Reaction and Thoughts on "Girlhood: Growing Up On The Inside"

This post is on an unique documentary that followed the lives two young women who became incarcerated in their teenage years... and how each of them changed and 'grew' through that process. Both individuals had open ended sentences which meant they would be released based on their behavior and family circumstances. The young women were named Shanae Owens and Megan Jensen.





Shanae was incarcerated because she got into a fight with another girl and the other individual died. She has some amazing family who really care about her and just want to really help her improve, to love herself and to have the best life that she can. I can feel their support in every moment with them and its obvious that she feels their love and support too. Even though she has done something really bad, she feels secure in their love and caring for her. Her family also really openly talks about their flaws and problems- her father admits to a shady past and her mother states, “I've been there.” One of the questions that her social workers and probation officers look at is whether the family is growing as well, and I see so much of that in these clips. Even at such a young age, Shanae is learning about critical thinking and in counseling sessions makes comments such as “That might be effective for her.” I listened to that comment and compared it with some of the individuals around her and thought of her as an older woman inhabiting a young body with a brain wise and thoughtful beyond her years. She has had circumstances that in many ways I can not fathom; raped by several men at age eleven, becoming pregnant at age eleven (not sure if they were from the same circumstance, but I suspect they might be), getting into a fight and not even remembering what happened during it, etc... When she is moved to a group home, she reminds herself, “I started at the bottom there, I can do it here”. She reminds herself of her flaws but also focuses on her blessings “They never gave up on me, my parents, my family, nobody...” She finds her strength in her family and their love for her, so much so that she is able to continue to draw from that strength even when her mother passes away. She seems to see how to grow even within tight limitations and how to use the limitations in many ways to her own advantage.

Megan is an interesting young lady. I am not sure what she was incarcerated for as if it was mentioned I missed it... she doesn't seem to talk about it at all. She states that she is in trouble ever day at her facility and that she doesn't care. I watch her and realize that she almost never looks at the person she is talking to or the camera... almost like she doesn't notice that they are there. Megan states several times that she 'doesn't care', but that isn't what I feel as I watch her. It feels like she cares so much her heart would bleed with the showing of it, she looks away to hide herself, her bravado and anger are her masks. I sense her fear of relationships and hurt, but I also feel her strength and resilience... her desire to be better and to have better is just as apparent as her defense mechanisms.

“You're going to end up just like your mother and unconsciously I have been doing that”

“I regret so much... I feel like an old woman trapped in a young girl's body”

“I'm never going to change anything in my life cause this was what's supposed to happen”

I see parallels between her and her mother and the ways that they think as well as differences in their views. Both of them seem to state at different times that they have nowhere to go and you can see how this view of their lives and positions can shape a negative vision of their lives and possible choices going forward. Her mother states that they need to go to counseling together and Megan refuses- a struggle that I can see in two lights. Counseling would be helpful for Megan for her own problems and learning to deal positively with her anger, but at least at this point I am not sure that family counseling would be beneficial for her. Her mother complains that Megan states that her mother was never there for her – is a 'stranger' to her in fact – and then state that she had custody of Megan until Megan was seven. You see her mother try to count out how many years she had with Megan and the use of words like custody, she had her grandmother, etc... suggests that Megan may have a valid viewpoint... her mother wasn't there even when she wasn't in jail. I watch Megan tell social workers and probation officers that she will not avoid undesirables because her mother would be considered an undesirable and as time goes by to cut her mother out of her life, recognizing the danger and stress that it causes her in her life. Megan has more options than her mother... mainly because she sees that she has more choices than her mother. In so many ways, their viewpoints are similar but Megan's are beginning to evolve as she heads out on own and starts to try and live on her own and with friends. She doesn't have the strong support of much family at all... you do not see her grandmother much at all and only hear about things she might do, etc... (In her grandmother's defense, it sounds like she is overwhelmed trying to deal with all the problems she faces between herself, her daughter, and all her grandchildren.)

“I ain't nothing like my mother”

I see a very tough life for Megan ahead of her. She tends to fight her limitations and looks at adversity in a short term way, not recognizing how her behavior and thoughts can affect her long term choices and limitations. I want to reach out and help her and also back up because her anger scares me a bit... no matter how justified it might be.

Something that interested me and I am still thinking about is that Shanae's family seems more close knit and show their love for each other better. While Shanae seems to have committed a harder crime and therefore, has more to overcome along with the lack of privilege that she has due to race, gender, etc... she is the individual that I have the most hope for after watching this film. Both of these individuals were living their lives beginning to relieve the cycles of their parents that were potentially destructive to themselves and others. Andre Lorde states, “There is no such thing as a single issue struggle, because we do not live simple issue lives.” Both of these individuals show us a good example of how trying to separate people into single categories isn't helpful for the individuals being classified nor really informative to those doing the classifying. It seems like the only consequences of trying to see people in these limited vision are negative... for everyone involved. Megan's mother makes a very excellent observation- “It doesn't matter what you did, it matters what you do” After the death of her mother, Megan mentions that she has so much to forget and she could get drunk or smoke to 'try and forget' but that wouldn't really be helpful in a positive way for her- a very mature observation for some her age and with her grief. I see Megan as getting some advantages that she didn't really work for... that Shanae only got through hard work and in some ways, I think that Shanae will do better for it and that some of Megan's privilege is helping to hold her back from what changes she really needs to make in her life.

I wonder how the director chose these two girls, how she found them and what about each of them drew her to them to help her express her ideas and thoughts. I wonder how these young women changed the ways that Liz Garbus viewed them and their individual situations and how all the individuals involved in this project may have modified their viewpoints on these women and incarcerated young people in general based on the work they performed for this film. I am grateful to see this small vision of what could have been my past and what so many struggle with. Thank you.


One how that came up in some reading near the end was "Orange is the New Black." I have never watched or had any interest in watching this show, however, the statistics in the readings were powerful, sad and horrifying. The fact that jails are now are largest mental health providers in our country isn't totally new to me, but adding women to that equation is. Recognizing that their families and children are affected by the states' choice to incarcerate these women instead of providing mental health services and giving them the ability to be at home seems to suggest that what society's goals really are is to provide people for private incarceration for profit, instead of helping people be productive members of their communities. The documentary asks a good question... “Is incarcerating these women worth it?” I suggest it is not.

photos from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368745/, https://woyingi.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/documentary-review-girlhood-by-liz-garbus/

Hiatus...

Well, the last few months have been a bit crazy with all my classes and everything going on right now. So the blog has pretty much been pushed aside while I dealt with everything and got my school work done. However, in answer to the email I received today, the blog is still active and actually the next few months will be very busy with reading for my consuming family and public as I begin to edit and post my assignments and writings from my classes. I have writings on human behavior, racism, genocide, history, eugenics, gender studies and more... so for those of you who have been waiting… don’t stress! More is coming…. ;)

I love you all and look forward to trying to share and continuing introspection in the new year. Anything you want me to research, share, etc… feel free to ask. I might be willing to do so. :)

Manic...

I fond myself really struggling to sit in Sacrament meeting a few weeks ago and I tried to write down my thoughts in an attempt to acknowledge and understand them. I do not think I did find understanding after all, but I did manage to get through the meeting and as I read over my thoughts and words, I do have much to think about. I figured that I would share. Do any of my friends feel like this sometimes?

I think that I am a little manic today. Not really sure and until I understand myself better and my emotions/energy I probably will not be able to. I am not even convinced that I have used the word 'manic' correctly- I have no diagnosis or firm knowledge base in which I use it. It was the phrase that leaps to my mind as I sit in the pew trying to analyze this feeling in my body that is almost overwhelming and feels pretty urgent. I am sitting, but I feel my limbs twitch slightly... hopeful for movement. Even my foot, my injured foot wearing a ridiculous ugly boot- is trying to move, subtly flexing. If I am honest, I feel like jumping up from my pew and going home- not due to church, my testimony or even feelings of disobedience- but to cook and then to run. The urge to take off the boot, leap onto the treadmill and to run.... just run, listening to Rob Thomas's voice filling the air and just pushing my body until it can do no more. However, now is not the time... It is the time for Sacrament meeting... so I sit.

Interestingly, my mind is slower. Thoughts are not screaming and racing through it. It's almost like my brain feels the exuberance in the rest of my vessel and feels too tired to even contemplate using more energy on thought. The only thing I know is that I feel terribly exhausted and at the same time, terribly energized and like a rabbit feeling the watchful eyes of the hawk... ready to run, but not sure if it should nor where it would go. So I am still sitting and I find myself twitching and breathing quickly.... and trying to focus on not moving. (What kind of an example would I be for any of the adorable kids that I teach if I jump up and make a fuss in the meeting? What kind of example would I be to myself actually :) And so I am scribbling... trying to understand these strange feelings coursing through my muscles while my brain is trying to listen to the speakers themselves. And, funnily enough, the more I sit and write, the more I feel like I can actually hear what is being said... the more I can endure

And so the meeting ends... and I have many pages of doodles and this page of words. I made it! My feelings haven't changed, but I have made it. I managed to stay sitting and look attentive even as my body yearned for freedom. And now it can have it! Off to the nursery I go to jump and sing and play.... Hooray! :)

A Sabbath Experience...

Wow. I have so many adjectives to describe today in my mind, but this Sabbath cannot fairly be described as restful or a 'day of rest'. It's funny, but if you attend any church I cannot imagine that you have much rest at all. If you have children, then there is no possibility that the Sabbath is a day of rest. And for those of us with callings at church, those callings-even when enjoyable and fun- are learning experiences and as such are often work.

I will admit that Sundays for the last few years have always been a great deal of work. Taking Bug to church, getting us through the day and home along with the joys and responsibility of helping my friend Sarah Drew left me fairly wiped out. The pressure and work load was intense and after some Sundays of carrying 40+ pounds on my shoulders for two hours plus helping Sarah I will admit that I didn't really feel the spirit much at all. The struggle was just too great. And the weariness was manifested in almost everyday of my life as I would struggle and fight to stay awake any time I was at all stationary-while driving, while eating... even while driving a car.

In so many ways, Sundays have changed over the last year. I no longer have a best friend to sit with and I no longer have the struggle with Bug. I come to the building an hour before church and I open the library. I copy the programs and the inserts. I choose the items to change and put up front for checkout – the DVD's, new books, etc... I prepare the Sacrament kits and help people get what they need for their lessons. When the meeting starts, I close up and get up the courage to join into the group in the chapel... to reconcile myself to learning, to listening... to feeling alone in the crowd. If needed I also give of the time and my energy to help others with their children... to hug them, distract them, to quiet them... and to love them. That is my average typical Sunday. The work is different and is less physically exhausting than I used to do, but I would be lying if I didn't suggest that it isn't work. The secrets I bring and the burden and emotion and pain are just as much of a struggle in many ways. Heck, sometimes the weight of the pain and emotions and my silence feels somehow heavier than the weight of my son riding along on my shoulders for the hours on end as I bounced him quietly and tried to keep him silent in the past.

In some ways, this Sunday was no different. I had all of these tasks as well as my burdens, but one of my choices and circumstances today very much added to the stress of the day. One circumstance was that my phone broke and so I didn't arrive as early as I usually do... so I lost track of time and was only about 1/2 an hour early. When I arrived, I found that things were actually a bit chaotic and so I started my work by trying to hunt down the program and then racing to the supermarket to buy gluten free bread after it was discovered ten minutes before the meeting started that there was none to be found. I was back in twelve minutes (a record I think) and was only three minutes late for the start of the meeting... a stunning achievement, but I will admit not very spiritual. So it was with a relieved heart that I sat down in the foyer on the couch to catch my breath, to think and to try and bring myself back to be ready for the spirit.

However, my choice to sit in the foyer was a big mistake. While well intentioned, I discovered that I then had the difficulty of trying to listen to the talks in Sacrament with the members of one family walking back and forth every few minutes checking the foyer. It was very clear immediately that these members were no willing to enter the meeting, but were also not willing to sit in the foyer while I was sitting there... so they kept checking to see if I had left. The behavior was so obvious that another sister who came out of the meeting to sit in the foyer commented that I really need to apologize for offending these members as I surely must have done for this behavior to continue.... it was so clear to her what their purpose was. I tried to smile and just bite my tongue to continue to keep my silence. And so every time I saw one of them come to check, I would think of getting up to go into the meeting. Not because I felt comfortable or able to do so, but because I felt hounded and hunted and pressed to do so. So I tried to breath deeply and continue to sit... fighting the feelings of fear and anger welling inside and tried to listen. It was almost impossible to glean anything from the talks because it would take me a few minutes to really get myself refocused... and then they were back to see if I had gotten the 'hint' yet.... and the fragile peace in my head was shattered. It is hard to sit through this behavior and not feel like I have done something awful and deserve it... to remember that I have not only done all I can but have bent over backwards to try and make the situation manageable... to remember that in many ways I am the one who was wronged and now struggle to deal with the reality that her choices have helped create for me in my life. So I sat... and I sat... and the meeting finally ended.

I tried to deal with the library and some things there, but when I heard shouting a few minutes later in the foyer, I gave up and walked out. There I found one of the sisters yelling at the missionaries to force the child playing the organ in the chapel to stop- it was apparently inappropriate. (Frankly, yelling at the missionaries and in the church was inappropriate, but I digress. ; ) So I went into the chapel to see one of my favorite summer visitors happily playing the piano and celebrating song and church. Adam is a beautiful child with so many difficulties and disabilities and his joy was as obvious as his father's slight embarrassment. So he can't actually play music that we recognize and the composition is his own. Doesn't that make it an even greater gift to the Father? Soon he was distracted and came with me to the library for crackers and I gave him one of my very favorite books. Off to class he headed with his dad, satisfied and ready. And I picked up my stuff, left a message for the branch president, and took off hoping to steal an hour or two of silence for myself.

So many people say that I am strong- my branch president, friends, family... but I don't tend to feel that way. I feel like I am walking on a fragile cord struggling to keep my balance and hoping the cord won't break and send me crashing to the ground. Still, after all this time.... I am not sure about much, but I think I need a redefining of myself and my life. I need a new focus... a way to feel strong. But until then... I guess I keep going. :)

Why Leaders Lose their Way and some Personal Introspection

I think I have seen leaders, both up close and certainly through the news media, that have lost their way and not only ended up being a failure as a leader but causing the organizations or groups that they are affiliated with to crash or stumble in a big way. I have worked with a few people whose leadership skills have been quite poor and I have personally felt the pain and frustration caused by their poor leadership abilities. So i took the time to look at the different archetypes of leaders that fail and try and analyze what parts of myself I saw in them. I think it is appropriate to say that after looking at the the archetypes of leaders (the Impostor, Rationalizer, Glory Seeker, Loner, and the Shooting Star), I can see qualities of each of them in myself and the way I think and react to things. First I looked at generic behaviors that I could see in leaders who have not been totally successful. Some of the behaviors I have seen displayed in others and myself are arrogance, the focus on selfish desires, the fear of failure, doubt and lack of confidence, as well as misplaced aggression, a sense of entitlement, and the sense of needed to be the hero. In my new understanding of what leaders are and what they can and should be, I have started to realize that I see these behaviors and 'failures' everywhere around me- at church, at local businesses, and at home. But I would be dishonest if I didn't also mention that I see some of them in myself.

Looking at the archetype of the 'Impostor', I do not recognize a lot of these qualities in myself but I do recognize that others around me have them. I lack the ability (at least I think that I do) to understand the politics of getting ahead and I allow almost everyone to stand in my way. :) I do not understand politics in almost any organization and at this point will not pretend to understand them in my private life. I will say that I am not confident in my ability to lead and at least in this point have no wish to be in any position of power or authority over anyone.... not even myself.

Focusing at the qualities of the 'Rationalizer', I see quite a few in myself as well as others. I certainly make mistakes to help things short term that have long term costs. I will admit that I didn't see that aspect in myself until the last year. I also rationalize not telling people bad things because if it isn't useful I think its better to not say anything. Little things like that sometimes do come back to bite me. I also tend to like to share responsibility with others so failure belongs to all of us and I do resist taking full responsibility for things myself. I am not sure if that is because I could be considered a blamer or I work so hard to not be the only maker of the 'choice'. If I work with others we are all responsible for the failure or success.

Looking at the archetype of the 'Glory Seeker', I think I had a few of those qualities earlier in my life. I wanted to be famous and successful and leave my past behind. In some ways I am still that person. I do not want good grades for myself, but so I can say that I have them. I joined the Honor's program because it was pointed out to me it wasn't a great deal more work and I would have that little 'badge' next to my name. I have two minors for my degree and while I wanted them both, I think I did the extra work to have that accolade when I graduate as well. I will say that I think my 'thirst for fame' is quite quenchable and I think I would like to spend most of the rest of my life unknown and not in any kind of limelight. I think I want to discover how to be successful for myself.

Focusing on the qualities of the 'Loner', I recognize that this archetype is the one that fits me the most right now. I do 'believe they can and must make it on my own.' I really feel very uncomfortable forming close relationships right now. I don't feel comfortable sharing much and while I have recently created a support network, I feel very uncomfortable using it for myself and only really feel comfortable using it for my family. I have quite a few superficial relationships and I think I actively work to keep them at arm's length. It is so much easier to keep secrets if I don't let down my guard and I am not close to anyone. I also do not know how to understand people sometimes when they are trying to give feedback.

Looking at the archetype of the 'Shooting Star', I don't see much of it in me at all. My career is so secondary and I then to use it to keep up with my 'Loner' archetype. That way I have social interactions, but have a professional distance from most people. I think at one point I allowed my church membership to act in this capacity and because I felt like there was so much need there I did allow my personal life to be ignored. If there is anything about this archetype that fits me it would be that I always tend to rarely make time to take care of myself. That is always last. I think that I do learn from my mistakes, but I also think that mistakes tend to make me more introspective and less likely to put myself at risk.

I think that any person or leader can find themselves in situations that can cause them to lose their way. I think that if I managed to be successful enough that I felt a bit of confidence in being a leader, I might not be a good leader because I do tend to be a loaner, un-trusting of others and doubtful that any risk is worth the risk of pain and failure. I can see myself struggling and losing my way if the one person I trusted had lost their way and I kept following them. When I was younger I had one good friend and there was a special activity that was set up at church where you were blindfolded and two people were supposed to give us directions across a field of obstacles and one person would give the wrong directions. The leader of the group had my best friend give me the wrong directions. Every other individual in the group only made one or two mistakes when they went through the 2000 feet obstacle course- I made it almost to the end before I stopped listening to Ashley. I think its a pretty good metaphor for myself as when I do trust... I trust strongly. And it takes a lot to lose that trust... but once it's gone I rarely give it back.

So I think it is safe to say that until recently I have never tried to be my on person and I haven't really actively tried to go my own way. I have simply tried to surround myself with good leaders. I am very effected by external pressure and only in the last year have I tried to analyze that tendency and fight it. Too bad I allowed myself to get into the hole I am in now before I got some guts. :/

I have a huge sense of failure. I absolutely fear failure and the pain and problems that it causes myself and others. I fear that I will harm others, myself, and I fear causing permanent harm to everything around me. I fear what others will think of me and how I will be treated. And I think there is a little pride in the sense that I do not want to be seen as a failure by myself. I want to see myself as a good person and I want to be a good person. The funny irony is that I also feel that I cannot say no to anyone who asks for something. I will say yes to someone who asks me to do something that I do not want to do and think isn't helpful, but they asked and the yes trips easily off my tongue... another reason to be careful who I hang out with. :)

My fear of failure affects everything and every decision in my life. I have refused to make many decisions unless I am sure that I can succeed in it. I prefer to stand back, be quiet and sometimes add a comment to a group, but I think I try to be a chameleon and meld into the nearest environmental object... be it wall or picture. I think that I consciously avoid situations in which I need to be a leader and therefore I can avoid the risk of individual failure.

How do you deal with failure? Do you see any of these characteristics in yourself?

Counting Blessings...

One of the truly blessed things about the trials that Heavenly Father gives us and others is that not only are we able to learn, but I have found that sometimes a blessing in disguise comes to the foreground in my own life. We all have discovered this a few times in our lives I am sure. We discover the blessing of a nose when we get sick and it is constantly runny- very rarely do we thank the Father for our wonderful nose nor do we really remember it is there unless there is something wrong with it. And there are so many of those blessings in all of our lives. The blessings of kidney and liver function, of laughter...of breathing.

Last night, I was given some great news as I found that a relative is out of prison and back home. His problems have weighed heavily on my mind over the last few years. As I thanked my Father in prayer, I recognized that while my relative is no longer in prison, he is now on 'house arrest'. While I find that much better, being trapped in the house can also be seen as a large burden. While I sometimes wake up in the morning and feel tired and 'growly' that I 'have' to go out, the blessing is found in the realization that I can go out... I really can! So while I am out volunteering today, passing out food and trying to give advice and cheer... I am thankful that no matter how tired or grumpy or sad... Or even happy and hyper... I have the ability to do what I feel I need to do without the limitations that some others have to deal with in their lives.

It's a blessed day!

A Body-Altering Experience...

I had a body altering experience today. It's still amazing to me that life can really in a matter of seconds alter and twist in such a way that the path you were on has disappeared.... a little like Alice on a path in wonderland with that cartoon broom that sweeps away the path and you find yourself standing in one spot... unsure of where to go, not sure of what your choices are... and recognizing that the longer you stand there is actually a choice in itself. Indecision truly is a decision.

But instead of a mind altering decision, I found a quick way to alter my body structure. I was standing talking to my husband when my son jumped from the top of a calf hutch onto my back. He thought it was fairly funny – my son that is. But I caught him on my shoulders and neck. I am not sure what sound exited my mouth but it wasn't happy. I think it was the quickest way I could have found to totally alter my spinal column and still be able to laugh about it later. So I am going to spend the rest of the day in bed on an ibuprofen high and think about the fun morning I had with Bug... and not follow through on my other plans today. It only took about four minutes to realize that a massive migraine was coming and I was going to be hurting quick.

It feels like I just had a baby a few years ago,.. and now my baby is nine years old, 60 lbs and about 4 ½ feet tall. I am 5'6” and 120lbs.... so my son at his age is almost bigger than me and the games that used to be fun when he was three are really not as much fun. But the glory of life is in the living and in the life changing events that remind us that life isn't for the weak of heart and spirit. While my day is not ending the way I thought it would, it is a good day. I hope it is for all of us.

Advice for Preparing and Collecting Interviews for Genealogy/ Family History

I read an article recently on history that I wanted to review for a larger audience. I thought that it was really important information to have available for someone searching for it. So here is a good summary.

The article that I am reviewing was written by Linda Shopes. One of the first things she discusses is the fact that the terms 'family history' and 'genealogy' are not always interchangeable even though they are used interchangeably in most societies. The term genealogy is defined as the 'reconstruction of a person's lineage through use of written records'. Family history, however, has a much more inclusive definition and can include genealogy- but also oral history, pictures, historical significance, etc... And there are many benefits to the use of oral history in the work of the 'family historian'. These can include, but are not limited to:

1. The discoveries in this work can enhance the historian's sense of identity and can help them gain perspective on their own life and give the historian's life more context and meaning.

2. The family members who participate in the interview process may find preparing for the interview and the interview themselves rewarding. Recalling life experiences and sharing them with others who show true interest can be not only rewarding, but give a sense of accomplishment and giving to the interviewee.

3. Gathering these records can be an impetus for developing and deepening family relationships for the historian as well as other family members... and the records themselves can help open relationships and appreciation for other family members that other members may know little about.

Another benefit that can be found by the general historical community is that if the family historian prepares these records and does the research to place the individuals in their historical contexts, not only are they more interesting, but they can provide information for the general historian about times and situations of which there may be very little or only misleading information available to study.

So it is important to carefully prepare for doing oral interviews. It is important to have the basic data for the family members that you are going to discuss and talk to. Then you should take that basic info and do some research on the historical and social times in the life of that person. Some places to begin for looking for family information are: the family bible, misc family papers such as tax forms, material objects, and also public documents such as -birth, marriage, census, wills, etc... One reason for doing the research ahead of time is to save time in the interview and spend the time on getting answers and recollections that you do not know or to get more information that you can only get in the interview process. By having some information you might be able to help stimulate recollections and its the next step to understanding individual lives in their relationships and social circumstances. It will also help make the historical setting and involvement more clear.

It is also very important to make sure you have a precise focus... and the focus that you choose can cover three specific areas. The first is the impact of major historical events and trends during the person's life. The second is technical developments and how they have changed the world around the person and that individual's life. The last is the various relationships of various aspects of social life- work, religion, community, family, class status, structure and dynamics of their life. This can also include family stories, traditions, customs, and beliefs.

You should also start with the family members that you feel most comfortable with and are willing to be interviewed... and as these interviews are successful, you are very likely to get more positive responses from more reticent family members- although older family members should be put at the top of the interview list for obvious reasons.

So when preparing for your interview, think about how to encourage extensive and thoughtful recall. Explore possible topics for the interviewee before the interview. You should encourage a mood of expansiveness and ask open ended questions. If necessary, you can ask follow up questions to bring the interviewee back to the discussed topic and always guide and encourage, but do not intrude and do not comment positively or negatively- try to be impartial. Each topic should be explored as completely as possible before moving on to another topic. You as the interviewer should be in a relaxed body posture, develop a good rapport with your subject, use nods and smiles and use clarifications and examples can be used after the question has been answered. Make sure that pauses are not interrupted by more questions; make sure the question is fully answered. Interviews should be in comfortable, informal settings with no background noise and the interviews should be slowly ended- not abruptly closes. A few closing questions with small talk for a few minutes and thanks is the recommended ending. And no interview should last more than a maximum of two hours- the interview will become more tiring and not productive.

You can also use a group to record oral history. A family group can be very enjoyable and valuable to the participants involved as well as the historian. It can provide more information as individual group members provoke responses and trigger memories in other members. A group interview can also highlight patterns of interaction among members and highlight the similarities and differences between the members.

In conclusion, Ms. Shopes had some words of caution. It is important to understand that some family members will be uncomfortable talking about personal things and will have little enthusiasm for your interview. Some will be unwilling to talk about personal things and will refuse outright. Others may have difficulty getting past the feelings of past embarrassment, pain such as deaths, etc... that they will have difficulty expressing or feel that they cannot do so. And some others will use this interview to try and sway the interviewer to 'their' side of a family quarrel or may only present the 'good' side of the information. The author reminds us - “Oral testimony, like any other historical source, needs to be evaluated both for its factual accuracy and for what it reveals about the attitudes and values of the interviewee.”

After the interview, it is important that the historian uses a good form of organization that allows for easy access of the information to others. Careful filing of pertinent information under the individual's name as well as good transcriptions are key. It is also an idea to make the transcripts available to other family members... and if possible to your local historical society or library for other researcher to use in their research efforts. The author does however advise that any family history that leaves the 'hands' of the family should be kept in a way that permission must be granted to use or view the information.

I enjoyed writing this summary and I hope it is helpful to someone searching for information about preparing family history. :)

Oral History and Thoughts on the Individual

For this post, I really wanted to take the time to dissect how individuals and their personalities clash and mesh with both culture and society when collecting historical research from others I have broken the post into three sections: Individual/Personality, Culture, and Society.

Individual/Personality

There are many reasons that it is important to focus on the individual when looking and studying history. First, it is the 'individual' that makes history. Yes, most of history focuses on rich, royal and upper class individuals, as well as powerful religious leaders (or leaders with huge followings) and only a few of them at that. But the history of even large countries has been forced to include individuals that do not fit those classifications. A few nameable examples are: Joan of Arc of France, Rasputin of Russia, and Martin Luther King in the United States. Second, all of us as human beings are making history as we live. Yes, maybe our history will be noticed by few and cared about by even less. But if we look at our actions and our behavior, it directly effects those in its path. My tiny town of Brooklin has made national news a few times for its behavior that I know of... and both of these times- one person's behavior, belief system and ingenuity or stubbornness have been the catalyst for the large event. I have been told that the local soup kitchen would have closed a few months ago if one person had not stepped in. One person in the right position systematically denied disabled children a good education and fought and insulted parents in his attempt to save money in my area. Now he is retired and living in the same town... and seems confused that he is 'not well respected'. His handiwork can be seen by anyone dealing with the children in our town... and little pleasure is taken I assure you. I am sure that there are so many other examples, but individuals and individual's lives do clearly change the world, culture and society around them. An individual can describe a social and cultural situation that he has been involved in... and see it differently from the other twenty who experienced it... and the other individuals who were indirectly affected by the situation.

Taking the time to learn about individuals and their distinct personality bents gives you clues about how a person thinks about the world and where their biases and perceptions lie. Keeping an open mind and truly trying to understand the person that we wish to collect information from will help give our information more meaning. The information that someone gives on a topic will vary in so many ways, including their general way of looking at things, people involved and how the individual felt about them, ways it affected the individual or his loved ones/family, how society itself views the situation, how their past history colors how they view the more recent past and present, and how the individual's present situation can color their views on the past. So attempting to understand the person behind the information you seek should become as important as the information itself.

Some questions that would be useful to consider when trying to decide if someone makes a good person to interview can be easily summed up. Determining if the person is honest, able to try and deal objectively with the past, and other personal information about the interviewee is key. Does the individual have anything to lose by objectivity? Is the individual able to be objective about things that caused great pain or hardship? How does the individual view his life and those around him? Determining an individual's unique traits and how a person reacts to people, his environment, joy and hardship, etc... give us clues about how accurate the interview itself will be... and how useful.

There are a few reasons that truly understanding an interviewee's family life and social situation are important when collecting oral history. Understanding how the individual has lived, grown up, choices they have made such as marriage and children, and the social environment in which that person has had to make life changing decisions will not only help shape our questions to better fit the individual's probable experience (not useful to ask a poor individual who lived all of their life in California what the White House was like to visit during their lifetime unless you are sure they went there!) If you are asking the interviewee what the individual Jeffery Dahmer was like, you will surely get a different viewpoint based on interviewing his parents or neighbors... or the parents of one of his victims. An individual who has been raised in poverty and managed to scramble out of it to an upper class existence may think that welfare is useless because everyone else could do what he did, or may recognize that his circumstances were helped by others, etc... knowing how this individual thinks, currently lives and has lived gives us important cues when using the individual as a source to collect oral history.

Culture

Culture helps the historian to place individual facts into a greater context by looking at the different groups that individuals can belong to in order to help us understand the different cultures... and have a window of understanding into the people that we are interviewing. Culture is usually behaviors that are shared by individual groups. And as culture must be taught or learned through an individual's life experience, we as historians can truly understand culture only by learning it from other people. A book can only go so far in this regard. So, by looking at individual experience and comparing them to others in the same group, we can learn a lot about the experience itself, but the collective group experience and how culture can affect the group experience itself.

The word 'ordinary' suggests a faceless void. It is also almost demeaning and seems to suggest that anything ordinary shares the same background and story. However, this is not true. Ordinary people- as opposed to celebrities or very powerful people- tend to exist in shadow in a historical perspective, but that does not mean that these lives are even similar let alone the same. These 'shadow' individuals can tell us a great deal of what life is like for many that are not in the limelight. People who live complicated and earth changing lives that are not in the newspapers. In some instances such as studying social changes, the ordinary man will necessarily give better answers than the powerful or the celebrity- as the famous will be more untouched by grassroots changes. The ordinary man can show us the emotions and turmoil of change as it happens, one person at a time. The ordinary person can help us to see what tiny, minute emotions and behaviors and movement go into the large scale version of social change. Without these 'collages' of information from people who have lived in the very 'trenches' of history, we will not have a truly accurate picture of history... and we certainly will not have one that we can understand on a truly human level.

Inner facts are so important because they can fill in the gaps that basic knowledge can never fill. Reading that something is bad is a fact, but someone who was there telling and describing to you how bad it was adds an element that helps to cement the fact as true... and brings genuine understanding. The key to truly understanding events such as defining social moments is also in the concept 'inner facts'. Casual observation can give us the knowledge that a transportation strike is happening in France... but why? Why the strike? Why now? What brought the idea and organization into being? Who started it?

The importance of putting 'inner facts' into their historical perspective cannot be overstated. If the historian or reader is unable to understand what the facts that are presented really mean, they will not end up meaning much about the original topic. Certainly oral history not in context can tell us about humanity and emotions and the basic human dilemmas... but when placed within an appropriate historical context we can learn how the emotions were evoked, what the suffering or joy really, truly meant, and how the emotions and behavior made the changes that the individual did or helped make the changes of an individual together with a collective whole. And the information given by one individual about an experience and then added to the stories of others, can give us a rich and diverse picture of not only the event in question, but the culture that the event happened in as well.

Standardized questionnaires have a few problems, but the biggest one is that no individual is truly 'standard'. So a standardized questionnaire will not glean much information that is truly detailed and can only glean 'standard' responses. To get detailed information, we must ask someone in their own words to describe something... and not trap them into using our words which may not get us the information that we seek. Any question is also subject to an individuals interpretation of the question... and again, humans are not standard. Language and the past can color what words mean to people and so they can also change how a question is interpreted. (An example is I grew up thinking that the word 'couple' meant three or more-except when discussing human couples. So a 'couple' of sandwiches always meant three or more to me- until last year. When I finally realized the reason for past misunderstandings when using the word, I have actively worked to change the definition in my mind. But until then, I would have used the word incorrectly!)

The term 'thick description' can be defined as a very careful and detailed description. A thick description will usually help to uncover a person's reasons and motives for behavior and will also usually give cultural information and context. It can give you ideas for questions that you would never have thought to ask based upon your own cultural bias and can give insight into situations that you as the historian may never have heard of in your own culture. These descriptions can also give insight into how culture has changed over time and ways that society or local communities have changed as a result.

Society

Society is the name given to the human world of interactions and living that are important in determining some of our behavior and the behavior of the people around us. Society forces us for instance to wear clothing... but culture may help determine what type of clothing that we wear. Society includes the human community, how we interact together and our relationships with each other. Both society and culture- while distinctively different- are very interrelated and influence each other. Our culture may be shaped by society and culture itself can, in turn, help shape the society around it. However, society is what 'surrounds' us and where we live... culture is what is in us and how we live.

To really get a good grasp of social history, oral history and other qualitative sources should be used because they will provide the details that will truly make the social history developed and not just a brief outline of time. Brief pieces do not give us a picture of what it was like to be truly human during that time frame and so 'his-story' becomes dry, uninteresting, and also unable to be used to see how humanity has changed or not changed today. Social history without culture or other sources simply becomes a basic black 'outline' and the contents are not clear until they are filled in with the hues of personality, humanity, emotions, and behaviors of individual people. As Hoopes states, qualitative sources bring history to life and reveal its significance and meaning- which help to give history meaning.

Historians should use both types of sources if they truly wish to get a full picture of what they are studying. Using both types of sources makes more difficult projects probably more successful. The two source types can also help to find more information for 'smaller' projects than there would usually be if only quantitative sources are used. Using both sources not only helps make the history more clear and more interesting, but it also helps to make it more accurate as you can compare the sources to see where they agree, disagree and are different or compliment each other. Then the historian can compare the differences and look for other sources to help determine accuracy and why there are differences- something that the historian could not do if it was not recognized that there were differences.

It is important to understand how society impacts groups and individuals for a few reasons. One (and the most important personally) is the need to understand that society does affect us as individuals in our daily lives- whether we understand or pay attention to that reality or not. Another reason is that many individuals are very likely to believe that their personal history really isn't 'important' history, but the tasks of working at jobs, raising families, attending school, etc... contain the marks of the society in which the individual lives/lived. And so, no matter how isolated the individual sees themselves from society around them, they are not... and understanding the different ways that society affects groups and individuals helps to develop understanding and interpret sources.

Many people choose to interview their family members because finding another 'family' to interview that is willing to put up with your nosiness and be as honest with you can be quite difficult. Another benefit is that you will have some basic knowledge of the individuals and personalities involved and so you will better be able to quickly understand what family members would be better for interviewing, which family members might be unreliable, and where the different biases might be a problem. You might also have a better understanding of questions that you want to ask. You also have the added benefit of adding to your knowledge of your family, your heritage and the history intertwined with it all. This kind of project can give greater personal awareness and understanding to the historian about their life, their role in their family and how their family has developed and changed over time.

One problem of interviewing family members is that family members may not always see the information that they have about themselves and their history as important. You, as the historian, must try and get the details of their lives and they may be hesitant to share them with you. They might also have reasons that they prefer not to share information with family members.... maybe things that they have been hiding. Convincing these individuals that it is a good idea to share and even give some details of certain circumstances may be very hard indeed. Some ways to overcome these problems is to know the individual being interviewed really well so that you can address the individual's concerns and also determine if the individual would even make a good interviewee.

Social history defined is a way of looking at history that includes the history of 'ordinary' people, how they lived, and attempts to look at history from the point of view of social trends, movements, etc... Quantitative history is an approach to the study of history that uses physical countable evidence- numbers, tax forms, statistics, etc... as primary sources for facts. A quantitative fact can be measured and 'solidified'. Qualitative history are facts that can be debatable- there are internal facts and are facts that give us understanding of human behavior and not just the behavior itself. It gives you the why the behavior happened and other intangible facts that while harder to pin down- are facts.

Conclusion

So, the term 'society' refers to the idea that we live among other people who have some forms of power to permit us to do some things and stop us from doing others. Culture is defined as the intellectual influences that enable us to see some possible avenues of behavior and refuse to do or see other ideas... and personality is the individual response to the cultural and societal influences around us and how we individually interpret these avenues and expectations and conduct ourselves accordingly- or not, based on our own decision making, learned or innate cues, etc... These three terms (society, culture and personality) describe separate ideas that in some ways can be teased out separately from the other two terms. Yet, like triplets, while they are separate entities, each of these terms describes ideas and behavior that are interwoven together and so... they cannot totally be separated except on a vague and less informative basis. Society and culture can help define people and even how they see themselves, but personality can change and mold culture... which can change society. Or personalities can change social 'expectations' and in doing so change the larger picture of culture and society. So each of these ideas clash and mesh depending on different factors.

What do you think? Do you disagree with anything that I have written? Let's discuss! :)

Today...

1. I did a good deed and helped feed over 300 people.
2. I shared a hug and a birthday wish with a friend.
3. I finished some history homework and I am almost caught up from being sick.
4. I only almost cried once.
5. I shared a nice moment this evening looking at the stars with my husband... and we move forward..?
6. I made Val laugh- a herculean task!
7. I had a good dinner with a surprise dessert from my husband- g/f blueberry pie :)
8. I am warm, safe and not feeling too stressed.
9. I am truly blessed to have such good family, good friends, and the strength to deal with my challenges.
10. I know longer think of my challenges and secrets every second of the day and can find joy... at least it is becoming easier.
Today... was a great day!

Comparing Society and Culture... to a Tootsie Pop!

So my teacher gave me a fun assignment that I thought I would post here and see what other people thought. The first paragraph will contain the definitions of society, culture and personality/the individual. The next is the fun part! :)

This one is tough to really work out in my head and explain- at least satisfactorily to me! Society refers to the idea that we live among other people who have some forms of power to permit us to do some things and stop us from doing others. Culture is defined as the intellectual influences that enable us to see some possible avenues of behavior and refuse to do or see other ideas... and personality is the individual response to the cultural and societal influences around us and how we individually interpret these avenues and expectations and conduct ourselves accordingly- or not based on our own decision making, learned or innate cues, etc... These three terms (society, culture and personality) describe separate ideas that in some ways can be teased out separately from the other two terms. Yet, like triplets, while they are separate entities, each of these terms describes ideas and behavior that are interwoven together and so... they cannot totally be separated except on a vague and less informative basis. Society and culture can help define people and even how they see themselves, but personality can change and mold culture... which can change society. Or personalities can change social 'expectations' and in doing so change the larger picture of culture and society. So each of these ideas clash and mesh depending on different factors.

OK- know for the fun!

I first have to admit... that I didn't do the tootsie pop or blow pop eating exercise. I know of very little candy that is gluten free so I didn't even think of risking it. But... I will give it a shot! I must also admit that the most jarring and significant quote from this week's reading was in chapter four and was 'statistics don't bleed'. Gosh, how true is that! Only emotions- whether positive or negative can truly convey the feelings behind statistics. Truly, a number is nothing much by itself toward understanding.

But back to the tootsie pop. The outer candy shell would remind me of culture and society. The color and flavor would stand for culture and the sugar and sweetness would stand for society. When just glanced over, there almost doesn't appear to be a difference between the two and when licked, you might only separate them slightly. The flavor of strawberry might be separate in your mind from the 'sweet'- only if you are mindfully licking of course. :) This candy shell is thick and you might be very tempted to just eat the shell and throw the middle... or the individual away. Also, you can buy many different colors or cultures and so flavors and levels of sweetness may vary. But while the individual tastes different and looks different... it adds the best perspective on the lollipop or culture itself. For the culture and society can change, but the variety and diversity of the individual remains the same- high quality, long lasting and memorable. But neither the culture or the society would be interesting without each other. The flavor of culture is bitter without sugar... and the sweetness of society is frankly boring without diversity. The individual brings out the flavor and sweetness of the culture/society... and makes it worth living in. Also , as the individual is different it is flexible... in ways that society and culture may not be. Only through the flexibility of the middle or the individual... can the culture or society change.


It is so important to understand how these groups or ideas work together to present a complex picture of diversity, beauty and tastiness that give us a true picture and understanding of the whole- which raises the value and importance of the information to us. Otherwise, we might be tempted to ignore or not 'eat' the information as we will be ignorant of the joys and knowledge that can be found in the patient lick, lick, lick of information to get us to the most knowledgeable and interesting core.


So what do you think? Would you describe it differently? How so... and do you agree with my analogy or to simplistic. Be creative and have fun!

The "Parent Interview" Project

For a project last semester, I interviewed some friends about their families and parenting style. I really appreciated their help and boy I learned alot! Here is the project in its entirety. :)

For the Parent Interview Project, I made a few assumptions based on what I thought you (the teacher) wanted and what I thought would help me to learn the most. One assumption that I made was that I should try and find 'different' people to interview- different in gender, backgrounds, life experience, number of kids, religion, and sexuality. Another assumption was that I should really take the time to develop three questions that I was genuinely curious in the answers, thought might be helpful for my situation at home, and would also be interesting for this paper and for reading. I have listed the questions farther down in my paper. The last assumption that I made was that as I chose so many different individuals, I would find that the families would have many differences, but also distinct similarities that could easily be 'teased' into looking at the whole group in a similar manner... that was not the case.

I sent out fourteen letters asking for responses and received five back fully filled in and ready for me to study. Out of the five, four are women and one is male. Three have been through at least one divorce and two are currently married to their first and only husband. All five individuals have children in numbers from one to eight, one adult is homosexual, two of these families have at least one child with a severe disability (autism or bi-polar disorder) and one family has an adult with PTSD. The families also live in different environments as the states that can be included are California, Nevada, Maine and Wisconsin- three families live in a semi-rural area and two live in urban areas. The religions that are involved in some of these families- whether through past involvement or current activity- are United Church of Church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon), deeply spiritual, and atheist (one member of this group is currently in college studying seminary and divinity). Also, at least three out of the five individuals appear to have grown up in dysfunctional households (one spent some time growing up in a cult, one with alcoholic parents, abuse, etc...) Lastly, one individual is currently single, three are married and one is living with her partner and her children.

When looking at the definition of family, there were many different responses, but a lot of overlapping when the answers were put side by side and compared. One individual describes their 'family' as a large group of related individuals which included younger brothers and their families, cousins and their families as well as other extended biological family ( one quote from the answer- “Curiously, it does not necessarily include my parents or my older brother.”). Two people spoke about family as a small group of people that love and support each other and has nothing to do with blood relationships or shared parentage. These individuals seemed to have a really open view of family in the sense that family can be flexible and made and broken and reformed – a “family of choice”. The last two adults had a more rigid view of family and for them, a family is a social unit connected by blood or marriage or a family is a unit created solely by God for the rearing of children and families that are bonded through marriage, His Gospel, Commandments, and Love. The last individual described a family as having a male and female at the head of the home with rigid gender roles and family assignments as quoted from the “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” as written and distributed by the Mormon church.

Definitions of effective parents and good parental behavior were described with different words by all five individuals, but when reading the responses I felt that all the answer really said the same thing:

1. “The object of parenting is not to raise a perfectly obedient child but rather a responsible and contributing member of society.” “Teach them to think and empathize and not to blindly model other's behavior.”

2. “A parent's job is to help their children become happy, fully developed people. Teaching children things they need to know and help them become independent and fully functional adults and able to make their own decisions.” Parenting behaviors: Setting limits; teaching; providing guidance; encouraging; seeking to understand the child's point of view; caring deeply; and loving unconditionally.

3. “Someone who is together, follows though on what they say and the rules of the home. Stick to your word and have structure in your home. Show unconditionally love and caring.”

4. “Someone who positively teaches a child how to be a functional member of society”

5. “A person who teaches a child empathy, consideration, caring and how to be a good decision maker- even if you do not like the decisions that they make. You raise them to think of themselves and those around them and how to accomplish their goals and fulfill their needs and love them.”

While there were a few statements edited due to lengths of answers, I kept the scope of the answers which show that with a few differences of ideas, the thoughts are the same: to raise happy, healthy people who think for themselves, have a positive outlook for themselves and others and are willing to help others. In a nutshell- to be productive and happy members of the world around them.

Answers about the necessary skills for communication really seemed to vary a great deal, although I think that the question itself may have been misunderstood or interpreted differently due to perception... and I must say that I love the idea of a communication answer being misunderstood! The irony is fairly laughable. One individual suggested an answer in a way that suggested to me that the question was interpreted the same way that I had interpreted it. They felt that openness and honesty were absolutely essential communication skills. Listening well and taking the time to make sure that you truly understood the other person's point of view and perspective -even if you didn't agree with it- is an essential skill for living in and around other people. Two people said that 'Honesty and love are key needs so that children feels secure and can rely and trust others'. Another focuses very 'literally' on the question - “Verbal and physical communication are absolutely essential- technology is not essential even if we and the media think that it is.”. And the last person talked about important times for family communication: 'Dinner is an important time to get together and talk as a family. You should also have one on one interviews with your children and they should learn manners and respecting others'.

The question about whether we are living in turbulent times was pretty illuminating to me and I think on of the most important questions asked. How 'turbulent times' was so defined by the individual sharing with me their thoughts expressed what those words meant to them personally. Some saw them through the lens of religion while another saw it through their lens of current political and economic hardship.

1. “I think a certain segment of every generation is prone to declaring themselves as living in turbulent times. My goal has always been to create a place of dependability and relative calm for my kids within the private functions of our family.”

2. “Yes. The protracted war and the economy have made this a very unsettled time. In a way, it may have brought families more together as they try and cope and support one another.”

3. “Yes. When family values are undermined by social acceptance of divorce, infidelity, violence, abuse, and other negative actions / emotions. These actions tear the underpinnings of the social unit and do not promote healthy conflict resolution and respect toward others. As a consequence the family unit is no longer stable.”

4. “Yes I do. Right now I think kids have it very hard. There are teens out there killing themselves because of being bullied. Kids are starting to have sex in middle school and that never happened when I went to school. The world is a lot different now and we need to raise our kids to be strong in the world because it is not easy.”

5. “Oh, yes. I think that all times have their 'turbulence' in them, but as a society we are angry, hateful, and fearful of all who are different. Since we all have differences, we are feeding off of each other and killing each other- or bullying and killing ourselves. I try to keep as much of it out of my home as I am able.”

It appears that a few interviewees stressed that keeping the 'turbulence' our of their homes was important as well as the idea that this particular 'time' may be turbulent... but other times were as well. One person saw the turbulence as an unwanted consequence towards harming families, while another thought that teaching the children to be strong would help them to deal with the turbulence (expressing the thought that this person does not believe the turbulence will not be going away soon.). And one person talked about how the turbulence could be used to strengthen families as they try and support each other through the 'storm'- really a great way to look at it I thought.

Everyone universally agreed that there were no “good ol' days” - one individual went so far as to say: “ The "good old days" are a fiction. In the past, there was incest, abuse, and child labor, etc... Women were controlled as objects and had few rights. The good old days never existed except in fictionalized memories”. If 'changes' were mentioned, they were mentioned as positives: women have more rights, no such thing as a woman's job or a man's job, women were controlled as objects- no more, and more along those lines. It was also almost universally agreed upon that families have always been complicated and have never been simple or truly “traditional”- families have always been complex depending on the society, that the size and shape of the family doesn't have anything to do with whether they are fully functional and healthy or dysfunctional, and good families are created and do not depend on gender or sexuality. One person thought about families and parents: “Are they making decisions that are in the best interests of the child/family or not? That is the only way to judge.” I think I agree with that statement.

The types or discussions that are held in the home/family varied in minutia- while the individual topics could vary and cover a wide swath (soccer, running, home renovation, animal husbandry, etc), the conversations themselves tend to focus on:

1. “But we talk about what might be going on at school or work, our plans for the future, and otherwise share interests in each others’ lives.”

2. “Activities we can do as a family.”

3. “Often we talk about my son's school and his future. As my son has matured, our discussions have become more wide ranging and adult-like in content.”

4. “We talk about everything and anything. We are a very open family. My kids are very young so things my husband and I don't talk about in front of the kids would be problems with other people but other than that just about everything.”

5. “Things we have in common, want to share, and what is happening in our lives, feelings, thoughts.”

While these answers are all different, they all have the theme of being together, loving each other and understanding and sharing with each other... which I think is a common theme for all humans in groups. We all need to feel like we belong and are appreciated and listened to.

When discussing the stresses involves in parenting and being a parent, I was a little surprised that while these individuals discussed different 'stressors', all the stressors ended up dividing neatly between emotional and physical stresses. However, even the physical stressors became emotional stressors if discussed long enough. Physical stressors discussed were the need to balance everything, to 'do everything', lack of sleep, and 'physically run down by the work involved'. Emotional stressors mentioned were the stress of watching a child struggle or have difficulties, trying to balance the needs of the children and the parent, the stress of watching children fight for their health when they are sick, and the difficulties of watching your children as they try and fail and not stepping in unless truly needed.

Family comparisons was funny... and very enlightening. I did feel like I learned a bit that was new about each person and family that I interviewed based on their responses to this question.

1. "I suppose one of those families of acrobats, where everyone is holding on to each other and balancing on each other and leaning out in different directions. There is a natural give and take, where we try to counter-balance each other and be each other’s safety net."

2. "In my home we are all experimental chefs: We work together and separately and come together often to see what we have created. Sometimes we are very congratulatory, sometimes we are mean and laugh too much, and sometimes we come together to commiserate over culinary experimental disaster. But we will continue to cook together, experiment together and help a cook who is tired of cooking."

3. "My family is like a small pack of wolves. We are independent and solitary, but we understand each other and come together when needed."

4. We don't compare ourselves. "We are a happy family."

5. "I don't really know. We have never compared our family to something. Maybe just a regular American family. We have our ups and downs but in the end we make it. "
There were some very pretty metaphors in there. I really liked the chef comparision- maybe because I love food, I am not the best cook, but I keep trying and sometimes I make something fabulous! (And sometimes....yuck!)

The last three questions are the ones that I needed to make up and ask. The questions that I devised are:

1. If you were able to change just two things about how your family works, what would they be? What would you prefer?

2. If you have been divorced before or are currently in a non traditional family, how has it changed your perspective of family? What changes do you see in how you view family from your childhood to now? Do you feel that your boundaries of what constitutes 'family' have changed over the years?

3. In what ways has your parenting style changed between your first child and your last? Between the 'newness' of first time parenting and now? Between family changes (death, divorce, etc)?

I chose these ideas from my heart and questions that I have been bouncing around in my head for a little bit now. So here are my responses.

The idea of changing something in your family was a pretty neat question. I realized as I interviewee people that this question could really help them to pinpoint something they wanted to change and work on it. If you never ask the question, it is very easy for someone to never try and make a change... because it never becomes very obvious that not only is change needed, but you can make it into smaller steps to work on and doesn't seem so challenging. Two quotes were really poignant to my mind.

1. “I wish there was less nagging involved in getting family members to take their turn at chores, and perhaps a little less questioning of decisions made by others. If I had to pick just one of these, it would be the first – I appreciate the intellectual skills of my family members, but sometimes I would love to skip a debate!”

2. “I would like my sons to really listen more and understand that if they listen to my guidance as their father they will do better in life and have less struggles. I would like to listen more deeply as a parent; to really seek to understand what my children are saying to me and why they think and feel the way they do about things.”

What I really liked about these quotes was that both of them were about communication. Both of these individuals are looking for better communication in their families and they recognize that there is a communication issue. Once it is recognized as a concern, making a plan to try and change it will be much easy. The last quote I am adding was a little sad for me to read.

1. I wish my husband didn't work as much. He works 60+ hours a week and so we don't see him as much as I hope. He will get home, eat dinner with us and we have 1-2 hour to spend time together before we put the boys down for bed. I wish my husband and I could have more time to go out together. We have date night once a week but it is usually at home doing something fun together like renting a movie, playing a game, making smoothies, ect. We can't afford to pay someone to watch our kids so we can go out and we wish we could.

This individual really seems to enjoy her family and wishes that she could have more time with her husband. More time and not less time. I can feel the caring and the wish for more of a physical presence in her home for her husband. I do hope that they will have it sometime!

For the question on divorce and changes in perspectives on family, I got some pretty amazing answers.

1. “I am a child of divorce who has been married for almost 23 years to my first (and last) husband. I feel very blessed and lucky to say that; each of my siblings has experienced at least one divorce, and I have seen the emotional toll taken. The most concerning part of fractured families is the lack of mutual respect often modeled by the parents (and clearly absorbed by the children). While my concept of family has enlarged over the years beyond the “one man, one woman, one marriage” nuclear family of the 60’s, I believe that the most important aspect of family is not gender or birth status but love.”

2. “I was from a broken home and grew up without a father and with an absentee mother, and was raised primarily by my grandmother. I have been divorced. I think that I have always viewed families more by the content of their actions than in a "traditional" way, and I think that this view has been strengthened over time.

3. “Divorce did not change my perspective of family, it reinforced what a functional family is. I.e. the divorce occurred because of dysfunctionality. As to the rest, I will say that I lived in a dysfunctional family growing up and knew that I wanted to create a healthy family. I have done this."

4. “I haven't been in that situation but my grandparents have. What i have observed from that is nothing i would ever want to experience. They have each been married 6-7 times and are in their late 50's. I see how it has effected my mom and wouldn't never like to be in that place. Her mom made her write nasty letters to her dad after the divorce and her and her dad still to this day don't talk. She has step sisters that don't like her. She feels like the outcast.” (sic)

5. Been there, done that...don't think it has changed my perspective except for cynicism. I am more careful now. (sic)

I am not sure that most of these answers actually answered my question, but I thought they were intriguing nonetheless.

The last question as changes in parenting style- I think the weakest question that I developed. However, one person's statement really stayed focus in my mind and is the one statement made throughout these interviews that I have found myself reflecting on quite a bit. It is :

1. “I now am more realistic about my children's potential, and my goals are to raise happy children that are self-sufficient and are the best people they can be. I want them to do whatever they want in life and am more accepting that their way is not my way. I think as you parent your second child, you become less stuck in what you want, and more open to what the child's unique personality and desires might be. Part of this may come from having experience with the first child, but part is from aging yourself. I know that I look at the world very differently at 49 than I did at 29. In a way, I think that I am more realistic, possibly more cynical, and that my expectations for my child, and also myself, have become grounded in reality more. Is that bad? Perhaps, but it is also comforting.”

Two individuals stated that their children came too close together to really be able to see a change in parenting style- one says that she has noticed that she is a lot more relaxed around other people's kids and helping now. One pointed out some physical changes like with her first she would carefully clean and sterilize binkies that fell on the floor- now she wipes them on her pants and pops them right back in! (I thought that was great and I laughed.)

So through this exercise, I think I have discovered quite a few things. While I already knew that people think differently from one another due to experience, etc... I have never taken an opportunity to really learn about these differences. I feel like I know so much about more not only about these individuals and their families, but how they think and view the world. I also found that I learned a little bit more about how I viewed families and the world around me as well. And I was able to open a door to a family member that I had been unsure how to approach due to family trauma and so I think that this assignment helped me to even increase my family a little bit. Thank you.

Thoughts on Somatoform Disorder... and a Lot of Questions!

1. Somatoform disorder is the name for a group of conditions in which the physical pain and symptoms a person feels are related to psychological factors. These symptoms can't be traced to a specific physical cause. In people who have a somatoform disorder, medical test results are either normal or don't explain the person's symptoms. This group of disorders includes: Conversion disorder, Dissociative disorder, Somatization disorder, Hypochondriasis, Factitious disorder, and Body Dysmorphic Disorder.


I will admit that after reading my texts twice- I am still not sure that I 'get' Somatoform disorder. Or at least I thought that I was starting to get it until I read a lot of the other posts from my other classmates. Everyone seemed to focus on hypochondriacs and while I do think that was part of being discussed... well, I guess I wasn't really convinced that was the whole idea... And the amount of backbiting/rudeness and judgement was quite impressive ('I know someone just like that and she does it for the attention...' or 'I know someone who definitely fits this disorder and they go to the doctor all the time but it's clear there's nothing wrong with them', etc...)

Am I wrong? Maybe I am so focused on the idea that I was so sick and nobody could find anything wrong for a year. I had x-rays, ultra sounds, a colonoscopy or two, and was poked and prodded by everyone imaginable in my local practice and was given huge antibiotic shots every few weeks, started Prozac and was then sent to a third specialist... who then gave me an upper-endoscopy and then told me that all of my symptoms made perfect sense for the problem that I was really having... which wasn't recognized by any of the other physicians that I had seen.... So how can you really be sure that someone is a hypochondriac and doesn't really have something physical wrong with them? Especially just by casual looking or conversation...? The textbook talked about how women are more likely to be diagnosed with this disorder... can this be because physicians as a rule are more likely to think women have something wrong with their mind (anxiety, etc) than a heart attack for instance... and so they do not look deep enough? Or am I just overly tolerant and not cynical enough?

I guess I also wonder if pain disorders have to be specifically 'pointed' at in the sense that I think that Fibromyalgia is a 'pain disorder' but there doesn't seem to be anything specific to 'point' at- they hurt, but no one seems to know for sure why? Are they hurting?... I have no doubt. Is it all in their mind? I can't believe that... Also if I look at the criteria, is it possible that someone with a bad relationship and stress problem be able to be 'diagnosed' with this disorder that with time and other changes could no longer qualify for this disorder? For instance, if my friend Pamela has belly pain and reflux from stress (she thinks), a sex symptom- because she has no interest in sex with her estranged husband right now, and she is also likely to complain of random chest pain, a twitching eye, headaches, and leg pain... could she be diagnosed with this disorder if her doctor can't find anything definitive? Even though a casual discussion and exam could probably show that this is most likely temporary and stress related? And once you are diagnosed, can you ever 'lose' the diagnostic label... or is it yours forever? I also wonder which came first- the label hypochondriac or somatoform disorder... although I suspect that the term hypochondriac came first. I guess I have more questions this week than answers- sorry :(

One thing that was really interesting to me was that Body Dsymorphic Disorder is one of the disorders under this diagnosis- known to us lay people usually as anorexia or bulemia. Because maybe that is my clue for understanding the idea of the disorder. If the idea behind BDD is than an individual for some reason is unable to accept who he/she is or what he/she looks like or can't be what he/she wants to be... is able to for unknown reasons in her mind attempt to force the body into what he/she cannot have (and I believe that is done unconsciously truly- I can't imagine that those thought processes are something that someone works on to develop... although I could be wrong.) Well, than maybe what the book is trying to say is that a person has so much 'stuff' in his/her life that is painful (whether it is abuse, stress, etc...) that they cannot control... then the unconscious mind tries to get out some of the strain through other various ways which the individual doesn't tend to recognize and then they go to the doctor thinking that they had another problem. But I guess I am again stuck on the idea that at some point the doctor can decide that the patient has nothing really wrong and diagnose them with this when it could be something else.

Does anyone out there know someone who has one of these disorders and can maybe give me a little more insight into it? I really am curious and want to have a real discussion on it. What do you think if you are someone who has it? Would you be willing to explain a little bit of your personal history so maybe I can understand a little better?