Coping With Everyday Life


What This Blog is About

Your hosts for this blog are listed under “Hosts” in the menu choices. We invite you to join the blog and participate in our discussions about psychology and stress. If you are interested in pursuing any topic we cover, email us at charlesbrooks@kings.edu. We also encourage you to visit our website (www.subtlesuicide.com) to learn about our published books on subtle suicide, dysfunctional giver/taker relationships, and research on how psychology applies to everyday life.

This blog is about what psychology has to say about facing everyday stress. Anxiety, jealousy, anger, love, depression, grief – like everyone, you experience these emotions and the stress they can produce. You lose loved ones, you get bored with your job, you have kids, you care for elderly parents, the water heater breaks, you suffer a personal attack, a storm damages your house, your neighbor is a pain in the a……well, you get the idea. Stress surrounds you and sometimes you feel helpless to do anything about it.

Faced with life, you really have two choices: You can say the hell with it, decide to live with the stress, withdraw into a protective shell, and avoid trying to do anything about it. From a psychological perspective, this choice will turn you into a stagnant pool; you exist, but not in any productive or satisfying way.

On the other hand, you can decide to attack the stress in your life, to accept challenges and meet them as best you can. You can decide not to be ruled by your emotions, but to use them to your advantage. This choice requires more effort and focus than the first one, but the effort is well worth it in the long run. This choice, and how you can apply psychology to your life and become better at dealing with your everyday stressors, is what we talk about in this blog. Join us!


Emotional Dysregulation

Did you ever feel that your emotions and thoughts are out of control? Maybe you have unpredictable outbursts of anger that are not really appropriate to the situation, or experience flare-ups of anxiety, mood, or attitude. In short, do you occasionally show emotional fluctuations when it seems that your emotional life is poorly regulated and beyond your control? Many people would answer “yes” to these questions, and the fluctuations are pretty mild and temporary. But what if they are frequent – almost chronic – and extreme in their intensity? In this case, the instability in emotional expression is called emotional dysregulation. The condition can obviously be quite unsettling, and it may interfere with your relationships and general quality of life.

Emotional dysregulation can exhibit itself in a variety of emotions and thoughts: Anxiety; shame and anger; self-harm; substance abuse; perfectionism; conflict in interpersonal relationships; eating disorder; and even suicidal thoughts. The pattern seems to overlap considerably with borderline personality disorder, which affects the way you think and feel about yourself and others, and includes self-image issues, difficulty managing emotions and behavior, and a pattern of unstable relationships. People diagnosed with borderline personality disorder often experience emotional dysregulation with emotional sensitivity, reactivity, and difficulty finding an emotional level that feels stable.   

How might all this emotional lability develop? What sorts of experiences could cause emotional expressions to become so inconsistent, changeable, uncertain, turbulent, unsettled, and undependable?  Some psychologists say the condition develops out of a childhood characterized by caregiver abuse that involves deprivation of basic needs. The deprivation would show itself in failure to provide consistent and adequate supervision; lack of basic health care, clothing, education, and safe housing; an inability to meet emotional and social needs; and rejecting, ignoring, or harshly judging the child’s thoughts and feelings. In short, the child is raised in a roller coaster environment of uncertainty, ups and downs, and unpredictability that makes emotional stability difficult to develop and maintain.

Regardless of the cause, adults tormented with emotional dysregulation need professional help in learning how to regulate better their emotions, how to mitigate extreme reactions to emotional triggers and stimuli, and in general how to control more effectively their expression of thoughts and feelings. Effective techniques in therapy include helping the sufferer build new skills and actions that can be consistently applied in different situations. A professional mental health care provider can help sufferers learn and practice practical behaviors that can increase satisfaction, foster higher self-esteem, and give them a greater sense of control over their emotions. Examples could include things like taking a college course, learning a new skill, completing school, requesting new opportunities for advancement at work, or volunteering to help those in need.

Whatever the case, note the emphasis on actions, doing things. The best way to increase emotional consistency is not solely by positive thinking, but by consistently doing things that tend to bring you positive results, meaning feelings of contentment and satisfaction from taking on something new. When the situation is structured appropriately, self-esteem will increase; confidence will increase; and you will teach yourself the value of behaving in a predictable way. You will be able to say, “I gave it my all and did the best I could. I will look for ways to improve and do even better tomorrow.”

Rory came to therapy because he was suffering from panic attacks. He didn’t realize it, but these attacks were telling him he needed to make some important life changes. Like many cases, the source of panic attacks was actually anger, not anxiety. He viewed himself as a failure, which resulted in unpredictable waves of anxiety. He also had chaotic wake-sleep cycles with no consistent routine, and his social life was unstable as friends found him unreliable and disordered.

Rory had achieved his life-long career dream, but found his profession did not give him the glamour and luster he thought it would. He wanted to get married and have a family, but not with his present lifestyle. He knew he was young enough to pursue another career, but he was not moving in that direction. Thus, he was unconsciously angry at himself for not moving toward a more appropriate and productive goal. His agitation, panic, and tumultuous disorganized attacks were a signal that he needed to look seriously at making major life changes. Originally, Rory viewed his panic as the problem he had to confront, and he saw the attacks as a sign or weakness. But in fact, the attacks were providing valuable information: “Things are not right! You need to take corrective action.” Ultimately, he made the changes he needed to make. He investigated alternative careers, and he took courses at a local college to prepare himself for a career change. When he began to make specific alternative career plans and follow through with them, his panic attacks subsided.

Let’s be clear about Rory: his life changes were not easy to face. But the changes were productive, and they put him on a much smoother life road. Rory’s problem was not the panic attacks, but that he was lounging around stagnating, wasting away in a pool of frustration, confusion, and muddled non-productivity. Only by forcing himself to face challenges, could he produce satisfying outcomes resulting from personal autonomous efforts.

Writing for Mental Health

Joshua Smyth and his colleagues at the State University of New York – Stony Brook studied the effect of writing about personal traumas on physical and psychological health. In Smyth’s general procedure, people were asked to choose a personal trauma and write about it for a few minutes a day for several days. The most frequent topics were the breakup of a relationship, death of a loved one, or being in an accident. A control group of people was asked simply to write about their plans for the next day.

After the writing period, all participants were given physical and psychological tests. The physical tests assessed how well their immune system was functioning; the psychological tests evaluated how effectively they felt they were handling stress in their lives. On both measures, the group that wrote about personal issues scored better than the group that merely wrote about plans for the next day. Along the same lines, James Pennebaker of the University of Texas described a study done with unemployed engineers. Half were randomly chosen to write about how being laid off from their jobs made them feel; the other half did not. Over a period of weeks, measures of psychological well-being showed those who wrote about their feelings were happier, healthier, and more energetic in their job search.

What’s going on here? Does writing provide some sort of energy release – getting rid of negative thoughts and feelings – that is responsible for the benefits? The researchers didn’t think so. They concluded that writing helps people restructure their thinking about current stressful issues. That is, as they write about stressors, they are actually dealing with them at some intellectual and cognitive level; they are seeing things in a new perspective while thinking things through. In other words, the writing exercise helped the writers focus on their problems, not on their emotions and feeling sorry for themselves.

Many entries in this blog describe the dangers of being overly concerned with your emotions. Do you believe your emotions are the cause of your problems? Do you see those emotions as the reason you can’t fall in love, work with colleagues, or have a satisfying social life?  If so, you need to stop focusing on your emotions and focus instead on the fact that you are troubled because of actions you take: denial, social withdrawal, avoidance of responsibility, inappropriately confronting others, hanging on in an unsatisfying relationship like some masochist – these are actions that sabotage effective coping. You need to accept the reality that you are anxious, frustrated, jealous, ashamed, or angry because of actions you choose to perform to service these emotions. “I must become less anxious” is not a good coping strategy because you must deny a part of yourself; “I will learn to act in different ways when I am anxious” is a good strategy because you see that you have a problem to solve.

When you believe your emotions cause your difficulties, you will try to manage, control, and avoid those emotions. This approach won’t work because emotions are a normal part of you. If you try to suppress or deny them, you become obsessed with them, and they actually become more frequent and troublesome. You will become frustrated and self-critical, putting yourself down, complaining that “I can’t even control my emotions.” Such self-criticism can lead to feelings of helplessness, and depression is not far behind.

When psychologically troubled, you may not profit from writing about it. Always remember, when it comes to coping plans and strategies, once size does not fit all. Still, the studies on writing and mental well-being show the benefits of focusing on what you can do about your emotions, rather than preoccupying yourself with those emotions. Asking, “Why am I such an anxious person? How can I get rid of this anxiety?” takes you into a world of denial, avoidance, and instability. Writing about a problem and ways to solve that problem just might inspire you to recognize, “I’m an anxious person in these types of situations, so I need to prepare appropriate behaviors so the anxiety doesn’t overwhelm me.” Such a strategy will take you into a world of effective coping with confidence and personal empowerment.

An Olympic Lesson in Coping

NOTE: What follows is a discussion of the psychological dangers of self-medicating with psychoactive drugs when coping with stress. The discussion uses the Acceptance, Accountability, Action model of coping that we have discussed in this blog over the past 4 years. This entry deals with psychology, and there is no attempt to make a sociocultural statement about marijuana use and laws in the United States, the World Anti-Doping Agency, or the United States Olympic Committee.

Sha’Carri Richardson is an up-and-coming US sprinter who won the 100-meter dash at the US Olympic trials. She was a definite favorite for a gold medal at the Summer ’21 Olympics until she failed a drug test, testing positive for THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. THC is a banned substance under World Anti-Doping Agency rules, and Richardson was suspended for a month, which extended through the 100-meter event at the Olympics. The United States Olympic Committee also decided not to place Richardson on the team to possibly compete in other track events.

In an interview on NBC, Richardson, 21, said, “I want to take responsibility for my actions. I know what I did. I know what I’m supposed to do. I know what I’m allowed to do, and I still made that decision.” Good for her. She accepted responsibility for making a stupid decision. She embraced accountability, which is a cornerstone of the coping model we often repeat in this blog: Effective coping requires acceptance of reality, being accountable for your actions within that reality, and developing a realistic coping plan of action that includes humility and empathy.

But wait. Richardson went on to explain that she used the marijuana after being told that her biological mother had died, news, she said, that put her in a state of “emotional panic.” This comment raises a psychological red flag because it contradicted her earlier statement of responsibility for using the drug. Now she played the “entitlement card,” saying that the emotional burden of the news about her mother caused her to self-medicate. Psychologically, that’s an avoidance strategy that says, “It’s not on me.”

Applying our coping model, when Richardson brought in her burden-of-grief excuse she was avoiding accountability and not serving herself well, psychologically speaking. In general, when you’re all stressed out and emotionally overwhelmed, self-medicating with psychoactive drugs is a poor coping strategy. Counselors’ offices are filled with clients who have traveled the self-sabotaging road of alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, opioids, stimulants, and designer compounds. This road is paved with avoidance, denial, helplessness, dependence, and self-criticism, and it generally leads to the dead end of depression. In Richardson’s case, her action sacrificed something she values: winning an Olympic medal. Whenever you behave in ways that damage what you value, you’re in psychological trouble.

Richardson’s unfortunate action shows that being accountable for your behavior can be easier said than done. In last week’s post we described Grace, who was molested by a coach when she was 12. She also carried a heavy emotional burden, and for years she coped with it by adopting a sense of entitlement. Grace said, “The only way I could deal with it was to use it to gain sympathy from others. You know, ‘Treat me gently because I suffered abuse as a child. I deserve your sympathy and tenderness.’ That attitude of entitlement drove people away from me; my social and romantic life was a mess. Counseling helped me realize that I did not deserve to have the corners of my world padded just because I had a traumatic experience. It happened, and it raised a whole bunch of emotions that I let dominate me. It took me awhile, and I still process it, but the fact is I don’t deserve squat, and I have to be responsible for living my life now, not yesterday.”

Grief presents a special set of coping challenges, but Richardson could have met hers without seeking padded corners for her world. A world-class athlete like her could have discovered that her grief could be worked through by honoring her mother’s memory with hard training, and dedicating her Olympic performance to her mother. [See blog entry of December 24, 2020] When her suspension ends, she will have many opportunities and challenges ahead. I hope she finds an appropriate social and professional support network to help her realize that effective coping with those challenges must involve complete accountability, independence, confidence, humility, and self-esteem, none of which will be found in a drug.

Memories: “Ah, yes, I remember it well.”

NOTE: This entry does not refer to any particular person or group, and the examples are composites from multiple cases.

How often do you reach back into your storehouse of memories to retrieve a memory of an event long past? This can be a tricky undertaking because your memories are not like photos in a scrapbook, unchanging replications of a past event. They are more like sand dunes on a beach, changing shape according to wind and tide fluctuations. For instance, in one experiment, just prior to taking a test, students were asked how anxious they were. About a week after taking the test, they were told they either did well, or did poorly, and then asked again how anxious they felt before taking the test the previous week. Those who were told they did well, remembered themselves as less anxious before the test than they actually were; conversely, students who were told they did poorly, remembered themselves as more anxious before the test than they actually were. In others words, when you reflect back on an event, your memory can be influenced by your current circumstances. If you’re presently depressed and are asked what sort of childhood you had, what are the odds you will remember it as Brady-Bunch delightful? You are more likely to remember your childhood as stressful and frustrating, and you can justify your depression by casting blame on your parents. In this case, the potentially-distorted memory retrieval can greatly complicate efforts to deal with your current depression.

Memories can also be an impediment to effective coping by trapping you in your past. You can become tormented by memories of long-ago events that may produce anger, shame, anxiety, or similar emotions that interfere with stable functioning in the present. You may need to learn to accept the past as something over which you have no control, and focus your coping efforts on the present. Grace, for instance, was physically molested by a coach when she was 12. “I never forgot that experience,” she says, “and it haunted me. The only way I could deal with it was to use it to gain sympathy from others. You know, ‘Treat me gently because I suffered abuse as a child. I deserve your sympathy and tenderness.’ That attitude of entitlement drove people away from me; my social and romantic life was a mess. Counseling helped me realize that I did not deserve to have the corners of my world padded just because I had a traumatic experience. It happened, and it raised a whole bunch of emotions that I let dominate me. It took me awhile, and I still process it, but the fact is I don’t deserve squat, and I have to be responsible for living my life now, not yesterday.”

            Another way memories can challenge your coping efforts is when you come to believe things that didn’t happen the way you remember. Elke Geraerts of Maastricht University, The Netherlands, and colleagues were interested in determining if presumed victims of sexual abuse when a child, could actually forget the event and then later recover it years later during therapy. The researchers conducted extensive interviews and testing with women in their 40s who claimed they had recovered forgotten memories of earlier sexual abuse, and recovered the memories during formal therapy. Geraerts also interviewed family members and friends, and found little objective confirmation of the recovered memories. That is, extensive interviewing and investigation with relatives and friends just did not verify the events these women said they suddenly began to remember during therapy sessions. Geraerts concluded that during therapy, the clients were slowly buying into suggestions from the therapist – “Maybe the source of your problems is that you were abused as a child. Have you ever considered that?” – and they incorporated imaginary experiences into their memories, experiences that never took place. Impossible? Actually, memory researchers have found that false memories from childhood can be “implanted” in highly suggestible people, memories like getting lost in a store for a few minutes when 3, or being taken to the hospital for a stomach ache when 4. Some people are quite capable of unconsciously manufacturing memories that never happened.

            There are some valuable coping lessons here. When trying to cope with stress, you would be wise not to rely on analyzing your past, especially if your memories of that past are all you have to go on, and you cannot confirm the reliability of your memories with reports of others. Also, remember that your memories can be greatly influenced by suggestions from others, and by your current circumstances and emotional state. Given these caveats, it’s safe to say that your coping efforts will be much more successful when you focus on what you can control and act on in the present, and not dwell on memories of past events.

Improving Self-esteem

Most psychologists agree that your self-concept gives you a sense of stability and allows you to see yourself as the same person from day to day. Yes, you act differently with different people and situations but, nevertheless, you maintain that continuity of “self.” The way you view yourself is called “self-esteem,” and the level of self-esteem that we carry around is important. For instance, if you have high self-esteem, you probably tend to see yourself as empowered and able to obtain high goals; you are not likely to act like a failure and give up when faced with challenges; you enjoy involvement with others, especially in a helping, empathetic context.

People low in self-esteem show quite a different pattern of behavior. Compared to those with high self-esteem, they are more prone to depression, anxiety, poor interpersonal relationships, underachievement, and health problems. They believe they are destined to these fates, helpless to change them, and deserving of unhappiness; they tend to avoid meaningful interactions with others, thinking they are inferior to others; they see failure, rejection, and loss as their fault; their negative self-perceptions sustain their self-doubts, low confidence, self-criticism, and other self-defeating thoughts.

In short, acting like a failure, giving up, immoral behavior, and poor health are inconsistent with having high self-esteem, but consistent with low self-esteem. High self-esteem protects people when negative events occur. They are resilient by reminding themselves that they are worthy; they ascribe setbacks to bad luck or the fault of others. Low self-esteem, however, does not afford these protections. These people have difficulty seeing aspects of their self-concept that are admirable; they blame themselves for adversity, and become self-critical, which makes them vulnerable to anxiety and depression.

How might one improve their level of self-esteem? Therapist Michael Church uses an exercise with low self-esteem clients to help them deal more realistically with who they are, and discover that many aspects of their lives are commendable, admirable, and worthwhile. He asks clients to draw a circle and divide it into pie-like slices that represent the main areas of their life. This task may take several efforts to include all relevant areas, and Church says many clients find that insightful. That is, they don’t usually think about how diverse and complex their self-concepts are.

Church says, “Clients eventually section off spaces relevant to job or school, friendship, extended family, girlfriend/boyfriend, intelligence, physical attractiveness, morality, and health. There are other areas that may or not be included such as citizenship, spirituality, emotional development, and maturity. I discuss their choices with them to make sure that they are comfortable that all pertinent aspects of self-concept in their life are included. Then, I ask them to shade the areas where they see themselves with at least a modicum of self-esteem. I have never had anyone fail to shade in at least a few areas, even those who claim to have ’no self-esteem.’ This part of the exercise helps them realize that contrary to what they believe, they do not have generically low-self-esteem that pervades all aspects of their life. Then, we work on the shaded areas of choice, consistent with their priorities and values. I encourage them to identify actions they can take, and work within productive and proactive goal-setting guidelines. [See blog entry April 30, 2021.]. This helps them define goals appropriately and realistically while also having the means to know objectively whether they are making progress or have reached their goals.”

Note how Church’s exercise stresses action. As he puts it, “The best way to increase self-esteem is not by positive thinking, but by doing things that bring about positive results. Thoughts and feelings can be discarded, but we cannot easily dismiss our efforts and results that are valid and obvious. Our behavior is factual; it either occurred or it did not. Our effort is under our control, unlike the reactions of others and life situations we did not create.” Church is saying that if you want to increase your self-esteem you must focus on what you can control, and in many cases that is personal effort. You may apply for a job and get an interview. You may prepare for the interview – that’s something you can control. But you can’t control the interviewer, and you may not get the job. If you focus on your effort, however, you can view the interview as a learning experience, accept the result, and move on better equipped for the next interview. There is nothing to be gained by hanging on to disappointments and setbacks. Learn from them, correct mistakes, and adapt your effort to the next situation. Self-esteem does not require constant success. It requires you to be able to say, “I gave it my all and did the best I could. I will look for ways to improve and do even better next time.”

Weather and Mood

NOTE: Lynn’s case is hypothetical.

It’s June! It’s getting warm! Is your mood increasing too? If so, that’s not surprising because there a relationship between our moods and the weather. For example, researchers at the Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics found that mood and thinking ability both improved with warmer temperatures, and sunny, pleasant weather. But, there’s a caveat: The researchers also found that when assigned to work on tasks outside on warm, sunny days, the mood of the research participants increased; for those assigned to complete the tasks inside, however, even when pleasant weather conditions prevailed outside, mood was lower. In other words, the positive effect of weather depended on where the person was working during those nice weather conditions. Working outside – certainly more stimulating to the senses than being inside – produced better performance than working inside.

Isn’t this exactly what happens every Spring (except for 2020, of course, when the pandemic took hold)? Warm April days come after weeks of cold weather that have driven you inside – at least in the North. And now, almost overnight, there is opportunity for outdoor activities. So, you get outside and do more and you feel great!

There’s a key word here: Activity. Is winter a “downer” for you? If so, is it possible that you might feel a little sad in the winter months because you change your routine and give in to the darkness? All those worries about the dangers imposed by bad-weather driving, flying home for the holidays, becoming snowbound, getting the flu, or a host of other concerns – all resulting from negative psychological responses to winter – just tie you up in knots. So, you retreat and curl up on the couch. You’re less likely to “mask-up” and go out to dinner and parties, host small social events at home, or engage in outdoor hobbies and recreation. You lower your activity level.

Every September Lynn gives her psychiatrist’s office a call and asks to refill her anti-depressant medication. She tells them she’s feeling fine and hasn’t taken any meds since last April. But winter is coming and she knows that come late October she will begin to feel “down” as those winter blues set in. She wants to get a running start and start the meds so they will have already “kicked in” by November, and she will cut off the depression at the pass, so to speak. Her strategy is like getting a flu shot before the flu season sets in.

If you tend to get down-in-the-dumps during winter and want to take antidepressants, that’s your choice. But in a few months, you might consider an alternative strategy. Perhaps the key to maintaining a good mood during winter is to maintain your activity outside the home. When winter 2021-22 begins to rear its ugly head, don’t let it drive you inside; rather, stay active. Schedule special events and activities that you’ll enjoy. Sure, you’ll have to adjust from November to April to take that walk, go to the gym, deliver meals to the needy, volunteer at the animal shelter, or visit with hospice guests, but doing so is better than sitting on your butt.        

Some physiologists speculate that winter depression results from altered brain biochemistry because of reduced sunlight. While certainly plausible – bathing in sunshine is uplifting for the spirit – a psychological hypothesis seems equally reasonable. As winter approaches and the days get shorter, maybe it’s not reduced sunlight that makes you feel miserable; maybe it’s what you do – or don’t do – during the reduced sunlight that brings on that glum mood. Yes, you can choose to take antidepressants during this time; but you can also resolve to approach winter as a challenging time to continue with activities that give you pleasure and a sense of control in your life, not as a time to hibernate! What you do is under your control; the weather is not! So, have a great summer, but when it’s over, find creative ways to extend your pleasurable warm-weather activities into the winter months. [For a lengthier, more detailed look at this topic, see our entry on November 12, 2017.]

Critical Thinking

NOTE: This entry does not refer to any particular person or to any particular group, and the examples are composites from multiple cases.

The phrase “critical thinking” has been absorbed into a lot of current issues – think conspiracy theories, for instance. When someone expresses a conspiracy theory, it’s not long before someone else mentions the need for critical thinking. In this blog, we’re also interested in critical thinking, but in the context of coping with stress: Critical thinking is essential for effective coping. Being able to think critically about conflicts will help you immensely in resolving the stress involved.

Critical thinking means being able to evaluate, objectively, what a speaker says about an issue. The critical thinker will want the speaker to produce clear, impartial, independent evidence supporting their position, and to show how alternative explanations can be ruled out. In other words, the critical thinker wants something more than, “Because my Senator [or my dad] said so!”

Years ago, I had a college classroom discussion going about the psychological benefits of religious belief. At one point a young man ventured off focus and made a comment about Mormons: “They have more than one wife, you know.” I asked how he knew that, and he said, “My dad told me.” I said, “But where’s dad’s evidence? Where are all these extra wives? Are they hidden away?” “Must be,” he replied.

I told the class, “Hang on. Dr. Murphy in our department is an expert on Mormons. Let me go get her.” She was in her office and I asked her to come to the class and tell them what Mormons believe and practice. I didn’t tell the class she was Mormon; that was her business and she could tell them if she wanted. She didn’t. Instead, she treated the topic like any knowledgeable professor would: Here’s some history, some statistics and data, and current Mormon doctrine governing things like tithing, family, and ministry. At the end of class, as the students were filing out, I asked the kid who started it all, “What do you think?” He said, “I don’t care what she says, I’ll stick with my dad.” Critical thinking is a challenge because it may require you to discard ideas that bring you comfort and certainty, and this student was a long way from reaching that requirement.

Bart hears a speaker proclaim, “We are at the end of days. God has had it with humanity, filled with pedophiles, baby killers, and other assorted perverts, and the world will end within the year. Only my believers will be saved.” Bart is attracted to this notion because he also feels humans have screwed everything up. He doesn’t see much hope for the world, and he would love to have a pathway to salvation. “I should join this group,” Bart thinks.

But, wait, let’s have Bart do some critical thinking first. “Just because his words bring me comfort doesn’t make him correct. Since the dawn of time, the world has been filled with evildoers. Why hasn’t God ended it all long before this? Why would God single out this guy as His messenger? Does this guy have some private agenda? I know my buddy, Jim, is always telling me how much good there is in the world, if I just look around for it. Maybe he’s right, and not this guy. If I join this group, what will that mean for other parts of my life?” And on Bart could go, critically and objectively evaluating the claim that the world will end this year, and examining the guy’s motives in proclaiming that view. Bart must also examine his personal consequences of accepting or rejecting the world’s-end claim. The task requires him to detach himself emotionally from arguments on all sides and think about things rationally, logically, and realistically.

There’s one more thing involved, the most important thing, but it’s also the one thing that people never seem to realize: Critical thinking requires humility. Critical thinking requires you to admit that it’s not all about you, that you are not the center; you are not the indispensable ingredient in the recipe; you are not the one with the best judgment. Critical thinking – like effective coping itself – requires you to put aside such self-absorption and admit that you may be wrong! Unless you’re a narcissist, that admission shouldn’t be difficult. After all, it’s illogical to think that you are always correct, and those who disagree with you are always wrong. You say the government is evil and the source of all your troubles. Or, maybe it’s mom, dad, or any of several other authority figures in your life who are to blame. But you know your belief is true because you see yourself as superior to others in evaluating what’s around you.

But here’s the problem with such condescension: You are not superior; you just think you are. The truth is, you cannot accept uncomfortable truths about yourself; you are unable to hold yourself accountable for your actions and beliefs; you cannot devise your own independent, autonomous coping plan that includes the needs of others. In short, without humility, not only are you unable to think critically, but you’re also unable to cope with life as a rational, independent, self-sufficient human being.

Critical thinking and coping effectively and realistically with stress are tightly intertwined. Those whose self-concept is threatened by self-examination; those who see infidels under every rock and conspiracies around every corner; those who blindly follow and never question the wisdom of their own actions – they are self-absorbed and imprisoned by self-interests. They are incapable of handling stress because of denial, anger, fear, and self-blame – unchecked emotions and ego defenses that inevitably lead to self-sabotage.

[For more on critical thinking check out blog entries for May 14 and 21, 2021]

Oppositional Defiance in Adults

NOTE: This entry does not refer to any particular person or to any particular group, and the examples used are composites derived from multiple cases.

Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) is a disorder of childhood. Children with ODD are uncooperative and hostile toward peers, parents, teachers, and other authority figures. The condition often begins when children are toddlers, and may reflect problems with becoming independent from a parent or caregiver – anyone to whom they are emotionally attached. Conflicted between independence and dependence, they become more and more resentful of rules and restrictions on their behavior.

Although not typically diagnosed in adults as a disorder, oppositional defiance can be expressed as a chronic adult behavior pattern. Habitual actions would include temper tantrums; arguing; refusing requests; preoccupation with self and pathological narcissism; questioning rules and refusing to follow them; purposely doing things to annoy or upset others; being easily annoyed by others; speaking harshly or unkindly; seeking revenge or being vindictive. Of course, at any given point in time, anyone could exhibit some of these behaviors, but many occur habitually, we can characterize the individual as being an oppositional defiant type.

The adult pattern could have its roots in childhood. For instance, the victim might have unresolved anger toward a parent. This anger would be released when conflict with other adults – particularly authority figures – occurs. The authority represents the parent. Unresolved anger from childhood could also be turned inward, and the victim blames him/herself for the childhood conflict. Such blame could lead to instability in interpersonal relationships, especially when dealing with a spouse, significant other, boss, or co-worker. Whatever the case, the ODD adult is not pleasant to be with.

Felicia is an extreme example of the ODD pattern, and her case shows the influence of unresolved childhood anger toward a parent. Felicia had a lot of emotional upheaval in childhood. Her parents divorced when she was six and she lived with her father to escape her alcoholic mother. Her father eventually remarried, and he was overly controlling and dictatorial toward both his wife and Felicia. She harbored anger toward her dad but was unable to express it, fearing retaliation. When she was 16, her boyfriend raped her. They were “making out” but he escalated the situation despite her pleas of, “No, stop! I don’t want to.” She kept the episode a secret, and was eventually able to end the relationship. The episode, however, intensified her mostly unconscious anger toward men, anger she didn’t know how to resolve.

Ironically, as she grew older, Felicia only felt comfortable with abusive, confrontational, angry men. They were a part of her “father comfort zone,” meaning she was used to confrontational interactions with men and felt a sense of predictability and control. On the other hand, when a man showered Felicia with warmth, support, consideration, and understanding, she experienced anxiety because she didn’t know how to handle those gestures. She didn’t know how to return affection and it’s no wonder her multiple marriages were a bust.

Felicia’s third husband, Kurt, was much like her, and their arguments were monumental; she was finally symbolically confronting her dad and releasing years of pent-up anger and frustration. Physical and emotional abuse from both Felicia and Kurt resulted in multiple calls to the police, and their home life was, at best, chaotic. At one point they tried marital counseling, and over several years one or both of them had therapy sessions. They tried psychiatrists and different medications; they tried psychologists and different types of treatment strategies. Soon they found that going to sessions together was a mistake because issues that came up would just provide fuel for arguing later. The counseling and medications did not really lessen their personal insecurities or their anger with one another – and for Felicia, her anger toward her dad. Neither she nor Kurt could be intimate with the other, nor refrain from lashing out at the other. Even on rare “pleasant” days, eventually something would come up that would cause stress and tension, and they would once again fight like two rams locked in battle. Will they stay together unhappily until death?  “You’ve heard of soul mates?” says Felicia. “I guess we’re devil mates!”

Do you know someone who fits the ODD pattern? A co-worker, partner, acquaintance, spouse? Obviously, their coping abilities are terrible; they do not solve problems, they create them. Their actions are designed to help them avoid the inner turmoil tormenting and terrifying them – the repressed, never-resolved emotional conflicts that require them to maintain a pathological character armor to protect them from having to face who they are, and sabotage their life in the process. They are perfect models of ineffective coping.

Values Clarification: An Exercise for Your Teens

Joe Namath and Roger Staubach are former NFL quarterbacks who played in the late 60s and early 70s, and are now enshrined in the Hall of Fame.

Namath was “Broadway Joe,” the superstar who lived the New York club life with a new babe on his arm each night. He opened a popular Upper East Side nightclub called Bachelors III, which not only drew big names in sports, entertainment, and politics, but also organized crime figures. To protect the league’s reputation, NFL Commissioner Pete Rozelle ordered Namath to divest himself of his interest in the venture. Namath refused and retired from football. But he eventually recanted, agreed to sell the club, and un-retired. In 1984, at age 39, confirmed bachelor Namath married Deborah Mays. The couple had two daughters, and divorced in 2000.

Staubach was a Naval Academy star (Heisman Trophy, 1963) who did his military stint after graduation, and then joined the NFL. He and his wife, Marianne, have been married 56 years and have five children.

I remember a TV interview with Staubach sometime in the late ‘70s or early ‘80s. The interviewer was trying to draw Staubach into comparisons of himself and Namath with respect to their lifestyles, especially sex. At one point the interviewer even implied that perhaps Namath’s libidinal needs were more satisfied than Staubach’s. I’ll never forget how an irritated Staubach interrupted the interviewer and said, “Wait a minute. I enjoy sex just as much as Namath does. I just always have it with the same woman.”

Are you the parents of a teenager, and wondering where he/she might be heading on the morality wagon? You could share the stories above and ask them leading questions like, “Who do you admire more?” “Who do you want to be like?” But what about instead of focusing on their choice of identification, try this question on for size: “Which lifestyle do you prefer that we, your parents, follow? Namath’s or Staubach’s?” Suddenly, the context is not one of you telling the kid what’s right and what’s wrong. And, when the kids hear themselves telling you how they want their parents to behave, they open the door inside themselves for thinking critically about some pretty heavy issues.

For parents looking to discuss “character” with their kids – things like ethics, integrity, values, and honor – they might consider as a prompt two US Presidents, George H. W. Bush, and Donald Trump.

Bush was the 41st president who served one term from 1989 to 1993. In 1942, at age 18, he enlisted in the Navy and became an aviator during WWII. He flew his first combat mission in 1944 during the attack on Wake Island in the Pacific. Three months later his plane was shot down during a bombing attack on Japanese-held territory, but he was rescued. After the war, Bush married Barbara Pierce in 1945, a marriage that lasted until his death, 73 years and six children later.

In 1993 Bush lost his bid for a second term as president to Bill Clinton. In his concession comments he said, “Well, here’s the way I see it. The people have spoken and we respect the majesty of the democratic system. I just called Governor Clinton over in Little Rock and offered my congratulations. He did run a strong campaign. I wish him well in the White House. And I want the country to know that our entire Administration will work closely with his team to insure the smooth transition of power. There is important work to be done and we wish him well.”

Trump was the 45th president, and he lost his bid for a second term in 2020. He was educated at Fordham University and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, graduating in May 1968. In 1977, he married Ivana Zelníčková. They had three children and ten grandchildren followed. The couple divorced in 1992, and in 1993 he married Marla Maples. They had one daughter. They were divorced in 1999, and in 2005, Trump married Melania Knauss. They have one son.

Following his loss in 2020, Trump said, “This election was rigged. Everybody knows it. I don’t mind if I lose an election. But I want to lose an election fair and square. What I don’t want to do is have it stolen from the American people. That’s what we’re fighting for, and we have no choice. We already have the proof, we already have the evidence, and it’s very clear. Many people in the media, and even judges so far, have refused to accept it. They know it’s true, they know it’s there, they know who won the election. But they refuse to say, ‘You’re right.’ Our country needs somebody to say, ‘You’re right.'” To this day, Trump continues to encourage his followers to find a way to overturn the election.

Try the Bush/Trump stories as prompts in discussions with your kids about honesty, values, principles, and conscience. Ask the kids: “Which approach do you prefer that we, your parents, follow, Bush’s or Trump’s?” Even if your kid knows where you stand on Trump, the nature of your question puts the discussion on a different playing field where you, not the kid, is the object of concern. Also, the issue becomes much broader than Bush or Trump. “I wouldn’t want you to look for excuses when you lose, Dad.” Or, “For me, Mom, if you really believe something, I want you to stand up for yourself.” Again, you have opened an inner door to self-discovery for your kids. Isn’t that what parenting is all about?

Coping with Vax Side Effects

Many vaccination-resistant folks justify their hesitancy by saying there are side effects to the shot: Pain, redness and swelling in the arm; plus, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, chills, fever, and nausea, generally lasting a day and occurring primarily after the second shot. Many also mention blood clots in a small percentage of Johnson & Johnson recipients.

Isn’t it interesting that many of the “popular” medications used or prescribed for various conditions also list possible side effects, but these are generally ignored? I often wonder how many of those folks who refuse to get the coronavirus vaccination because of the side effects, readily take other prescription medications that have a daunting list of side effects. Even the most popular OTC pain killer, aspirin, can cause stomach irritation and bleeding, nausea, heartburn, skin bruising, and tinnitus.

Lexapro and Zoloft, popular antidepressant drugs, can produce drowsiness, dizziness, fainting, insomnia, fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, decreased libido, irregular heartbeat, and seizures. Xeljanz, used for types of arthritis and ulcerative colitis, can cause liver disease, heart problems, blood clots, stomach and intestinal ulcers, kidney disease, and risk of developing certain cancers.

Lisinopril (Zestril), a drug prescribed for high blood pressure, can produce a light-headed feeling, shortness of breath, fever, sore throat, nausea, weakness, chest pain, irregular heartbeats, and kidney and liver problems. Maybe you’ve seen a commercial for Entresto, which is prescribed for heart problems. Side effects include dizziness, cough, trouble breathing, elevated potassium, hypotension, fainting, and rash.

Another thing that’s interesting is that the people who justify their vaccine hesitancy by appealing to side effects, don’t seem to worry about the possible long-term effects of becoming infected. There is clear and ample anecdotal evidence that post-infection problems can occur long after infection symptoms have dissipated. The coronavirus has the potential to adversely affect literally every organ in the body, and produce lingering symptoms that can pop up over months. People who suffer this way are called “longhaulers.” And yet, fear of the vaccination seems to override logical thinking about such things.

Maybe the issue is the needle, something we mentioned in last week’s blog. Receiving a vaccination involves a needle being inserted into the body. Do we have a primeval fear that penetration of the skin signifies delivery of an impurity into the body, a wound, a threat to life? News coverage repeatedly shows people having a needle inserted into their arm, and many recoil at this sight. Most prescription medications that we talked about earlier involve taking a pill, an action that arouses far less instinctive revulsion than having a needle invade your body.

One thing for certain: using side effects to justify your resistance to receiving an inoculation is a poor coping strategy because it transforms what should be a problem-solving issue into an emotional issue. That transformation focuses on fear, anger, and distrust. Those and other emotions compromise your ability to think about an issue rationally, logically, and realistically, and make you dependent on others who may not have your best interests in mind. There’s no secret to effective coping with stress. It involves focusing on solving a problem, not on catastrophizing your life in service to normal emotions that you assume make you different, incompetent, and worthless.