Your list of “simple suggestions” is accurate although the social environment, both micro & macro, makes it often hard to implement. But accurate, yes.
Fine idea. I wonder what the next stage of this project might be. I have just had a glimpse, but I am interested based on your earlier writings for MIA.
Question 5 asks how the problem might be “conceptualized.” That’s a graduate school word. I don’t know what is your target audience, but my guess is that that word would be off-putting to many parents.
Elise Bon-Rudin
Previous Graduate School Participant
I am not sure that it is a”psychotherapy of character” that is needed. Given the content of this article overall & Dr. Berezin’s other writings, this point may be more a quibble about wording than a disagreement about conceptualization. Leaving that aside, an otherwise good and timely article would have been even better if the last sentence had referred not to “a biological understanding of the brain” but to a “relational and biological understanding of the brain,” following the earlier statement that “the mappings of our emotional experience are laid down through the amygdala and limbic system.” Lastly, reading this piece reminds me again the large debt that many of us have to Allan Schore. Many thanks, Dr. Berezin.
Eric’s email address cited above came back as undeliverable. Fairly annoying:
“The following recipient(s) cannot be reached: ‘[email protected]mail.com.’ on 9/18/2017 9:36 AM
Invalid recipient”
This is what I tried to email to him. Can’t attach the .pdf here.
Hello Eric –
Thank you for working on this MIA series. I’ll be sure to follow it. For starters, Tim Carey’s list of questions was very good. It put me in mind of Stanley Greenspan’s irreplaceable list of children’s irreducible needs (book by that name & p. 1 of the document attached).
Elise Bon-Rudin, Ed. D.
re: “I wouldn’t even call it healthcare” around here we use this ponderous but accurate term: “the so-called health so-called care so-called system.”
Thank you for the fine fillet-ing of psychiatry.
“I will demonstrate for a total ban on ECT—I mean, shooting electricity through a person’s skull—like, what the fuck?”
“like” ? Vulgarity? What the heck, Bonnie?
Re: Sandra’s comment that “Insel remains wedded to the notion that we HAVE to understand the brain in order to help the person,” first I wonder how Insel adapts Jaakko Seikkula’s data into his paradigm. Second, I feel compelled to make the sophomoric rejoinder that a la the work of Seikkula & his team & that of the Swede’s Family Foundation, you have to understand (not the brain but) the person in order to help the person. In order to do that one needs at a minimum 1.) 1 or more adults committed & capable of consistent nurturing, 2.) a structured environment that affords varied opportunities to be useful & to play, and 3.) individuals whose medical & cognitive states are sufficiently “cleared” or “clearing” to enable them to experience 1 and 2.
Your list of “simple suggestions” is accurate although the social environment, both micro & macro, makes it often hard to implement. But accurate, yes.
Fine idea. I wonder what the next stage of this project might be. I have just had a glimpse, but I am interested based on your earlier writings for MIA.
Question 5 asks how the problem might be “conceptualized.” That’s a graduate school word. I don’t know what is your target audience, but my guess is that that word would be off-putting to many parents.
Elise Bon-Rudin
Previous Graduate School Participant
I am not sure that it is a”psychotherapy of character” that is needed. Given the content of this article overall & Dr. Berezin’s other writings, this point may be more a quibble about wording than a disagreement about conceptualization. Leaving that aside, an otherwise good and timely article would have been even better if the last sentence had referred not to “a biological understanding of the brain” but to a “relational and biological understanding of the brain,” following the earlier statement that “the mappings of our emotional experience are laid down through the amygdala and limbic system.” Lastly, reading this piece reminds me again the large debt that many of us have to Allan Schore. Many thanks, Dr. Berezin.
Eric’s email address cited above came back as undeliverable. Fairly annoying:
“The following recipient(s) cannot be reached: ‘[email protected]mail.com.’ on 9/18/2017 9:36 AM
Invalid recipient”
This is what I tried to email to him. Can’t attach the .pdf here.
Hello Eric –
Thank you for working on this MIA series. I’ll be sure to follow it. For starters, Tim Carey’s list of questions was very good. It put me in mind of Stanley Greenspan’s irreplaceable list of children’s irreducible needs (book by that name & p. 1 of the document attached).
Elise Bon-Rudin, Ed. D.
re: “I wouldn’t even call it healthcare” around here we use this ponderous but accurate term: “the so-called health so-called care so-called system.”
Thank you for the fine fillet-ing of psychiatry.
“I will demonstrate for a total ban on ECT—I mean, shooting electricity through a person’s skull—like, what the fuck?”
“like” ? Vulgarity? What the heck, Bonnie?
Re: Sandra’s comment that “Insel remains wedded to the notion that we HAVE to understand the brain in order to help the person,” first I wonder how Insel adapts Jaakko Seikkula’s data into his paradigm. Second, I feel compelled to make the sophomoric rejoinder that a la the work of Seikkula & his team & that of the Swede’s Family Foundation, you have to understand (not the brain but) the person in order to help the person. In order to do that one needs at a minimum 1.) 1 or more adults committed & capable of consistent nurturing, 2.) a structured environment that affords varied opportunities to be useful & to play, and 3.) individuals whose medical & cognitive states are sufficiently “cleared” or “clearing” to enable them to experience 1 and 2.