January 26, 2013 7 Comments

Choice Theory in a Spiritual Jacket

Last summer (2012) I presented a breakout session on choice theory during the NAD convention in Nashville. In preparation for that breakout I got to thinking about the key beliefs of choice theory and how those beliefs jibed with key beliefs of Christian faith. Glasser developed what he referred to as the 10 axioms of choice theory, belief statements that, to him, were self-evident bedrock foundation points of his approach. I came up with the following belief statements to serve as a springboard for discussion during the convention breakout. I don’t think the list is comprehensive, so I invite you to help me complete it. I am also open to any questions you may have. Here goes —

Choice Theory in a Spiritual Jacket

God created us in His image – with free will being the most impressive of our attributes.

We are designed to create, to think, and to choose.

He created us to be in connection and harmony with Him.

He created us to be in connection and harmony with each other.

Every individual is designed to control himself.

We were not designed to control others.

Neither were we designed to be controlled by someone else.

Since God created us with free will, this would indicate that even God Himself will not control us.

Humans constantly behave.

All behavior is purposeful.

Our actions represent what we think will best meet our needs at that moment.

The only person we can control is our self.

The world of Choice Theory is a responsible world where individuals understand how and why they make choices and then own the results of those choices.

We choose our state of mind, including the misery we feel.

Instead of adults seeking ways to control the behavior of children, often extending this desire to control even into adulthood, their goal should be to wean children from such control as soon as possible.

(Remember that weaning children from our control does not mean weaning them from our guidance and influence. Our influence actually increases as our control decreases.)

Children need to understand their status as free will beings and the power that comes  with their ability to make choices.

Schools need to be a part of the process that helps students recognize and embrace their choice power.

 

Some of you may be curious about Glasser’s 10 choice theory axioms. Just in case, his axioms are listed below as they appear on his website.

The Ten Axioms of Choice Theory

The only person whose behavior we can control is our own.

All we can give another person is information.

All long-lasting psychological problems are relationship problems.

The problem relationship is always part of our present life.

What happened in the past has everything to do with what we are today, but we can only satisfy our basic needs right now and plan to continue satisfying them in the future.

We can only satisfy our needs by satisfying the pictures in our Quality World.

All we do is behave.

All behavior is Total Behavior and is made up of four components: acting, thinking, feeling and physiology.

All Total Behavior is chosen, but we only have direct control over the acting and thinking components. We can only control our feeling and physiology indirectly through how we choose to act and think.

All Total Behavior is designated by verbs and named by the part that is the most recognizable.
January 22, 2013 11 Comments

Give Me Victory, or Give Me Death

SI cover

It was haunting, stark, in-your-face. The cover of the April 14, 1997, Sports Illustrated, drew your attention to an image that dramatically captured, in one stroke, the state of affairs in athletics, indeed, the state of affairs in society. An arm, a strong arm with bulging bicep, fist clenched, wrist cupped, formed the bulk of the image, yet placed between the cupped wrist and bulging bicep was a syringe, it’s needle plunging into the taunt muscle. That was it, just an arm and a needle, yet you couldn’t look away. Although it appeared 16 years ago I have never forgotten that image.

The lead article, titled Over the Edge, opened with survey results that were, it doesn’t seem possible, even more haunting than the cover image. Quoting the article’s opening statement, it reads –

A scenario, from a 1995 poll of 198 sprinters, swimmers, power lifters and other assorted athletes, most of them U.S. Olympians or aspiring Olympians:
You are offered a banned performance-enhancing substance, with two guarantees: 1) You will not be caught. 2) You will win. Would you take the substance?
One hundred and ninety-five athletes said yes; three said no.
Scenario II: You are offered a banned performance-enhancing substance that comes with two guarantees: 1) You will not be caught. 2) You will win every competition you enter for the next five years, and then you will die from the side effects of the substance. Would you take it?

The survey question hangs for a moment before us, suspended in silence, as we consider just how far someone would go to come in first. Something inside of us roots for these athletes to draw a line at the thought of giving their lives for victory, to say that enough is enough, and to recoil at the suggestion of such a sacrifice. Their response was stunning; at least it should have stunned us. When asked if they would take a drug that would assure them of victory for five years, but also just as assuredly lead to their death –

“More than half of the athletes said yes.”

Of the close to 200 athletes surveyed, over 100 of them were willing to trade their lives for fleeting notoriety. Over half. The SI article was like an Old Testament prophet talking into the wind. It deserved more attention. My purpose, though, isn’t to review this article or a host of others that have documented athletic cheating. Instead, I want us to think about the personal decision that so many athletes make, at the risk of their lives, to gain an advantage. The media and the “schizophrenic” public may be calling for more testing and harsher penalties, but these strategies will do little to address behaviors that value winning over life itself. As Gabor Mate reminds us, “We keep trying to change people’s behaviors without a full understanding of how and why those behaviors arise.”1

Lance Armstrong recently confessed to Oprah and the world that he used performance-enhancing drugs to win his many titles, including his seven Tour de France championships. His years of ferocious, lawsuit-filled denials came to a crashing halt under the weight of overwhelming evidence. Now we know that Armstrong and his teammates injected EPO, a substance that had already killed other athletes, including five Dutch cyclists in 1987. Future rules, policies, and punishments must take this level of commitment into account if we are even going to begin to solve this challenge. Telling someone who is willing to give his life to win titles that he will be suspended for using drugs is like telling a suicide bomber that if he is discovered he won’t be able to ride any busses for a year. Policies and punishments aside, what is going on in the heads of these athletes? Choice theory may help us answer this question.

Choice theory, a theory of human motivation and behavior created and refined by William Glasser, presents several key points or axioms, as he refers to them, on which to begin the discussion. These points include –

All we do is behave; and

All behavior is purposeful; which means that

Our behavior represents what we think will best meet our needs at that moment. Further

Every human being is striving to meet a uniquely personal set of basic needs. We are born with these needs and throughout our lives we respond to their urgings to be met.

Beginning at birth, since we do not arrive like other mammals with instinctual knowledge and skills to survive, we begin to learn how to meet our basic needs.

I believe there are six basic needs, one physiological need – the need for survival, and five psychological needs – 1) the spirit need for purpose and meaning, 2) love and belonging, 3) power or achievement, 4) freedom, and 5) joy or fun. Some of these needs may not be so strong in us, while others can be very strong. The greater the need strength, the greater the pressure to make sure that need is met.

From birth and through childhood and beyond we identify those things that meet a need or that bring us a greater feeling of control. Much like a scrap booker, we collect visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, and taste “pictures” of the people, things, places, activities, ideas, etc. that are need-satisfying to us. These pictures, because they are so important to us, form the targets we aim for in our lives.

This all sounds fine so far, except that these personal scrap books, these mental store houses in our brains, are not so good at judging whether some one or some thing is good for us. Our scrap books simply identify if a person or thing is need-satisfying. Thus, we might put a person in our mental scrap book who brings us a little sense of belonging, even though that person is ultimately bad for us. Or we might, like I did when I was newly married, put the deadly habit of distancing in our scrap books and give our partner the silent treatment because it gives us, even if only slightly, a feeling of control over the situation.

In the same way that a person sets the thermostat in a room to control the temperature, when we place a need-satisfying picture in our mental scrap book it sets the target we want our lives and circumstances to match. Good pictures in our scrap books are healthy and helpful; bad pictures not so much.

Until athletes, and the rest of us for that matter, understand the concept of the basic needs and the scrap book process of meeting those needs, our rules and punishments will have very marginal success at best, and actually be counterproductive at worst. We need to understand that people are always acting in what they think is their best interest at the moment. Whether a recreational cyclist who drinks water before heading out on a ride to get in better shape or a professional cyclist who dopes before heading out on the next leg of the competition, both are doing what they think is best. Based on the pictures they pre-determined in their mental scrap books, their behavior is rational. Maybe not right or ethical, but rational.

I referred to the public earlier as being schizophrenic because one moment we want the home run to go 600 feet, offensive linemen to be 320 pounds with less than 10% body fat, and cyclists to win multiple Tours de France, while the next moment we vilify the outfielder or the football player or the cyclist for chemically trying to gain an advantage. Their lives, at our urging and our worshipping, have been dedicated to gaining an advantage. As much as we might want to blame and vilify, could it be that we, as spectators, are part of the problem?

1 Mate, G. (2010). In the realm of hungry ghosts: Close encounters with addiction. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
January 14, 2013 1 Comment

Flummoxed in Scandinavia

I recently received this letter from a teacher in Scandinavia. Before you read my response, think about how you would respond to her challenge.

Jim,
I am this year working in a class with children who are 11-12 years old. The boy I want to help now has the diagnose ADHD. We experience a boy who struggles to find out how to master his school days. I wonder if I have taught him anything so far this school year. He has been to our school for about 2 years, and they say it has helped him to come to us.
In my heart I feel that this is a boy with a very low self-esteem. He talks loud and makes a lot out of himself almost whenever he is in the classroom. He can talk calmly about his own problems and behavior when we have meetings with his parents or when he is one/one with a teacher. But in the classroom he reacts at once if anyone has a comment or he doesn’t find the work satisfying. I think this is the easiest way for him to satisfy his need for power and to be seen. He argues a lot and in my lessons this happens almost at once after I have started. We are lucky to have more grown-ups in the classroom who can help and take him outside so he doesn’t disturb the class. But this makes him feel like a failure again, I am sure. He think he really wants to stay although he sometimes leaves on his own because he knows that he finds the situation difficult.
My main problem now is that my way of dealing with him seems to annoy him tremendously. He tells me he hates me, that he doesn’t like me, that I am evil. He tells his mother and the other teacher that he doesn’t like me because I am too kind, not strict enough. But when I have become strict, as I have been driven to my wits end, he laughs. (in an insecure way).
I have been searching myself to see if I could be more strict, or maybe more clear (I know he needs that), but it made me use all the deadly habits on him and myself and was of no use. I now feel that trying to stick to choice theory, as much as I can, makes me feel like I am doing the right thing, although it doesn’t seem to give the results I had hoped. The problem is – how to reach him.
Just before Christmas he showed me interest and I thought maybe, maybe something good was on its way. I was asked to look after a precious “toy” he had. He is also very intelligent and often says “I’m sorry,” and we start anew. But it doesn’t last for more than 10-30 minutes and after Christmas I am again his “enemy”. I believe that when I do not get angry with him he feels insecure. When I give him responsibility he seems to feel lost, and has to turn it back over to me to feel ok. That’s what he is used to, and that seems to help him to control himself. Does he want me to feel insecure to get his own helplessness away? I so much wish he could know that he is a wonderful boy. Does a low self-esteem keep someone from being able to receive kindness? Should I just continue in the way I have been trying or should he have another teacher, because his diagnose needs it, I am sure? Sometimes I wonder if I give him more chaos than I should by not responding the way he “demands.”
Flummoxed in Scandinavia

Dear Flummoxed,

In some ways I think Erik (I will refer to him as Erik) is an outlier, a case that is more difficult and, hopefully, rare. In other ways, though, his behaviors are all too familiar to a lot of us. The way you have described the situation in detail will allow me and other readers to make attempts, along with you, at analyzing the situation.

First, let’s all be reminded that choice theory helps us to understand behavior, it doesn’t guarantee success. I think that tapping into choice theory principles puts me and others in the best position to succeed, but free will is always present. Sometimes people will do what they want to do, even when a gun is being pointed at them to stop them from doing it; and sometimes people will do what they want to do, even when choice theory is “being pointed at them.”

A continent away it appears to me that Erik has been brought up within a distant, yet controlling environment. He is desperate for consistent acceptance, yet unable to relate to freedom and insecure (I think you used the right word here) at the thought of responsibility. The system that he has learned, which appears to be a toxic stimulus-response environment, doesn’t apply at school and it is troubling for him, to say the least. The ground is moving under his feet and it is hard to maintain balance. Erik probably does have a fairly strong need for power, but I think he also may have a stronger than average need for love and belonging. Throughout his young life he has probably received mixed messages when it comes to control and love. When these two needs are mixed in a toxic way it can become a terrible thing to have to work through later in life. His behavior, going back and forth between showing affection toward you one minute and then pushing you away the next minute, reveals what he has probably been experiencing at home.

When I first read the description of Erik’s behavior I became very concerned about what his options were and what he faced in life. I think I may have felt like Joseph when he realized what he needed to tell the king’s baker after the baker’s dream (Genesis 40). But after reading your description several more times, I feel less like that for some reason. Erik has some real issues, but the sooner he begins to really see what his options are, the better.

Your efforts on his behalf will take strength, the kind of strength that in love moves ahead without needing to be liked in return. That is where he thinks his power lies. When things become uncomfortable for him, he retreats into various forms of threats and punishments. “I will hate you” he emphasizes, or “you can’t have me,” he threatens. Yet it is clear that deep inside he doesn’t want to hate you. It will take strength to show up positively, dispassionately, and compassionately in the face of his moods.

You asked if a low self-esteem could keep someone from being able to receive kindness. I think the answer to this is Yes, most definitely. When we do not value ourselves it is hard to believe that anyone else values us either. It truly is a secure person that can graciously accept the favor and love of another person. This is one of Erik’s burdens that you, and the Spirit, want to remove from him. Erik is in a situation that needs an intervention. When I say that, I mean that someone, another person, may need to show him acceptance, modeling it to him in word and deed, for him to begin to become convinced of his worth. I am reminded, too, of the disciples having a problem healing a boy and coming to Jesus afterward, inquiring of Him why they couldn’t heal him, and Jesus replying that “this kind can only be dealt with through prayer.” (Mark 9:29) Erik’s issues are very real and we need to seek the Spirit’s help on his behalf. We need to pray that he and/or his parents will become open to seeing things differently. It may be that you will be given an opportunity to talk with Erik or talk with his parents in a way you thought would never be possible.

You described how you felt better using choice theory, but that it wasn’t having the results you wanted. It actually is having results as Erik is acting out in a way that he hopes will restore the set-up he is used to. The steps you are taking, however uncomfortable they may be, are necessary before a breakthrough can occur.

I, and others, will be praying for this situation.

Jim
January 13, 2013 8 Comments

On Obedience

I wrote something five years ago and I want to run it by you. I know it was five years ago because I referred to my wife, Maggie, and I being married for 30 years, and now we’ve been married for 35 years. I’m good at Math. We no longer have that second Saturn, although we had it for 11 years before trading it in on another car, a Scion xB, if you must know. It’s sad that GM seemed to intentionally let their Saturn branch die like it did. That story might be for another blog, since that story is really about corporate managers wanting more external control. Anyway, here’s some thoughts on obedience.

On Obedience

What is the antonym of arbitrary? What word or phrase captures its opposite? Over the next few minutes, as you read the following ideas, I invite you to answer these questions..

I was recently reading from the small devotional book, As Bill Sees It. This particular Bill isn’t Bill Glasser, whose ideas I also like to read. No, this Bill is Bill Wilson, co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous. Over a twenty-five year period he wrote books and articles about the A. A. way of life and As Bill Sees It (Wilson, 1967) contains short excerpts from this literature. The following passage really got me to thinking.

We of A. A. obey spiritual principles, at first because we must, then because we ought to, and ultimately because we love the kind of life such obedience brings. Great suffering and great love are A. A.’s disciplinarians; we need no others (p.27).

It was the phrase we love the kind of life such obedience brings that caught my attention. Christian choice theorists don’t know exactly what to do with the word obedience. Obedience, as either a word or a concept, is found throughout scripture. Jesus himself used the word to describe the standard for our behavior. Yet the word conveys the idea of the control of one person over another. It conveys the idea of compliance. Words like control and compliance raise caution flags in the eyes of a choice theorist.

During one of my interviews with Dr. Glasser, I asked him to do a word association exercise with me. He agreed to the exercise and I said the word obedience. He replied, “Well, I don’t really like that word.” I then said the word forgiveness. “Oh,” he said, “I like that word a lot.” Is he so different from us when it comes to our gut reactions to these words?

But again, I am joyfully confronted by the A. A. principle that we love the kind of life such obedience brings. As the words wove their way through my brain cells a picture came to me.

Twice in our thirty years of marriage, Maggie and I have owned a new car. The first time was in 1996 when we bought a gold-colored Saturn SL2. The second time was when we traded that Saturn in for another new Saturn in 2000, which we still drive to this day. I don’t know if they still do this or not, but when we purchased these new cars the people at the Saturn dealership made a big deal out of it. They all gather around and congratulate you and sing to you and take your picture. It’s like you’ve now become part of a special community. I thought back about how I felt as we drove away from the showroom. It was a need-satisfying moment, to be sure. I felt joyful and powerful and free. As Maggie drove us home to the friendly, waiting garage, I looked in the glove box and pulled out a crisp, new car manual for the model we had just purchased. It contained all kinds of helpful information. It described little details on how you could custom program the automatic door locks; or on how the posi-traction worked; or on how to make the change your oil light go off after you changed your own oil; or on the kind of oil you should put in the car; or on how much oil should go in the car. And on and on the information went.

So think about this for a moment—If I put the kind of motor oil in the car that Saturn recommended in the manual, was I obeying Saturn? When I change my oil every 3,000 to 5,000 miles, am I complying with a Saturn demand? It seems silly to view it this way. We don’t view Saturn as an arbitrary car company out to make our lives difficult. We figure they built the car and they probably know best how to keep it running well. Obeying Saturn, if you will, rather than being restrictive, simply makes sense. Further it leads to a more joyful car experience now and in the future.

With my Saturn experience in mind, the A. A. principle that we love the kind of life such obedience brings begins to appear in its true light. Such obedience is really not like the obedience we usually think of. If the A. A. passage above is accurate, and I for one think the passage is on the right track, then there are different levels of obedience. Level one is based on I must, probably for reasons of survival. Level two is based on I ought to, which reveals a growing sense of personal responsibility to one’s self and to others. Level three is based on the idea that we love the kind of life such obedience brings, which is the highest and most secure level of obedience, where we obey because it makes sense and is for our best good.

I can see how God would have a challenge on his hands when working with the human race. At times during our earth’s history our very survival has been at stake. When the Hebrews were rescued by the mighty arm of God from Egyptian captivity they formed a massive group, probably approaching two million in number. Although impressive in numbers, they had almost no knowledge of their Rescuer God, had minimal knowledge on how to create and preserve effective relationships, and no knowledge on principles of health. It indeed was a situation calling for God to be extremely clear about who He was and what His expectations were. The boundaries for behavior had to be very specific. For instance, without modern medicine an illness could easily wipe out every one of them. Therefore, cleanliness procedures were vital, not because God was arbitrary, but because their very lives depended on it. It truly was an obey and live moment in time. If they weren’t ready for level two or level three obedience, God was willing to work with them at level one, even if it meant being misunderstood, even if it meant later generations might struggle with the word obedience.

And so we come back to the question that started us off—what is the antonym of arbitrary? Because I think Christian choice theorists would be very interested in those words or phrases. Could it be that God is more like the Saturn car company than we realize?

Wilson, B. (1967). As Bill sees it: The A.A. way of life (selected writings of A.A.’s co-founder). New York: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc.
January 9, 2013 3 Comments

Vexed in California

A letter from a small schools head teacher –

I have an 8th grade boy who is quite bright all around. He has mild ADHD. Since I’ve had him in my classroom (this is the third year) he has been difficult to motivate to do school work. I’ve tried everything I can think of: Allowing him to choose the subject matter, choosing and designing his own projects, picking his partners, etc. The end result has often been that he just won’t do it. Sometimes he lies and says that he was really busy the night before, but when I ask his mother she says that they weren’t busy, and that he told her that he had finished his work. Other times he just says, “I didn’t do it.” During the student-led parent-teacher conferences he has said more than once that he would rather be playing video games or watching TV, or hanging out with his family instead of doing his work. Though he is bright, his grades don’t reflect it because he doesn’t produce very much work. It is very frustrating. I’ve tried to motivate him by finding out what he wants to be when he grows up, and telling him how what we are learning will help him become that. I’ve also showed him how not doing his work will be detrimental to his desire to do the job he wants to do. Sometimes that will motivate him a little, but his overall behavior hasn’t changed. I’ve also taught the students about how to study, take notes, keep a portfolio of work, how to have good study habits, when to study, where to study, etc. Again, nothing. So I need advice if you think you can help.
Sincerely,
Vexed in California

Dear Vexed,
People are so unique and I don’t want to sound like I have this figured out. Of the options that Mike has been offered (I’ll refer to him as Mike) he is finding his present behavior the most need-satisfying. Why he is choosing this behavior becomes our puzzle to lovingly consider. Several possible areas come to mind.

1) You are doing so many things right on Mike’s behalf. I can tell you are willing to do a great deal to help him. In a way, what you are doing for him is evidence that stimulus-response approaches don’t always work. If stimulus-response theory was true, given all of the right stimuli you are giving him, Mike would be tackling his schoolwork. But for reasons that are unique and important to him, he isn’t. This may sound counterintuitive, but pulling back, combined with developing compassionate boundaries, may be part of the answer. By pulling back I don’t mean giving him the silent treatment or being quietly disgusted at his lack of effort. I just mean conveying to him that you realize you can’t make him do his work, that you will continue to be open to suggestions on what will make the learning better for him, that you will give him feedback on how he is doing, including giving him grades on what he does or doesn’t do, but that it is up to him whether he does the work or not. Try to convey this to him in a warm, sincere tone. Let him know you believe in him and that you have been so caught up in wanting him to succeed that you may have missed something. Admit that you don’t know what it is that you have missed, but that you care about him and hope that he is ok. I would then let the situation go. When he misses an assignment, acknowledge it, but pull back from the normal teacher response. Begin to let him know that he is in the driver’s seat of his life.

I don’t know what is or isn’t happening at home. Somehow his performance at school is tied to quality world pictures he has regarding home. You mentioned that he would rather be hanging out with his family. Does he get very much of that kind of time with the people that are most important to him? Are his parents still together? Divorced?

During one of our interviews I did a word association activity with Glasser. I asked him to quickly respond to words that I would say. One of the words was motivate. He surprised me a bit when he said he wasn’t real fond of the word motivate or motivation. For him the word motivate had a tone of other control, like someone outside of you trying to make you do something. People with high power needs want to call their own shots and decide what needs to be done and when it needs to be done. They often don’t want or need other people motivating them to do things a certain way. People with high freedom needs are very sensitive to feeling pressured. They tend to shut down and drag their feet when they feel that others are trying to make them do something. I haven’t met Mike, but for some reason I have this sense that it might be more about freedom with him, than it is about power. In both cases—whether about power or freedom—your doing exactly the right thing, if the right things were ultimately about motivating him, may be unwittingly contributing to the problem.

2) Keep in mind the developmental needs of a middle school student. It is an essential, yet incredibly complicated, time of life. As he should be, Mike is beginning to separate from the significant adults in his life. He is becoming more aware of his I am-ness. More than ever he needs a sane adult to help him navigate territory that is new to him, to help him deal with thoughts and feelings that he very likely doesn’t know what to do with himself. Middle schoolers are so unique. One moment they are holding a parent’s hand at an event in which they may be scared or shy, the next moment they are acting like they don’t have parents. Her? I’ve never seen her before. Mixing the natural developmental needs I just described with the basic needs and quality world pictures mentioned above can definitely create a challenge. So few in the public have any idea how challenging a teacher’s life can be.

3) Another area that comes to mind is that of the teacher him/herself. As teachers we have a set of basic needs and unique quality world pictures, too. When a student isn’t responding to a lesson I’ve worked hard to create, that experience doesn’t match the quality world picture I have in my head and it doesn’t help me meet my need for power or success. This is natural and there is nothing wrong with that mental process. It is what it is. We just have to remember to be careful to not go into a mode where we are more focused on meeting our need for power than we are of helping students to meet their need for power. It is so easy to go into the BIRG mode. BIRG stands for Basking In Reflected Glory. In other words, when my student or child does well and others see his/her competence shining forth, I can bask in his/her reflected accomplishments. If he/she is doing well it must be because of my parenting or my teaching. It is easy for this way of thinking to become a part of us, but when it does it subtly begins to add elements of toxicity in our relationships. Kids are aware of this dynamic and don’t like it.

Mike is fortunate to have you as his teacher. I want to encourage you as you guide and support him toward healthy independence. I would love to hear about how he is doing in the future. Stay in touch.
January 2, 2013 2 Comments

Dagnabit! Pt. 2

Besides the deadly habits derailing our New Year’s resolutions, something else to consider is the strength of the behavior with which we are dealing. Wanting to eat differently is a common New Year’s goal, and on the surface that goal seems simple enough, but our eating habits often revolve around much deeper issues in our lives than simply taking food and swallowing it. Behaviors can become forms of self-medication. We want to feel good and over time we discover behaviors that satisfy our needs. We don’t refer to certain kinds of food as comfort food for nothing.

Some self-medicating behaviors, like gambling or use of illicit drugs, are inherently destructive, while many others, like shopping or eating or even sex, are not necessarily bad in themselves, yet they can become destructive as we give them more power than they deserve. Self-medicating is by nature an addictive process, a complex process that involves nature, nurture, and choice factors. Engaging in a particular activity, or even thinking about the activity, bathes our brain cells in a way that results in either pleasure or a at least a release from the pain.

The power of addictive behaviors can be incredibly strong, leading us to do things that leave us incredulous at our own weakness and disgusted with our self-imprisonment. A book that compassionately, yet firmly and candidly describes the comprehensive and compelling power of addiction, especially drug and alcohol addiction, is titled In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts (2010), by Gabor Mate. Describing the lives of drug addicts in Vancouver, British Columbia, Mate persuasively explains why the current war on drugs does nothing to curb the addict’s drive for a fleeting moment of satisfaction. The book also makes a case for all addictions basically being the same. Whether we are a hardcore drug addict or a housewife desperate to do some online shopping, addiction is addiction. Behaviors that weaken us and lessen our ability to have control over our lives are negative addictions. It is possible, though, according to William Glasser, for certain habits (e.g.- exercising, devotional meditations, creative hobbies, etc.) to add strength and self-control to our lives, to literally be positive addictions. For more on Glasser’s views check out Positive Addiction, which was published in 1976.

At a New Year’s Eve gathering we got to talking about New Year’s resolutions and a friend shared that he had heard that as of June each calendar year, that of the people who had made resolutions, 40% of them were still keeping their new commitment. I felt that number was way high, but I do agree that a percentage of us are able to make and keep behavior change commitments. For some of us we know that we aren’t exercising enough and we start exercising; for some of us we know that we are eating to much sugar and we cut back; and for some of us we know that we’re spending too much time playing video games and we stop. For others of us, though, it isn’t that simple. Some of us are in a battle for our lives.

If a behavior has become a self-medicating behavior, then we need to acknowledge and respect it for what it has become. We made choices that invited that behavior into our lives. It felt right or important enough at the moment. And we have repeatedly affirmed that choice, sometimes for many years. The behavior has become a “friend” that we can count on. True, this “friend” is a bully and cares nothing for our real happiness. But we prefer a terrible friend we can count on over other options that seem out of our reach. If this kind of self-medicating behavior has become a part of your life, be aware that a simple resolution sometime around the end of December or beginning of January isn’t going to cut it. The cause of the challenge lies deeper than a New Year’s promise can affect.

Self-medicating, addictive behaviors can be dealt with! There is most definitely hope! To begin to gain the victory over behavior that weaken and trap, I recommend the following:
1) Take an honest personal inventory and admit the largeness of your addiction. Recognize that the behavior has become a thief of your power and your joy.
2) Bring your inventory to the Holy Spirit, admit your inability to effectively deal with the behavior, and seek His cleansing and strengthening might. He is anxious to share His insight and muscle with you.
3) Begin to learn about how our brains actually work. Seek to understand the source of your own motivation. For me, choice theory offered the best explanation of human psychology and provided details into how God created us a free will beings. (My goal is to write a follow-up book to Soul Shapers that will describe choice theory, along with how it shows up in our lives.)

Just remember that real change, lasting change occurs from the inside-out, and that not even pressure we afflict on ourselves from the outside-in, also known as the deadly habits, will make a positive difference. I am so glad that Romans 8:1, 2 comes right after Romans 7:18-25.

“And I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature.* I want to do what is right, but I can’t. I want to do what is good, but I don’t. I don’t want to do what is wrong, but I do it anyway. But if I do what I don’t want to do, I am not really the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it.
I have discovered this principle of life—that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God’s law with all my heart. But there is another power* within me that is at war with my mind. This power makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin and death? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God’s law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. And because you belong to Him, the power of life-giving Spirit has freed you from the power of sin that leads to death. Romans 7:18 – 8:2.
December 28, 2012 2 Comments

Hey, 2013! I’m makin a change, dagnabit!

More than any other time of the year, New Year’s has us thinking about choices. What follows are some choice theory thoughts as we ring in 2013.

We call them resolutions. When day 365 of 2012 is over we want a new beginning on day 1 of 2013. We know what we want, we know what’s needed, and we make a promise, a commitment. And not just any promise. This is really a promise, dagnabit! In spite of the intensity of their intention, for many their New Year’s promise goes by the wayside and the old habit rushes back in to fill its rightful place. As sincere as we are when we identify a new behavior that we want to become a part of our life, it may be that external control thinking is setting us up for failure.

External control thinking is based on a stimulus-response approach to life. This approach relies on the belief that people can be manipulated through well-placed rewards and punishments. Most of us know this approach pretty well. We were raised with it (often by well-meaning parents), and it was used on us in school. In fact, it seems to be everywhere. Choice theory explains that external control is destructive on so many levels. When used in management external control strategies ultimately reduce the quality of the product being sold, whether the product be a service or a thing. And more importantly, whether it is used in the workplace or at home, external control harms relationships. This seems to be especially true when it comes to the relationship we most value–that being our relationship with our spouse. A therapist once shared with me that over 90% of his clients would rather be right than married. I think it would be even more accurate to say that his clients would rather be in control of their partner than connect with him/her in unconditional acceptance.

Externally controlling behaviors are so destructive to relationships that they are referred to as deadly habits. Examples of deadly habits include criticizing, blaming, threatening, punishing, and bribing. To get others to fulfill our expectations (or even just to gain a slight feeling of control) we rely on these habits. Over time we can become especially good at one or two of these ways of being. It is interesting and sad that so many of us stick with the deadly habit approach, even as we can see that they don’t help us get what we really want. (What we really want is intimacy with our spouse–spiritually, emotionally, and physically.) I guess that little feeling of control we get when we use a deadly habit is worth it to us. Maybe it’s pride, too.

So, what do the deadly habits have to do with our New Year’s resolutions? Just this. For those of us who have marinated in an external control world, we not only apply the deadly habits with our colleagues and loved ones, we apply them to ourselves. We criticize and blame ourselves for eating too much, or not exercising enough, or not praying enough, or watching too much TV. And we bribe, threaten and even punish ourselves when don’t behave accordingly. I am convinced that the deadly habits work no better on ourselves than they do on others. The sincerity of our desire and the intensity of our commitment cannot overrule a foundation built on external control.

The key is understanding that we were designed by our Creator to be internally motivated and controlled, rather than controlled by others or circumstances outside of us. We behave in ways that are need-satisfying to us. Take note here — I didn’t say we behave in ways that are good for us. We behave in a way that satisfies a need. Coming into an understanding of our needs and the ways in which we satisfy them will help in our efforts to make better choices. Berating and bullying ourselves may have some short term success, but ultimately our success lies in understanding our internal control design.

More when New Year’s, Pt. 2 is posted.
December 25, 2012 6 Comments

Christmas and Choice Theory

I have been thinking about Christmas and choice theory and I have come to the conclusion that they are wonderfully connected!

My logic goes like this. Christmas marks the moment that God gave up His riches and glory to become one of us with our weakness and poverty. He entered a literal battlefield, a war zone, as a vulnerable, tiny baby. The Christ Child was the Commander of heaven’s armies, though, and He ultimately came to wreak havoc on the enemy’s schemes. Luke described how the choir that announced the Child’s arrival to the shepherds was actually made up of “the armies of heaven.” Luke 2:13, 14 This incredible display was God’s way of saying Game On. And John declares that “The Son of God came to destroy the works of the devil.” 1 John 3:8

The works of the devil are bad news. Driven by his hatred of God’s Son, the same Child Commander who would eventually arrive in a smelly stable in Bethlehem, he would do everything he could to deface and hurt God’s creation. Having already lured over a third of the angels to distrust God and join him in forming a new government, he focused on convincing us, the crowning work of God’s creative power, to distrust God, too. We chose to believe the devil, to seek a higher place, to go our own way, to align ourselves with the new, alternative government. A void was formed between humans and their Creator and the attributes of the new government–fear and insecurity–rushed in to fill this space. Instead of the self-control with which we were created, the devil took advantage of our allegiance to him and sought to capture us in his trap, to chain us within his dungeon, to addict us in behaviors from which their appeared no escape.

How fortunate for us that when the Commander Child arrived in the humble Bethlehem stable it was in fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah. Thirty years later, as Commander Messiah, He would read this prophecy in the synagogue as a declaration of His mission. “I have come to release the captives and set the prisoners free.” Isaiah 61:1 God’s government is based on freedom, on the power to choose, on the ability to be in control of our thinking and behavior. Immanuel-the God with us Child-came to win back our freedom to choose, to level an unfair playing field, to give us back to ourselves.

The manger and the cross were one from the beginning. The Child was born in the shadow of death. Yet by His death we are healed, the shackles are unlocked, the prisons of our lives are opened. Through His Spirit we are free. “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love, power, and a sound mind.” 2Tim. 1:7 This freedom, this power to choose, this ability to be who you want to be, is so important to God that He was willing to give up everything to insure its future. It was and is a universal non-negotiable.

Choice theory explains how we are motivated from within for reasons that are uniquely personal to us, and that we choose to behave in a way that we think will best meet our needs at that moment. How incredible that God would create us with this kind of autonomy.! Let Christmas be a reminder of the freedom that God not only created us with, but also of His return to redeem us as Commander Child. Game on at the manger! Game won at the cross! We are free!

Since we have been united with him in his death, we will also be raised as he was. Our old sinful selves were crucified with Christ so that sin might lose its power in our lives. We are no longer slaves to sin. For when we died with Christ we were set free from the power of sin. Romans 6:5-7
December 20, 2012 1 Comment

It’s THE better plan

The phrase “the better plan” did not make it as the title of the book. Soul Shapers took that distinction. The Soul Shapers title was better than The Blindfolded Dolphin, however it could be misleading if a reader thought that it was his/her role to shape the souls of the children in his/her care. During one of our conversations regarding the title one of the Review editors informed me that the subtitle of the book would be A Better Plan for Parents and Educators. I was glad that the phrase “better plan” was going to be on the cover, but wondered aloud why it was going to be printed as “A” better plan, rather than “The” better plan. She explained that “A” made it sounded more open and allowed for their being other good plans, too. Proclaiming it as “The” better plan made it sound like it was THE way and that there weren’t other ways that might be good, too. I replied that the phrase “the better plan” was not my idea. I didn’t come up with that emphasis. I got the idea from the following quote –

“Those who train their pupils to feel that the power lies in themselves to become men and women of honor and usefulness, will be the most permanently successful. Their work may not appear to the best advantage to careless observers, and their labor may not be valued so highly as that of the instructor who holds absolute control, but the after-life of the pupils will show the results of the better plan of education.” Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 57

In referring to “the better plan” in this blog I have often written it as ” . . . the better plan . . .”, rather than “The Better Plan.” I have surrounded the phrase with ellipses to emphasize that it is a part of something bigger, some important things that come before and something important that comes after. One of the important things that comes before is the idea that our motivation is internally driven, not externally controlled by others. I believe God designed us with freedom to choose and that ultimately He died on the cross to preserve this freedom. Another important thing that comes before is a description of a teacher that prefers control and compliance, rather than guidance and freedom. An important thing that comes after is the reference to “the after-life.” which to me means both the life we lead after we leave school and, most importantly, the life we lead eternally. That this topic has eternal implications makes it really important to me.

I grew up a PK – that is, a preacher”s kid. My dad passed away before Soul Shapers came out in 2005. If he had lived long enough, I think he would have been very pleased at its being published, although the concepts of internal, rather than external, control would have been a stretch for him. His upbringing as a child and the views of his generation, in general, would have led to a steep learning curve with these non-traditional ideas. I don’t know that he always got it right when it came to non-coercive living and leadership. One thing he did get right (and he had many) was his value of and support for Christian education. When it came to “his” church school he talked the talk and walked the walk. He was always involved in a project to raise money for the school. (Many of these were smaller projects, but some were bigger, like the time he planted and harvested 50 acres of sunflowers.) His Education sermons frequently included a reference to what he called an “education blueprint” that, I now assume, could allegedly be found in the Spirit of Prophecy. As I mentioned in Soul Shapers, after 35 years in Adventist education, and after a lot of time spent in the Spirit of Prophecy, I am not aware of a blueprint for SDA education. The phrase . . . the better plan . . . comes the closest to it as far as I know. To me . . . the better plan . . . captures the idea that children (and adults for that matter) are in the process of forming their own characters and as significant adults in their lives we have the privilege of guiding, modeling, inviting, persuading, and inspiring them to form characters that serve others and honor God. And so I have embraced . . . the better plan . . . I like it, in fact, enough to name this blog after it.
December 18, 2012 2 Comments

Soul Shapers vs The Better Plan

On the home page of . . . the better plan . . . blogsite I described how Soul Shapers, published in 2005, “renewed the conversation.” I used the word “renewed” intentionally as a shout out to William Glasser, who re-started the conversation in 1965, and especially to Ellen White, who emphasized the conversation at the turn of the last century. The ideas in Soul Shapers struck many readers as new and radical, but I will be the first to admit that the ideas were around long before I came along.

Getting a book published, especially to newbie writers like myself, is an interesting adventure that involves important details. It is great when a company like the Review & Herald wants to print your manuscript, however when you sign their thick contract you agree to give up the rights to your book and a number of the significant decisions that go with getting the book published. For instance, you give up the right to title the book. They do that. The working title I labeled the manuscript with was The Better Plan, which I thought was the best option of several I had thought of. They started to edit the book and said they would get back to me regarding the title. When they called me several weeks later (I remember that I was waiting for a flight in the Oakland airport terminal when my phone rang) they suggested that the book be called The Blinfolded Dolphin. (You may recall that I share an example on page 33 of Soul Shapers in which I describe one of the demonstrations during the dolphin show at Marine World.) I said “what was that?” I wasn’t sure I heard correctly. Yes, in fact, I had heard correctly. Someone on a committee must have really liked the dolphin story. I responded that I didn’t think it was a very good title, that the dolphin story was a very minor moment in the book, and that it didn’t really represent what the book was trying to express. I could tell the person on the other end was miffed at me, but they said they would think about what I had said.

Soon thereafter they chose the title, Soul Shapers, and a little while after that the first copies, ten to be exact, arrived at my house. I really did like the tone and visual feel of the cover. Designers know what they are doing. I struggle with that kind of thing. A closer look, though, past the tone and visual feel to the actual details of the cover gave me a bit of pause. Along with the Soul Shapers title, which appeared in rich lettering, was a cookie cutter in the shape of a heart. The heart connection was touching, but the sharp metal of the cutter had just one purpose – to force its way into soft dough and make it into a specific shape. When you read Soul Shapers you come to realize how opposite the goals of the book are compared to the role of a cookie cutter. Adults should not be in the business of forcefully shaping children into their preconceived pictures. Instead, adults have an opportunity to model, to guide, to persuade, to inspire, and to invite. By the time I saw the book for the first time, 5,000 copies of it had been published. Very few people have brought the disconnect to my attention, although people quickly agree if I bring it to their attention. The key to remember is that we really aren’t shaping kids souls. Every human being on planet earth is in the process of forming their own character. When we keep that in mind it really does change our roles as teachers, parents, and leaders.

I’ll share one more thought on . . . the better plan . . . in my next blog.