Author: thecopingblog

The holidays are a time when a lot of folks seem to focus on happiness. It’s Christmas! Let’s gather around the tree, sing carols, laugh, and have a happy time. Unfortunately, holiday happiness can be elusive because too often people tend to center their search around “me,” always asking, what do “I” need to do to make “myself” happier? If this sounds like you, the problem here is that you’re being self-serving and looking for answers that are defined by your needs, your frustrations, your anxieties, your difficulties. “But,” you ask, “how can I possibly help myself if I don’t center my plans and actions around myself?”

Here’s a thought: Instead of putting yourself as the main ingredient in the recipe, take yourself out of the recipe. Consider the possibility that, whatever your difficulty, you can use the emotions it generates within you to increase your sensitivity to others who suffer from trauma and conflicts similar to yours. This empathy will not only help others, but yourself as well. That’s right, taking yourself out of the formula will encourage you to reach out to others. The bonus? You will discover that reaching out will bring you ample helpings of personal satisfaction – call it happiness if you want, but it’s much more – and help you cope better with your problems. Many people feel that happiness is something that is acquired, like a trophy, a promotion, or winning the lottery. Psychology research shows, however, that happiness emerges from things you do, not from things you acquire. Reaching out to others, committing to a cause, working hard at a task, persisting in spite of frustration and adversity – these sorts of things seem more related to being “happy” than merely acquiring something.

Viewed from this perspective, one clear road to happiness involves empathy, a social responsiveness that does not involve a search for happiness, but a desire to help others because you understand their need. If you have been previously victimized or are presently dealing with emotional upheaval in similar ways as someone else, who can understand their plight better than you? Who is better equipped to relate to them than you? The true beauty of empathy and helping others, however, is that you reap the psychological benefits of contentment, satisfaction, and self-actualization. There is no more effective therapy than empathetic service to others. It’s not that empathy brings you happiness; it’s that empathy brings you a sense of being a useful person.

Here are some comments from clients in group therapy.

“Telling my story helped me face it as real. Then I knew others’ stories were real, too. I felt less alone. New people would show up. It was hard for me to listen to them because I was reliving my own experience. But I understood them, and knew they understood me. That was so cool.”

            “I discovered I could help others. Hell, if I could do that, I should be able to face myself. That brought me a lot of inner peace.”

            “I discovered I wasn’t the only one hurting. Others were there, too. Whenever I felt like I was drowning, I threw a lifeline to others in the group. We taught each other how to save ourselves.”

Whatever your plight, you are not alone in your difficulties. The best way to facilitate your ability to cope is to make sure that – as you travel the road to discovering that you are useful – you leave no one behind. Christmas is unique in offering you that pathway. Take it. Doing so will help you will find yourself participating in – and enjoying the richness of – the human adventure.

Poor Santa. He gets a free ride at the Macy’s Thanksgiving Parade yesterday, but it comes at a cost. Just at that time of year when millions of children idolize the guy, someone comes down on him as the cause of mistrust in children toward their parents. Presumably, the mistrust develops when the kid discovers that there is no jolly guy flying around the world in a sleigh pulled by reindeer, and concludes that “my parents have been lying to me all this time. I’ll never trust them again.” Pop psychology at its best.

Christian evangelicals also criticize presenting Santa as real. They point out that lying is sinful; your child could also be embarrassed in front of peers; even worse, your child could suffer religious confusion among peers when faced with a question like, “You believe in God? I suppose you also believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, and the Easter bunny!” And, finally, many argue that focusing a child on Santa encourages them to overlook the true meaning of Christmas – the birth of Jesus.

These false narratives are not based on solid child psychology knowledge. For example, enlightened and empathetic parents can use their children’s newly-discovered skepticism about Santa as valuable life, family, and yes, even religious lessons. “Hey, mom, Sally just told me that Santa isn’t real. Is that true?” I remember a conversation I had with a former student about this issue. She said that a few days before Christmas she and her 7-year-old daughter were wrapping presents. She told her daughter they could make one from Santa. “But mom, I know Santa’s not real.” When I asked mom how she handled that, paraphrasing, here’s what she said:

“Well, you know I teach elementary school, and I was ready for it. I admitted there was not a bearded old man in a sleigh. But I brought up some of our family traditions and talked about them with her – things we did, special decorations, meals, all the fun times we had at Christmas. And I asked her, ‘Has Santa been a part of all those fun times? How is Santa in this house? Could it be that we’re all Santa? You, me, your dad, your little brother? And what makes us Santa?’ She nailed this one and said, ‘We give each other presents!’ Building on that insight I went into some comments about giving and receiving, that both are blessings because they bring us together as a family. I said, ‘That’s who Santa is. All of us, and it’s one of the things that shows each of us that we love each other.’ I could tell she was really soaking all this in like a sponge. And then I took the plunge. I pointed at the Nativity scene we always had in a prominent place under the tree. And I went into the great gift that God, the ultimate Santa, gave us – his Son who would teach us to love one another.”

The pop-psychology stuff about seeding mistrust in children by lying to them about Santa is nonsense. An isolated deception about a real Santa is not going to sow mistrust of parents in an overall warm, supportive family filled with love and positive guidance. Furthermore, as Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget showed us, children’s understanding about their world progresses through stages, and the first stage is very concrete: their understanding is primitive. Try to explain to a 2-year-old that Santa is symbolic of the gifts of giving and receiving, those things that define a family and love, including the love and redemption we receive from Christ. Good luck. But, believe it or not, the vision of a jolly, smiling guy being towed through the sky by a bunch of flying reindeer is preparing the child’s mind for understanding those greater mysteries to be grappled with at a later age, with a more physically-matured brain. The fact is, the early belief in the real Santa is not at all incompatible with appreciating at a later age the significance of what’s really going on in that Bethlehem stable.

There’s a coping lesson here: Put more Santa into your life throughout the year. The reality of Santa embodies the principles of effective coping with stress: Get outside yourself and give service and support to others; likewise, receive what others bring you, remembering the difference between taking – which is based on egotistical self-absorption, and receiving – which is based on understanding, empathy, and humility. Remember, receiving allows you to give to another the special blessing of giving. Keeping Santa’s Ho-Ho-Ho in your heart will help you establish a psychologically healthy daily legacy that is based on making others – and yourself – feel good.

Are you regularly self-critical, always casting yourself as the enemy? You will never cope effectively if you are your own enemy. Sure, you have negative thoughts and feelings, but they are a natural part of life, and having them does not make you weird or abnormal. If someone criticizes you, well, that’s their problem, not yours; you’re not here to live up to others’ expectations.

            Do you give in to self-destructive behavior – drug/alcohol abuse, social withdrawal, gambling, eating disorders, jeopardizing your family’s welfare – at the expense of your values? If you value your roles as parent, spouse, employee, or friend, but, at the same time, let yourself become less effective in these roles, how can you expect to feel good about yourself?  If you value work, family, and friends, you must act accordingly, and with a sincere commitment and dedication.

            Do you regularly ask yourself, “How am I doing?” or, “Am I happy enough?” If you overdo this self-focus you can lose your ability to feel satisfied in the present. For example, chronically depressed and anxious people are likely to focus on whether they are feeling better. They search for answers in social situations to see how they are doing: “Does Joe see I’m here?” “Do I look foolish to Sally?” They also monitor their own actions: “Is my heart racing?” “Am I sweating?” “Am I just pretending?” “How well am I relating?” They try to feel “right,” which makes it impossible to be themselves and have a good time.

Do you constantly check on your actions and worry about what others are thinking? Do you try to maintain complete control over what’s going on around you? Such efforts are not coping solutions, but are coping problems. In the final analysis, actions based on fear and anxiety are the basis for the issues most people face; fear and anxiety are the motivators for the conflicts that produce most psychological problems and encourage inappropriate actions. Can you see that your emotions are not the problem, but inappropriate actions servicing the emotions are?

            Stop treating your emotions as if they are alien invaders. They are you! We all have them and they are a natural part of living. You are not weird. Accept your emotions but do not be governed or dominated by them. Acceptance of their presence and focusing on your behavior are the keys to effective coping.

Sometimes you’re miserable, right? You often compare yourself to others who seem to be so much better off, so happy. “Why can’t I be happy?” you ask. Unfortunately, happiness can’t be your goal; it’s not something you find; it is something that emerges from things you do. Stop comparing yourself to others because you probably choose those who are shining examples of certain traits. There will always be those better than you, and those worse than you, so why restrict yourself to always choosing the former for comparison? Ignore those standards of beauty, skill, and perfection that so many others seem to have achieved. They haven’t. Also, understand that any criticism and rejection directed at you does not mean you are unworthy. Your critics also have issues, and they often project their issues onto you. They are the ones to blame, not yourself. They are not being honest.

Be aware of – and be wary of – the influence of online “friends.” Who influences you? Is it a flesh-and-blood real friend you trust and talk to with face-to-face, eye-to-eye contact? Or is it a distant, anonymous, virtual someone who is simply familiar to you in a chat-room or podcast? The “virtuals” can be strong influencers, but too often they are shallow, detached, uncaring, manipulative, and dangerous. Their influence is not reality-based, and it is designed to strip you of your independence.

Start communicating honestly with real-life, trusting others. You might be surprised to discover that they have many of the concerns and doubts that you do. Communicate with those real, genuine people who are honest with themselves and with you. The result will be that you will provide them with reassurance about their worthiness, and receive support for your own worthiness in return. Above all, remember: You are defined by your actions in the real world.

According to Mental Health America: In 2019-2020, 20.78% of adults were experiencing a mental illness – equivalent to over 50 million Americans. The percentage of adults reporting serious thoughts of suicide is 4.84%, but 11% of adults who identified with two or more races reported serious thoughts of suicide in 2020. Over 10% of our youth experience a level of depression that impairs their ability to function at school, work, or with family and peers. To top it off, 28% of adults with a mental illness report that they are not able to receive the treatment they need.

What is going on in America that makes coping so tough? For one thing, American society is a confusing, unpredictable, and contradictory environment. Psychologists know that such an environment is not conducive to mental stability, especially for young folks struggling to find their goals, purpose, and values. Daily, Americans are faced with sensory overload from social media; ubiquitous electronic devices impede the search for personal values; students are frightened because of school shootings; we are in a tsunami of banning books, censoring school curricula, and insulting the ability of teachers to teach; we say climate change, vaccines, and science are real – unless they are fake; we degrade and humiliate those with diverse lifestyles. On top of all these trends, we are infested with a self-preoccupation – “me, me, me” – approach to life that has metastasized into destructive attitudes and actions directed at others. And we ask why mental health problems are increasing? Frankly, it is amazing that not all of us have lost our grip on stability.

Self-absorption melds perfectly with another troublesome trend in our society: censoring attitudes and policies that foster equality and inclusion across diverse elements of society. Is it not confusing that a fundamental cornerstone value of our democracy – all are equal – is rejected by a large portion of our populace? This denial adds to the confusion and unpredictability in America that contributes significantly to mental health problems. The incidence of mixed-race mental illness noted above shows the danger of censoring diversity: It destroys respect for others by increasing self-absorption to the exclusion of empathy for others. This empathy deficiency leads to apathy and ambivalence about life as meaningful and worthwhile, which eventually leads to risk-taking, aggression (antisemitism anyone?), negativity, and self-disrespect. Self-censorship of the value of others also leads to avoidance thinking, which decreases honest self-evaluation.

Mental stability is based on predictability, clarity about others’ actions, humility, and empathy. These are features of reality that help one cope with stress. When one’s world becomes confusing and unpredictable, humility is replaced with feelings of unworthiness, and empathy is replaced with withdrawal and anger. At that point, one is vulnerable to the anxiety and depression that preclude living a purposeful and satisfying life.

The Coping model developed in this blog involves four steps:

Acceptance of Reality. Conspiracy theories are fun, but they are a form of avoidance of reality. Think of acceptance as the opposite of avoidance of your problems. When you seek to avoid and escape your stressors, you get trapped by irrational thinking, denial, and passively believing what others tell you. Acceptance, on the other hand, means empowering yourself to face yourself and the reality around you. It does not mean submissively consenting to the dictates of others. It means accepting the fact that you need to coordinate your actions with your values, and to take appropriate action that may involve working through some pain and suffering if you are to grow.

Acceptance leads to…

Accountability. Take responsibility for your actions and their consequences. Accountability does not mean you always must admit that you were at fault for what happened. It means recognizing that you are responsible for evaluating your role in some event. In many cases, you must choose not to blame yourself, not to form a pity parade, and not to make it all about you as a sufferer. Accountability means empowering yourself to choose how best to evaluate an experience, and how best to resolve the subsequent emotions you feel.

Accountability leads to…

Humility. You are not the primary ingredient in the recipe. Humility allows you to go “beyond yourself,” to face your troubles directly, and to interact with others who are also hurting. Only with humility will you be able to see the importance of reaching out to others with problems like yours; only with humility can you understand the effect you are having on others; only with humility can you become “other-oriented” rather than “me-oriented.”

Humility leads to…

Empathy. When most people think of empathy, they think of sympathy: “If I understand how another person is feeling, I am more likely to feel sympathy toward them, and want to help them.” Maybe so, but in a coping context, empathy has a much broader meaning than feeling sorry for someone. When you use empathy to cope, you are acting with moral strength; you are empowered by an understanding of how others are feeling, and you reach out to them – not because you pity them, but because you see yourself in them. The beauty of empathy is that both you and the other reap psychological benefits. Walk in another’s shoes, and service to others will follow; and, there is no more effective coping therapy than empathetic understanding and assistance to others.  Giving of yourself to others will be the greatest gift you ever receive.

            It’s been about 5 years since the Boy Scouts of America announced they would drop the word “Boy” from its name, and welcome girls as Scouts. The reaction from extreme conservatives was predictable: Boy Scouts is run by liberals who want to convert men into feckless weaklings; women are doing better than men with more attending college and becoming doctors because liberals are stripping men of their masculinity. The reality is, the future scares these extremists and takes them out of their comfort zone. The future threatens them with increasing numbers of competent women, non-Whites, non-Christians, and non-native-born Americans. They are terrified by what Kristina Hernandez, a media consultant and freelance writer, had to say about her 7-year old daughter who joined a Cub Scout pack that previously was open only to boys: “I have watched my daughter’s confidence bloom in the short amount of time she has been a Cub Scout. She has been able to do everything the boys do, from learning how to shoot a bow and arrow, to starting a fire, to racing her own derby car, and shooting a BB gun.” Hernandez is grateful to BSA for opening their ranks. “I want my daughter to have every opportunity that boys have, to be empowered as a woman and know that she is capable of doing what boys do, but in her own, female way. Femininity or masculinity need not be lost because the Boy Scouts allows girls and changed their name.”

            Hernandez’s rational, and thoughtful comments are a breath of fresh air, and based on sound psychological principles. Psychologists have long known that the key to effective coping is flexibility, which means having a wide range of options when faced with challenges. The modern woman has the traditional feminine traits, and has no problem raising children, cleaning house, or cooking; but if the situation requires her to be assertive, competitive, and forceful, she can do so without feeling less of a woman. By the same token, most men today can stand their ground firmly and decisively, and initiate forceful action; but many are also comfortable showing emotion and sensitivity, changing a diaper, and supporting their spouse’s career without any threat to their manhood. The breadth of traits shown by today’s women and men makes them far better able to cope with life compared to those who are secure only in traditional roles.

            The desire to bring back mid-20^th century attitudes about how men and women should behave will render many young folks psychologically weakened and unable to cope with future stressors. The result will be psychological sabotaging of both themselves and of larger society. Effectively coping with stress requires rejection of rigid extremes, and acceptance of flexibility in your thinking and attitudes. You can cope best when you are comfortable confronting a wide range of situational demands, and being strengthened by values, morality, and honor. Fortunately, we see almost daily – whether it be the crusades of students tired of being shot at, athletes tired of being sexually abused, or women tired of being subjugated to the whims of powerful men – positive movements based on constructive – not destructive – coping with the demands of reality. Constructive coping means choosing not to avoid, distort, or deny the realities of challenges, but choosing instead to confront, manage, and survive those realities. In your own life, choose well and you will live a more satisfying life.

If you want to cope with stress more effectively, you must be vigilant and willing to face the fears that can lead you to reality distortion and irrational thinking. You simply cannot cope effectively if your mind is engaged in distorting reality to maintain misguided beliefs. That house of cards will eventually fall because it is based on avoidance and fear.

Coping with stress requires a willingness to change your beliefs when appropriate. The first step in the process is looking squarely at your beliefs and asking yourself, “Am I avoiding something? Am I afraid of something that makes me hold onto these beliefs?” Rodney was an 18-year-old who believed that all Mormon men had multiple wives, only one of whom they made public. The rest were hidden away. Rodney’s father taught him this “fact,” and Rodney’s self-esteem was based on praise and acceptance from his father. He had a mostly unconscious fear of offending his father and suffering rejection, which would plunge him into anxiety about being abandoned. He could not challenge this father’s beliefs. Rachel, a 35-year-old single woman, avoided romantic commitment like the plague. At a deep mental level, Rachel feared she would be sexually promiscuous like her mother, who was a prostitute throughout Rachel’s childhood. Rachel feared that romantic involvement would lead to promiscuity, and expose to herself and others that she had no moral values. Only complete avoidance of emotional commitment could keep her fears hidden. Carol, a 19-year-old college student suffered intense test anxiety. Rather than face this truth realistically, she was able to convince her school’s Learning Skills Center that she needed special arrangements in her courses for taking tests. She was a solid B student, but she was tormented with the idea that she was a “dumb, incompetent, loser who couldn’t face a challenge without special help.”

Rodney and Rachel required professional counseling to be able to accept the reality of their core fears. Over time they were able to consider alternative beliefs and actions that enabled them to cope with their anxiety in more realistic fashion. Carol was more aware of her core fear, and she was able to work with a college counselor for alternative ways – notably better study practices – to confront the anxiety.

When it comes to dealing with stress, no matter what beliefs we’re talking about, when they are unrealistic, illogical, inconsistent, and contradictory, you should attack them critically and work at discarding them in favor of alternatives. Discuss your choices with a trusted friend, advisor, or professional counselor. Finally, when you choose new actions consistent with more realistic beliefs, make sure you have a reliable social support network. Coping with stress is seldom accomplished alone.

A recurrent theme of this blog is: Extreme attitudes make coping with stress difficult. “Men have better judgment and executive ability than women”; “Conservatives are liars”; “Blacks are less intelligent than Whites”; “Winning is the only thing”; “Homosexuality is a choice based on being mentally ill.” These extreme attitudes will make it hard for a person to adapt to situations that require some flexibility. For instance, taking each of the opinions listed above, what if your boss is a woman, or a Black? (You will look for another job.) What if you’re on a project team at work and the other team members seem to be liberal in their views? (You will be seen as uncooperative and selfish, and jeopardize your standing at work.) What if your 8-year-old son is distraught because his baseball team finished last? (You will encourage him to quit, and undermine his self-esteem.) What if your 12-year-old son comes to you and says he thinks he’s gay? (You will show him a road of denial and his self-concept will slowly disintegrate.) In each case, holding an extreme attitude will make it nearly impossible for holders to adopt a problem-solving approach to the stressful situation. Rather, they are more likely to take an emotion-based approach, and the result will be conflict, misinterpretation, frustration, anger, and isolation – all conducive to poor coping.

There are several concepts from the discipline of psychology – confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, cognitive bias – that capture the essence of extremism: distortion of reality. Those who hold rigid extreme attitudes twist and garble information from the outside to keep it consistent with their inflexible world view. Their rationality and accuracy are compromised as they struggle to alter facts to conform to their predetermined beliefs. They harbor anxious self-doubts, low self-esteem, and little confidence. They attack others – “It’s good-me against the evil-them. What my group believes is righteous.” They construct a world of lies, alternative facts, conspiracies, and false narratives to justify their extremism. They turn to domination and violence to eliminate the enemy. Eventually they turn against their own group, and aggression implodes bringing both them and others down. Thus it is that a dysfunctional member of a family can wreak destruction on the whole family; a small-group leader can destroy the cohesion of the group; a national leader can lead millions to their deaths and destroy a country.

Gene, 38, has a high-stress job with a stock market group. The workers exist solely to make money for their clients by choosing how to invest their clients’ money in the market. Gene has a so-so record with the company – a few successes, more failures – but you would never know it. Whether at work or in public, Gene prances and struts around like the head rooster in the farmyard. He boasts to anyone who will listen about his prowess, and he’s always eager to criticize his colleagues. He wears the best clothes, drives a super expensive car, and generally lives beyond his means, which puts a lot of pressure on his wife of 12 years. He also is very opinionated, holding extreme views about virtually everything (religion, politics, and childrearing, just to name a few), and seems to enjoy arguing with others – especially his and his wife’s family members – about the error of their ways when they disagree with him. He became so argumentative at family gatherings that both his parents and his in-laws warned him that if he could not restrain himself, he would not be welcome. The warnings did not work, and Gene, his wife, and kids were essentially ostracized from the rest of the family. His wife managed to keep in contact with the family when Gene was not around, but she, Gene, and the kids no longer attended gatherings like Thanksgiving and Christmas. The family was torn asunder.

Gene’s arrogant behavior is extreme, well beyond what he could logically justify. A psychologist would look at his excessive bragging and conflicts as designed to hide and avoid facing some internal fears. A knowledge of Gene’s childhood would uncover his core insecurity: Gene was raised by an authoritarian, demanding father who could never be pleased. No matter what Gene did, Dad found a way to criticize it. He hit a homerun in Little League, but Dad reminded him he struck out twice; he got a B+ in chemistry, but Dad wondered why not an A. Dad always managed to belittle Gene’s successes, which kept his son’s self-esteem in the toilet. Gene’s adult behavior shows the ego defense of reaction formation: Inside, he is insecure and afraid of failure; his extreme overt displays of confidence are smoke screens—ego defenses—designed to hide those internal fears. His displays of competence and independence are intense and chronic, and they betray in him a desperate attempt to hide his anxieties and weaknesses from others, especially from himself and from Dad. The tragedy was that his desperation brought considerable collateral damage to his family and his wife’s family.

Extremists base their lives on emotion – “I am right! You are wrong and you are evil!” Enchained like a slave, they live in an unchanging, static world of blame, anger, and revenge. Their emotions may eventually turn inward, producing a mind divided against itself, causing more stress. It pays to remember that if you are to cope realistically and successfully with your stressors, you must be guided by facts and results, not by a gut feeling. Only then can you be accountable for your actions, less self-preoccupied, and more socially responsible.

Guidance from the discipline of Psychology about how to raise a child seems to swing back and forth like a pendulum. For instance, 100 years ago, the prominent behaviorist John Watson recommended to parents that they eliminate nighttime thumb sucking in their infants and toddlers by pinning the arms of their bedclothes to the mattress; babies should be raised on a strict feeding schedule; physical punishment of children was appropriate and necessary; and affection between parent and child should be used sparingly. In short, from infancy on, children should be treated as adults. Twenty-five years later, the age of pediatrician Benjamin Spock began, and Watson’s advice was seen as bordering on cruel and barbaric. Spock’s book, “Baby and Child Care,” preached a more permissive childrearing model, and guided the behavior of millions of baby-boom parents following WWII. During the last half of the 20^th century, Spock’s book sold nearly 50 million copies worldwide. His permissive, nurturing approach to childrearing advised parents to recognize and be sensitive to their child’s changing motives, interests, and abilities at different stages of development. He promoted “moderate strictness,” where children must be taught manners, courtesy, cleanliness, and obedience, but always in a context of supportive guidance. He was passionately opposed to using physical punishment with children.

Most adults of the baby-boomer generation (born 1946-1964) can remember being physically punished when they were young. Often, I have heard someone comment on some action by a young person today, and say, “If I ever did that when I was a kid my old man would take a belt to me!” I have also heard baby boomers reflect on their school, and refer to “Miss So-and-so” as someone who wouldn’t hesitate to “wrap me on the knuckles with a block or a ruler if I acted out in class.” Over the Dr. Spock years, however, many of his messages took hold and parental actions like physical punishment slowly were seen as inappropriate for childrearing and schooling. As one young father put it: “I have my own kids now and I don’t use any physical punishment, nor does my wife. These days it’s just too easy to be accused of simple spanking crossing a very blurry line, and becoming something that say a teacher under strict mandated reporting has the duty to report further. I don’t need that! I also believe that violent acts breed violent acts; if I spank, I teach the kid violence is the way to handle things. Not worth it.”

Corporal punishment in the schools also began to fade away during the Spock years. As one teacher put it: “Physical punishment only sends the message to fear the instrument, or provider, and not actually curb the behavior. In schools, we clearly can’t resort to physical punishment, but we do have the option of response-cost, which is taking away something preferred, or positive reinforcement, which is giving something preferred. I tend to use reinforcement much more often because it seems to be more effective. I’d rather do something to earn something, than have to act simply to avoid punishment.”

The teacher’s comment notwithstanding – in our present atmosphere of online threats, gun violence, and extreme verbal aggression by some political leaders – reputable media sources are reporting an increasing trend of allowing corporal punishment in schools. Some school districts have been designing policies that – with written parental permission – allow teachers to use physical punishment in the form of “paddling.” Some of these policies are in effect state-wide. This trend is disturbing because psychologists can call on a mountain of evidence showing that punishment is ineffective in changing behavior, potentially contributes to childhood trauma, and can have adverse consequences that extend into adulthood. Furthermore, think about it – what kind of parents would permit a teacher to inflict pain on their child? Fortunately, in spite of these policies to insert physical punishment into schools, nationwide support for school paddling continues to be low. Most people do not want to see a return to early 20^th century childrearing practices that deny decades of sound psychological research into the cognitive, emotional, and social development of children. From a mental-health perspective, let’s hope corporal punishment stays out of schools.