Spiritual trauma: did you have any?

[_Dr. Shades]

BishopRic:

I'm still a bit befuddled over what the four women wanted you to do. Now, were they concerned that there would be repercussions at home if their husbands found out that they had gone to you? If so, then what did they think you could possibly do for them?

Also, you mentioned that they thought the church could do something to resolve their husbands' temper problems. Did they envision meeting together with you at a later date with their husbands for a "workshop" sort of thing, and did they think their husbands would all of a sudden hang up their "abuser" hats and quietly go along with such a plan?

[_Tori]

Your psychology is the Carl Rogers humanistic theory. It really sounds nice, all touchy feeling, unconditional love, etc. But the problem is, it is not very efficacious in terms of treatment. The way to change feelings of self worth is not through sympathy. It is through supporting the individual in making changes toward competence.

Tell that to the countless people that BR has already helped as a counseor.

You don't know, what you don't know, Charity.

There are people who are going to be helped just put on a waiting list to see a counselor. If BishopRic is a trained psychologist, he knows that. It is the placebo effect. We are talking about long term outcomes. RET has much better long term outcomes than CCT.

YOU were talking about long term outcomes......I guess, anyway. If I recall, Rick's first post on this thread asked if anyone had experienced some "spiritual trauma" that led to a change in belief. You seem to have turned this thread into a 'Call for authentication that his experience actually happened', attacking the women calling them "spineless", insinuating that they were the guilty ones, blah, blah, (and I will add one more 'blah'.) You throw out your Psychology terms thinking that using those terms (like anyone cares) give you credibility. Wow! You took/teach/talk, psychology....big Whoop! (insert rolling eyes, here)

Rick told of his experience as a young man that was put in a very difficult position without the real training a person needs to deal with problems such as the problems these women had. He did as he was told to do....go to the Stake President. The Stake President really was of no help and his advice struck a chord with Rick....he got that gut feeling (the Still Small Voice?) that something was wrong. As he looked back, this experience was one of the things that led him to study the Church at greater depth and look into things that had already previously bothered him. After several years, much study, a lot of prayers, he came to a conclusion that the LDS Church was not what he had always believed it to be or thought it to be.

Now, I for one, would like to hear of other experiences that people have had that also triggered some study. Wasn't that the point of this thread?

By the way....I will reiterate that you really don't know, what you don't know.

[_charity]

So which is better?

Psychologist A: Sit and listen to multiple repeats of depression, abusive events, self-loathing, guilt, low self-esteem. Result: Years of repeated victimization, but she knows why it is happening.

OR

Psychologist B: Tell the woman that the past is past and nothing will change it. Then guide her into how to make the future better by taking charge of her own life. Result: A woman gets her life on track and is no longer a victim.

Sounds like B wanted to cut the sessions short. Perhaps their client load was too full anyway, although getting your life back on track does seem like a laudable goal, it does not make payments on the BMW. So how does this apply to many ex-mormons? Would you toss them into the streets of wellness? What would that do to these many boards?
Would you give us religious posters similar short-shift? What about those of us who have come to depend upon these boards as an alternative lifestyle?

I think I said in one post that bishops and stake presidents are not trained nor qualified nor authorized, even, to act as therapists. Of course, BishopRic was way in over his head, when as a counselor in a bishopric, women came to him to solve a problem that should have been taken to a domestic violence advocate or counselor.

Where it applies to ex-mormons is when an experience like this leads people out of the Church. And how does it apply to these message boards? This one is not quite as bad as some others which merely reinforce the negativity and a lack of adjustment. Like the anorexia support group which ended up reinforcing anorexic behaviors and set the girls back a year or more in their treatment. Some that I have seen make adjustment almost impossible.

What should religious posters like you all do? What is your purpose in being here? Those who are still with one foot in the Church may be helped to have a place to express ideas they can't in Gospel Doctrine class. Those who are filled with vitriol and venom, and you know who they are, will get progressively sicker. They would be healthier if there would take up miniature golf or water skiing.

Alternative lifestyle? Tee hee.

[_guy sajer]

So which is better?

Psychologist A: Sit and listen to multiple repeats of depression, abusive events, self-loathing, guilt, low self-esteem. Result: Years of repeated victimization, but she knows why it is happening.

OR

Psychologist B: Tell the woman that the past is past and nothing will change it. Then guide her into how to make the future better by taking charge of her own life. Result: A woman gets her life on track and is no longer a victim.

Sounds like B wanted to cut the sessions short. Perhaps their client load was too full anyway, although getting your life back on track does seem like a laudable goal, it does not make payments on the BMW. So how does this apply to many ex-mormons? Would you toss them into the streets of wellness? What would that do to these many boards?
Would you give us religious posters similar short-shift? What about those of us who have come to depend upon these boards as an alternative lifestyle?

I think I said in one post that bishops and stake presidents are not trained nor qualified nor authorized, even, to act as therapists. Of course, BishopRic was way in over his head, when as a counselor in a bishopric, women came to him to solve a problem that should have been taken to a domestic violence advocate or counselor.

Where it applies to ex-mormons is when an experience like this leads people out of the Church. And how does it apply to these message boards? This one is not quite as bad as some others which merely reinforce the negativity and a lack of adjustment. Like the anorexia support group which ended up reinforcing anorexic behaviors and set the girls back a year or more in their treatment. Some that I have seen make adjustment almost impossible.

What should religious posters like you all do? What is your purpose in being here? Those who are still with one foot in the Church may be helped to have a place to express ideas they can't in Gospel Doctrine class. Those who are filled with vitriol and venom, and you know who they are, will get progressively sicker. They would be healthier if there would take up miniature golf or water skiing.

Alternative lifestyle? Tee hee.

Actually, I don't know if I'm filled with vitriol and venom. Please do enlighten me.

[_charity]

Actually, I don't know if I'm filled with vitriol and venom. Please do enlighten me.

You don't display it if you are. But of course, you are the one who knows best.

[_The Nehor]

I think that when a person is abused that it is almost entirely the abuser's fault. The abuser is the guilty one. However, a failure to analyze your own life when you fall into that kind of trap is stupid. Too many people I know that end up in tons of bad relationships (not even necessarily abusive) tend to wonder, "Why does this always happen to me?" Everyone around them could easily tell them. If you've been attacked and beaten to a bloody pulp the last time you've gone to a nightclub if you go again getting beat up again does not change that the attacker bears the bulk of the responsibility. It does make me think you're an idiot.

Abusive relationships are more complicated (and more dangerous) than the above scenarios of course. I would advise people to get advice from God in addition to seeking help from their Bishop. The Voices have very good ideas. ;)

And what in the world leads you to conclude that the victims of abuse aren't analyzing their own life? Good grief, Nehor. You're another one who knows nothing about the dynamics of abuse. Victims of abuse often spend an inordinate amount of time "analyzing" their own life. In some ways, the abuser encourages this as well. The victim of abuse wonders what's wrong with her (or him, in some cases). Did he/she "invite" abuse? Why can't he/she find a way out? etc etc

What neither you nor Charity seem to fully recognize is how the victim of abuse becomes 'entrained' by the abuser. She/he begins to view him/herself as powerless, hopeless, worthless. He or she is being carefully taught to view him/herself in those ways. If you've never experienced abuse and haven't studied the dynamics of abusive relationship, you may think it's "stupid" for the victim to "allow" him or herself to be so entrained. But it isn't stupidity at all. It's the dynamics of abusive relationships.

Your advice to get help from their bishop and God goes along nicely with the question in the OP. This is exactly what I did during my marriage, up until the very last two years (at which time I lost belief). I went to every bishop I ever had, and I prayed relentlessly. The "answer" I received from both courts were answers you would deem "stupid". I was told by bishops and by "God" (ie, the feelings and thoughts I had during prayer and meditation on the problem) that I should be loving and forgiving, should do my best to meet my husband's needs so he would feel safe and loved. I should be less sensitive and willing to overlook his unkindness.

These answers led me to stay in a horrible, verbally abusive marriage for fifteen years. Fifteen years, during which time all the love and forgiveness I could muster did nothing to ameliorate the situation. Fifteen years - more than enough time to bring three children into an abusive home environment, the effects of which they still struggle with.

The difference is why and how you analyze it. First you get OUT of the situation and then you figure out why you seem to attract that kind of person. As I said above the majority of the blame falls on the abuser. GET OUT!!!! The horrible story I see is when someone gets into abusive relationship after relationship. I think we may be discussing two different things. If you think I'm arguing that an abuse victim should figure out what tthey're doing that might attract abuse while in an abusive relationship that is not what I meant.

First, get clear. Then figure out what your own problems are.

[_guy sajer]

Actually, I don't know if I'm filled with vitriol and venom. Please do enlighten me.

You don't display it if you are. But of course, you are the one who knows best.

Whew!! That's a relief!

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Charity... have you ever actually worked as a therapist with survivors of abuse? Or with abusers?

You seem to know virtually nothing about abuse... NOTHING.

This is where you are wrong. They are never going to get out of the situation if all that is happening is somebody letting them cry on their shoulder and hearing, "you should feel good about yourself."

Why in the world do you think all a therapist does is "letting them cry on their shoulder saying, you should feel good about yourself"?

Where in the heck do you get something like this idea? I'm seriously interested. Where do you get this idea that this is what therapists do? This has nothing to do with any theory, or any known form of therapy of which I am aware dealing with abuse. Why would you suggest such a thing?

I can just magine Charity with a client (hopefully she's never actually had one):

Client: I love cats.

Charity: Why do you hate dogs so much?

Client: I don't hate dogs.

Charity: Dogs are better than cats (goes on to argue ad infinitum why it's bad to hate dogs).

It's kind of funny watching her defend her position as if it actually had anything to do with the price of rice in China.

[_the road to hana]

I guess you don't understand the abuse cycle. You are right, they didn't have much "spine." They had not been raised with one. I would think with a psychology background Charity, that you would understand the fear and guilt many of these women have -- and they have been taught that much of the abuse is their fault. You use this word a lot, but it is appropriate here -- "SAD," but common.

I understand the abuse cycle. And do you understand that 70% of women raised in abusive homes go on to NEVER be abused in their lives? Because they don't allow it. And people who treat women as perennial victims do the a great disservice. This is not teaching them to be strong.

I'm somewhat confused by your response, Charity. Are you suggesting these women were wrong to approach ward leadership for counsel, guidance and support?

I imagine if they'd bypassed ecclesiastical leadership, you'd have said they were wrong to do that.

[_the road to hana]

A woman who is in a abusive relationship does not need someone to pat her hand and say, "there, there, dear." She needs help to change the situation. If you knew anything about abusive relationships, you would know that the hardest thing to do is to get the woman to DECIDE to leave the abusive relationship. To press charges against her abuser. Get a grip.

Sounds to me like you're criticizing the priesthood leadership who failed to counsel and support these women accordingly. Obviously, if they'd done something concrete about the abuse, the women wouldn't have had to come to BishopRic at all.