Drchristinavillarreal's Blog

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

WIth more and more celebrities adopting children from different racial and/or cultural backgrounds than themselves, some of you may be wondering what experts say on inter-racial, or ‘transracial’ adoption, and what laws pertain to this issue. This article serves to briefly summarize key points on this issue.

“What is transracial adoption? Transracial adoption is the placement of infants and children of one race with parents of another race. Black children are more likely to be in foster care than white children, stay in foster care longer, and thus, are more likely to undergo multiple placements. Due to the developmental risks associated with long-term residence in foster care, a few strategies have been attempted to reduce the number of children in the welfare system (Taylor&Thornton, 1996). Transracial adoption is one of the most controversial methods currently being utilized to improve the welfare of black children” (from Issues in Transracial Adoption, Maureen McManus.)

Proponents of transracial adoption argue that transracial adoption is a preferable alternative to foster care. In the United States the majority of families wishing to adopt a child are white, and about half of the adoptable children in foster care are black (The New Republic, 1994). A simple solution would be to place the black children into the homes of white people, but the controversy over race-mixing has kept thousands of black children in foster care, though many white families are willing to adopt them. The National Association of Black Social Workers has discouraged the transracial adoption process by calling it “cultural genocide” (The New Republic, 1994). Other black groups, such as The National Association for Advancement of Colored People protested the statement and adopted a resolution to support it. The case in favor of transracial adoption comes primarily from empirical studies. Studies have repeatedly found that transracial adoption is a good situation for the children and families (Simon&Altstein, 1996). One study found that children made as successful an adjustment in their adoptive homes as other non-white chidren had in prior studies. According to this study’s results, seventy-seven percent of the children had adjusted successfully. Other studies have also shown that the foster care system produces adults who are developmentally disabled, socially isolated, highly unemployed, and are over-represented in the homeless population (Taylor&Thornton, 1996).

A controversial area of transracial adoption concerns issues of identity development. Proponents of transracial adoption believe that black children will not lose their identity if they’re adopted by white parents. Group identity is defined as “a bond with a racial group whose members are perceived by themselves and others to have a common origin and culture, and shared activities in which the common origin or culture is an essential ingredient”(Taylor&Thornton, 1996). The job of parents in socializing black children involves two areas. The first is standard socialization experiences and practices. The second is providing black children with skills to counter the impact of racial prejudice and discrimination and develop a healthy sense of self as a person of color (Taylor&Thornton, 1996).

Proponents of transracial adoption argue that adoption provides a permanent loving home for children who would otherwise languish in the out-of-home care system, and that the race of the potential adoptive parent should be irrelevant (Courtney, 1997). They believe that what’s in the best interest of a black child stuck in the child welfare system is to become part of a nurturing loving family, who will provide stability to the child’s life, regardless of whether the adopting family is black or white or of other cultural/racial background. Supporters of transracial adoption feel that families wanting to adopt should not be judged on their skin color, but instead on their ability to provide a good home and to be good parents. Otherwise, black children in foster care will not find homes, and suffer the consequences associated with long term foster care.

Opponents of transracial adoption are concerned that black children will lose their racial identity if they’re adopted by white parents. They also claim that black children will lose their cultural, physical, and psychological identity if adopted by parents of another race. The National Association of Black Social Workers is one group opposed to the placement of black children into white homes. This group is opposed to transracial adoption for these reasons: 1) to preserve African-American families and culture; 2) to enable black children to appreciate their origin by living with a family of the same race; 3) to enable black children to learn to cope with racism and learn how to function around it; and 4) to help make it easier for African-American families to adopt. Many black groups believe that if black children, who have not yet established a sense of racial identity, are adopted into white families, they will have diffuculty coping with prejudice and discrimination. Those without a strong sense of racial identity may internalize racist behavior directed toward them, resulting in a variety of negative outcomes, such as psychological distress (The New Republic, 1994). Also, individuals with poorly developed racial identity may become isolated. They may reject their black peers, while at the same time may never feel socially accepted by their white peers.

In 1972 The National Association of Black Social Workers’ president stated “We are opposed to transracial adoption as a solution to permanent placement for black children. We have an ethic, moral, and professional obligation to oppose transracial adoption. We are therefore legally justified in our efforts to protect the rights of black children, black families, and the black community. It is a blatant form of racial and cultural genocide” (Simon&Altstein, 1996). Then, in 1994, The National Association of Black Social Workers restated their position saying that “Transracial adoption should only be considered after documented evidence of unsuccessful same-race placements have been reviewed and supported by appropriate representatives of the African-American community (Simon&Altstein, 1996). Opponents of transracial adoption believe that public agencies do not try hard enough to find qualified black families interested in adoption, and the criteria required by these agencies discriminates against black families who cannot meet their standards.

The laws regarding transracial adoption are governed by the same laws as regular adoptions. “Each state has a set of statutes regulating the placement and adoption of children” (Simon&Altstein, 1996). These statutes state that the goal of the adoption law is to serve in the best interests of the child. Most of these statutory statements do not mention race in connection with the adoption process. However, nineteen jurisdictions do refer solely to race in their adoption laws. “Ten of these jurisdictions provide that the race of one or more of the parties directly affected by the adoption is to be included in the petition for adoption or listed as a finding in a court ordered or statute mandated investigation” (Simon&Altstein, 1996). The statutes are silent as to how agencies should use this information in final decisions of adoption. It inadvertently follows that this part of a process that takes race into consideration.

Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin all prohibit the use of race to deny an adoption or placement. Three states, Arkansas, California, and Minnesota, have laws that specifically require preference for adoption within the same racial group. “The first preference is for a blood relative, the second for a family of the same race as the child, and the last for placement with a family knowledgeable and appreciative of the child’s racial or ethnic heritage” (Simon&Altstein, 1996). Analysis of past court rulings indicate that the courts are wiling to allow race in the consideration of adoption placements. However, there is no single approach to the legal analysis of the consideration of race in adoption. It is certain that the use of race as the only reason to make or break an adoption placement is condemned under any approach.
How You Can Help Your Child To Become a Stable, Happy, Healthy Individual With a Strong Sense of Racial or Cultural Identity is an article that discusses seven parenting techniques compiled from books and articles on adoption and by interviewing experts in transracial and transcultural adoption. Some of these “techniques” are common sense and apply to all adopted children, but others are specific to transracially or transculturally adopted children.

Resources:

1 “African-American Leadership Group Condemns Racist Adoption Practices.” Project 21

2 “All in the Family.” The New Republic, January 24, 1994, pp6-7.

3 Christ, Fran. “When Whites Adopt Blacks.” PLAN Preadoption Course, May 1990, pp.1-3.

4 Courtney, Mark, “The Politics and Realities of Transracial Adoption.” Child Welfare, Nov/Dec 1997, vLXXVI n6, pp.749-773.

5 Simon, Rita and Altstein, Howard, “The Case for Transracial Adoption.” Children and Youth Services Review, 1996, v18 n1/2, pp.5-12.

6 Taylor, Robert and Thornton, Michael, “Child Welfare and Transracial Adoption.” Journal of Black Psychology, May 1996, v22 n2, pp.282-291.

Most of us have had that “OH NO! I think I have that!” moment, after poking around online, trying to figure out the cause of our vague physical symptoms. A 2004 study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that 79 percent of Internet users — roughly 95 million Americans — have researched health information online. People now have access to incredibly complex medical information, with little ability to sift through it or interpret it accurately. The abundance of health information available online, valid or not, has contributed to what the media have coined ‘cyberchondria’ (researching diseases on the internet, and then worrying that you have the symptoms of that disease.) These people are often frustrated when their self-diagnosis does not prompt their doctor to order the tests and/or medications they feel necessary.

Yet after getting checked out by a doctor and getting a clean bill of health, most of us feel reassured, and are then ready to move on. For hypochondriacs however, relief does not come, and the fear of serious illness continues to fester. Hypochondria falls under the umbrella category of Somatoform Disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) and is defined as a preoccupation with the belief that one has an illness, based on a misinterpretation of bodily symptoms. To qualify as hypochondria, this preoccupation must cause distress in the person’s daily life and persist for at least six months — despite medical evidence discounting the perceived illness. About 1 to 5 percent of the population suffers from hypochondria, and the disorder is believed to strike men and women equally.
In the professional world of mental health, “Somatization” is a term that describes the expression of psychological or mental difficulties through physical symptoms. Somatization can range from preoccupation with potential or genuine but mild physical problems (as previously described in Hypochondria), to the development of perceived or actual physical pain, or dysfunction. This article will briefly explain some of the other major diagnoses that the DSM-IV-TR defines within the Somatoform Disorders category.
Somatization disorder is characterized by a history of multiple unexplained medical problems or physical complaints beginning prior to age 30. People with somatization disorder report symptoms affecting multiple organ systems or physical functions, including pain, gastrointestinal distress, sexual problems, and symptoms that mimic neurological disorders. Although medical explanations for their symptoms cannot be identified, individuals with somatization disorder experience genuine physical discomfort and distress. Review of their medical histories will usually reveal numerous visits to medical specialists, second and third opinions, and numerous medications prescribed by different doctors, often putting them at risk for drug interactions.
Conversion disorder is marked by unexplained sensory or motor symptoms that resemble those of a neurological or medical illness or injury. Common symptoms include paralysis, loss of sensation, double vision, seizures, inability to speak or swallow and problems with coordination and balance. Symptoms often reflect a naive understanding of the nervous system, and physicians often detect conversion disorder when symptoms do not make sense anatomically. The name conversion disorder reflects a theoretical understanding of the disorder as a symbolic ‘conversion’ of a psychological conflict into a concrete physical representation. Ironically, patients with conversion disorder may not always express the level of concern one would expect from someone with their described condition.
Pain Disorder is physical pain that causes significant distress or disability or leads an individual to seek medical attention. Pain may be medically unexplained, or it may be associated with an identifiable medical condition, but it is experienced as far more severe than the actual physical condition would warrant. Common symptoms include headache, backache and generalized pain in muscles and joints. Pain disorder can be severely disabling, causing immobility that prevents patients from working, fulfilling family responsibilities or engaging in social activities. Like patients with somatization disorder, people with pain disorder often have a long history of consultations with numerous physicians.
Body dysmorphic disorder is characterized by preoccupation with a defect in physical appearance. Often the defect of concern is not apparent to other observers, or if there is a genuine defect it is far less disfiguring than the patient imagines. Common preoccupations include concerns about the size or shape of the nose, skin blemishes or color, body or facial hair, hair loss, or “ugly” hands or feet. Individuals with body dysmorphic disorder may be extremely self-conscious, avoiding social situations because they fear others will notice their physical defects or even make fun of them. They may spend hours examining the imagined defect or avoid mirrors altogether. Time-consuming efforts to hide the defect, such as application of cosmetics or adjustments of clothing or hair, are common. Many people with body dysmorphic disorder undergo permanent procedures like plastic surgery or cosmetic dentistry, but are seldom satisfied with the results.
Note that Somatoform disorders should be distinguished from Factitious disorder, in which patients intentionally act physically or mentally ill without obvious benefits such as monetary gain. What motivates people with Factitious disorder is being able to play the role of a sick person. Further, the DSM-IV-TR distinguishes Factitious disorder from Malingering, a disorder which is defined as feigning illness when there is a clear motive—usually to economic gain, or to avoid legal trouble.
Causes. One longstanding theory about the cause of Somatoform disorders suggests that it is a way of avoiding psychological distress. Rather than experiencing depression or anxiety, some individuals will develop physical symptoms. According to this model, their preoccupation with the body allows them avoid the stigma of a mental health/psychiatric disorder. They end up getting the care and nurturing they need from doctors and other people in their lives who are responsive to their physical illnesses.

Treatment. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is considered an effective treatment for Somatoform disorders, focusing on changing negative patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behavior that contribute to somatic symptoms. The cognitive component of the treatment focuses on helping patients identify dysfunctional thinking about physical sensations. With practice, patients learn to recognize catastrophic thinking and develop more rational explanations for their feelings. The behavioral component aims to increase activity and self-care. Many of these patients have reduced their activity levels as a result of discomfort or out of fear that activity will worsen their symptoms. Patients are instructed to increase activity gradually while avoiding overexertion that could reinforce fears. Other important types of treatment include relaxation training, sleep hygiene, and communication skills training. Preliminary findings suggest that CBT may help reduce distress and discomfort associated with somatic symptoms; however, it has not yet been systematically compared with other forms of therapy.

Resources
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th edition, text revised. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association,2000.

Phillips, Katherine A. The Broken Mirror: Understanding and Treating Body Dysmorphic Disorder. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Pilowsky, Issy. Abnormal Illness Behavior. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons, 1997.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Have you ever wondered in frustration why someone you respect or admire decided to “stay” with a spouse or partner who has committed repeated acts of betrayal? Or do you tend to always end up dating people who come from alcoholic or dysfunctional families? Or maybe you know someone whose job consumes all of their time and energy, leaving essentially no time for self-care or meaningful relationships. This article aims to explain why some of us struggle to separate from unhealthy people or work settings that consume our energy at the expense of our own mental and physical well-being.

Codependency became a widely used term in the 1970’s to describe family dynamics when one person is an alcoholic. Since then, mental health professionals have come to describe codependency as a learned behavior that often originates during childhood in dysfunctional families. Common causes of family dysfunction are chronic parental conflict or divorce, alcoholism or addiction of any kind, physical, emotional, or sexual abuse, or chronic illness. Children raised in an environment where their needs and feelings are frequently overlooked are at risk for developing a codependent style of interacting. As adults, they tend to seek out relationships or work environments that demand codependent behaviors, because they feel familiar and comfortable, in spite of the pain or hardship they bring.

Common characteristics of codependency

A need to control others. Codependents attempt to exercise authority over people around them through unsolicited advice, in an effort quell fears of unpredictability. They tend to use gifts, favors, doting behaviors and sex to manipulate others into cooperation. They can appear to have a superior attitude, but very often have low self-esteem as a result of poorly developed self-worth in childhood.

A need to “fix” people or things around them. Codependents need to feel needed. They have a hard time knowing the difference between normal caring behavior and codependent care-taking. They tend to believe others are incapable of caring for themselves, and are typically attracted to people whom many would deem hopelessly riddled with problems. They believe (unrealistically) in their power to change others. When people around them start to ‘get better’ codependents may sabotage others’ progress, so as to continue being needed. Other types of codependents take on unrelenting work loads, believing themselves to be the only one capable of doing a job, while others in similar positions find it acceptable to do less. They are compulsive care-givers and workaholics, often neglecting their own physical and mental health.

Codependents have difficulty expressing feelings. Codependents often struggle to identify their feelings, and attempt to minimize, deny or alter their true feelings once they are known. They tend to avoid confrontation, and remain loyal to their own detriment out of fear of abandonment or loss of a job that has essentially taken over their life. They often repress a great deal of anger, and as a result, tend to behave in passive-aggressive ways, making statements such as “After all I’ve done for you, this is the thanks I get” or “where would you (or ‘this company’) be without me?”

Outside opinions determine their self-worth. Codependents rely heavily on the opinions of others to determine their value, because they lack a sense of their own positive self-worth. They often accept purely sexual relationships when they really seek love. Only when they believe people are attracted to them/like them, or they earn coveted praise or work accolades do they feel any sense of worth. They have an extreme need for recognition and approval and are often devastated when their efforts go unrecognized.

Codependency Test

1. Do you feel offended, rejected or angry when another person does not want your help?
2. Do you constantly over commit yourself to another, committees or your work?
3. Do you have a hard time understanding or expressing your true feelings?
4. Do you feel worthless unless you are ‘productive’?
5. Do you find it difficult or uncomfortable to spend time by yourself?
6. Do you work long hours at your job, without receiving additional compensation or recognition for your effort?
7. Do you find yourself constantly trying please others?
8. Do you worry more about your loved ones’ activities than yours own?
9. Do you go to work early and stay late, because the boss “needs you”?
10. Do you blame others for your anger and/or lack of control?
11. Do you find yourself repeating one bad relationship after another?
12. Do you sometimes deny or hide the fact that your family may have been abusive and/or dysfunctional?
13. In the last year, has anyone resorted to arguing with you, or begging to get you to stop trying to help them?
14. When you survey your relationships, do you find yourself surrounded by mostly people who need you?
15. Do you ever find yourself making excuses for needy or abusive people in your life?

If you answered YES to 4 or more of the questions above, you may have a problem with codependency. Treatment options, including individual and/or group therapy, may help you begin to make healthy changes.

Reference:
www.CoDA.org (Co-Dependents Anonymous, Inc., a.k.a. CoDA). CoDA is a fellowship of men and women whose common purpose is to develop healthy relationships and is not affiliated with any other 12 step program.

If you’ve ever felt annoyed, amused, baffled, or disturbed by the various ways people use social networking sites such as Facebook, this article is for you.

“Can you believe she posted that status update/picture?” “Why would he write that on my wall, where everyone can see it?” “Why do people do that on Facebook, with no concern for how awkward or irritating it is for other people to see?” “I can’t take it anymore. I’m unfriending this person!”

These are actual statements I’ve heard from people, in frustration towards others’ differences in personal boundaries on social networking sites such as Facebook. Quite often we see stark contrasts in the social judgment of our friends, family members, co-workers and acquaintances as they reveal themselves in various ways on Facebook. If we look closely, we can begin to understand these differences in social judgment (as well as our responses to them) as a reflection of our psychological functioning. The following list serves to capture a just few of the ways people behave and react to differences in social networking patterns.

How much do we share?

Actual example from a Facebook user*:

Status update: “I’m sorry FB…but I’m the luckiest woman in the world to be having multiple orgasms instead of having to fake it like my girlfriends…” (boyfriend chimes in with a response post, stating “I bring my A-game for you baby”) (*source is confidential)

How much do we share? Facebook is essentially a place to share- what we do, how we look, what we like/dislike, etc. If you’re not comfortable with learning personal details about someone else’s life online, then Facebook is likely not for you. Yet the degree to which an average Facebook user observes private matters via posts and pictures can vary from an enjoyable opportunity to catch up with others, to unsettling, or even offensive. Facebook users that push the boundaries of social etiquette are particularly controversial. When people share highly intimate or sensationalized information on Facebook, they may revel in shocking their audience and crave attention from others, whether good or bad. This may come from an underlying need to ‘stand out’ as special and different. Or perhaps it is an unwillingness to recognize that others might be offended by their display of private details in a widely public arena.

How much do we observe? Most of us have probably spent more time than we’d like to admit looking at others’ pictures, or perusing through someone’s wall on Facebook. In some instances, we may not know all of our Facebook friends in such a way that would afford this much access to their personal information. Yet our curiosity compels us to peek, perhaps as a means to increase feeling connected, or closer to people. Or in some cases, we feel compelled to pry in order to compare ourselves to others (regardless of how well we know someone) as a way to judge our own success or happiness. This addictive quality keeps Facebook’s typical user on the site for an average of 169 minutes a month according to ComScore. Compare that with Google News, where the average reader spends 13 minutes a month checking up on the world, or the New York Times website, which holds on to readers for a mere ten minutes a month.

How much space do we take up? We’ve all had the experience of opening up our Facebook News Feed, and found that certain people take up an exorbitant amount of space through higher frequencies of sharing. Some of us perceive this as social entitlement, which can drive us to feel annoyed, resentful and even superior to those who openly ‘ask for our attention.’ This can feel especially irritating when other people share strong opinions or make lifestyle choices that are different from our own. How much space we take (or don’t take) on Facebook may reflect our expectation of the attention we feel we deserve from others.

Does Facebook allow us to be someone different than in our everyday life? Online interactions, as opposed to face-to-face interactions may allow or encourage some people to be more confrontational, racier, sexier, more militant, or melodramatic than might be acceptable in their daily life. Adopting new behaviors or personas via Facebook can feel liberating, without the discomfort of facing people’s immediate reactions to a stronger display of personality. We may gain the sympathy and/or support that we may not have (but want) in our everyday lives.

At it’s best, Facebook is a social opportunity that allows us to share our lives with others, support our friends, family and acquaintances with the happenings of their daily experiences, and actively expand our social connections. Yet, to others it can feel like a chaotic free-for-all that invites people to bend social rules of etiquette.

When it comes to Facebook, everyone seems to have an opinion. What’s yours? Leave comments on this page with anecdotes that capture your experience of Facebook. I, for one, would love to read them!

With all the celebrities that have admitted themselves into ‘sex rehab’ centers recently, you might be curious about what goes on there. How does sex rehab work? Is it effective, or is this just an excuse to ask others for forgiveness? You might even scoff at the idea that someone needs to enter a sex rehab center. Perhaps you believe all they really need to do is come clean and stop cheating on their significant other, or choose to live a single life so as to not hurt others with lies and increased exposure to sexually transmitted diseases. This article serves to explain what sexual rehabilitation or ‘sex rehab’ is, and how a person with a sexual addiction might benefit from this form of treatment.

Treatment for sexual addiction tends to focus on two main areas:

1) Separating the addict from opportunities to continue harmful sexual patterns of behavior, much in the same way drug addicts need to be separated from their drug-filled lifestyle. This is why inpatient or residential treatment is often the suggested setting. An inpatient setting provides a controlled setting, which aims to eliminate opportunities for compulsive behavior.

2) Utilization of a safe, therapeutic setting with trained professionals to help individuals begin to face the guilt, shame and depression that is common amongst sexual addicts.

Sexual rehabilitation centers may vary in the variety of psychological treatment modalities they provide, but this list contains a broad overview of therapeutic strategies that have proven to be effective at helping people overcome sexual addiction.

12-Step Programs. Sexaholics Anonymous (SA) is a 12 step program which utilizes principles similar to those used in other addiction programs, such as Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA.) However, unlike AA, where the goal is complete abstinence from all alcohol, SA pursues abstinence only from compulsive, destructive sexual behavior. By admitting powerlessness over their addiction, seeking the help of God or a higher power, working the 12 different steps, seeking a sponsor and attending meetings consistently, many addicts have been able to regain intimacy in their personal relationships.

Cognitive-Behavior Therapy (CBT).
This form of therapy helps people to examine the relationship between their thoughts, feelings and behaviors as they relate to their addictive patterns. By targeting the triggers and reinforcers that perpetuate the addictive pattern, people can begin to short-circuit the process and make healthy changes. Treatment can include teaching addicts therapeutic tools such as thought stopping, behavioral substitution, and thought record keeping, as a means to prevent the relapse of addictive patterns.

Interpersonal Therapy. Traditional “talk therapy” or counseling with an individual therapist can be helpful in providing a space for individuals to sort through past experiences that shaped addictive behavior, as well as manage mood symptoms, increase the ability to cope with stressors, and learn healthier lifestyle patterns and behaviors.

Group Therapy.
Group therapy typically consists mental health professional(s) facilitating a group of people that engage in dialogue around addiction issues, and learn from related psychoeducational materials. A group environment is thought to enable people to learn from others’ experiences, strengths and relapses. It is also an ideal setting for people to learn through the confrontation of denial and rationalizations common among addicts in various stages of their rehabilitation.

Medication.
Recent developments in the literature suggest that certain psychotropic medications (antidepressants) may prove to be useful for many people in managing sexual addiction. In addition to treating mood symptoms common among sex addicts, these medications may have some benefit in reducing sexual obsessions and ruminations.

This article was composed by Dr. Christina Villarreal, Clinical Psychologist in Oakland, CA

References

1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_addiction_
2 The National Council on Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity – http://www.ncsac.org and http://www.sash.net
3 Defense Security Services – http://www.dss.mil
4 Patrick Carnes (1991). Don’t call it love: Recovery from sexual addiction, (New York: Bantam, pp. 22-23, 30-34).
5 Michael Herkov, Ph.D., Mark S. Gold, M.D., and Drew W. Edwards, M.S., Feb 2001