I am much too old to claim Bon Jovi as one of my music idols.  On January 7, 2013, at age 72, I was much more likely to be listening to the latest recording by the violinist Joshua Bell.  In fact, the only time in my life when I seemed to be in step with popular music was in the late seventies and eighties. That was when I would go disco dancing with friends and dance until the wee hours of the morning. Probably for the first time in my life, I did not worry about  whether or not I was the best dancer on the floor. I was certainly one of the most energetic and by the time I took off my shirt and shared my sweaty, in shape chest, I knew that  Gloria Gaynor was a kindred soul as she sang and I danced to “I’ll Survive.” Clearly Gloria convinced me and many others we could move mountains.
 
Obviously, I  am not completely hidden in the classical or operatic concert hall because for some reason  I have stored such names as Bon Jovi.   In that oddly placed  stray Bon Jovi file in my brain is stored some of the lyrics of the song “Because We Can” which he released on January 7, 2013.   That song inexplicitly surfaced to the forefront of my brain just as I sat down to respond to emails after I finished cleaning up the dinner dishes.  Oh my!  Where did that come from?  I have no idea, but was pretty sure I was not imagining that this was a Bon Jovi song. Thank God I have lived long enough to delight in the luxury of high-speed internet  on my home computer. Instantly I was able to access a You Tube recording of the song and just as instantly I was able to download the lyrics which follows:
 
"Because We Can"
 
Usage of azlyrics.com content by any third-party lyrics provider is prohibited by our licensing agreement. Sorry about that. I don't wanna be another wave in the ocean
I am a rock not just another grain of sand
I wanna be the one you run to when you need a shoulder
I ain't a soldier but I'm here to take a stand
Because we can
 
She's in the kitchen staring out the window
So tired of living life in black and white
Right now she's missing those technicolor kisses
When he turns down the lights
 
Lately he's feeling like a broken promise
In the mirror staring down his doubt
There's only one thing in this world that he knows
He said forever and he'll never let her down
 
I don't wanna be another wave in the ocean
I am a rock not just another grain of sand
I wanna be the one you run to when you need a shoulder
I ain't a soldier but I'm here to take a stand
Because we can
 
TV and takeout on the coffee table
Paper dishes, pour a glass of wine
Turn down the sound and move a little closer
And for the moment everything is alright
 
I don't wanna be another wave in the ocean
I am a rock not just another grain of sand
I wanna be the one you run to when you need a shoulder
I ain't a soldier but I'm here to take a stand
 
Because we can, our love can move a mountain
We can, if you believe in we
We can, just wrap your arms around me
We can, we can
 
I don't wanna be another wave in the ocean
I am a rock not just another grain of sand
I wanna be the one you run to when you need a shoulder
I ain't a soldier but I'm here to take a stand
 
I don't wanna be another wave in the ocean
I am a rock not just another grain of sand
I wanna be the one you run to when you need a shoulder
I ain't a soldier but I'm here to take a stand
 
Because we can, our love can move a mountain
We can, if you believe in we
We can, just wrap your arms around me
We can, we can
Because we can
 
Submit Corrections
googleoff: index start of lyrics end of lyrics googleon: index
 
JANGO PLAYER END OF JANGO PLAYER credits
Writer(s): Richie Sambora, Jon Bon Jovi, Billy Falcon
Copyright: Sony/ATV Tunes LLC, Aggressive Music, Bon Jovi Publishing, Pretty Blue Songs, Universal Music Corp.
 
I had just responded to an email from my friend, George, in which I commiserated with him about our tendency to over analyze everything  - because we can, I suggested that we – he and I – could experiment with just allowing ourselves to claim our ability to love not only each other and our respective children and his wonderful partner, Jess,  but others whom we might have a tendency to test or with  whom we might have a tendency to keep score.  X has a – 12.  It is, therefore,  their  turn to reach out to me.  My score is only a -10. Obviously I am the better person and X should reach out to me. I can easily wait another one or five or ….    It is not at all even clear to me how I arrive at the scoring system. I know it is lodged permanently in my brain and only requires me to push the blue button to call up the winner.
 
We humans sometimes do this in our partnership or marriage relationships. We are great score keepers.
 
Bon Jovi seems to echo the words of Jesus, The Buddha, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, and even that strange little, wave-making pope, Francis. “Because we can, our love can move a mountain. We can, if you believe in we.  We can just wrap your arms around me.  We can, we can Because we can”.
 
I am again reminded of the six degrees of separation  - the fact that there are only six people separating me (and you) from every other person in the entire world. Wow!  I am in awe every time I think of this fact.  What if tomorrow or today even we decided to quit thinking in terms of duality ( good or bad; right or wrong; criminal mind versus non-criminal mind; male versus female; yellow versus brown versus white versus chocolate; Muslim versus Scientologist versus Christian versus pagan versus Hindu versus Jewish)?  What if we dropped all these labels which  lie to us about the essence of each of us and just loved each other without checking the score card or label first? What if each of those people then did the same with those other people who then ….   One gets the idea.
 
Why would we do this. Because we can.  Why do we not do this? Because we are fearful? Because we can think in terms of the delusion of dualities. 
 
What if we quit judging and hating and pushing each other away and just loved each other. Because we can. 
 
What if we expected to find a wise teacher in the Bon Jovi lyrics?  Because we can. 
 
What if we are the rock for each other? What if we tell ourselves that we are not just a grain of sand?  Could it be true that I am who I intend to be?
 
I am a very physically short person (5’5” and shrinking as I age).  One day, a new client came into the office who knew me only by reputation as a man who often worked with/for the  most violent men in the community.  She took one look at me and said, “You are so small. You are so small.”   She spent nearly the entire hour  repeating this refrain.   How did I get to be big even though I was small?  Because I  could not help but see myself in the  those who had been labeled as violent. Even though, as I recently reminded someone, I am a physical coward and a pacifist (because I am a coward?), I know I must fight for myself under the guise of fighting for those labeled as violent or addicts or criminals or …Because I can I must. I must because I can.
 
Could it really be this simple. Perhaps.
 
Because we can, our love can move a mountain
We can, if you believe in we
We can, just wrap your arms around me
We can, we can
 
 
Written October 28, 2015
 
 

Embedded in or with
 
Since I first heard the term embedded being
used in 2002 to refer to the attachment of journalists with the United States
military I have more than a vague feeling of dis ease.   I knew that part of my discomfort was
because of my understanding this was a policy decision made at the highest
level.  Some of the reason for the
agreement , as I understand it, was:  “These reporters signed contracts with the military
promising not to report information that could compromise unit position, future
missions, classified weapons, and information they might find."
“Joint training for war correspondents
started in November 2002 in advance of start of the war. [4] When asked why the military
decided to embed journalists with the troops, Lt. Col. Rick Long of the U.S.
Marine Corps replied, "Frankly, our job is to win the war. Part of that is
information
warfare. So we are going to attempt to dominate the information
environment.”   ( Wikipedia)
Although I am sometimes leery of what I read
in Wikipedia, when I checked other sources I found general agreement about the
use of the term in reference to military journalist.
I was intrigued that the term was also used
to refer to a deputy sheriff who was described as embedded in the Spring Valley
High School in Columbia, S.C.   The
officer is reported (and recorded on cell phones of students) to have “flipped
a student backward in her desk and tossed her across the floor for refusing to
leave her math class.” (Associated Press article by Meg Kinnard entitled “Girl
was flipped backwards, tossed across the floor.")   This was the first time I had heard the word
embed used to describe the role of officers in schools in the United States.
The NPR report to which I was listening went on to report that the role of the
school “resource officer” varies from one primarily concerned with support
to one directly responsible for discipline as was apparently the case in this
South Carolina School.  According to what
I heard and read, the math teacher in this classroom requested that the student
hand over her cell phone during the class. Having taught at the middle school,
high school, and college level, I can personally attest that it is very
frustrating when students are using their cell phones during class. Various
schools have explored ways of handling these issues without setting up a
potential confrontation or a power situation with a student.
 
The purpose of this blog is not to address
the issues of how to address issues with disruptive students per se although I
think I could greatly benefit from having a discussion about this with my
six-year old adopted niece, Sam.
At this time, I am more interested in
exploring the power of the use of the term embedded and the corresponding power
of the role.
As I often do, I consulted
oxforddictionary.com for current accepted definitions of the word embed. I
found the following:
· 
Fix (an object) firmly and deeply
in a surrounding mass:….
· 
Implant (an idea or feeling) within
something else so it becomes an ingrained or essential characteristic of it.
· 
Place (a phrase or clause) within
another clause or sentence.
· 
Computing – incorporate (a text or
code) within the body of a file or document.
· 
Attach to a military unit during a
conflict.
It is interesting that in this day of instant
communication and updates, the use of the term to refer to journalist attached
to a military unit is already in the online version of the oxford dictionary.
The first question that comes to mind when
using this term to describe the relationship of the journalist to the military
or the “resource officer” to the school system is, “Who is the employer?”  In the case of the journalist, is the
employer the military, news organization who pays the salary, the moral values
of the journalist,  the religious
institution (if any) of whom the journalist is 
associated, the general United States public, or the world public?  In the case of the so-called resource
officer, we must ask the same question, “Who is the employer?”  Is it the school, the students, the law
enforcement body that pays his or her salary, the general public, or the values
system of the individuals?
As a licensed counselor and a certified
addiction counselor, I have often felt compelled to ask myself the same
question.  Who is my employer?  Is it one of the professional organizations with
a code of ethics to which I have agreed to adhere, the client and the people
affected by the behavior of the clients, the organization that employs me (this
could be a company, an agency or an insurance company), or my core value
system?
 
As a U. S. Navy veteran and a former
Presbyterian minister, I have often asked myself  the question of whether it is possible to have
a primary commitment or allegiance to the U. S. Military, the Presbyterian
Church, the God of my understanding, and the person to whom I am providing
spiritual guidance?  Often it seems to me
that there is a conflict with their various commitments.
It seems to me that in my role as counselor
or in my former role as pastor/minister, my primary commitment is to the person
I am counseling. The exceptions occur when that person is a danger to himself
or herself, another person(s) (especially when that person is a child) ,or the
community at large.   Most of the time
there is not a situation which makes it very clear that the person possess an
immediate threat to the physical health of another person. When one is talking
about the mental health of another the situation becomes cloudier.
In the case of the journalist who is embedded
with the military they have, in most cases, apparently agreed that their
primary commitment is to the military. To their credit, a number of journalists
have raised the same questions I am raising. 
It is also true that although many of the atrocities committed by military
personnel have been reported by the U.S. military personnel in Iraq, there have
been journalists who held on to their primary commitment to report what is going
on even if it meant jeopardizing their embedded role.
Although I am well aware of the need to
protect the mission of a military or the overall mission of an academic
institution once one has agreed to the basic premise that war is both moral and
necessary and that individuals needs sometimes have to be secondary to the
needs of the larger group, I think that terms themselves help shape one’s
behavior.
Really. Unless one is thinking as a
scientist or even the material of an artist, what do you, the reader, think of when
you hear the term embedded?  Does one
think of a very clear psychological and emotional distance between the embedder
and the embeddee?  I certainly do
not.  Of course, I know that I have been
accused of being "a perverted old man” but really?  Does not the average reader think of going to
bed with and, if thinking of adults (I am), does one not think of a very
intimate (if not overtly sexual) relationship?    When have I last said to someone I care
about that I want to be embedded with him or her?  When have I last felt comfortable or appropriate
saying to someone at the gym, “I would love to be embedded with you?”  In my gym, that would get me slapped and
probably, if reported, barred from the gym. 
It is not a term that I use or even think of in my everyday conversation
with friends, colleagues, or strangers.  
If, on the other hand, my mind (for which I
cannot be help responsible during my sleep) congers up a “potential embedding
situation” it is not in the context of my professional role.  In fact, if I had less than
ethical/non-sensual/non-sexual thoughts about a client I would quickly have a
“coming to Jesus” talk with the part of my mind in charge of my dreams.  Given my romantic partnership history, which
is not one I am always proud of (after all, I am twice divorced), I have not
always been the sharpest tack in the box, but, even I would never have said to
my partner “I am thinking of embedding myself with X.”  Really!
Am I the only one who has these sorts of
issues with the language we as a population seem to be eager to accept?   I have had a difficult time having a
thoughtful conversation with my concerns about the use of the term embedded as
well as the concept. 
I would like to think that we, as a
population, are inundated with works via social media and other outlets that
our poor minds are just too overloaded to even identify these sorts of issues,
but I am not convinced that is the case.
At the risk of being accused of being a stand
in for Mrs. Sheppard, my very strict, my 4th grade English teacher,
or the new language police, I am going to challenge myself and others to begin to
refuse to so blandly accept the use of  terms which so effectively blur our
relationships with each other and our roles to/with each other.
I do not want a journalist embedded with the
military. I do not want law enforcement embedded with the school system.  I do not want professional organizations to
which I belong embedded with the funding sources.   In fact, I am not sure I want to be
associated with anyone who is embedded with another person or who wants me to
be embedded with another person.  I am
perfectly comfortable with glassmakers, such as Chihuly, embedding a color into
another color in one of his wonderful creations even if that is not the term
which first comes to mind.
 
Written October 28, 2015

Spiritual Goal

I often say to clients and to myself that it is important
that one keeps focused on spiritual goals as opposed to work goals, home
chorettes, parenting issues, or other goals.  
Often, what happens is that we go to work, start tackling home chorettes,
parent, or do some community activity and soon find ourselves focusing on
getting a  task done. It may feel as if
my spiritual goal needs to be keeping my boss, my partner, my children, my
mother-in-law,  the customer, or someone
else happy  or satisfied.    We may tell ourselves that it is our goal just to show up and be the most loving person we can be, but then we get sucked i
nto another, often task-related, goal. 
Soon we may be feeling a tad bit less than loving. Our boss is
pressuring us to get projects done (yesterday); our troubled teenager or adult
child who is “temporarily” living back with us is being a demanding 13-year-old
and blaming me or us for his or her foul mood; someone in the community
organization to which we have been generously donating time, energy and
possibly money accuses us of doing a poor job; the car breaks down; the
computer will not work; or, perhaps a relative or other person gets angry at me
for not taking their side in relationship feud. 
What was my spiritual goal?  If
those “challenged” people would just get their act, I could stay focused
on being who I want to be spiritually. 
Perhaps I even tell myself that I am spiritually centered, but I still
need x to do task y.

Other people do not make it easy to stay spiritually
centered.   You know those other people
who are very challenged.  Those “other
people” are not just the ones who got an honorable mention in the morning
newspaper as  the person who robbed the
local liquor store, or the one who got another DUI, or the ones who are now
suggesting that the vegetarians were right all along and we should not be
eating meat. Those “other people” bomb hospitals where Doctors Without Borders
are working.  Those “other people” are
convicted sex offenders.  Those “other
people” are the crooked politician or the community member whose full-time job
is seemingly to complain.   Sometimes,
those “other people” are not those who names and/or photographs make it into
the newspapers.  They are the
mother-in-law who is always complaining, the bank official who acts as if the
trust money for one’s nephew is intended for the profit of the bank, the repair
person who does not show up, or the partner who again promised to do x and again
forgot.

If only the “other people” would get their act together, do
what they are supposed to do or what they said that they were going to do, I
could stay spiritually centered.

Sometimes we  convince
ourselves that our spiritual goal has to be something very profound or  something which would rank right up there
with achieving world peace before 9:00 a.m.   
One of the many things which I appreciate about my spiritual teachers,
such as Pema Chodron, is that they remind me to keep it simple or as the my
friends involved in a 12-step-program would say, “Keep it simple, stupid.”   Pema might suggest that a spiritual goal
could be as simple as enjoying a good cup of coffee.   The focus, of course, is showing up/being present
enough to appreciate the taste, smell, and the overall luxury of a cup of
coffee.  Sometimes that is enough
refueling to allow me to hold on to my goal of being the most loving person I
can be today.  Perhaps the goal could
just to be more aware when I am blaming other people, places, or things for my
bad mood or for mistreating others.. 

It often seems to me that reality is external and I am just
responding to what is happening out there. If that external reality was
different then I could be different. Whether we are an individual, a family, a
community, or a nation, we humans seem fond of blaming others for our mood and/or
our actions. 

Today it is raining. My friend Becky calls this liquid
sunshine. Other will  experience the day
as dark and dreary.  While it is
true  that some geographical places such
as the Ohio Valley around Pittsburgh and Wheeling have a paucity of days when
the sun is shining, folks such as Becky who live in that area manage to be in a
positive mood 99 % of the time.  Sure, as
is true for all of us, there are moments when she gets frustrated with
something or someone, but she quickly returns to taking charge of her
reality.  Her reality is very spiritually
based. She knows that she has to choose her battles, that no battle is that important,
that life, at best, lasts only a few minutes, that she can choose to focus on
the positives or she can be miserable and make sure everyone around her is
miserable.   Fortunately, Becky does not
live with any sort of brain disorder, such as clinical depression, dementia,
thyroid dysfunction or other conditions which has an acute affect on one’s
experience of reality.   Some of these
and related conditions make it impossible to experience the positives. The best
one can hope for is to constantly practice reminding oneself that the condition
is defining or naming reality.  The condition
is lying. It is saying that the only reality is negative.  If one can, just on a cognitive level, keep
reminding oneself of the ‘fact’ that it is lying,  then one will not be  feeding the negative experience. For example,
if it appears that the world is all negative, one can “know” or “trust” that is
not the case. Even though it feels as if it is the case one can “know” it is
not.

Someone I know was very depressed. Every day I would text
her an affirmation which I knew to be true for her.  Her task was to text me the same or a similar
affirmation back. For example, I would text,”You are a bright, beautiful,
competent, compassionate, spiritual person, and a terrific parent.”  She would text me back. She might also share
how she was feeling which might be, “I feel as if I need to be in a different
profession. I feel as if I am a terrible parent. I feel as if there is nothing
positive to do; that I am a bad person; that my child would be better off if I
was not around.”  Wow! These feelings
told a very different story than the one my mind told me about this
person.   She did eventually agree to get
back on a low dose of an anti-depressant which took enough of the edge off the
depression to allow her to resume more regular exercise, to experiences herself
as more positive, to eat better, and to see more healthy opportunities for
connecting with others in the community. 
Nothing externally changed. The only change was how her brain was
functioning which made it easier “to feel’ the truth of the affirmations – the
same affirmations she is in the habit of 
readily applying  to others,
including her daughter.

Her spiritual goal started out as very simple. She was going
 to connect with me on a daily basis via text and weekly for an hour for a
scheduled coaching appointment.  
Eventually she was able to allow herself to get back on medication  and then to pick up other pieces of health
care. 

The external reality did not change. Other humans are still
being human.  The hospital where she
works is still not the most positive healing place she has worked.  Other people, such as her daughter’s father,
have their own challenges.   She still
lives in the Ohio Valley where non-liquid sunshine is rare!

I  saw another client
yesterday who was “feeling” very negative and distraught!  At the end of the appointment she was calm,
laughing, and able to say that she felt good.  
I reminded her that we had not changed any of those people whose
behavior  was causing her to be in such a
foul mood when she first arrived. 

Her spiritual goal initially was to just show up for the
appointment and to do her best to open to the possibility of a different
reality.   Very simple and achievable.

The other day I wrote about the film, Steve Jobs.   Steve was often very miserable when
interacting with people.  It would seem
that his experiences as a very young child shaped his view of intimate
relationships.  Relationships were not
emotionally safe for him. Although he achieved a very laudable goal of putting a
personal computer in the hands of everyone so that we could have access to more
effective communication and more information, on a very personal level he could
not experience  a loving concern for
people or for his own emotions. Towards the end of the movie he begins to open
a bit to the possibility of loving and being loved.

My personal experience is that I can be easily pulled into
the space of others or into the belief that reality is external and that
external reality is responsible for my mood and my behavior.  My belief is that I can be very intentional
about the reality I want to experience today. While not denying painful events
(I cried watching the movie of Steve Jobs and reading about the killing of yet
another teenager by a police officer in Florida, I also do not have to deny
the beauty which surrounds me; the beauty which is present in all of us and in
the world at large.  I still get grumpy
and out of sorts.  I get frustrated when
my computer or other machines do not work as I want them to. I am much better
at noticing when I am doing that and am much quicker to smile at myself.  For today, that is as good as it gets
today.  I would, of course, love to have
a huge, positive impact on the world or to be a really, really, really good
person today. Oh well!  That is asking a
bit much. For today, I will smile, bring myself back to center 50 times or more
if necessary, and leave the rest to the God of my understanding.

Written October 27, 2015

I need a cellphone – Conversation with Six-year old Sam about wants vs. needs.
 
When I saw my adopted six-year old niece coming through the path we have created in the hedge separating my house and the she shares with her parents I assumed that she had lots of Monday homework. I often help her with her homework, especially if mom and dad are at work or one is a work and one is helping Sam’s brother, Paul, with his homework.
 
I did not notice she was crying until she got closer.
 
Me: Sam, what is the matter?  Is someone at home sick or has something happened to Oscar (the family sheepdog).
 
Sam:  (sniffling and wiping her nose on her sleeve)  Nooo…
 
Me:  Come here (I hand her a Kleenex.) and tell Uncle Jim what is making you so sad.
 
Sam:  Mom said I did not need a cell phone.  All the other kids have a cell phone.
 
Me:  Oh dear!  It feels as if you really need a cell phone.
 
Sam: (now defiant as only a six-year old can be) I do. I will be the only one in my class who cannot text my friends.
 
Me:  Goodness. It sounds like it is really important to you that you can be able to text your friends. I thought that you sometimes used you mom or dad’s phone to text.
 
Sam:  UNCLE JIM! (Shoulders raised and lowered showing how frustrated she is with me for not understanding!)   THAT IS NOT THE SAME!  They check everything I do.
 
Me:  It feels as if they do not trust you.
 
Sam: Yes!!
 
Me:  I know that must be frustrating since you are so smart and make really good decisions most of the time.
 
Sam:  Mom and dad both say that some people try to fool kids into thinking that they are nice and then they hurt people.
 
Me:  That is true Sam.  Not very often but sometimes it happens. Your parents and I would be so sad if someone tried to hurt you.
 
Sam: It is just because I am a girl.  Paul (her 12 year old brother) has a phone.
 
Me:  Yes and either your parents or I check it every day to see how he is using it.  If there is an email or a text from someone we do not know, Paul is not allowed to have the phone for the next week or.
 
Sam:  (Now smiling).  Yes, it makes Paul very angry.  I like it when he gets into trouble because he is always trying to get me into trouble.
 
Me:  Why do you think that we take Paul’s phone away.
 
Sam: (sigh!)  I know. It is because you love us and do not want anyone to hurt us.
 
Me: You really get tired of us saying that don’t you?
 
Sam:  Well, yes!
 
Me:  let’s get back to your original frustration.  You feel as if you need to show the other kids that you are just as grown up as they are.
 
Sam:  Yes.  Their parents trust them!
 
Me:  I know it feels like your parents and I do not trust you.    It is really difficult to feel different than the other kids in school isn’t it?
 
Sam: Yes (sniffle).
 
Me: So it feels as if you need to be like the other children.  What about your friend, Sue, who is in the wheelchair? She is not like the other children.  Does she need to be like the other children for you to think she is a good person? 
 
Sam: No. She cannot help it that she is in a wheelchair. I told you. She has surpy pal….
 
Me: Cerebral Palsy?
 
Sam: Yes. I can’t every remember .
 
Me: yes. That is hard to remember.
 
Sam:  yes
 
Me: How about your friend Ahmes from Egypt. You have been really helpful to her.  She is having a difficult time learning English and she has taught you some words in Arabic.  She is not like the other kids and she does not have a cell phone
 
Sam: That is true. 
 
Me: So I am wandering Sam, do you think that a cell phone is a want or a need.
 
Sam: We talked about this before didn’t we?
 
Me:  Yes.  It seems as if there are a lot of thinks which Uncle Jim wants but he does not need.  Remember we talked about all those people who have to flee their country and how we can help them.
 
Sam:  Oh yeah!  We got on the computer and tried to find out what they needed.  They needed clothes, food, and a place to live and to be with their family.  We both decided that you, Paul, your parents, and me have those things and a bunch more. You have a lot of toys and I have all sorts of things in my house.
 
Sam: We went to your closet and decided we could give clothes to a lot of people.
 
Me:  Yes, Uncle Jim did not need all those clothes. We did the same thing with yours and Paul’s clothes. Then the other day your grandparents came to bring you more clothes. 
 
Sam:  I know. I told them to give them to the other kids.
 
Me: Yes, you did.  That was really kind of you.  The clothes were really pretty but you decide other kids needed them more than you.  Before the other day you might have thought you needed them.  Your grandparents even brought Uncle Jim a new shirt and I told them I would feel better if we could give the shirt to the families who were fleeing.
 
Sam:  They even said that they were going through their closets when they got home.  I was glad that they understood. Even Paul said he wanted to give his new clothes away.
 
Me:   how come we did not decide that the kids fleeing needed cell phones Sam.
 
Sam: Uncle Jim!   If they cannot eat the will die and then they cannot call anyone.  You know dead people cannot use phones! Well, maybe the ghosts of Halloween Did I tell you about my Halloween costume Uncle Jim.  We are making it from things that my mom already had in the attic!
 
Me: That is exciting. When do I get to see it?
 
Sam. Not until Halloween. You will be surprised. What are you going to wear?
 
Me:  I do not know yet. What do you think?  Remember tomorrow night we are making treats to give to the trick-or-treaters.
 
Sam:  I love doing that. I have to taste everything.
 
Me: Yes, we “need” a taster!
 
Sam;  What about the cell phone Uncle Jim
 
Me:  What do you think Sam?  Is it a want or a need
 
Sam:  I guess it is a want but I really, really want it Uncle Jim.
 
Me: I know you do Sam.   I really appreciate that.   For now do you think you can be okay without it?
 
Sam:  I guess. Can we talk about it again Uncle Jim?
 
Me:  Yes, of course we can Sam.
 
Written October 26, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Steve Jobs – Abraham Lincoln – Adam Grant
 
Most people will be familiar with the names of Steve Jobs and Abraham Lincoln.  Not everyone will recognize the name of Adam Grant, an organizational psychologist who is the youngest tenured professor at the esteemed Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He is also an author, a father, husband, son,  grandson,  friend, and fellow traveler on this brief journey of life.   Dr. Grant was recently featured on the NPR program On Being with its host Krista Tippett.  It seems as if he was one of those children whom the Buddhist might claim  had lived many lifetimes and was thus able, even as a child, to appreciate that there was something very special to be learned from both sets of grandparents who gave generously of their love.   On the other hand, when he talks about other humans as takers, givers, or matchers he can sound very academic and as if his heart finds it difficult to accept that those who do feel or believe that it is safe to love may  spend much of their energy attempting to find some way of filling that void and/or pushing away others.   At other times when listening to him he seems able to accept that even the person who appears to be only a taker can be found giving to others in some ways.  In my personal experience and, certainly, in the movie or television portrayal of the mob boss who may find it easy to kill others, one will find a fierce love and devotion to his family.  On the other hand, if one does not behave in a way which fits the definition of family, he may not be able to access his heart.
 
Dr.  Grant quotes something the 16th President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, said in the final paragraph of his first inaugural address:  “I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearth-stone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”
 
This  quote probably resonated with me because I am a firm believer that we humans are, by nature, essentially good. At the same time I think that (1) many factors can affect the ability of our human brain to create a cogent thought and (2)  we humans are enormously protective when we become convinced at a conscious or unconscious level that it is unsafe to allow others close enough to love  us because they might, in the end, hurt us.
 
This thought process followed my seeing the movie Steve Jobs.  Aaron Sorkin, the writer, Danny Boyle, the director, Michael Fassbender, the actor, and numerous others combined their talents and skills to create a movie about this man who has fascinated millions of people in the world. He is known for his amazing ability to envision a future which we are now living – a future which for many of us has the personal computer as its core – a seeming  ability to focus on a goal no matter who it hurt or discarded, and what  I understand as his fear of emotional closeness.  I am not  sure if, in the last phase of his life, he would have agreed or disagreed with the later part of this statement.   Certainly on the cognitive level he loved his parents and would get angry if anyone called them his adoptive parents.
Most of us know Steve Jobs as the visionary who was one of the co-founders,  along  with Steve Woznick and Ronald Wayne, of the computer on which I am typing – Apple Macbook – and the phone I am using – iPhone.   He was known as an amazing visionary; a man who was committed to giving all people the wonderful gift  of the personal computer  which would eventually connect to something called the internet.
 
Steve  Jobs was not what Dr. Grant would call as taker although he did seem, at times, to use people as objects with little concern about who they were emotionally.  He did not fit Dr. Grant’s definition of a taker as someone who is “kissing up and kicking down.”  We have all seen  and probably experienced that person who so desperately needs/wants power  or at least the acknowledgement of the boss or higher up that his or her entire focus seems to be on pleasing that upper level person  that they will  literally, if necessary, kiss the feet (or other body parts) of the higher up  while kicking their co-worker out of the way of being recognized  or noticed. They can be exceptionally cruel.  They are the people who the psychologist, Maslow, would describe as existing on the lower rung of the developmental pyramid.   Maslow maintained that those of us living at that level on the pyramid do not have the luxury of considering the needs of others or seeing the common human connection of the other.  He or she does not even care about the higher up and, if given the chance, will kick them out of the way of their way to advancement and recognition.  Power, money, status, the corner office is their addiction- what they hope will  finally establish their worthwhileness.
 
That was not Steve Jobs although it might appear that his single-minded focus came from the same emotional or psychological need to prove himself.
 
As I watched Michael Fassbender in the role of Steve Jobs,  I wanted to alternately shake some sense into him, to hug him, and tell him that  he can both love and follow his vision.  So much about his ability to envision the potential of a personal computer was admirable.  One needs the ability to dream or envision the impossible – an ability which few of us possess to that extent.  Yet  the energy he spends avoiding his heart also delays the achievement of his dream. He not only needs to hold fast to the vision but he needs to take all the credit, be better than, keep the Apple a close system (his system), and alternately push away keep those he needed close.  This is especially evident in his relationship with his daughter, Lisa.  There are moments when it seems as if his heart involuntarily pops open for a second only to quickly close again. 
 
In so many ways he is a taker and yet he is one of those to whom I am grateful and who I want to love and who, for moments in the movie, find easy to love.
 
Dr. Grant would probably label Steve Jobs,  on a personal level, as a taker who occasionally is a giver.  He is certainly not a matcher.  Matchers are those who take their cue from the larger group. If others in their group are takers they will get sucked into being takers also,  If, on the other hand, the larger groups are givers then the matcher will find themselves being drawn into that behavioral pattern. The matchers do not lead. They are somewhere between the givers and the takers developmentally.
 
When President Lincoln talks about the better angels of our nature he is talking about the part of us  who are the grandparents from whom Dr. Grant learned from at an early nature.  It is that part of us which can relax with just being the humans that we are – warts and all – and who can then afford to give.   The better angels of our nature  know that we have to fill up our emotional, spiritual, physical, and nutritional gas tanks before we give to others. The better angels of our nature know that we are at our most creative selves when we are present just to love and not focused on proving our worth or earning another star.  As much of a visionary as Steve Jobs was just imagine what he could have accomplished had he been free of the twin demons of fear and the need to prove himself.
 
Some of Dr. Grant’s research seems to validate that we humans are at our best when we are not worried about climbing a success ladder but able to focus on being very intentional about  giving.  I would use the word loving interchangeably with the word giving.
 
Another Sunday and  another step in  appreciating all I have to learn from the Grants, Lincolns, Jobs and Aaron Sorkins of this world.  I think Aaron Sorkin could easily have written this blog. In fact, I am sure he could have said it more succinctly and more eloquently. Still. …
 
For today I will see if I can contact the better angels of my nature and in so doing connect with the better angels of all those with whom I come into contact today.
 
Written October 25, 2015

Das Kind with dem Bade ausschutten  - The baby with the bathwater
 
Many will recognize this idiom as a reminder that sometimes in our zeal to rid ourselves of something negative we will also throw out something positive.  “This idiom derives from a German proverb, das Kind mit dem Bade ausschütten. The earliest record of this phrase is in 1512, in Narrenbeschwörung (Appeal to Fools) by Thomas Murner; and this book includes a woodcut illustration showing a woman tossing a baby out with waste water. It is a common catchphrase in German, with examples of its use in work by Martin Luther, Johannes Kepler, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Otto von Bismarck, Thomas Mann, and Günter Grass.””
….
Some claim the phrase originates from a time when the whole household shared the same bath water.[10] The head of household (Lord) would bathe first, followed by the men, then the Lady and the women, then the children, followed lastly by the baby. The water would be so black from dirt that a baby could be accidentally 'tossed out with the bathwater'.[10] Others state there is no historic evidence that there is any connection with the practice of several family members using the same bath water, the baby being bathed last. (wikepedia)
 
Fortunately, even though I grew in a household in which the entire family took a bath in the same bathwater in a tin bathtub  set up in front of the wood stove in the winter or outside in the summer, I was never thrown out with the bathwater (at least not physically).  The youngest child was the last to bathe and, indeed, the bathwater would get a little rich in color by the time the last person bathed.  This was especially true in the winter. In the summer, if one had more than one tin tub one could fill them both from the well and heat them in the sun. As I recall (funny, how fuzzy my memory is regarding much of this history) none of we children were thrown out with the bathwater.  I do recall some very vigorous scubbing with a brush to insure that the country/farm dirt was all removed leaving only the faintest hint of an actual body!  Or so it may have seemed!
 
This proverb popped into my mind as I was reading The St. Petersburg Tribune on Saturday, October 24th, 2015.  There were several news items which caught my attention including the  one  headed “Border Tunnel leads to 12 tons of marijuana”.  According to this report  a tunnel measuring 2,400 feet long and 20 feet deep compete with lights, ventilation and a rail system was discovered.   The tunnel connected warehouse in San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico.  “Authorities recovered 2 tons of marijuana in the U.S. and 10 tons in Mexico.”  Wow, I thought, that is impressive.  I have thought the same things about the ever thriving drug trade in Afghanistan and the ability of groups of individuals in this war torn country creating ingenious  methods to not only improve, at times depending in part on weather conditions, the yield per acre,  but the number of acres and, thus, the overall production of the poppy plant. In  Guardian.com reports that in 2013, “For the first time over 200,000 hectares of Afghan fields were growing poppies, according to the UN's Afghanistan Opium Survey for 2013, covering an area equivalent to the island nation of Mauritius.”
 
Now, let me be perfectly clear. I am not in favor of drug addiction which ruins the life of the addict and often the lives of everyone  who to live with or deal with the out of control addictive behavior.   I am also not in favor of daily use of marijuana or even regular use of it, getting drunk on alcohol or “experimenting with acid, crack heroin or other addictive and potentially dangerous drugs.  I am well aware that quite a number of people do manage to use alcohol, marijuana and some other drugs on a recreational basis without getting addicted. In fact, I enjoy a glass of wine with dinner  two or three nights a week.  I have no desire to get drunk and, in fact, am unable to get drunk. I will  get physically ill before I am able to drink enough to even get a buzz. Obviously, I get no credit for this fact. It is just the way my body responds to alcohol.)
 
Have said that, I am in awe of the  business acumen of many of the individuals I know or read about who are “successful” entrepreneurs.  I love entrepreneurial spirit and ability of some of the people who start and successfully run a drug business without all the “professional” marketing  staff of the pharmaceutical companies or who operate very “successful” business enterprises in jail or other institutions.   I recall the first time I was in a foreign country with a more obvious black market than that I had known about in some cities in the United States. I was impressed with the ability of many I met. Some of them were quite young and yet, if they had been operating a legitimate/legal business, they would have commanded top dollars in some companies.
 
Just the other day I was talking to a young man, now 20, who when his parents argued frequently over money issues and then eventually got divorced, at age 12 started his own marijuana business. Before being “discovered” this young man had several employees and was making a great deal of money.
Wow! That was amazing.  Sadly this young man continues to use his considerable intellect and skills to take shortcuts in various areas of his life.   I laughed with him because, despite his considerable skills, he is very inept in other ways. He always has an accident or gets caught and is constantly playing catch up financially and otherwise.   It is sad that this young man was not encouraged and mentored in pursing a legitimate/legal entrepreneurial business enterprise when he was age 12. 
 
For whatever reasons we often  forget to praise  and  encourage the skills of those who  have a lot of business acumen,  but who may be using this talent in a way which is against the law or the customs of a community.    We are so intent on self-righteously labeling people as bad and punishing them that we miss the fact that they have very useful skills for which many people in so called ‘legitimate” business enterprises pay a lot of money.
 
It seems to be that the distinction between legal marketing and/or lobbying and illegal marketing/lobbying is very narrow.
 
Some of the facts about Bernie Madoff’s scams that intrigued me were:
·      He had been a very successful broker prior to turning to illegal activity.
·      His skill in creating stock reports which even the most sophisticated business person could not distinguish from the  reports of legitimate enterprises. 

I was interested in reading somewhere recently that CEOs who are paid an obscene amount of money do not really care about the money but the extent to which it reinforces their need to be the top competitor.  
 
Steve Jobs whose life is now chronicled (at least parts of it) in a new movie is a  very good example of someone who understood systems  if the parts were a computer,  but was unable to use that same system knowledge for explore how he functioned in intra and interpersonal relationships.
 
When I get a new client who is struggling with addiction, one of the first things I might say to them is, “It is wonderful that you have been attempting to take care of yourself. Your method may be backfiring or causing more harm than good, but  I love the fact that you want to feel better and have been proactive in doing something.  Now, how about we explore some safer ways of doing that which are more effective long term.”
 
Our jails are filled with many people who are enormously creative,  bright and functional. If we do not help them find a way to use their talents to make a significant positive difference in their lives then many, if not most, will continue to use those talents in “projects”  which eventually lands them in jail or with an out of control addiction.   Instead of acknowledging and praising their success we act as if we really expect positive change if we tear down  the basic parts of their ego strength. This approach does not work. There is no  research which has indicated that this approach is likely to work.
 
In order words  too often our approach to working with (not for or against) both children and adults is to steal their entrepreneurial spirit and crush their talent.   In other words we throw out “Das Kind with dem Bade ausschutten.”
 
Written October 24, 2015
 
 
 

Wants versus Needs
 
This subject has been much on my mind this morning as I attempted to respond not only to the internal message in my head, but also as I attempted to respond with empathy to several people from whom I received emails or texts this morning. Thankfully, one of the emails I got was from a site entitled  “Squeebles.”  Today one of the headlines was “St. Bernard is so needy.”  Accompanying it was a video of a St. Bernard affectionately lying on top of this man and not allowing the man to get up. The dog was very affectionate and clearly was experiencing a “need” for sustained, close attention.  The fact that he or she is larger than the person (owner/master?) on whom they are lying, gives them the power to hold the person captive for as long as the need is being experienced.   Although this  video was humorous, the situation could be less than humorous for the human being held captive.   Suppose, for example, that the human is now going to be late for work or has an acute, immediate “need” to use the bathroom facilities.  Then we would have the common situation of a real or perceived conflict of needs.  Individuals, families, community members, groups, and nations  often convince themselves that their perceived needs are more important than the perceived needs of the other person(s), community,  company or nation.  This morning I had several emails or texts from individuals who felt that their needs were not been honored by someone else.   Situations included:
·      A neighbor not honoring the  legal property boundaries and cutting trees  within the property legally owned by my friends.

·      A person romantically involved with another person who is in the process of extricating from a long-term marriage and who feels that her needs for reassurance that the relationship has really ended is not being respected.

·      A man who feels he needs  a romantic commitment from a woman in order to be okay emotionally.

·      Parents who need their adult son to quit his alcoholic drinking and related behavior before they can relax.

·      Disagreement between a husband and a wife about how much to do to stage the house they are showing on Sunday to sell.

 
I also read the morning newspaper and again was reminded of the perceived needs of various individual, groups, companies, or countries. There is much disagreement over  the distinction between needs and wants. For example:
·      Some people think that basic health care is a need which should be provided regardless of income or ability to pay.

·      Some people think that the unborn fetus needs to be protected from the moment of conception regardless of how the woman in which the fetus has been conceived feels what her needs are.

·      Some people think it is a basic right and need for everyone except for the mentally impaired or the convicted criminals to  be able to openly carry a gun.

·      Some countries think that  they need to resolve the political  issues in countries such as Syria.

·      Some people think that they need to do something to stop the violent interplay between other nations or between groups within a nation.

·      Some people think  that that they need to make sure that the black bears are protected from the hunters in Florida.

·      Some think that they are deserving of a significant share of the available wealth.

 
Obviously both of these lists could go on and go. Perhaps when we were all living in a tribal community with plenty of food and clothing resources available, the distinction between wants and needs was easier to determine.   Basic needs seemed to be food, clothing,  shelter, and the means to procure, construct, and make use of the means to get and maintain these basics.  There also seems to be a basic need for organizational structure and various attempts to design and set rules/customs  to insure that structure.  At some point there  developed a perceived need to protect one’s territory and its resources from other groups or tribes.  Civilization was not yet at the developmental stage where fuel sources, complicated medical care, or credit cards were a “need” in order to function  Those and many other tools were  not developed for a very long time.
 
It is not surprising that in many areas of our life, there is a lot of confusion between wants and needs. It seems as if the list of perceived needs by individuals, families, communities, and nations keeps growing.  One look, for example, at the financial budget for the average family, community, organization, or nation will provide enough fodder for discussions which seem unresolvable.  In fact, it seems as if the budget of the United States is so complicated and contentious that we will never again be able to arrive as budget decisions in a timely manner or just before the bell of impending disaster rings.
 
When it comes to individual needs, I am well aware that I am living way beyond the need level of existence.   It seems to me that at this stage of my life I only need:
 
·      Enough nutritious food to maintain my basic health.  I could subsist just fine and spend a lot less than I now spend. It might not be as appetizing but my body would probably be grateful.

·      Enough space to accommodate my physical body. Some means of storing and preparing food, and access to water and soap for cleaning and washing clothes as well bathroom facilities  seem to be a need. The rest of my two bedroom, two bath condo and the furnishings thereof may be a more of a convenience than a necessity or a need.

·      Some way of connecting with mother earth including other people.  As I type this, I am aware that some people seems able to live well as a hermit or in silent retreat for long periods of time, but it does seem as if even they have an especially close relationship with mother earth.

 
I also have a long  list of wants, many of which I have managed to obtain. These include:
·      A cell phone,  computer (actually I have a smart phone, an iPad, a laptop, a billing computer which uses a program which will only work on an old version of windows, and an large office computer.

·      A car which is very convenient, especially if it is raining, but with careful planning I could easily use my bicycle  to go to the public library (in fact I can download many of the books I want from my computer), the grocery store, and the gym.

·      A gym membership which is part of my health insurance benefits.

·      Two bicycles, one of which is for visiting guests.

·      Bookcases, books, pleasant flower vases, more art than I have room for, three sets of dishes, several pots and pans, and various other kitchen gadgets, conveniences, and other luxury items.

·      More clothes than I could use or wear even if I wore something different every day for a week or even two weeks. 

·      A host of friends – more love and support than I need to survive.

·      Ability to keep working part-time and to thus purchase trips, tickets to events,  or more stuff which is not on the need list.

·      Health insurance at the Veterans Administration plus a supplementary policy.   Actually the Veterans Administration benefits have allowed me to have access to medication which has kept me alive. Thus, one might consider it a necessity, but, on the other hand, one could argue that at age 75 I have far outlived many of my peers with the same illness. Thus, one could argue that living longer is a luxury and not a need.

·      Eyesight, hearing, and allegedly a brain which works well enough to allow me to keep learning and to enjoy the luxuries of books, writing,  and other ways of learning and expressing myself.

 
Although I am sure I have left some luxuries off the list, I am hard pressed to think of other wants which are not being satisfied.   I certainly have the ability to enjoy such additional luxuries as:
·      A life partner which I would really enjoy but would also limit me in other ways.

·      The opportunity to visit places and people around the world who I now seldom or never visit.

·      The ability to be more generous with family and friends although if I had the money to do that I am not convinced that I should be in possession of the power to decide who gets help.

·      To continue to enjoy the luxury of enough health to enjoy physical and mental activities.

·      The ability to make more of a positive difference in the world although I am already blessed to be able to be intentional about how I greet and treat others with whom I come into contact or  with whom I initiate contact.

 
It seems as if we humans, including this human, has an endless capacity to either convince ourselves that we need much more than we can possibility use or an endless fear that we need  stuff, power, money, prestige, or whatever, to prove that we are more than in order to know that we are deserving of love and respect.    Whether it is as an individual, a member of a family, a member of the community, a group, a company/corporation, a political party or a country it seems as if we humans have this amazing capacity to convince ourselves that we need more to be enough.
 
As I near the last stage of my life (even if that is another 25 or 30 years), I am increasingly aware of the profound sadness of the illusion that there is a scarcity of resources and, thus, an inability to share  and meet the needs of all   of life.    Of course, no matter what, all of life will change form.  Soon, whether my body is burned or buried, I will be dust and the energy which was my life will be in some other form. I suppose that if my energy becomes part of a rock I will not be as confused about my wants versus my needs.  At least, in my current incarnation as a human, I have a difficult imagining a rock saying, “I need to be bigger. I want to occupy an entire acre of land.  I want to be higher than any other rock.  I want to be a different color.”  I hope not. Perhaps, if I am lucky, I will be perfectly happy being a rock for as long as my rockiness lasts.   I will have to elicit Sam’s thoughts about this subject. It should be an interesting discussion.
 
Written October 23, 2015

I was surprised to look  out of the kitchen window and see six-year old Sam stopping by again on a school day this week. The other day she had stopped by to talk about why we humans get angry. We decided that sometimes we get angry because:
• Our brain gets on overload and  anger can be a way of pushing away too much incoming stimuli
• We do not like to admit that we do not know something, did something dumb, or did something foolish.

Me:  Sam, what a nice surprise on this Thursday morning.  What prompted Princess Sam to visit the plebian Uncle Jim this morning (me bowing to the  floor and then ‘pretending’ to have a difficult time rising again!!  

Sam:  Uncle Jim, you are so silly but the princes allows you to rise!!!  I learned that in a play at school!

Me: Do you want some breakfast?

Sam:  I ate but I do like that pumkin stuff you got the other day.

Me: Oh, the pumpkin butter.  You want it on an English muffin?

Sam:  yes, please.

Me: Let me fix it.  was there something on your mind Sam.

Sam:  Remember the other day when we were talking about anger.  My teacher, Mrs. Williams, said sometimes anger is  ahhh  testified?

Me:  Justified?

Sam:  That is what she said.  When I was telling mom and dad, Paul said, “See I told you I was right in getting angry at you.”  

Me: Paul is pretty quick with responding to something you say isn’t he.

Sam:  (sighs) Yes.

Sam:   Mom and dad said, “Why don’t you ask Uncle Jim to explain that to you.”

Me:  Okay.   I think Mrs. William meant that sometimes people say or do mean things and it hurts.  She may think  that if we get angry they will quit saying mean things.

Sam:  She said that when we do not do our homework  or when someone bullies someone she gets very angry.

Me: Those are two good examples. Let’s first look up the word justify.  Would you get the dictionary please?

Sam:  okay! (Sam gets the big Oxford dictionary off the shelf and carries it to the kitchen table.)

Me:  Okay. Let find the word – j u s t i f y.

Sam:  J u s?

Me: Tify 

Sam: Here it is:

Me:  Great.  Let see what it says:
1. Prove to be right or reasonable.
2. Have a good reason for.
It is from the word justice.  Let’s look that up.

Sam:  Okay  (big sigh) Ju

Me: J u s t i c e

Sam: Oh hear it is Uncle Jim.  It says “administration of the law. From latin Justus (see just).  Oh no! Do we have to look that work up too Uncle Jim?

Me:  Yes.  Let’s do that.

Sam: Okay.  J u s t.  Here it is.

Me: What does it say?

Sam:  “Latin just us, from jus ‘law, right’

Me:  Justus – law, right     So it sounds as if Mrs. William was say that sometimes it is right to be angry.  The law does not say we have to be angry does it.  

Sam: I hope not but then the could arrest my brother Paul when he was mean to  me!

Me: (hiding a smile)   Would you really want Paul in jail?

Sam:  I guess not.

Me: So, Mrs. William is saying that it is right to get angry when some of the students do not do their homework or when one of the kids is bullying another.

Sam:  Just like it is right for me to get angry at Paul.

Me: Well, let’s look at this Sam.  Do you think if Mrs.Williams gets angry at a student they do better the next time?

Sam: Maybe. I sure do not like it when she is angry at me.  One day I told her Oscar ate my homework  (Oscar is her dog) and she got angry and said “I do not believe you.  You are making that up because you did not do your homework.”

Me:  So was  Mrs. Williams was right in being angry  at you because she thought you were lying?

Sam:  But I was not lying. Oscar did tear up my homework after I did it.

Me: So it was not right to angry at you for telling the truth?

Sam: No (sniffle).

Me: What if you really had not done it and told her the truth?

Sam:   She still would have gotten angry.

Me: So sometimes if we think someone is going to get angry we are tempted to not tell the truth.

Sam:  I don’t like it when Mrs.William is angry. It scares me.

Me:  So what else could Mrs. Williams do that would make you want to do your homework?

Sam:   (beaming) Not give us homework?

Me:  Cute Sam.  Good try.   What else could she do? 

Sam:  Well, she has been putting the homework on the computer and now mom and dad see what I have to do. They do not let me forget. If they are busy they tell you and you help me.

Me:  So in this case instead of staying angry she found another way to make sure it gets done. That sound better.
What about the bully.  Is it right to get angry at the bully?

Sam: it is not nice to bully.

Me:  I agree.  Remember on other time we talked about the bully  being someone who does not feel good about himself or herself. Bully is a way for them to feel better  or more powerful about themselves.

Sam: Oh yes.  You said we should help the boy whose dad drinks and is mean to feel better about himself.  Ever since he started doing his homework at our house he is much nicer and even smiles a lot.

Me: That is a great example. So while it was not good or right for him to bully the other kids, being angry or mean at him did not seem to do much good did it?

Sam:  No. 

Me:  So we could say we understands why Mrs. Williams gets angry, getting angry does not seem to solve the problem.

Sam:  Like when the waffle iron broke and you got mad at it Uncle Jim.

Me:  Good example. It did not do any good to get mad at the waffle iron did it. I even hurt my hand when I hit it didn’t I. You laughed at Uncle Jim didn’t you Sam.

Sam:  And then you laughed too Uncle Jim.  You said you were pretty silly for blaming the waffle iron for being a waffle iron!

Me: That is true.  Thinks like waffle irons, cars and other things break or wear out don’t they.

Sam: Yes, but we get angry because we do not want them to break.

Me: Does getting angry help.

Sam: Well….  For a minute it feels good but then I am usually sorry  because I break something else or say something I have to apologize for.

Me:  Yes, I agree.  So have we decided that something can be understandable but not helpful or does not work  well.

Sam: I agree but it is right.

Me: You will notice that I have avoided using the words right and wrong. We will talk about that another time. Now I think I see the school bus coming.

Sam:  (Takes one more bit of her muffin with the pumpkin butter)  Thanks Uncle Jim.  (Gives Uncle Jim a kiss and runs out the door to the bus stop.)

Written October 22, 2015

 
I want to begin this blog by acknowledging my debt to Leonard Pitts, a columnist for the Miami Herald whose article
‘If I only had a gun’: Could the course of history been changed” which I read in The St. Petersburg Tribune on October 20, 2015, page 7.  He very creatively and pointedly questioned the opinions of Dr. Ben Carson regarding the value of every citizen arming him or herself.  Dr. Carson made following statements:
·      The outcome of the Holocaust would have been different if Jews had guns.  (One can goggle pbs.org, slate.com or any news site.

·      “As a Doctor, I spent many a night pulling bullets out of bodies. … But I never saw a body with bullet holes that was more devastating than taking the right to arm us away.  Nationscapital.wordpress.com

 
As Mr. Pitts so eloquently states in this article “This has become a recurrent theme on the political right, the idea that unarmed victims of violence are to blame for their own troubles.”   It is fascinating to me that so many in this country and others continue to be convinced that violence is the answer to violence, which is the answer to violence. Whether it is Dr. Carson, the Florida Legislators (advocating open carry and right to carry on college campuses) or our elected and appointed leaders deciding that after 14 years of the use of military violence and the killing of up to 50,000 (security forces and civilians) Afghanistan’s plus 3407 Allied individuals, more violence and subsequent killing (even bombing of hospitals) will eventually insure long-term peace.   We may have become numb to the reading of facts about the suffering we humans inflict on each other and immune to the fact that killing each other off by swords, guns, machetes, hangings, or other methods has not brought enduring peace to the world.  The use of force to get people to give us what we deserve (more than they) or to accept the imposition of a religious or political system has not worked long term in all of recorded history or so it seems to me, although I am aware of the very cogent arguments by many educated and thoughtful persons including men and women of the cloth.
 

Perhaps if Dr. Carson were not a neurosurgeon who also happens to be an African American the statements he makes would not be so surprising. Dr. Carson can trace his ancestry to Africa.  He is also the son of an amazing mother who, although she herself could not read, had Ben and his brother turning off the television and giving her two or three book reports a week.  This followed the discovery that Carson’s father had another family and his mother subsequently taking he and his siblings from Detroit to Boston where he was raised amid all of the poverty, drugs, and violence in some sections of Boston.   Dr. Carson has written a number of books. He and his wife have been very personally generous and are known for their philanthropy.  By all accounts there is much to admire about Dr. Carson and the legacy given to him by his mother.
 
Dr. Carson has also taken some version of the Hippocratic Oath. I am not sure which version. The original version which bears the name of Hippocrates, “the so-called father of medicine who lived in the early 5th”(pbs.org) century was:
 
 
HIPPOCRATIC OATH: CLASSICAL VERSION
I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:
To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art—if they desire to learn it—without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.
What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.
—Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943.  (Pbs.org)
 
There is also a modern version of the oath such as the one below:
 
HIPPOCRATIC OATH: MODERN VERSION
I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:
I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick; all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.
I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death? If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.
I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings that sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.
—Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.
 
The question, for me, Mr. Pitts, and others is how to make sense of the fact that this very good man, Dr. Carson,who has sworn to some version of the Hippocratic Oath and has undoubtedly in his personal and professional life brought the reduction, if not the end, of suffering for many in his distinguished career also seems to be able to resolve what seems to some of us as the cognitive dissonance when offering the recommendations for more gun use and ownership alongside the Hippocratic Oath. Dr. Carson and his wife have generously helped others through such efforts as the Carson’s Scholarship fund.  Although plagued by a temper, he seemingly overcame that through prayers and learning to channel the energy in a different direction.   Yet, I am having a difficult time reconciling this man who I so admire in so many respects with the politician/thinker who says that:
Ben Carson Tells CNN the Holocaust Would Have Gone Differently If the Jews Had Guns
By Elliot Hannon
Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson took to the airwaves again on Thursday to discuss his views on guns. The former neurosurgeon is a believer in the therapeutic powers of heavy artillery in America’s classrooms, for instance. And Carson’s views on gun control, laid out in his book A More Perfect Union, bubbled to the surface again on Thursday during an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, where he suggested that the outcome of the Holocaust would have been different if Jews had guns. (Slate.com)
 
This is the same man who so vehemently opposes the Affordable Care Act and the VA health care system.  He also says:
"You know Obama care is really I think the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery," Carson said Friday. "And it is in a way, it is slavery in a way, because it is making all of us subservient to the government, and it was never about health care. It was about control."
Carson was recently hired by Fox News as a contributor. He served as the director of pediatric surgery at the Johns Hopkins Children's Center for 39 years.
Carson has made other shocking comments in the past, once calling white liberals "racist."
"[White liberals are] the most racist people there are," Carson said in April 2013. "You know, they put you in a little category, a little box -- you have to think this way. How could you dare come off the plantation?" (Huffingtonpost.com)
 
While there is much about the Veterans Administration, which needs overhauling, and there are many changes I would like to see made in the Affordable Care Act, I do not think that a system that is based on making a huge profit off of the medical issues of we humans is moral or has been very workable.  I would certainly like to see a single payer health care system and less focus at the VA and all government sponsored health care on possible misuse of the system thus making it very simple to get service as well as to bill and get paid.     While I admire the generosity of the modern robber barons such as the Carson’s and the Gates, I do not think the a few individuals who were grossly overpaid to start with should be in charge of foundations which decide who gets assistance or what health related research gets done.
 
The sound bites of Mr. Carson and all the other political candidates garnish a lot of headlines and a lot of reaction but I am not convinced that they contribute to creating an atmosphere which is conducive to a coming together to create a more just, less violent, and loving society in which we share all the resources.  If one or more of us is born with the wisdom of Dr. Carson’s mother, the native intelligence to become a neurosurgeon, or the ability to create a more effective treatment for cancer, we have much for which to be grateful. This does not, in my humble opinion, entitle us to an unequal share of the resources.
 
Dr. Rachel Remen in one of the books she penned, My Grandfather’s Blessings, talks a lot about the blessings of her life, including the lessons she learned from her illness and the search for effective/healing treatment.   Although I have not heard her talk about the Affordable Care Act, the Veterans Administration Health Care System, or the use of guns, I strongly suspect that many of us would do well to sit down with her and other very thoughtful people. The use of terms such as liberal, gun advocate, NRA spokesperson, Obama Care, and other sound bites is very tempting, perhaps especially in this election year, but I am not sure they are all that useful.  (I must, once again, give credit to my good friend Barbara Bonenberger for challenging me about the use of sound bites.)
 
I am personally going to, once again, resolve to make a concerted effort to avoid sound bites and to do my best to have respectful, adult, cogent, discussions with other humans such as Dr. Carson.
 
Written October 20, 2015

 
This morning I had a text from dear friends whose 26-year-old son has finally agreed to go to a treatment facility for his alcoholism. Again.  Once there, he ended up in ICU with aspirated pneumonia and very high blood pressure.  He wants to come home.  His loving parents are refusing to go get him. Fortunately he is some miles away. Last night I had a text from another dear friend whose brother’s child, a 22-year-old young man, is struggling with addiction.  He was back in treatment, but got sent home with kidney stones.  He cannot return to treatment until he no longer has kidney stones and has no need for pain medication. Already he has stolen money out of his mother’s purse.   Another young man in his early thirties has relapsed again. His father and one of his siblings also struggled with addiction. His mother and his other two siblings have suffered with the effect of this disease for many years.  I could name many other folks I know who struggle with various addictions – power, money, alcohol, other drugs, sex, work, shopping, or food. 
 
Every parent knows that one does not try to have a logical discussion with a 13-year-old.  They may appear to be capable of a logical discussion, especially if they want something.  Actually they may have a moment of apparent logic, especially if talking about music, video games, or some other passion of theirs. 
 
It is said that an addict quits developing emotionally when they start running from themselves. This is, of course, the purpose of addiction. Initially, an addict might think that they can occasionally get a break from being with their emotionally confusing selves.  Some can safely do this and come right back to facing themselves. Many cannot. For those who cannot, no matter how chronologically old they are, it will be impossible to have a logical discussion with them.  They can have moment of seeming maturity but often they will later (years and years later in many cases) reveal that they were attempting to get you to give them something or do something for them.
 
Most of we parents – certainly this parent – see at least two images when we look at our chronologically adult children. My son will soon be 45 (I was very, very young when he was conceived!  Liar, liar, pants on fire).  Those images are:
 
·      That beautiful, innocent, dependent, little baby we brought home from the hospital. The image melts my heart.

·      This adult, attractive (of course), bright, charming, adult whom one would choose as a friend.

 
If one has a child who has lived with a disorder such as addiction, autism or some other disorder, which made it impossible for him or her to emotionally develop “on schedule”, one might also see:
 
·      This Halloween monster with wicked teeth designed to destroy one in an instant.

·      This seemingly sweet, bright, charming, logical, person who can switch in a moment.

·      This humanoid recording whose language repertoire resembles the caricature of a sociopathic criminal attempting to function on the most hard core tier of the worst maximum security prison in the world.  He/she has two words in their vocabulary – one begins with F and one begins with S.  Often they are used together and frequently directed at the closest family members who are totally responsible for their unhappiness. (They always know which family member(s) will bite/accept this blame or get sucked into a pseudo discussion.)

 
The family members can readily understand why the addict chooses to run.  At the moment has had to deal with this seeming thing which has taken over the body of one’s child, one is tempted to drink, poke out one’s eyes, plug up one’s ears, or do  anything else which numbs one’s mind or blocks out this creature who pretends to be one’s loved one.
 
In other words, the situation is crazy making.  All these various people can co-exist in the body of one’s child.
 
One can get advice from various people, which requires an acceptance of what for many of us might be a new vocabulary.   From professionals, members of support groups, or books we learn words or phrases such as:
·      Co-dependence

·      Tough Love

·      Co-addict

·      Coward

·      Unkind

·      Fault/blame

·      Faithless

·      Caretaker

·      Control freak

·      Acceptance

·      Guilt

·      Triangulation

·      12-step-program

·      Let go and let God.

 
The list could go on and on.  Some of the books are very helpful at certain points, but none really have the answers.  It is often as if the author of the words or phrases understands the innocent child or the monster, but not the fact that both co-exist.
 
The truth is, of course, is that there are no acceptable answers. Certainly there is no ‘one size fits all’ answer.  There is always that person who has tried one method and their loved one got better because of or in spite of what they did or did not do.  Our family members who disagree with our approach are not right and they are not wrong. No one knows what to do.  Treatment has a notoriously low success rate the first time or second time or even the third time. Many people do get better and seemingly are able to avoid addictive behavior for the rest of their lives. Others seemingly do everything that is recommended – go to treatment, practice a daily recovery program, eat well, exercise, have a relationship with a higher power, pursue their passion professionally/artistically – and still cannot prevent relapses.  We see with pattern with such chronic illnesses such as diabetes.   We humans often have a difficult time consistently doing what we need to do to thrive.  There are some who just seem to do what they need to do and apparently do not struggle.  Perhaps some are like my former mother-in-law who put down her two pack a day cigarette habit/addict one day and claimed to never have a desire to smoke again. If asked how she did that she would claim it was because she had a clean conscience from which one might infer that she “knew” that one did not have a clean conscience. Bless her now departed soul!
 
If all this is true, why bother.  We bother because we have to.  We do not know when something will work and this dear child/person will heal.  We do know the following:
·      We are not powerful enough to cause an addiction or to cure an addiction. Do not blame self or other family member.

·      Focus on what we do have control of – taking care of each other, seeking support, eating well, exercising, meditating/praying, laughing a lot, get lots of hugs from healthy people.

·      Support groups – talking with others who are struggling – can help.

·      Believe in miracles without counting on them.

·      Addiction and other diseases are not personal – are not about you. It just feels as if one is being picked on!

·      Forget right answers.

·      Do not judge the addict but do not buy into their craziness.

·      Forget logical discussions.

·      Forget trusting the addict.

·      Think 13 – the person is 13-years-old. They are not yet human!!!!!

·      Laugh often.

·      Love the person who continues to exist beneath the addiction. They are there and they are worth loving.

·      Run screaming down the hall often!!!

·      Rend (tear)  one clothes, curse the gods and cry hysterically and then laugh!!

·      Tell God to quit taking vacations!  Really!  Free will!  What was he/she/it thinking?

 
 
Written October 21, 2015