Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Of the many contradictions that exist in the world, the contrast between love and hate
is perhaps the starkest. It is one that helps us value true love while understanding the
ramifications of hatred.
Love looks through a telescope; envy, through a microscope.
Josh Billings
Love is much like a wild rose, beautiful and calm, but willing to draw blood in its defense.
Mark Overby
Hatred ever kills, love never dies. Such is the vast difference between the two. What is
obtained by love is retained for all time. What is obtained by hatred proves a burden in
reality for it increases hatred.
Mohandas K. Gandhi
Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?
Abraham Lincoln
Fear, Hate and the Power of Love
A discussion forum being a minitiature version of society its interesting to observe by which
insidious means people are tricked into fear and hate. Under the guise of exposing the elite or
denying ignorance or fighting for freedom enemies are sought out and bashed. Scandals and
Evils elaborated on. Indignant Rage expressed. Protest voiced.
All the while something is happening on a more subtle level ‐ the emotional level. It begins with
dislike. Thoughts of dislike repeated often enough and fueled by more negative information
create hatred and fear. These emotions do not actually strengthen the body and mind. They do
not make you more free, more productive, more intelligent, more liberated from oppression.
They do just the opposite.
They cripple your ability to think, discern, see clearly, show compassion, forgive, feel joy,
express love, gain strength and health and with that power truly make a difference in the word.
Who will be able to work more productively ‐ someone filled with love or someone spending the
entire day bashing "the powers that be" or "the other side" or any particular worldview?
They scoff and laugh when I talk about the Power of Love, telling me Love cant change the
world and the enemy will "eat me alive" if I love him. This is a lie.
The biggest lie ever. It is fear that makes you vulnerable, not love. It is hatred that makes turns
your life into a nightmare, not love.
You think that you can spend 30 minutes writing a hate‐rant against some politician, religion,
organization, country, nation, and then go offline and that energy of hatred will not effect your
offline life? You think it will not effect your private life?
It will. You carry the "vibe" around with you, also into "real life".
The energy of hatred can cause real illnesses, ulcers, cancer. It will make you weak and stupid.
Do you want to be weak and stupid? If not, shift your focus away from the enemy and invest
your time and attention in solutions, betterment, beauty, work, help, support, virtue, creativity,
positivity, peace, prosperity. Expose evil, yes, but dont dwell on it, dont develop a hatred
towards it or fear of it. Analyse it with a cool eye but dont get sucked to the same level as it.
After analysing evil, forgive evil and counter it with good. If you dwell on negative information
you will take the path of fear ‐ a path to the dark side.
The lost souls will give you hundreds and thousands of reasons why it is right to hate Bush, hate
Obama, hate Muslims, hate Christians, hate Atheists, hate Homosexuals, hate Jews, hate the
Elite, hate the Poor, hate Conservatives, hate Socialists, hate Catholics, hate Blacks, hate Whites,
hate the Rich, hate Nerds, hate Women, hate Men ‐ and every reason given "why" you should
hate them is a trick to suck you into weakness. You dont need the emotion of hate in order to
analyse and resolve a problem. To solve a problem you need the emotion of Love.
Love is the ultimate Power and the ultimate Weapon of Liberation.
Autonomy
Autonomy refers to free choice and is formally defined as “internally perceived locus of
causality”—basically a decision from your heart or your authentic self. Intrinsic motivation
decreases as autonomy decreases. Autonomy is the opposite of being controlled.
The distinction between “I choose to do this” and “I have to do this” is the essence of autonomy.
Autonomy is:
• being self‐governed.
• making your own informed decisions and choosing to act according to your own values
and beliefs,
• authentic and responsible; taking responsibility for the choices you make.
• the feeling deep inside that your actions are your own choice.
• choosing to . . .
Autonomy is not:
• individualism—pursuit of self‐interest
• independence—acting alone
• detached, selfish, egotistical, or irresponsible
• compliance—behaving according to external controls, or defiance—rebellion against
external controls.
• narcissism
• irresponsible or disingenuous
• acting as a pawn
• submitting to coercion or threats
• permissiveness
• being controlled.
• having to . . .
Responsibility requires Autonomy
Responsibility requires autonomy. We can only feel accountable and be held accountable for
the choices we make for ourselves. Free choice is only possible when we are autonomous. As
autonomy increases, responsibility increases with it. However, when autonomy is reduced,
responsibility is reduced along with it.
This leads to an unfortunate and all too
common destructive spiral when one person or
agency imposes arbitrary rules in an attempt to
control another. But arbitrarily imposed rules
reduce autonomy, and therefore reduce
responsibility. Management, parents, teachers,
agencies, partners, governments,
organizations, and others often attempt to
increase control by increasing the number of
rules. But this increase in rules decreases
autonomy which reduces responsibility.
Arbitrary rules remove responsibility.
This is the failure of “micro management”; the target is frustrated by all the silly rules, and the
manager is frustrated by the negative response, disengagement, and overall poor
results. Treating adults like children by imposing arbitrary rules that destroy autonomy often
encourages them to act like irresponsible children. This degenerative spiral is illustrated here. It
illustrates how submitting to authority reduces the sense of responsibility. To reverse this spiral,
increase responsibility by increasing autonomy.
Various appeals such as loyalty oaths or calls to faith are often used in an attempt to sustain
personal responsibility as people are asked to tolerate, accept, and obey arbitrary rules. Be alert
to these, judge for yourself if they are manipulative, and carefully evaluate what you are being
told and asked to do. Decide for yourself what you believe, what you accept, what you value,
and what you are willing to do.
When rules are understood as a reasonable means toward achieving a goal they can help
increase autonomy rather than decrease it. We understand the value of driving on the right (or
left, depending on your country) and stopping at red lights because these simple rules promote
order and help keep us safe. We understand that waiting our turn in line provides fair and
orderly access. We choose to obey these helpful rules. Committees and well‐run organizations
choose to adopt rules that help each person better contribute to the shared goals, meet the
reasonable expectations of others, and perform better as a group. If the purpose for the rule is
understood and judged to be reasonable and valuable then the rule is adopted voluntarily. The
rule becomes integrated. In this case the rule increases order and improves results without
reducing autonomy or responsibility.
Azim’s mission – to ‘stop kids killing kids’
A conversation with Amiz Khamisa, a forgiving father
.
‘FRENZY OF VIOLENCE’: Azim Khamisa was horrified when he learnt of the ‘
gang culture’ that had led to his innocent son’s death
Tariq Khamisa died at the age of 20 when he was shot by 14‐year‐old gang member Tony Hicks
in January 1995.
While the horrified San Diego community called for Tony to be “hung from the highest pole”,
Tariq’s father, Azim, forgave his son’s killer with the realisation that “there were victims at both
ends of the gun”.
A charismatic and artistic university student was dead, a teenager had been sentenced to 25
years to life in prison, and two families were devastated, including Tony’s grandfather and then‐
guardian, Ples Feliz.
Three fellow gang members were jailed for their involvement in the murder, one for two
consecutive life sentences.
Seven years later, Tariq’s fiancée, Jennifer, committed suicide, having never recovered from her
grief.
“He was my only son; I have a beautiful daughter but he was my only son, so needless to say this
brought my life to a crashing halt,” says Azim.
“It was a devastating experience … I’ve never felt pain like that.”
Tariq was in his second year at San Diego State University.
“He was a very charismatic young man,” Azim says. “He had a very generous spirit and a lot of
friends, and he had a good sense of humour.”
A gifted writer and photographer, Tariq aspired to work for National Geographic.
He grew up in Seattle with his mother, then moved to San Diego to attend university and be
closer to Azim, then an international investment banker.
“He was there for about 2½ years before he lost his life. It was a very random and meaningless
incident,” Azim says.
“He worked as a pizza delivery man for a local restaurant close to where he went to school.”
On the evening of January 21, 1995, Tariq received a delivery order and was lured to a building
in a middle‐class area of San Diego, having been given a bogus apartment number.
After door‐knocking the building, he returned to his car with the unclaimed pizza.
“As he was leaving he was accosted by four gang members; three of them were 14 years old,”
Azim says.
The leader of the gang, an 18‐year‐old, handed a 9mm gun to Tony, one of the 14‐year‐olds.
“There is a gang ritual called ‘jacking the pizza man’, and as my son was leaving [what would
become the] scene of the crime, the 18‐year‐old gave the order. Tony fired one round which
came through the open driver’s side window and entered my son’s body under the left armpit. It
travelled across the upper part of his chest and the bullet actually exited from the right armpit.
The coroner explained to me it is called a ‘perfect pass’, which I thought was an interesting
choice of words, but it means perfect pass in the sense that it destroyed all the vital organs.
Tariq drowned in his own blood a couple of minutes later, over a lousy pizza, at the age of 20.”
Azim says the days that followed “were very difficult”.
“I believe in God, I am a practising Sufi Muslim … and it was like a nuclear bomb going off in my
heart; you are broken into millions of small pieces.
I believe that I went out of my body and into the loving arms of God and he held me in an
embrace for a long time.
And when the explosion had subsided he sent me back into my body with the wisdom that there
were victims at both ends of the gun.”
Azim then had to call Tariq’s mother in Seattle, “one of the most difficult things I’ve ever done”.
“How do you tell a mother she’s never going to see her son again, or hear him laugh, or give him
a hug? They had a very special relationship, Tariq and his mum.
Even though it was 14 years ago I still remember she let out this loud piercing shriek and fell to
the floor with a thud. I can still hear her scream. It will probably haunt me for the rest of my
life.”
The ensuing months were hard for the businessman.
“I made a living as an inter‐ national investment banker so I had a very full life. I would routinely
fly to London, come home to San Diego, change suitcases and fly to Tokyo,” says Azim who was
born in Kenya and educated in England. And after Tariq died it literally took all of my willpower
to climb out of bed.”
But, beneath the grief, he had questions, and “the answers I got horrified me”. I really, at that
point in my life, did not know there were such things as youth gangs,” he says.
“But Tariq had been killed by a gang member, so I wanted to learn more about gang culture. It’s
very complicated today for children to grow up in America, and maybe that’s true in Australia as
well. They join gangs at the age of 10 and 11. Tony joined the gang at the age of 11 when he was
in the 6th grade. I was told they join gangs to get respect, because gang members are respected
by their peers. They also join gangs because they live in areas where, if they don’t join this gang,
they are targeted by a rival gang.”
“And I was told they join gangs to get a sense of belonging, because sometimes they don’t have
it in their own homes. Or they join gangs because it’s expected of them. Over the past 14 years
Ples (Tony’s grandfather) and I have met gang members that are four or five generations, so it is
just expected of them.”
These answers baffled Azim, “because America is a very wealthy country”.
“When I moved from Kenya in the mid‐seventies to the US, the budget for the entire country of
Kenya was the same as the budget for the University of California, Los Angeles. I could not figure
out how we could spend hundreds of millions of dollars on wars on foreign soil or conquering
outer space when, every single day, right in our own backyards, our defenceless children are
being wiped out in a frenzy of violence. It is an epidemic.
Seventy‐five kids get shot every day in America; 13 die, the rest end up in wheelchairs.
And on top of that another 237 kids every day get
arrested for violent crimes where there is a
weapon involved. We lose them, too, because they
end up in the penal system. These are kids, aged
12‐19, and this is every day.
“The second highest cause of death for children in America behind car accidents is gun‐related
violence.”
Although his forgiveness of Tony was “immediate, the night it happened”, this new
understanding further absolved him in Azim’s eyes.
“My response to this tragedy was probably a little different than most people,” he says.
“I saw Tariq as a victim of the 14‐year‐old; I saw the 14‐year‐old as a victim of American society.
And as an American I felt I must take my share of responsibility for the bullet that took my son’s
life, because Tony was an American child.”
“I wasn’t after vengeance and revenge and retribution.”
Thousands of San Diego residents signed a successful petition campaigning for Tony to be tried
as an adult, but Azim was not among them.
“At the hearing, Tony gave a very emotional and remorseful speech where he actually took
responsibility,” says Azim.
“And that hearing was not about him taking Tariq’s life; that hearing was over whether he
should be tried as a juvenile or not. He was the first 14‐year‐old to be tried as an adult. Prior to
that, the law was 16, but a new law went into effect on January 1, 1995, that at 14 they could be
tried as an adult, and this tragedy happened on January 21, just three weeks later.”
In his speech, Tony asked Azim’s forgiveness “which I had already granted, but I think it made
me feel better that his attitude had shifted finally, because it took him a while”.
Azim says the case was also “a landmark case because he pleaded guilty … he took responsibility
for what he did, which not many of us do. We all make mistakes; how many of us take
responsibility?”
Nine months after his son’s death, Azim launched the Tariq Khamisa Foundation with the goal of
“stopping kids from killing kids by breaking the cycle of youth violence”, based on three
mandates, the first being to save lives.
“It doesn’t have to be your child [who dies for you to be affected]. When a child dies in any
community we are all diminished,” Azim says.
The foundation’s second mandate is to empower the correct choices, “because they join gangs
for the wrong reasons”. And finally, the foundation strives to teach the principles of non‐
violence and peace making. I believe violence is a learned behaviour. No child was born violent,
and if you accept that as a truism then it also makes sense that non‐violence can be taught.”
Soon afterwards, Azim asked to be introduced to Ples, Tony’s grandfather, with whom the
teenager had been living the night Tariq was killed. “I told him that the way I saw it, we both lost
a child. Tony calls Ples ‘Daddy’ and was more like a son to him, and Ples lost that son to the
penal system.”
Azim shared his plans for the foundation and its “very lofty mission” with Ples and asked for his
help in making sure a tragedy like that was never repeated.
“Ples was very quick to take my hand of forgiveness, because he had been praying that he would
one day get to meet me and extend his hand of condolences, which he did. The Tariq Khamisa
Foundation is now 14 years old, with six programs in schools across America, a staff of 15, and a
proven success rate for “keeping kids away from gangs, guns and violence. We have reached
half a million kids face‐to‐face, and another eight million through our broadcasts into their
classrooms,” says Azim. “And we have received over 100,000 letters from kids.”
Currently in the first year of a three‐year pilot program in “the most violent high school in San
Diego”, a team of staff members and volunteers work in the high school as well as the two
middle schools and five elementary schools that feed the high school.
“In the first year of the pilot we reduced violence in the most violent high school in San Diego by
25 per cent,” Azim says.
“These are not our numbers, these are the mayor’s numbers, and that is huge.”
He says the violence impact forum is the signature program of the foundation, in which he, Ples,
and two former gang members share their stories with school students.
“These are middle school children, 12 or 13 years old, and you could hear a pin drop. It’s a life‐
changing program for them. It’s amazing where the foundation has gone. It’s quite a journey.”
Five years after Tariq’s death, Azim visited a California prison and met his son’s killer face to
face. “I felt that to complete my journey of forgiveness that at some point I had to come eyeball
to eyeball with the person who actually pulled the trigger on my son.
“You don’t really know, as a human being, how you’re going to react when you meet the person
who murdered your son.
“When I did meet him he was 19, and I could see that my forgiveness had shifted him, that he
had done a lot of work on himself. I did not see a murderer in him; I saw another person.”
Tony will be eligible for parole in 2026, at the age of 46, but Azim is now urging the governor of
California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to commute Tony’s sentence in order for him to be released
early. “This is a landmark case,” he says.
“It shows the power of restorative justice; it shows the power of forgiveness.”
Azim’s latest book, Secrets of a Bulletproof Spirit, reveals the keys to emotional resilience and
the strategies for transcending grief and loss.
“It is often better not to see an insult than to avenge it.”
Lucius Anneaus Seneca
The Power of Love
By Dr. Ellen McGrath
Psychologist
published on December 01, 2002 ‐ last reviewed on March 30, 2009
Love is the best antidepressant—but many of our ideas about it are wrong. The less love you
have, the more depressed you are likely to feel.
Love is as critical for your mind and body as oxygen. It's not negotiable. The more connected you
are, the healthier you will be both physically and emotionally. The less connected you are, the
more you are at risk.
It is also true that the less love you have, the more depression you are likely to experience in
your life. Love is probably the best antidepressant there is because one of the most common
sources of depression is feeling unloved. Most depressed people don't love themselves and they
do not feel loved by others. They also are very self‐focused, making them less attractive to
others and depriving them of opportunities to learn the skills of love.
There is a mythology in our culture that love just happens. As a result, the depressed often sit
around passively waiting for someone to love them. But love doesn't work that way. To get love
and keep love you have to go out and be active and learn a variety of specific skills.
Most of us get our ideas of love from popular culture. We come to believe that love is
something that sweeps us off our feet. But the pop‐culture ideal of love consists of unrealistic
images created for entertainment, which is one reason so many of us are set up to be
depressed. It's part of our national vulnerability, like eating junk food, constantly stimulated by
images of instant gratification. We think it is love when it's simply distraction and infatuation.
One consequence is that when we hit real love we become upset and disappointed because
there are many things that do not fit the cultural ideal. Some of us get demanding and
controlling, wanting someone else to do what we think our ideal of romance should be, without
realizing our ideal is misplaced.
It is not only possible but necessary to change one's approach to love to ward off depression.
Follow these action strategies to get more of what you want out of life—to love and be loved.
• Recognize the difference between limerance and love. Limerance is the psychological
state of deep infatuation. It feels good but rarely lasts. Limerance is that first stage of
mad attraction whereby all the hormones are flowing and things feel so right. Limerance
lasts, on average, six months. It can progress to love. Love mostly starts out as
limerance, but limerance doesn't always evolve into love.
• Know that love is a learned skill, not something that comes from hormones or emotion
particularly. Erich Fromm called it "an act of will." If you don't learn the skills of love you
virtually guarantee that you will be depressed, not only because you will not be
connected enough but because you will have many failure experiences.
• Learn good communication skills. They are a means by which you develop trust and
intensify connection. The more you can communicate the less depressed you will be
because you will feel known and understood.
There are always core differences between two people, no matter how good or close you are,
and if the relationship is going right those differences surface. The issue then is to identify the
differences and negotiate them so that they don't distance you or kill the relationship.
You do that by understanding where the other person is coming from, who that person is, and
by being able to represent yourself. When the differences are known you must be able to
negotiate and compromise on them until you find a common ground that works for both.
• Focus on the other person. Rather than focus on what you are getting and how you are
being treated, read your partner's need. What does this person really need for his/her
own well‐being? This is a very tough skill for people to learn in our narcissistic culture.
Of course, you don't lose yourself in the process; you make sure you're also doing
enough self‐care.
• Help someone else. Depression keeps people so focused on themselves they don't get
outside themselves enough to be able to learn to love. The more you can focus on
others and learn to respond and meet their needs, the better you are going to do in
love.
• Develop the ability to accommodate simultaneous reality. The loved one's reality is as
important as your own, and you need to be as aware of it as of your own. What are they
really saying, what are they really needing? Depressed people think the only reality is
their own depressed reality.
• Actively dispute your internal messages of inadequacy. Sensitivity to rejection is a
cardinal feature of depression. As a consequence of low self‐esteem, every relationship
blip is interpreted far too personally as evidence of inadequacy. Quick to feel rejected by
a partner, you then believe it is the treatment you fundamentally deserve. But the
rejection really originates in you, and the feelings of inadequacy are the depression
speaking.
Recognize that the internal voice is strong but it's not real. Talk back to it. "I'm not really being
rejected, this isn't really evidence of inadequacy. I made a mistake." Or "this isn't about me, this
is something I just didn't know how to do and now I'll learn." When you reframe the situation to
something more adequate, you can act again in an effective way and you can find and keep the
love that you need.
“The man who beats his horse will soon be walking.”
~
DOCTOR OF CLINICAL HYPNOTHERAPY
By Ashley Gutherie, Ph.D.
Q. Dr. Anderson, tell me first, how do you define addiction?
A. Well, I am a radical about that. First of all, “addiction” is just a model. It is not something
that’s real. It’s a way of describing a set of phenomena, and it has been a really useful model for
certain kinds of things, for example, alcoholism and heroin addiction. It doesn’t exist though. It
is just something that somebody made up. Now, there are some physical characteristics that
people have been able to associate with the model like certain kinds of changes in the brain and
certain neuroreceptor sites and that kind of thing. My opinion is that, although those associated
physical characteristics are interesting, and perhaps even important, they are not really the crux
of what is going on with someone who is experiencing a difficulty with abusing or overusing a
substance. Pretty much the universal definition of addiction is that people have cravings for
substances when their blood levels of the substance drop, and they have a difficulty in
discontinuing the habit of use. And so, we can look at a scientific definition, which I do not use
with my clients because the people who I am dealing with are not scientists. They are basically
just the general public, and what they mean when they say they are addicted is that they have
been having a hard time quitting. They mean that they want something that they do not want to
want anymore. They wish to stop using that substance, nicotine, for example. And, they mean
that they are conflicted about it and they are having a difficult time quitting. That is really what
most of them mean when they say they are “addicted”.
Q. In this case, do you feel that addiction is a disease?
A. I do not think “addiction” fits the disease model very well. For one thing, if we look at mumps
or Alzheimer’s disease, there are certain kinds of physiological and pathological changes that are
going to occur consistently in people with mumps or Alzheimer’s disease. That is not true with
addictions. What you get is a set of behavioral changes that are generally similar without overt
pathology The pathologies are a consequence of the substance abuse.
Let’s take a look at alcoholism in which somebody who is considered an alcoholic binges once
every three months, or who once a month will go on a two‐day binge. Then there is the alcoholic
who drinks a little bit every day. They feel as though they can’t stop. These people feel like they
have got to have a certain amount, but they might not drink nearly as much as the alcoholic who
binges. Yet they are drinking every day and are becoming psychologically dependent on the
drinking. Then there are the ones who drink heavily every day. That is a pretty broad range of
behaviors and of consumption to be all lumped into one thing. So, I think the model developed
because in earlier people who drank too much were considered to have a moral defect in their
character. So the people who promoted the disease model basically were trying to counteract
and replace the character deficit model. So, they said, “Let’s call it a disease. A disease doesn’t
have moral implications.” So that is really what they were all about. They were trying to take the
moral stigma out of alcoholism and drug abuse.
I actually had an interesting experience with someone who was deeply committed to the
disease model once. A therapist who worked in a drug rehab hospital did a presentation at a
hypnotherapy association meeting and she spoke about alcoholism disease. I asked her, “Well,
what are the advantages and the disadvantages of the disease model, and what other ways do
you have of thinking about it?” And her answer was to basically go blank. She had no answer at
all, because it never occurred to her that “addiction” could be anything other than a disease. No
one ever taught her it was a model. She thought it was real. It’s not real. Addiction is not real.
Addiction as a disease is not real. It is just a
way of thinking about things and as a metaphor it has proven to be very powerful and very
useful in a great many circumstances.
I don’t think of it as an illness. For one thing, it is not contagious. It is not something like
leukemia or lupus or any of the other “real” diseases. There are real, major distinctions to be
made between the two phenomena.
Q. So, in that case, there has been research done that shows that alcoholism, in particular, can
be familial. Studies have been done where I think they studied so many men only who were
children of alcoholic parents but were not raised by the biological parent. They were actually
raised by the adopted parent in an environment other than the home of the biological parent
and, yet, these studies have shown that almost every one of these men showed alcoholism
traits. Do you feel that there is something to this familial theory?
A. I haven’t seen the research so I can’t comment on those specific research findings. My guess
is there probably is something to it although maybe not what people make of it. There are
frequently any number of ways of interpreting the same set of data. It may well be that there
are genetic predispositions. For example, I understand that American Indians tend to have a
great deal less tolerance for using alcohol because they do not have a genetic tolerance for
alcohol. American Indian’s use of alcohol doesn’t go back any more than about 400 years.
Whereas, in Europe and Asia, people have been using alcohol for millennia and they have
actually had a chance to develop a genetic tolerance to the poisoning. Alcohol is actually a
poison and the drug affects are due to the body responding to it as a poison. I would guess that
the whole thing about familial and genetic predisposition has something to it. The important
thing to notice is that even with the predisposition, somebody doesn’t have to have an alcohol
or drug problem. Unless we have a case like a cocaine baby, nobody is born addicted to
anything. I don’t know enough about that research per se to make an argument one way or the
other about it.
When I see a client, it doesn’t matter to me whether they have a familial influence, or genetic
influence,or anything like that in terms of the substance they may be abusing, because I look at
each of them as an individual ‐ each perfectly capable of changing whatever behaviors they are
engaging in.
They complain, and they whine, and they tell me that it’s not possible, and all that kind of self
defeating nonsense. But, that is just hypnosis they have done on themselves, and they are trying
to do it to me. It doesn’t work. I am the hypnotist. I do the hypnotising, not the client. At least, I
hope so. So, I think of the research as interesting. It may have some validity and value, but it’s
not really all that important when it comes to me sitting down with a client.
Q. Very interesting point you raised. In that case, do you feel that there is a common
denominator in both substance addiction such as nicotine, drugs and alcohol, and non‐
substance addiction such as sexual and gambling?
A. Well, I see everybody as an individual. I have never seen anybody who is an addict as part of a
group of addicts. I just see individuals. Yes, if you take somebody who is abusing alcohol and
compare them with other alcohol abusers, there are going to be some common characteristics
about which one can generalize, and the same would hold true with heroin users and smokers.
Of all the socalled addictions (I dislike even using the word because it is so broadly applied)
tobacco is the one with which I have the greatest familiarity. What I have found is that there is a
fair amount of variation in terms of people’s experiences of tobacco use, although there are
some generalities that one could usefully consider. We can get into that if you want. Most of the
generalities have to do with attitudes and beliefs that smokers share about nicotine, and at
some point as we go along I will talk about how I differentiate nicotine from the other
substances.
In terms of carbohydrate, food addictions, sex, gambling, these things cannot be true addictions
– not by the disease model anyway. What you’ve got are people who may have chemical
balances that cause them to have predispositions towards certain kinds of compulsive
behaviors. I don’t think of chemistry in these cases as primary. I think of the chemical
imbalances as secondary, as a result of the way their mind is processing things. For purposes of
hypnosis, that is a good way to think of it. Just reverse the normal thinking process for the
medical and psychological establishment and see what happens. Maybe it’s useful, maybe not.
One thing that you could say is a common denominator is people engaging in behaviors that
they believe, or others believe to be destructive to them and to other people, is that these folks
have a difficult time stopping the behaviors, and that they feel compulsions and strong urges to
engage in those activities whether it is using a substance or whether it is gambling or sex. That is
the reason why they have all been called addictions. They have been lumped together because
of that quality of compulsion that goes along with the activity.
Q. Do you feel, then, that compulsion is that one basic component that is present in all so‐called
addictions, both substance and non substance?
A. Yes. I would agree with that. Compulsions ‐ a sense of being unable to stop or having a great
deal of difficulty stopping the behavior. Those with compulsions and strong cravings for a drug
or behavior, are similar to a lot of people with eating issues. It’s fascinating to me that some of
my weigh control clients say they are “carbohydrate addicted” and then proceed to tell me it is
only certain kinds of sweets that they want. Peanut brittle is not good, but M&Ms are greatly
compelling. “How about if I give you a pound of rice?’ “I don’t want any rice.” So, you have got
“carbohydrate addicts” who will sit around with a pound of cooked rice and not eat that
because it doesn’t taste all that good to them, but who will insist that they are addicted to
carbs, and if one put them next to M&Ms they would be gobbling them up without any kind of
control. It all sounds peculiar to me because I pretend I am a Martian, and then I look, and
listen, and say to myself, “Wow, that’s really weird. How can this be so?” as a part of
understanding the individual and the dynamics of the individual’s behavior. I have gotten a little
far afield.
The question is the common denominator between substance and non‐substance addiction. It is
basically psychological ‐ the psychological experience of the so‐called “addictive” behavior. Let
me make another comment about that. I am differentiating because when I work with smokers,
in particular, most of them tell me that they are addicted. Well, we don’t know that for sure
because they haven’t been diagnosed as medically addicted by proper authorities. As I
understand it, about twothirds of smokers statistically are going to be addicted, and I may have
a skewed population. I am getting a population of smokers who consult with hypnotherapists. At
any rate, some of them must be addicted, by the technical definition. What I say to them is, “I
don’t like the word addiction when it is applied to heroin and nicotine equally. There are enough
differences between heroin and nicotine addiction that they ought to have their own different
categories. For example, if you take a heroin addict and lock him in a room for 12 hours, what’s
going to happen? He is going to go into withdrawal. He is going to get sick. He is going to be
pretty damn miserable. If you take the smoker and stick him in an empty room, they are going
to get bored. They might want a cigarette but they are not going to get sick. They are not going
through withdrawal with the kind of intensity that a heroin addict does. They won’t get sick.
They might get annoyed or bored. Maybe angry , who knows? It depends on the personality of
the individual, and there are some other things to consider as well. For example, smokers sleep
all night. Heroin addicts will not sleep through withdrawal. They will wake up and go get
something to stop their cravings.
Q. Interesting point there. What about those with so‐called sexual addictions and gambling
addictions as far as obviously in the middle of the night they might not get up and go out seek
out a sexual liaison or go to a gambling table but do you feel there are some common factors
involved there as well as with heroin addiction?
A. The reason those behavioral difficulties have called it addiction is because of the behavioral
similarities that they have with those addicted to substances. They have been labeled as addicts.
Consider this: there were no sex addicts in 1912. There was no such thing because no one had
invented the label. There were philanderers. There were people who were overindulging in sex,
and they were looked down upon as morally depraved and that kind of thing. Or maybe they
were thought of as rich, and they could get away with it. At any rate, spiritually or morally they
were considered off track at best. And, along comes the notion of addictions, which is first
applied to alcohol ‐ or the disease model of addiction ‐ first alcohol and then other drugs. Then
people say “Well, these people are compulsively having sex. It is like an addiction.” All of a
sudden, they dropped “It’s like…” and said “It is an addiction.” And it was the same with
gambling.
I have not worked with these people very much, if at all, so I can’t make really any
generalizations about the so‐called sexually addicted and the gamblers ‐ at least, not from
personal experience. My uninformed guess is that if you set these people down in front of me
and they talked with me about what is going on with them that there would be any number of
psychological dynamics that would be similar to some of the substance addictions. However, if
you take a sex addict and you lock him in a room for 12 hours, are they are going to get sick? No.
The same is true with the gambler. They are not going to get sick from physical withdrawal from
gambling. That’s not true with heroin, and that is not true with cocaine, Valium, amphetamines,
Prozac and some of the other addicting drugs. It’s not even necessarily true with alcoholics
depending on again which end of the spectrum of consumption volume that they fit into. An
interesting thought for you ‐ I don’t know if it is true now but it used to be that in Japan there
were no alcoholics. Nobody was considered an alcoholic. They just said “He likes Sake.” If they
knew people were drinking who sometimes woke up in the gutter the next morning covered
with their own vomit, it was “He likes Sake.” And there was no negative social consequence to
being a drunk who fell down in the gutter and woke up there the next morning.
Q. You have raised an interesting question too ‐ one that I would love to explore more and that
is what about the role of compulsion vs. choice or does it have to be “versus choice” in
addiction? Is addiction strictly a compulsion? Does the person have some choice in the matter?
A. First of all, compulsions are psychological phenomena. Typically, what happens in a
compulsion in my model is the person is dissociated to some extent and has an unconscious set
of imperatives, which are actually causing them to behave in certain ways, and they consciously
feel like they have no choice. The reason they consciously feel they have no choice is that they
have dissociated themselves from the activity so their conscious mind is going “This is really
dumb. This is bad, and I really ought to be stopping it.” Meanwhile they are engaging in the
behavior. I certainly have heard that type of thing from smokers and people with eating issues
quite a bit. They will be saying, “This is really dumb.
Why am I doing this?””, while they are engaging in the behavior and so what is happened is that
their unconscious mind has actually hypnotized them ‐ they are acting out of a post‐hypnotic
suggestion. They are conscious of the behavior and yet they don’t know why they continue
doing it. They may even be fighting against themselves, and unhappy that they are doing it.
However, the real key is that it is dissociation. If they fully associated into the moment, they
would have choice. Full conscious awareness and volition in an action gives someone choice.
Milton Erickson demonstrated that with a young man who was about 16 years old who came to
see him because he had a tic on one side of his face. Milton said to him, “Can you do it on the
other side?” The young man practiced for hours in a mirror so he could make a tic on the other
side identical to the one on the first side. What that did is that gave him conscious control of the
tic. When he was able to consciously control the second side, he had control of both sides. That
is the metaphor that I use for explaining how we gain full choice by making an activity fully
conscious.
Typically what I will do with clients who feel conflicted yet helpless while actually doing the
unwanted behavior is an anchor collapse, which is an NLP technique. An anchor is a stimulus
response association. Pavlov’s dogs are an example. Ring a bell; the dog would salivate because
there was a conditioned response to the tone with the presentation of meat when they were
hungry. So, I’ll take somebody and get them fully associated into “I am just going to eat it. I
don’t give a damn” or “I’m just going to smoke. I don’t care.”
I anchor that state. I usually use a touch anchor on one knee. Then I anchor them into “I just
want to quit. I’m tired of it. I just want to be done” into the other knee. Typically what happens
is these two things will be dissociated in time. So they will be engaging in the behavior at one
time, and then later they will be just wishing they could quit. The two don’t ever mix. So to make
it easier to affect the offending behavior usually both will be need to be associated in time, that
is, made simultaneous rather than sequential. Once I have an anchor for each of them, I will
then fire both anchors simultaneously. What happens is the person will for the first time
experience both “I want to” and “I don’t want to”, “yes” and “no” simultaneously. And one will
see a shifting on both sides of their faces, because they do not normally experience those
feelings simultaneously. Once I have done that, I will go back and check it and say, “What do you
think about smoking?” They will say “Yeah, I can remember it” and they will feel conflicted
versus either fully congruent with “I’ll smoke” or fully congruent with “I want to quit.” They will
be conflicted both ways. There will be a mix. At which point, it is a lot easier for me to work with
them. This technique is very powerful, particularly with substance abuse.
I once used this technique with a cocaine addict, and he had an incredible response to the
anchor collapse. I wish I had a video of it. His wife was in the room with us, because she wanted
to sit in on the sessions. I anchored on one knee his desire to use the cocaine. I had him think
about cocaine and touched his knee as he got this little grin on his face, and his face lit up. Then
I had him go to a neutral space and then I asked him about wanting to quit. He was very serious.
He wanted to get off the cocaine. So then I anchored that state on the other knee. Then I had
him to go back to a neutral state. Next I fired both of anchors simultaneously. As I fired both
anchors simultaneously, he physically tried to pull away from my touch.That response is
generated because they have such a strong feeling of wanting the substance, and a such a
strong desire to quit that there is a huge gap between the two states. Those two states together
feel really strange. I just held on to him two or three minutes, which is long enough for the
integration to begin. Then I said “What do you think about doing some cocaine now?” He had
the facial expression of wanting to quit. He didn’t grin anymore. He didn’t light up again. I said,
“Do you notice the difference?” He said, “No.” His wife on the other hand said “Yeah, I can really
see it.”
Q. My next question was going to be “Can you describe your approach to the treatment of
addiction?” It sounds as if this is possibly your basic approach and that the underlying
assumption is that the addict must be associated in order to realize that they have a choice?
A. It is one piece of my approach, and there are people with whom I don’t need to do the
anchor collapse. With regard to my general protocol, let’s talk about smokers because that is
probably the thing that I do the most that could be considered working with “addiction.”
The first thing that I do is to find out what their beliefs are. I go through a list of common beliefs
that smokers have: “Cigarettes are my friend, etc.” People will say that kind of thing, and will be
really serious. So what I will do is reframe it. I say “Boy, how would you like to take one out and
have a conversation with it. Just pull it out and just talk to it, and pour your heart out. Put them
on your pillow at night, and say goodnight to them, and wake up and say good morning. I’ll tell
you what, I will introduce you to somebody who is always going to be there for you, the best
friend you ever had. Eventually, we don’t know when, he is either going to kill you or hurt you
real bad. You want to meet him?” They all kind of laugh and look a little sheepish and say “No.”
And what that does is break the association. It blows out the metaphor that “cigarettes are my
friend.”
Another belief is that they are addicted. I go through my song and dance about differentiating
heroin from nicotine, and I go through a number of steps with belief so I can at least loosen the
notion. The reason being, that as long as they have noxious beliefs about being “addicted” in the
same way that heroin addicts are, they are going to have a harder time quitting.
I will address any fears they might have about gaining weight, about going through withdrawal
symptoms, or about quitting being unpleasant. I will check to see if there is and element of
defiance. For smokers in particular, many have been nagged a lot about quitting, and so they get
a “(expletive) you, don’t bother me” kind of an attitude. I have even had a few say, “Cigarettes
are something no one can take away from me.” They will be very, very strong on that. Usually
what I will do with that is talk about the value of defiance. Defiance is actually about us standing
up for ourselves, and proclaiming who we are. Somebody can’t make us be somebody else. Of
course, they are asking me to help them quit smoking, and they want to be a nonsmoker, so it
doesn’t make sense to be defiant by saying “I am going to keep smoking no matter what.” That
isn’t who they want to be. I also point out that as an adult they have a lot more choices than
they did as a child because most of the people who start smoking are 18 years old or younger. I
have had a few that started in their twenties but I have had any number of them that started at
14, 15, 16 years old. One person started smoking when he was 5. His parents gave him
cigarettes. They thought it would be cool. So off and on from 5 to 8, 9 years old, here and there
he would smoke a cigarette. As an adult people have a lot more choices. They could just punch
somebody in the nose. They could call an annoying person a name. They don’t have to associate
with them anymore. They could file a lawsuit. All those things are things that adults in our
society have as choices. A lot of times just reminding smokers of all those things will be enough.
One woman was so precious, I wish I had a videotape of her. She used to smoke to annoy her
husband, because she would work 12‐hour days and when she would come home in the evening
she wanted 30 minutes or so to decompress. She didn’t want to be around anybody. He hadn’t
seen her all day, so he wants to visit. She would smoke because it would drive him away. I
looked at her and told her “You are an adult, and you are a woman. You have so many other
ways of torturing this poor guy.” She said, “Yeah!”, and the look on her face was so delighted.
These are what some people call secondary gains, irrelevant things that became associated with
her smoking.
Typically also I will ask people how old they were when they started. They will say 14 years old. I
will say “Would you let a 14 year old make that kind of decision about your health now?” “No.”
“Well, isn’t that what you have done up until today? You’ve let a 14 year old’s decision make
that kind of impact on your health?” They will typically respond “Gee, I never thought of it that
way.”
You can see what I am doing here. I am bringing these beliefs into their awareness, and
reframing them. I will also find out what times they typically smoked: after meals, stress,
boredom, various other sundry times. Some are habitual triggers like, “It’s 3:00 p.m. Time to
stick a tube of paper filled with some dried up poisonous weeds in it in my mouth, light it on fire,
then suck on it and inhale the toxic fumes.” When I say these things they laugh. That is another
way of messing with their mental representation of a cigarettes and smoking. What’s going on is
a loosening of the structure of beliefs, and habits that they have associated smoking that had
kept the behavior in place. When their beliefs change, their behaviors and amount of smoking
they do will change. I have actually not finished doing all that I wanted to with clients, although I
had started with some of the reframes I just mentioned, and Another thing is that smokers tell
me that they have compulsions, so I grab my arm with my holding fingers like I have a cigarette
between them, and I look at it and go “No, please don’t make me smoke you. Noooooo!” Of
course, they laugh. I say “Oh, yeah, those sneaky desires for a cigarette are like jaguars. They
hang out in trees and just drop down on you when you are not looking.” I really get them
laughing, and make it absurd. They are saying absurd things very seriously. “Well, you know,
cigarette just came ‐ the feeling just came and I couldn’t go on without smoking.”
Usually I’ll ask them something like, “How did you know you were craving a cigarette instead of
a bath?” I make them think about their thinking. Our behaviors all have a mental structure to
them. For us to get up in the morning, we have to do something in our mind that initiates the
sequence of arising from the bed. The same thing is true for a smoker, the same thing is true for
somebody who looks at an M&M and just has to have it. If you, first of all, bring the structure to
the consciousness using what in NLP is called the meta‐model, you can get all the specific details
of their strategy, and it starts to deform the pattern. They are used just to doing it. They are not
used to knowing how they do it, and they are not used to breaking it down into a lot of little
pieces.
Another thing I have done with smokers who say they like smoking, is ask them what they like
about it, and nine times out of ten they will tell me that they don’t know. I say, “How peculiar. If
I go to a restaurant, I could tell you what I liked about the restaurant. If I had a great meal, I
could tell you what I liked about the meal. If I went to a movie I could give you some idea about
what it is I liked about the movie, and why I enjoyed it. You have done this smoking thing
something like 200,000 times in your life, and you say you like it, but I don’t know what it is
about it that you like.” Of course, by this point, they are going “Well, that’s kind of weird.” And I
will press them for more details and what happens, again, is that they start to say, “Well, maybe
I don’t really like it that much.”
Another thing is, “you could just give yourself the responses you wanted from the inside”,
because it wasn’t the cigarette that they wanted. It was their response to it. Often I’ll say, “First
of all, you can either go into the desired response directly, or you can think “it’s time”, have a
desire, then have to look around and find cigarettes, find the lighter, pick them up, take the
package of cigarettes” and describe the activity in exquisitely boring detail. The lifting it all the
way up, noticing which hand do you use, which fingers, etc. and I’ll have them go through all this
detail, and make them tell me everything. By that point it is starting again to deform, and break
apart the habitual pattern by which they had automated the responses and the behavior. There
is a lot of stuff that I can do with this. I mess with their patterns, their strategies, and with their
choices.
One woman had the defiant “Nobody can take cigarettes away from me” attitude, and I only
found one thing that worked with her. She wasn’t buying this “You are an adult. You have other
choices” thing. She liked smoking. She was only quitting for health reasons, and she did not want
to quit. She was doing it because she thought it was in her best interest. She had the beginnings
of emphysema, and her doctor told her if she quit smoking she could probably get the
emphysema to reverse. She was around 63, her great granddaughter was on the way, and she
said she wanted to live long enough to see her great granddaughter. But, she had that defiant
“No one can make me quit” attitude in full strength. I had to think about how to approach that
for a while. What I finally said to her was “So, some people have beliefs they are willing to die
for. Is this one that you would be willing to die for?” She said, “No” in kind of like a nonchalant
voice. I said again, “No, would you really be willing to die for this belief?” And she said “No!” She
got scared. And, when she got scared, I touched her on her knee. Then every time I mentioned
cigarettes after that I touched her on the same spot on her knee, associating fear of death with
smoking. And it worked. She quit.
Q. Again, I think these are brilliant treatment approaches. What about in cases of relapse? Are
there are any different or additional factors you would use for relapse in the areas of smoking,
food addictions, any types of addictions?
A. Typically, what I am looking for under those circumstances is that either they are going
through major stress, which means they have found their new choices are insufficient. So, I’ll
typically reframe the relapse this way: It is an unconscious signal to them to their conscious
mind that they need some more help. That what they have done up until now has been
insufficient and they need something else to do, more choices.
Secondly, I remind them that anybody can make a mistake. When you notice a mistake, what
you do? You correct it. Recently I had this funny thing happen with a client who said, “Well, you
know, I smoked one so I decided what the hell, I’ll just keep going.” So, I said, “Oh. So you took
your hammer, whacked yourself on your thumb, and it hurt really bad! ‘Well, damn, I already hit
myself once. Might as well do it again’. (Whack) ‘Damn!’” He starts to laugh. By this point, he’s
not thinking that one cigarette has blown the program anymore.
Another thing I will look for is undiscovered, undisclosed secondary gains. I go through a lot of
checking for secondary gains, and handle them in a variety of ways. Another thing that I do a lot
with smokers, which can go into our list of primary techniques, is the visual squash. I know that
you are familiar with the technique. Essentially what we’ve got is a part that wants to quit, a
part that wants to smoke and then I do a negotiation between the two of them so they can
cooperate and work together.
Q. Would you give just a basic outline of that for the reader that may not be familiar with it?
A. Basically what we do is we have the person imagine the part of themselves that smokes on
one hand. “If that part were to come out on one of your hands, which hand would it pick? The
right hand? Okay, good. Okay, so the part of you that most wants to quit will come out on your
left hand..” Then I will have them objectify the parts, which causes them to dissociate from each
of those parts. “What does it look like, what color, what shape, which is heavier, which is bigger,
if the smoking part were making a sound what sound would it make, if the “I want to quit” part
were making a sound what kind of sound would it make?” Then what I will do is ask each part
what its positive intention is for the person. “The smoking part wants to relax.” Okay, so once
she gets relaxation, we’ll go higher and higher and higher in the hierarchy of values. “Once you
relax what does that do? What is the positive intention of relaxation?” ‘Comfort.’ “What is the
positive intention and value of comfort?” ‘ Good health.’ So you might actually have someone
smoking to be healthier. Ironic, to say the least.
On the other hand we have the part of them that wants to quit. So we ask what the positive
intention is, and the response is “I want them to be healthy.” ‘What’s the positive intention of
good health?” “Have a happy life.” So eventually we get to the point that both will have the
same intention or a complementary intention. Then I will say to the part that smokes “So, have
you noticed when you look at the other part’s intention, that it is positive?” ‘Yes.’ Then I will do
the same with the other part. Then I will use a little piece of hypnotic language, and have the
person ask the parts if they would be interested in having a way of cooperating that would get
them more of what they wanted for you and be more satisfying. I didn’t ask them if they would
cooperate, I asked would they be interested in cooperating under those circumstances, and
usually they respond with a “yes”. When I get a yes, I say “Okay, hold your hands up facing palm
to palm, maybe a foot apart”, and then another piece of hypnotic language, “and your hands
will only come together with an honest unconscious movement at the same rate at which these
two parts pull together, and form a new cooperative arrangement.” So we watch for that honest
unconscious movement. First, they will go into a trance. They don’t think they are. Their eyes
will be open and they will be talking, but their hands are moving by themselves. And, then I will
have them, once the hands come together signifying the completion of the process, bring the
newly formed part, or newly cooperating parts back into themselves and re‐integrate them.
That ends the internal conflict, and I expect them to have quit by that point. The other thing that
I use frequently that I have not mentioned so far, is metaphor. I will just tell people stories. I am
sure you are familiar with Ericksonian metaphor to some extent, Ashley. Basically what I do is if
we reach a sticking point with a particular belief, or they are holding onto something really
strongly, I might just tell them a story or two or three or six and somehow or other that seems
to help.
Q. Dr. Anderson, you have so beautifully answered my questions and given me a wonderful
overview of your treatment approach. I want to thank you for your time and I appreciate every
effort that you have made to conclude this interview.
A. My pleasure, Ashley.
~ Power can be exercised from three basic posture ~
Dominance—The ability to inflict harm, also know as aggressive coercion
Stature—The ability to provide help, also know as leverage
Influence—altering people's beliefs.
The first two power bases are the proverbial “carrot and stick”. The third is an implicit and
pervasive method used to alter people's behavior without requiring their obedience or
submission
Adults:
Adults act responsibly, children do not,
regardless of how long they may have lived
• Control impulses and act deliberately according to their values, well chosen
beliefs, and long term goals,
• Consider the needs of others and the community, not only themselves,
• Are generous rather than selfish, kind rather than cruel, gratified, not greedy,
• Are comfortable with complexity, doubt, and ambiguity, they are not quick to
judge,
• Control their emotions and don't tolerate tantrums, anger displays, self‐
indulgence, and violence,
• Are emotionally competent and apply a robust theory of knowledge,
• Integrate experiences and information to act rationally, consistently, and reliably
rather than unpredictably, inconsistently, irrationally, and erratically. Adults are
stable, even tempered, and non‐volatile.
• Are patient and consider the long term, not only this fleeting moment,
• Speak with candor and don't tell lies, speak disingenuously, or mislead,
• Are trustworthy, not manipulative; respect others and play by a fair set of rules.
Children often cheat and expect to win at any cost.
• Choose wisdom over ignorance,
• Value reason over power, the pen over the sword,
• Confront problems and transcend conflict, rather than deny and avoid problems,
instigate quarrels, become vindictive, or seek revenge,
• Accept responsibility for their actions, admit mistakes, accept their share of the
blame, and apologize to others,
• Accept and assimilate facts, rather than dismiss, distort, ignore, spin, self‐justify,
or fantasise,
• Maintain a balanced perspective; adults tolerate trivial transgressions while
courageously upholding the most vital principles,
• Attain an authentic humility and keep their egos in check.
• Are authentic, not phony,
• Are autonomous, competent, and value their interdependence with others,
• Are helpful, not helpless.
• Are sober, not strung‐out,
• Enjoy fun, but never at the expense of others.
“With great power comes great responsibly.”
Spiderman
Dominance & Stature
Dominance
The ability to harm another
• Power based on the ability to use force. Dominance does not require the actual use of force,
but can be based on the potential use of force, or the infrequent use of force.
• Power derived from the potential for destructive actions. Contrast with stature.
• Coercion potential,
• Fighting ability,
• Competitive ability,
• Influence based on fear,
• Use of force to control sexual access.
Stature
The ability to help others
Stature is the ability to help others. We are attracted to people we believe have high stature
because of the possibility of receiving a reward. Pride is the emotion related to increased
stature, while shame is the emotion related to decreased stature. The terms “one up” and “one
down” refer to relative status in a relationship. Insults are an attack on stature or status that
often provoke humiliation and anger.
• Your contribution.
• Possessing assets that are potentially helpful to others.
• Power derived from the potential for constructive actions. Contrast with Dominance.
• Power based on a resource that cannot be taken by force, also known as leverage.
• Level of achievement attained.
“Restore your manhood”
Hummer Advertisement
Dominance
Leadership. Dictatorship.
The positive pole of Dominance is leadership. This means leading from the front, striving to
make good decisions, taking responsibility for the outcomes, and having respect for those who
choose to follow.The negative pole of Dominance is dictatorship: “Just do it because I say so.”
This means forcing outcomes by giving others no choice, blaming others when the results are
not as expected, treating subordinates with contempt.
Dignity
The quality of worth and honor intrinsic to every person
~ The power of love must overcome the love of power ~
Dignity for Your Self
Dignity is your birthright. Simply because you exist you are worthy and have every right to hold
these powerful and profound beliefs about your self:
• I have every right to exist, to live, and to thrive. I am worthy of life. I accept my self.
• All human beings, including me, are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
• My life is important. I have a right and responsibility to live my life to its fullest
potential. I have a right to be successful and happy, to feel worthy and deserving, and to
request and pursue my needs and wants.
• I am autonomous; I am free to make my own decisions and choose my actions. I hold
myself responsible for those decisions and actions.
• I am competent to think for myself, face the basic challenges of life, and succeed at
those challenges. I can trust my own mind and my own thoughts.
• I respect myself, I respect you, and I deserve your symmetrical respect of me.
• My life is mine to live, not yours to play with. I am not anyone's property or toy.
• It is OK for me to have fun. Play is essential for development, learning, growth,
creativity, and innovation.
• I am lovable, admirable, and powerful.
• My observations and viewpoint are valid. I see what I see and know what I know
without requiring further validation. Similarly, your viewpoint is also valid.
• I am free to choose my own beliefs.
• I learn from my mistakes. I am better off admitting and correcting my mistakes than
pretending they do not exist.
• I have a right to express myself and I am responsible for what I say, when I say it, and
how I say it.
• I was born free of sin.
• I have the right to resist unreasonable trespass.
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” ~
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Dignity ‐ Human Treatment Indignity ‐ Inhuman Treatment
Adequate: Denied the attributes of dignity.
Victims of:
• Clean air
• Clean water • Depravation; inadequate
• Nutritious food water, food, shelter.
• Shelter
• Rest • Inattention, being ignored.
• Autonomy
o Privacy • Insult, or Humiliation.
Personal space
Personal information • Ridicule, harassment, bullying.
o Freedom of thought and
opinion • Assault.
o Freedom of speech and
expression • Deceit, manipulation, or
o Mobility cheating.
o Responsibility
o Security and safety • Tyranny.
• Relatedness
o Caring touch • Oppression.
o Recognition by others
o Caring for others • Slavery.
o Cared for by others
• Competence • Torture
o Meaningful work
o Appropriate challenges • Coercion
Access to: • Denied or abridged human
rights.
• Healthcare
• Education and information
• Equal protection of the law
Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View
Between 1961 and 1962 Stanley Milgram carried out a series of experiments in which human
subjects supposedly were given progressively more painful electro‐shocks in a careful calibrated
series to determine to what extent people will obey orders even when they knew them to be
painful and immoral ‐to determine how people will obey authority regardless of consequences.
These experiments came under heavy criticism at the time but have ultimately been vindicated
by the scientific community.
Stanley Milgram's experiments on obedience to authority are among the most important
psychological studies of this century. Perhaps because of the enduring significance of the
findings ‐the surprising ease with which ordinary persons can be commanded to act
destructively against an innocent individual by a legitimate authority ‐it continues to claim the
attention of psychologists and other social scientists, as well as the general public. This study
continues to inspire valuable research and analysis.
The Milgram Experiment
The subject was given the title teacher, and the confederate, learner. The participants drew slips
of paper to 'determine' their roles. Unknown to them, both slips said "teacher", and the actor
claimed to have the slip that read "learner", thus guaranteeing that the participant would
always be the "teacher". At this point, the "teacher" and "learner" were separated into different
rooms where they could communicate but not see each other. In one version of the experiment,
the confederate was sure to mention to the participant that he had a heart condition
The "teacher" was given an electric shock from the electro‐shock generator as a sample of the
shock that the "learner" would supposedly receive during the experiment. The "teacher" was
then given a list of word pairs which he was to teach the learner. The teacher began by reading
the list of word pairs to the learner. The teacher would then read the first word of each pair and
read four possible answers. The learner would press a button to indicate his response. If the
answer was incorrect, the teacher would administer a shock to the learner, with the voltage
increasing in 15‐volt increments for each wrong answer. If correct, the teacher would read the
next word pair
The experimenter (E) orders the teacher (T), the
subject of the experiment, to give what the latter
believes are painful electric shocks to a learner (L),
who is actually an actor and confederate. The subject
believes that for each wrong answer, the learner was
receiving actual electric shocks, though in reality there
were no such punishments. Being separated from the
subject, the confederate set up a tape recorder
integrated with the electro‐shock generator, which
played pre‐recorded sounds for each shock level.
At this point, many people indicated their desire to stop the experiment and check on the
learner. Some test subjects paused at 135 volts and began to question the purpose of the
experiment. Most continued after being assured that they would not be held responsible. A few
subjects began to laugh nervously or exhibit other signs of extreme stress once they heard the
screams of pain coming from the learner. If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt
the experiment, he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter, in this order:
1. Please continue.
2. The experiment requires that you continue.
3. It is absolutely essential that you continue.
4. You have no other choice, you must go on.
If the subject still wished to stop after all four successive verbal prods, the experiment was
halted. Otherwise, it was halted after the subject had given the maximum 450‐volt shock three
times in succession.
Results
Before conducting the experiment, Milgram polled fourteen Yale University senior‐year
psychology majors as to what they thought would be the results. All of the poll respondents
believed that only a few (average 3 out of 100) would be prepared to inflict the maximum
voltage. Milgram also informally polled his colleagues and found that they, too, believed very
few subjects would progress beyond a very strong shock.
In Milgram's first set of experiments, 65 % (26 of 40) of experiment participants administered
the experiment's final massive 450‐volt shock, though many were very uncomfortable doing so;
at some point, every participant paused and questioned the experiment, some said they would
refund the money they were paid for participating in the experiment. Only 1 participant
steadfastly refused to administer shocks below the 300‐volt level.
Milgram summarized the experiment in his 1974 article, "The Perils of Obedience"
“The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very
little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale
University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply
because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the
subjects' [participants'] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the
subjects' [participants'] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often
than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an
authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding
explanation.
Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can
become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of
their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with
fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist
authority.”
Roles Within Dysfunctional Families
A dysfunctional family is one in which the relationships between the parents and children are
strained and unnatural. This is usually because one of the family members has a serious problem
that impacts every other member of the family, and each member of the family feels
constrained to adapt atypical roles within the family to allow the family as a whole to survive.
The spouse in this family may enable the problem spouse to maintain employment by lying for
him or her, for example. He or she may become obsessive about the problem spouse's abnormal
behavior, such that he or she loses perspective in his or her own life, a pattern that is called
codependency. Sharon Wegscheider referred to this family role in alcoholic families as that of
the Enabler.1
The children also assume roles within the family to make up for the deficiencies of parenting.
Sharon Wegscheider referred to these roles within the alcoholic family as the Hero, the
Scapegoat, the Lost Child, and the Mascot.2
The Enabler protects and takes care of the problem spouse, whom Sharon Wegscheider refers
to as the Dependent,3 so that the Dependent is never allowed to experience the negative
consequences of his or her actions. While the Enabler feels angry and resentful about the extra
burden that is placed upon him or her by the Dependent's unhealthy, irresponsible and
antisocial behavior, he or she may feel powerless to do anything about it. The Enabler feels he
or she must act this way, because otherwise, the family might not survive. While the family is
afforded survival by the Enabler's responsibility, the Enabler may pay the cost of stress‐related
illness, and never have his or her own needs met, in effect, being a martyr for the family. The
paradoxical thing about the Enabler's behavior is that by preventing the Dependent's crisis, he
or she also prevents the painful, corrective experience that crisis brings, which may be the only
thing that makes the Dependent stop the downward spiral of addiction.
The Hero, who is usually the oldest child, is characteristically over‐responsible and an over‐
achiever. The Hero allows the family to be reassured it is doing well, as it can always look to the
achievements of the oldest son or daughter as a source of pride and esteem. While the Hero
may excel in school, be a leader on the football team or a cheerleader, or obtain well‐paying
employment, inwardly he or she is suffering from painful feelings of inadequacy and guilt, as
nothing he or she does is good enough to heal his family's pain. The Hero's compulsive drive to
succeed may in turn lead to stress‐related illness, and compulsive over‐working. The Hero's
qualities of appeasement, helpfulness and nurturing of his or her parents may cause others
outside the family to remark upon the child's good character, and obtains him or her much
positive attention. But inwardly, the Hero feels isolated, unable to express his or her true
feelings or to experience intimate relationship, and is often out of touch with his or her own
sources of spirituality.
The Scapegoat, who is often the second born, characteristically acts out in anger and defiance,
often behaving in delinquent ways, but inwardly he or she feels hurt in that the family's
attention has gone to the Dependent or the Hero, and he or she has been ignored. The
Scapegoat's poor performance in school, experimentation with drugs, alcohol, and promiscuous
sexuality, flaunting of the conventions of society, or involvement in adolescent gangs or criminal
activity may lead him or her to be labeled the family's problem, drawing attention away from
the Dependent's addiction. This behavior can also be seen as a cry for help, and it is often the
delinquency of the Scapegoat that leads the entire family into treatment. The acting out
behavior of the Scapegoat may bring with it substance abuse or addiction to alcohol or drugs,
early pregnancy for which he or she is not prepared, or incarceration. The hostile and
irresponsible attitude of the Scapegoat may lead him or her into accidents, or acts of violence
against others or self. The attitude of defiance may lead him or her to do poorly in school,
effecting future employment and the opportunity to earn an adequate income. The Scapegoat's
cleverness and manipulation may be used to engage in leadership of peer groups, or in the
invention of schemes of dubious legality, or outright criminality, to earn a livelihood. Though the
Scapegoat may develop social skills within his or her circle of peers, the relationships he or she
experiences tend to be shallow and inauthentic. The Scapegoat, cast in the role of a rebel, may
have lost touch with his spiritual potentials and morality, as well.
The Lost Child role is characterized by shyness, solitariness, and isolation. Inwardly, he or she
feels like an outsider in the family, ignored by parents and siblings, and feels lonely. The Lost
Child seeks the privacy of his or her own company to be away from the family chaos, and may
have a rich fantasy life, into which he or she withdraws. The Lost Child often has poor
communication skills, difficulties with intimacy and in forming relationships, and may have
confusion or conflicts about his or her sexual identity and functioning. These children may be
seen to seek attention by getting sick, asthma, allergies, or by bed‐wetting. Lost Children may
attempt to self‐nurture by overeating, leading to problems with obesity, or to drown their
sorrows in alcohol or drug use. The solitude of a Lost Child may be conducive to the
development of his or her spirituality and creative mental pursuits, if low self‐esteem does not
shut down all efforts at achievement. The Lost Child often has few friendships, and commonly
has difficulty finding a marriage partner. Instead, he or she may attempt to find comfort in his or
her material possessions, or a pet. This pattern of escape may also lead him or her to avoid
seeking professional help, and so may remain stuck in his or her social isolation.
The Mascot role is manifested by clowning and hyperactivity. The Mascot, often the youngest
child, seeks to be the center of attention in the family, often entertaining the family and making
everyone feel better through his or her comedy and zaniness. The Mascot, in turn, may be
overprotected and shielded from the problems of life. Inwardly, the Mascot experiences intense
anxiety and fear, and may persist in immature patterns of behavior well into adulthood. Instead
of dealing with problems, the Mascot may run away from them by changing the subject or
clowning. The Mascot uses fun to evoke laughter in his or her circle of friends, but is often not
taken seriously or is subjected to rejection and criticism. The Mascot commonly has difficulty
concentrating and focusing in a sustained way on learning, and may develop learning deficits as
a result. The Mascot also may fear turning within or looking honestly at his or her feelings or
behavior, so he or she may be out of touch with his or her inner feelings, and his or her
spirituality. The frenetic social activity that the Mascot expresses is in fact often a defense
against his or her intense inner anxiety and tension. The inability to cope with the inner fear and
tension leads many Mascots to believe they are going crazy. If this inner anxiety and desperation
is not addressed, it is not uncommon that a Mascot may slip deeper into mental illness, become
chemically dependent, or even commit suicide.
A special case is the only child. An only child in an alcoholic family may take on parts of all of
these roles, playing them simultaneously or alternately, experiencing overwhelming pain and
confusion as a result.
Sharon Wegscheider notes that the longer a person plays a role, the more rigidly fixed he or she
becomes in it. Eventually, family members "become addicted to their roles, seeing them as
essential to their survival and playing them with the same compulsion, delusion and denial as
the Dependent plays his [or her] role as drinker." 4
Types of Dysfunctional Families
Dr. Janet Kizziar characterizes four types of "troubled family systems," which are "breeding
grounds for codependency:" 5
1. The Alcoholic or Chemically Dependent Family System
2. The Emotionally or Psychologically Disturbed Family System
3. The Physically or Sexually Abusing Family System
4. The Religious Fundamentalist or Rigidly Dogmatic Family System
Codependency expresses in these dysfunctional families through the typical strategies of
minimizing, projection, intellectualizing and denial. Minimizing acknowledges there may be a
problem, but makes light of it. Projection blames the problem on others, and may appoint a
scapegoat to bear the family's shame. Intellectualizing tries to explain the problem away,
believing that by offering a convenient excuse or explanation, the problem will be resolved.
Denial demands that other people and self believe there is no problem.
The patterns of codependency can emerge from any family system where the overt and covert
rules close its members off from the outside world. These family systems discourage healthy
communication of issues and feelings between themselves, destroy the family members' ability
to trust themselves and to trust another in an intimate relationship, and freeze family members
into unnatural roles, making constructive change difficult. Rules that encourage the unnatural
patterns of relating in these codependent family systems include:
• Don't talk about problems
• Don't express feelings openly or honestly
• Communicate indirectly, through acting out or sulking, or via another family member
• Have unrealistic expectations about what the Dependent will do for you
• Don't be selfish, think of the other person first
• Don't take your parents as an example, "do as I say, not as I do"
• Don't have fun
• Don't rock the boat, keep the status quo
• Don't talk about sex
• Don't challenge your parent's religious beliefs or these family rules
The dysfunctional family dynamics engendered by these unrealistic and restrictive rules leads to
unfulfilling relationships as adults. This leads, Dr. Kizziar believes, to the symptomatic
characteristics of codependency in adult relationship styles, marked by
1. difficulty in accurately identifying and expressing feelings
2. problems in forming and maintaining close, intimate relationships
3. higher than normal prevalence of marrying a person from another dysfunctional family
gfsdlgjf or a person with active alcoholism or addiction
4. perfectionism, having unrealistic expectation of self and others, and being too hard on
d oneself
5. rigidity in behavior and attitudes, having an unwillingness to change
6. having a resistance to adapting to change, and fearful of taking risks
7. feeling over‐identified or responsible for others' feelings or behavior
8. having a constant need for approval or attention from others to feel good about f f
gdffffff themselves
9. awkwardness in making decisions, feel terrified of making mistakes, and may defer
ghhggg decision‐making to others
10. feeling powerless and ineffective, like whatever they do does not make a difference
11. exaggerated feelings of shame and worthlessness, and low self‐esteem
12. avoiding conflict at any price, and will often repress their own feelings and opinions to
jfffffff keep the peace
13. apprehension over abandonment by others
14. acting belligerently and aggressively to keep others at a distance
15. tendencies to be impatient and over‐controlling
16. failure to properly take care of themselves because of their absorption in the needs and
ggggggfconcerns of other people, and acting like martyrs, living for others instead of for oneself
17. dread of the expression of their own anger, and will do anything to avoid provoking
ffffffffff another person. The particular expression of these codependent traits by each
fffffffffffindividual is often a function of the type of family in which a child grows up.
For example, Dr. Janet G. Woititz6 recognizes the following 13 traits that are characteristic of
adults who grew up in a family where alcoholism was present.
Adult children of alcoholics
1. guess at what normal behavior is
2. have difficulty in following a project through from beginning to end
3. lie, when it would be just as easy to tell the truth
4. judge themselves without mercy
5. have difficulty having fun
6. take themselves very seriously
7. have difficulty with intimate relationships
8. overreact to changes over which they have no control
9. constantly seek approval and affirmation
10. usually feel they are different than other people
11. are super responsible or super irresponsible
12. are extremely loyal, even in the face of evidence the loyalty is undeserved
13. are impulsive, and tend to lock themselves into a course of action without giving serious
ddddddconsideration to alternative behaviors or possible consequences.
In Authoritarian families, whose members may be subjected to inflexible religious values or a
black‐and‐white, one‐dimensional view of the universe by a dominant parent, Dr. Janet Kizziar7
believes may be subject to the following problems.
1. They suffer from a frozen identity state, dominated by oppressively strict moral values.
2. Their feelings become cut off from beliefs, and they no longer are certain what they
fffffffff really feel.
3. The members experience great difficulty in thinking and deciding for themselves, as
ffffffffff dogma or parental authority overshadows free choice and independent thinking.
4. They have discomfort sharing honestly about their past, as they believe they must
ffffffffff continually pretend they are living up to the ideal held up to them by their authoritarian
fffffff parents.
Children who grew up in families where they were victims of incest show a variety of
psychological, behavioral and interpersonal issues.
Psychologically, they suffer from sleep and eating disorders, fears and phobias, recurring
nightmares, dissociative reactions, depression, anxiety and hysterical reactions, have low self
esteem, believe they are polluted or inferior, and feel intense guilt, fear, shame, and anger.
Behavioral consequences include school problems, truancy, delinquency, running away from
their families, prostitution, promiscuity, and higher rates of suicide attempts and completed
suicides.
Interpersonally, they have difficulty trusting others, and they are more likely to physically and
sexually abuse their own children, and are more likely to be sexually victimized.8 Some adults
experience difficulties with adult sexual adjustment, and nearly half show decreased sexual
drive after childhood sexual abuse.9
So intense are some of the reactions to growing up in these families, that Dr. Timmen L. Cermak
believes they are similar to "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" experienced by survivors of
disasters or wars, such as VietNam Veterans. These happen to people who chronically live
through or with events "outside of range of what is considered normal human experience." War
veterans and adults growing up in dysfunctional families may, without warning, re‐experience
feelings, thoughts and behaviors that were present during the original traumatic event. These
re‐immerging painful feelings are newly triggered by environmental stimuli.10 Dr. Cermak notes,
"for children from chemically dependent families, the trigger can be almost anything...the sound
of ice clinking in a glass, an expression of anger or criticism, arguing, the sensation of losing
control.11
Another symptom of stress disorder is psychic numbing, which Dr. Cermak describes as
suspending feelings in favor of taking steps to ensure personal safety, or splitting between one's
self and experience— disconnecting from feelings in order to survive.12
Survivors of trauma also experience hyper‐vigilance, an inability to feel comfortable unless they
are continually monitoring their environment. Cermak relates they "remained on edge, always
expecting the worst, unable to trust or feel safe again."13
Finally, survivors of trauma, veterans of a war or children from chemically dependent families,
feel survivor guilt. 14 "Whenever they experience the fullness that life has to offer, they
immediately feel as if they are betraying those who never had the chance. It seems somehow
wrong to go away and be healthy when those that are left behind are still suffering."15
Healthy Families, Unhealthy Families
Codependency is transmitted through family learning, and family members come to believe that
these distorted patterns of relating are normal. As the family is the primary arena of
socialization, children growing up in these families are ill equipped to deal with the demands of
the larger world outside the family home. They are often saddled with inadequate coping skills,
distorted perceptions of what is appropriate behavior, and unrealistic expectations of the
behavior of other people.
To heal these dysfunctional patterns of relating, the codependent adult must get into touch with
the "inner child", the real self within. This part of us is alive, energetic, creative, and capable of
seeing things as they really are. The inner child can love others unconditionally, and can tell the
truth.
In contrast, the codependent, "false self" feels uncomfortable, strained and inauthentic in
relating to other people. It acts to cover up, deny and withhold genuine feelings, and inhibits
spontaneous, "natural" or playful behavior. It may develop a negative attitude toward self or
others that is envious, critical, blaming, shaming and perfectionistic. It tends to be other‐
oriented, focused on what it believes others think it should be or others want it to be. It is
capable of only conditional love, rewarding others only if they conform to its inner values of
what is right and wrong.
Codependency is generated in emotionally disturbed family systems by inconsistent,
unpredictable, and crazy parenting styles. In physically and sexually abusive family systems,
codependency is related to the violation of personal boundaries. Victims of abuse fear that the
violation may reoccur at any time, and also experience an invasion of their self respect‐‐they
cannot control their own bodies, and their choices and desires are not respected. In alcoholic
and drug using family systems, codependency arises as a result of the unpredictable behavior of
the substance abuser, and the stresses it places on the other members of the family. In
fundamentalist, dogmatic families, codependency is created by over‐control and excessive
regimentation.
In a healthy family system, family members openly acknowledge their problems, discuss them
openly, and work toward change. They believe change is acceptable, and actively solicit
workable solutions from other family members. Children in these families are free to express
their needs and wants. Family members can talk about feelings and traits in themselves that
they feel should be changed: shame and embarrassment do not immobilize them. There is
permission to express appropriate anger. The adults of the family model healthy, congruent
behavior for their children: what they tell their children to do and what they themselves do,
match.
Families function to provide the following needs for their members:
1. Maintenance, the provision of food, clothes, shelter, and health care
2. Nurturance, the granting of safety, security, warmth, and a sense of "home
3. Inclusion, the fulfilling of love and belongingness needs
4. Privacy, respect for each member's autonomy and separateness
5. Esteem, the bestowing of a sense of worth and personal value on its members
6. Understanding, the agreed upon right of members to make mistakes and learn from
ggggg them
7. Recreation, the opportunity to have fun together
8. Spirituality, the permission to develop a relationship with a Higher Power, to have
meaning and purpose in life.
To the degree that these functions of the family are eclipsed by dysfunction of one or more of
its members and by the codependency that derives from this, to that degree will the ability of its
members to successfully cope with life in the world outside the family be diminished.
Dr. Janet Kizziar sees that the family roles embody these functions of family, albeit in a distorted
way. The Enabler provides for Nurturance needs, and may ensure Maintenance needs as well, if
the Dependent is incapacitated. The Hero brings Esteem to the family; the Scapegoat, mistakes,
so that the individual and family derive Understanding and learn from them; the Lost Child,
Privacy; and the Mascot, Recreation, the spirit of fun and comic relief. She also points out three
other roles that appear in some dysfunctional families, that of the "Princess" or "Little Man," the
"Doer" and that of the "Family Priest".
The Princess or Little Man is the child that is cast in the role of the family favorite. This family
member is often subject to emotional, or covert incest, becoming a substitute spouse for the
opposite sex parent. As a result, this family member never gets his or her needs met. The
Princess or Little Man is not allowed to be a child, as he or she must always be available to
service the needs of mother and father. Children who are pressed into this role often attract
sexually and physically abusive partners in their adult relationship as they never form proper
boundaries. This child often embodies the Inclusion, or love and belongingness needs of the
family.
The Doer is often cast as the breadwinner, the caretaker for the family, furnishing its
Maintenance needs. He or she tends to be over‐responsible, yet is saddled with guilt, feeling
that he or she never does enough. The result of this labor of love on behalf of the family that
takes up all of the Doer's time and strength is that he or she often feels fatigued, tired, lonely,
unappreciated and empty. The family does not acknowledge the Doer for what he or she
accomplishes. The Doer may become workaholic, deriving his or her personal satisfaction and
self respect from employment. Doers may attempt to meet their needs for love and
belongingness, esteem and actualization outside the family, which is perceived as a place of
tension and misery.
The Family Priest is cast in the role of embodying the family's spirituality. This family member is
denied sexuality, and is expected to abide by the strictest codes of morality or virtue. The family
expectation for this member is that he or she will take vows, and become a monk or nun, a
priest, rabbi, minister, or sannyasin, renouncing the world, and living for God and service to
humanity. If this family member refuses to assume this role, he or she may be treated as if they
are worthless, a family pariah or scapegoat.
In a healthy family, members are not cast into rigid roles. Instead of pressing each member to
embody a role to fulfill only one family function, each member is giving the opportunity to
experience each of the family roles.
As a result, they incorporate positive adult and parental modes of functioning. They are able to
maintain themselves and their own families. They are able to give and receive nurturing. They
are able to establish a network of intimate and friendship relationships in which they can
experience love and belongingness. They have the capacity to function autonomously and to
take initiative, they have self respect and can respect the values and boundaries of others. They
can accept their own mistakes and learn from them. They have the capacity to laugh and have
fun. They have a relationship with their Higher Power, a source of inner meaning, strength, and
hope.
A Question of Boundaries
In dysfunctional families, parents violate the boundaries of their children. Parents from these
families do not respect their children's personal freedom and privacy, they discount their
children's feelings, do not honor their attempts at independent thinking and decision‐making,
and do not allow them to experience their impulses toward creativity, spirituality and self
actualization. These deficits in the children's development are revisited by problems in their
adult relationships and careers, and with raising their own families.
When parents disrespect a child's boundaries, the child's sense of self—his or her autonomy,
self‐respect, feelings of effectiveness and of making a difference—are compromised. In place of
a healthy sense of self, children may come to feel they are "damaged goods": unworthy,
inferior, inherently bad, incompetent, stupid, or ugly. This negative conditioning limits what they
believe they are capable of doing, being, and having throughout their lives. One of the central
priorities of the recovery process must be to reconstruct this damaged self‐esteem.
Boundaries are broached in different ways.
In the physical or sexual abusing family, the child's physical boundaries are violated.
In families where there is insanity or serious illness of a parent, the child's emotional boundaries
are infringed upon, and the child may be forced into the role of surrogate spouse for the other
parent, or required to act as the ill parent's caretaker.
In the substance abusing family, the volatile and immature behavior of an intoxicated parent
creates confusion about appropriate boundaries in interpersonal roles. As there are no models
of rational or predictable behavior, there is breakdown of honest communication, a lack of
emotional stability and nurturing by the parents, and a lack of safety that would permit trust,
self disclosure and intimacy to develop.
In the fundamentalist, dogmatic or authoritarian family, parents trespass on children's right to
think for themselves (mental boundaries). They also violate children's rights to make their own
decisions (volitional boundaries), to interpret and act upon their own conscience (moral
boundaries), and to experience and express their innate spirituality, creativity, and quest for
meaning and value (spiritual boundaries).
Another priority for recovering adult children from these dysfunctional families must be to
rebuild appropriate boundaries.
They must relearn what is appropriate sexuality, and what are legitimate ways to express
displeasure or anger without injuring others or themselves.
They must re‐empower themselves to say no to relationships they do not want and that are not
good for them, no to demands that they are not able to handle.
They must rehabilitate their ability to trust, to feel and share their feelings, to self disclose and
establish intimate relations.
They must reestablish their ability to think for themselves, and to make their own decisions,
confusing and scary as that might be.
They must re‐own a coherent and meaningful set of moral values by which to govern their lives,
and to take responsibility for their behavior.
And finally, they must renew their connection and relationship with a Higher Power, that
provides for them a sense of guidance, a roadmap, a set of principles from which they may
confidently and courageously live their lives.
None of this is easy. But the experience of numerous people who have survived growing up in
these families, and have embarked upon a program of recovery, let us know that it is possible to
regain their sanity and peace of mind, despite their painful and abusive past.
We also know that if an adult who grew up in these types of families does not address these
powerful and poignant issues, it is likely that he or she will unwittingly continue these patterns
of abuse into a new generation.
The child who is a victim of incest or molestation may go on to molest his or her own children.
The victim of physical violence may beat or neglect his or her own children.
The child of an alcoholic or drug addict may become chemically addicted him or herself, at a rate
up to four times that of the population who did not grow up in these families.
The child of an authoritarian parent may perpetuate the cycle of tyranny, passing on intolerant
and repressive values to his or her children.
This familial transmission does not stop unless we break the pattern, and find a way to heal the
wounds that have been inflicted upon us, and resolve that we will not repeat the past: not in our
lives, not in our children's lives.
Exercise: setting your personal boundaries
You define your personal boundaries by zones of emotional space around you. They vary with
the degree of personal intimacy with which you relate to other people. Acquaintances are those
individuals that you let into your public space. Friends are those whom you let into your private
space. Close friends are those whom you let into your intimate space. Only those individuals
who come closest of all, a spouse, the dearest and most trusted of friends or relatives, or your
life companion, are ever allowed to enter into your most intimate space.
With each progressive layer of intimacy, you apply different standards to what is required of an
individual to earn the right to know you in a more intimate way. To protect your privacy, to
ensure your safety, you erect barriers to those who would come close to you: only those that
earn your trust and pass your tests are ever granted the right to move to deeper layers of
intimacy.
Through betrayal or disillusionment, people can be exiled from a more intimate layer to a less
intimate layer: thus close friends of one day may become friends or acquaintances of another.
In this exercise, first, list on separate sheet of paper those individuals in your life who fall into
each of these intimacy categories in figure one above. In other words, list the names of the
people in your life who are acquaintances, friends, close friends, and those you allow into your
most intimate space, your nearest and dearest.
Next, observe what your standards and rules are for allowing a person to be an acquaintance, a
friend, a close friend, or your nearest and dearest. Write these down on a second sheet of
paper. Notice if your current relationships adhere to these rules or guidelines for getting close to
you. If you are experiencing discomfort or feelings of mistrust in a relationship, notice if that you
may have allowed that person to get closer to you than is appropriate.
By controlling your standards, you insure that only those individuals who meet your needs for
integrity, safety and trustworthiness will come close to you. You control intimacy in
relationships by what you are willing to disclose about yourself, and you can distance yourself if
it is appropriate. This way you will prevent many unfortunate relationships and the attending
heartache that goes along with them.
Changing Negative Conditioning of the Past
Though you may now be an adult, you carry with you the memories of the past. The past has
shaped you and molded you in ways you may not even be aware of, ways that remain deeply
buried in your subconscious mind. The trauma of growing up in a dysfunctional family has left
scars, wounds that still hurt, emotional pain and confusion that won't go away, crazy patterns of
acting and relating that don't make sense, but you feel compelled to do them anyway.
To change the negative programming in the biocomputer that is your Subconscious mind, you
must correct the statements that are replaying like endless answering machine tapes. These
statements tell you that you are not good enough, that you can't succeed, that you are just
another drunk like your father (and you are painfully aware that like him, you do have a problem
with alcohol)—statements you have come to believe and act upon. If you want your behavior to
change and to alter the negative consequences that your behavior has brought to you, you can
begin to change this negative programming.
The overt functioning of the Conscious mind includes behavior and sensation. The functioning of
the Conscious mind of which you may become readily aware comprises eight levels:
1. Gross motor behavior, such as turning your body or moving your arms and legs.
2. Fine motor behavior, as when you move your fingers, or perform coordinated ggggggf f
ffff movements like dancing or playing hockey.
3. Orientation toward stimuli, like when you move your eyes, ears, nose, tongue, or the
fffffffff touch or temperature receptors on your skin to become aware of some object in the
ddddddenvironment, or something on or next to your body.
4. Movement of internal organs, as in the case of when you become aware of your heart
ddddd racing after a chase, or butterflies in your stomach when you feel anxiety.
5. Speech, when you vocalize your thoughts & feelings * communicate to others.
6. Voluntary control of breath, as when you hold your breath when diving underwater or
dddddd taking deep breaths when you are feeling angry or upset.
7. Self‐direction, the inaudible speech you use to tell yourself the next thing to do, as in
ggggggg"sit down, reach down, grab your shoelaces with both hands, tie your shoe".
8. Self‐monitoring, the I AM statements you use to describe what you are doing, for
dddddd example, "I am now eating ice cream."
Your functional Subconscious mind also has eight levels. It is comprised of your basic
conditioning that determines what you think, feel and believe.
1. Fear or aversive conditioning, which includes your feelings of wanting to escape,
ddddddthoughts that a situation or a person is dangerous, or beliefs that you might be harmed
ddddddif you hang around any longer.
2. Sexual or attractive conditioning, that elicits your feelings and sensations of sexual
ddddddarousal, your fantasies about sexual behavior, your beliefs about your sexual
ddddddattractiveness, worthiness, and competence.
3. Anger or aggressive conditioning evokes your feelings of being wronged, your fantasies
ddddddof harming another or taking revenge, or beliefs that you are justified in hurting another
ddddddperson, acting out violence, or causing injury, pain or misery.
4. Moral or inhibitory conditioning, that bring up feelings of guilt or unworthiness,
ddddddfantasies of being punished by another person or by a Supernatural Agency like God or
ddddddthe devil, and the beliefs that define for you what is good or evil.
5. Learning or experiential conditioning produces feelings of confidence or certainty, gives
ddddddrise to associative thinking and memories from your past, and your beliefs that identify
ddddddan event, person, or thing as being similar or dissimilar to what you have experienced
ddddddbefore.
6. Habit or motor conditioning, prompts feelings of ease and confidence in making a
ssssssssmovement you have previously practiced repeatedly, thoughts about the effectiveness
ssssssssof your actions, and beliefs about what is possible and impossible for you to do and
ssssssssachieve by your actions.
7. Desire or attachment conditioning, which motivates feelings of craving or need,
ssssssssfantasies of doing, being, having, and enjoying the object of desire, and beliefs about
ddddddwhat is possible for you to do, be, and have in your life.
8. Subliminal awareness, marked by your I AM or identity statements about your thoughts
ddddddand fantasies, feelings and beliefs, and your perception of your desires, habits, and
ddddddconditioning.
The simplest kind of self‐programming is called affirmation. Affirmation is having the self‐
direction portion of your Conscious mind give suggestions to your Subconscious mind. You may
suggest to your Subconscious mind, for example:
• There is nothing to fear when you stand up in front of an audience to give a talk.
• You are beautiful and desirable and are attractive to the opposite sex.
• You can control your anger.
• You will act in accordance with your morals.
• You will remember the information you just learned so you will do well on the upcoming
dddddd test.
• You will shoot baskets easily when you aim the basketball.
• You can achieve what you set out to do in your life.
Another kind of self‐programming is called processing. In this method, you have the self
direction portion of your mind ask your Subconscious mind a series of questions.
You may ask, for example, what makes you afraid of heights? What is it that makes you
attracted to men or women who abuse you? What is it that makes you so angry about that?
Why do you feel this behavior is wrong? What was it like when you were five, growing up? What
is keeping you from running the 100‐yard dash just a little bit faster? What is it you really want
in your career?
Surprisingly enough, your Subconscious likely has an answer to whatever you may ask it. It will
give you direct answers and will often reveal the hidden truth about whatever is troubling you.
All you have to do is ask, and then listen for the answer. You may wish to write it down, as well,
so you can refer to it later.
Affirmation and processing will allow you to get in touch with your basic feelings, thoughts, and
beliefs, and to change them to a certain degree. For the stubborn, recalcitrant, and deeply
engrained patterns and attitudes, however, affirmation and processing may not necessarily
work—for these you need to bring out the heavy guns of Metaprogramming.
Metaprogramming means directing or changing your behavior and conditioning from an even
deeper portion of you, called the Metaconscious mind. Metaconscious mind brings the following
functions to bear on your basic conditioning:
Resolution getting mad at, fed up with, and tired of old behavior or habit patterns, and deciding
emotionally to do something about it.
Rehearsal role playing new verbal behavior, mentally practicing new movements, visualizing
yourself acting in a new way, having new things and people in your life, and being a different
person.
Argument setting new limits or standards for your behavior, specifying how your behavior,
words, or life shall be changed, and undermining and exposing your negative beliefs and
behavior.
Planning scheduling, designing, and setting up new goal‐oriented patterns of behavior. Defining
projects and goals, and specifying deadlines for accomplishment of objectives.
Reflection thinking about the consequences of your behavior, getting ideas for alternative ways
of acting, feeling, believing or thinking.
Insight looking at yourself objectively with the "eye of the mind". This allows you to witness
your behavior, conditioning, and defenses against change.
Self Awareness the awareness of your total personality from the vantage point of the Self. This
center is the nucleus of the personality, and is experienced as a center of awareness, will, and
joy, director and controller of your life.
Will is the internal controlling and ordering principle that operates through the human
personality and gives expression to impulses from yet higher aspects of the mind, the
Superconscious Mind, the human spirit, and the Soul. For either programming or
metaprogramming to operate effectively, they must be empowered and given permission by the
Will. Will is the connection with the deepest principles within a human being and is the
manifestation of his or her Essential Self.
Behavior is largely the end result of the internal conditioning imbedded in the Subconscious
mind.
Affirmation and Metaprogramming allow you to alter this programming in the Subconscious
mind. This helps you to begin to take charge of your thoughts, your beliefs, your actions, and
ultimately, your life.
By rediscovering your Will, you are reunited with your core, your Essential Being. This gives you
the power to regain control over your life and affairs, and to take it back from those to whom
you have given it away by your codependent styles of relating.
In learning to take charge of your conditioning, you give yourself back the keys to determining
your own destiny, instead of being controlled by the traumatic experiences of your past and the
people who have learned to manipulate you.
Whole Self / Damaged Self
The impact of growing up in a dysfunctional family takes its toll on individuals growing up in
these families.
Adults who grew up in these dysfunctional families may experience problems with addiction:
overeating, chemical dependency, sexual compulsions, workaholism, or destructive gambling
behavior.
They may suffer from low self‐esteem, not believing they deserve the good things in life.
They may feel depressed or anxious, and be uncertain why. They may self‐sabotage their goals
and dreams, fail to actualize their potentials, unwitting acting out a life script written by early
negative programming.
They may have problems with making money, managing money, or settling down into a
satisfactory career.
They have difficulties with intimacy, forming close relationships, and dread letting go of a
relationship, even when it is destructive. They report sexual dysfunction, sexual obsession or
lack of sexual desire.
They may be troubled with health problems that derive from too much stress, failure to properly
care for their nutrition or get proper exercise or sleep, and being overly driven in their lives, not
knowing when to let go or relax.
Their acting out as adolescents may have interfered with their education, and their emotional
tension may have interfered with their ability to concentrate and to study, limiting their job
prospects; and confusion, which effected their school performance.
Their rebellion may have led to legal entanglements.
They may be out of touch with their feelings and their spirituality, and lack a sense of meaning in
their lives.
In sum, they emerge from their stormy childhood with a damaged self.
The healing process is assisted by an inventory of the damage, and then developing a personal
"treatment plan" to address the aspects of the self that can be rehabilitated. In some cases, the
damage can no longer be remedied, which means that you will have to grieve for your loss, and
in time, come to an inner acceptance, and forgive yourself for your mistake.
The next steps are reflecting on each important aspect of your life, setting realistic goals, then
determining a way to reach these goals. By writing down these goals you will be on your way to
dealing with a painful past and creating a brighter present and future for yourself.
First inventory the following aspects of your life, asking where I am now for each area:
• My physical health and appearance
• My home and living environment
• My emotional life
• My relationships
• My recovery from addiction and dysfunctional patterns
• My mental life and education
• My career and work life
• My finances
• My involvement in the community
• My hobbies, interests in other cultures, my desires for travel
• My ethics and principles I live by }
• My spiritual life
Write as fully on each subject as possible. Be honest! You may also wish to elicit
feedback from supportive friends or co‐workers who aren't too timid to level with you
about how you are doing in your career or in your relationships, in case you may be
laboring under any delusions that you are doing fine, when you really aren't.
Next, you want to set some clear goals in each of these areas of your life, both the ones
you are not having problems in and the ones you are having problems in. You can get
out a new sheet of paper, and make three columns, like this:
WHEN I WILL
AREA OF MY LIFE MY GOALS
COMPLETE THIS
You need to be realistic about when you can accomplish these goals, and not be too
hard on yourself if you fail to meet a deadline. Just figure out went wrong, revise your
deadline, and try a new and better approach. Your goal statements should be concrete,
not "I want to be happy, " but "I want to better cope with the situations and people that
frustrate me," or "I want to be earning 125% of my current income by December of next
year."
Next you need to determine what will help you achieve each of your goals.
Get out a third sheet of blank paper, and make three columns, like this:
WHAT WILL
HELP ME
MY GOAL COMMENT
COMPLETE
THIS?
You want to briefly restate your goal, and think of what will help you reach your goal.
The comment section is for a brief comment like, "Completed on 3/15/92," or "Decided
against this on advice of my sponsor or therapist." You may wish to do this one in pencil,
so you can add or revise items on it. I call it a success spreadsheet.
I've done a sample one on the next page to give you some ideas.
Once you know how you can work on reaching your goals and what you are willing to do
to reach them, there is only one step remaining. DO IT! MAKE YOUR DREAMS HAPPEN!
It is possible for you to overcome a painful past, to rediscover your unique individuality,
and to become more effective in your personal life. Getting in touch with your Soul,
your real Self, through a spiritual awakening, is a healing experience, and will help you
recognize your potential and find inner strength and wisdom to cope with life's
challenges.
Setting clear goals for yourself and finding out how to accomplish them will actualize
your dreams, and you will experience greater personal satisfaction. By finding others
who will support you in your recovery, by love, by understanding, by forgiveness, by
empowering yourself, it is possible to release the burdens of the past and live more fully
in the Actuality of the living present.
This is not an easy task, but no task is more urgent or worthwhile.
SAMPLE SUCCESS SPREADSHEET
MY GOAL WHAT WILL HELP ME COMPLETE THIS COMMENT
Get therapy or counseling. Read good books
Better Self‐Esteem about building self‐esteem. Complete some
goals so I feel better about myself.
Take an assertiveness training class. Read a
Be less of a doormat
book on assertiveness training.
Decide what are appropriate limits on C.W.'s
behavior. Say no when I mean no. Practice my
Set better limits
assertiveness skills. Talk over with my therapist
why I'm in this relationship.
Take up a commitment I can't get out of so I'll
be sure to do it. Get someone to do it with me
Need more discipline A great book!
so it won't seem like a burden. Read The Act of
Will by Roberto Assagioli
Discuss relationships with authority figures with
Improve my relationship
with my boss
my therapist. Work in my journal about
resentments toward mom and dad.
Work on trusting with my therapist more fully
so I can feel safer in intimate relationships.
Journal on my fears of talking to my parents.
To disclose myself
Make a list of what I am afraid to tell about
myself and tell them to B.J. Tell B.J. what I like
sexually.
Learn to negotiate by reading a book about this
Clearer communication
subject. Take a public speaking class.
Enroll in a class at the university next semester.
Learn Accounting Get an accounting package for my computer
and use it.
Get into a recovery program today. Read Do whatever it
Stop Using Alcohol Hazelden recovery books. Attend Alcoholics takes to stop
Anonymous and work the steps of the program. drinking!
Attend ACA (Adult Children of Alcoholics)
Deal with pain of
meetings. Get therapy and counseling. Work on
growing up in an
my codependency by working the steps. Read
alcoholic family
books on codependency and ACA issues.
Learn to meditate and practice meditation daily.
Pray daily and attend Church on Sundays. Read
Enhance my relationship
with my Higher Power
books about spirituality and metaphysical
topics. Read the entire Bible. Keep a spiritual
journal.
Practice relaxation daily. Practice time
Reduce my stress management. Say no more and don't take on
any more projects.
The first thing I always show my clients, is how their own negative thinking not only exacerbates
any problem they believe they have but, how just thinking negative thoughts makes them feel
bad. This basic home truth applies to everyone. Once you are in this negative state it is very
difficult to see a way out of any challenging situation. The easiest way out seems to be blaming
those nearest to us, namely our spouses.
The longer you remain in emotional states like anger, sadness, overwhelm or fear, your
emotions become self fulfilling prophesies, as you unconsciously adopt behaviours to prove how
bad you are feeling. This in turn creates yet more negative and limiting thinking, concluding the
negative circle. By now you are trapped in your own negativity, making it twice as hard to
resolve any problems and challenges. This, needless to say, creates more stress and disharmony
in your marriage.
Energy Therapy uses energy, the basic building block of everything in existence, including our
thoughts, to address emotional and physical challenges. When we feel low, the radiant energies
in our bodies are low. The body's meridians are tight, constricting the amount of energy that can
flow through them. Mind and body become starved of blood and oxygen supply, making us feel
moody, sluggish and, well, simply unwell. In this state you are hardly in a position to think
clearly, or solve problems easily.
Learning to unlock the free flow of energy is key to clearing body and mind and ultimately
problem solving. You can do this by learning EFT, Emotional Freedom Technique, a very
powerful and simple energy technique. EFT focuses the mind on a specific problem, anger for
example. Whilst you focus on your issue you simultaneously tap on a small number of meridian
points on body and face.
Mind focus together with the action of physical tapping is a very fast way to change your
vibrational energy almost instantaneously.You begin to feel the energy rushing through your
body within a few minutes, clearing your head of old cobwebs, so to speak.
You may experience feeling detached from your original worries, sometimes even forgetting
why you were upset in the first place. Suddenly the big issue does not matter any more as it is
being reframed in a more constructive way. This process happens automatically during the
repeated sequences of tapping and focusing. EFT dissolves your problems, literally
Mercedes Oestermann van Essen is an Advanced EFT Practitioner
Overcome the need to find the right words when tapping
Rod Sherwin from Tap4Health
One of the things I love about EFT is that whatever you do is the right thing. It’s very hard to do
wrong, and in fact I’ve never figured out how to do it wrong. As long as you are tuned in and
focused on the emotional issue that you want to work with you’re doing it right. We’re going to
do a couple of rounds of tapping now to get rid of the fear of saying the wrong thing, or the
frustration and the resistance because you have to figure out the right thing to say.
So we’re going to start tapping on that karate chop point on the side of the hand and I like to tap
them both together. I’ll get you to repeat after me, “Even though I think I have to say the
perfect words because otherwise EFT won’t work and if I say one little word wrong it will
completely fail, I choose to acknowledge myself and my desire to do a good job.”
“Even though I’m afraid of saying the wrong thing – what if I make things worse? – I choose to
acknowledge myself. Even though I think I have to come up with the most perfect phrases so
that EFT will work perfectly and I will solve all of my problems instantly with a magic wand, I
choose to be gentle and forgiving of myself, giving myself permission to heal at a rate that is
right for me.”
Come up to the top of the head and tapping there, “This fear of saying the wrong thing.” Then
come up to the eyebrows, “This fear of saying the wrong thing. This fear of somehow doing EFT
wrong. Thinking that I have to come up with the perfect words. This fear of doing EFT wrong. All
this remaining anxiety of doing EFT wrong. I feel like I have to do everything perfectly. The way
this shows up in other areas of my life. The fear of saying the wrong thing when doing EFT. What
if I say the wrong thing and it works anyway? Am I allowed to do it wrong and have it work?”
“I wonder what words I need to describe how I’m feeling about this issue. Whatever the right
words are for me are the ones that describe how I’m feeling. I don’t have to figure it all out
before I start tapping. I can just start tapping and allow whatever words need to come out, to
come out. As I continue to tap and my confidence grows I choose to feel even more freedom in
the way I express myself. All this remaining fear of saying the wrong thing, letting EFT do its
work, I can get myself out of the road and allow EFT to achieve the emotional freedom that I
desire.”
Now you might continue on and do a few more rounds on other different aspects of having to
say the right thing, having to say it in the right order, and this will be a good practice of just
saying whatever it is for you specifically about this issue. You can see that I do it in a very
freeform way and it’s kind of the way that you learn anything; you learn the rules to start with
and then you can break all the rules. Enjoy experimenting with saying whatever it is that you
need to say to tune into the issue and let EFT do the healing for you.
I look forward to hearing from you with the comments on this page about how you were able to
express yourself, about how you got rid of this fear and what other issues you’ve been able to
clear now that you are able to express yourself saying whatever you want to say while doing
EFT.
Your Gospel or Your Life!
By: Rev. Ken Collins
http://www.kencollins.com
In Sunday school, there was a discussion about Matthew 5, where Jesus says that you should
love people who hate you. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other toward
them; if they take your coat, let them also take your cloak; and if they force you to go one mile,
go a second mile also.
On that very evening, you are alone at home. Someone breaks into the house. He holds a knife
to your throat, and instructs you to give him your valuables. He talks tough, but he appears to
be drunk or on drugs, and you realize that you can easily overpower him.
Assuming that all the choices below are possible, which do you do?
• 44% would: overpower the robber and then call the police.
• 29% would: be as kind as possible to the robber and give him everything he wants. Then
call the police after he is gone.
• 15% would: try to get away from the robber, go to a neighbor’s house, and then call the
police.
• 9% would: do something else not listed here.
• 3% would: overpower the robber but do not call the police.
• 0% would: be as kind as possible to the robber and give him everything he wants. Then do
not call the police afterwards.
• 0% would: try to get away from the robber, go to a neighbor’s house, and wait until he is
gone. Do not not call the police afterwards.
It is interesting to see how everyone responded to this question, because it shows how we apply
our spirituality to a crisis in which our lives are at stake. It also shows how willing we are to see
our adversaries as human beings. I’m not going to pontificate about which one is the right
answer, because in real life there are very few answers that fit all situations. However, I do think
the results are sad.
When this happened to me, the robber used a pair of scissors instead of a knife.
I was as kind as possible to him and helped him rob me. That put me more or less in control of
what he stole, and it threw him off guard, because he wasn’t expecting me to be nice and he
wasn’t sure how to act. When we reached the kitchen, I thought I was going to faint, because
we had been going through all the drawers in the house and the drawers in the kitchen
contained sharp knives. But I gathered my wits and asked him if he was hungry. I offered to
prepare him a meal. That confused him, and he turned my offer down. Then he turned to leave
and instructed me not to call the police or he would come back. I replied that I had no intention
of calling the police. He was puzzled and actually demanded to know why not! I told him that he
had not stolen anything, because in helping him rob me, I had essentially given him everything
as a gift. You don’t call the police to report that someone accepted a gift! He was very confused
when he left. I did not call the police. I was so shaken that I did not go to work the next day.
Everyone told me I handled it wrong. Everyone said I had acted as a wimp, and they said I should
have fought him or hurt him. They told me that because he was a robber, I didn’t have to keep
my promise not to call the police.
A year later, my doorbell rang in the middle of the afternoon. When I opened the door, the
robber stood there, completely sober, nicely dressed, and shaking nervously from head to toe.
He even produced his drivers license to identify himself. He apologized for robbing me and for
not being able to restore what he stole. He asked me, very nervously, if I was going to call the
police. I said no, I had promised that I would not, and anyway, he hadn’t stolen anything
because I had given him gifts, and it would be rude of him to return them. Then he told me that
because I had been so nice to him, he couldn’t stand himself after the robbery. It bothered him
until he enrolled himself in a twelve‐step drug program and was free of drugs—which was
evident by looking at him. He was at the point in the twelve‐step program where he had to go
back and reconcile himself to all the people he had hurt and make restitution if possible, and
that was the purpose of his visit.
If I had called the police, he would have gone to jail. He would have become someone’s
girlfriend and he would have learned new techniques for committing crimes. But because I
treated him like a guest and did not call the police, he allowed the Holy Spirit to make him into a
useful member of society.
Would it work in all situations? I don’t know, I haven’t been in all situations. But I do know that
in this case, turning the other cheek did work, and that by loving my enemy, I had poured hot
coals onto his head, and that the Holy Spirit transformed his life.