​Am I my brother’s keeper?
 
Recently I began rereading books on codependence such as Melody Beattie’s Codependence no More – How to Stop Controlling Others and Start Caring for Yourself.  Even before I read the forwards to the various editions of this book I found myself questioning the assumption that the intent of those of us who may be labeled as codependent is to control others.  I understand, of course, that it is easy to for many of us  to convince ourselves that the person who is caught in the grips of addiction or some other belief system which convinces them they either cannot take care of themselves or should not have to take care of themselves,  will, with just a bit more love, monetary support or some other form of assistance find the courage or the will to  start taking steps towards independence.   I accept that sometimes no matter how much I do it may not make a difference.  After all, if the person does not want to get  better it is not my place tell  them what to do. Yet, it seems more complicated than that.  Often the addict or the person whose thinking process has been taken over by the very  real addictive  or compulsive thought process is unable to make what we would think of as rational decisions.  Yet, there comes a point where  one has to choose whether to join the sick person and become dysfunctional or remove oneself from  contact from the person until they die or are able to function more rationally and humanely.    
 
Moral choice are sometimes very easy.  The woman or man in the checkout line in front of me  is short $2.00.   It is obvious that the children’s diapers, milk and baby food are not frivolous purchases.  One gives the woman $2.00 or perhaps a $100.00 if one is able. Assuming that one will be able to  feed one’s own children, it is an easy moral choice for many.  There are many  other similar situations in which the moral imperative is very simple and clear.  
 
Sadly often a point is reached with the ill/dysfunctional family members when one has to choose between the health (perhaps even the life) of one and the life of many.   Often in a college course on morality or ethics the students are presented a scenario in which one has to make a choice between harming one person and saving five or not harming one person and losing the five or even the six. Suppose, for example.  Six people are adrift at sea and by killing and eating one of them five will survive. If, however, one does nothing all six will die.  What is the moral choice?  
 
The question facing many families is whether to admit defeat/helplessness or to keep trying to “help” the  addict or other sick person until one gives so much that they have nothing left for themselves or other family members. This is a dilemma many families face.  Although I may often recommend that they attend support groups or read one of the many books on co-dependence, my heart knows that letting go of a child or even a spouse is not that easy.   Most of us  do not even want to face the homeless person or other people who are in desperate need of help.  We would much rather make an occasional (or even regular) donation than face the reality of  the limitation of our “help.”  We also may not want to think about the fact that “there but for the Grace of God or fate or luck go I.”
 
I recently  met someone who seems like a  basically healthy, kind, self-supporting person.  That person who I really do not know is now in a foreign country where his mother lives.   He emailed me and told me that his mother has brain cancer and the doctor is demanding $2000.00 before he will begin the surgery.  It is entirely possible that this story is true.  Everything or nearly everything in me says that I need to send this man, who I do not know, $2000.00 .    Yet this is the third such request I have received in the past year and all have a connection to the country where this person’s mother is lying the hospital in need to money to pay for surgery. If I give the money am I being controlling?  Can I, at my age, afford to give away this much money when there is a good chance I will not get it back.  Yet, what if this story is accurate and by sacrificing a little I could insure that she has a chance of living?  What is the right thing to do?  What if I had said yes to all three of the people who had asked for significant help this year?
 
I believe that I am my brother’s  (and sister’s) keeper.  Yet, if I give away all my savings what happens when I or my son needs help?  What if I can no longer work even part time?    Do I assume that my siblings or others are then obligated to help me?  What if they suggest that I have to live  with the consequences of my emotional decisions? 
 
My decision has been to not help any of these people financially.  On the other hand I will see a client who is struggling financially for nothing or a very tiny portion of my normal fee.  That I  feel I can do without having to expect others than to help me financially in the future.   I can also do this without risking my physical, emotional or spiritual health.  It is an easy “moral” choice.
 
One couple and another essentially single parent I know are getting so sick living with the daily stress of the active addiction of adult children that unless they let go of trying to help their child until the child see the light they are going to get physically and emotionally sicker themselves. They no longer have anything to give and now face the difficult decision of separating themselves from their children even at the risk of their children not being able to allow themselves to seek or stay in treatment.  Their children could die.   This is a sad, tough decision.  
 
Accepting the limits  of my ability to help my adult child or even my adult neighbor or the person far away is a part of my spiritual growth.  I do not want to be obsessively hoarding more money than I need. I do not want to judge others for their illness even if that illness is a sense of entitlement. I do not want to forget that “There but for the Grace of God/luck/fate go I.”   I do not want to claim moral superiority or even the ability to pretend that I know what is moral.  I do want to have the courage to make some tough decisions and have empathy for others who must make tough decisions.
 
Am I my brother and sister’s keeper? Am I trying to help or be controlling? 
 
I hope that these decisions are never easy for me.  On the other hand, I do not want to delude myself into thinking I have an answer or will ever have “THE ANSWERS.”  
 
Written March 30, 2017
 

​School Bells – Current Affairs – Grade 1 – Week 30
 
I am really eager to hear what these young scholars have to say about the responsible use of cell phones.  They always amaze me with their ability to both listen and question in a way which is not possible for many first graders.  
 
The children are arriving now.
 
Me:  Good morning class.
 
Class:  Good morning Mr. Jim.  Cookies?
 
Me:  No cookies today but next week I promise.   I am eager to hear what you and your families think about the responsible use of cell phones.  I know that a couple of you have phones that you are to use only for emergencies.   
 
Perhaps we need to start by sharing what we think the word responsible means.  Who wants to share?
 
Sam:  Should I get the dictionary Uncle Jim?  
 
Me:  That would be great Sam.
 
Sam gets the Oxford dictionary from the desk.   
 
Sam:  Uncle Jim, is it r-e-s-p-o-n-a-b-l-e?
 
Me:  Close Sam. Let’s try  re – spon – si – ble.
 
Sam:  Here it is Uncle Jim.
 
Me:   Great.  I will write the definition on the white board.
 
1.    Having an obligation to do something or having control over or care for someone as part of one’s job or role.
Sam:  Like I  am responsible for making my bed.
 
Me:    Very good Sam.
2.    Having to report to (a superior) and be answerable to them for one’s action.   
Sue:  Is that like doing our homework Mr. Jim?
 
Me:  Excellent Sue. So, all of you are responsible for getting your homework done and coming to class prepared.
 
3.    Being the primary cause of something and so be able to be blamed or credited for it.
 
Sofia:  I was responsible for spilling the milk this morning Mr., Jim.
 
Me: That is great example. Thanks, Sofia.   When we use the word responsible in regards to cell phones what do we mean?
 
Steve:  Someone keeps saying bad things about my brother on his phone.
 
Me:  So someone is leaving unkind messages on his phone?
 
Steve: Yes.   He says that the teacher told him that this is cider bull?
 
(I suppress a smile.)
 
Me:  I think you mean cyber bullying. That is when someone uses a phone, computer, or an iPad to say something unkind and often untrue about someone.  Here let me write that on the board under “Not responsible use of phones or computers.”
1.    Cyber bulling.
What are some other things we should not do?
 
Tommy:  My sister says that it was mean of me to take a picture of her when she was in pajamas and to try to send it to her boyfriend.
 
Me:  Very good Tommy.  How shall we word this?  Let’s try.
2.    Being unkind by making fun of and sharing it with others by the phone or computer.
What else?
 
Tara:  In our family no one is allowed to bring a phone to the table when we are eating. We cannot bring a game to the table either. Even in other rooms if someone is talking we are not allowed to use or even look at our  phone.
 
Me:  That is great Tara.  It sounds as if the goal is to make sure everyone in the family listens to what others have to say.   Are there any exceptions Tara?
 
Tara:  When grandpa was sick mom set the ringer on her phone so that we would know it was grandpa calling or sometimes mom is expecting a call from work which is important.
 
Me:  Excellent   Let me see if I can word this accurately.
3.    Ignoring family members to talk to or text someone else except when someone is sick.
 
Ahmes:  Once I used mom’s phone to call grandma in Egypt and told her mom and dad were being mean to me and not allowing me to play until I cleaned my room.
 
Me:  So were they being mean?
 
Ahmes:  No, I just did not want to clean my room.
 
Me:  Very good Ahmes.
4.    Calling someone and lying to try to get out of doing something one needs to do.
Sue:  My old brother sent a private picture of himself to his girlfriend.  Dad was very unhappy.
 
Me:  Was that a picture when he does not have clothes on?
 
Sue:  Yes.  Dad says that was something private and not nice to send over the phone.
 
Me:   I think that is called sexting.
 
5.    Sexting
 
Sam:  Grandma likes it when Paul or I call her just to talk but not if we call too early or too late.
 
Me; There are some really good uses of the phone. What are some other positive uses of the phone?
 
Tommy:  If we are in trouble or someone is trying to hurt someone in the family.
 
Sofia: Calling for help if someone is sick.
 
 
Ahmes:  Calling Uncle in Egypt to wish him happy birthday.
 
Sam:  Looking up information.
  
Me:  All those are very positive and responsible use of the phone or computer.
 
Steve:  Sometimes when we are traveling I watch a movie or play a game.   Mom and dad have to approve the game or the movie.
 
Me:  You and  your families have obviously talked a lot about this issue and all of you young scholars seem to understand that we need to think about how and why we are using the phone or the computer.  I am very impressed.  What I am hearing is that there are both good and bad uses of cell phones and computers. 
 
Time is nearly up.  Does anyone have a topic they want to talk about next week? 
 
Tara:  My parents will not let me play any games that they say are violent but all my friends get to play those games.  They are nice people.  What is wrong with playing those games?
 
Me: That is a great topic.    Let me writing it out and then print it off for all of you to take home.
 
All of you did a terrific job. I am very proud of you.
 
Ring!  Ring!  Ring!
 
Tara, would you hand out the assignment please as everyone leaves?
 
Class:  Bye Mr.  Jim.
 
Me: Goodbye. Have a terrific week.
 
Written March 29, 2017
 

 
School Bells – Current Affairs – Grade 8 – week 30
 
I am eager to hear what these bright, compassionate 8th graders recommend regarding the treatment of those we currently diagnose as a sociopath or a psychopath.    
 
The students are now arriving.
 
Me.  Good morning class.
 
Class: Good morning Mr. Jim. Cookies?
 
Me:  Sorry. No cookies this week.  Next week I promise.
 
I am eager to hear the results of the discussion you and your family had regarding the treatment of those we may label as sociopaths – those who are unable to consider the needs of others.
 
Will:  As I recall Mr. Jim we were to exclude those with mental illness or who have an addiction problem.
 
Me: That is correct Will.  Although many addicts may appear unable to feel or express remorse  or be unable to consider the needs of others, once they begin to recover they will  often able to do so.  Of course, it is possible for someone to be both a sociopath and have an addiction issue.
 
Will:   Can I read  something?
 
Me:  Sure Will, please do.
 
Will:  When we looked it up on the internet on http://eyesofasociopath.weebly.com/statistics.html as well as on other sites, we found out that there seems to be general agreement that” between 15 to 25 per cent of inmates may be sociopaths  and 3 to 5 per cent of the general population may considered sociopaths.   According to the U. S. Bureau of Justice statistic for the year 2013,  2, 220, 300 people in the United States were in jail/prison and another 4,751, 400 people were on parole or probation.” That would mean that 1, 045,755 and 1, 742, 925 people are sociopaths and either in jail or on parole/probation.   That is a lot of people Mr. Jim.  We are spending a lot of money on  these people.
 
Me: Very good Will. What is the  primary question we need to ask?
 
Abdul:  You always tell us that we need to ask if the approach is working Mr. Jim.   How do we know if it is working?
 
Me:  Good question Abdul.  We need to ask the goal of the current approach.  What do you think is the goal?
 
 
Paul:   My family and I talked about this and it seems as if the goal is to punish.  That is called retrib...   Oh, what is the word Uncle Jim?
 
Me: Retributive justice  is defined by various people but  the web site “plato.standford.edu”  seems to state it well:
 
“The concept of retributive justice has been used in a variety of ways, but it is best understood as that form of justice committed to the following three principles: (1) that those who commit certain kinds of wrongful acts, paradigmatically serious crimes, morally deserve to suffer a proportionate punishment; (2) that it is intrinsically morally good—good without reference to any other goods that might arise—if some legitimate punisher gives them the punishment they deserve; and (3) that it is morally impermissible intentionally to punish the innocent or to inflict disproportionately large punishments on wrongdoers.”
 
Paul:   All the evidence we found seems to suggest that it does not work very well; that if we treat people badly, a lot of them seems to just commit more crimes.
 
Me: Are there other approaches to justice?
 
Amena:  We were reading about restorative justice Mr. Jim where the person committing the crime and the victim or the victim’s family meet.
 
Me:  What happens when they meet Amena?
 
Amena:  it seems as if the goal is for the criminal to make amends and the victim or the family of the victim to forgive and maybe understand how any of us could do something terrible.
 
Me: Very good Amena.    There are also other approaches to justice and other interpretations of both restorative and retributive justice but there is another point we may be missing.  Does anyone know what that might be?
 
Ann:  My family and I noticed that you worded the question in a way which indicated that the sociopath was unable to consider the needs of other or the effect of his or her behavior on others.  If the person is unable to consider the needs of others, how can we punish them?
 
Me:  By saying unable is that the same thing as saying that they were legally incompetent or not able to be responsible for their actions?
 
Susie: We talked about that and the legal definition of incompetent or insane is very narrow. 
 
John: We talked about that also.  An autistic person might not be able feel empathy but they are still considered legally responsible for their actions.
 
Me: Yes, our laws and how we treat people do not always match what we are finding out about how the brain affects our behavior.  We also seem to get very fearful that someone will pretend to not be able to think of others but just be a bad person.
 
John:  What does it mean to be a bad person?  Can we tell what is going on in the brain, Uncle Jim?
 
Me: There are studies which show that there are parts of the brains of sociopaths or psychopaths which are undeveloped. The good news is that it may be possible for that part of the brain to develop even in later life.
 
Paul: Can that happen in prison Uncle Jim?
 
Me:  No, not well. Prisons are very stressful places and stress inhibits the growth  or healing of many parts of the body including the brain.
 
Tom:  We seem to be saying that our current approach is not based on what we know about the brain.
 
Paul:  We also seem to be saying that no one benefits from our current approach. 
 
Me:  Those are excellent observations. You and others your age are going to become the future scientists, politicians, judges and others who are going to have to decide whether society is better served by different goals and more scientific approaches or whether we are just going to keep building more jails.
 
Ann:  Do we know if every sociopath can be helped?
 
Me:  No, currently it does not appear that all can be helped.
 
Susie: But if they cannot think differently should they be treated badly or kept in a safe place?
 
Me:  That is another great question Susie.   If you and other young people were in charge today and asking these questions we might be closer to a more effective approach.  I am once again very impressed.
 
Sadly, we are nearly out of time.  How about for next week we talk about whether there are any scientific ways of knowing what is right and wrong.  There is a Ted Talk by Sam Harris entitled “Science can answer moral questions” which you and your family might want to listen to before you start your discussion.
 
John will you hand out the assignment please?   
 
(John does so.) 

Have a good week everyone.  Great job.
 
Ring!  Ring! Ring!
 
Class:  Bye Mr. Jim
 
Written  March 28, 2017
 

​Grandma Says:  Learning is power.  Learn a new word every day.
 
When I think of Grandma Fannie I usually think of her at the farmhouse Grandpa Ed, with some help, built in the earlies 1950s after he and Grandma Fannie remarried.   To a young boy used to living in one and three room houses, their new house seemed enormous. It boasted a large kitchen, a sunroom where Grandpa Ed smoked and which also contained such tools as the cream separator, a dining room which doubled as a study/educational center, a formal parlor, a bedroom and an indoor bathroom.  I vaguely recall the much smaller house in which they lived prior to their divorce.  I suspect that they had built that house when they traveled to Oklahoma to stake out land which had first been opened up for white people to settle in 1889.  Sadly, I am not sure of the year that they made the journey and staked out their claim but it certainly was not in in 1889.   It has never been clear to me whether the amount of Native American Blood (Cherokee Indian) was sufficient to claim land that was open only to the Native Americans.  At any rate, my memory of time with Grandma Fannie and Grandpa Ed begins to be clearest when I was called upon to help build the house although I am not sure that I was all that helpful.
 
Once the house got built it seems as if it was instantly filled with possessions which they must have been storing somewhere. Besides books, including the Bible, and a set of the Encyclopedia Britannica, a piano,  and china  there was a large Webster dictionary and dictionary stand.  One of the required daily tasks  and joys was to learn a new word every day.  I cannot recall how Grandma Fannie determined what word one should learn. Perhaps there was a chart.  There certainly was not a pre-computer version to the app which announces via my iPhone and computer what new word I should learn today.   At any rate, whether it was new to Grandma Fannie or  from an internal or external list the schoolmarm edition of Grandma Fannie kept, I have no idea.  I do know feeding the mind in this way was only the first of many intellectual and spiritual feedings of the day.    Days on the farm ended with feeding the mind by writing, reading or practicing music and, of course, prayers.
 
Although in my young mind schoolmarm Grandma Fannie knew all there was to know, I later realized that  she pushed herself to learn something each day.  This habit remained with her until a few days prior to her death.  In fact I received a letter from her a week after she died.   (In those days mail delivery took a bit longer.)
 
Once I decided a few years ago that, if I was honest, I was not using the large Merriam-Webster Dictionary, or an of the many specialized dictionaries very often I reluctantly gave them away. The goal was to downsize and leave as little for my son to deal with when I died.   (He may feel as if I still am leaving him much too much stuff of which he will have to dispose.)  By that time I did have the dictionary app for my phone and computer to remind me of the word I was to learn for today and I had access to Wikipedia as well as a thousands of other virtual file cabinets.  I also still have more  physical  books than I need plus all those Kindle editions on my iPad, phone and computer.     
 
I can well imagine that Grandma Fannie, if she was alive today, would have the latest Apple computer, an Ipad, an iPhone, a stack of stationary and her pen.  She would delight in looking up information  and in the speed of correspondence. She would insist that we obey all the normal rules of letter writing even if  using email. 
 
In other words she would continue to walk the talk as some say. 
Aristotle’s followers are said to have discussed philosophy while walking about with him—hence their name: “peripatetics.” I suppose they could have been said to “walk the talk.”
 
For the rest of us, the saying is “if you’re going to talk the talk, you’ve got to walk the walk”—a modern version of old sayings like “actions speak louder than words” and “practice what you preach.” Another early form of the expression was “walk it like you talk it.” public.wsu.edu)  Of course, schoolmarm Fannie would expect her grandchildren to also walk the talk.  She would not hesitate to remind one that either you are going forward or backward. There is no standing still.   
 
Today the new word for the day is surfeit  which my dictionary app defines as “an excessive amount  of something.”   I could keep it simple and say I will not use a surfit of salt today in my cooking. I could also resolve that I will not succumb to a surfeit of excuses for not learning today.
 
Thanks Grandma Fannie.
 
Written March 27, 2017
 

​Sunday Musings – March 26, 2017
 
Spring officially arrived last Monday. The weather was running a bit behind – at least here in the Ohio Valley – but all the vegetative wonders of nature are now proudly strutting the magic of their design and color.  I am reminded the simplest of these breath taking treats is seemingly very happy to be who they are for as long as they are.  Yesterday, when attempting to take in the majesty of the thousands of blooms at the Phipps Conservatory which are showcased in their spring flower show, I was acutely aware that some blossoms were just about to make their grand entrance and some were approaching the midnight when their grand gowns will be no more. Yet I heard not one sound of protest or even one bit of whining.   Not once did I hear, despite my very  intentional listening, “Oh, this is not fair.  I was supposed to live another week. I hate my neighbor who is larger than me or that one down the road which has those frilly edges. Why can’t I have something interesting like that?”  Apparently, as also seems true with animals other than humans, all the vegetation at Phipps is perfectly content being who they are for as long (or short) a time as they are.
 
I was thinking of the richness of these spiritual teachings this morning when I “found myself’ tempted to rush through my exercises at the gym rather than just being present. I had gotten up a little later than usual and some juvenile part of my brain kept reminding me that I was behind schedule.  Yet, it is Sunday and while I have my list, there is nothing urgent I need to accomplish today. Although it would be nice to fold  and put away the laundry, iron a few pieces, write, possibly do some work in the yard, attend a fund raiser,   and even take a bicycle ride, it would be even more enriching to be present for whatever few tasks I accomplish    I seem to have to remind myself of this truth very often.  
 
I was this morning listening again to a 2013 On Being conversation between Krista Tippett and Joy Ladin “Transgender Amid Orthodoxy.  I Am Who I Will Be. “   Ms. Tippett states: “…Joy Ladin transitioned from male to female identity. She became the first openly transgender professor at an Orthodox Jewish institution.”  Ms. Ladin reminds the listening audience that our daily experience of existence needs to be integrated with our body. When a person cannot yet claim their gender identity; when it seems as if one’s body is not one’s own; one cannot integrate one’s daily experience.  Dr. Besel van der Kolk the psychiatrist in a recent conversation with Ms. Tippet talked about the fact that PTSD occurs when one cannot integrate a traumatic experience into one’s memory – into one’s body.  Various techniques can help the person integrate that traumatic experience.   When one lives with fear of being exposed as a fraud which Ms. Ladine did for the 40 plus years she lived as a male or one  lives with a generalized  anxiety disorder making the world a very fearful place, one cannot integrate experience and body/dance.  When one cannot integrate one cannot move up Maslow’s hierarchy of becoming.  As Ms. Ladin said before her transition, “my version of Descartes dictum (I think therefore I am) would have been ‘I kvetch, therefore I am.’  I was a walking complaint about existence….I can’t be who I am, so I’m really suffering existence rather than being given a gift and an opportunity and a challenge and a responsibility and all those actually mature attitudes. I would say the two most important things about being a Jew are living in gratitude and living in joy and I wasn’t able to do either.”
 
As I am reflecting  on this past week, I am aware that although I have sometimes felt grateful and experienced joy often, as I noticed at the gym this morning,  I often did not.  At those times I am not allowing myself to live the dance of joy and gratitude.  I am not Jewish, but  this belief is consistent with my understanding of what it means to live a full and meaningful spiritual life.  
 
As I begin a new week I resolve to continue to be more aware when I am labeling some activity as routine or something on the list as a task to get through.  Whether I am dusting, writing, exercising, sitting with a friend,  doing laundry or present with the spring blossoms, I will allow my dance to be with that experience.  Although I might have written that this week was another very routine one personally, politically and culturally it was a week of moments of gratitude and joy. I again realize that I have the power to connect these moments which will allow my dance to reflect and share joy and gratitude.
 
Written March 26, 2017
 

​When is a psychopath not a psychopath?
 
Instead of the old ten personality types, DSM-V has simplified the system by cutting them down to just five: Antisocial/Psychopathic, Avoidant, Borderline, Obsessive-Compulsive, and Schizotypal types. Each type comes with a narrative paragraph description.
 
1.   Significant impairments in self-identity or self-direction and interpersonal (empathy or intimacy) functioning. 
2.   One or more pathological personality trait domains or trait facets. 
3.   The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are relatively stable across time and consistent across situations. 
 
 
One of the question which has haunted me since  I first worked at the Yardville Youth Correction Center in New Jersey and later as a consultant on prison reform for the state of New Jersey has been to what extent, if any, are those we label as antisocial or psychopathic able to learn or develop empathy.  Anyone who has worked with one individual or a group of individuals who carry this label knows that they seem as if they are not able to change.  Yet, my experience is that they are more complicated than this.  As with both fictional and real life mob figures, there seems to be an ability to compartmentalize parts of themselves. Thus, they may with their immediate family and their mob family be kind, empathic, generous and capable of a variety of emotions. Yet, these very same people seem to have no sense of connection with those they decide threaten some aspect of their operation or the “family” structure.  Certainly, the creators of the Tony Soprano character fit this profile.  Then there are those who seems unable to have an empathetic relationship with any humans.  Yet, some of those will have a very empathetic relationship with an animal such as a dog.
 
Yesterday I listened to two Ted Talks while at the gym. The first was by Daniel Reisel entitled “The neuroscience of restorative justice.”   
“Daniel Reisel grew up in Norway but settled in the UK in 1995. He works as a hospital doctor and a research fellow in epigenetics at University College London…  Daniel is current training to be become an accredited restorative justice facilitator with the UK Restorative Justice Council.”   For those not familiar with the concept of restorative justice it is an approach to justice that personalizes the crime by having the victims and the offenders mediate a restitution agreement to the satisfaction of each, as well as involving the community. This contrasts to more punitive approaches where the main aim is retributive justice or to satisfy legal principles/laws. I have long believed that restorative justice can be for many a much more effective approach for both the victims of crime and the individuals who commit the crimes.  Regardless of how people feel about such alternatives the fact is that punishment is a very costly and largely an ineffective means of bringing about change.   The question, of course, is whether an adult brain is capable of changing especially for those who appear to be unable to consider the rights or needs of others – who lack the ability to empathize.  Daniel Reisel and his colleagues are discovering in their study of inmates who have been convicted of serious crimes the following:
“These individuals were not just the victims of a troubled childhood. There was something else. People like Joe have a deficit in a brain area called the amygdala. The amygdala is an almond-shaped organ deep within each of the hemispheres of the brain. It is thought to be key to the experience of empathy. Normally, the more empathic a person is, the larger and more active their amygdala is. Our population of inmates had a deficient amygdala, which likely led to their lack of empathy and to their immoral behavior.”  Furthermore, he reports:
“So can brains change? For over 100 years, neuroanatomists and later neuroscientists held the view that after initial development in childhood, no new brain cells could grow in the adult human brain. The brain could only change within certain set limits. That was the dogma. But then, in the 1990s, studies starting showing, following the lead of Elizabeth Gould at Princeton and others, evidence of neurogenesis, the birth of new brain cells in the adult mammalian brain, first in the olfactory bulb, which is responsible for our sense of smell, then in the hippocampus involving short-term memory, and finally in the amygdala itself.”
 
Readers may recall that research has been showing that those on the Autism scale lack the development in the part of the brain which allows for empathy.    Many are now working very successfully with Autistic children.  
 
Researchers are also discovering that stress will grossly inhibit the growth of new brain cells including in the amygdala.    If anyone has worked in or been resident in a prison/jail one knows that the stress level is very high.  Treating people as less than in an atmosphere where one is forced to function on the lowest level of the Maslow hierarchy is very stressful.  Thus, the possibility of positive changes in the brain while in prison is practically non-existent.   
 
Another Ted Talk to which I listened was by: Franciscus Bernardus Maria "Frans" de Waal, PhD (born 29 October 1948), a Dutch primatologist and ethologist. “He is the Charles Howard Candler professor of Primate Behavior in the Emory University psychology department in Atlanta, Georgia, and director of the Living Links Center at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center[1] and author of numerous books including Chimpanzee Politics and Our Inner Ape.” 
His talk is entitled, “Moral behavior in animals.”   Dr.  de Waal and his colleagues have studied chimpanzees, bonobos and elephants. He summarizes his findings:
 
“I believe there's an evolved morality. I think morality is much more than what I've been talking about, but it would be impossible without these ingredients that we find in other primates, which are empathy and consolation, pro-social tendencies and reciprocity and a sense of fairness. And so, we work on these particular issues to see if we can create a morality from the bottom up, so to speak, without necessarily god and religion involved, and to see how we can get to an evolved morality.”
 
One of the observations he and his colleagues make is that the animals they study will work to help others even if they are not hungry and if they do have a fight; they will reconcile after a fight. Chimpanzees may kiss and embrace following a fight.   “Bonobos do everything with sex.  And so, they also reconcile with sex.” (Some human males may be tempted to use this as “proof” that their desire to engage in sex right after a fight with their partner is logical and, in fact, a ‘natural’ desire, while their female partners may use this as further proof that their male partners have not evolved beyond the primitive state of bonobos.  We will save that for another discussion.)
 
Once again, the research findings for both of these areas of science are strongly suggesting that although punishment may be temporarily satisfying to some victims and to the community as a whole, in the long run it is not likely to lead to positive results. If the goal is to create a safer, more empathic and cooperative society then one would want to do everything possible to develop new brain cells in the amygdala of those convicted of crimes.    
 
Can everyone who is convicted of crimes and who may be labeled as sociopaths or psychopaths develop brains which are guaranteed to be cooperative and empathic?  I do not think we are close to being able to set and achieve that goal.   On the other hand, we keep amassing evidence that what we are doing is not working, is very expensive and, in fact, counterproductive. 
 
In all areas of medicine, we keep discovering that:
·      Our human bodies are capable of much more healing and growth than we previously thought possible.
·      Development of our brains and other parts of our human body does not occur at the same pace and the same level for everyone. 
·      If we, as a species, want to continue on the path of reducing violence of humans toward each other than we need to quit allowing our emotions to dictate our approach to such issues as healing and justice.
 
 
Written March 24, 2017
 

​Overhead of non-profits – rethinking
 
All regular readers of this blog know that I am a big TED fan because the speakers on TED frequently challenge my thinking about a wide variety of issues.  This morning I listened to several TED talks, some of which provided additional evidence that society’s approach to particular issues is not based on sound scientific evidence and one of which challenged me to think differently my often-myopic view of the issue of overhead for non-profit organization.  Dan Pallotta gave a Ted Talk entitled “The way we think about charity is dead wrong.”  Mr. Pallotta is an activist and fund raiser.  On his website, he posited:
 
"I BELIEVE DEEPLY IN THE POTENTIAL OF PEOPLE AND IN THE POTENTIAL OF OUR SOCIETY. AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE COME ANYWHERE CLOSE TO TAPPING THAT POTENTIAL. NOWHERE CLOSE."
 
This is not the statement which challenged me although it did impress me.   No, what challenged me to think was his very simple assertion:
 
So, the next time you're looking at a charity, don't ask about the rate of their overhead. Ask about the scale of their dreams, their Apple-, Google-, Amazon-scale dreams, how they measure their progress toward those dreams, and what resources they need to make them come true, regardless of what the overhead is. Who cares what the overhead is if these problems are actually getting solved?
 Although if I sat down with Mr. Pallotta to have a conversation about making non-profits more effective we might disagree about such issues as the salary one needs to pay the directors of non-profits, he could teach me a lot about viewing the annual reports of non-profit organizations with my business eye rather than merely looking at the amount of money they are collecting and the percentage that they are spending on overhead. Usually, the overhead figure is a pretty blanket figure indicating salaries, office supplies, rent, maintenance and related costs. It may or may not give one a detailed business plan and how the board of directors is making decisions about how to spend money in terms of short and long term goals.   Mr. Pallotta cites the example of:
 
“In the 1990s, my company created the long-distance AIDS Ride bicycle journeys, and the 60-mile-long breast cancer three-day walks, and over the course of nine years, we had 182,000 ordinary heroes participate, and they raised a total of 581 million dollars.
They raised more money more quickly for these causes than any events in history, all based on the idea that people are weary of being asked to do the least they can possibly do. People are yearning to measure the full distance of their potential on behalf of the causes that they care about deeply. But they have to be asked. We got that many people to participate by buying full-page ads in The New York Times, in The Boston Globe, in prime-time radio and TV advertising. Do you know how many people we would've gotten if we put up fliers in the laundromat?”
 
Amazon did not plan on making any profit for six years.   They were focused on long term goals.
 
I have traditionally donated goods and sometimes money to the Salvation Army because it spends very little of what is donated on overhead.   Its mission is very clear:
 
“The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian 
Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission 
is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.”
 
This is, in my opinion a very laudable goal.   What it does not say, however, is whether or not it is committed to reducing the need for its services.   Its community care ministry seems to be focused on training individuals to care for others.    Within that limi6ed mission it does a very good job.  On the other hand, if one looks at the programs and work of such organizations as Glide church in San Francisco one finds;
 
         “Since the 1960s, Glide Church has provided various services for the poor and disenfranchised. Glide currently runs 87 various social service programs. Through their Daily Free Meals program, Glide serves three meals daily, amounting to over 750,000 free meals a year. [10]
In 2007, Glide provided 750,000 meals per year through their community clinic, which serves more than 3,000 homeless people. They provided over 100,000 hours of licensed childcare and quality after-school programming to over 325 clients in 2007. They provided emergency supplies to 2,190 individuals in 2006. And they booked 5,707 shelter beds and helped 120 homeless persons move into permanent housing in 2007. [11] According to their website, Glide’s daily Free Meals program served 934,000 meals in 2009. [12]
The church also provides HIV testing, mental and primary health care, women's programs, crisis intervention, an after-school program, creative arts and mentoring for youth, literacy classes, computer training, job skills training, drug and alcohol recovery programs, free legal services for the homeless, housing with case management, and much more. “(Wikipedia)
 
They are two very different organization, both of which I respect and admire.  Purely from a business standpoint the organization which I think is long term going to do more to address the issues which lead people to needs its services is Glide church and Foundation.
 
In the past I, have focused too much of an aspect on the overhead such as salaries and not enough on what the organization is accomplishing in reducing the needs for its services.  I am still not convinced that an MBA degree worth so much more to society than a masters in social work, education or clinical psychology.  I am not convinced that anyone needs a salary of $400,000.00 per annum or more to feel good about the work that they are doing, but, on the other hand, if I found out that the director  of all the programs at Glide Church was making a  $400,000.00 a year I would feel significantly better about that then I would when I look at the results of some other non-profits including some community mental health centers.  
 
Once again, I am blessed to be challenged to think outside of my little box. In that case my little box has to do with analyzing the overhead of non-profits.  Thanks to Mr. Pallotta, my mind has expanded just a tiny bit again today.
 
 
Written March 23, 2017
 

​Identity crisis   alpha male or pajama man
 
I was surprised to hear a top advisor to President Trump extol the virtues of alpha males now being in top positions to advise the President and help run this country.  Consider the following:
 
“Breitbart News National Security editor, Dr. Sebastian Gorka, author of the best-selling book Defeating Jihad: The Winnable War, joined SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam on Friday’s Breitbart News Daily to talk about the final act of the secretary of state drama,
“I’d like to recognize the fact that after eight years of Pajama Boys, it’s time for the alpha males to come back,” he added. “How appropriate that we’ve got three Marines from the same division, legendary figures in uniform, to represent three of the key posts in the new administration! The fact is, having met Donald Trump a long time ago, and talking about national security issues, one of the first things that was clear to me from this businessman, this very special businessman, is that he understands we are at war, Raheem. He gets it. And he wants to win that war. He knows he’s not going to do it with limp-wristed Pajama Boys. Who better than a bunch of legendary Devil Dogs to do it? So yeah, it’s baloney, and it’s very cool in my opinion.”
 
 
 I was a bit confused by his comparison of alpha males to pajama men.  I heard this while driving in the car and could not wait to get home to google the term.   I did make some assumptions when this same advisor seem to equate pajama men and limp-wristed men.
 
I discovered that the term was born out of attempt to promote the affordable care legislation.   
 
The photo was posted on December 17, 2013 by the organization which advocated for the legislative agenda of President Barack Obama, from President Obama's own Twitter account. It was part of a general campaign to get younger Americans to sign up for the health insurance program. The photo showed Krupp wearing thick-rimmed glasses, wearing black-and-red plaid onesie pajamas, and cradling a mug. The accompanying text read: "Wear pajamas. Drink hot chocolate. Talk about getting health insurance. #Get Talking."[2] The tweet linked to the OFA website, which encouraged individuals to discuss Obamacare during the holiday season with those family members that are uninsured, and encouraged them to sign up.[3][4]
The tweet and pajama-clad man featured in it were quickly dubbed "Pajama Boy", and mocked across social media, particularly by conservatives.[5]  
(Wikipedia.com)
 
I have often written about the character traits that we intentionally and unintentionally teach our sons.   I suppose part of me likes to think that we are at a stage of history when we males have learned to respect both men and women and want to work towards becoming partners and members of a more cooperative society in general.  I am not so naive as to think that all males have evolved to aspire to these goals. Yet, when I googled alpha males I was a bit surprised to find a significant number of sites devoted to teaching men how to become alpha males. For example, there is a site entitled “tobealpha.com.” The authors or creators of this site list what they consider the primary positive character traits of an alpha male.  These include:
·      Persevering,
·      Do not try to be everyone’s friend,
·      Are not afraid to stand out.
·      Do not need external validation – do what makes them happy and not what makes others happy.
·      Non-reactive – not emotional.
·      Strong – are in shape.
·      Know how to dress.
·      Calm under pressure.
·      Aren’t afraid to get physical.
·      Strong eye contact.
·      They get the girl – understand their role as a man – not afraid to express their sexuality.
·      Take chances.
·      Dominant – tell people what to do – King of the mountain.
·      Position themselves.
·      Walk like the shit – swagger.
·      Strong body language.
·      Have presence.
·      Competitive.
·      Mentally tough.
·      Confident – knows that they are the shit.
 
Another site (askmen.com) has a list of behaviors which an alpha male should never do. These include:
·      Never allow a woman to pay.
·      Never apologize.
·      Never suck up to leaders.
·      Do not gossip.
·      Do not panic in a crisis.
·      Do not react.
·      Do not blame others.
·      Do not bully others.
·      Do not betray others to get ahead.
 
Obviously, some of the mentioned behaviors are desirable for males and females.  Not blaming others, acting and not reacting, not betraying others and not bullying others are very desirable behaviors. So are being mentally tough, confident, being calm under pressure and taking care of oneself physically.   On the other hand, the overall sense I get about the alpha male from various websites and recommended books is that respecting women as equals, working as a cooperative team, being able to admit that one is wrong are not desirable traits.  Although there is a prohibition against bullying many of the character traits are that of an arrogant bully.   The very fact that this advisor to the President talks about alpha males and not alpha people says a lot.  
 
 
The urban dictionary says of the alpha male:
 
“The alpha male is an act that is performed by males usually in their teens and twenties who act tough, are loud, and have to be the center of attention or they feel insecure. When a man is successful and in his thirties, he no longer acts this way because he has grown up and realized that the entire alpha male act is phony. When was the last time you saw a rich, successful man try to pick a fight??? Never. The only guys that do this are the losers that go to bars to take their anger out because they are angry inside for going nowhere in life.
35 yr old alpha male at the bar, “I’m bald, fat, I make 7 dollars an hour and I work a job I hate...what are you looking at? Do you want to fight? I need to kick someone’s ass today because my boss ripped me a new asshole for burning the fries at McDonalds and I need to take it out on someone."
 
Yet, the urban dictionary does not allow for the possibility that a rich, successful (financially) man can still aspire to be an alpha male.   This dictionary makes the same mistake that many make when it stereotypes those who feel ignored or not important in the current body politic.  Although one might hope that all males who get a formal education and/or otherwise make a decent income have moved past needing to prove their manhood by adopting the behaviors mentioned above, that certainly is not always the case.  Dr. Gorka is an educated man who by all appearances is financially successful. Yet, he apparently sincerely believes that we need alpha males to run this country and, by implication to run families and communities.    There is no indication that he or others who extol the virtues of the alpha male are using the term in a general sense to refer to both males and female leaders.  Certainly, he does not see President Obama as an alpha male.  
 
While I like to think of myself as a physically fit, mentally healthy man I would like to think I have a healthy respect for the qualities in men and women which might allow us to more toward creating a more cooperative, just, loving society in which resources are shared by all.  Apparently, I may be more of a pajama man than an alpha male.  Perhaps we need to proudly claim the status of pajama men and women.  Pass the hot chocolate please.  
 
Written March 22, 2017
 

​School Bells – Current Affairs – Grade 1 – Week 29
 
Last week the young scholars were enjoying spring break.  I missed meeting with them and am eager to do so today.  I hear them arriving now.
 
Me:  Good morning scholars.  Welcome back.  I hope you had a good time on spring break.  
 
Class:  Good morning Mr. Jim. Cookies?
 
Me:  Yes, I have cookies.  Sam and her brother Paul helped make them last week.   Ahmes and Sofia will you pass them out please?
 
(They do so and the cookies are quickly inhaled.)
 
Me:  The assignment for this week was to talk with others in your family about what behaviors affect how the brain works.  Last time we met we decided that food and exercise affects how the brain works.  We also decided that how the brain works affects how we treat others.  Who is ready to share?
 
Ahmes:  My cousin has been in the Army.  He just came back from war and is upset a lot.   Mom says that he has some condition. P something.
 
Me:  Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder which is often just referred to as PTSD.    Being in a war is a trauma for many people.   When we experience a trauma then we can have a really tough time.  Accidents, being abused, or lots of other really sad and frightening events can cause a person to frightened, get angry easily or just not be able to think clearly.
 
Sofia:  My cousin plays football and he has had many con…   Now I forget Mr. Jim.
 
Me:  I think you mean concussion Sofia.   It is an injury to the head.   They are finding that many people who play rough sports games such as football may have some permanent brain damage. This is another kind of trauma.  One could also have a physical injury to the head from a fall, a car accident or some other incident.  Our brains are pretty tough but they can get injured.   Does everyone here wear a helmet when you are riding our bike? What is the purpose of the helmet?
 
Steve:  To protect our head but does that always work Mr. Jim?
 
Me: No, that does not always work.  Football players wear helmets and still get head injuries but it may reduce injuries. Please be very careful and always wear your helmet.  
 
Steve:  My dad says that smoking can affect how much air gets to you brain.
 
Me:  Yes, it can reduce the amount of oxygen to the brain as well as cause other injuries which also affect how well all parts of the body work.    What about other drugs?
 
Tommy:  Dad is a doctor and he says he sees a lot of people who are really messed up from drugs.
 
Me:  If someone uses drugs which are not good for them and cannot stop we call that addiction.   When people have to have certain drugs sometimes they hurt others or steal from others to get money for the drugs.   It is very sad.
 
Tommy:  Dad says alcohol is a drug but some people can drink and some people cannot.
 
Me: Yes, Tommy, not everyone who drinks alcohol drinks too much but many people do. Is there anything we are forgetting that affects the brain?
 
Susie:  Our neighbor has Cerab …   Now I cannot remember. 
 
Me:  I think you mean Cerebral Palsy.  How does this illness affect the brain?
 
Susie:  She has trouble talking and now she cannot walk and her arms sometimes go all over place.  When she tells her body to behave it will not.  
 
Sam:  What about mental illness Uncle Jim?  When we go to Catholic Charities some of the people get very confused.
 
Me: That is right Sam. Many mental illnesses affect how we experience the world and, thus, how we treat ourselves and others.
 
Tara:  Mr. Jim if we take good care of ourselves will our brain always work?
 
Me:  Tara, if we take good care of ourselves our brains are more likely to work better, but we could still be in an accident, have some disease or be in a war situation.    
 
Ahmes:  If everyone took good care of their brain would everyone be nicer to each other Mr. Jim?
 
Me: Good question Ahmes. It is true that the better our brains are working the more we can think about how our behavior affects others.   As I just said there may be some other factors which affect how our brain works.
 
Steve; My Uncle has a brain tumor which is affecting everything he tries to do.  He is a really good person and has always taken care of himself.
 
Me:  Yes, we can still get a lot of different illnesses, but we also know how to prevent some or at least reduce the possibility.
 
Tara:  It seems as if I just wake up and my brain works Mr. Jim.
 
Me:  Yes, Tara, I know what you mean.  It is hard to imagine that one day I might wake up and my brain will not work well.   It is easy to just assume that no matter what we do our brain will work.
 
You scholars, once again, did wonderful job with this topic. I am so proud of you.  We have learned that there are some things we can do to take better care of our brains and when we do we can think better about how our behavior affects others.  We need to focus on those behaviors we can control.
 
I was thinking that next week we could talk about the responsible use of cell phones.  I know that some of you already have a cell phone and others will eventually get one.  Talk with your families.
 
Steve and Tara, will you pass out the rest of the cookies?
 
(The do so.)
 
Ring!  Ring!  Ring!
 
Me: Have a good week everyone.
 
Class: Bye Mr. Jim
 
Written March 22, 2017
 

​School Bells – Current Affairs – Grade 8 – Week 29
 
I am eager to meet with the eighth-grade students following their spring break last week.   I hear them coming now.
 
Me:  Good morning class.
 
Class: Good morning Mr. Jim.  Cookies?
 
Me:  Yes, I have cookies.  Paul and his sister helped me make them last week.  Shall we thank Paul?
 
Class:  Thanks Paul!
 
Me:  Tom and Ann, please pass out the cookies.
 
(As is usually the case, the cookies are gone in a nano-second.)
 
Me:  Our assignment was to have exploratory conversations about possible alternatives to how we are now treating those who break the law.  We know that the United States incarcerates more people, keeps people incarcerated longer, and has a higher recidivism rate that any other so-called developed nation. I am eager to hear what you and your family members think would be more effective approaches.
 
Will:  My mother heads a company.  She says that when there is a problem at work, they take some time to try to accurately diagnose the problem.  She asked what I thought the primary problem is?
I said that it was that people are breaking the laws.  Then she asked to think about how else we might define to problem.
 
Me: Wow!  That is impressive. What did you suggest?
 
Will:  We did some research.  Apparently, a lot of people have a mental illness, others have an addictive disorder, some like the excitement of seeing what they can get away, and some cannot seem to think of any other way.
 
Ann:  Aren’t some there because they only committed one crime when they were upset or angry?
 
Will:  Yes, that is another group of people.
 
Me:  If what you say is true, and I suspect it might be, should we approach every group or individuals the same?
 
Will: My mother said that if there are issues with buildings, such as with the electricity, that that is a different issue than a problem with an employee who taking too long to fill orders or some employees who are just unhappy in general.
 
Tom:   There are a lot of people suggesting that non-violent offenders be treated differently than violent ones.
 
Me:  Does that make sense to  you Tom?
 
Tom:  Dad said that some of the people who are charged with violent crimes were drunk or high at the time.
 
Me: What difference does that make?
 
John:  If they were drunk or high  is the problem that they were violent or that they have an issue with addiction?
 
Will: That was my mom’s point.   Identifying the real issue is important if one wants to problem solve. If the problem is with the electricity and someone replaces the gas lines nothing will change.
 
Me: Great point Will.
 
Abdul:   We read that some people think that we need to treat people more like the bad people they are.
 
Me:  Are you saying Abdul that some people think we need to punish people more?
 
Abdul:  Yes, Mr. Jim. 
 
Me: So, the theory is that if we if we treat people worse they will feel like they are a member of the community – the larger family – and want to behave in a way which is good for all the family?
 
Abdul:  When you say it that way Mr. Jim it sounds stupid.
 
Paul:  When someone in our family is unhappy or angry we try to find out why. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the family but with something else.
 
Me: What happens if they will not talk about it?
 
Paul:  Everyone has two days of not talking but then the family rule is that you cannot just treat everyone mean. You have to talk. Everyone has agreed to that rule.
 
Me:  What if someone would not agree to that rule?
 
Paul: In our family, we operate with a consensus decision model.  We keep talking until we can agree. Sometimes this can take a long time.
 
Me: What if someone did not want to be a part of the family any longer?
 
Paul:  That has never happened in our family but I know what you are talking about Uncle Jim.  In that case, one would have to honor their request to not be a part of the family.
 
Me:  How would the rest of the family respond?
 
Paul:  Well, if my job is to love that person I would just keep loving.  If they later wanted to return to the family we would, so to speak, kill the fatted calf and have a celebration.
 
Amena:  Sometimes in my home country and at times, historically in this country, one could get punished just for being themselves. If a female behaves a certain way or a person is a homosexual, they are in danger.
 
Me: Yes, there is a long history of killing or incarcerating people because we are mad them. Sometimes we are mad because their behavior frightens us.
 
Amena:  My dad said that a lot of people on the sexual offenders list are people we are just mad at but they are not dangerous.
 
Me:  What would the diagnosis of the problem be then?
 
Will:  That came up in our family discussion also Mr. Jim.   Mom says that if a boss is just mad then the problem is the mad boss.  There might be another problem but that is one of them.
 
Me:  You and your families have again impressed me with your wisdom and your willingness to talk about difficult issues.  It sounds as if everyone is saying that we need to problem solve by first accurately defining the problem and not just the symptoms.
 
Next week I would like to suggest that we follow up this discussion with a discussion about how we deal with the person who seems unable  to consider the needs of others in the community, but who is not necessarily mentally ill and does not have an addiction problem.  We would generally call this person a sociopath.
 
Ring!  Ring!  Ring!
 
Me:    Paul and Tom would you pass out cookies.   Have a good week everyone?
Class:  Bye Mr. Jim
 
Written March 21, 2017