Treatment Methods

Provide a 4-6 page paper (excluding title and reference pages), using at least three outside scholarly sources. If you were superintendent of a training school, which treatment methods would you use? Why? What treatment technologies would you use in a residential program for juvenile probationers? What type of staff members would be effective in carrying out the treatment method you have chosen?

Treatment Technologies

Cognitive Programming

Behavioral Modification

Peer Culture Influence

You can use any other treatment technologies to include one listed above.

“How to Access Miami Dade Databases

Purpose of this Discussion: To help prepare you to integrate research into your paper, and to access the Library Databases to find acceptable critical, peer-reviewed sources and credit the sources correctly within your text.

Read: “How to Access Miami Dade Databases” in your Module 3 Resources folder. Another site to find what you need is Google Scholar, but too often access to those articles require payment. Do not use plain Google. The Miami Dade Databases is your best source. Contact a reference librarian at one of the campuses if you are having trouble logging on. Wolfson Campus library telephone number: 305-237-3144

Find Two Articles: In the Library Databases find two articles, one concerning Disgrace by J. M. Coetzee and one concerning apartheid or South African history.

Prompt: 1. Write a few sentences or a paragraph, integrating a quote, paraphrase, or summary from either of the articles. 2. Document your paragraph with either a signal phrase or a parenthetical in-text citation.

  • Example of a signal phrase:  “According to Joe Doe, from Liberal Arts University…”  If it is from a print source, add the page number in parentheses. Web sources require no page number. When the author’s name is not mentioned in the paragraph’s signal phrase, add it in parentheses, as in the following example: Example of an in-text citation:  (Coetzee 102). Your MLA Resources folder also has information and a sample paper.

M1: How to Access the Miami Dade College M1: How to Access the Miami Dade CollegeDatabasesDatabases

How fo access the Miami dade College Database:

Why am I sending you to the Miami Dade College databases?  Because Googling your topic will take you to too many unacceptable sources.  Most of what’s in the Miami Dade Database will be acceptable. If you don’t feel you’ve found what you were looking for in the MDC site, you may try Google Scholar or any other university library databases, but you may find those require a fee.

Make sure to read the page titled “Evaluating Sources” and/or the section on “Evaluating Sources” under the Research tab, pg. 416 of Rules for Writers, 8th Edition. Those will keep you from choosing wrong sources, no matter where you find the articles and sources that you want to use.

How to access the Miami Dade College database: Begin by going to the Miami Dade College home page menu on the left > Libraries > Databases A to Z.

Or go directly to this link:  www.mdc.edu/learning-resources/libraries/  

Anyone with an Internet connection can search for library materials online. You must connect to the databases by using your valid Borrower ID and PIN which is your MDC student or employee number. Your Borrower ID is your MDC student/employee number, and your PIN (unless you change it) is the last 4 digits of your MDC student/employee number.

Adjustment Disorders

5 stress and physical and mental health

image1

learning objectives 5

·   5.1 What is stress?

·   5.2 How does the body respond to stress?

·   5.3 What role does our emotional state play in our physical health?

·   5.4 What mental disorders are explicitly recognized as being triggered by stress?

·   5.5 What are the clinical features of posttraumatic stress disorder?

·   5.6 What are the risk factors for PTSD?

·   5.7 What treatment approaches are used for PTSD?

With its deadlines, interpersonal tensions, financial pressures, and everyday hassles, daily life places many demands on us. We are all exposed to stress, and this exposure affects our physical and our psychological well-being. Sometimes even leisure activities can be stressful. For example, a loss in the Superbowl is followed by an increase in heart attacks and death over the following two weeks in the losing team’s city (Kloner et al.,  2011 ). And watching a stressful soccer match more than doubles the risk of having acute cardiovascular problems (Wilbert-Lampen et al.,  2008 ). How are you affected by stress? Does it make you anxious? Does it give you migraines?

The field of  health psychology  is concerned with the effects of stress and other psychological factors in the development and maintenance of physical problems. Health psychology is a subspecialty within  behavioral medicine . A behavioral medicine approach to physical illness is concerned with psychological factors that may predispose an individual to medical problems. These may include such factors as stressful life events, certain personality traits, particular coping styles, and lack of social support. Within behavioral medicine there is also a focus on the effects of stress on the body, including the immune, endocrine, gastrointestinal, and cardiovascular systems.

But stress affects the mind as well as the body. As we discussed in  Chapter 3 , the role that stress can play in triggering the onset of mental disorders in vulnerable people is explicitly acknowledged in the diathesis-stress model. Moreover, exposure to extreme and traumatic stress may overwhelm the coping resources of otherwise apparently healthy people, leading to mental disorders such as  posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) , as in the following example.

Posttraumatic Stress in a Military Nurse Jennifer developed PTSD after she served as a nurse in Iraq. During her deployment she worked 12- to 14-hour shifts in 120-degree temperatures. Sleep was hard to come by and disaster was routine. Day in and day out there was a never-ending flow of mangled bodies of young soldiers. Jennifer recalled one especially traumatic event:

·  I was working one evening. We received information that a vehicle, on a routine convoy mission, had been hit by an improvised explosive device (IED). Three wounded men and one dead soldier were on their way to our hospital. Two medics in the back room were processing the dead soldier for Mortuary Affairs. The dead soldier was lying on a cot. The air was strong with the smell of burned flesh. I was staring at the body and trying to grasp what was different about this particular body. After a while I realized. The upper chest and head of the dead soldier was completely missing. We received his head about an hour later. (Based on Feczer & Bjorklund,  2009 ).

In this chapter we consider the role that stress plays in the development of physical and mental disorders. We discuss both physical and mental problems because the mind and the body are powerfully connected and because stress takes its toll on both. Although the problems that are linked to stress are many, we limit our discussion to the most severe stress-related physical and mental disorders. In the physical realm, we focus on heart disease. For mental disorders, we concern ourselves primarily with PTSD.

image2

After a Superbowl loss, heart attacks and death increase in the losing team’s city.

What is Stress?

Life would be very simple if all of our needs were automatically satisfied. In reality, however, many obstacles, both personal and environmental, get in the way. A promising athletic career may be brought to an end by injury; we may have less money than we need; we may be rejected by the person we love. The demands of life require that we adjust. When we experience or perceive challenges to our physical or emotional well-being that exceed our coping resources and abilities, the psychological condition that results is typically referred to as stress (see Shalev,  2009 ). To avoid confusion, we will refer to external demands as  stressors , to the effects they create within the organism as  stress , and to efforts to deal with stress as  coping strategies . It is also important to note that stress is fundamentally an interactive and dynamic construct because it reflects the interaction between the organism and the environment over time (Monroe,  2008 ).

All situations that require adjustment can be regarded as potentially stressful. Prior to the influential work of Canadian physician and endocrinologist Hans Selye ( 1956 ,  1976 ),  stress was a term used by engineers. Selye took the word and used it to describe the difficulties and strains experienced by living organisms as they struggled to cope with and adapt to changing environmental conditions. His work provided the foundation for current stress research. Selye also noted that stress could occur not only in negative situations (such as taking an examination) but also in positive situations (such as a wedding). Both kinds of stress can tax a person’s resources and coping skills, although bad stress ( distress ) typically has the potential to do more damage. Stress can also occur in more than one form—not just as a simple catastrophe but also as a continuous force that exceeds the person’s capability of managing it.

Stress and the  DSM

The relationship between stress and psychopathology is considered so important that the role of stress is recognized in diagnostic formulations. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the diagnosis of PTSD—a severe disorder that we will discuss later. PTSD was classified as an anxiety disorder in DSM-IV. However, DSM-5 introduced a new diagnostic category called trauma- and stressor related disorders. PTSD is now included there. Other disorders in this new category are adjustment disorder and acute stress disorder. These disorders involve patterns of psychological and behavioral disturbances that occur in response to identifiable stressors. The key differences among them lie not only in the severity of the disturbances but also in the nature of the stressors and the time frame during which the disorders occur (Cardeña et al.,  2003 ).

Factors Predisposing a Person To Stress

image3 SHAPE \* MERGEFORMAT image4

Stress can result from both negative and positive events. Both types of stress can tax a person’s resources and coping skills, although distress (negative stress) typically has the potential to do more damage.

Everyone faces a unique pattern of demands to which he or she must adjust. This is because people perceive and interpret similar situations differently and also because, objectively, no two people are faced with exactly the same pattern of stressors. Some individuals are also more likely to develop long-term problems under stress than others. This may be linked, in part, to coping skills and the presence of particular resources. Children, for example, are particularly vulnerable to severe stressors such as war and terrorism (Petrovic,  2004 ). Research also suggests that adolescents with depressed parents are more sensitive to stressful events; these adolescents are also more likely to have problems with depression themselves after experiencing stressful life events than those who do not have depressed parents (Bouma et al.,  2008 ).

Individual characteristics that have been identified as improving a person’s ability to handle life stress include higher levels of optimism, greater psychological control or mastery, increased self-esteem, and better social support (Declercq et al.,  2007 ; Taylor & Stanton,  2007 ). These stable factors are linked to reduced levels of distress in the face of life events as well as more favorable health outcomes. There is also some evidence from twin studies that differences in coping styles may be linked to underlying genetic differences (Jang et al.,  2007 ).

A major development in stress research was the discovery that a particular form of a particular gene (the 5HTTLPR gene) was linked to how likely it was that people would become depressed in the face of life stress. Caspi and colleagues ( 2003 ) found that people who had two “short” forms of this gene (the s/s genotype) were more likely to develop depression when they experienced four or more stressful life events than were people who had two “long” forms of this gene (the l/l geneotype). Although this specific finding was controversial for a while a recent meta-analysis has provided clear support for the original finding (Karg et al.,  2011 ). More generally, it is now widely accepted that our genetic makeup can render us more or less “stress-sensitive.” Researchers are exploring genes that may play a role in determining how reactive to stress we are (Alexander et al.,  2009 ; Armbruster et al.,  2012 ).

The amount of stress we experience early in life may also make us more sensitive to stress later on (Gillespie & Nemeroff,  2007 ; Lupien et al.,  2009 ). The effects of stress may be cumulative, with each stressful experience serving to make the system more reactive. Evidence from animal studies shows that being exposed to a single stressful experience can enhance responsiveness to stressful events that occur later (Johnson, O’Connor et al.,  2002 ). Rats that were exposed to stressful tail shocks produced more of the stress hormone cortisol when they were later exposed to another stressful experience (being placed on a platform). Other biological changes associated with stress were also more pronounced in these rats. These results suggest that prior stressful experiences may sensitize us biologically, making us more reactive to later stressful experiences. The term  stress tolerance  refers to a person’s ability to withstand stress without becoming seriously impaired.

Stressful experiences may also create a self-perpetuating cycle by changing how we think about, or appraise, the things that happen to us. Studies have shown that stressful situations may be related to or intensified by a person’s cognitions (Nixon & Bryant,  2005 ). This may explain why people with a history of depression tend to experience negative events as more stressful than other people do (Havermans et al.,  2007 ). For example, if you’re feeling depressed or anxious already, you may perceive a friend’s canceling a movie date as an indication that she doesn’t want to spend time with you. Even though the reality may be that a demand in her own life has kept her from keeping your date, when you feel bad you will be much more inclined to come to a negative conclusion about what just happened rather than see the situation in a more balanced or more optimistic way. Can you think of an example in your own life when something like this has happened to you?

Characteristics of Stressors

Why is misplacing our keys so much less stressful than being in an unhappy marriage or being fired from a job? At some level we all intuitively understand what makes one stressor more serious than another. The key factors involve (1) the severity of the stressor, (2) its chronicity (i.e., how long it lasts), (3) its timing, (4) how closely it affects our own lives, (5) how expected it is, and (6) how controllable it is.

Stressors that involve the more important aspects of a person’s life—such as the death of a loved one, a divorce, a job loss, a serious illness, or negative social exchanges—tend to be highly stressful for most people (Aldwin,  2007 ; Newsom et al.,  2008 ). Furthermore, the longer a stressor operates, the more severe its effects. A person may be frustrated in a boring and unrewarding job from which there is seemingly no escape, suffer for years in an unhappy and conflict-filled marriage, or be severely frustrated by a physical limitation or a long-term health problem. As we have already noted, stressors also often have cumulative effects (Miller,  2007 ). A married couple may endure a long series of difficulties and frustrations, only to divorce after experiencing what might seem to be a minor precipitating stressor. Encountering a number of stressors at the same time also makes a difference. If a man loses his job, learns that his wife is seriously ill, and receives news that his son has been arrested for selling drugs, all at the same time, the resulting stress will be more severe than if these events occurred separately and over an extended period. Symptoms of stress also intensify when a person is more closely involved in an immediately traumatic situation. Learning that the uncle of a close friend was injured in a car accident is not as stressful as being in an accident oneself.

image5

A devastating house fire is not an event we can anticipate. It is almost impossible to be psychologically prepared to experience a stressor such as this.

Extensive research has shown that events that are unpredictable and unanticipated (and for which no previously developed coping strategies are available) are likely to place a person under severe stress. A devastating house fire and the damage it brings are not occurrences with which anyone has learned to cope. Likewise, recovery from the stress created by major surgery can be improved when a patient is given realistic expectations beforehand; knowing what to expect adds predictability to the situation. In one study, patients who were about to undergo hip replacement surgery watched a 12-minute film the evening before they had the operation. The film described the entire procedure from the patient’s perspective. Compared to controls who did not see the film, patients who saw the video were less anxious on the morning of the surgery, were less anxious after the surgery, and needed less pain medication (Doering et al.,  2000 ).

image6

Unpredictable and uncontrollable events cause the greatest stress. These people are reacting to the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

Finally, with an uncontrollable stressor, there is no way to reduce its impact, such as by escape or avoidance. In general, both people and animals are more stressed by unpredictable and uncontrollable stressors than by stressors that are of equal physical magnitude but are either predictable or controllable or both (e.g., Evans & Stecker,  2004 ; Maier & Watkins,  1998 ).

THE EXPERIENCE OF CRISIS

Most of us experience occasional periods of especially acute (sudden and intense) stress. The term  crisis  is used to refer to times when a stressful situation threatens to exceed or exceeds the adaptive capacities of a person or a group. Crises are often especially stressful, because the stressors are so potent that the coping techniques we typically use do not work. Stress can be distinguished from crisis in this way: A traumatic situation or crisis overwhelms a person’s ability to cope, whereas stress does not necessarily overwhelm the person.

Measuring Life Stress

Life changes, even positive ones such as being promoted or getting married, place new demands on us and may therefore be stressful. The stress from life changes can trigger problems, even in disorders, such as bipolar disorder, that have strong biological underpinnings (see Johnson & Miller,  1997 ). The faster life changes occur, the greater the stress that is experienced.

A major focus of research on life changes has concerned the measurement of life stress. Years ago, Holmes and Rahe ( 1967 ) developed the Social Readjustment Rating Scale. This is a self-report checklist of fairly common, stressful life experiences (see also Chung et al.,  2010 ; Cooper & Dewe,  2007 ). Although easy to use, limitations of the checklist method later led to the development of interview-based approaches such as the Life Events and Difficulties Schedule (LEDS; Brown & Harris,  1978 ). One advantage of the LEDS is that it includes an extensive manual that provides rules for rating both acute and chronic forms of stress. The LEDS system also allows raters to consider a person’s unique circumstances when rating each life event. For example, if a woman who is happily married and in good financial circumstances learns that she is going to have a baby, she may experience this news in a way that is quite different from that of an unmarried teenager who is faced with the prospect of having to tell her parents that she is pregnant. Although interview-based approaches are more time consuming and costly to administer, they are considered more reliable and are preferred for research in this area (see Monroe,  2008 ).

Philosophy Reflection Paper

Theodore Dalrymple

The Frivolity of Evil

When prisoners are released from prison, they often say that they have paid their debt

to society. This is absurd, of course: crime is not a matter of double-entry bookkeeping.

Autumn 2004

When prisoners are released from prison, they often say that they have paid their debt to society. This is absurd, of course: crime is not a matter of double-entry bookkeeping.

You cannot pay a debt by having caused even greater expense, nor can you pay in

advance for a bank robbery by offering to serve a prison sentence before you commit it.

Perhaps, metaphorically speaking, the slate is wiped clean once a prisoner is released

from prison, but the debt is not paid off.

It would be just as absurd for me to say, on my imminent retirement after 14 years of my

hospital and prison work, that I have paid my debt to society. I had the choice to do

something more pleasing if I had wished, and I was paid, if not munificently, at least

adequately. I chose the disagreeable neighborhood in which I practiced because,

medically speaking, the poor are more interesting, at least to me, than the rich: their

pathology is more florid, their need for attention greater. Their dilemmas, if cruder,

seem to me more compelling, nearer to the fundamentals of human existence. No doubt

I also felt my services would be more valuable there: in other words, that I had some

kind of duty to perform. Perhaps for that reason, like the prisoner on his release, I feel I

have paid my debt to society. Certainly, the work has taken a toll on me, and it is time to

do something else. Someone else can do battle with the metastasizing social pathology of

Great Britain, while I lead a life aesthetically more pleasing to me.

My work has caused me to become perhaps unhealthily preoccupied with the problem of evil. Why do people commit evil? What conditions allow it to flourish? How is it best

prevented and, when necessary, suppressed? Each time I listen to a patient recounting

the cruelty to which he or she has been subjected, or has committed (and I have listened

 

http://www.city-journal.org/index.html

 

to several such patients every day for 14 years), these questions revolve endlessly in my

mind.

No doubt my previous experiences fostered my preoccupation with this problem. My

mother was a refugee from Nazi Germany, and though she spoke very little of her life

before she came to Britain, the mere fact that there was much of which she did not speak

gave evil a ghostly presence in our household.

Later, I spent several years touring the world, often in places where atrocity had recently

been, or still was being, committed. In Central America, I witnessed civil war fought

between guerrilla groups intent on imposing totalitarian tyranny on their societies,

opposed by armies that didn’t scruple to resort to massacre. In Equatorial Guinea, the

current dictator was the nephew and henchman of the last dictator, who had killed or

driven into exile a third of the population, executing every last person who wore glasses

or possessed a page of printed matter for being a disaffected or potentially disaffected

intellectual. In Liberia, I visited a church in which more than 600 people had taken

refuge and been slaughtered, possibly by the president himself (soon to be videotaped

being tortured to death). The outlines of the bodies were still visible on the dried blood

on the floor, and the long mound of the mass grave began only a few yards from the

entrance. In North Korea I saw the acme of tyranny, millions of people in terrorized,

abject obeisance to a personality cult whose object, the Great Leader Kim Il Sung, made

the Sun King look like the personification of modesty.

Still, all these were political evils, which my own country had entirely escaped. I optimistically supposed that, in the absence of the worst political deformations,

widespread evil was impossible. I soon discovered my error. Of course, nothing that I

was to see in a British slum approached the scale or depth of what I had witnessed

elsewhere. Beating a woman from motives of jealousy, locking her in a closet, breaking

her arms deliberately, terrible though it may be, is not the same, by a long way, as mass

murder. More than enough of the constitutional, traditional, institutional, and social

restraints on large-scale political evil still existed in Britain to prevent anything like what

I had witnessed elsewhere.

 

 

Yet the scale of a man’s evil is not entirely to be measured by its practical consequences.

Men commit evil within the scope available to them. Some evil geniuses, of course,

devote their lives to increasing that scope as widely as possible, but no such character has

yet arisen in Britain, and most evildoers merely make the most of their opportunities.

They do what they can get away with.

In any case, the extent of the evil that I found, though far more modest than the disasters

of modern history, is nonetheless impressive. From the vantage point of one six-bedded

hospital ward, I have met at least 5,000 perpetrators of the kind of violence I have just

described and 5,000 victims of it: nearly 1 percent of the population of my city—or a

higher percentage, if one considers the age-specificity of the behavior. And when you

take the life histories of these people, as I have, you soon realize that their existence is as

saturated with arbitrary violence as that of the inhabitants of many a dictatorship.

Instead of one dictator, though, there are thousands, each the absolute ruler of his own

little sphere, his power circumscribed by the proximity of another such as he.

Violent conflict, not confined to the home and hearth, spills out onto the streets.

Moreover, I discovered that British cities such as my own even had torture chambers:

run not by the government, as in dictatorships, but by those representatives of slum

enterprise, the drug dealers. Young men and women in debt to drug dealers are

kidnapped, taken to the torture chambers, tied to beds, and beaten or whipped. Of

compunction there is none—only a residual fear of the consequences of going too far.

Perhaps the most alarming feature of this low-level but endemic evil, the one that brings

it close to the conception of original sin, is that it is unforced and spontaneous. No one

requires people to commit it. In the worst dictatorships, some of the evil ordinary men

and women do they do out of fear of not committing it. There, goodness requires

heroism. In the Soviet Union in the 1930s, for example, a man who failed to report a

political joke to the authorities was himself guilty of an offense that could lead to

deportation or death. But in modern Britain, no such conditions exist: the government

does not require citizens to behave as I have described and punish them if they do not.

The evil is freely chosen.

 

 

Not that the government is blameless in the matter—far from it. Intellectuals

propounded the idea that man should be freed from the shackles of social convention

and self-control, and the government, without any demand from below, enacted laws

that promoted unrestrained behavior and created a welfare system that protected people

from some of its economic consequences. When the barriers to evil are brought down, it

flourishes; and never again will I be tempted to believe in the fundamental goodness of

man, or that evil is something exceptional or alien to human nature.

Of course, my personal experience is just that—personal experience. Admittedly, I have looked out at the social world of my city and my country from a peculiar and possibly

unrepresentative vantage point, from a prison and from a hospital ward where

practically all the patients have tried to kill themselves, or at least made suicidal

gestures. But it is not small or slight personal experience, and each of my thousands,

even scores of thousands, of cases has given me a window into the world in which that

person lives.

And when my mother asks me whether I am not in danger of letting my personal

experience embitter me or cause me to look at the world through bile-colored spectacles,

I ask her why she thinks that she, in common with all old people in Britain today, feels

the need to be indoors by sundown or face the consequences, and why this should be the

case in a country that within living memory was law-abiding and safe? Did she not

herself tell me that, as a young woman during the blackouts in the Blitz, she felt perfectly

safe, at least from the depredations of her fellow citizens, walking home in the pitch

dark, and that it never occurred to her that she might be the victim of a crime, whereas

nowadays she has only to put her nose out of her door at dusk for her to think of nothing

else? Is it not true that her purse has been stolen twice in the last two years, in broad

daylight, and is it not true that statistics—however manipulated by governments to put

the best possible gloss upon them—bear out the accuracy of the conclusions that I have

drawn from my personal experience? In 1921, the year of my mother’s birth, there was

one crime recorded for every 370 inhabitants of England and Wales; 80 years later, it

was one for every ten inhabitants. There has been a 12-fold increase since 1941 and an

 

 

even greater increase in crimes of violence. So while personal experience is hardly a

complete guide to social reality, the historical data certainly back up my impressions.

A single case can be illuminating, especially when it is statistically banal—in other words, not at all exceptional. Yesterday, for example, a 21-year-old woman consulted me,

claiming to be depressed. She had swallowed an overdose of her antidepressants and

then called an ambulance.

There is something to be said here about the word “depression,” which has almost

entirely eliminated the word and even the concept of unhappiness from modern life. Of

the thousands of patients I have seen, only two or three have ever claimed to be

unhappy: all the rest have said that they were depressed. This semantic shift is deeply

significant, for it implies that dissatisfaction with life is itself pathological, a medical

condition, which it is the responsibility of the doctor to alleviate by medical means.

Everyone has a right to health; depression is unhealthy; therefore everyone has a right to

be happy (the opposite of being depressed). This idea in turn implies that one’s state of

mind, or one’s mood, is or should be independent of the way that one lives one’s life, a

belief that must deprive human existence of all meaning, radically disconnecting reward

from conduct.

A ridiculous pas de deux between doctor and patient ensues: the patient pretends to be

ill, and the doctor pretends to cure him. In the process, the patient is willfully blinded to

the conduct that inevitably causes his misery in the first place. I have therefore come to

see that one of the most important tasks of the doctor today is the disavowal of his own

power and responsibility. The patient’s notion that he is ill stands in the way of his

understanding of the situation, without which moral change cannot take place. The

doctor who pretends to treat is an obstacle to this change, blinding rather than

enlightening.