lies, to the accidental drowning of little Caylee.  Her father was now the target of the defense council, asserting that he sexually abused his daughter, giving justification for the habitual lying. 

Ms. Anthony’s affect and demeanor in court are, often, wildly unpredictable.  From proclaimed anxiety and nausea, to intense, brief rage, Casey’s emotions seem to fluctuate, depending upon the presence of the jury and the position of cameras.  She is seen often, unbelievably laughing at moments and at other times, completely stoic and stone-faced.  She often seems completely in control of her council team, passing out files and papers, setting up computers and answering questions from the judge in calm disposition.  However, towards the end of the defense’s presentation, they submit a motion, declaring Casey Anthony of “incompetence.”  The judge denied the request, following a battery of tests by court-appointed psychologists. 

Dr. Keith Ablow (2011) recently penned the article, Why We Can’t Stop Watching the Casey Anthony Trial.  He asserts three reasons that the public is enthralled with this trail:  First Casey represents a “brainteaser.”  He describes her as a “psychological Rubik’s Cube,” She has no criminal history, prior to 2008.  She comes from a middle-class family.  Her parents are still married and despite recent allegations of abuse, there is no documentation or witness to attest to this. (2011)

Secondly, Ms. Anthony’s conduct, whether a killer or a simply a mother who did not report her child missing, is a “conduit for buried, forgotten terrors still inside all of us.” (Ablow, 2011) Dr. Ablow (2011) explains that during childhood, our physical and emotional vulnerabilities are entirely dependent upon that of our guardians.  At that time, the thought that a mother or father dislike us, wished that we didn’t exist, and may be able to act upon those feelings, are fears that we suppress.  These childhood nightmares are, simply, unthinkable, and, in adulthood, still locked deep inside us. (2011) He states,

Casey Anthony, the pretty, smiling, mother who may well have murdered her daughter is, in fact, every adult’s worst, long-denied childhood nightmare. The chance to see such a woman in captivity, and to ponder what she is accused of, is like going to the zoo to see the rarest, deadliest monster you can imagine, the one resurrected from the deepest recesses of your mind in its most fragile moments. And, what’s more, even if she is that monster, she may or may not be freed. (2011)

Finally, the third reason that the public is so enthralled with this murder trial is that many people who have experienced the joy of starting a family, still have moments of wistfully recalling what it was like to be unencumbered with a child. (Ablow, 2011)  Parenthood is not easy.  There are times when it is downright hard.  With the many moments of blessing, also bring moments of challenge, emotion and frustration.

Spiritual Elements

Demon Possession

Mark 5:1-13

They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones. When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In God’s name don’t torture me!” For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you impure spirit!”  Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” “My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area. A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned. (New International Version, 1984)

The passage of Scripture cited is one demonstrating demonic possession.  There are a few key elements relating to mental illness.  The first, is the fact that this man was isolated, due to the fact that he could no longer be physically restrained.  This could be likened to extreme aggressive behavior and possible mania.  His strength and ferocity required segregation from society.  The second key, is that he would “cry out” and “cut himself with stones.” Today this would be described as inappropriate outburst of emotion, indicative of possible psychosis, Bipolarity, Delusional Disorder, Schizophrenia, or a personality disorder.  Finally, the final relation to current mental illness is the response by the man to Jesus’ question about his name.  The response, “Legion, for we are many,” is clearly attributable to Dissociative Identity Disorder, formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder.              Based upon this passage, and assuming a biblical worldview, this is solid evidence that mental illness is, at least in some cases, directly caused by demonic possession.  Symptoms that are commonly classified in modern times as mental disturbance have clear, direct correlations to cases that occurring thousands of years ago. 

            Neil T. Anderson (2000) is a proponent for the theory that most, if not all mental illness is derivative of possession.  What many term mental illness, psychosis, and poor habits, the author redefines as living in bondage to demonic influence. The author points out that these are merely symptoms, but one should appropriately ask:  Who or what is causing the symptoms? (2000) 

            There are six common misconceptions: 

1. Demons were active when Christ was on earth, but their activity has subsided.
2. What the early church called demonic activity we now understand to be mental illness.
3. Some problems are psychological and some are spiritual.
4. Christians cannot be affected by demons.
5. Demonic influence is only evident in extreme or violent behavior and gross sin.
6. Freedom from spiritual bondage is the result of a power encounter with demonic forces.  (Anderson, 2000, pp.19-26)

However, In Tennant’s (2001) article, Altar of Possession, the author highlights the relation of dissociative patients to satanic ritual abuse or SRA.  “And once most started talking about SRA, there was a bias on part of the therapists to look for this phenomenon,” Kelley says. “If genuine SRA wasn’t there, the doctors would help them find it.”  (p. 51) This is one concern of most secular psychotherapists.  Hypnosis is a similarly controversial technique in which there is great speculation of “memory planting” and within the Biblical Counseling field, an invitation of demonic activity.  

Discussion

Antisocial Personality Disorder, psychopathy, sociopathy are labels that strike fear into the hearts of, both, lay persons and professionals.  It is important to note that not all those who display ASPD behaviors are violent.  Further, this diagnosis presents several concerns of misdiagnosis.  Are some people, simply demon possessed?  Is an exorcism necessary?  Or, less dramatic, are antisocial tendencies merely the result of sinful behavior, thinking, and action?  It is very possible that there are degrees and cases of each scenario.  Only by viewing this “illness” from the scope of a biblical worldview, is it possible to truly discern the true foundations for ASPD.
References

Ablow, K. (2011, June 25) Why we can’t stop watching the Casey Anthony trial.

Retrieved June 25, 2011 fromhttp://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/06/25/why-cant-stop-watching-casey-anthony-trial/

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental

disorders (Revised 4th ed.).Washington,DC: Author.

Anderson, N. T. (2000).  The bondage breaker.Eugene,OR:  Harvest House.

Antisocial Personality Disorder- Part One. (2000, December). Harvard Mental Health

Letter, 17(6), 1-4.

Antisocial Personality Disorder- Part Two. (2001, January). Harvard Mental Health Letter,

17(7), 1-4.

Furnham, A., Daoud, Y., & Swami, V. (2009). “How to spot a psychopath”. lay theories

of psychopathy. social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 44(6), 464-472.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Gunter, T. D., Vaughn, M. G., & Philibert, R. A. (2010). Behavioral genetics in antisocial

spectrum disorders and psychopathy: A review of the recent literature. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28(2), 148-173. doi:10.1002/bsl.923

Lykken, D. T. (1996). Psychopathy, sociopathy, and crime. Society, 34(1), 29-38.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ogloff, J. P. (2006). Psychopathy/antisocial personality disorder conundrum. Australian

& New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40(6/7), 519-528. doi:10.1111/j.1440

1614.2006.01834.x

Ted Bundy (n.d.) Retrieved June 30, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_bundy

Ted Bundy Interview [Video file]. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheJeremyKyIeShow#g/c/FDF64AD8FE64B10E

 Tennant, A. (2001). Alter possession: some “demons” are better left unexorcised.

Christianity Today, 45(11), 51. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

The Holy Bible. (1984). New International Version.Grand Rapids,MI:  Zondervan

Publishing House.

The New Founding Fathers: The lore and lure of the serial killer in contemporary

culture. (1990). Journal of American Culture (01911813), 13(3), 1-12. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ullrich, S., & Coid, J. (2010). Antisocial personality disorder — stable and unstable

subtypes. Journal of Personality Disorders, 24(2), 171-187. doi:10.1521/pedi.2010.24.2.171

Accolades From One Funny Chic….

The Versitile Blogger

One Lovely Blog Award

One of my absolute favorite blogs is Twinisms.  First and foremost, the author and I both have twins.  She has two sets, I have one, so I salute her, knowing the double trouble that one set brings. 

Actually, even more than this fact, she also is fluent in sarcasm. I liked her immediately.

It has taken me a several years to carefully craft my witty chides.  I have fond memories (ok, not really) of my early years, developing the skill, whilst my mother very nearly sent me to boarding school. 

Timing and target audience, took many years to learn. 

The other reason I love this blog is that it is so smart and and reflects brilliant snark about everyday events, which leave you wanting to know more about this military mom’s life.  So, I take great pride in the honor of her nominating Order in the Quart for “Lovely Blog” and “Versatile Blog” Awards. 

I have, truly, finally arrived, it seems. Who needs a Grammy, anyway?

By accepting this highly esteemed and coveted honor, I agreed to: 

1. Choose five (or more) other people who deserve this award and pass it on.

This could be a problem.  I either don’t know five people or they simply don’t claim to know me. Next.

2. Tell 7 facts about myself.

If you’ve read any of this blog, you know I am a passionate person.  So, I suppose that doesn’t count.  Alrighty. 

1. I love the ocean.  (boring, just wait)  I love sharks.  But, I am a bit paranoid about meeting a shark while IN the ocean. (This is also true about lakes and catfish.  But, I don’t like catfish.)

2. I can be spontaneous and adventureous.  I have often considered cage diving with sharks. Yes, I am serious.  (here’s a freebie, sometimes I don’t make sense.  See point 1.)

3.  I love culture.  I love learning about family geneologies and history.  I love knowing the origination of surnames. 

4.  One of the items on my bucket list was to eat a cannoli.  I am proud to say, I achieved that goal two years ago.  (And I lived to tell about it.)

5.  I am a communicator.  If I am frustrated, I try to politely express it.  (I have failed often, but I try.) If I care about someone, I will firmly let them know.  I try to hold to the addage of “not letting a day go by…”  I think I have a literal allergy to being fake.  There are many people who are content to just sweep issues under the rug, so people can get annoyed by my honesty and committment to communication. What can I say though? I like to keep it real.

6. I ran into the ocean in the dead of winter in a foreign country.  (No, I wasn’t a fugitive and no there weren’t any sharks.)

7.  I am hopelessly addicted to Diet Coke fountain drinks from McDonald’s.

3. Let the people know who gave me award.   Check.

4. Thank the person who gave you the award.

Thanks Twinisms!  You rock!!

Feelin’ a Little Snarky

After a week that began annoying and ended in physical pain, I have chosen to begin this one a little…hmmm…snarky.  I’m in full jaded wit mode. 

**Sarcasm alert**

So, I guess I’ll just take this time as an outlet for my whiplash wit.  After my little rant, you may wonder if I have schizophrenic tendencies – I’m just gonna flow. (watch out, Eminem….)

I chose to take at least a week of of Facebook.  Several of my fb posse, some of my dearest friends (cyber friends and the real ones, too), went into shock mode.  They may have been tempted to call authorities to check if I:

A. had been held against my will at Area 51

B. was roaming the city, mumbling about Cheerio liferafts,

C. was abducted by aliens (like Randy Quaid) or

D. placed in a rubber room to the tune of Lady Gaga. 

After last week, I think any of these scenarios would be a welcome vacation. 

Thankfully, I haven’t lost my sense of humor. 

Aren’t you glad?…Don’t answer that.

Though I faced a few personal attacks, my true friends, people I consider my family, immediately lined up  to bless, encourage, and support me.  These last two years, I have had to modify my methods of communication.  You see I am a die hard advocate for communication.  But, I have had some intense times of learning how to effectively communicate.  Yet, in spite of it, there are people who still don’t agree with my passion (in more than one venue, I assure you).  What’s particularly sad, is that those who know me best, know that regardless of how zealous I am, my deepest desire is to convey that I love, in spite of any disagreement.  This is especially true after learning that my brand of wit, even in debate, could sometimes be tinged with a little too much “bite”.  It takes alot to get that “bite” from me, especially in face-to-face conversation, but when writing, I have a tendency to utilize the full arsenal of my gift for edgy wit and arguement.  I am proud to say that I think much harder before introducing “bite” to my “bark.”  These are lessons that have been tremendously beneficial, though heartwrenching. 

I proclaim my right to be a “lump of clay.” 

However, don’ t you hate the few days after a disagreement when you go over and over what you should have said, what you shouldn’t have said, and what you would like to have said, but know that it would be wrong???  I wish I had some precognition to an upcoming discussion.  I could be prepared, rather than, “Beday-beday,bu..bhsjdsllds..”

Think Porky Pig on psychotropic medication.

What frustrates me, though, is when others in conversation, don’t even try to be kind.  Accusatory, vicious, and downright mean, are attitudes that NEVER promote healthy dialogue.  Insinuations, condescention, and inhumility are the icing to the poison laced cake that is disingenuity. 

One of the most ironic aspects of this particular rant is that most of the time, those who are unkind, uncaring, or simply neglectful tend to be my family. 

Ouch….Ouch…..OUCH!!

Does anyone else feel like this?  Am I the only one? 

Yeah, I’ve heard the arguement that this is due to the fact that family “will always be there.”  That these are the people that you are most likely to take for granted that they are “always there”.  How is that a good reason?  When did it become “ok” to be rude, based on the fact that “blood is thicker than water?”

And just because the annoyances from last week continue – I just published this post without realizing it.  Okaaaayyy. Guess I was done. Subconciously, maybe?

Of Garden Gnomes and Compost….

Garden Gnomes

It’s almost June.  And I’m getting ready to start my garden. 

By “getting ready,” I mean that I really like the idea of a garden and I have a complete book that I need to read before I clear the area in the yard, build the platform, get the seeds, dirt, and grow a green thumb. 

Most avid gardeners got ready in early April with their lettuce’s and plans, but not here.  I’d rather, like most things, procrastinate until I get to the point where it’s hotter than hades outside to get the shovel out. 

Getting “ready” to garden, got me thinking about what it takes to grow vitamin rich vegetables and fruits.  I have managed to skim my “Square Foot Gardening” book and looked at the section about making your own compost. 

Wow. 

That seems like a project I could do. 

Just throw your trash in the yard?  Seriously??  I am so there. 

The neighbors a few houses down must be about to grow a friggin’ co-op!! 

With the general cloud that hung over last week in my world, I realized that gardening is so representative of the relationship between us and the Lord.  Literally and metaphorically, speaking. 

God made the seeds.  God made the sun.  God made the water.  But, when we stick the seeds in the soil (provided that we plant in appropriate soil), it all comes together and grows! 

So about that soil…Gnomeo, the square-foot, garden guy (not really, I don’t remember his name.  I can barely remember to take my psychotropic medicine.) recommends that you select only the best soils. 

Translation: Don’t use the suburban crap loaded with chunks of cement that the housing developers sell you, mislabeling it, a “lawn.”

  He suggests using a trio combination, I only remember one: vermiculite. 

(I only remember because its fun to say, “vermiculite.” Seriously, try it, “verMIculite.”).  So you take the verMIculite, soil 2, and soil3 and

VOILA! 

Insta’ cozy bed for the precious, widdle, veggie-weggies. 

This wasn’t the part that fascinated me. 

That may be the reason I haven’t done it, yet.  I’m sort of like a two-year old, in terms of attention span, you know….wait…what???

Oh, right…

So, what was sort of interesting to me was the fact that you can take your compostable garbage (I’m guessing styrofoam, 6-pack plastic rings, and diapers aren’t the target.) like leftover corn stalks, I don’t know pork-rinds, and uneaten beanie weenies.  Plus, any unused horse manure you have lying around . 

What other uses are there for horse manure???

Does dog dirt count? I’ve got a yard, chocked full of unused dog droppings.  It’s about time the resident mutt make a useable contribution around here….

(See, 2-year old attention span…sorry)

Yeah, this post is getting a little messy, time to interject the point!

The Bible even talks about gardening.  Jesus told gave this parable:

“A farmer went out to sow his seed. ⁴ As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. ⁵ Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. ⁶ But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. ⁷ Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. ⁸ Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. ⁹ Whoever has ears, let them hear.”  (Matt. 13:3-9)

Soil is important!  Even Jesus talked about it!  He explained the reason for his metaphor, saying,

¹⁸ “Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: ¹⁹ When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in their heart. This is the seed sown along the path. ²⁰ The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. ²¹ But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. ²² The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful. ²³ But the seed falling on good soil refers to someone who hears the word and understands it. This is the one who produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.”

Soil is vital to the health of the crop.  Without good soil, any seed scattered will not take root and flourish. 

The foundation for a garden is a prelude to the outcome of the crop. 

Back to the compost – (see?)

I got to thinking. 

What is compost? 

Waste.  The leftover junk that smells, may be moldy, and really is unusable for any other reason. 

(Well, except the horse manure…)

In life, we can take our junk to God’s garden.  We can unload our leftovers: our personality quirks, our pasts, our addictions, our smelly, moldy stuff. We allow it to hit the rich soil of God’s grace and watch him water and grow vitamin-rich, nourishment in our lives.  But this requires effort on our part!  We must be sure we are planting in the rich soil that is a balance of biblical truth, the love and forgiveness of Christ, and the infiltration of the Holy Spirit’s leading. 

The Soil, the Son, and Living Water.

VerMIculite.

Once we have seed within a good soil, compost it, water it and allow the Son to take over, we have to be vigilant.  We weed, pulling out any thing that enters the garden that doesn’t benefit the garden:

Again, weeds.

Pesty insects.

Pesty animals. (rabbits, squirrels, birds, dumb mutts….)

We have to take precautions, knowing that these things are bound to threaten the thrival (is that a word?) of the garden.  We watch the garden.  Prune out the threats.  Set boundaries and barriers to inhibit the pests from threatening the crop.  Cultivate the soil, continuing to take advantage of the richness in the foundation (the Word of God, accountability from mature brothers and sisters in Christ, prayer). 

Such careful work will yield a successful crop. 

One more time….

VerMIculite

SPF vs. Good Ol’ Fashioned Clothes

Meghan McCain featuring duct tape

The other night I happened to turn to Hannity. He featured a five-minute debate regarding modesty in dress. The segment stemmed from the recent so-called, “Slut walks.” The protests, by mainly liberal women, are in response to comments by a Toronto police officer, who said women could avoid being raped by not dressing like sluts. The segment featured Rebecca St. James, Christian recording artist and purity advocate and left-wing liberal Tamera Holder. Here’s the clip:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4685921/sluts-rally-against-sexism

I watched it once and couldn’t watch it again, due to fears of hypertension, cardiac failure, and all around self-combustion. The highlight of the entire “civil” debate is when Ms. Holder proceeded to tell Ms. St. James that she was “seriously disturbed.”

Yes, any woman who believes that dressing sexually provocative leads to sexual objectification is, clearly, off her rocker.

Most ALL of us can agree that rape under ANY circumstance is WRONG. That’s not the debated issue here. The infiltration of “Skin is in,” however, is. Television, billboard advertisements, magazines, music, and water cooler conversations (maybe the water, itself?) are all tainted and downright plastered with sexual image, innuendos, and suggestive lyrics. But, I’ve noticed in the last few years that even a “charitable” cause is now on the “ooh la la” list. (I thought having a “cause” was supposed to be revolutionary and about the need, itself?)

Oops. I did it again. I underestimated the use of sex to sell ANYTHING.

In an effort to promote awareness to younger generations and men (??), campaigns for Breast Cancer Awareness even revved up the sexuality a couple notches. (I really should’ve seen that one coming, I suppose) Now my kids get to see fun car magnets, like “Feel your boobies” and “Save the ta-tas.” That’s a great conversation for tiny tots, right? And I just love seeing adolescent boys wearing bracelets that say, “I love boobies.” Classy. That will really bring out the responsibility and awareness….

For the last several years, PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals) has even jumped on the sex wagon. (Its supposed to be about ANIMALS for crying out loud!!) Ads promoting fur boycotts by featuring a Hollywood starlet in nothing, but, well, nothing have taken off (pun intended), “I’d rather go naked, than wear fur…” being the caption.  (Well, good for you!  You know here in the 21st century, there are alternatives to fur?!  I’d go with cotton, personally.)

Why does everyone think that promoting awareness involves the loss of the clothes? Peep shows for pets??? REALLY?

Do they think the people who are hooked by this marketing style really give a care about the actual cause?? Riiiighht…

The last straw for the diatribe rehashed by yours truly, came this morning with the new advertisement featuring the likes of Meghan McCain, Brandi, and some other B and C-list celebrities stripping down to promote skin cancer awareness. COME ON!!!! Are you kidding me???!! Seeing their naked derrières is not going to prompt me to put SPF on anything!

Here’s an idea! Why don’t you put some clothes ON and then your butt won’t get burnt!!!

Flashback: ”Hitch it up, honey!”