depression

Psychotherapist Nica Selvaggio on LGBTQIA Mental Health

An Interview with Psychotherapist Nica Selvaggio

Dominica (Nica) Selvaggio, LMHC is psychotherapist at Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC. Nica has experience working with clients on a wide variety of issues, including anxiety disorders, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual orientation and gender identity, acculturation and systemic oppression related to race and gender, trauma and PTSD, mood disorders, personality disorders, self-harm, relational issues, and attachment struggles.

Jennifer Smith: Hi, thanks for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrists Interview Series. I'm Dr. Jennifer Smith, Research Director at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We're a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders. I'd like to welcome with us today, Dominica Selvaggio, who is one of the psychotherapists at our practice. Nica has worked as a therapist for roughly a decade in the Seattle area and works with adults and adolescents aged 13 and older. Before we get started today, can you tell our listeners a little bit about yourself?

Nica Selvaggio: Yes, and thank you so much for the introduction, Jen. I'm really excited to be here talking with you today. That's always such a broad question. I never know where to start, but I guess that is the place to start that from a very young age, I was diagnosed with ADHD, and so my inability to pick where to start is a reflection of what I deal with in my brain. I love being a neurodivergent therapist because it brings a sense of understanding and compassion for folks who struggle with this sort of tangential thinking or not knowing where to start, that I find really, really helpful and I just get a lot of joy out of it.

So all that to say, I'm your local ADHD therapist. I'm originally born and raised in Chicago, the Midwest, and I've been in the Pacific Northwest for most of my adult life. I did spend three years living in Hawaii, and that was a really life-changing experience. And ultimately, I came back to the Seattle area because this land really has my heart.

Jennifer Smith: Wow.

Nica Selvaggio: I always describe myself as someone who's incredibly creative and just a lover of nature.

Jennifer Smith: That's great. And so you moved to the Seattle area from Hawaii. So what would be your favorite parts of the Seattle area, or just Washington as a whole?

Nica Selvaggio: It's the land, it's the mountains, it's the water, the plant life, all of it. I always say because of growing up in the Midwest that I was raised in corn and concrete. So when I moved to the Pacific Northwest and saw these huge mountains for the first time, even after a decade of being here, I'm still in awe. Yeah, I just really, really love the landscape.

Jennifer Smith: That's great. What is it that got you interested in being a therapist?

Nica Selvaggio: Big question. There's this storyline of The Wounded Healer that I think a lot of us are familiar with, that archetype of someone who has gone through their own experiences of pain and suffering, have tended to them, and then turned that compassionate attention outwards towards others who are struggling with similar wounds. My story as a therapist is not so different from that. I became interested in working in mental health out of necessity of caring for my own mental health throughout my life.

I'm a former foster care survivor and an adult adoptee, and so I had exposure from a very young age to some of the suffering in the world and in my own world and experience. So walking that path has really led me to wanting to provide a hand to hold for other folks on their own paths.

Jennifer Smith: Wow, that's really fantastic. Thank you for sharing that. What areas or disorders do you specialize in, besides ADHD?

Nica Selvaggio: Well, I got my start working in the clinical world specializing in eating disorders. So the bulk of my career was spent working in high acuity treatment centers, inpatient level residential, partial hospitalization, intensive outpatient, and working with folks who struggle with things like anorexia, binge-eating disorder, bulimia, ARFID, avoidant restrictive food intake disorder, which is often accompanied with neurodivergence. And when you work with eating disorders, you work with everything.

So people often think of eating disorders as being about literally food and body, and while those are absolutely components of a person's experience with an eating disorder, it's a symptom for an underlying issue. And often what underpins eating disorders is trauma, depression, anxiety, huge contributing factor, and other ways that the brain is sensitive. So for example, someone on the autism spectrum might really struggle with their sensory experience with food, be labeled with having an eating disorder, when really, it's something that's going on in a sensory way for them. It's not accompanied by cognitions and things like that.

So that's the bulk of my experience and I could talk about that forever. But because I'm an ADHD person, I have a million interests and my path has diverged many a time from that foundation of working with eating disorders. So through that work, I found my way into the somatic world in treating trauma because trauma is a huge underpin of most folks with eating disorders. And I got my foot into somatic experiencing, which is working with folks more so through the visceral felt-sense experience of trauma held in their bodies and helping them to let go of it rather than talking the story to death, which can be re-traumatizing for folks at times. Absolutely has some value in reclaiming our narrative and making meaning. However, I found working in the body to be a lot gentler.

Through that world, I found my way into psychedelic assisted therapy. I did a fellowship last summer in Jamaica, working with mushroom assisted therapy, and I've done a couple of trainings in San Francisco for ketamine assisted therapy. So that is a world I'm very interested in. And then gender and sexuality. So I'm non-binary. My pronouns are she/they, and working with trans folks, working with gender sexuality came out of working with eating disorders as well because those populations tend to struggle with eating disorders, body dysmorphia, those sorts of things at a much higher rate than the general population.

Jennifer Smith: Wow.

Nica Selvaggio: And then from there, add in interest in couples work, sex therapy. So a little bit all over the place, but a really strong foundation underneath all of it.

Jennifer Smith: Wow, that's fantastic. And basically that means you can help a lot of different people, which is really great. Your online bio notes that you've been trained in several evidence-based approaches. Can you let our audience know what those are?

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah, and I'm noticing in myself through this interview, I'm talking very fast and not breathing very much because I'm oriented to my own body. I'm going to take a moment and just take a deep breath before I answer you.

Jennifer Smith: Yeah, absolutely.

Nica Selvaggio: Thanks. And if anything-

Jennifer Smith: Oh, I was just just saying-

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah, go ahead Jen.

Jennifer Smith: That's great for our audience to see too. You need a moment, take a moment. There's nothing wrong with that, and I think we could probably all do that at times and we just don't, unfortunately. And then we feel awful.

Nica Selvaggio: Well, we're not really given permission to in our culture and our systems that we operate in.

Jennifer Smith: Yeah, which is unfortunate.

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah. Which ties into that question a little bit about what evidence-based therapies I work with. Most of them I learned when working in treatment settings. So in a lot of eating disorder treatment centers, the foundation of the treatments are evidence-based therapies such as dialectical behavior therapy, DBT, which was developed by Marsha Linehan, and that was a therapy originally developed to treat folks who struggle with extreme emotional dysregulation who are feeling suicidal or are diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. So these extreme swings of mood and inability to regulate.

Off of that came... And that approach is really good for folks who are... The temperament under controlled. So under UC versus OC, under controlled versus over controlled, so more impulsive behaviors, you're going to see things more expressive. You might be able to tell I'm more on the UC side. DBT is great for that. And then on the other side, you've got OC, over control. Those folks are going to have higher levels of generally OCD type thinking, more restricted, flat affect, much more wanting to control their outer experience because their internal world feels so chaotic that it reflects on the outside. In those folks, you're going to see things more like anorexia, restricting behaviors, much more flat affect.

RO-DBT, radically open DBT came out of DBT to help over control folks. So those are two different therapies, even though they have the same name in them, but essentially they're both skills-based therapies that are laid on the foundation of mindfulness and some of our Eastern inspired practices. So as well as another evidence-based therapy that's used a lot in treatment centers, ACT, acceptance and commitment therapy by Stephen Hayes. But these therapies are really trying to bridge the worlds of that grounded mindfulness foundation with concrete skills that people can use to actively change the behaviors that are causing them distress in their lives.

I love a lot of those therapies so much because they work, they can really shift things quickly. I often use those in conjunction with therapies that maybe don't have as much of a robust research base because they haven't had the time or the funding or whatever it is, such as somatic experiencing and more experiential therapies. I went a little bit all over the place.

Jennifer Smith: Thanks. And what about your treatment approach? What's that like?

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah, so I was trained in a clinical mental health counseling master's program and the foundation of my training and program was person-centered humanistic therapy. So for folks who don't know what that means, my foundation of who I am as a clinician, as a counselor is very much through the egalitarian lens of I am not an expert in your life. You are the expert in your life and I'm coming here to join human to human to witness and perhaps equip you with skills that you need in order to change the things that you're wanting to change.

That said, that's the foundation I weave in depending on what a person needs after collaborating with them on what sort of therapy they're interested in working with, all different kinds of approaches. So again, the somatic work is a huge part of my work, bringing in the body. I also do a lot of parts work, internal family systems, and for folks not familiar with that, that involves accessing the different parts of ourselves that are often in conflict. Everyone has different aspects of self that they might connect with at different times. The part of me that's doing this interview with today is my manager part, right? I'm going to present my best self today, but maybe my inner child part is like, "This is scary. I don't like talking in front of people that I can't see." That's an example of parts work.

Who else? Again, super interested in growing more in the psychedelic assisted therapy world. It's really profound powerful work that can really jump start a person's journey, but not to be used without caution and a lot of discernment and support. Yeah, it's just different for everyone.

Jennifer Smith: That's fantastic. I'd like to go back and talk about one of the areas that you can help clients with, and that's regarding their sexual orientation and gender identity. And I was reading on The Trevor Project’s website that they offer 24/7 free, secure access to counselors for young people who are LGBTQ. In a nationwide survey that 41% of LGBTQ people age 13 to 24, so the younger range, seriously considered committing suicide in the past year.

So clearly something's going on here that's severely impacting this population's mental health. So I just have a few questions regarding this, that maybe you can shed some light on.

One is, what types of issues does someone usually struggle with regarding their sexual orientation or gender identity?

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah, I love this question. Thank you for asking this. And first I want to name... I always experience a lot of heaviness in my body when tapping into the sense of powerlessness or hopelessness that comes in for a person to feel like the best option is to end their life, that they've exhausted all of the avenues and this is the best way to escape the pain that they're experiencing when that becomes the option in their brain. This is for so many different reasons and ties to what a lot of folks in the LGBTQIA+ community struggle with, which I want to differentiate that struggling to know what your sexual identity is or your gender identity is, is not in and of itself a pathology or an issue that someone's struggling with.

What people are struggling with is how the systems in the world, how our culture, how our families, how our religions, how all of these things reflect our worthiness of access to resources, safety, the right to use the bathroom in the public. Our daily lived experiences of oppression are the issues that we struggle with, not the fact that we are part of the rainbow community.

So that being said, because of operating or living in a system that... And I can give so many examples of it's February 1st and how many anti-trans legislation bills have been pushed forward this month in January alone? The visceral, physiological, emotional, spiritual, psychological response to being faced with that. Those issues can look like suicidality, that can look like depression, that can look like anxiety, that can look like a nervous system that's chronically stuck in fight, flight or freeze because they're in survival mode because the world is reflecting to them that they're not safe.

Things more classically associated with folks in the LGBTQIA community are things around identity formation. How do I know who I am? How do I put a word or a label to who I am? Do I even want to do that? Is there even a necessity for me to come out and name myself as such? Where do I fit in and belong in this LGBTQ community? How do I move through the world in the straight world? A lot of identity formation issues in that. And again, that's not an issue of pathology in and of itself. Culture's response to that question is the issue.

Substance use is often higher. Again, this is a way of coping with all the things that I've named and eating disorders and body dysmorphia tend to be much higher incidences in the trans and LGBTQ community.

Jennifer Smith: Wow. And eating disorders too, they're often highly correlated with suicidality, correct?

Nica Selvaggio: Yes, yes. Can be. Not all, but yeah, they tend to be.

Jennifer Smith: Wow. Another question I had is often when you're doing paperwork now for a medical provider or surveys, they ask about someone's preferred pronouns. And can you talk a little bit about that, preferred pronouns and how can that affect someone's mental health? Why do they matter? Why do pronouns matter?

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah. Yeah. And I love how you changed the sentence at the end. Why do pronouns matter? Because even the language of preferred can insinuate that it's someone's choice in terms of... Okay, how can I put this? If you knew that the sky was blue and someone came up to you and was like, "You're nuts. The sky is not blue. I see yellow, and you are bad and wrong for thinking that the sky is blue. How could you?” Take it a step further: “You're going to a bad place because you think this sky is blue."

And then I said to you, “Well, you just prefer it to be blue.” Is that a preference or is that just what you see? So a person's preferred pronouns implies that it's an actual preference, when in reality, it's just their lived experience. And so when someone is vulnerable enough to even name their pronouns, even if we don't understand, even if we think the sky is yellow, the reason it's important is because it indicates a level of belief that that person understands and knows themselves better than we could possibly know, their internal experience.

Jennifer Smith: Right.

Nica Selvaggio: It indicates respect for their beingness, and it creates a level of safety for that person who may have moved through many different systems in their life where it was not accepted or not safe for them to use the pronouns that fit for them.

Jennifer Smith: That's fantastic. Thank you. One anecdote that I wanted to share is that in our practice, we were trying to decide internally, "Should we all put our pronouns in our signature block?" And I'd say one-third were gung ho for, "Yes, we should." One-third didn't care. And there were other people who didn't want to, and one of the members of our team said, "Maybe we shouldn't do this, because if a person isn't comfortable saying what their pronouns are, we're forcing them to either disclose their pronouns or force them to put stereotypical pronouns that you would think that they should be.” And for me, that was really eye-opening.

So for that reason, I went on the bandwagon of I'm not putting pronouns. That way, if someone else didn't want to, they didn't feel like they had to as well.

So I thought that was really interesting, that pronouns can really mean so much to a person and just... Yeah. So thank you for explaining that, that it really does matter.

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah, absolutely. And I love, thank you to that person who brought that point up because that's always what I like to... Oftentimes when we're trying to show up as allies in support of a community that we're not part of, it's easy to misstep and to do things out of good heart and good intention, but ultimately can contribute further to harm. And the pronouns in the bio or in your email signatures requirement is one of those ways where it's like, "Oh, we're trying to help normalize it for everyone." But again, you don't know who you're requiring to out themselves or to live falsely.

Jennifer Smith: Right. That's fantastic. And that's why part of the reason that we do this series is to help educate people and just explain things. Thank you.

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah, thank you.

Jennifer Smith: Yeah. So what can you say to people who simply might not have any understanding or have confusion about what we've just been talking about and just don't understand the distress that some people might have about identity or orientation or pronouns? Why is it a big deal?

Nica Selvaggio: Yeah. I always come back to why do we need to understand? I don't even understand myself. Why do I need to understand another person's experience for their experience to be legitimate and valid for them? I don't. In fact, it's often impossible to try. I can do my best, but I can't ever fully step into another person's experience. And so we don't actually require understanding. We require respect and compassion, just to be believed. Right? And you can compare this across many different experiences of identity. I will never know what it's like to walk through the world, say, as an Arabic man, I don't know what that is.

Jennifer Smith: Right.

Nica Selvaggio: It's not for me to try to understand. It's for me to listen and believe and provide respect. So first throwing away that word understanding, we don't need to understand. What I would say is have you... I would invite folks who really just don't get what the big deal is about to reflect on if there's ever been something in their own life that was really important to them, that they really cared a lot about, but that was dismissed or diminished, or they were told that they were foolish or crazy even for caring about that thing.

And we can do this together too, but just to take a moment and really call to mind that feeling, that memory and see what happens inside. So I notice immediately I start to contract, I start to constrict, and I start to want to feel small and to hide myself. Other folks might have a different experience. Maybe they feel angry, they want to fight back. There's no wrong response here. Just notice how do you feel when you're invalidated, misunderstood, and told that you're wrong to care about the things that you care about? Generally not pleasant.

So when we show up in that way, we're often perpetuating more of the same for people around us. If we've experienced that, then we're going to put that out on others too. Like, "Well, I had to conform. I had to shut down this part of myself, so how dare you not do that?" Right? We face a lot of anger from folks oftentimes as a result of that. Yeah. And what would the world be like if we had more spaciousness for those pauses to actually feel into, what am I reacting to in my not understanding? Am I being reminded of a time that I didn't feel understood? How can I show up in a more compassionate way?

Jennifer Smith: That's great. Thank you. Our final question, which I'm a little bummed to say because I thought this has been great. Do you have any words of advice or anything else that you'd like to say to our listeners today?

Nica Selvaggio: Be gentle with yourself. Working as a clinician, as a counselor, as a therapist, through some of these major world and global events that we've been experiencing collectively over the past decade, something I've noticed in the broader populations is that levels of fear are very high. Anxiety is very high, which makes sense. And levels of burnout, feeling like we just cannot continue on are very high. Levels of trauma and secondary trauma are very high.

In the midst of all of that, I want to invite all of us to both stand in the center of honoring and witnessing our sacred human struggles together, and also find those spaces in which things feel a little bit lighter, or we can expand more and access things like rest and pleasure and resilience, and that both of those things need to coexist in order to show up in a more whole way. So gentle, gentle, gentle, gentle. Show up when you can. Rest when you can.

Jennifer Smith: That's fantastic. Thank you so much, Nica, for finding time to speak with us today.

Nica Selvaggio: Thank you for having me.

Jennifer Smith: And for our listeners, if anybody is interested in scheduling an in-person or telehealth appointment with Nica, you can do so and self-schedule at seattleanxiety.com. Thanks again and have a great day.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychiatrist Peter Reiss on Psychiatric Medication Management

An Interview with Psychiatrist Peter Reiss

Peter Reiss, M.D. is psychiatrist at Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC. Dr. Reiss specializes in the treatment and medication management of anxiety related disorders.

Jennifer Smith: Hi, thanks for joining us today for this installment of The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Dr. Jennifer Smith, Research Director at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We're a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

I'd like to welcome with us Dr. Peter Reiss, who is one of the psychiatric providers at our practice. Peter has extensive experience with psychiatric medication management and has worked in multiple levels of care in the Seattle area, including inpatient, outpatient, partial hospitalization, and residential treatment programs, as well as in the psychiatric emergency room.

Before we get started today, can you tell our listeners a little bit about yourself?

Peter Reiss: Yeah. Hi, Jennifer. Thanks for having me, and inviting me for this interview series. As you said, I worked in quite a few places before I started working as an outpatient psychiatrist here. I took a slightly different route than the traditional way of, "What do you do when you start working after residency?"

I initially started working as a locum tenens, which includes more short-term contracts. I was doing six months to a year at different kinds of levels of psychiatric care. It just gave me a way to see what kind of psychiatric jobs I like, and it gave me an opportunity to see what the mental health resources are in the area. And, just gave me a chance to see what I could see myself doing in the long run.

Jennifer Smith: That's great. I think, like you said, to have all that different exposure probably makes you a really well-rounded psychiatrist. I think that's fantastic. Great.

Peter Reiss: I did think that. It just gave me a little bit more opportunities to really see what different acuities look like on different levels of care.

I wouldn't change a thing, so I'm very happy I did it this way.

Jennifer Smith: Fantastic. Just to let our listeners know a little bit more about yourself as well, what are your favorite parts of the Seattle area or Washington as a whole?

Peter Reiss: So, the first time we came to Seattle, I just immediately loved the area. I do think that it has this very special kind of culture. I love how it combines the urban and the nature, and just the fact that there's so much to do. Especially in the summer, with festivals going on. And, even the winter, I mean, people do complain about, or some people say we have particularly bad winters, but, in the middle of winter, it's 55 degrees, and you can go hiking or do whatever if you're okay with a little bit of rain.

Jennifer Smith: The saying is "It's not bad weather, it's bad clothing," or something like that. Right?

Peter Reiss: Well, I think our weather is our best kept secret.

Jennifer Smith: Yes.

Peter Reiss: Not as bad as people say.

Jennifer Smith: Exactly.

Peter Reiss: Or, have the reputation.

Jennifer Smith: Right?

Peter Reiss: Yeah.

Jennifer Smith: Exactly. That's great. And, what is it that got you interested in becoming a psychiatrist?

Peter Reiss: So, I didn't start out in medical school wanting to be a psychiatrist. I did keep my options open. I was leaning more towards primary care, internal medicine, possibly emergency medicine. I always knew that psychiatry and mental health is important, and that it's kind of very ubiquitous anywhere you go in medicine.

I didn't think about psychiatry a whole lot until my third year in medical school when I had my real introduction to psychiatry, where I went to the psych ward and other psych facilities for my medical school rotation. And, I just immediately loved it. I liked how it's just slightly different than other fields of medicine. It kind of forces you to think more outside of the box. It doesn't necessarily follow the standard algorithms that we have in medicine. There's a lot more nuance and room for interpretation, and it's probably the least well-understood specialty in medicine as well. So, I did the fact that there's just so much more that potential will change in the specialty in the near future hopefully.

Jennifer Smith: That's fantastic. One question that we're often asked is, "Should I see a therapist or should I see a psychiatrist, or both?" And, can you explain the difference to our audience why should someone see either of these two professions?

Peter Reiss: Mm-hmm. Yeah. So, we do have quite a good variety of mental health specialists for anyone wanting to see treatment for any mental health problems. The two options, generally, are to see a medical doctor, so a psychiatrist, or see somebody who'll focus more on non-pharmaceutical management, which would be a therapist, which would typically be clinical social workers or psychologists by training. And, it sometimes comes down to personal choice what people prefer.

I would say, if somebody's psychiatric symptoms are fairly mild, they might need to see a psychiatrist. So, not everybody would be necessarily a candidate for psychiatric medications.

Psychiatrists themselves rarely practice psychotherapy anymore. It used to be different. We are trained in psychotherapy. We do go through all these different didactical trainings, how to provide different modalities of psychotherapy, and it used to be much more prevalent back, really, back in the seventies, eighties, up to nineties, where many psychiatrists were still offering psychotherapy. But, mostly due to our insurance landscape, it really has changed that that responsibility has fallen more to clinical social workers and psychologists who are very, very qualified to provide that training. And, they're really specialized in all these different training modalities, since there's just so many of them. So, somebody who has PTSD is getting different psychotherapy than somebody who has an anxiety disorder or depression.

And, it's really hard for a therapist to be very good at all of these therapy modalities. So, I think sort of the specialization among the different therapies works very well, and it's great to just share that professional space with all these very qualified therapists that we work with.

Jennifer Smith: Wow. Have there been times when a patient will come to you and you realize this person probably doesn't need medication - do you refer them to therapy? Does that ever happen?

Peter Reiss: Oh yeah. That is quite common.

I mean, I would say, in the majority of cases, probably at least a trial of medication might be helpful, just for the patient to engage better in psychotherapy if symptoms are just a little bit too severe at that time. But, for a lot of mild cases of the anxiety and depressive disorders, often starting with therapy alone might be a good option.

Jennifer Smith: Okay, fantastic. In what ways can someone's mental health impact their physical health?

Peter Reiss: So, that's actually a really good question. I think most people do understand the connection between chronic medical conditions causing psychiatric symptoms to worsen, but it's really also the other way around. So, I mean, for example, most psychiatric disorders, whether it's anxiety disorders, whether it's depressive disorders, trauma, excessive trauma responses, they typically cause physiological changes as well. Things like, for example, chronically increased stress hormones, like cortisol. And, that can have an impact on immune function, it can increase somebody's risk for cardiovascular issues.

And then also, indirectly, somebody who has low executive functioning, low motivation due do psychiatric issues, is less likely to take care of themselves and engage in these kind of activating behaviors that tend to improve one's mental and physical health.

If somebody, for example, is less likely to engage in things that are good for social connections, that leads to loneliness. And that, in itself, leads to worsening mental health and physical health as well just due to increasing chronic stress and things like that.

Jennifer Smith: Oh, wow. So, when they say, "Mental health IS health," it really is true.

Peter Reiss: Oh, it is absolutely true. I mean the two... It's not only that it's just in your head, right? It does cause real physiological changes, whether those are directly caused by mental health issues or indirectly.

Jennifer Smith: Right. Can you talk a little bit about your treatment approach?

Peter Reiss: So, I emphasize a lot of psychoeducation, making sure that I meet my patients where they're at, and also give them as clear information about what's going on for them to make the best informed decision.

Sometimes, maybe, they have a particular treatment modality in mind, particular medications or whatnot. Just, trying to understand what their idea is, where they're coming from. So, our treatment goals might be different; we might not always agree, and that's not necessarily wrong. But, giving them as much information as I can for them to make the most informed decisions, that's very important to me.

Then also, I tend to put a big emphasis on always reassessing... Just, speaking specifically about medication management, to reevaluate the need for a particular medication. Sometimes, patients come to me having been on one medication for 10 years. We don't know if they still need to be on that. We don't need... Maybe they need to be on something different. We need to reevaluate what, really, each component of their treatment is really doing, if it still has any effect on their mental health. Sometimes, less is more with psychopharmacology.

I do always want to do check-ins, even with patients who have been on a long-term medication, "Is that really necessary, and what can we do about it?"

Jennifer Smith: That's really great that you work with a patient. And, it sounds like you strive to just get the optimal dose and really not put things that are not... Meaning that you don't do unnecessary things.

Peter Reiss: Right, because each medication could not have side effects; it could have unwanted side effects; or, something else that the patient might not know about. So, they're still... Psychiatric medication's still among the safest medication in medications in general, but we shouldn't take it lightly to have somebody on long-term medications generally.

Usually, it's not a problem. We just have to do it the right way.

Jennifer Smith: Right. And, what type of disorders do you specialize in?

Peter Reiss: So, the disorders that I see here in the clinic are fairly standard, the average psychiatric disorders, including the depressive disorders, wide variety of anxiety disorders, including OCD and different kinds of phobia. We do see ADHD patients here in our clinic as well, patients with PTSD and more trauma-related issues, and also different levels of functioning. So, there's many of my patients who are really doing well, especially on the surface. They're able to do their day-to-day activities. And then, there's patients who are not doing well at this time, who might not be able to have a job right now. So, it's a big variety of different psychiatric issues that we're dealing with, but also, different, wide variety of patient needs.

Jennifer Smith: And, let's say that I was going to sign up for an appointment with you. You are a medical doctor, so of course, I would have to complete the intake paperwork so you have an idea of where I'm coming from, what medications I'm on, my past history. So that's, I think, pretty standard. But, after that, I have no idea what to expect. So, what can I expect in the first session with you? What would we do? What would we talk about?

Peter Reiss: Mm-hmm. Yeah.

So, after a patient signs up for an appointment, there's the initial intake. That can be done either here in my office, in person, or it could be done remotely. There's always those two options. On most days during the week, I have those two options available.

The first session is just gathering a lot of information, getting to know the patient. And, that typically takes at least 45 minutes to an hour so we are clear on establishing a diagnosis, getting enough information about the patient's medical background, mental health background, social background. And, the last part of the initial meeting... Well, there's initially the psychiatric interview, and then, we kind of talk about what we're going to do.

And, if there's any disagreements, or the patient might need a little more time to think about these different options, we might talk about... Besides different medication options, we might talk about potential referrals for therapy as well to see if there's somebody who might have that particular therapy skillset that the patient needs, whether that's in our office or outside of our office.

And then. If the patient decides to be a patient with us, there would be a follow-up appointment to check in, within usually two to four weeks or so. Depending on the acuity, really, and if there's any problems.

Jennifer Smith: Okay. And, that actually leads to my next question regarding follow-ups. So, at our practice, we have a form of concierge care. Can you explain what that is to the audience? And, how does it differ from a traditional practice, and what are the benefits that our patients may have?

Peter Reiss: Mm-hmm. So, the main difference with concierge care is really that it's a subscription-based access to our services.

In a traditional setting, patients would have their appointment and then schedule follow-ups, and then, essentially, the difference in payment would just be that they would pay for each follow-up appointment. But, a subscription-based model of concierge care, it's really that patients pay a monthly subscription for, essentially, unlimited access. So, they can have one appointment, they can have two appointments; they have access to their psychiatrist via messaging system or email. It just makes it easier for us to respond in real-time to any issues that might come up.

It also helps us to see who is continuing care at a regular interval. So, sometimes in outpatient psychiatry, it becomes a little tricky, because patients might be partially lost to follow up. They might not show up for an appointment, so we're not sure is that patient still patient with us, right? But, with a subscription model, we at least know, "Oh, that patient actually wants to continue, and that patient will continue with their follow-up appointments."

So, I think it helps with patient retention in the outpatient setting.

Jennifer Smith: Great. And, I think one thing that I've noticed from the administrative end is that, because we essentially cap the number of patients that our psychiatrists will see, and you've kind of alluded to this, that our patients really can have unlimited access, to a degree, because you're seeing X amount of patients and not thousands of patients. So, there's just more time that you can give each of your patients, which I really think makes more specialized care as well.

Peter Reiss: Mm-hmm. Yeah. So, our overall patient numbers are lower than you would see in a typical outpatient clinics, which helps with just the time that we give each patient. We're not necessarily back-to-back.

I mean, there's some days where we see more patients than other days, but it just feels a little bit more... It feels a little more less time pressure, to give that extra time as well, whether it's directly during the appointment or to communicate with the patient through our messaging system and hone in their treatment that way.

Jennifer Smith: Wonderful. So, our final question, do you have any words of advice, or anything else that you would like to say to our listeners today?

Peter Reiss: So, the main thing that I probably would say is that, to somebody who's starting out with their mental health recovery, really seeing that they want to get treatment, it initially seems very daunting, but I do want to say that it does get easier when somebody is actually establishing care and is getting the help that they need.

And, oftentimes, we often forget to check in with ourselves, especially when we're in treatment, making sure that we're really doing well, that we're not just doing okay, that we're really thriving and flourishing. And, that can mean different things to many people, obviously. But, often, what suffering from a lot of mental disorders and mental illness does to us, we're losing the sense of self-worth and almost like forgetting what our normal... We're getting used to this normal baseline of functioning and being. And, sometimes, it becomes difficult to keep track of what our purpose is in life and what we can do to thrive.

So, don't settle for any less when it comes to your mental health. That would be my main advice.

Jennifer Smith: That's great. Thank you so much for your time today.

If anyone is interested in scheduling an in-person or a telehealth appointment with Dr. Reiss to discuss psychiatric care and medication management, you can self-schedule at seattleanxiety.com

Thank you again, Dr. Reiss, we appreciate your time.

Peter Reiss: Thank you, Jennifer. Good seeing you.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Sandra Parsons on Social Psychology & Depressive Realism

An Interview with Social Psychologist Sandra Parsons

Sandra Parsons, Ph.D. is an Associate Teaching Professor, the Director of Undergraduate Studies, and the Director of Pedagogy in the Department of Psychological Sciences at Rice University. She specializes in the various aspects and components of groups in society, such as decision-making, identity and competition.

Jack Eisinger:  Hello everyone. Thank you for tuning in. My name is Jack Eisinger, and I'm a research intern for the Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We are a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders. I'm here today with Dr. Sandra Parsons who graduated from Miami University with a PhD in social psychology, and is currently a psychology professor and RA at Rice University.

She has won three George R. Brown Awards for superior teaching, and has done research on human decision processes, executive coaching, and information sharing. Dr. Parsons, before we get started, can you tell us a little about yourself and what got you interested in social psychology?

Sandra Parsons:  Sure. So I've been at Rice for about 12 or 13 years. It's fuzzy on the exact dates, because I started as a sort of a patch hire and that turned into a full-time position. And I've been teaching both in Houston, and also before that in Baltimore, and before that in Columbus, Ohio for about 30 years, which is hard to believe since I'm only about 30 in my head.

I really got interested in social psychology because people are so weird. People are so strange and unpredictable, and I was always asking, I wonder why people do that and why are people like that?

And I was also interested in trying to figure out how we could diffuse some pretty common misunderstandings among people, some things that come up over and over again that are problems in groups of people. And so when I was talking to my research advisor, an undergraduate, I told him I wanted to go to graduate school in psychology and he said, "What kind?"

And I remember being shocked that there wasn't just the one kind. I'm not sure what I thought happened to all the professors in the world who taught all the different kinds of psychology, but I think I had some conception that everyone was a clinical psychologist and then they had expertise in different research areas.

Anyway, he said, "You could be a social psychologist and study this all of the time." And I said, "Okay, well that's what I want to do." So my interest in psychology has been since forever, but specifically social psychology since about middle way through my undergraduate years. So here I am.

Jack Eisinger:  That's really cool. And by the way, before coming to college, that's also what I thought, you just went to grad school in psychology.

Sandra Parsons:  That's right. I had no idea.

Jack Eisinger:  Somewhat common. All right. So let's get into the questions. Question one, of your published studies finds the impact of professional coaching on university students. I was hoping you could explain a little bit to our audience what leadership coaching is, and is it something that is practical and useful for the everyday college student?

Sandra Parsons:  Absolutely. So we're really lucky, because this study actually took place at Rice University in partnership with The Doerr Institute. And so we have incredible resources, incredible funding with professional coaches who teach undergraduates how to develop their leadership tools, the idea being that everyone can be a leader.

Though I have to say we are very specifically talking about Rice University undergraduates. So it's not literally everyone in the world can be a great leader, but really focusing on the kinds of students that we have in this kind of institutional space.

So the professional coaching really is about looking at the literature on successful leadership tools, and helping students develop their leadership goals. So with The Doerr Institute specifically, it's very much tailored towards what kind of leadership roles students are interested in, what kind of leadership skills they want to develop, what kind of personal goals they have taking into account their culture of origin, but also the culture that they want to practice more leadership roles in. Because the way that you successfully lead is of course bound by cultural expectations and cultural norms.

And I would say that absolutely, this is something that is practical and useful for everyday college students. I think that it is fairly rare for one to be in professional spaces where there's no leadership. There is almost always some opportunity. Even if it's just the leader of your very small team at whatever level of job that you're doing, there are different tasks that come along where someone has to sort of take charge. And so I think having all of our students have some ability to harness those skills and refine those tools to better lead is wonderful. It's a tremendous asset.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah, I definitely agree, and I definitely have met some of the people that may have participated in those studies, and I definitely agree with that assessment. My next question, regarding teams and social psychology, what are some suggestions you have for those teams? Whether it's business teams or just as something as simple as college students working on a class project. What are some ways that people can foster a better experience and have more positive outcomes in these situations?

Sandra Parsons:  I love this question because it really gets to the heart of one of the things that I went into my graduate schooling thinking I wanted to know more about. I talked before about how people were weird, which is clearly a driving force. But the other thing that I was really focused on is why is it that we do so much group work and yet still haven't figured out how to do it well? And so I studied a lot about how could we make that experience better.

So I think that number one, you have to define what the roles are in the group, so who's going to be in charge of what. There are some ways that tacitly develops. So that develops not necessarily on explicit understandings, though in my opinion, it's better if you spend some time being explicit about that. Because if you leave it to unspoken estimations of what other people are going to do, it takes much more time to develop those efficiently.

But also, what is the product going to be and how will people be held accountable for that product? Because one of the things that we know that happens is that when groups of people get together, it's very easy to imagine that other people will take on the bulk of the task. And we call that social loafing, the idea that if there are many of us doing it, then all of us can kind of relax a bit.

And the usual way of doing business in a group like that is to have a group product that just pops out the other side and is assessed by some external force like your professor, or the customer buying the product, or whatever it is, with little attention to who in the group was responsible for which parts of it. And when it's set up like that, then that means that people can take advantage of the shared workload and not put in their all.

So I think having some rules of holding each other accountable, either within the group where everyone agrees that these are how we're going to hold each other accountable to these, or asking the outside entity like your professor to set up some sort of a rubric or expectations about how to define whose work was what.

I also think it's important to think about, is this even a group task? Why are you doing this in a group? And I think for the group to understand why they have come together to do this product or this project together is vital.

So for example, one of the things that we assume is that a group will do a better job on a task. That if we put lots of heads on it, we'll have an even better outcome. But that's assuming that there's some either really hard lift, something that one of us couldn't do by ourselves because it's just too much work to do alone, or because we need lots of different people thinking about it differently.

And so we've already talked about the first problem. If we're doing it all together because we know that it's just a really hard lift for any singular person to do, then we better make sure that this is something we can each contribute to and be held accountable for each of our individual outputs.

If it's the other thing where we're coming together because of a diversity of skillset, then we need to make sure everyone knows in that group who is really good at what. If we don't do that, we run the risk of having everybody focus on the shared information and not talk about the stuff that they're uniquely qualified to talk about.

And so we really waste that resource, and that can potentially slow down the process and also tamp down the creativity and uniqueness of the product that you're trying to get, which is really actively working against having a group of people do it.

So trying to figure out, who's going to be responsible for what? How to maximize individual output, making sure that it's a group task, and also agreeing on how you're going to communicate about. They're all absolutely vital. And I think that those pieces of advice suit all kinds of situations. Classroom, outside of classroom, business context, really anytime you get a group of people to do something.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah. No, that's a really good answer. I've definitely been on both sides of social loafing, both in school and in jobs.

Sandra Parsons:  Absolutely.

Jack Eisinger:  So I completely agree with that. No one really wins usually in those situations.

Sandra Parsons:  That's right. And it's such a shame, because group processes should be a really good tool for getting something done. We have so many big tasks that we have to do, and having more people work on it absolutely means more buy-in. People feel like they're involved in the process.

And so we want to continue to use groups for sure. But if we're not utilizing them to the best ability based on what we know, then like you said, nobody wins. It's just an unpleasant process and you end up with less than fabulous product. It's certainly less fabulous than it could have been if everybody had been doing their best work. So it's something we need to think about whenever we're in groups.

Jack Eisinger:  To continue with groups, in teams or groups, can you talk a little bit about in group competition or in-group threats, and what would be the best way for people to handle these situations in the healthiest way possible?

Sandra Parsons:  Absolutely. So I often talk about in-group versus out-group threats, usually talking about how we develop our identities in part around the people who are in our groups and by what we are not. And so we develop this strong in-group bond, and it is sort of implied whenever we're in a group that there is some out-group that is different from us, and also by definition not quite as good as us. We prefer our in-group members over our out-group members generally speaking. And there's lots of research with that in-group bias.

So then when we start looking at, well, what happens when there's actual competition from inside the group, which we know happens of course, or some sort of threat to identity that comes from inside the group.

Because it is a somewhat unexpected source of conflict, it can be very devastating. So if you think about how you know that you and your people are cohesive and connected, and you know that you're in us and that those are thems, and one of the things that makes you a good us is that you were willing to fight for resources or compete for resources with the other us against the other thems, that's kind of a comfortable space to be in, because we're used to that conception of things.

So when someone threatens your membership or when someone competes for a place within the group, it can be kind of scary because it threatens your idea of this cohesiveness, and it threatens your idea of what makes the us different from the thems.

So it can be particular threatening, and particularly insidious and difficult to deal with. And I think the best way to deal with that is to have honest conversations and to understand why it is that it's so anxiety provoking to have that threat come from someone you thought of as an us or part of your in-group.

I think it's also useful to think about your definition of your in-group. Why is that your in-group, why is that important to you? Why is that part of your identity formation process? And then perhaps use that to reconceptualize what that in-group threat means.

I say this because I know it's not always going to be easy to just say, "Well, let's just talk about it and resolve it, and then we'll all be fine again." The resolution might be that we have to redefine how we think about ourselves. Maybe we decide that we aren't really part of that group in that context, and we have to redefine where the boundaries are. And anytime we're doing that, that is going to be anxiety provoking and difficult, and we just have to give ourselves the time and space to have those conversations and decide, can we both still be in the group? Is this some irreconcilable difference? Do I need to think about my identity differently? Do I need to maybe join another group with respect to this task?

The good thing about in-group and out-group memberships is that they are often very fluid, that they're based on some expectation or some either internal or external expectation, or situational factor that's malleable. So we can decide to change the membership or we can decide to reconceive how we think about things.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah, it can be a difficult thing to balance. The larger the group, typically the more power that group has. But at the same time, the larger the group gets, the more divisions there are going to be over little idiosyncrasies or bigger things.

Sandra Parsons:  Absolutely. And the more potential there is to see factions within a group. We recognize when we're in a group how heterogeneous the group is, and we tend to think that the out-group is very homogenous. But that heterogeneity while wonderful within our in-group, we also have to appreciate that's going to be the source of conflict sometimes, because we aren't all the same. We aren't all going to think about things the same way.

Jack Eisinger:  Right. Just to transition to teaching a little bit, what is the biggest takeaway you want your students to have in your social psychology and positive psychology courses?

Sandra Parsons:  So we'll start with the social psychology. So usually, it ends up being that I meet students early in their four years for my social psychology class. So I'm usually talking to first years and second years, with a few older students sprinkled in who are trying to get distribution credit.

And so I have the opportunity to talk to them at the beginning of their four years of college, which is a really exciting time. There's a lot of change and a lot of potentially tumult going on, where they're trying to find their way and trying to figure out who they're going to be in their new, more adult lives.

So one of the things that I want to make sure my students know is that in many cases, they have the power to change the situation. So social psychology is all about how the situation affects the way we think, feel, and behave. And that means that when we get into these spaces where there's conflict, or misunderstanding, or frustration even leading for example to violence, that those are coming out of situations that we've socially constructed, that we have somehow agreed as a group on the certain ways of doing things. We have certain normative reactions. We have certain expectations about what others are going to do.

And because they're socially constructed, that means that they can be socially reconstructed. So if something isn't working, we can decide collectively to change those situational variables to create a new situation that better serves us.

So specifically, thinking about times when we see conflict between people. It's often because there's some misunderstanding. I see the situation one way, and you're seeing the situation a totally different way. And once I understand your perspective, I can understand your behavior. So if we can come to some shared understanding of you're reacting to your construal of the situation over here, and I think it's supposed to be like this. And when you don't do it right, I get mad.

But what if we came to it with, "Okay, here's what I thought the ground rules were. This is what I thought was the environment we were interacting in. And I want to hear more about what you thought, and then we can come to a compromise."

One of the things that I worry about is that this makes it sound like it's very Pollyanna. "All we have to do is just change our expectations and the world will change." And obviously, I don't think we're going to get rid of all of the world's strife just by changing the way we construct things. I also think there are some cultural barriers where we can't just say everybody has the agency or the power to change the situation. That's just not true either.

But I do think that opening up students' minds to the idea that they don't have to go with the flow the way that the flow has been constructed before, but they can create a new flow. We get to create new places for us to be in. And especially at this age with this exciting group of students, you all will have the power. You do have the power.

So looking for ways to change those understandings and clear up misunderstandings I think is a really, really powerful tool that students can have and that humans can have to make the world a more harmonious type of place.

I often like to use the example of queuing cultures versus massing cultures. So there's some cultures where we stand in line, and then there are others where we kind of crowd around for our turn for something. And if you're from a queuing up and you think that you're supposed to stand in line for something, and you go to a place where they're crowding around, can be very frustrating, because you're wondering why aren't they doing what they're supposed to do? Why are they taking mine before? It's not their turn, right?

Likewise, if you come from a crowding place and you go and you stand in line, you're wondering, "Why are these people standing in this long line? Why don't they just crowd around and grab what they need?"

And you can see there's a lot of conflict there, because both sides are like, "What are you doing? You're not doing it right." But if you just explain to the other group, "This is what I can see the situation to be," and the other group is like, "Oh, this is how I thought it was supposed to be," then you can at least understand each other and understand where the differences are coming from, and potentially really tamp down that anger response that causes so many problems between people.

So long story short, power to change the situation. I want students to understand that they're not just being pushed along through their daily activities without any agency.

Positive psychology is actually fairly similar in terms of a lesson, but what I want people to understand first and foremost is that the goal of positive psychology is improved wellbeing. That does not mean improved happiness in the sense that everyone should be skipping through the tulips, and singing and dancing. I think about Shiny Happy People from the R.E.M. song, which is a reference probably most people don't get anymore, but I'm like, "I'm going to keep talking about it until everyone knows who Michael Stipe is."

The goal is not shiny, happy people, and that shouldn't be the goal. And I think that we are sold, especially in western societies, that is the goal. And then if we're not feeling happy in the sense of skipping through the tulips, that we're not doing the right kinds of things and something has to change.

So with positive psychology, I want people to understand that happiness is a very broad multi-tiered or multi-pillared kind of conception that has multi-facets to it, multiple facets to it. And it involves connection with other people, certainly positive feeling, meaningful work, connection, all sorts of really rich and interesting things that come with effort.

So the takeaway message for positive psychology is to reconceive happy as a much more complex construct that it has lots of pieces to it, and that it's changeable. That we do have the power to change our wellbeing, but it's going to take effort.

So it is not that we are going to magically either be happy or not happy, and if we're not happy, we have to keep trying to find this magic pill that will make us happy again. It's that we need to conceive of happiness differently, and then very consciously choose activities that support more of the good stuff. And so actively working on that, just like you would exercise every day or eat good food every day. It's not something you do once and then you checked it off your list. It's something every day, you have to pay attention to and nurture.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah. I think if I had to combine the two into one, social psychology and positive psychology, it's the need to break down the things that happen in your life. That it is not so simple that you just can follow the flow of the group, or that you're just going to do whatever you want or just feel like, and you're going to be happy. That there are things that you need to consciously think about and put effort into.

Sandra Parsons:  I think that's absolutely right, Jack.

Jack Eisinger:  All right. Okay, perfect. Question number five. Can you talk a little bit about stereotyping? Why do people do it? Is it an automatic process? And what are some ways that individuals... And I was particularly interested as well in governments. What can they do to try to combat this practice?

Sandra Parsons:  That is a very interesting and provocative question. So let me take it apart one at a time. So let me talk about stereotyping.

So stereotyping is when we decide that there are boxes that people or things can fit into. Clearly, what you're thinking about is people stereotyping. So let's talk about that. That we decide that we know what people are like, based on certain kinds of features, we can put them in these different categories.

And it is necessary. It is automatic. It is part of the way that our brain makes order out of a lot of what would be chaotic information if we didn't do otherwise.

So we are in some sense what's called cognitive misers. We want to figure out the easiest way to tackle the largest amount of information possible, and our brains are constantly trying to organize those things into chunks of information.

If we didn't do that, the world would be full of way too much information. We would have trouble functioning even in the most simple tasks, because everything would be new to us constantly, and disordered, and uncomfortable, and not very pleasant.

And so what we do is we make these categories of people. And then once we know what we think we know about people, these stereotypes, then those help us decide how to behave. So we create these stereotypes, we create these boxes, put people in those based on some very quick judgment that we have, and some very little information often we have about those people in those groups. And then we behave and act towards them to reinforce those stereotypes.

So having stereotypes is not actually the problem, and it's a good thing it's not a problem because it is an automatic process. We're not going to be able to get rid of stereotyping. It's something that we do naturally.

The problem comes of course, when we have these assumptions that lead to discrimination and to prejudice. So it's when we have negative stereotypes, and also that we believe that they're immutable, that it's unchangeable, and that there is a fundamental difference in a group of people that is insurmountable, and that we can't be convinced otherwise.

And this actually goes back to the discussion we were having before about in-groups and out-groups. We think we know something about the out-group, because we have a stereotype about them. And so whenever we see behavior from an out-group member, we imagine that that supports the stereotype. And it's very hard for us to remember times when it refutes the stereotype, and have that stick where we start to alter the stereotype. Usually we dismiss it or we say, "Oh, well that's a unique member of that group. That's weird, because they're not like all the rest of them."

So then we get to the juicier part of your question, which is what can individuals, and then what can governments do? So I'll start with the easier one.

What individuals can do is be aware of that. So having a stereotype is not, like I said, necessarily in and of itself a bad thing. But we have to be very consciously aware and checking ourselves, how are we using that stereotyped information to guide our behaviors?

And we also have to actively seek out alternative explanations and information. It's again, a very effortful process. It is going to mean that we can't always take the comfortable, quick, easy route of just making an assumption about something, and that we have to constantly seek out others, make sure that we are not just always trying to prefer the comfort of people we think who are like us, but we have to seek out people actively who might be different from us.

And so then when we start talking about, how do we have governments be a part of that? I think it starts getting a little trickier because we have to think about what we think, what is the role of government, and how much hand does government have in our day-to-day interactions? So it's a little bit of a political question I think.

I think that we know from data, from research that when people are zoned to certain areas, if there are certain areas that have certain resources, that the areas that have more resources are going to be places where people with more resources can live. And to the extent that privileges certain groups of people in society, that is encouraging this prejudicial and discriminatory behavior. We definitely can't have that.

So I guess one of the things you could argue is that governments would have to make sure that they weren't providing resources to some groups over others or in certain locations over others.

And again, I think that goes back to a political conversation is I'm not sure... We're going to have really different ideas about how big the government could be and how far its hand should reach. But in some utopia, you would have governments enforcing only regulations and resources in ways that did not systematically privilege certain groups over others.

Because when we do that, we know that that causes strife between people. You can't just put people to together and hope that they solve their differences. When people are put together without some sort of environmental, situational variables in place, they actually reinforce those stereotypes, and things become worse between groups of people.

So providing opportunities for people to interact with people who are different from them or interact with people with whom they don't normally, or actively putting people together who have negative stereotypes about each other. With some things in place, like figuring out a common enemy that they share. It's actually a really effective way of bringing groups together.

But also helping people, facilitating people figuring out how they're more alike than they are different. So some sort of governmental programs that encourage sharing resources across stereotypically adverse groups or opposed groups would be one way that they could do it.

Anything that's going to encourage people to get out of their little echo chambers where they think they know everything about a different group is something that will encourage the breaking down of these prejudicial and discriminatory practices. But we're never going to get rid of stereotypes.

And frankly, they're shortcuts. They're useful. And so it's going to help me know... For example, if I have a stereotype about college students, then when I meet a college student, I don't have to think for very long what we're going to talk about, because I know they're going to be stressed right around Thanksgiving, because that's right before exams. If I know they're a third year, I know they're going to be looking for jobs. I have a stereotype about what kinds of things are going to make them anxious, and I'm going to immediately be able to talk to them about those kinds of things.

And that's good, because that makes for easier conversation. It makes for less stressful interactions. And so again, I know I'm repeating myself, but in as much as they are positive in making life smoother, they're going to be continuing to be part of our process.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah. It seems like if we don't make assumptions and we don't see the same person every single day, it could be pretty hard to talk to them. And then also for your government answer, politically, what should the government do? But what could the government do? Making people live together, and sharing resources, and making sure those are equal, like you said. Utopia, which I think was the right way to word that.

Sandra Parsons:  Yeah. Yeah. I think in theory, it would be a lovely place to live where there was no competition for resources, or the only competition was where you had a perfectly self-sustainable unit where everything was equally accessed. I think we're probably describing a type of government that has been tried and failed before, but in our perfect-

Jack Eisinger:  Not necessarily with fully economic resources.

Sandra Parsons:  Right, exactly.

Jack Eisinger:  Okay, so just to transition back to class, I remember in social psychology, one of the biggest takeaways I had... And it was something that we didn't talk about for a super long time, but it really stuck with me, was when we talked about depressive realism. And that when people who are depressed sometimes do not have the "elevated" versions of themselves that a lot of other people do.

And so I was hoping you can explain for our audience a little bit more about depressive realism, why it can develop, and what are some ways for a psychologist to determine that in a potential patient or other person.

Sandra Parsons:  I love this question. So the other side of that is rose colored glasses, which has to do with the self-serving biases that we have. So the idea is that most of us, if we're mentally healthy, are walking around with a little bit elevated version of ourselves in our heads. So I referred to these self-serving biases. We bias the information that we believe about ourselves and that we think other people have about us, that's a little more positive than reality.

So for example, we think people think that we're a little smarter than we actually are, or than they actually think... We think they think we are a little smarter. We think they think we're a little more attractive, a little more clever, a little better dressed, all of these things. In fact, when we look at pictures of ourselves, one that's just us and the other one's a little enhanced, we think the enhanced one is a better picture, it's more accurate.

So the rose colored glasses are actually useful. They protect us from the harsh realities in the world, and they allow us to go out in the world and be a part of things, and continue to explore, and take risks, and be vulnerable, because we're somewhat protected. We think we're already doing pretty well. And so I'm going to extend myself in these spaces, and it should probably go pretty well because hey, I'm a pretty good-looking, smart, clever kind of person, and everyone thinks that about me.

It's when you are depressed that those glasses come off. So it's less about depressive realism developing, and it's more that you are taking away that self-serving bias, and you're being more realistic about the way the world sees you.

So it's realizing that when you're not mentally healthy, when you're a little depressed, mildly to more than that depressed, that the world really isn't spending that much time thinking about you. And that when they do think about you, they are not assessing you as positively as you hope that they are.

So I'm glad that you didn't spend a ton of time thinking about this, because when you do, it becomes in and of itself kind of depressing. It is hard to go out into the world constantly and put your best self forward without that illusion. And so it is a protective mechanism and it's one of the things that keeps us healthy. And so we shouldn't spend a ton of time tearing it apart.

Now, I think the interesting point that I think is probably behind this question is that when we're thinking about this illusion, we do have to think about the healthy version of that versus the unhealthy version of that. So we don't want to be delusional, and we don't want to be unable to accept very true and accurate criticism of self. We have to be able to learn from our mistakes, and we have to have people who can give us that negative feedback and that we will take it in.

So one of the things I would say is that when we... And again, based on research, we know that people who have an inflated sense of self that's not based on any reality, that's actually problematic. So an inflated self-esteem not based on real attributes is problematic.

So I think one of the things... And this is outside my field, but one of the things that I think clinical psychologists would want to do is to figure out, where is the illusion and the self-protective rose colored glasses turning into something more detrimental, something that's delusional? So where the line is between self-serving bias versus delusional thoughts about self or grandiosity is going to be a clinical question, I think with some sort of assessments.

And then I think for the average person who we aren't concerned has delusions, knowing that they have somebody who has their best interest in mind, who can give them realistic feedback, that they will be able to take in without having that in-group threat that we talked about is going to be really important.

So it's the difference between somebody who believes they're so spectacular, that to believe anything else is going to be crushing to them. Versus somebody who in general, thinks they're pretty great and a little better than the average bear, who has a parent or a best friend or a partner who can say to them, "You are really great, but there's this one thing that we need to talk about. You're really a terrible cook, Sandy. You really can't actually cook." Or, "You think you're being gregarious and you're actually being annoying in these spaces. You need to stop talking so much," or whatever. It is the thing that you think is really charming about you, that other people may not think is super charming.

And being able to trust that information and say, "Okay, the threat's coming from inside the house, but it's okay because I trust you." And in order to continue to have that positive feedback loop, we do have to make changes when necessary. So that's okay. Yeah, but it's hard. That's tough.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah, that's exactly what I wanted to get into, just the different spectrum from depressive realism to rose colored glasses, and the fact that not only are humans weird, like you mentioned. And I also think we can also be relatively unaware of ourselves all across that spectrum. And so like you mentioned, which is perfect, having that person that is able to tell you those things is just the crucial, most important thing to making sure that you don't stray too far.

Sandra Parsons:  100%.

Jack Eisinger:  One side or the other to the point that it would cause some detrimental effects.

Sandra Parsons:  Absolutely. I think you said that really well. I think you do have to have that person. And the other thing that's true about wellbeing is that one of the best predictors of wellbeing in a person is whether they have social support. And part of social support is someone who can say the good, the bad, and the ugly, who can say, "You really are all these things a little better than the average bear, but in this one area you're"-

Jack Eisinger:  Social support isn't all support. Yeah, it's a little bit of pushing you in inward direction.

Sandra Parsons:  Absolutely. A little bit of realism spiced in there is good.

Jack Eisinger:  All right. And now to go the opposite direction of realism, I want to ask you a few, I don't know, not theoretical, but just questions that aren't so grounded in the curriculum. I was curious, what is the most misunderstood thing about social psychology in your opinion?

Sandra Parsons:  I love that question. So I think that when people hear that we're going to study how other people affect the way we think, feel, and behave, they're like, "Oh, you mean you're going to study everyday knowledge, like stuff that we already know all the time?" And that's something that social psychology has a bit of a chip on its shoulder. I think psychology in general does, but specifically social psychology, because the thing that we're studying is in fact the thing that most of us are doing all day long. We're trying to figure out why are people the way that they are, how can I understand how they are, so I can control it, and I can react to it, and make things turn out the best way possible?

And there's various versions of that, but that's kind of the big thing, is how can I be in this world and understand what's going to happen so that I can predict it, so that I can react to it and get things my way? Basically in a nutshell.

And so I think what people misunderstand about social psychology is that it is not just the study of everyday behavior. That there's a scientific method to it, that the reason why you think something is true may be totally wrong. Not that it leads you to the wrong reaction to it, but the processes behind it are wrong.

And so social psychology can help us tease out those theoretical implications and theoretical predictions in ways that are surprising to somebody who doesn't study social psychology. I'm going to give you example, but I think some people might see that and say, "Well, who caress? If it leads me to the same conclusion, why do I care what the process is?" And that's somebody who just isn't interested in studying social psychology.

I think we're always going to have... My husband studies the brain and cancer cells, and I don't want anyone to have cancer. And as long as he can figure out how to prevent it, I don't really care how we got there.

So here's an example. People talk about personality all the time and they say, "I know how she I because I know her personality." And what a social psychologist would say is, "What you really know is how that person expresses their personality in the context of the situation you see them in."

And so I'm not saying that they're wrong. You probably do know, not as well as you think you do, but it doesn't matter. People think that they know how other people will behave in certain situations based on personality. And when I point out to them, "You really only see that person in a very narrow band of situations. It's the situation that's driving the behavior, not the personality." And they're like... So I think that's something that's exciting to think about, because for me, that changes the way I think about what personality is. I want people to understand that when you use that word, you mean something different than what you think you mean.

I think that's cool. Some people don't care, but then they don't have to be social psychologists if they don't want to be. Right? So that's I think-

Jack Eisinger:  No, that's cool. I remember taking your class and hearing that. But even still to this day, even though I have that mental note of that distinction, when I'm talking with people, I'll still sometimes refer to them both as personality, even though I know the difference. It's a harder thing to say.

Sandra Parsons:  Yeah. And even though we all know what we mean, in my head when people say that, I'm like, "Well, I don't know." That's personality or situation. And what makes it interesting to me is that means that it's more changeable than people think that it is. Because I think if I could get you in a different situation, I get you to have a different kind of response to that.

Jack Eisinger:  So then is that...

Sandra Parsons:  Right? And like you said, people are often really unaware what's driving their behaviors. And so to me, that's powerful, because to me I think, "Okay, well let's get you out of this situation that I think is driving you to do something that I don't think is good or healthy or equitable, or the way I want it to be selfish. Let's move you into a different location, in a different situational space. Let me change the factors, and then let's see how you behave and see if it turns out better for all of us."

Jack Eisinger:  I really like that answer. And then in a similar vein, if you had to create a class about an under focused area of social psychology, or positive psychology, or really any topic that you're interested in, what would you want to teach about?

Sandra Parsons:  To figure out how to best teach people how to utilize the skills and the tools that we have. I think people don't harness what we know about social psychology in ways that get the best outcomes done. And so very specifically, how do we present information to people in a way that will make them more likely to accept that information?

So this class would be something like a social movements class, or how to improve the public service announcement. Every time I see people talking about a problem that they see, and I think to myself, "I wish that they'd talked to a social psychologist about that because I could help you solve that problem." Not me personally, but social psychology. How do we persuade people to do things? How do we frame messages that can be the most useful?

So it'd be all about that. It's like how to deliver messages, how to harness expertise, how to use what we know about the way people think and feel to get them to do the more healthy thing, the fairer thing, the more just thing. That's what I would do. And I-

Jack Eisinger:  So kind of like the more communicative aspect, the more practical way of getting things done.

Sandra Parsons:  Yes. Even just thinking about Covid-19 rules and regulations, let's use what we know about persuasive messages, and what we know about different audiences for different types of behaviors, and tailor multiple different messages. And I feel like we just got one message. "This is what you're supposed to do." And then of course the other side is, "This is what you're not supposed to do."

We can talk to both of those groups with social psychology, we just have to tailor the message appropriately, and I don't feel like anyone did that. And so that kind of thing, like composting. How can we present composting to a diverse group of people, or cessation of smoking, or better alcohol use rules? It can apply to anything, but how do we harness that communication and what we know about message framing, and audience effects, and all of that, and make it more effective?

Jack Eisinger:  I don't know how classes are made, but I would definitely take that.

Sandra Parsons:  Would you take it?

Jack Eisinger: Yeah, that does sound very interesting. And then that's pretty much the end of my questions. I just wanted to ask, is there any advice or takeaways you want to share with the audience in a conclusion?

Sandra Parsons: Take a psychology class. I think everyone should have to take at least one psychology class. I think it makes us better human beings. Also try to remember that...

You know what? Here's my takeaway. Fundamental attribution error. I want the world to know that when you think someone does something, and you think that they are something, a jerk or not a nice person because you don't like what they did, try to imagine that there's some situational effect that's leading them to that behavior, and make a more gracious attribution about the person instead of immediately jumping to the assumption that they're not very nice or jerky.

Jack Eisinger:  Yeah. No, that's definitely my biggest takeaway from social psychology, fundamental attribution error. It's ingrained in my mind now.

Sandra Parsons:  Good. I'm so glad. We need to be nicer about our assumptions about other people, and give each other the benefit of the doubt in the same way that we give ourselves the benefit of the doubt when we do something that we wish we hadn't done.

Jack Eisinger:  Put on some slightly rosier colored glasses for other people as much as we do ourselves

Sandra Parsons:  There we go. That's right. I love that.

Jack Eisinger:  All right. Yeah, so that's pretty much the interview. Thank you so much for taking the time to participate. For you and any of the other viewers, feel free to check out the Seattle Anxiety Specialists website, and I hope you all have a great day.

Sandra Parsons:  Thank you so much. It was my pleasure. It's good to see you.

Jack Eisinger:  Of course.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Ami Shah on Caregiver Burnout

An Interview with Psychologist Ami Shah

Ami Shah, Psy.D. is a licensed clinical psychologist in private practice in New York and New Jersey. She specializes in working with adults and geriatric patients and helps support caregivers suffering from burnout (in particular caregivers of those with dementia, cognitive decline, and medical illness).

Adithi Jayaraman:  Great. Thank you all for joining us today for The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Adithi Jayaraman, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We're a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

Today, I'd like to welcome Dr. Ami Shah. Dr. Shah is a clinical psychologist in New York who specializes in working with adults and geriatric patients. She also specializes in the areas of bicultural, multicultural identity, relationships, marriage concerns, family, individual stress, and grief and loss. Dr. Shah received her master's and doctoral degrees in clinical psychology from the University of Indianapolis. Today, we'll be speaking to her about her work with caregivers and caregiver burnout. So, before we get started, Dr. Shah, can you please share a little more about yourself and what made you interested in working with caregivers?

Ami Shah:  Yes. Thank you for the lovely intro, Adithi. So, my journey to becoming interested in working with caregivers was a bit roundabout. I initially started off thinking I wanted to work with kids, and as I began to work with individuals clinically in training, I recognized there was a large gap at that time in terms of older adult care, and then when I did my fellowship... I'm sorry, I had done research prior to that at the VA in caregiver interventions for older adults that have dementia. That was the first time I was exposed to and recognizing there was a big gap in terms of, we were working on a research project at that time, it was a phone intervention, long before we had Zoom, and we were working on a phone intervention to provide emotional support for caregivers of veterans that had dementia at that time. And from that, during fellowship, we continued to do caregiver work in the same capacity, primarily as well caregiver interventions for veterans, again, that have dementia.

So, that was the capacity I started, and now most recently, I work at a skilled nursing facility and I'm seeing folks who are caregiving a number of older adults. So whether it's primarily, it's secondary to, say, a fall. Perhaps it's chronic falls, it's chronic pain. Sometimes it is cognitive decline. So, there's a number of caregiving capacities. That's sort of the capacity, so the capacity and context I'll be talking about is primarily in working with adults and older adults.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Perfect. Thank you. Yeah, and then on that note, can you provide us a working definition of what caregiver burnout is and how common it is in the States?

Ami Shah:  Yeah, I think that's a great question. Caregiver burnout I think is, it may go through waves, and sometimes it doesn't. So, it really depends on a number of factors. It's quite complicated, actually. When we think about caregiving someone at a certain point in time, say for example, I'll speak to individuals I see currently, if you're caregiving someone that perhaps fell once, it depends on the nature of the injury. The context is always critical in any of these situations. If it's a one-time fall, depending on their age, their premorbid functioning, the caregiving capacity could be more acute and short term, and so perhaps it really may not necessarily disrupt or impact someone's functioning as much.

What becomes a bit more complicated is, depending on the nature of the injury, but also understanding the caregiver's individual life and responsibilities, including their own health, caretaking other folks. So, burnout, really the word burnout, I think it's important to understand at a single point in time, what is the experience of the person they're caretaking and what is the experience of the person that is doing the caretaking? Of course, as we all know, burnout is essentially saying, at a certain point of time, someone is perhaps giving more than they're able to at a certain point in time, which can of course contribute to feeling distressed.

I know with, for example, caregivers of dementia, at large, again, this is generalized... I'm trying to think back. I think 60% at some point report experiencing some sort of, quote, unquote, "burnout", and sometimes as much as 40% may experience clinical depression. And so sometimes it can be a depressive episode, which can be normalized to, well, what is going on at that point in time? So yeah, I would say even more than the commonality, it's important to understand the context at a certain point in time.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Thank you, thank you. And then in terms of, you kind of alluded to this, but what are some of the main concerns or themes that you've seen in your work with caregivers and the general caregiver population?

Ami Shah:  I think one of the biggest factors is thinking about more of the structural. So, depending on, again, the context here of caregiving, in the sense that if someone is prepared mentally to care-give X, Y, Z person, there's time to plan. So, for example, I see a number of folks here, it's a skilled nursing facility, folks are here for physical rehab, oftentimes due to a fall, multiple falls. So, they've been here more than once. So, if the caregiver has time to think about, for example, if they're planning on being discharged home as opposed to a skilled nursing facility, perhaps that lessens the, quote, unquote, "burden" of responsibility, where they can call insurance, make sure the house is safe for return. So, in more the physical or structural capacity.

Oftentimes, what happens is folks are not always prepared. Sometimes insurance, I would say more than 80% of the time, determines how long someone is staying at a facility, which then can directly, indirectly affect caregiving if they are also, again, aging themselves, working, have other responsibilities, personal responsibilities. It creates this increased stress for everyone that's involved. I think another thing too in terms of caregiving, again, in the capacity of primarily older adults that I see, is finance. Things that we don't necessarily talk so much about. How are we going to finance certain things if insurance doesn't cover it? If there's multiple kids, family members, money is one of the biggest topics that come up. And time. Who's going to care-take so-and-so, and to what capacity, if it's not in a skilled nursing facility?

Another thing is, which comes up quite often in working with older adults, is what they call decision-making capacity. If there's sort of two major, and I'm speaking about it broadly, if so-and-so, Mr. Smith is unable to make decisions for himself, first of all, how are we determining that, and what decisions? So, say Mr. Smith, he recovers from rehab, he's like, "I'm ready to go home," and there's questions about his cognitive capacity. Who's making those decisions about where he goes next? How are those decisions being made? It's not always that clear cut, I'll tell you that. It looks pretty on paper and in textbooks, but in reality, things are moving fast.

So, considering also that individual, Mr. Smith's sense of autonomy in this process. If so-and-so has decision-making capacity, is able to, to some extent share an awareness of why they're in a facility, what they're being treated for, that then directly, indirectly affects caregiving capacity. Are we allowing Mr. Smith the opportunity to say, "Hey," and this comes up a lot, "I would rather just go home"? And they're saying, "I'm not sure we have the time or ability to care-take." Then what? If someone has the ability to speak for themselves and the caregiver is saying, "I'm so overwhelmed," what do you do?

These are family conversations that oftentimes I think bring about a lot of tension for the caregiver, anyone involved with caregiving Mr. Smith. So, I think that comes up quite a bit. And the autonomy part, is caregiving means helping someone to get through X in some capacity, and I think with that, sometimes Mr. Smith may lose his voice at times, assuming he has that capacity. And even if he has, say, mild cognitive decline, he still has feelings. So, it's thinking about how... Caregiving, it goes two ways. Caregiving also means recognizing, preserving someone's autonomy, and it's little sometimes, right? It's allowing someone to eat on their own or maybe they make a little bit of a mess, and it's not the end of the world. So, I think those are big themes.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah, it shows caregivers go more beyond just caregiving physically, but also emotionally, spiritually, mentally, and that's definitely a large feat to hold.

Ami Shah:  Oh yeah.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Perfect. Thank you. And then in terms of caregiver burnout, can it be prevented, or what are some steps that a person can take to reduce it or to prevent it coming on?

Ami Shah:  That's a good question. I think it's quite complicated, again. To your first point, can it be prevented? I guess that's like saying anything else that could be prevented, is who knows? If we were to think about it, if it's something that's more abrupt and sudden, someone caretaking, say someone falls and then they're working and they're not expecting their mom, for example, to fall, and suddenly they're in this capacity, there's a shock factor, one. Emotionally coping with, "Mom fell, oh my gosh. Maybe I'm aging as well." Again, context on both ends.

In that moment, I think number one is seeing if you can have at least someone to talk to in that moment in time. If it's a friend, family, a therapist, it doesn't matter. In some capacity, having a place that isn't mom, because you're both going through this thing together and perhaps you both need an outside person or professional, that would be my opinion, others may say otherwise, to kind of walk through that. And number two, the structural, which is calling insurance and making sure, because a lot of the distress comes from, "Is this covered? Is this not? What do we need to pay for?" A lot of stress comes out of the finance, like I was saying before. So, the stress can be by educating yourself on the insurance policy. These are very real stressors that come up.

So, I would say prevented, who knows? It depends on what you're going through at that time. I have some caregivers who, before they even fell into the role of caregiving or perhaps chose to be a caregiver, they already had a therapist. They already had a solid group of friends and a spouse, partner, whatever, and they tend to perhaps at least emotionally feel a bit more sound. So, I think the prevention part, it's a tricky question, because I think at large, we need to do a better job with understanding what contributes altogether with folks' distress, even before they're in the caregiving capacity.

Oftentimes, a caregiver capacity can exacerbate existing stressors. If someone has a history of depression, for example, and then they come into this caregiving capacity, whether it's suddenly or even over time, depends on the severity of it, how stable mentally are they feeling before taking on this pretty large responsibility? It's almost like caretaking a child. I'm not sure if that answers the question, but...

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah. No, makes sense.

Ami Shah:  Yeah.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah. No, thank you.

Ami Shah:  Yeah.

Adithi Jayaraman:  I think that's very interesting. I think that even the finances you brought up, that's something I think that not many people talk about, and I can only imagine how much, if you're abruptly placed in that role and you have to figure out the whole healthcare system in a few days.

Ami Shah:  Right. It's a nightmare.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah.

Ami Shah:  It really is, because even if the caregiver is in the healthcare field, I mean, it took me at least two years with time to really understand health insurance and how it works. These are things that even if you're in school as a mental health provider, we're not taught how to. And insurance, it's all about billing, and that then directly, indirectly affects caregiving. If insurance isn't going to cover certain services, such as physical therapy, which comes up a lot, physical therapy, is Mr. Smith better going to a facility that offers that? Is that covered? That then affects the caregiving quality of life, and for Mr. Smith. So, that's a difficult job.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah, definitely.

Ami Shah:  You know?

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah. There's a lot of infrastructural forces that are-

Ami Shah:  Oh, sure.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah.

Ami Shah:  Yeah.

Adithi Jayaraman:  And then in terms of once a person is no longer a caregiver, do you tend to see that they normally just bounce back, or there's some rebounding or burnout continues? What have you seen post that caregiver position?

Ami Shah:  That's a good question. I'm not sure I'm equipped to even answer that, because I'm not necessarily seeing folks post-caregiving. I primarily see them when they're in the moment.

Adithi Jayaraman:  In the moment. Mm-hmm.

Ami Shah:  If I were to imagine some folks that have taken on caregiving as their sole responsibility, I imagine if Mr. Smith ends up and it's sort of this informed decision where they've discussed it and he has that capacity to make a decision and agreeable to it, I imagine things might be a lot lighter, in this sort of picture-perfect scenario. Which is great. Doesn't always work that way. So, maybe I said this a million times, but the context is important at that time. So, again, burnout is a certain point in time. It doesn't necessarily mean they feel that way at all hours of the day.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah. No, that makes sense. And you mentioned how a lot of preexisting mental health concerns get exasperated by this caregiving position. So, when you treat caregivers, do you oftentimes, it goes beyond just talking about caregiving, goes into some of their root fears or concerns that are brought up by the responsibilities they have as a caregiver?

Ami Shah:  That's a good question too. I'm trying to think back to when I first started doing the phone interventions. Well, it was part of a research study, I should add. The research study is about focusing on caregiver distress, so we did talk about, it was primarily about caregiving as opposed to even, are you saying even going beyond the caregiving and talking about their own needs?

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah.

Ami Shah:  Yeah, that's a good question. In the capacity that I've seen folks for caregiver distress, not so much. More recently, I did speak to an individual who was caregiving her husband who had aphasia, but this individual already had a therapist, and so it wasn't my place to sort of-

Adithi Jayaraman:  Oh, yeah. Yeah.

Ami Shah:  So, we just focused on the spouse. But I think the times that, I'm trying to think too, there have been times where I've suggested they speak to someone. It depends on the capacity and the setting you're seeing someone in. So, for example, when I was at the VA, it was a research intervention. It was protocoled. It was a bit more like session one, session two. That's not reality all the time. At the nursing facility I work at now, obviously the patient many times is the primary focus, and if they're unable to, in this case, this gentleman with his aphasia was having trouble with speech, is when I sort of went to the caregiver and to kind of see the best way to support him. So, again, our focus was on him.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah.

Ami Shah:  And she also had shared she had someone. But it's certainly, to your point, it's a great idea, I think to explore. And this is more short-term acute care.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah, yeah.

Ami Shah:  I seem them one to five times. This isn't long-term therapy.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Exactly, yeah.

Ami Shah:  And a lot of times in these settings where you're meeting caregivers, it may be in a hospital setting. Not always. Perhaps I'm just speaking to my own experience. If you're in a setting where you're allowed to and you're able to, and again, see someone beyond just the patient, you can explore if it wouldn't be conflicting to see the caregiver as well, or perhaps even provide them resources if you're unable to for whatever reason. So, yeah.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Wow. Thank you. And just one last question. How has your work changed post-pandemic? Have you seen some significant changes in the caregiver field and just generally mental health-wise in regards to caregivers?

Ami Shah:  I think that question is a great question, and it's complicated, because I think post-pandemic, it's hard because there could be a number of factors. I'm not sure I can just pinpoint the pandemic as the only factor, but I think as human beings, which then of course translates to caregiving to some extent, and with increased use of technology and social media, think of climate change, I mean, there's obviously all the things happening in our world, there's sort of this increased, I should say decreased distress tolerance capacity as human beings.

And so for example, in the setting that I'm in, sometimes when someone wants something, whether it's the patient or the caregiver, they want it now. And yes, of course, there's certainly, if it's an emergency, it's a crisis, that's understood. That's a given. But it's sort of a top-down effect. It's that all of us are experiencing this sort of vortex of, "You need to get this done right now or else," in some ways, because of inflation. But things are more costly now for folks. So, if things are more costly, then I'm going to have less time to spend caretaking Mr. Smith, and then Mr. Smith gets less from me as his daughter, then that sort of creates that trickle effect. So, the economy, the environment, I think perhaps we're just sort of aiming for good enough. Perfection is sort of an illusion here. So, as long as we can say, "Hey, am I doing enough today? Am I able to at least accomplish what was necessary to get done today?" and just leave it there.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Yeah, definitely. And I think that mindset just applies to all of us and-

Ami Shah:  Yeah.

Adithi Jayaraman:  ... the capacities we're functioning in. Yeah.

Ami Shah:  Absolutely.

Adithi Jayaraman:  Definitely. Well, thank you again so much for your time. I really appreciate you being part of our interview series. Yeah, and I'll leave it there. Thank you again, and best of luck with your future endeavors.

Ami Shah:  All right. Thank you.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychotherapist Rachel Kuras on Integrated Therapy

An Interview with Psychotherapist Rachel Kuras

Rachel Kuras, Psy.D., LMHCA is psychotherapist at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. She provides therapy for individuals and families, and helps clients of all ages - including children. Her clinical work focuses on: trauma, attachment, gender & sexual diversity, family conflict, grief, anxiety, depression, and ADHD.

Kate Campbell: Hello, everyone, and thank you for joining us for this installment of The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Kate Campbell, a research intern for Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC. We are Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders. I'd like to welcome with us Dr. Rachel Kuras, a licensed mental health counselor associate who recently began working with the Seattle Anxiety Specialists as a psychotherapist.

Since graduating with a doctoral degree in psychology from Pacific University, Rachel has trained in trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy, and attachment therapy and commitment regulation. Prior to joining SAS, Rachel completed an internship through Idaho Psychology Internship Consortium, where she provided in-person, individual psychotherapy for children and adolescents, comprehensive neuropsychological assessments, and comprehensive diagnostic assessments. Welcome to the interview series, Rachel, and thank you so much for joining us.

Rachel Kuras: Thanks for introducing me, Kate.

Kate Campbell: Of course. So before we get started, can you tell our listeners a little bit about yourself?

Rachel Kuras: Yeah, so my name is Dr. Rachel Kuras, formerly Rachel Rower. I changed my name this year. I grew up in Tacoma, Washington, and I was a graduate from University of Washington Tacoma campus, where I majored in psychology and obtained a minor in global engagement. Directly out of undergrad, I pursued my doctoral degree from Pacific University in Hillsboro, Oregon. And the fifth year of that program was an internship in Idaho, where I worked at Pearl Health Clinic, as you already described. So a lot of what I'm saying is repeating what you already said.

But yeah, aside from pursuing my degree and being a student for most of the time that I've existed, I really love my pets. I have a cat who is a calico polydactyl cat, meaning that she has extra toe beans, so she has thumbs, which is really fun. Her name is Pickle. And then I have a dog who just turned six last week, and her name is Daisy. And I spend a lot of time with them. I'm a huge animal lover. And I really enjoy backpacking and hiking, which unfortunately I haven't done very much in the past five years. Graduate school takes up a lot of time and energy, but I'm getting back to it.

When I graduated high school, I worked in Yellowstone National Park as a room attendant for a summer. And I really enjoy going back to Yellowstone, spending time in the Tetons. But at heart, I'm a Pacific Northwest person. So yeah, I like national parks. I enjoy playing music recreationally. I sing recreationally. I also like gaming, but I'm kind of a cozy gamer. My favorite games are Animal Crossing, Mario Party and Stardew Valley.

Kate Campbell: Yeah, no “Call of Duty” or anything along those lines.

Rachel Kuras: No, I like games where I can catch fish and garden.

Kate Campbell: That's awesome. And I love that where you went to school for undergrad is where you are now a psychotherapist. So that's really cool that you continue to get to work in the same area. And on that note, I think it's just a cool thing to be able to see different parts of the Pacific Northwest, but I was wondering, what's your favorite part of being in the Seattle area now?

Rachel Kuras: I have been so grateful to be in Seattle. Growing up in Tacoma, Seattle was a north neighbor. So I spent a lot of time here growing up, and I missed Washington very dearly when I was away. Right now, my favorite part of Seattle is my neighborhood. My childhood best friend lives just like a five-minute walk away from me. So I've been moving around and away from home for a while, and now I have a best friend close by. So I've been enjoying going on walks with our dogs and just spending time in a neighborhood near people who I grew up with, which is really nice.

I also love Olympic National Park. The Olympic Peninsula is just magical, and the Puget Sound. I remember growing up, I heard stories from my dad about whales coming through the Puget Sound in the past, and I was like, "Oh, that would be so cool. I want to see a whale so bad," but not like whale watching. I want to just see a whale by chance. That sounds funner. And now they're back. They're coming through the Puget Sound, so I'm hoping to get to see them. But yeah, I love the ocean and I love the mountains, and the Pacific Northwest has it all.

Kate Campbell: Oh yeah, that's awesome. That's what I miss about the Pacific Northwest since moving back to the East Coast, so I totally know what you mean. So I was wondering what else got you interested in being a therapist? So you talked a little bit about loving where you grew up and being happy to be back in the area, but what else in terms of your experience growing up made you interested in therapy?

Rachel Kuras: Yeah, that's a big question that I could probably talk about for hours. I think to narrow it down a little bit, I had a lot of experiences growing up that really highlighted the importance of mental health literacy and access to mental health services. My experiences of being human and my experiences of suffering have fostered an interest in what it means to be human. And I really value every person that I work with sharing their individual experiences with me.

So ultimately, I have struggled with mental health myself, and mental health struggles significantly impacted my family growing up. And I saw multiple therapists as a teenager, and there was one in particular who really inspired me, and I was like, "Oh, that's who I want to be when I grow up." And I did it. So I think having access to quality mental health services is something that I'm really grateful for and I was very inspired by. And mental health is something that impacts literally every human. I think that, that did inform my interest in child and family work and in trauma work, with my own experiences growing up.

Kate Campbell: Awesome. Thank you so much for sharing. I was wondering, so what areas or disorders do you specialize in?

Rachel Kuras: So, I have the most experience working with people who have experienced childhood trauma, so post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other specified trauma-related disorders, and also anxiety disorders, like generalized anxiety, social anxiety. I've worked with lots of kids experiencing separation anxiety, and I've worked with a few people experiencing selective mutism, so kind of the whole anxiety disorders chapter of the DSM. And right now, I'm currently working on increasing my competence in obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). So trauma and anxiety have been my main focus, and I am expanding my competence working with people who have been diagnosed with OCD.

Kate Campbell: And it's interesting, because I feel like a lot of the times therapy is hardest for people that have anxiety and your OCDs, because opening up about those kinds of disorders make people feel extremely vulnerable. And then getting to know a new person, especially a new therapist, there sometimes can be a wall up. So I was wondering, what's your treatment approach when you're going into those kinds of situations when you first meet a new patient?

Rachel Kuras: I use a person-centered, integrated approach to treatment. I have training in multiple treatment modalities. I was really lucky to work with a lot of people with a lot of different perspectives and experiences. It's a long sentence that I've strung together to try to summarize my approach. I am an attachment-oriented, trauma-informed, cognitive behavioral, acceptance and commitment, and existential therapist. So that's a lot of different treatment modalities. My approach is to meet someone and go from there. Everybody has commonalities between our experiences, but we also have things that are unique to our own lives.

So I like to start with a conversation. The therapeutic alliance is at the core of my approach, because we know through research that the therapeutic relationship is one of the most important determinants in terms of the outcomes of therapy. So if we want positive treatment outcomes, the relationship is what's most important. And as you were saying, Kate, relationships are vulnerable, especially living with chronic anxiety. So my approach is to start by building comfort, to start by getting to know each other. I'm a feedback-informed therapist, meaning I solicit feedback often, and I try to integrate client feedback actively into my approach. So my approach is pretty flexible. I like to tailor it to client needs, but I also really enjoy acceptance and commitment therapy and existential therapy.

So that was a long-winded way of explaining what it means to be an integrated therapist. But yeah, I draw from a lot of different treatment modalities. I view suffering as a central part of being human. Everyone suffers. And it's a challenge to figure out how to build a relationship with suffering and with being human that feels authentic and genuine. So I like to provide support to people in increasing the amount of internal empowerment that they have over their lived experiences. So I like to help people build a relationship with life, build a relationship with their experiences of anxiety, and find ways to connect with the present moment and exist in a way that feels less laborsome. So I like to acknowledge the role that suffering plays in our lives, and inevitably suffering is there. It's just a matter of how do we think about suffering, how do we interact with our suffering?

Kate Campbell: Wow. That's really awesome. It just sounds so individualized. There's cultural competence, it's empowering. There's just so much wrapped up in that. So I think it's awesome, just all the different facets that you incorporate into your style and your approach, so thank you for sharing it really is amazing to hear.

Rachel Kuras: Thank you. Yeah, I think it can be a little overwhelming to summarize at times. I'm also very interested in liberation psychology. Liberation psychology is an area that I've been trying also to increase my competence. And within liberation psychology, there's this idea that what each individual needs to heal is already within them. So the role of the therapist is to help someone find that within themselves. It's not my job to give advice or to provide answers. It's my job to, if your life is a trail and you're walking on it, to walk with you for a moment and to observe with you and explore that with you. Yeah, so I do really value that individual experience. And I think that there's different value in different treatment modalities, but there's also a thread that connects a lot of them. So I like to see that thread, see where they meet, and try to integrate it in a way that works for my clients.

Kate Campbell: That's super cool. I'm excited to look up liberation therapy after this just to learn more about it. That's really interesting. So on that note, how is your approach with working with children, and what's your favorite thing about getting to work with that age group?

Rachel Kuras: My approach is sitting on the floor. I'm on the floor a lot. I'm coloring a lot, playing lots of games, doing lots of art, and exploring through play. I think that kids are so fun and funny. I'm laughing a lot. It brings out a youthfulness and a playfulness in me that I really enjoy cultivating in the therapeutic space. It's hard for me to really articulate how it's different from working with adults, because I think that all adults were kids once. So there's aspects of working with kids that mirror working with adults, but kids have never been adults. So there's a lot of emphasis on cognitive development and behavioral skills.

And I focus a lot on attachment relationships, working with kids. Another thing I enjoy about working with kids is that there's a lot of wiggle room in terms of their cognitive development. There's more neuroplasticity in childhood, meaning that there's more give. As we grow into adulthood, we often become more rigid in our behaviors and our beliefs and in our worldview. And we're digging deep into the roots of what's going on, whereas with kids, it's not as deeply rooted because there hasn't been as much time for-

Kate Campbell: Within their formative years, yeah.

Rachel Kuras: Yes, exactly. So I think that there's a lot of hope and playfulness. And I'm just honored when I work with kids and families to be a part of that development. And I think these things are true working with adults as well. It's just kind of less at the center of therapy. Yeah.

Kate Campbell: Yeah, I could definitely see that. And then also the family aspect, I assume that when you're working with kids, the parents are going to have a heavier involvement than, say, a spouse would be necessarily, if it's an individual.

Rachel Kuras: Yeah, that's a good point. Working with kids is working with systems, is working with family systems, is working with school systems, is working with the foster care system. So I think that I've also really valued the experiences I've had providing services to kids, in that they give me a big picture of what's happening in the world. I didn't mention this previously, but I take a systemic approach to therapy. So I like to view our internal daily struggles within the context of larger systems. And with kids, you can't avoid that at all. With adults, sometimes one-on-one work, systems is just as important. And since you're not doing as much collaboration necessarily, you're not thrown into that systemic involvement in an individual outpatient setting with adults as much as with kids.

Kate Campbell: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And I know that over time there may be different changes in the way that you would approach both your therapy with children and adults. So I was wondering, what was your favorite part about your initial training, and then how has your perspective changed over time with that, both with different age groups, or how you have to approach your end goal when you're working with each patient?

Rachel Kuras: Yeah, so my favorite part about my training is people. I'm trying to think of the best way to word this. I feel very honored throughout my training to have been trusted by the kids and families that I've worked with, and to see some really pivotal moments of growth, amongst some really pivotal moments of suffering and pain and setbacks and stuckness. I've really enjoyed seeing kids learn about their brains and their bodies and how it works and what's happening when they have an emotion.

And I think a lot of the time when talking to kids, we don't always realize how much they're retaining, but one of my favorite parts of ... I worked with a kiddo for a long time. And I wasn't quite sure if what I was saying was landing. And then at one of our last sessions, it was like they basically described to me what happens in your central nervous system when you're feeling afraid and how they know in their body when their central nervous system is starting to get activated. So I really enjoyed those moments of like, “Yeah, you get it.”

Kate Campbell: The light bulb. Yeah.

Rachel Kuras: “You get it and you're benefiting from it and you're applying it.” And I think sometimes we underestimate kids' ability to do that. So yeah, I really valued seeing those moments of growth. And there was another part to your question, right?

Kate Campbell: Yeah. It was just what was your favorite part about your initial training, and then how has it changed a little bit?

Rachel Kuras: It changed over time. I think that I was a graduate student at a very unique time. The COVID-19 pandemic hit during my first year of practicum. So I had been working with people for about six months and then everything went online. So I think the events that have occurred during my training have really emphasized the importance and the need for mental health services, for quality mental health care providers. And it's been exciting to see more people talking openly about mental health, where in a time where when I was a child, even with my own experiences, it wasn't something that was very openly talked about. We didn't have a lot of information in my family and my neighborhood and my community about what was going on.

So it gives me a lot of hope and excitement to see the stigma around mental health decreasing. I don't think that it will disappear, but it's changing. So I think the things that have happened while I've been in grad school have really emphasized the importance of mental health care, and I feel very honored to be a part of that process. Did that answer your question?

Kate Campbell: It definitely did. It actually carries really well into my next question, because you talked about how much the conversation around mental health has changed and just some of the generational differences. It's really nice to see that kids feel more open talking about some of their struggles. But I was just wondering, so what are some of the ways that you think that the psychology community can continue to grow? You did already answer some of the ways that you've seen it transform over time, but if you have details on that too, I'd love to hear too.

Rachel Kuras: Yeah. I think that there's been an effort to expand access to resources, even just with telehealth, being able to go to therapy from home. Yeah, so access to resources, I think there's been a push for that to increase. I think that will continue to happen. And the COVID-19 pandemic and other large-scale events that have happened over the past 10 years and really over the course of human history, but just viewing this snapshot, it's something we all experience together. So I think that it's been beneficial to have a sense of humanness, to connect in our humanness as a society, whether that's between therapists and client or on a larger scale. I've seen a lot of efforts towards connection and towards valuing ourselves and valuing each other. And I hope to see that continue. And I think it will.

Kate Campbell: Yeah, it's kind of ironic that COVID-19 brought us closer together, but in a weird way, it did too.

Rachel Kuras: Yeah. And I think for a lot of people, it really emphasized the importance of social connection, because working with kids, I mean, the effects of the pandemic have been incredibly destructive on people's routines. And for kids, not going to school is a huge thing. These really essential interactions that were once there weren't there anymore. So I think it, for me, has made me value our connections. And not that I didn't before the pandemic, but it just gives a different perspective and urgency around maintaining connective relationships that cultivate growth and love and acceptance of each other.

Kate Campbell: Yeah, absolutely. And as a final question, do you have any words or advice that you would like to say to our listeners?

Rachel Kuras: Yeah. I think that if you are seeking therapy services for yourself or for a family member, I encourage you to try it, right? Even if there's fear about how it might go, dive in, be vulnerable. There's so much value that each individual person has, and I think it's easy to lose sight of that and feel disconnected from that, and it's easy to be hard on ourselves in this society. So, if you are feeling like you would benefit, even just from having a space to come and be witnessed and be heard, I encourage you to seek out therapy services, try it. And yeah, be vulnerable. Talk about mental health. Don't shy away from subjects just because they've been taboo. Yeah. I think that's it. Be open, dive in, be vulnerable.

Kate Campbell: Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for those words of encouragement, Rachel, and for joining us in our interview series. Hopefully, everyone can take something from this, and thank you all again for joining us.

Rachel Kuras: Awesome. Thank you, Kate, for having me. I'm really  grateful for this opportunity.

Kate Campbell: Of course.

* For those interested in working with Rachel, click on our appointment page to see her current availability.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

CEO RUTH STRONGE ON BUILDING RESILIENCE & REDUCING ANXIETY VIA DONKEY EXPOSURE THERAPY

An Interview with CEO Ruth Stronge

Ruth Stronge, MA is the CEO of Snowdonia Donkey Sanctuary. She has a master's degree in environmental and development education, and a master's degree in clinical and health psychology. She specializes in helping children, teens and adults build resilience and mitigate various anxiety disorders at her farm sanctuary.

Jennifer Smith:  Hi, thanks for joining us today for this installment of The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview series. I'm Dr. Jennifer Smith, Research Director at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We are a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

I'd like to welcome with us Ruth Stronge, CEO of Snowdonia Donkey Sanctuary, located in Bangor, Wales. She has a master's degree in environmental and development education, and a master's degree in clinical and health psychology. Ruth was a primary school teacher by training, and with the founding and development of Snowdonia Donkeys, she has been able to combine her passions. Before we get started today, Ruth, can you tell our listeners a little bit more about yourself, and how the rescue organization got started?

Ruth Stronge:  Hi. Well, thank you for inviting me. Yeah, I would say I have a passion for donkeys, and I have always loved donkeys. Maybe about 12 years ago now, there came an opportunity for me to get two donkeys, and I got two little donkeys. I kept them with my daughter who had a pony, and my children were older, my daughter had a pony, and our son was at the village, so we never rode our donkeys. We always took them for walks. And for me, spending time with those donkeys before work and after work were just the best time of the day. I would do it before I'd go to school where I was teaching, so then I was ready for school. And then on the way home, that would be my downtime of reflection. It went on from there and people, our friends that we knew said, "Please, can we come and walk the donkeys with you?"

And then we would bump into people with our donkeys, and they would say, "Oh, it's been ages since we've seen a donkey." And then, people just wanting to come and spend time with our little donkeys. It grew from there in as much as I wanted a donkey to ride, so I got another donkey. And then a group of friends, when we were out walking the donkeys, we were talking and decided if we could help any local donkeys, we would do that. We set up a small charity, and that was just 10 years ago now, a small charity to help local donkeys, and that's how we began, really.

Jennifer Smith:  Wow. That's great. Your website has a large banner that states, "Rescuing donkeys and changing people's lives," and I think that's a pretty moving statement, and I'd like to talk about some of the work that you do there. One of the first courses that you developed was for vulnerable adult learners, so that they could help build confidence by working with the donkeys. Can you tell us a little bit about that? How can caring for donkeys help someone?

Ruth Stronge:  It was a chance meeting with another organization, and telling them about the looking after the donkeys we do, and how volunteers were coming to help us, and how we were working with just giving people opportunities and time to spend time with the donkeys. And it was an organization in the center of Bangor who worked with adults, providing them with opportunities for support if they had mental health difficulties. And I invited their manager to come out and see the site that we worked on, and go through some of the activities that we did of how we managed our donkeys, which was following a simple routine in a quiet place, and basically just really being quiet around the donkeys, and being around each other, explaining to people how some of our donkeys are not used to people, and how we have to approach them, and how we read their body language so that we can support them in the best way.

And it was that opportunity and those conversations that allowed us to run a small program of one afternoon a week for people to come spend time outside with the donkeys. Initially, our volunteers and staff had done all what we would class as the "donkey work", so they'd done all the cleaning out, and the working out, and the feeding. But then just giving people time to brush a donkey and learning which brushes to use, how you would approach a donkey, basically reading body language, as well, of an animal, and giving them the story of the animal, and finding their character was the start of all that then, really. And for some of the people engaged with us, they became more and more interested, wanting to come more often, be more involved with what the animals needed for their welfare needs. And one of the really important things that we took from it was that it was a conversation piece for people. They had something to talk about with other people, what they had done.

Jennifer Smith:  Wow. Oh, that's great. And just for our audience to know, I actually met Ruth when I went for a tour of Snowdonia Donkeys, and it was really fabulous just getting to spend time with the donkeys, and I have to say there is something very soothing about it. Just brushing them, like you said, just petting them, just having that quiet moment, it really is nice. And going for a walk, and seeing beautiful scenery with them is a wonderful thing. I think you've stumbled upon, and definitely have built, a beautiful organization.

Ruth Stronge:  Oh, well, thank you for that. But I would say it's how I want to spend time with my donkeys. I know it works for me. And sometimes when I'm talking to people, if we're explaining the kind of work we do, and with our young people as well, and I would have to say it isn't for everyone, and that's okay. If you are more interested in fast moving things, and you are boisterous, and you are running around, then we are actually not the right place for you to be, because you would frighten the donkeys. And it's a case of, okay, let's take a step back. And our donkeys and our organization is very good at supporting quiet, anxious people, because that's the way we look after our donkeys in a quiet way, building confidence, following routines. And partly that has just evolved, but also my training as a teacher, I was an early years teacher, so the routines and the structures that we put in place to take away too many decisions initially for people were simple things like which donkey you're going to work with.

Well, if you've got a pink brush in your hand, then you are going to be brushing the donkey that's wearing a pink head color. The one in the picture behind me is wearing a pink head color. So you would know, she would have pink brushes, a pink bucket for her feed, and if you were going for a walk with her, she would have a pink lead rope. It sounds simple things, but it takes away anxiety from people if they don't have to ask questions. Some things are just pointed out for them, and next time they come, that routine is built upon.

Jennifer Smith:  Wow, that's wonderful. Through a partnership with Adult Learning Wales, you run an accredited course on animal care, which focuses on supporting young adults. Can you speak about what that entails, and how can young adults psychologically, emotionally, and socially benefit from that course?

Ruth Stronge:  Again, you realize as you do these other, things happen by meeting and talking to people. Behind the scenes, the young people that we work with, or the adults, for them, they don't always know where the funding comes from as enablers to deliver sessions for them. So behind the scenes, it's a bit like a jigsaw puzzle so that they can have the best opportunities. And if they are interested, they can stay as long as they can if we can afford them to stay, and to progress their development. So Adult Learning Wales are a national organization here in Wales that fund accredited and non-accredited courses for people over 16, and we had been delivering some courses that it called engagement courses, which were non-accredited. But working with some of our other young people who had come through us from another grant program which allowed them to do one-to-one sessions with an adult and a donkey, basically just being in a nice quiet environment, having someone to talk to if they wanted to, or just spending time with a donkey.

We were looking for a next step for some of these young people when we identified that for a vast majority of them, they hadn't engaged with the education system at all. They had, whether it be anxiety built on after COVID, or for whatever reason that they had, not been in the education system, so there were no exams, and there was nothing on paper for them to take their next steps. With the program that we had delivering one-to-one sessions, we then built on that, offering them some small group sessions, which for us would be no more than four or five at the most for a few weeks. And then Adult Learning Wales, because myself as a trained teacher, I can be a tutor for them, I approached them and said, "I have this group of young people, who some would like to go to formal college in the future, but I want to be able to acknowledge the progress they've made. And also once the summer holidays comes for some of our other young people, what do they do for six weeks?"

And I wanted them to be able to come and work with us, but we didn't have any funding to enable that to happen. So Adult Learning Wales helped me find a couple of, we would call them entry level modules, so not too high, but requiring some academic input on animal care. We would do things like how to muck out, and how to brush an equine. And the young people that we had focused on having come for one time, one session a week as an individual, and then as a small group, were then asked to apply, we knowing that they would always get on the course, but to give them a formal leading to it, to apply us for a fortnight, coming every day to take part in practical activities and record those activities using photographs and written work so that they could then submit it for an accreditation from one of our organizations, Agored Cymru which accredits their work and then they can build on that.

That was a journey. We've been plotting a journey for some of those young people, and they themselves wouldn't know who had funded their journey, but behind the scenes, we were able to do that. And for our funders, that's interesting as well, because they like to see that it has an impact, which it certainly does.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, that's really fantastic that you help people to transition in that way.

Ruth Stronge:  And one of the things you asked was about their anxiety and their social skills, so that because they had had those small steps before they got to something that we called education, but we often didn't use that term, then we were trying to look at adding one new thing every time they came. If they were all familiar with the setting, then one-to-one was their first step, be familiar with the setting. The next change would be to work with a small group of people, and then to come every day for a longer period, so trying to increase that confidence, and reduce the anxiety as they took on new things, then.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, wow. Yeah, that's similar to exposure therapy, correct? And like you said, to lessen their anxiety, the social anxiety and such, that's wonderful.

Ruth Stronge: By the time they got to the accredited side, brushing a donkey was what they would do automatically, so it wasn't the new thing. The new thing may have been recording or talking about what you'd done. So yeah, it's those small steps, and just building on that was really important.

Jennifer Smith:  Ah, fantastic. You also offer one-on-one sessions for those with additional learning needs. What types of conditions is this specifically geared for, and who can benefit the most from these sessions? Would it be people with social anxiety like you mentioned, or general anxiety, or anything else?

Ruth Stronge:  A lot of people with either social anxiety or general anxiety, and we do quite a bit with people with autism as well, who have communication difficulties. Communication difficulties on the side of struggling to verbalize their needs, or anxiety, or shyness, or selective mutism. And again, through following those routines and building that confidence, we've worked with quite a number of young people in that way to increase their confidence. And again, hopefully moving from one-to-one sessions onto small groups. For some of the people that we work with, it isn't always appropriate to do that, but if we can, we can do that, or we would then change or build on the activities that they're doing, so they are being more engaged in different activities. Some of our work, we also work with young people who may have learning disabilities, and may have reduced cognitive abilities, and again, we would match the donkey to their needs.

Some of the autistic people we have worked with are very sensory, some of them like to throw things around, so sawdust moving around the place obviously isn't appropriate for all our donkeys. And so, we've got some donkeys who are very chilled, and don't mind those things happening. But I would say where I find most pleasure is working with people with anxieties, and shyness, and quietness, because to see them make that progress, and to be able to talk, even to their families, about the donkey that they've worked with is just amazing, really.

Jennifer Smith:  Wow, that's wonderful. In terms of the people who have the mutism, as you said, or if they're on the spectrum and not very, or nonverbal, have you noticed where they do become more verbal, or this therapy isn't really applicable for that? Have you noticed a change?

Ruth Stronge:  We do notice a change, yes. And for us, it's trying to not put them into situations where they become more anxious, or it's not putting them in those situations where it makes it more difficult for them to speak. Just by following those routines every time they come, and building a rapport with one of our support workers, and especially with the donkey, then we found almost that the donkey acts as that diversion, that there's someone else, so there's something else to talk about, to be involved with. And then our staff are very much aware of the sensitivities of some of the people we work with, and wouldn't then ask them direct questions. They are very good at supporting the people to shine, and to build on the skills they've got, so almost praising them in a positive manner, using the language of support, and making suggestions together to do things is the way that we tend to build on people's development.

Jennifer Smith:  That's fantastic. And this sounds so perfectly suited for you and your background. It's really wonderful that you've been able to develop this.

Ruth Stronge:  It has just been amazing. Yeah, I feel very privileged to be able to do that, and also then to look around at the other people that I work with and say, "Yeah, I couldn't do it all myself," because there's not enough hours in the day, but we have some lovely members of staff who themselves have maybe been through some of our systems as well, and are able to talk about how working with the donkeys, and following the routines, and just being out in the fields with them doing field work, and then having something to talk about to people. Because we have visitors coming to see the donkeys, and they've got something that they can talk about that they've achieved, they know about this donkey, in a supportive environment. There would always potentially be a member of staff or a key volunteer who would be around, if we saw them faltering or being more anxious, could then step in and support, so that they didn't have extra worries themselves then.

Jennifer Smith:  That's fantastic. Can you tell us about the program that you run with the BBC Children in Need? What is it, and who does it serve?

Ruth Stronge:  Okay. BBC Children in Need is a national charity, a national grant-giving charity here in the UK, and we've had funding for quite a few years from them. And our program for them has always been targeted at young people, so for them, that's under 18, who have social and communication difficulties. And that can be, from our point of view, I guess it started with shy people and quiet people with anxiousness, and that's how we've kept on going with that. We offer them one-to-one sessions for an eight-week period of an hour with an adult and a donkey, in a quiet period of our week. And then, if they are keen to carry on, then we offer them small group sessions for a longer period. So that, again, a bit linking what you were saying back to the exposure therapy, they are quite familiar with the donkeys and the donkey routine when they've done the one-to-one sessions for six to eight weeks, and wanted to come for longer.

The only thing that is different then is there may be more people around. The staff tend to be the same, so they've got familiar people to support them. They know the donkeys. It's just extra new people, then, and that seems to work quite well. And those groups then go on as they get older, and we've had some people with us for quite some time now, so we've moved to being volunteers, or we call them supportive volunteers. Again, they are supported by key staff, funded by Children in Need, familiar adults who know or are aware of their own personal needs. But the older young people then, one of the targets is to take our donkeys to a local agricultural show, and show the donkeys to be part of something bigger, and that works really well. We do that as a day out, so they take the donkeys out for the day.

The show is a four-mile walk to get to, so they have to come the day before and get the donkey ready for the show. Then they have to come early on the day it's happening, walk the donkey to the show, be in the show ring. They will have spent quite a few months actually preparing for all this, but that is on those following through, and that's what we aim for them to be part of, so that then, again, following the journey with Children in Need, then they can be active volunteers then, in some respects giving something back to us, as well as their own lives then.

Jennifer Smith:  Wow, that's a fantastic cycle. Like you said, people get help, and then they help others, and it's just a wonderful thing.

Ruth Stronge:  It's really important for me behind the scenes, to provide that route for people. And I guess that's not just my teacher background, but also the psychology side of it is where do you go? Where is your journey on it? And I would say that I actually do that for all the donkeys as well. They all have a learning journey, too, and targets that I need them to achieve, and things that they can be good at, and stuff like that. But if the young people or the adults coming to us on the one-to-ones are making progress and want to stay with us, then we discuss with them those journeys we would like them to be able to take, if that's what they want, and how we can best support them on that.

Jennifer Smith:  Wow, that's wonderful to have those specific goals to try to reach for, if they're able and want to. One thing I saw on your website was that there was a video showcasing the experience of Zoe, who is 16 years old. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about what she experienced in life, and why time at the sanctuary has been essential to her mental health? And this is just one story, but I think it really signifies what your sanctuary can do to help people.

Ruth Stronge:  Yeah. Zoe has been with us for quite a few years now, and when she first joined us, as with all our children funded through BBC Children in Need, we asked them to be referred to us by a professional working with them. That could be a school nurse, it could be a teacher. We have something we call CAMHS over here, which is Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services so that we had some kind of filtering system, and we'd sent information to our school nurses and CAMHS, and also I often will give talks to the local authority, and give them some examples so that we work with the right people, so that we can have those best outcomes for ourselves, and for the people we work with. And Zoe was referred to us by CAMHS. She had moved to Wales just before COVID time, it was. She'd moved to Wales with her mother.

It was a one-parent family, and moved to quite an isolated place in Wales, as well. Quite in the countryside, quite remote, but didn't go to school, so was homeschooled as well as moving to a new place with one parent. And so Zoe came to us doing one-to-one sessions for her eight weeks. We had to let Zoe know before she came which donkey she would be working with, which adult would be there, reassure her that the adult would be waiting for her when she got there, again, to remove all those anxieties. And we actually sent her, before she came to us, a picture of the donkey she would be working with, so that she had some knowledge of what she was going to be doing. We knew that Zoe liked animals, and this was a good opportunity for her.

After her one-to-one sessions, she wanted to carry on coming, which was wonderful. And so, she joined a group that stayed for more, so she came from morning session again, five or six children at the most, with adults that she had met. But again, those preparation time and the information, so she knew what was coming, who she would be working with. Zoe had quite a lot of anxiety, as it sounds like, obviously when I'm presenting that to you, quite a lot of anxiety. And her anxiety would not only manifest before she came, but also during sessions, as well. If there was going to be something new happening, we would tell her beforehand.

There would be a lot of demonstrations. If it was maybe learning how to tie the donkey up, then a lot of demonstrations, let her do it without being watched, because she found that very anxious to be watched, or if she felt she wasn't achieving it, or couldn't get it right. A lot of support for Zoe in that way, repeating, and again, positive reinforcement, the things that she had done right, and then taking those small steps.

Zoe came when we were talking before about the two-week course. Last summer, Zoe came on that course for two solid weeks and she had never been... She was 16 then. She had never been in education since 11. That was the first time she'd ever done anything like that. In order for her to get support at college, which she then managed to go to college on the basis of having spent a fortnight with us and could demonstrate to college that she could commit to something, and was able to do that.

She had to have a psychology report, an educational psychologist's report. And what I personally found quite touching, and also quite a big responsibility, is that we were actually the only outside organization involved with that child, because she was homeschooled, didn't attend anything. There was nobody else to talk to the psychologist about her needs, and how best she learned. I spent a lot of time with the team that would've been supporting Zoe when she moved on to college, with the local authority, explaining how we supported Zoe. And again, I would say had I not been in the profession I was, I wouldn't have liked to have taken it on. And fortunately for me, the psychologist who was assessing Zoe, I knew her from school. She used to be my Ed Psych in school, so it was like, oh, that's great. We knew the language we could talk, which was really useful.

Having set that up for Zoe, and then her doing the two-week course, she was keen, and as she said in the little video clip, she was keen to start college, and excited to start college. And she has now just completed her first year at college, and has had really good attendance, a few ups and downs along the way, as most teenagers would do, but was very pleased to have finished her first year, and be accepted into the second year. We are just so pleased for her.

And the time with the donkeys, when you listen to her talking about it, she has a favorite donkey, and that's the donkey she's drawn to every time she comes, and the conversations that she would have with that donkey to help her work through some of her anxieties, and also helping him to work through some of his, because sometimes, we ask our donkeys to do things they don't necessarily understand. And it is those conversations that are helping the children or the young people that we're working with understand why we're doing this with the donkeys, and how do we teach them to do that, enables them themselves then to think about themselves, and how they can move forward as well.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, wow. I recall also in the video, and correct me if I'm wrong, that Zoe was initially homeschooled due to bullying, and she developed some severe depression. And it sounds like because of the social support that you offered her as an adolescent, which is really critical to maintaining good mental health, that she was able to really develop great resilience. And, like you said, now she's in college, whereas before, it sounded like her life was almost at a debilitating level, where she was unable to really just get out there and function with others.

Ruth Stronge:  Yeah, it is amazing when you listen to what she says that we were the only place she would come, and then small number of people around her was all she could cope with. She wouldn't talk to anybody else. And some of the young people that we work with in BBC Children in Need who did that video always ask us can we give them a case study? They'd asked before, and Zoe wasn't ready to talk, because, and this is something we've had on a couple of occasions from our young people, when I come to the donkeys, this is special and I don't want anybody to spoil this, so I don't want to tell people at school, because that isn't a nice place where I want to be. This is my safe space.

For Zoe, on a number of fronts, it was very brave of her to talk about, not just what she had been through, but then almost that this is what she does, and she loves what she does, and she's a wonderful advocate for it. But it was an incredibly brave thing for her to do. And the amount, like you say, her resilience, and how far she has come is all credit to her. She's worked really hard.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, fantastic. And the donkey that she likes is Norman, am I correct?

Ruth Stronge:  No, that's Walter. It's Walter.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, Walter!

Ruth Stronge:  She likes Walter, and she says they have the same birthday. They're exactly the same age. Yeah, he's her favorite, and she does have a special relationship with him. He can be, as most animals can sometimes, he can be quite cheeky, and she won't stand any nonsense from him. One of the wonderful things that they did with this group of donkeys, and she was in charge of Walter, is one of the walks, I know you went on one of our walks, and one of the walks that we do, there's a little bridge going over a small stream, and if we could cross the bridge, we can go on longer walks.

But Walter couldn't cross the bridge. He just couldn't cross over this bridge, because of the running water underneath it. He was quite frightened. And for long, I'm saying years here, we would stand and look at this bridge. And one day I was on site, but I wasn't leading the group that Zoe was with. I think there was four young people with one of our other members of staff. And apparently, they'd gone out for a walk, and I knew they were due back at a certain time and they were late coming back.

As you do, I was worrying, where had they all gone? The parents were arriving, and they all came back laughing, but very late. And I said, "So, where have you been?" And Zoe said, "Well, I just said to Walter, 'today is the day we're going to cross that bridge. Sometimes, we have to do things like that. It's hard, but we can do it.'" And she got him to cross the bridge, and they all went over the bridge and could go for a walk. But he couldn't come back over the bridge, so they had to walk the long way round. They were all laughing. These young people were just howling with laughter that they've managed to do this with Walter, and Zoe had been wonderful and got him over there, but he said once was enough.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, that's wonderful. And what a fulfilling experience for her to be able to get across, at least that one time.

Ruth Stronge:  He will go now. Next time, he was fine. He was just once was enough on that day. Because we do say to him now, "Zoe, are you going over the bridge?" and she says, "Yes, and we're coming back over the bridge, too."

Jennifer Smith:  So Walter had his own exposure therapy, it sounds like.

Ruth Stronge:  His own exposure, but for her, when she was saying to him like, "Walter, we look at this so often, we are going to do this bridge now." And that was just like, yeah, you are an amazing young woman to be able to say, yeah, I'm going to do this, and do it for herself, and for him. So, yeah, it's lovely.

Jennifer Smith:  It's very empowering. That's wonderful. Thank you. During the pandemic, you started a Long Ears Listening Project. I know donkeys have long ears, but what is this project?

Ruth Stronge:  Long Ears Listening is really all my passions all in one place, which was quite a privilege to do. As an early years teacher, when I left school, I knew I still wanted contact with young children. We do a lot of work with young people and with adults, but young children is an interest I've taught all my life in the early years, we would call it here in the UK, and outdoors and environmental education is my other interest.

When I left school and worked with the donkeys full time, when the pandemic came, we have a lovely patch of woodland that we manage, and it was used a lot during the pandemic by people visiting. I would leave activities and resources in for people to use, and then when we could meet together, we started a formal parent and toddler group for parents, and it's outdoors in the woods, and the donkey comes every session and carries some of the resources. With a focus on language and literacy through storytelling, then, we have a group of parents who meet every Monday morning and share time together. And whilst it is an emphasis on language and literacy for them, it's also a time for them to get together and just be outdoors enjoying themselves, and giving their babies and young children exposure to nature, access to animals, in a friendly, supportive environment.

Jennifer Smith:  And the benefits of nature therapy, or ecotherapy, like you said, just spending time in nature, and then you're with an animal, and then there's the reading... It's just beneficial on so many levels.

Ruth Stronge:  It's been a fascinating journey, that one, as itself has developed, too. And we have a small number of songs that we now use every time we meet in Welsh, so that we are then doing that bilingually for them. And they are about donkeys, obviously, so we do a few counting rhymes that we have. If you've ever met early years teachers, they'll sing to anything, a song, a counting song or anything like that, to a familiar tune, so we've made up a couple of songs that we sing about donkeys to start it off, and just a relaxing place for them to be out there. And they all have a little activity bag, which would have some sensory activities in, and a book. And again, that bit started with COVID when we couldn't share resources the same, so everyone had to have their own resources, and we actually just kept that up. If the child is not old enough to walk around, they've still got activities that they can do and interact with their babies with, then.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, that's great. This has been extremely informative, and I think this time has unfortunately flown, for me, anyway. As we wrap up, is there anything else that you'd like to share with our audience about the sanctuary, or anything else mental health related at all?

Ruth Stronge:  Yeah, I think one of the things that it makes me realize is that I started it probably by accident, and because I know the benefit I got from being with the donkeys, and stroking them, and mucking them out before and after school, and then part of my work, making time to be out of doors in nature was so important to me, personally. And to be able to offer those opportunities to other people that, as you said, I went back to Uni to do my clinical health psychology degree, because I'm thinking, I don't want to just be the person that says, "I know it's good, and it really is nice." I wanted to embed it in the research, really. And we still work with Bangor University to try and get the psychology students to use as case studies. And for us, it's often another pair of interested hands as well.

But we're really keen that the work we do is the best it can be, not only for the people we work with, but to give the work that we do with donkeys, who often get quite a bad press, or are often looked down upon, and they're very hardworking animals, to give them a value as well. Because it just doesn't happen by accident. If it looks from the outside that it's easy, then sometimes, I think, well, actually that means we're working really hard, and it is working well. But behind the scenes, all that theory, and the small steps, and the thinking about how people need to move forward, and how we can help them do that is important. And I guess I would also throw in as well that for our staff and volunteers, we try to make time for them always to have what we would call "donkey time," so that they have their own mental health moments where they can just be with the donkeys, and enjoy doing those things and being in the moment with them.

Jennifer Smith:  Oh, that's wonderful. For our audience listening, for those of you who are local, or plan on traveling to Wales or the Bangor area, we're definitely going to link up in the interview so people can check out your website. Also, learn about different ways to support your group, sponsorship opportunities. I know you have some wonderful little knitted donkeys. I forgot to bring mine. (*photo at bottom of page)

Ruth Stronge:  I forgot to leave one out as well. Yeah, should have done that.

Jennifer Smith:  Yeah, different ways to support you guys and this wonderful mission that you're doing, that's helping both donkeys and people in a really wonderful cycle. So, again, thank you Ruth Stronge, for speaking with us today. And tell Jenny the donkey that I said hello. That was my friend that day. And we wish you all the best.

Ruth Stronge:  Thank you very much for the opportunity to talk to you, and we would love to see people over here. It'd be amazing.

Jennifer Smith:  Thank you.

Jennifer Smith with Jenny the donkey. (left)

A souvenier “knitted donkey” from Snowdonia Donkeys posing for a picture near the sanctuary in Bangor, Wales. (right)

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Albert Garcia-Romeu on Psychedelics & Consciousness

An Interview with Psychologist Albert Garcia-Romeu

Albert Garcia-Romeu, Ph.D. is an assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He's a founding member of the Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research and the International Society for Research on Psychedelics. His work specializes in the clinical applications of psychedelics, particularly as it applies to addiction treatment.

Sara Wilson:  Hi everybody. Thank you for joining us today for this installment of The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. My name is Sara Wilson, and I'm a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We're a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

Today, I'd like to welcome with us psychologist Albert Garcia-Romeu, PhD. Dr. Garcia-Romeu is an assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. His research examines the effects of psychedelics in humans, with a focus on psilocybin as an aide in the treatment of addiction. His current research interests include clinical applications of psychedelics, real world drug use patterns, diversity in science, and the role of spirituality in mental health.

He's a founding member of the Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research and the International Society for Research on Psychedelics. He serves on the board of directors for the College on Problems of Drug Dependence (CPDD), and is an associate editor for the journal Psychedelic Medicine.

So before we get started today, could you please let us know a little bit more about yourself and what made you interested in pursuing psychedelic research as it relates to the study of consciousness, selfhood, and therapeutic development?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah, absolutely. So thanks for the intro. My name is Albert Garcia-Romeu. I'm a researcher here at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. And let's see. I mean, it's a long story in terms of how I got involved here. I've been doing this work here at Hopkins for over 11 years. And so before that even, I became interested in this area.

But initially, my work in graduate school was not even focused specifically on psychedelics. It was really much more driven by curiosity about the intersection of spirituality and mental health, and also how certain types of spiritual experiences could interact with mental health in both positive and negative ways.

And so I think a really good example of that is that people can have spiritual, or transcendent, or other types of peak experiences that can be tremendously helpful for them in a developmental state, in terms of how they developmentally are able to move throughout the lifespan and help them build resilience against difficult life events that they may face.

But other people have really powerful, intense experiences that sometimes have more negative repercussions. Things like developing psychotic and delusional states and sometimes dealing with persisting mental health challenges.

And so that was the starting point for me. My undergraduate work, I had been exposed to both eastern religion and spirituality, and philosophies like Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism. And that also came along with practices like meditation that I found very compelling. And I had some very powerful experiences in the meditation club that I joined during my undergraduate when I was studying philosophy and psychology at Tulane University.

But that really translated later into a curiosity about where the overlap and where the divergence was between all these spiritual and philosophical schools and what they thought about in terms of mind and selfhood, and all of the Western psychology that we learned. Including things like neuroscience and behavioral and other paradigms of psychology.

So that kind of led me into studying other schools of psychology, including humanistic and existential psychology, which Maslow was a big proponent of. And one of his areas of studying self-actualization specifically also brought in this concept of peak experiences and the idea that people could have peak experiences that help them become more self-actualized.

And so that was really a jumping off point for me in graduate school to start studying these types of experiences that some people might consider altered states of consciousness, and that they have some relationship to things like psychedelics or meditation practices.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah, thank you. I think that it's really interesting, this intersection that you've achieved in your research among existential philosophy, and therapeutics, and spirituality. I think that it's very, very good work that you do.

So now, arguably there is no single thing that is more real and immediately known than our own consciousness. However, the specific constituents of this sense of self and sense of conscious experience remains highly elusive, even among the seemingly intuitive conviction that we all have. So I was wondering before we get into the nitty-gritty, what is meant by the term consciousness, and how is this distinguished from the brain?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah, that's a great question. I would say I don't have a good answer for you. And that was something that I was very interested in early on in my research and studies when I was in undergraduate and even in graduate school. I was really curious about consciousness and what does that mean, and where does it come from?

I've gotten a little bit more frustrated with the field over the last 10 years or so, feeling like in many ways you're kind of stuck because... And we've talked about this I think in our prior email conversations, but the idea of this hard problem of consciousness is one that we're kind of at an impasse perhaps in terms of what we're able to observe, measure, and study in an empirical manner.

But consciousness is hard to define, and it's a very slippery term. But I tend to think of it as a sort of sum of all of the things that we're aware of, both internally and externally. And so we're aware of what's going on around us in the environment, and we're also often aware of what's going on in our bodies if we're feeling certain sensations or we have emotional states that we're going through. And so this is a sort of immediate first person experience that we're living in. So that's typically what many of us think of as consciousness. And of course, that's changing from moment to moment, and that can also be altered by using certain practices like meditation or psychoactive drugs.

But there's probably not one definition of consciousness that everybody would agree on. And that also makes it really hard for us to find meaningful ways to study that phenomenon. Because when we're talking about consciousness of certain stimuli, for instance, we can start to look at what are the component processes that the brain is going through to be aware of, say something like a sound, or something that we're seeing visually.

But when it comes to the whole gestalt or the whole first person experience that we're going through in a subjective experience at any point, there's really not a good explanation for the mechanics of that, how that comes to be, where it comes from, and why it even is that we have the type of experience that we have. And so that then makes it very difficult for us to be scientific about studying it, although there are lots of folks who are working on in that area, many of whom are very interested in brain related mechanisms and processes. But eventually, I sort of veered away from that and much more towards clinical work.

Sara Wilson:  Right. Yeah. I remember you saying in an interview with the American Psychological Association, that many of these trials with psychedelics, for example, are focused on how the brain is responding to these drugs. And you say that it's more of a question of how the mind is responding to these drugs, which I think is definitely conversant with the hard problem of consciousness, because that's where you start to see changes in self-identity in a way that allows someone to fully live their life. And maybe that can manifest itself in measurable behavioral changes or brain functioning, but it is hard to clinically measure. So I guess that's an enduring problem in both psychology and philosophy, I guess, and many other disciplines.

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah, yeah, I agree with you. We kind of run up against a limitation of what we're able to observe, because consciousness is in many ways, a first person phenomenon. So even the idea of whether or not other people around us are conscious, or whether the kind of consciousness that they experience is similar or not to what we experience is hard to say. I mean, we can't really tell that for certain. And so that makes it a sticky problem for something like empirical hard sciences to wrap our collective minds around.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. So you already touched on the hard problem and the problem of other minds, so I think it's fair to move on. I was just curious, why do you enjoy studying consciousness through catalysts such as meditation and psychedelics? Why is this research important in a therapeutic context?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah. To me, that was a really important jumping off point just because the idea that there's a sort of baseline state of consciousness as people like Charlie Tart have posited, and that we're kind in this baseline state of consciousness much of the time without knowing that, that we flip channels between being awake, being asleep, sometimes dreaming, and then that there's these other channels or modes of consciousness that we can enter, really became clear to me when I started practicing meditation initially when I was in undergraduate, and having specifically a really powerful experience practicing a meta loving kindness meditation, and having this feeling of... I don't really even know how to explain it, but there was this strong feeling of love radiating out of me all throughout the entire universe. And also just sitting there, and then all of a sudden opening my eyes when the bell rang, and just having tears streaming down my face, and a lot of really intense emotions coming along with that.

And realizing, "Wow, the way that I'm walking around most of the time doesn't mean that that's the way that I always have to be feeling and experiencing the world," and that there are these very powerful tools that we have at our disposal, these techniques or these practices, to change that way that we're experiencing things.

And that was an important realization for me that led to an ongoing fascination with what is consciousness and what are altered states. And eventually, really zeroing in on how we can use these in a way that's pragmatic and helpful.

Particularly for things like mental health conditions like major depression, anxiety, substance use disorders, where you might even think of the actual condition as almost a state of stuckness of consciousness to certain patterns. Getting trapped in these loops over and over again, thinking about oneself, thinking about negative things that could happen or that have happened, or being constantly focused on certain compulsive behaviors, or obsessive thinking about whatever it might be. Substances, for instance, is a great example. And how do we shake one out of those dysfunctional loops, so that they can get back on with their lives?

And so that was eventually where I landed. It took quite some time from initially being interested in what are these altered states and how do we elicit them, to finally getting to a point of saying, "Well, now I know more about what they are, but now we need to understand, how do we use them?" And that's kind of where I've landed most recently.

Sara Wilson:  Right. Yeah. I think that you touched on a lot of very interesting points in that response, particularly ramifications of being conscious with your sense of self and a sense of agency over self. I feel like humans have a tendency to think of the world and think of self as fixed entities that we don't have much agency over.

So I guess bringing the conversation more towards selfhood, in your article “Self-Transcendent Experience: A Grounded Theory Study”, you discuss self-transcendence. What is self-transcendence, and how do participants describe a self-transcendent experience?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  That is difficult to pin down, because just like consciousness, the idea of what the self is isn't really any... There's no conclusive sort of definition that everyone's going to agree on throughout different disciplines and psychology and philosophy. But there is, again, a very intuitive sense that many of us have that I am this self, I am this person, and that's a collection of memories, and experiences, and also behaviors and habits that we kind of grow into and develop over time. And of course, that also encompasses our bodily sense of self, us being this being in the world that's moving around in space and time.

So the idea of that self then becoming enmeshed with or entangled with something greater than itself. So connecting with something bigger. And that's often a theme that you find in things like spiritual experiences, for instance, or these types of peak or mystical type experiences. Where the feeling of selfhood is temporarily almost offline, such that the boundaries between what I thought of as in here myself and out there, everything else, are very blurry.

And then all of a sudden, there's this sense of interconnectedness between what's inside and outside, or even this sense of non-duality that there is no inside or outside, that there really is just one entire organism or process, if you will, that's happening, and that you're just one part of that process.

And losing that sense of selfhood can both be frightening and overwhelming. And that can often happen to people when they're having experiences both in meditation and using psychedelics. But that can also be a very ecstatic type of experience, and it can lead to a lot of positive emotions, and potentially, I think psychological healing.

And that's really become one of the main areas that we've been focusing on specifically with therapeutic use of psychedelics, because these self-transcendent experiences outside of psychedelics and psychedelic research, they tend to be difficult to elicit. We can't make them happen when we want them to happen. They tend to occur spontaneously a lot of the time. When I was doing that small study that was part of my graduate dissertation work, I had interviewed a number of people about experiences that they considered transcendent, where they felt like they were in touch with something larger than their normal sense of self.

And what struck me is that there were a number of different triggers or catalysts that seemed to help people get there. And some of those included taking psychoactive substances like psychedelics. But also, others included engaging in spiritual practices, meditation, going on retreats, having different types of fasting or prayer practices that they were engaging in.

For other people though, this seemed to happen much more spontaneously. I mean, it would just come out of the blue. There wasn't necessarily any intentional practice to get there. And that was also something that maybe was elicited by something like being in nature or being around something that could be awe-inspiring like a waterfall or the Grand Canyon.

So the idea that we can't necessarily have these transcendent types of experiences happening when we want them make them very hard to study, we kind of have to do it retrospectively and try to put the pieces together.

But the exciting thing about the research with psychedelics over the last few decades has been specifically that in many people, it seems like we can, by using both careful preparation and then high dose psychedelic administration, help people get there in a much more reliable fashion. And then that allows us to study these types of experiences in a way that's much more convenient and easy to do, even in a laboratory setting.

So that's I think one of the major ramifications of the work we're doing, is that it allows us to really put these experiences under a microscope. Whether we're putting people in brain scanners, or we're just having them on the couch and then asking them about what it is that they're going through.

Sara Wilson:  What are the perceived therapeutic outcomes of having a self-transcendent experience?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  That can be really hard to say, because it varies so widely between people. And for some people, this can be a short-lived just moment of “Aha”, this feeling of insight or realization, and going back to the way they continue to operate for some time.

For other people, it can actually sometimes be not so therapeutic, and it can be distressing, and it can lead to some destabilization, I would say. And even for some folks, in extreme cases, they can end up having delusional thinking or psychotic types of symptoms, which can be short-lived or sometimes persisting. So obviously, that's something to keep an eye on and to be concerned about.

But for other folks, there's definitely what you would consider benefits, therapeutic types of effects. So I'm just coming out of a room from a session where we're doing here for one of our studies, and the person really describing to me that the experiences that they've had here with psilocybin, which really were a powerful altered space, were really helpful in a lot of ways for them outside of the session room and in real life.

For instance, one thing that I was just told was - it was feeling that oftentimes, when people are treating her in a way that's not healthy or positive, that her gut reaction was just to let it slide, not to say anything, and just to kind of move on and suck it up. And that since she's had the experiences here in the study that she's been in, she's been much more forthright about the fact that it's not okay with her to be treated that way, that she's not comfortable with certain things, just being upfront and honest about it.

And so changing that pattern of communicating and socially interacting with people in a different way, which she also felt has been much better for her in terms of her mental health and feeling like it was really nice to get that off my chest. And that when I responded in that way, people also responded in kind and said, "I'm sorry. I shouldn't have been acting that way. That was a misstep, and I apologize."

So there's often shifts that can come along with these types of transcendent experiences that people can have, where it kind of shakes them out of some of their old patterns. And some of those old patterns might be behaving in ways that are not healthy. And if you can help instill in a person this movement in the right direction, then these experiences can be very therapeutically helpful to overcome some of those negative past patterns, and to put in place things that we hope are healthier and more adaptive.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah, I think that you definitely bring awareness to the fact that we need to be aware that not everybody is ready for these catalysts of self transcendent experience. So to be aware of important markers of when somebody might be ready to transcend the boundary of self.

And I think it definitely also speaks to the importance of acknowledging a person as a being that goes through stages of development. So I know that in major depression or the dissociative disorders, maybe schizophrenia, it's characterized by a lack of a foundational sense of minimal selfhood. So maybe in order to transcend self, it's important to still have an effective sense of self before you can get to that next stage.

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Absolutely. And so we think about that. In different terms, you can talk about, for instance, having sufficient ego integrity. But yeah, having that sense of self that's stable enough that it can be shaken up a little bit, or that some of those boundaries can get blurred without necessarily leading to adverse reaction, or a feeling of total destabilization, or getting immersed in chaos.

I think it was... Gosh, I forget who said it, but I think it was Joseph Campbell who said, "The person who's going through psychosis is drowning in the same waters that the mystic is swimming in."

And so it's this idea that for some people at certain times in their lives, they can go into these transcendent or peak experiences and lose their sense of self, and it can be therapeutic or it can be beneficial for them in the longer term. And for others, they may not be in a place where having that kind of experience is a positive one, and it can actually lead to more disorientation, distress. And so that's something you have to be mindful of, certainly with psychedelic therapies. But even with things like meditation, where you've seen that certain folks can have difficult experiences that can sometimes lead to ongoing problems.

Sara Wilson:  Right. Yeah. One question that came to mind from an evolutionary perspective was, how could it ever be adaptive to lose ourselves? How could it ever be adaptive for any organism to overcome self-interest?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Well, you can think of the evolutionary purview in many ways for us to survive, procreate, keep the organism alive, basically. And so that means find food, find safe shelter, safe haven, avoid things that are trying to harm you, and find potentially a mate and procreate, and then keep the biology going. And on very simple terms, that's what we're programmed to do.

But you can also think of all of the culture, and language, and stuff that we built up in the history of humankind. And obviously looking at things like social media, or how many followers do you have, we can get very entrenched in this tunnel vision. And I think that's something that we've seen ever since post industrialization for sure, but maybe even earlier on, is that people get sucked into certain things that they're very perhaps over-concerned with. And that may be things like status, it may be things like social standing, how other people perceive us. And that can potentially lead to this ongoing over concern or rigid pattern of really reifying these things, these constructs, whatever they may be.

And so when we get stuck in these patterns and we potentially end up in pathological or unhealthy ways of being and thinking and feeling, so exactly that is when the idea that you could get outside of those loops or those patterns, I think is when we'd be able to potentially have a therapeutic intent to go in there and then shift those patterns, get somebody out of these maladaptive ways of thinking about themselves or the world.

So you can think in a very basic sense, if somebody's got just a very negative view of themselves in the world, and that's the way that they see things, and that's the way they sort of have landed in terms of their worldview and their way of thinking about things, then that would be a really nice thing to be able to transcend out of, to then potentially see other ways of seeing the world in themselves and say, "Oh yeah, I've gotten really stuck, entrenched in thinking about things this way. But there are other ways of thinking and seeing things, and maybe I can practice some of that, and maybe I can become part of my repertoire that could then lead to a healthier mental mindset."

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. I think it's very hard to extricate ourselves from a lot of our daily practices once we become so entrenched in them, and not even fully comprehending what it's doing to us, to what it's doing to our ability to interact with others, and perceive our world, and how we perceive ourselves. And I think the importance of having an existential experience related to a core selfhood is maybe one of the only ways to really get out of those patterns, of those maladaptive patterns.

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah. And sometimes, something that's adaptive at a time, at a certain stage or phase of our life or of our existence, may not be later on down the line. And so in order to get from point A to point B, we may need to transcend ourselves multiple times over time, the lifespan.

And just thinking about something as simple as object permanence or conservation from Piaget in development, when children go through these stages of not knowing that when you're playing peekaboo, that you're not disappearing, that you're still there. And then all of a sudden, having this kind of transcendent realization that, "Yes, even when I can't see them, they're still there." And then moving on up through that.

Those are in ways, key developmental milestones where all of a sudden, we've shifted the way that we understand the world around us. And so I think it's kind of inbuilt in us in many ways to continue to transcend.

However, it's also extremely common nowadays, I would say, for adults to sort of get to where they're at in perhaps their twenties, thirties, and so on, and stop developing in some ways, and becoming stagnant.

So it can lead to what my mentor and professor at graduate school, Jim Fadiman used to call this psychosclerosis, this hardening of the attitudes where we just kind of like, "Well, I know everything I need to know. I'm a fully formed person, so what else is there to do or to learn?" But if you keep having this idea in the back of your mind that there is more growth and there is more development, then that allows us to keep visiting that transcendent territory, and hopefully becoming a better version of ourselves.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah, for sure. Yeah, I love that. So we've already touched on this quite a bit actually, but could you explain to our audience what psychedelics are, and what specific altered states of consciousness can occur with psychedelic interaction?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah. Psychedelics are a fascinating class of substances. And I even hesitate to use the term drug. I mean, you can say drug because some of them are molecules that were made by humans, but many of them are just these naturally occurring, found in nature molecules. And psilocybin is a great example.

It's something that is an alkaloid that's produced by over 200 different species of mushrooms. Why exactly do mushrooms make this specific chemical? We don't know. But for whatever reason, it interacts with our brain's serotonin receptors. And specifically what we call the classic psychedelics, including substances like LSD, psilocybin, DMT, mescaline. Many of these are occurring in nature, and then they're something that people have had a longstanding relationship with, have used for a long time. These mushrooms, for instance, that are containing psilocybin, because of their psychoactive effects. And so in terms of how they work, we believe that the serotonin 2A receptor is a big part of the puzzle in terms of the neurotransmitter, the pharmacology of the drug.

There's more to it than that. And we're slowly unlocking these mechanisms as we do more science to really drill down on what's happening in the brain when people and animals are exposed to these substances. But they have these really profound psychoactive effects, which I think is one of the reasons why people have taken them for so long.

And so for instance, we know that for thousands of years now, people have made artifacts around these types of mushrooms, showing that they have a sacred status in ancient and indigenous cultures. And the Aztec people, for instance, called the mushrooms teonanacatl which roughly translates to the divine flesh.

So for a long time, people have known about these substances, they've used them. And in terms of what they're doing, they can produce changes in our perceptions, and changes in our cognitions, the way that our mind is working and that we're thinking, and intense changes in our emotional state. And when that's happening, people are under the influence of psychedelics. It can last, depending on the substance, six hours, eight hours, or even longer.

And during the drug effects, people feel these altered states of consciousness. So their brain and their mind is working quite a different way from their normal sense of self.

But what's also very interesting and what we found in more contemporary research over the last 20 years or so, is that those temporary altered states of consciousness also seem to have an association with or can be linked to altered traits or altered ways of being in the world, and altered ways of experiencing ourselves and the world.

And that from a psychotherapist standpoint is very exciting, because one of the key things that people come to therapy for is because they want to find some way to change something that's not working for them, or somewhere where they feel stuck.

And so there's something about the altered consciousness that psychedelics can bring about that seems to lend itself to helping people make these longer term trait changes, which is fascinating because there's not a lot out there that we know of that can really do that in a reliable way.

Now, in terms of what kinds of altered states that people experience, it really runs the gamut because people can have... And it depends on the dose, which is very true in pharmacology in general. If you have a little sip of wine, it's going to be a very different experience than having a whole glass or a whole bottle of wine. And so the dose definitely affects the way that the drug is experienced.

But on lower doses, people often are having visual perceptual changes. It also depends on the drug, because they all have a slightly different pharmacological profile the way that they work and bind to different receptors.

But generally, these serotonin 2A agonist classic psychedelics are causing both these visual and perceptual changes, which are reminiscent of the types of tie-dye and paisley art and imagery that we see from the 1960s when psychedelics were a big part of the counterculture.

But then there can be certain characteristic types of experiences that people have when they're under the influence. And some of these can include autobiographical content that can come up.

I've talked to people, for instance, who have said they've taken ayahuasca, which is a DMT containing psychedelic mixture that's used in Amazonian cultures in Central South America. And what they've said about their experiences, it was almost like their brain was playing a highlight reel for them of all the terrible things they ever did in their lives, all of the things that they regretted, they felt bad about. And that in through going through, that they were also in a way able to go back and come to terms with and forgive themselves for having gone through that, and realizing maybe I knew better, and I needed to learn from that experience. Or maybe I didn't know any better, and that was just an honest mistake that I made.

But by going through that process, it can be very helpful, or at least people have told me that can be very helpful for letting go of some of these feelings of guilt and shame about things that have happened in the past.

Besides autobiographical content, though, people can have all sorts of really unusual content. Whether they feel like they're seeing imagery. And some of that imagery may be very basic geometric shapes and colors. But other times, people can find themselves in whole alternate dimensions where they see themselves in outer space, underwater, seeing themselves interacting with other creatures or beings. Some that might be experienced as having sentience or consciousness of their own.

Sometimes, people feel as though they're having encounters with higher power of some sort, and that may be a deity like Jesus Christ or some sort of incarnation of a Buddha, for instance, or saints, or visions of other types of spiritual figures.

Sometimes, people talk about having experiences where they're in contact with lost relatives and loved ones that they're no longer with us, but that they're able to re-contact during their experience.

Sometimes people can also have very challenging and frightening experiences where they feel paranoid, they feel strong anxiety, they feel a lot of disorientation. So that's something that we have to work with acutely when people are here in the dosing sessions. And it's also something that we see obviously, when people are using these substances recreationally. And sometimes they need to be cared for either by medical or psychological people, or by friends and loved ones who happen to be there.

And another big experience that we see and that we've spent a lot of time studying is this what we call mystical type experience. But I think that can really be interchangeably called a number of different things, whether we're talking about a unit of experience, or a spiritual or transcendent experience.

And really, there the key is just this sense of oneness with everything around us or with the universe. And I think that sense of unity is one of the key features that people will often describe when they go through these high dose experiences.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. In your article “Clinical Applications of Hallucinogens”, you find a meaningful interaction between mystical experience and the big five personality traits, particularly increased levels of openness to experience. And I was wondering if you could explain these findings a little bit for our audience.

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Sure. And so that's from some early work that was published out of this lab here at Hopkins. And what I think is more interesting now is that we've seen a shift in the data. So they're not all consistent, and that's not uncommon in science.

But what I would say is that really, the initial cohort that went through some of the early studies with psilocybin here at Johns Hopkins, this was work that was conducted by Roland Griffiths and Bill Richards, and others who were here at the time, Mary Cosimano.

And what they found though, was they took a bunch of healthy people. So they weren't people with any particular mental health condition like depression, but they actually had a clean bill of mental health. And they volunteered to join the study where we would give them a high dose of a psychedelic drug. Many of them had never taken any type of drug like that before.

And what they found in these early studies were that those people were coming in with a high level of baseline openness, higher than your average, at least average college student, which is what a lot of these data come from with psychological tests and inventories.

However, what they also found was that the greater mystical type experience they had under the influence of psilocybin, then those individuals were having increases in their personality openness, which is one of the five domains that's been proposed within this model of five factor model personality. There's openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism.

And so what we found with healthy people is that when you get people who have mystical type experiences with psychedelics, that increases their personality openness. And that's actually quite interesting, because personality openness has got a number of little subdomains or factors. But that includes things like aesthetic appreciation for art and music, and also open-minded tolerance of others' viewpoints. And so by being more open to others' views, that's something that could really be helpful in a lot of ways, if you think about what we find ourselves in contemporary culture.

Now, that data though, now that we've kind of zoomed out... And I recently came back from the Psychedelic Science conference in Denver where I went with a group of my colleagues here from Hopkins, and one of them, Nate Sepeda, was presenting on some data that we'll publish soon.

But he looked at data from hundreds of people that have gotten psilocybin in these different studies. And what he was finding was that there wasn't one clear path in terms of how high dose psilocybin was affecting your personality. But that for instance, different groups of people were showing different patterns.

So one of the things that's been found is that, for instance, people with depression, they tend to come in with higher baseline levels of neuroticism. And that tends to be something that comes down after treatment with psilocybin. And for some people, there's also increases in things like extroversion. Or basically, the ability and the desire to be social with other people.

So I guess the story here in terms of impact of psychedelics on personality is still taking shape, and it's still a little unclear. But depending on where you start, we can say that there's potentially some type of response that you may have in terms of your personality possibly being changed after these experiences. And for some people, the mystical type experience, certainly for healthy people, can lead to increases in openness. And for other people, we can see different changes like reductions in neuroticism or changes in some of these other factors like extroversion.

And so there's still a lot more to study there. But I think one of the takeaways there is that it sort of depends on what your personality is like when you go into that, which is a big maximum of psychedelic research, this idea of set and settings. So the person that's going into it is going to be impacted differentially because of who they are when they show up to that experience.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. Okay, yeah. This leads us really nicely actually into my next question, which is, are the changes in personality elicited by psychedelics encouraging or bringing out traits that were already in the person?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  So that's a difficult question to answer. We can't really say yay or nay on that, because it's kind of unclear where a person's, what their inherent tendencies are. You can say psychedelics are really uncovering who a person was all along, but it's hard to say yes, that's who the person was all along, in any sort of authoritative way.

But there's an idea in psychedelic therapy, this idea that psychedelics can kind of help people get in touch with parts of themselves that perhaps have been obscured or maybe covered over by life experience. And by getting back in touch with those parts of ourselves, they can help us get to where we're supposed to be going or develop more towards our true self, whatever that is, leading us towards more authenticity. So I think that that's certainly a working hypothesis that many people have brought to this psychedelic therapy and research space.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. I guess regardless of whether it's helping us get in touch with our true self or helping us get to where we ought to be going, I think it definitely does illustrate the positive, powerful potential in the human brain as something that we can unlock certain things, whether that's who we are or where we should be going.

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  And really, what I think is more pertinent is that if you think about people, a lot of who we are is predicated on what we experience and what we're taught. And so for instance, a person who's raised in a certain family, and culture, and environment may take on lots of ideas and beliefs that they may not have chosen. They're just what were thrust upon them as they were children and then growing up.

And so what's really nice about psychedelics is that it seems like it can help people to take a step back, and reexamine those beliefs and those ways of thinking about the world and themselves and say, "Now how much of this is actually true? How much of these are beliefs that I want to hang onto and that I feel are authentically a part of who I am?" And how much of this can I say, "You know what? That was stuff that other people basically spoon fed me, and I don't think I need to be this way, feel this way, think this way anymore." So you can think of lots of examples.

But being raised in a xenophobic, or racist, or homophobic type of situation I think is a great way to think about when we're spoon-fed some perhaps not particularly healthy ways of thinking about the world, and we're able to step back and say, "Is this really who I am or who I want to be?" And then making a more conscious, informed decision as an adult.

Sara Wilson:  Why do you think it's difficult for people to address deeply rooted issues naturally, and how might psychedelics help facilitate getting in touch with our subconscious?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  That's a great question. I think it really depends. But oftentimes, just like what we're just talking about, when we have big experiences, traumatic experiences even, they can be so overwhelming that, again, the ego integrity, our ability to really process those experiences just isn't there yet.

And so it may be something that we just don't know what to do with. It's almost like you're handed this big experience that is really powerful, and intense, and disruptive in a way to one's worldview and one's sense of self and saying, "I don't know what to do with this. I have to put it somewhere where it's out of sight and out of mind," so it can stay there for many years for lots of people.

And I should say I'm talking more now from clinical and lived experience and less from empirical data here. But it seems to me that when we go through these types of really difficult experiences... And it can happen at any time of our life. It might be childhood, but it could be in adulthood, it doesn't matter. It can be so frightening, powerful, or overwhelming.

And you can think of, for instance, a veteran who's in a combat zone and is in an experience where their life is in danger. They may see other people that they're with being harmed or killed. And again, their number one priority at that point is survival, make sure I get through this. So they may not have time to even then as adults, process that experience then and there. And it may be so unpleasant and so intense that again, it kind of gets swept under the rug.

So we have a tendency to often have these big experiences and try to get past them, move beyond them, but perhaps not really deal with them to the level that they need to be processed for us to make sense of them and to come to terms with them.

And I think psychedelics have a really powerful way of sweeping out whatever's under the rug for us to see and say, "Hey, this was important." Whether you were able to deal with it or not, now is a time for us to go back to this and look at it, and try to put this together with the rest of the life experience in a way that is cogent and makes sense, and that we can also come to some sense of acceptance or at least acknowledgement that yes, this is something that occurred. This is a part of my life story, whether I would've chosen it or not. It is there. It is what it is. And from there, I think you can get to a place where from a therapeutic standpoint, people can engage in some healing around that.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. What would the introduction of psychedelics look like in therapy, and why is it important to couple talk therapy with the psychedelic sessions?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  So because of the powerful alter state of consciousness, I think it's really important to have some level of psychological support around that. And it may not necessarily be a formal psychotherapy, like cognitive behavioral therapy, or ACT, or motivational interviewing, but it could be. And that's something that we've used. We've used these types of therapeutic modalities successfully in different studies here, and other labs across the country, and even overseas. And what we're doing there is a couple of things. And they're very basic, but at the same time complicated in many ways.

So the basics are that first, before there's even a real therapeutic process, we're often screening people just to assess their level of physical and mental safety to undergo this type of experience. I think this is a really important part of the process that doesn't get talked about enough, because people often want to jump right to the drug experience or to even the therapy.

But before we start the therapy, it's kind of like when people are coming in for any sort of medical procedure, we want to make sure this person is going to be able to go through this safely. And that could both mean looking at their liver and kidney function, looking at their cardiovascular function, but also looking at their past history of mental health and their family mental health history.

Because sometimes, there's clues there that perhaps this person may have an adverse reaction. And obviously, you typically are trying to avoid that, specifically in cases where you think you might trigger something like a latent psychosis or a potential bipolar mood condition. So those are the types of things we're doing before we even get started in the process.

But when we get into the actual psychedelic therapy, we're often starting with several weeks of just rapport building. Meaning if I'm sitting in the sessions with somebody, before we give them the drug, we're going to spend six to eight hours with them over the course of several weeks, getting to know more about them, making sure that they feel comfortable with us, getting a good sense of their life story. Particularly formative events.

And that can mean anything from their childhood and family history, growing up, going to school, important relationships, friendships, mentors, romantic relationships.

And then going from there, to just develop a sense that you're safe here with us. You're in a place where you can be yourself and be honest and open with us. And then developing that I think is really one of the first steps to doing psychedelic therapy safely so that even if people encounter these really scary or difficult parts of an experience, that they can work together with the facilitators to make it through that in a way that's not harmful.

The other big piece of this preparatory process is twofold. The one is explaining to people what it is that they're going to be potentially experiencing, because it is a very strong altered state of consciousness that includes intense emotions, changes in perception and thinking. That can be disorienting and frightening.

And so giving people a lowdown and saying, "This is what sometimes happens. And we don't know what's always going to happen, but we want to give you a sense for where we're at and what could occur." And finally, setting some form of therapeutic intention. Specifically when we're doing this as part of a therapy package, that typically is going to come along with some sort of therapeutic target or indication. Major depression, tobacco use disorder, existential distress related to illness.

And so part of understanding the person's life and their life story is where they're at now, and what's brought them here to us, and what is it that they're dealing with, and what does that look like in daily life when you're depressed or when you're struggling with an addiction.

And then that then sets the stage for saying, "Well, this is where I'm at." And then kind of determining, so where do you want to be? Or what would you like to get out of this process? How can we help support that? And what would life on the other side of a successful treatment look like to you?

And so really helping the person envision that, and also come up with strategies. Because it's not just a matter of, bam, take the pill and all my problems are gone. But it's really about on the ground, how do you make this something that's a sustainable change that's for the better for this person?

So that's really I think what the whole supportive therapeutic process is about, is getting somebody ready to go through the experience, providing the safe container for them to have the experience during the drug session or sessions. Sometimes, we'll go up to three sessions or more. But then also afterwards, providing a supportive process for integration where if there were insights, if there were difficult memories or difficult parts of the experience, or really anything that came up during the sessions, that you're able to work together to make sense of it, and take away anything valuable or useful from that. And put it into practice, so that it's more of a long-term change and not just, "Wow, I had this realization. But now I'm going to go right back to the way I was beforehand."

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. Okay. So in your article “Clinical Applications of Hallucinogens”, you claim that it is a moral responsibility of biomedical researchers to explore every possible treatment, which I think is very interesting. Could you talk about this a little more for our audience?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah. Well, my main thrust there is that there was good research in the 1950s and '60s and '70s to show that when used responsibly and carefully, that psychedelics would be really potentially useful for a number of different types of mental health conditions, including things like alcohol use disorder.

Now, the data weren't always consistent. Part of the problem there being the early research, they didn't necessarily have a good grasp on what the proper model was to use these types of tools. They were very new at the time. LSD was not even really discovered until 1943, psilocybin not until 1958. And so when using these new tools, there were different results in early research, but there was still an underlying thread there that this could be helpful.

And unfortunately, this really got wrapped up in a lot of politics, the counterculture. And I wrote a little blog for Psychology Today about this as well called “Psychedelics Reconsidered”, where I really talk about more of the historical arc of this culturally.

Because at the time, psychedelics and cannabis got really associated with the counterculture, and the counterculture was seen by the powers that be at the time, and certainly the Nixon administration, but just conservative politicians in general as a real threat to the status quo.

And so as a result, there was a huge amount of energy put into stigmatizing this idea that these were dangerous, that they're going to destroy your children's lives, and that they're something that need to be banned, put under lock and key. And as a result, it became very taboo to think about doing the type of research that we're doing now from 1970 on.

And so it took several decades until you finally start to see that thaw, where scientists like Rick Strassman, Roland Griffiths, Franz Vollenweider and others begin to set the modern era of research underway, Dave Nichols. And they're really starting to bring it back to, "Okay, let's see, can these things be useful? Or are they just these dangerous drugs of abuse, like many people have been saying for years?"

And come to find now that absolutely, there are ways that we can use these therapeutically, and they seem to hold a great deal of potential. And there's a lot there that we don't know yet, but there's been studies from various labs around the world showing robust, rapid acting antidepressant effects.

And when you're dealing with a large number of people who are struggling with major depression, and a not inconsequential number of people who are refractory to treatment, meaning that we give them the best medications and talk therapy that we have, and that they're not getting much better, then I think it is our moral responsibility to explore all the avenues available. And psychedelics represent one area of that, but there's lots more going on.

So it's a pretty exciting time, I think, for mental health research. And we're seeing a lot more outside the box thinking, which is I think a good thing.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah, certainly. So I don't think that there's an obvious answer to this question, but feel free to postulate. Your studies really illustrate not only what consciousness is and the current metaphysics of mind, but also what consciousness can be, and what it can mean to be human. Based on the research you've pursued, do you think that there's a higher level of consciousness that can be achieved, and maybe what might this look like?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah, that's a really interesting question to sit back, and ponder, and hypothesize about. Lots of different people are going to have different answers to this question.

I think one of the most compelling accounts that I've seen of this type of thinking of higher levels of consciousness is really from philosophers like Ken Wilber, and others whose work he based his work on, like Jean Gebser. Beck and Cowan who did Spiral Dynamics.

So these thinkers have sort of postulated that just like a regular single human being is going to go through different phases of development in the lifespan, and just like we're talking about with cognitive development and Piaget, and this idea of developing object permanence or getting to a level of understanding conservation.

As we move through these stages, one might say that it's a higher level of consciousness, or one might say simply it's a different level of consciousness, where we've reached a different level of understanding, again, of ourselves in the world. Now what's higher or lower, what's better or worse? Some of that can be relative. And certainly, there's also cultural differences that come to play here.

But I do think if you want to step back and look at us as a species of creatures that live on a planet with finite resources and other creatures on the same planet, that there are certain things that work better than others. And if we're going around, for instance, killing off all the other species, or even harming each other, whether it be across racial boundaries, or across territorial or religious boundaries, those are not necessarily outcomes that are desirable.

And so many thinkers like Wilber and others have seen that as humans develop over time and go through different phases and stages of development, that perhaps cultures also do the same thing. And that in that regard, perhaps higher states of consciousness and cultural development as well are those that are leading us to live in more peace and harmony with ourselves and with other cohabitants of the planet where we are.

And so that's probably my best answer, my best guess as to an answer is really anything that leads us towards having a more peaceful and harmonious existence with one another and within ourselves. And so coming back to the individual level is, how do we get to this state of optimal well-being? And how do we then put that into practice by hopefully having positive and peaceful interactions with the people and creatures around us?

Sara Wilson:  Yeah. So as this very stimulating conversation is now coming to a close, I wanted to ask you, is there anything else you would like to share with our audience about avenues of research you are finding most exciting right now, or just more broadly?

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  Yeah. I mean, there's a lot going on with the field of psychedelic research, which I'm heavily involved in. But I find it really exciting to see both this area of clinical and therapeutic research is really taking off, both doing bigger and more well controlled studies and conditions like depression and substance use disorders.

But also starting to explore new conditions. Alzheimer's disease, chronic Lyme disease, different areas that we're starting to dip our toes in the water to see, can we use psychedelics for these populations? Can we help people with end of life existential distress? Can we help people with chronic illnesses?

So that's a really exciting area. And we're seeing more and more research too on the mechanisms of, how in the world do these drugs exert these long-lasting changes and benefits that people are reporting? So brain research, neuroimaging, animal research, cellular molecular research is elucidating the mechanisms of how these drugs work, which is, I think, really exciting.

And then the other stuff that I think is also really important and is a little bit outside of the medical arena is the idea that we can also use psychedelics in other areas. Not just for people with mental health conditions or with physical illnesses, but also with people who are healthy and who are wanting to have spiritual or different types of altered states that may be helpful for their development.

And so as Bob Jesse puts it, for the betterment of all people, using psychedelics for people who are healthy in ways that have nothing to do with illness. But are really about promoting health, wellbeing, and even creativity.

And this was something I was just talking about a little while ago with a reporter from Scientific American. But this idea is not a new one, which is that in the 1960s, they were studying psychedelics as agents to enhance creative problem solving. And lots of people like Steve Jobs, Kary Mullis, and others, who have talked positively about the impact of psychedelic experiences on their own innovative ways of thinking, and the products that then led to down the line for them.

And so it's, I think, really exciting to think about using psychedelics outside of the medical model. But for people who are wanting to connect more with their spirituality or people who are wanting to change the way that they're thinking, or view themselves, or different problems that they're working on from a different perspective, which could potentially then lead to some new ways of approaching some of the big problems that we're facing now. Whether we're talking about climate change, ecological crises, etc., there's a lot of problems that need to be solved. So anything that we can use as a tool to help us solve those more quickly or more efficiently, I think is welcome.

Sara Wilson:  Yeah, thank you. Well, thank you so much for joining us today. This was such a cool discussion. And I really think that every human being, no matter your discipline, can learn something incredibly valuable from your practice. I think that this has major promising implications not only for personal well-being, but as you were speaking about, societal harmony, and how we treat each other, and our environment more broadly. So thank you for having this conversation with me.

Albert Garcia-Romeu:  My pleasure. Thanks for having me on.

Sara Wilson:  Of course.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Certified Mental Performance Coach Lauren Becker Rubin on the Mental Health of Athletes

An Interview with Certified Mental Performance Coach Lauren Becker Rubin

Lauren Becker Rubin is a Hall of Fame field hockey & lacrosse athlete at Brown University. She is an advisor to Haverford College’s varsity teams to ensure their mental health well-being as competitive athletes.

Jordan Denaver:  Thanks for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Jordan Denaver, research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialist. I'd like to welcome Lauren Becker Rubin. Ms. Becker Rubin is a certified mental performance coach who works closely with Haverford College's varsity teams. She also works with collegiate and high school teams as well as individual athletes. Before we get started, can you please tell me a little bit more about yourself, any sports that you may have played that made you interested in studying mental performance?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Absolutely. Good morning and thanks so much for having me. I've been involved in the mental performance space for about 30 plus years, and I think why I'm so passionate about it and why I love it so much is because I was absolutely the athlete that needed it. I was a collegiate athlete at Brown University. I played field hockey and lacrosse. Honestly, if you look at my athletic resume on paper, you would say, "Wow, you had a lot of success, a lot of awards, a lot of accomplishments." But my day-to-day didn't feel that way. I was often frustrated. I had a very hard time dealing with pressure and stress. I didn't feel like I was consistent, I wasn't meeting the big moments and I think mostly I had a really terrible relationship with losing.

I know most athletes don't like to lose, but I really took it personally. I would lock myself in my room after a bad game for hours in the dark and it would take me days to get over things, and it was just a super unhealthy relationship with how much pressure I put on myself, how I never thought I was good enough or never played well enough and just was really unhealthy, so this was 30, 35 years ago when I was in college. One day our lacrosse coach took us to the counseling center and we met with a psychologist who was dabbling in sports psych, which is pretty rare for the 35 years ago - it wasn't as common. A light bulb went on for me and it flipped a switch. I was like, "Wow, this could really help me and it could make me feel a lot better." And it did help me a little bit.

As an athlete, I found it late. That was my junior year, but it really changed my life. I just really got involved in mental health around athletes and mental skills coaching, mental performance as it pertains to athletes in sports just became my life's work.

Jordan Denaver:  Nice. All right, so then into our first question. In your experience, what are the mental health challenges that athletes may face during their participation in sports?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Great, so athletes face a lot of the same mental health challenges that everybody does. It just gets ramped up a little bit because we're performing. Athletes are on a public stage, so everything they're doing is out in the open and then there's the pressure of winning or losing or playing. The mental health issues are similar. Stress, anxiety, pressure, worry, a lot of fear - fear of losing, fear of winning, fear of embarrassment, fear of getting injured, fear of losing social status, fear of losing your position - so there's a lot of fear of worry, stress, anxiety about performing.

I would say embarrassment is a big one that affects mental health. There's also injury really plays into mental health issues, not playing, being left out, being isolated plays in. I'd say a big one that really affects mental health is loss of identity. If you get injured or maybe you're not playing or maybe you're not the star anymore, athletes identify as being athletes and for their whole lives that's their number one thing and then all of a sudden it's either over or it's taken away, so struggling with identity really affects what's my next identity? What else do I identify with? Affects mental health as well.

Jordan Denaver:  Definitely, I've experienced that too as an athlete. It's definitely tough.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Yes. I think one of the hardest things for athletes, especially the higher you get at collegiate level, pro, Olympian is when you don't play, whether that's somebody else is playing in front of you or you're injured and it's taken away from you, it's very difficult to process those feelings and it definitely weighs on your mental and emotional wellbeing.

Jordan Denaver:  Speaking to that, what are some positive mental health benefits that athletes can experience?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  There are a lot of them, and one of the biggest is social connection. I remember reading maybe 10 or 15 years ago an article from the “Happiness Lab” at Harvard that said the number one indicator of wellbeing is social connection. Being part of a team, being with people really bumps up wellbeing and mental health. The other pieces of participating in and benefits of athletics is you're part of something bigger than yourself, you're finding meaning and purpose, you're all working towards a common goal, so there's some shared humanity in that. That shared humanity when you win feels good, but also shared humanity when you lose and you have other people to work through it, and those are all really good health benefits.

The other things that athletics has shown to do is build resilience. It shows us we can do hard things. It makes us more adaptable, and because you never know if you're going to win or lose, you have to start learning how to manage emotions around that, and that's very correlated to life. There's ups and downs, there's good things, there's bad things. You have to learn to be able to manage your emotions around that and athletics really helps you do that.

Jordan Denaver:  I think one of my favorite things about working with Haverford College on the lacrosse field is being a part of that team. I love the sport, but on the other hand I love being a part of the team and being with the girls.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  That makes a lot of sense. Connection, community is just so huge for wellbeing and mental health.

Jordan Denaver:  I think we touched on it a little bit, but then on the other hand, what are some potential negative mental health impacts that athletes may encounter?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  They're there for sure. Athletes tend to be very hard driving, type A, on a mission, goal oriented, so with that comes some issues around perfectionism and not feeling good enough, not meeting moments which could lead to some issues with low self-esteem. There is the managing the emotions around stress and pressure and anxiety of games. We did touch on a little bit sometimes when you're injured or maybe you're not playing, you could feel a little bit isolated. That I think some of the other negative things that happened with athletics is maybe some shame around not performing. Then one of the biggest things that could be negative is if it's a toxic culture or toxic coach or toxic teammates and you're in that environment all the time, that really could be negatively impacting your mental health.

Jordan Denaver:  Definitely. All right, so what do you think are the mental health differences in competing in sports on a competitive level versus recreationally?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  It's a great question, and I'm not an expert on recreational sports, but I have read a ton of research and there's a lot of literature out there that about just the benefits of exercise and movement. If you're doing something recreationally, whether it's walking or yoga or Zumba or playing tennis for fun or running a 5K just to collect the T-shirts and it's something that you're doing for fun, it increases mood, it builds the positive feel good hormones. Again, there's social connection in that, and there's a lot of benefits around fun, having fun and a lot of research these days on just doing play. We play as kids and that's one of the most enjoyable parts of the day, but then as we get older, we start losing that playfulness. Doing things recreationally is play, and play enhances a lot of wellbeing, and on a physical, emotional, mental level, we just feel better.

I do want to say there are a lot of health benefits for competitive sports too, and we touched on a little bit about meeting and purpose and being part of a community, but sometimes people throw around the term like pressure is a privilege, and what's behind that is if you're feeling pressure, it means what you're doing is important to you. If you're involved in something that's important to you, there's going to be some benefits there by seeing it through, so there are health benefits of that pressure and of that competition that add to the movement, the exercise, the fun, the social connection that you get recreationally. There are benefits for both, but I think recreational athletes are enhancing mood, they're connecting, they're feeling good, they're having fun, they're playing. There's a ton of benefits there as well.

Jordan Denaver:  Yeah, I agree. I think the pressure of the competitive play definitely works into some of the mental health effects for college athletes.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  And I feel we'll talk about it, but it's how you interpret pressure, which really correlates directly to your mental wellbeing and your mental health. If you feel pressure is something that helps you, helps you get ready, helps you get your body activated, helps you focus because this is something that's really important, then it's a positive benefit. If pressure really makes you shrink and it really makes you worry and it really raises your cortisol and all the not so good hormones, then it's a negative. A lot of it comes to how you interpret what's going on.

Jordan Denaver:  Then on that note, are there any unique challenges or stressors that elite athletes face in terms of their mental health?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Here's really interesting and what I've found in my practice working with youth, high school, college, and even professional athletes, the challenges are similar. Even the youth athletes and working with the 12 year-olds right now, they feel frustration, they feel stressed, they feel pressure, they have anxiety over performance, they worry about things, so many of the challenges are the same. I think for elite athletes, what makes them unique, and this is college, pros, Olympic athletes, is that they need to be “all in”. They need to be solely focused and it's not a balanced life.

One of my favorite people in the mental performance space right now is David Goggins. And in his last book he called it “Savage Mode”. Elite athletes have to be in savage mode all the time, and that means you have to be selfish, you have to prioritize yourself, you have to prioritize your mission or your goal. I think sometimes that puts you at odds with people in your life. Relationships suffer. I think people judge you. I think it's a little bit isolating. People don't understand you, they want to bring you down.

So I think that is a real challenge for somebody who's trying to be elite, where they just have to be all in, solely focused, very selfish. I think the consequences of that is that people don't get them, and people want to judge you and they want to bring you down or tell you what you're doing is not balanced, but I think it's very hard to be balanced and be elite. I think when you're on that path to being elite, you have to have your blinders on and be all in to get what, to accomplish what you want to accomplish.

Jordan Denaver:  I think just to tie into the pressure, I think especially on an elite level, maybe higher up college like D1 or pros, the pressure of a fan base too really plays into the pressure that athletes feel.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I think you're absolutely right. I think social media and fans and money and contracts. Imagine an Olympic sprinter who trains for four years and then has 10 seconds to do their craft. I just think that everything we talked about, pressure, stress, anxiety, worry, isolation, just really ramps up the higher you get.

Jordan Denaver:  That ties into our next question a bit. How do you think societal expectations, performance pressure, and competition affect an athlete's mental wellbeing?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  This is a great question because this is the work, and I'm going to give you a roundabout answer to that and not direct answer only because the answer to that is it depends, it depends on the work behind how you allow that to affect you. How it affects you depends on what your skill set is, what your tools are, what your strategies are, and then this is absolutely the mental skills work or the mental performance work or the sports psychology work. It's about having skills and tools and techniques and strategies to manage societal expectations, the performance pressure, the emotions, the competitions, because at the end of the day or the beginning of the day, all those things are always going to be there. The pressure, the emotions, the adversity, the challenges, the social media, the judgment, all of that is going to be there, but if you have skills and you work on the skills and you practice and you train that part of your life or the game, then you have some techniques and strategies to work through those.

One of the things I really like to say is mental toughness and mental performance, managing the mental part of sports is directly linked to mental wellbeing. The skills translate, the more you train and develop the skills that help you perform, the more skills tool strategy you have for mental wellbeing and mental health. The work is training it and the work is doing and the work is having it be part of your daily protocol, building a platform so that when societal expectations ramp up or when you're preparing, feeling performance pressure and it's always going to be there, the adversity, the challenges, the setbacks, it's always going to be there. You have skills to help you navigate it so that it directly correlates to how it's going to affect you. The more skills you have, the more you work on it, the more it becomes part of your daily protocol, the more you can catch it and work with it. Does that make sense to you?

Jordan Denaver:  Yeah, that definitely makes sense. I think especially as you gain more experience, you just know how to deal with the mental pressures of playing at elite levels and just the performance pressure in general and societal expectations.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  And I think the more you replenish yourself, you bolster yourself up with things like breath mechanics and mindset or visualization and imagery, focus, working on resiliency, working on your belief system or limiting beliefs. All of this skill, all of these skill sets becomes part of your toolkit, so then when you're feeling that performance pressure or you're not feeling your best physically, you don't go down a rabbit hole, you go back to... I know with the team sometimes we use physical things like pound your chest, get your energy up, or maybe some EFT to bring down your stress and your anxiety. There's lots of skills and tools that you know can just proactively set yourself up to be in a better place, show up as your best version of yourself, but be able to reset quickly. All of those things weigh into how does it affect you? It affects you different ways when you have skills to counter it or to proactively set yourself up to be in a better place even before that happens.

Jordan Denaver:  Our team does love the heart tap.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Tap your chest or get big, expand yourself, take up space to feel power. There's just lots of anchors and tools that we can use to help ourselves navigate that, those pressures, because they're always going to be there. It doesn't go away. We just get better, more adaptable and more flexible with working with it and that directly ties into our wellbeing. That's the coolest part of the mental health and mental performances are tied together. We work on skills for helping us play better, but those same skills help us feel better, our overall mental health.

Jordan Denaver:  That's very true. All right, so what role does the team environment and social support play in promoting positive mental health among athletes?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  If the team culture is good, then we're talking about community. Again, connection, fun, shared experience, being in a group, striving for something bigger than ourselves. There's so many positive environmental and social support benefits of being part of a team. There's also teamwork and leadership opportunities, trust building, all these things are great for mental health. Then the vice versa is also true. If the culture's not good, if there are toxic teammates, then the environment weighs in a negative way, but being part of groups is really a great social support network if it's a positive culture. Do you feel that way on your team? On the field stuff helps off the field stuff. We're striving to win games and win championships, but then your group becomes your social support network off the field as well, I would imagine.

Jordan Denaver:  Exactly. My best friends are the girls on my team, and I think we work really hard on building up our team culture, so that takes a lot of time to build that team culture outside of sports and outside of practice and that's why doing a lot of team activities, just like getting to know one another and building that culture and that trust outside of the field, it helps so much. Then you'll see that trust and that support play out onto the field when we're playing games and during practice. I think that's so important.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Yep. It's bidirectional. It really is on the field, off the field. I love that you used the word trust, because trust and confidence go together. In fact, I think the root of the word confidence is an inner or intense trust, so the culture builds trust, trust builds confidence. The more you trust each other, the more confident you are, the better you play. The more you love each other, the better you play. It is really bidirectional, so culture, environmental, social support really is very entwined.

Jordan Denaver:  I remember it was a semifinal game of this past year and our coach, Coach Zichelli, she said that you need to play for your teammates. I think that speaks a lot to what we're talking about. She's like, "Play for your teammates, play for your seniors who are leaving." So I think it's a lot for just playing for each other and in that way you tend to play well because you're playing for each other. You want to boost people up, you want to show off your teammates, and I think it just all ties together very well in the field.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I love that concept. Playing for something bigger than yourself, playing for each other really helps us step up into the moment because we don't want to let people down, we care about them, we love and it really brings out the best in us, so I love that concept.

Jordan Denaver:  All right. Next, how do you think athletes can take care of their mental health while participating in sports?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I think this is an important question and I'm glad that you're bringing it up to the forefront because it's not always upfront. Sometimes it's in the back in crisis, what do we do? So I feel like having it upfront, making athletes know that they have resources. I think how athletes can take care of themselves is to use their available resources, teammates, coaches, counseling centers, mental performance coach like myself, know that those resources are there and don't be afraid to use them and ask for help. Don't hide it. That's another way that you can take care of yourself. We need to change the stigma around mental health, that it's a weakness and by bringing it up, it's really a strength. That means you're working on something just like we would do a physical skill. In lacrosse, if your non-dominant hand isn't strong enough, you work on it. If your mental health, if you're struggling with mental health, you work on it, you don't hide it, you don't lock it away.

And I would say one of the biggest things, ways an athlete can take care of their mental health is to be proactive. Meaning make this part of your daily protocol. Do things every day that build your foundation and get that foundation as big as possible. What I mean by that is sleep, nutrition, working on recovery, maybe meditation, watching funny movies, doing social things that are fun, having friends, going out in the sun or nature, getting a massage every now and then. Every day as an athlete you're doing a lot of things that are depleting yourself, physical exertion, mental exertion, stress, pressure around your sport. You have everything that's depleting you. Not to mention in a college setting all the academic pressure. You have to balance that out with things that replete you, replenish you, and you have to do that daily, know what those things are.

And if it becomes part of your daily protocol, then every day you're having mini wins, mini win, mini win, mini win, mini win. What that does, it adds up to big wins and it builds this great foundation of strength so that when you do have a setback or you might be feeling a little bit off or something really knocks you over the head that you weren't expecting, you're coming at it from a more replenished space. The biggest way I think to help with dealing with mental health is to build up wellbeing and make it part of your daily protocol so that when you do get whammied, you've got some resource already built in.

Jordan Denaver:  Yeah, I agree. I think having that framework is so important, so that you can fall back onto what you know and what skills you've built. Are there any strategies or interventions that coaches, trainers or sports organizations can implement to support the mental health of athletes?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I think the biggest strategy is to normalize the conversation around mental health. Just normalize it. Just like we normalize that sports are hard and that it's going to take some effort and we're going to get knocked down and get back up. We normalize that life is hard. I think we have to normalize that there are mental health issues with athletes, and when we normalize it then we aren't afraid to talk about it. I also think that coaches and trainers can bring in resources, they can bring in a mental skills coach like myself. They can bring in counseling, they can bring in speakers, they can bring in resources like books or articles or webinars that normalize that, "Hey, this is mental health issues are part of life of being an athlete and things are going to come up and we can talk about it."

I think the other biggest strategy that coaches, trainers, or organizations can layer in is bringing fun to whatever they're doing. Just because you're training hard and you're trying to be the best version of yourself as an athlete, win games, win championships doesn't mean it can't be fun. I did read a research article about this. The best teams, the most accomplished teams over time combine two things and that is grit. Angela Duckworth from Penn has written a lot about hard work over time, perseverance over time, that's grit. You have to do the gritty work, you have to get in there and you have to do the hard stuff, but when you add it to fun, grit, and fun, that's when teams are most successful. That's when athletes are most successful, so I think in a proactive intervention besides the resources and besides normalizing, just make it fun. Make it fun, make it enjoyable, and that really helps support athletes' mental health.

Jordan Denaver:  We talked a lot on our team is bringing the fun back into the sport because I think when you're younger, that's everything that you have really is the fun and the love that you have of the sport you're playing, but as you enter the more competitive level like college, pros, you lose that fun and now you're suddenly just in this space where you're just working to win or you're working in this competitive, this nature and you lose the fun that you used to have as a child and the love that used to have for the sport sometimes. We focus a lot on trying to have fun and bringing back the love that we have for the sport because that's why we play it.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I love that you're talking about it and that it's an emphasis, because I think it gets lost a lot in college sports where it becomes a job and you lose the fun. I think it really not only affects performance and success on the field, but it definitely affects mental health and wellbeing. I love the fact that you talk about it and that it's part of your culture.

Jordan Denaver:  All right. Next, are there any specific warning signs or indicators that athletes, coaches or peers should be aware of to identify mental health issues in athletes?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  This is a great question and it's a great thing to have some awareness around because sometimes there are no signs. Sometimes, especially for athletes, they want to suffer in silence and they're afraid of the stigma or the shame around mental health issues and the stigma or the idea that athletes have to be tough and strong and show no weakness. Sometimes there are no signs, and that's really tricky when some major mental health crisis happens, everyone says, "How come I didn't see it?" But a lot of times there aren't any signs.

Here are sometimes signs that come up that you could look for: different behavior. Is somebody who's normally social not going out and isolating themselves? Maybe somebody's drinking more or someone who used to drink is not drinking alcohol and drugs. A change in behavior, like someone who is normally loud and social, is being really quiet. Other signs might be someone skipping team functions, maybe sleeping a lot, or maybe you have a teammate that's going home every weekend, that could be a sign that something's going on. Then some of the more obvious signs is someone's just unhappy or they're appearing depressed or somebody is losing a lot of weight or gaining a lot of weight.

The signs are look for differences, somebody's acting, looking, behaving differently. It could be a sign that something is going on behind the scenes that they're not expressing outwardly, but they're trying to deal with inwardly. I would say another thing to look for is if you have a teammate, is it who's injured? I think being injured really plays into mental health and mental wellbeing for athletes because again, you're pulled out of what you identify with and what you love and it's very isolating. If you have a teammate that's injured, I would definitely check in with them and make sure they're okay and make sure they're still feeling included.

Jordan Denaver:  I can speak firsthand to that because I've been injured and I've spent time on the sidelines because of an injury, and watching your teammates play and on the field, it's really hard sometimes knowing that you can't be out there to help them or support them and that your role on the team has changed in a way, especially when the injuries are potentially season ending. It's very difficult.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  For sure. How did it affect your mental health and how did you work through some of those things?

Jordan Denaver:  It was hard. I was out for I think five, six months. I think I recognized that my role on the team was different, that I was on the sidelines and that I had to be more of a cheerleader and less of a contributor on the field, but then I think there was also a lot of hope that I will come back soon, which is also scary too, because coming back from an injury and you haven't played in six months, that's really tough too, but I think the team's very good about it. I think also making sure that you're not isolating yourself. Still maybe attending practices and just watching, still attending those games, still attending other team activities to keep yourself integrated even while injured is super important.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Well, I want to applaud you. You used a lot of great skills and when you're in a difficult time, sometimes it's really hard to find the things that pull you out of it. One of the biggest pieces of working on mental skills, mental health, mental performance is not being stuck, not being either stuck in one place or spiraling backwards. Do we want to keep moving? And part of keeping moving is shifting out of it. I love that you said I needed to find a new role. If we can use our mindset, "Okay, I'm not on the field, but what role can I take? How else can I look at this where I can be the best teammate? Or maybe I could be a good scout or maybe I could watch film." So you're shifting your mindset to find a different role is a great skill.

And you also use the word hope. Having hope, having faith, believing in things that you don't necessarily have all the proof of yet keeps you moving forward and it keeps you on a path of, "Hey, this could work out, this could be good." So those are all great strategies to keep you from staying stuck where you were or spiraling backwards. Great job of keeping yourself working on... Using tools to get you moving in the right direction.

Jordan Denaver:  Thank you. Let's see what's next. What steps can be taken to reduce the stigma surrounding mental health in sports? I think we touched on this a little bit.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Some of the things we mentioned about normalizing it and bringing resources I think helps reduce the stigma. I think on a broader level, I know that the NCAA is doing a lot of research and work and education on this topic where they are providing resources to colleges just to make them aware that this is an issue. In fact, I read one of the NCAA research studies they did where they found that for collegiate athletes, 24% of male athletes experienced some mental health issues and 36% of female athletes surveyed expressed mental health issues. I do know that also self-reporting is lower, so it's probably even a little higher than that.

I think education and providing resources by the NCAA would help on the collegiate level, but I really think what helps reduce the stigma is when people step up and talk about what's going on with them. Like Michael Phelps talking about anxiety and other pro athletes like Simone Biles in the Olympics, her anxiety got to her. Kevin Love in the NBA was talking about pressure and stress and some of his issues, and Naomi Osaka from the tennis world. When professional athletes step up and say, "I am working on this, I'm dealing with this. It's not preventing me necessarily from performing, I just have to manage it, influence it, control it, work on it, but it's part, it's there for me." I think it really helps normalize it and it just shows that everybody's human and it's okay not to be okay.

I want to take it into the weeds just a little bit further and say, I think the culture around this could start changing in youth sports. The message just tough it out, run through walls, get up, when someone might be having a mental health crisis is not the right message. We have to do hard things at athletes and we have to push ourselves, and getting out of our comfort zone is one of the most important things that we have to learn how to do, but I think if coaches have an awareness and players have an awareness that there could be something else going on, then there's more language around it, there's more education around it, there's more compassion around it, and it becomes more normalized as part of, this is part of sports, this is part of life, this is part of who we are and let's have some resources to work on it.

Jordan Denaver:  I agree. I think it does start younger because those messages start a little bit less, so when you're younger and they really build as you get older. I think too, having more public figures, spread awareness on it too helps people like college athletes, high school athletes recognize that they're not alone in their anxiety. That these people performing at super high levels also feel it too. I think that's really helpful. I think just spreading awareness of it will help reduce the stigma for sure.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Right. I agree with you. Kristin Neff, who's a psychologist that specializes in self-compassion is out there with her method, which is breathing and mindfulness, but a piece of that is shared humanity. “Other people are going through this, I'm not alone.” I think as athletes, one of the most difficult things that we struggle with is being compassionate to ourselves because we're so used to being tough and strong and do hard things, but the research that doesn't support that is that when we're more compassionate to ourselves, when we don't play well, when we make a mistake, when we lose, when we're having a mental health crisis, the quicker we actually rebound and reset. That compassion piece is really important. I think the more we normalize it and the more education is out there and the more the culture changes around it, the more compassionate we are to ourselves, actually, the better we can cope with the setbacks and the struggles, because like I said, they're going to be there. That's part of life, that's part of sports. The more we normalize it and then the more we can manage it.

Jordan Denaver:  I agree. All right. Are there any notable research findings or studies that have explored the mental health impacts of participating in sports? I know you mentioned a couple.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Yep. I mentioned the NCAA one. In fact, I went to that lecture and heard the psychologist that works with the NCAA delivered just how prevalent their mental health issues are with collegiate athletes because of the pressure and there's money and scholarship and losing your college education tied into it, so that's really high. I did read a research article from the American College of Sports Medicine recently that said 35% of elite athletes struggle with mental health issues including eating disorders, burnout, depression, anxiety, social anxiety. At the elite level there is also a lot of mental health issues. There are pros too. I've read plenty of research on what participating in sports, the positive parts, it improves psychological well being, it can improve self-esteem, it can lower depression, anxiety and stress. I read articles where participating in athletics decreases suicidal behavior and substance abuse and reckless behavior, and that piece is maybe being accountable to teammates and to the team.

There's definitely a lot of research on increasing resilience, confidence, empowerment, empathy, just because you're going through shared things. A big thing about participating is increasing healthy habits. When you are active and you're participating in sports, it bubbles over into other parts of your life. You're eating better, you're not doing substance things that you just get on a path. There is a lot of research both ways and I think the research is still developing here, and also the research around how to deal with the pros and the cons is developing as well. It's a rapidly changing space around research and interventions, both positive and negative.

Jordan Denaver:  I think having you speak to our team, I think it's almost biweekly at this point, is so helpful. I know it helps the girls and me too so much, and I think that's a big thing too. Bringing in people to speak to the team and to speak to these issues that are a little bit more stigmatized helps normalize it, because it brings you into a space where you can talk about it, where you have resources to air mental health issues.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I agree. I think the more you talk about it, the more resources, the more... What's really cool about this space and why I think I'm so passionate about it, as you can tell I love it, is it's ancient wisdom and modern science. The people I've been talking about, a lot of these things, the ancient stoics and Buddha and a lot for years, and now modern science is catching up and the research is backing. Breathing, compassion, visualization, self-talk. All of the tools that we're using are now research-backed, so the ancient wisdom is being supported by the modern science, and I love marrying the two. Giving a concept about manifestation, put it out there the way you want it to happen, and then having research back it up. It's a lot of fun to have the two worlds combined together.

Jordan Denaver:  Actually I've used a lot of the breathing techniques just completely outside of sports. Just any anxiety or stress I'm feeling like, "Okay, I'm going to do a box breath right now." And it's so helpful. It really is.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  I love hearing that. Obviously I want you to be the best lacrosse player that you can be and be the best version of yourself as an athlete, but I really want you to be the best version of yourself as a human being. That's why mental performance and mental health directly intersect. What's so amazing about what I do and why I'm so in love with the mental performance world is because these skills translate to life. The fact that you're using it for anxiety off the field or stress or pressure or in relationships is just really satisfying. What I hope I'm doing is creating opportunities for the athletes and the teams that I work with to reach their full potential, to be their best versions of themselves on the field and off the field.

Jordan Denaver:  And as you said before, a lot of the negative mental health issues that athletes face or a lot of just normal issues that non-athletes face and it just ties more into playing sports. Those are still stressors that people feel outside and breathing techniques and even the heart tap, that helps a lot. It's completely outside of lacrosse and sports.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  Yes, for sure.

Jordan Denaver:  All right, then I think it's our last question. Do you have any final words of advice or anything else you'd like to share with our listeners today?

Lauren Becker Rubin:  The biggest piece of advice, and ironically when I'm first working with an individual athlete or a team, I often lead with this because I feel it's so important. The advice is that mental toughness, mental strength, mental mastery, mental health is not about making it all go away. It's not about making the stress, the anxiety, the pressure, the challenges, depression, fear, worry. It's not about making it go away. It's really about hanging in there long enough so that you can shift, that you can shift out of it, that you can create enough space and awareness that, "Hey, this is going on." And then start using your tools and your strategies.

If you can recognize that these things are normal, start with the premise that life is hard, sports is hard, these things are going to happen. Hang out in it long enough that you can start using your tools, your strategies, your techniques to shift out of it, to move a little bit to get on a different path. I think that's my biggest advice is hang in there long enough that you can shift. Part of that shift though is building the resources on your own with other people, using support so that you have tools and strategies to help you shift out of it, but just to summarize, the advice is don't think that it's good feel... Feelings and emotions are not good or bad, they're just information. Use all the information, hang out long enough, shift out of it. Use your tools, your resources so that you can keep moving down another path.

I think most of us want to close the gap to where we are now and where we want to be, and the work that around the skills, around mental performance, around mental health helps us keep moving towards where we want to be, but where we're now is part of it and it's normal and sometimes it's difficult. When we go in with that mindset, then we're more adaptable, we're more anti-fragile, more flexible, and having that mindset that, "Hey, we could get knocked down, but we're going to get back up. We're going to learn, we're going to grow." Like a growth mindset that we talk about a lot with the team. It keeps us moving, so my advice is build up your resources, have tools, have strategies, know that it's going to be hard, that there's going to be setbacks. Hang out long enough that you can shift out of it and just try to keep moving.

And then my last piece of advice is don't suffer in silence. Get help, reach out, use your support, use your networks. Don't think you have to do it alone. My last piece of advice, sorry, I'll wrap it up, but growth happens when we get outside of our comfort zone and that's called adaptability. Sometimes people call it anti-fragility, but when we stress ourselves, we grow, but our body and our mind, our emotions, our thoughts, all of that stuff, we don't like to be outside of our comfort zone. When we get out of our comfort zone, what happens is we adapt and that adaption keeps us on the path of wellbeing and positive mental health. Getting stretched and getting out of our comfort zone, getting knocked back, initially it's not going to feel good, but with resources and with skills, we'll adapt to it and we'll grow. Adaption and growth is mental health and mental wellbeing, so stay in the fight long enough to grow and to adapt, and that's how we can build our mental health and our overall mental wellbeing.

Jordan Denaver:  I completely agree. I think that's some great advice. Thank you so much for doing this and for joining the Seattle Interview Series.

Lauren Becker Rubin:  You bet. Thanks for having me. It was a lot of fun.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Consultant Leon Seltzer on the Effects of Childhood Self-Shame

An Interview with Consultant Leon Seltzer

Leon Seltzer, Ph.D., holds doctorates in both English and Psychology. He recently retired from general private practice with clinical specialties in anger, trauma resolution (using EMDR and IFS), couples conflict, compulsive/addictive behaviors, stress control, and depression.

Jordan Rich:  Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us today for this installment of the The Seattle Psychiatrist interview series. My name is Jordan Rich and I'm a research intern at the Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We're a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice with a specialty in anxiety disorders.

For today's interview, I would like to welcome Dr. Leon Seltzer, possessing doctorates in both English and psychology. Dr. Seltzer has previously functioned as an English professor at Queens College and Cleveland State University, and then later, as a psychologist, maintained a private practice for 35 years.

Upon retiring from his private practice, he's continued to offer private professional and personal consultations. In addition to publishing two books titled The Vision of Melville and Conrad and Paradoxical Strategies in Psychotherapy.

Dr. Seltzer has also been an extremely prolific writer on Psychology Today's website, authoring over 550 articles relating to psychology and psychotherapy, particularly on topics such as problematic relationships, compulsive and addictive behaviors, controlling one's anger, suffering from deficits in self-esteem and one's general self-image, and issues inherent in narcissistic personalities. Dr. Seltzer’s blog is titled Evolution of the Self with the subtitle On the Paradoxes of Personality, and his varied articles for Psychology Today have received over 50 million views. Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Seltzer.

Leon Seltzer:  And thank you for having me. I'm very happy to be part of your series.

Jordan Rich:  So to start, Dr. Seltzer, would you mind telling us a little more about yourself and what drew you to the study of psychology?

Leon Seltzer:  Well, I guess one of the things that's most interesting about that is my starting out majoring in English and becoming an English professor for over a decade. And the reason for that was that I had gotten the message, this is many decades ago, that what psychologists did was diagnostic testing, which wasn't a particular interest of mine, whereas psychiatrists were the ones who did the therapy.

And because of that, well, I had basically tried to decide whether I wanted to major in psychology or music because I love music, that I got so much encouragement from English professors that by default almost I majored in English. Which I don't really regret that much now because even though I left the field, it enabled me to really see myself as much as a writer as a psychologist and gave me the opportunity to do a lot of writing as I have on psychology, on psychotherapy once I entered the field. So no regrets there. The only thing I might mention is that I did a human growth training.

And it was interesting because it was during the training that I realized that if I had it to do over again, because my first love even after getting tenure was psychology, that that would be my preference. It was that training that made me realize if I were willing to go through what frankly is the torture, another doctoral program, that it was a possibility. And that's what I did. So I don't know if there's anything more you'd want to know about my past, but that is probably the most curious thing.

Jordan Rich:  Yeah, it's a fun little journey back around to your calling. It's very fun to see the kind of cyclical nature of it. So on your blog you describe a lot of your articles as surrounding the paradoxes of personality, which is a very specific phrase. Would you mind explaining to us what that phrase means to you?

Leon Seltzer:  It's interesting that Niels Bohr, the physicist, and I think it was back in the 1920s, said something like, "The opposite of any profound truth is equally true." Which would surprise a lot of people, but what I discovered is that there are many different perspectives toward one and the same thing, each of which has a certain validity.

And I think one of the things that most therapists do, regardless of what school they believe in or practice, is basically to have people understand some of their, what? Maladjusted behaviors as behaviors that were once necessary for them, that they weren't mistaken at all. And that the problem is simply that those behaviors based on self-protective mechanisms have basically become less and less adaptive as they've gotten older.

So, just to be able to see how things can be understood in different ways. One of the things I did actually before today was to kind of look at some of my more recent posts, or—and articles for Psychology Today. And I might just want to read some of the titles if I can find this here, simply because almost all of them are imbued with paradox.

So, looking at the most recent one, I did an article called Determinism vs. Free Will: A Contemporary Update. And my point was that to think that we have absolutely free will is probably not very accurate for the simple reason that if you believe at all in cause and effect, then it is also true that one cause can have many effects and many causes can have one effect.

Then anything like absolute free will doesn't square with the research that's been done, particularly in the last decade or so. The same thing with determinism. To say that our lives are predetermined is also reductive. It really doesn't get at the fact that there are certain choices that we do have. So it's like it's a paradox, that even people who don't technically, theoretically believe in free will live their lives as though they have free will.

So again, whatever it is, I'm always looking for the paradoxical element because it's a way of going deeper. And when I go deeper, I generally find I have a more profound understanding of whoever it is I might be working with. Let me look at a few other titles. The one before that was Why Discord, Paradoxically, Is Vital in Close Relationships.

And I think the very title is paradoxical because why would you want discord in a close relationship? And basically, what it is about is that, if in fact when we grew up our family, our immediate family disapproved of certain of our behaviors, then if our spouse enacts any of those behaviors, the child part of us will feel threatened. Because if this is our intimate other, our other half as it were, then it's going to feel threatening to us.

So we're going to have to dissociate from our partner. And a lot of times people don't even really understand the basis, the crux of why they've suddenly moved from harmony to disharmony. So it's very useful when they're in a suggestion of discord to realize they're not just talking about money, they're not just talking about how introverted or extroverted the other person ought to be, maybe depending on how introverted or extroverted their parents were, that they're talking about something that is most likely unresolved in their past.

So to give an example of this, let's say that a child by nature is kind of boisterous, asks a lot of questions, always wants to share everything that's going on with him or her. And the parents are both quite introverted, they're quiet individuals and they're made uncomfortable by their child's extroversion.

In a sense, they feel invalidated by that extroversion. It's going to be very hard for them not to be critical of their child, although the child isn't doing anything wrong. But if the child is young and, of course, very susceptible to his parents' ideas about him, he is going to think, “I need to be less loud because they keep saying, shh.”

And that makes me feel ashamed. It makes me feel that my bond with my own parents is tenuous. And I can't think of anything that would be scarier for a child not to feel secure, not to feel safe in their attachment bond with their parents. Now to the degree that the child tries to conform to what the parents need or want of him, then he will be, in a sense, suppressing his essential nature. And I've seen so many adults in the past that felt empty, almost as though some part of them was missing.

And it was a part that they had repressed because it was associated with parental disapproval, maybe even parental rejection. And I won't go into it, but it's the same thing if the child is very introverted and had two extroverted parents who felt that he was too insular, that he was isolating himself from his peers, that basically he needed to be in more group activities even though he enjoyed collecting stamps, whatever it was, or maybe just watching baseball games by himself on tv.

And it's a shame because most parents just want to socialize their kids because they realize that's their responsibility, but they have blinders based on how they were parented. So a lot of the problems that I had dealt with with clients basically had to do with the fact that their parents had blind spots.

And I think one of the things that is so useful about all forms of therapy is to the extent that the client gives the therapist a certain authority comparable or hopefully greater than the authority he gave to his parents and gets the message that who he is is acceptable. It may deviate from the norm, but that doesn't make it unacceptable.

And even if he's engaged in antisocial behaviors, although the therapist would like not to see that kind of behavior, the therapist would help him understand compassionately why he developed those behaviors. And it could be that he had to suppress his anger toward his parents because that would further alienate his parents from him. So that was too scary. But the main thing is if you experience anger and you don't express it, it doesn't disappear.

It just goes in deeper and deeper and then it gets displaced onto other people who don't deserve your anger, your aggression, whatever it might be. And it's the same thing with passive aggression. And on the other side, and this is more true of girls than of boys, what girls may do is try to please their parents because their parents react to them favorably or more favorably or only favorably when they're putting their parents' needs in front of their own.

And then the problem is I have seen adults who when asked, “Well, what do you need?” They didn't know. They had never thought about it. They had never had the luxury of asserting their needs to their parents without being told that they were being selfish. So and again, this goes back to the paradox of it all, that what happens is you end up blending with your defense mechanisms, and people pleasing can be seen as a defense mechanism.

And when you do that, you basically become alienated from yourself. And when you think about it, being alienated from yourself is probably even worse than being alienated from your parents. And the main thing about giving authority to a therapist who can have a deeper understanding of what's unconscious in you and bring it into consciousness is you can't change outdated defense mechanisms without making them conscious first.

And a therapist has to find a way of helping you do that without, in a sense, revitalizing or reawakening defenses that the child part of you still thinks are essential. I'll do one more title and then we can move on to whatever your next question is. Yeah. This is one of my favorite titles.

It's called, The Monster Once Beneath Your Bed May Now Be in Your Head. And this too is about internalizing those things that threaten you from outside. I once had a client who had this dream of being followed by a monster, being chased after by a monster. Maybe she was five, six years old. And she ran into her parents' bedroom and basically wanted to cuddle with her mother, and her mother was really the monster in the dream.

So what do you do with that? And this is how people end up kind of suppressing things and then later repressing them. The difference between suppression and repression is suppression is feeling something but not allowing yourself to express it because it feels way too dangerous for you. Over time what happens is just having that feeling is scary and you can try, and it's amazing that human beings can do this, not to experience the feeling.

This is why a lot of people have anger problems, don't realize that the anger isn't the source so much as anxiety is the source. Boys more than girls may suppress, well, I should say, yeah, girls more than boys, but both genders do this. What they will do is basically, in order not to feel an anxiety, which is disabling. Anxiety is obviously one of the most uncomfortable emotions that anybody could experience because it feels as though you're about to go over a cliff.

What anger does, anger by definition is always self-righteous. So it makes you feel that at least you have reason on your side, that basically the way you're being treated is unfair. You don't deserve to be treated that way. So anger feels a lot better than anxiety. The problem is if anxiety is what's underneath the anger, you never get a chance to work through the anxiety, and that is what would be ideal.

Then you wouldn't need the anger, to the degree that anger is a defense against anxiety. And in my earliest writings for Psychology Today, and I don't know what I mentioned, at this point, I think there's something like 554 articles. And you did mention very prolific, I think in your introduction.

And I'm surprised myself that I wrote that many, but I'm just dedicated to try to share whatever I've learned in all the 35, 40 years I've been doing therapy to kind of disseminate whatever clinical wisdom I have earned so that people don't have to necessarily read a 300-page book, but can maybe just read an article and get a sense of what they might not have realized beforehand. I probably have been talking too much. What's your next question?

Jordan Rich:  Never talking too much. So thank you for breaking that down. I had never heard that phrase before. So hearing your explanation and your examples was very helpful. Speaking of your writing on Psychology Today, one of your recent articles is titled, Does Self-Shaming Help You Avoid Being Shamed by Others? Could you elaborate on what you mean by this and what you think kind of gives rise to these defense mechanisms and how while we're still kids, they might serve us in positive ways but might not ultimately be good for us? Could you break that down for us a little?

Leon Seltzer:  Yeah. And that itself is paradoxical because the question would be how in the world could self-shaming be beneficial to us? But what we internalize defensively if our parents are shaming us, is to say, "Okay, I must be bad." And I think I also wrote a post saying, Do You Need To Be Bad To Feel Good? If feeling bad in some strange, not to be paradoxical, but perverse way helps you to feel more connected with your parents, then it's going to feel safer.

It's going to feel a lot less dangerous to agree with them on how you think they are assessing your behavior. So it's almost as though in shaming yourself, if they give you the message explicitly or implicitly—and it's actually more dangerous if the message is implicit because then you really can't work with it, because they never actually said it.

It was maybe just the look in their eyes. Because I remember one client I saw a long, long time ago who talked about one of her worst memories being when she went into the kitchen, her mother was preparing a meal and needed to talk to her about something. And her mother looked at her in such a way that she basically ran out of the kitchen because she felt so denigrated, so put down. And I think she ran into her bedroom and cried.

Her mother didn't say a word. But basically if a child says, “Okay, they think there's something wrong with me, I think there's something wrong with me.” So it's almost like they're asking their caretakers the question, “Can you accept me now? I think about myself the same way you think about me, doesn't that join us?” And that to me is the saddest thing in the world. And I don't know that anybody has ever written about self shaming being a defense mechanism, but I think that illuminates why it would be.

Jordan Rich:  Yeah, that's definitely a very heartbreaking scenario. So looking at the long term, what do you see as some problems that could arise as a result of a person having this harsh sort of judgment of themselves?

Leon Seltzer:  I'll give you another example. I worked with a client whose parents basically believed in corporal punishment and the father probably found something to beat him for on, pretty much on a daily basis. And one of his worst memories was he had made a mistake and his father said to him, “Here's $5. I will give you this $5 after you pack your suitcase because you're not welcome to live with us anymore. You keep making mistakes.”

This father also expected him to follow rules that were never described to him. And kids can make mistakes because they don't automatically know what the rules are, and different families have different rules anyhow. And when his father would beat him, and tears came to my eyes when he told me this. His father said, “Take off your belt. I'm going to beat you with your own belt.”

And as he was beating him, this is almost unbelievable, the father said to him, “See, your belt hates you, too.” How can anybody say anything like that to his son? Of course, one of the things I learned that his father was comparably abusive to him. And remember what I said before that basically a lot of these behaviors aren't thought out, they're automatic, they're programmed in.

And the problem is, unless you reevaluate how your parents treated you and recognized that it was abusive, you didn't deserve it. Because you may have thought you deserved it. That's what self shaming is about. “If they're treating me this way, I must be bad and all I can do is agree with them that I'm really a bad kid. So at least that is some way that we will be on the same page.” But in any case, there was one time when he did pack his bag.

He did take the $5 and he went out into the fields. He didn't know where to go, so he just walked as far as he could. It was also cold. And at three o'clock he heard coyotes and that scared him to death. So he ran back to his house, begged to be let in, but feeling an incredible amount of shame because he knew he had to adapt to however his parents saw him.

Now the final irony in this story, which speaks volumes, is he became a renowned surgeon and never stopped seeing himself as a fraud and was just waiting for the other shoe to fall. Because even though everybody told him what a fantastic surgeon he was, he was called in to deal with the most difficult cases the other surgeons frankly didn't know how to handle and routinely he would know what to do.

It's like his hands were an unbelievable gift. But he still had this sense of inferiority. And in close relationships, he had been married more than once, he had difficulty making them work because the passive-aggressiveness that he felt as a child would come out in various ways, he could easily be triggered. The other thing is if you haven't worked through your childhood issues, you are going to be reactive.

And what that means in psychology for a person who's reactive is you are dealing with something that doesn't really exist in the present, but because it's a reminder of what typified your past, it feels like your past is in your present. So you react accordingly. And the main thing is for any therapist is to get people to respond. That puts you a choice.

When you react, it's basically the dominant programs that you internalize that have the final say. So again, working with somebody like that, you give him a message opposite from that person's parents, and you do it with an authority that ideally the person would respect and you go slowly. It has to be incremental. Because there's no way that a person could assimilate a message about himself that's directly contrary to the message that he got earlier.

So in terms of defense mechanisms, I would say all of them are maladaptive once you become an adult. So dissociation is the biggest one. Because dissociation takes you out of the present. And if there's some conflict, if there's something that feels threatening and you can't get hold of that and talk to yourself in a way that in the moment it dissolves, then basically you can't think clearly.

Because anybody whose emotions get hold of them is going to be, in a sense reduced to a childlike reactive state. So denial is similar to dissociation. It also takes you away from the present, which is what all defense mechanisms do. And the only defense mechanism that it occurs to me is always adaptive is sublimation.

Because what sublimation is about is defined in earlier, the earliest psychoanalysis vision with Freud is that basically the impulses that you have that are destructive, that are anti-social, that are overly libidinous, whatever you want to call them, you know at some level would be inhumane to express, dangerous to express, probably illegal.

So Confucius said something like 2000 years ago that if you embark on a journey of revenge, first build two pits. Is it pits, what would it be? Or burial sites. And the whole idea is you end up killing yourself even as presumably you're killing someone else. So it is normal, I think it's really in our DNA to have nasty vengeful thoughts about somebody who's exploited us, taken advantage of us, deceived us.

But to seek revenge on them, it's like giving them a taste of their own medicine, doesn't really resolve the problem. We somehow have to say, “Okay, what is it that I can learn from this? Revenge is not the answer.” And then move forward. The problem with somebody who is really immersed in getting revenge on others, retribution, if you will, is that they're really not focusing on what their personal welfare is.

I don't think that anybody can really be fulfilled by getting revenge because they're still back in the past. So sublimation is basically saying, “Okay, let me take up a musical instrument. Let me color a mandolin or something like that.” That basically you're trying to use that energy, and this is what sublimation is, transform it into something positive and something fulfilling.

So any form of play might be seen as a healthy return to childhood because I think that the healthiest adults are childlike. Not childish, but childlike. And that's one thing about having children, when parents play with their children, they are childlike and they can play a game with the children. And as much as the children love having their parents play with them, they are in a sense restoring something that may have been lost with all the adult obligations that on a daily basis they need to fill.

Jordan Rich:  Yeah. So thank you for diving into some healthier means of self-defense. I think that's going to be very helpful for our audience. So you've touched on reprogramming the self-defense mechanisms you've developed, specifically self-deprecation. Is there any specific advice you would give as to how to reprogram those behaviors or any therapies you would recommend to help someone through that process, any specific therapies?

Leon Seltzer:  The main thing is ultimately all healing comes from within, that therapists need to facilitate the process, they need to kind of guide it. Because basically, people who go into therapy go into therapy because they're stuck. It's not as though they need to have schizophrenia to go into therapy. And schizophrenia is handled as much by medications as anything else because it's considered a brain disease mostly.

And in terms of getting unstuck, some people can do it through what's called bibliotherapy. If you look at my background, you can see that I am pretty much enamored of books, and I stopped buying them when I realized that there was absolutely no more room on my bookshelves to put them. You can see how crowded they are.

I have to really work hard to extricate one book from the book on the left side and the right side. And I probably would not have anywhere as many books if I didn't start buying them before I knew how to use computers or there was all this information available on the computers. I know one thing I do in terms of consulting is I basically recommend books and articles and even videos they can read or they can see, because there's so much psychotherapy material now just on YouTube.

Basically, I'll want them to get a sense of what outdated defense mechanisms may be getting in their way. So sometimes I would explain core concepts to them. Given the fact that I function as a psychotherapist for so many years, I don't want my accumulated clinical wisdom if we can call it that, to go to waste. So I make myself available.

And generally I consult with people who've read one or more of my articles for Psychology Today and have questions. And if the questions are simple, I'm happy, gratis, to answer them, whether it's email or on the phone, maybe 5, 10 minutes. What I find sometimes is that they're complicated and without knowing more about their past, I wouldn't want to be glib and suggest something that would be untenable for them.

So then I make myself available, say for a more formal 60 minute consultation or more than one if that's necessary. But basically the model that I suggest to them is called Internal Family Systems Therapy. And what that means as opposed to Family Systems Therapy, is we have a family inside ourselves, and that internal family can easily give us different messages. So the essence of ambivalence.

And most people who go into therapy are ambivalent. I remember a cartoon I saw many years ago, I think it was called Cathy, it hasn't been in there for a while. But Cathy said something about the fact that she wants to be totally different, but please don't ask her to change.

Because change is very scary. What happens with change is you immediately find your level of anxiety elevating. Of course, because you're asked to change in different ways that your parents that are also inside you have been telling you, or you think they've been telling you not to change because it would endanger this core relationship that you have.

But in any case, with Internal Family Systems Therapy, it's interesting because Schwartz has written at least three or four books for lay people. Richard Schwartz is basically the originator of that particular model. And more and more people are seeing it as state of the art, although it's a very eloquent, elegant theory at the same time that it's not that easy to implement.

But basically, his second book for lay people. I love the title, is called You Are the One You've Been Waiting For. And what he talks about is a person's essential, authentic self, liberated from all these protective mechanisms that he refers to as protective parts. And those are parts of you, spontaneous, playful, wise even, that we all have.

And when we're feeling emotionally overwhelmed, because maybe we're in an incident that's shaming. And anything that's shaming to a child really is traumatic for that child because what defines it as trauma is they feel that their bond with their parents in the moment is being endangered, and they know that they're not self-sufficient, they're not mature enough to live on their own.

They can't run down to the Jones' house at the end of the street and say, "Would you please adopt me? I'm having problems with my parents." So they have to make all these adaptations that I've already talked about. So the main thing about IFS, Internal Family Systems is basically to get more and more in touch with the behaviors that really inhibit you from realizing who you truly are.

And basically, when I advise people, what I advise them to do is to think about how they needed to adapt to their parents' orders. It'd be one thing if the parent made a request, but it was okay if the child refused the request. But frequently, if the child feels that they have to have certain unalterable rules for the child, then the child doesn't have any sense of choice.

So even in self shaming, the protective part inside the child says basically, "You have to do this, otherwise you'll just constantly feel anxious." And I think the saddest thing is I've worked with people in the past that basically would engage in all sorts of extracurricular activities when the school day was over or would go to their best friend's house and come back only when they knew they had to come back for dinner, because as soon as they walked through the front door, their anxiety level would escalate.

And I can't think of anything more disturbing, more horrible than to never feel safe in your own house. And that hardly reflects the majority of people who are in therapy, but to some degree, they had to change who they authentically were in order to adapt. It's not always to the parents. It can be to an older sibling. It could be to kids in the neighborhood.

It could even be to their teachers, because teachers unwittingly can shame students very easily without even knowing that they're doing it. And it's not as though the child can go up to them after class and said, “You just shamed me.” No, they bear that burden inside. And basically what therapy is about, particularly in IFS, Internal Family Systems Therapy is basically to release those burdens, to integrate that wounded child part of you with your adult, and basically bring that child into your present life.

Have the child remind you when it's time to play, maybe even when it's time to get silly. Because being an adult really isn't that much fun. If you think about it, when we think of our adult selves, we think of being conscientious and responsible and productive, and that definitely has its place. But if that's all our life is, then our adult life becomes as burdensome as maybe our childhood was.

Jordan Rich:  Well, thank you for that advice, Dr. Seltzer. That actually concludes my questions for today. So to close, are there any final words of advice or anything else you would like to share with our listeners?

Leon Seltzer:  Well, I don't know that I can say anything that I haven't already said, or I could speak for another 10 hours, one or the other. So we should probably leave it as it is right now.

Jordan Rich:  Right. Perfect. Well, thank you again for meeting with me today, Dr. Seltzer. And thank you to everyone else for tuning in.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Travis Osborne on OCD & Hoarding

An Interview with Clinical Psychologist Travis Osborne

Travis Osborne, Ph.D. is the Clinical Director at the Evidence Based Treatment Centers of Seattle (EBTCS), as well as the Director of the Anxiety Center and Co-Director of Research and Outcomes Monitoring at EBTCS. Dr. Osborne specializes in the treatment of anxiety and related conditions, including OCD and hoarding disorder.

Tori Steffen:  Hi everybody. Thank you for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview series. I'm Tori Steffen, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We're a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders. I'd like to welcome with us today clinical psychologist, Travis Osborne. Dr. Osborne is the clinical director at the Evidence Based Treatment Centers of Seattle (EBTCS), as well as the director of the Anxiety Center and co-director of Research and Outcomes Monitoring at EBTCS. Dr. Osborne specializes in the treatment of anxiety and related conditions, including OCD and hoarding disorder. He has multiple appearances on the television show, Hoarding, Buried Alive on the Learning Channel TLC, and he is also a longtime consultant to the Seattle OCD and Hoarding Support Group and is a training institute faculty member of the International Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Foundation, IOCDF. So before we get started today, Dr. Osborne, could you let us know a little bit more about yourself and what made you interested in studying various obsessive compulsive spectrum disorders, including OCD and hoarding?

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, well thanks for having me today. So as you mentioned, so I'm a clinical psychologist, so the biggest part of my job is actually working with clients who have anxiety and related conditions. And the center where I work, in addition to being an anxiety specialty center, is also known for being an OCD specialty center. So when I joined that, when I joined EBTCS about 16 years ago, I actually had never treated clients with OCD before. I had treated anxiety, but I hadn't treated OCD. And so pretty quickly had to learn the treatment for OCD and get up to speed.

So I actually attended a training with the IOCDF International OCD Foundation, which you mentioned a minute ago that does these really great three day intensive trainings to teach clinicians how to treat OCD from an evidence-based perspective. And they're really doing a lot of good work to try to train as many therapists as possible to treat OOC because there's a huge lack of specialists trained in that treatment. So pretty early in that work went through that training, really fell in love with both the treatment but also working with OCD in particular.

One of the great things about the treatment, which we might end up talking a bit about today, exposure and response prevention is that's incredibly effective. Research has actually founded it to be one of the most effective forms of psychotherapy across all disorders. So it works well, which is exciting. And OCD is a really complex disorder. The symptoms can be very difficult for people to manage and figure out how to overcome on their own. So it's super rewarding to be able to deliver a treatment, has a lot of science behind it, and actually see the vast majority of people that do it get better. So fell into that work and then it's become one of the bigger parts of the work that I do over time.

Tori Steffen:  Awesome. Yeah, that sounds like a very rewarding field.

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, for sure.

Tori Steffen:  And I'm sure it's nice to have more specialists for the OCD and hoarding, so that's awesome. Well, getting down to basics, could you explain for our listeners what OCD is?

Travis Osborne:  Absolutely. So OCD used to be classified as an anxiety disorder, so that's kind of how it was thought of in the field for decades. And then around 2013, a new version of the classification system for psychological disorders came out. It's called the DSM-5 for a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, version five came out. And in that version there was a major reorganization of several conditions and OCD and hoarding were a part of that major reorganization. And after a lot of research and work by the committees that put this together, there was a decision made to move OCD out of the anxiety disorders into its own new category called obsessive compulsive spectrum disorders. And as part of that decision, there was also a decision to make hoarding disorder formally its own disorder. So previously it had been considered a type of OCD, there was a lot of research suggesting that was not quite right, which we could talk about today.

And it also became its own disorder. So OCD kind of now anchors this whole new category that's been created. And so what OCD is, is a combination of intrusive thoughts and those can be words or images or kind of movies playing in one's mind that are very distressing, cause anxiety or related emotions. And then people do a whole range of rituals or compulsions, which are behaviors that are done repetitively over and over again in an attempt to bring down their anxiety and distress. And OCD can present in an infinite number of ways, but there are seven or eight kind of really common kind of subtypes, ways that it can show up, but really can be just about anything as long as you see this combination of these repetitive thoughts that are really bothersome and then these repetitive behaviors as an attempt to reduce that distress.

Tori Steffen:  Gotcha. Okay. That definitely breaks it down for us. And then hoarding disorders, since those are two separate things, could you explain for us that one a little bit?

Travis Osborne:  Yeah. So as I mentioned prior to 2013 hoarding had always been considered a subtype of OCD. So if you had hoarding behaviors, you came to a mental health professional, you would've gotten a diagnosis of OCD and they would've just said that the subtype that you had involved hoarding behaviors. Unfortunately, what we discovered is, I've mentioned a little while ago that the treatment for OCD works very well. It's an incredibly effective treatment. And so we had several decades of research showing that this treatment, ERP or exposure and response prevention works great for OCD when they started doing some more fine grain analysis of what happens when we looked at just the subgroup of people in those research trials that had hoarding symptoms, what they found is those folks were actually doing terribly. So the treatment was not working for them very well at all, but it was working for all these other OCD presentations.

So it kind of started giving us the hint that something is different about these symptoms and the way that we're treating it isn't working for these folks. So a fair amount of work in the '90s, early 2000s went into flushing out some more specific diagnostic criteria for a separate hoarding disorder diagnosis would look like. And then also developing a completely different treatment approach for the disorder given that ERP was not working very well. The other thing that was discovered is that if OCD, if hoarding was a subset of OCD, we should see really high rates of other OCD symptoms in people with hoarding if it really was a type of OCD. What they found is only about 18% I think it is, of people with hoarding actually meet criteria for other OCD behaviors.

So it's a pretty small group. So there was all this research that started coming out, but these are different things. So in 2013, hoarding disorder actually became its own standalone disorder. So that's not that long ago, it's less than 10 years ago. So if you think about that in the history of mental health field, that's a pretty new classification of disorder. Obviously the symptoms have been around forever. What that means though is that the treatment research and the research on hoarding is lagging decades behind disorders like OCD and depression and anxiety, things like that because it is a pretty new kind of standalone disorder. And so what the criteria for hoarding disorder look like is people basically holding onto or saving a large number of things regardless of their actual value, having considerable difficulty getting rid of things and often only get rid of things if sort of pressed by others.

So it could be other people living in the house or landlords or other outside entities that might be involved and a fair amount of distress when faced with actually having to get rid of things. And then what that leads to is a tremendous amount of clutter in people's homes and an inability to use their homes as they're designed. So perhaps the kitchen table is so cluttered you can't actually eat at it. Maybe your kitchen counters are so cluttered you can't use them to prepare food. Your bed might be so cluttered you can't sleep in it, so you really can't use your home as it's intended. And so when we look just at the symptoms, they're actually pretty different than what OCD looks like. OCD, we have these recurrent thoughts and then these recurrent behaviors that people are doing in response to those thoughts.

And although hoarding could be seen as a compulsive behavior, it's a much more varied and complicated picture. And then you also have all these physical belongings that make it very different too. So the good news is a new treatment has been developed, that treatment is showing good promise, certainly much better promise than what we were doing before. But it has also really helped us understand that these are two very separate disorders. People can have both, but the majority of people that have one don't have the other. It's a relatively small number of people that have both.

Tori Steffen:  That's pretty interesting. It sounds like there's a lot of differences in the way that they present themselves as far-

Travis Osborne:  For sure.

Tori Steffen:  ... as symptoms go. Are there any ways that OCD and hoarding disorder are connected?

Travis Osborne:  I think the shared connection, and I think this is reflected in this new category of DSM that I mentioned of obsessive compulsive spectrum disorders. So they're both sort of under that umbrella, which is a recognition that there are some shared components. I think the component that probably would be arguably the most shared is that the compulsion, if you will, in hoarding is saving things. So not getting rid of things. And then for some people excessively acquiring things. So not all people with hoarding acquire things at a really rapid rate or excessive rate, but some do. And I think that as described as a compulsive type behavior, you could argue sort of fits, but there's actually I think actually more differences than similarities, kind of reflecting the division of them. For example, in OCD, the emotion that tends to be most predominant when people have their obsessive thoughts or encounter triggers for their OCD is anxiety usually, or fear.

There are other emotions too, but that's the most prominent. And anxiety is not necessarily the most prominent emotion in hoarding, it could be loss, feelings of sadness and loss when you get rid of things or anger when people suggest that you do get rid of things or try to help you get rid of things or push you to get rid of things. And so there's just a lot more variability in the emotions that come up, what those emotions look like. Whereas in OCD we see a lot more kind of narrower range of it typically looks like fear and anxiety, some other emotions sometimes. So they're pretty different in terms of the emotions that pop up too.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. That definitely makes sense as far as how they can be differently understood. So I saw an article on the EBTCS site that noted most OCD symptoms can begin in childhood. Do signs and symptoms of OCD tend to defer among children and adults?

Travis Osborne:  That's a great question. So the vast majority of people with OCD do show symptoms in the childhood or teen years. It can come on in adulthood, but that's more rare. And when most adults look back, even if they didn't have kind of full-blown OCD, they can see the traces of those behaviors. What's interesting is the symptoms themselves look pretty similar in childhood and adulthood.

So the subtypes that I mentioned of OCD that are pretty common are kind of the same subtypes show up in kids as show up in adults and what the big broad categories of those look like is contamination concerns where people probably the rituals are engaging a lot of hand washing or showering or washing their clothes, cleaning that kind of stuff, doubting whether you've done something. So did I check the stove? Did I check the lights? Did I check the car? The fear being that something bad could happen if I didn't do those things. And then the checking behaviors that can go along with that.

Obsessive thoughts about harm are really common. It's one that's not talked about a lot, but they're very high number of percentage of people who have what we call harm obsessions, which could be worries that they're going to harm other people in some way or concerns that they're going to harm themselves. And then usually lots of avoidance of situations where that could be potentially possible. Another major subtype is sexual obsessions, people having unwanted sexual thoughts. And we see this in kids and teens just as much as we see them in adulthood as well. And then what we call just right obsessions, which are needing things to be a particular way. And that could be anything from needing things to be symmetrical or done a certain number of times or done a particular way or doing something until you get a feeling that it's right. And then you can see a lot of repeating of behaviors until you get it right, in some sense.

Probably forgetting one of the subtypes. But those are the main kind of subtypes. And then from there, OCD can really be about, oh, the other one is called scrupulosity. So this kind of either religious or morally themed obsessions about, "Have I done something wrong? Have I done something sinful?" And then lots of rituals usually that are related if it's religious like praying or confessing or things like that. If it's more moral, it could be asking reassurance about whether somebody else feels like maybe you did do something wrong or whether you did X or Y or trying to evaluate whether you have made some kind of mistake or transgression or things like that. And so what we see in kids is the same subtypes, but maybe the way they show up just isn't as developed as it might be in an adult brain. But the things that kids with OCD worry about essentially are the same things that adults with OCD worry about.

Tori Steffen:  That's very interesting. It sounds like anxiety and then fear are probably the main symptoms that show up for OCD. Are there any that we're missing from there?

Travis Osborne:  So sometimes people can have disgust and disgust can show up in different types of contamination. So people feel like if food is rotten or if they feel like it's spoiled. Or some people with contamination concerns won't handle raw meat or eggs because they worry about salmonella or they worry about other diseases. They can actually feel fear, but also just like, this is gross, this is just kind of a disgust response. So disgust can definitely come up. And then I think guilt and shame can come up a lot when people have harm and sexual obsessions, so worries that they're going to hurt people or behave sexually in a way that's inappropriate. People can feel a lot of shame and guilt about those thoughts as well. So fear is kind of the biggest one and then disgust and shame and guilt can sort of pop up too.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, great. What kind of treatment options are available for those with OCD and hoarding disorder or maybe just OCD and/or hoarding disorder?

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, yeah. So for OCD two, clear treatments, one would be medication. So medication has been very repeatedly proven to be helpful with OCD, particularly the SSRI medications, which are also used for things like depression and other kinds of anxiety. Those can be extremely helpful for folks. The caveat is oftentimes for people with OCD, the doses of those medications need to be higher than for depression or other types of anxiety. And not all medication providers have that training. And so don't always know to try higher doses if lower doses aren't working, the medication can be very effective. And then the therapy that's most effective, as I mentioned, is something called exposure and response prevention, ERP for short, that's a treatment that was developed in the '80s and has 30 plus years of data behind it. There's probably somewhere between 40 and 60 randomized control trials evaluating that treatment with kids, teens, adults, very robust database.

And what ERP involves is having people systematically approach the things that trigger their OCD, make them feel anxious, and then have them practice not doing their rituals, not avoiding in response to it. And doing those two things together kind of helps people learn new ways of facing their OCD symptoms and breaks the cycle of OCD that people get stuck in. It's hard to do because it involves facing your fears, but what I usually tell clients is that, "It's no harder than living with OCD because if you have OCD, you're also feeling fear all the time anyways. At least with treatment, if you're feeling fear, it's in the service of you getting better as opposed to your OCD you're feeling fearful all the time, but you're just stuck in this endless kind of loop."

So the treatment for hoarding so far, we do not have any medications that are a clear home run for hoarding symptoms that is unique in the psychiatry psychology world. We do have medications for most disorders and we don't have a clear medication for hoarding. So what we think about for medication with hoarding is treating other conditions that might go along with it. So if someone is hoarding and also has depression or has a problem with hoarding and also has anxiety or an attention deficit disorder, we think about using medications to treat those other conditions because sometimes they make it harder for the person to do all the work involved of going through all their belongings and getting rid of stuff. There's no medication yet specifically for hoarding.

Then the treatment, the therapy that's been found to be most helpful for hoarding is a type of cognitive behavior therapy or CBT that has been specifically developed for hoarding that teaches people strategies that address the three components of the problem, which would be acquiring if they're bringing things into the home, the saving, not getting rid of stuff, and then the clutter that develops in the home.

So there's different strategies to help people tackle each of those things. And it's a pretty hands-on treatment, like ideally it's actually done in people's homes. So therapists often go into people's homes, actually help them go through their belongings, learn how to make decisions about what to keep and what to get rid of, and then actually practice going through that process until it becomes less distressing and they get better, better and better at it. Can take a while as you can imagine if a home has a lot of things in it, that process can take a long time, but for now it's the only treatment that we have that has some research behind it.

Tori Steffen:  Well, it's good to hear that there is the research out there and techniques that can help people with both hoarding disorder and OCD. So thank you for explaining that. That was very educational. Well, a past interview of yours with NPR notes that one goal in treating OCD as you mentioned is to limit that amount of ritualizing. Can you explain for us how that's usually accomplished in the treatment process?

Travis Osborne:  Yeah. So that part of the treatment is the response prevention part. So the exposure is facing the thing that makes you anxious and the response prevention is the trying to not ritualize or avoid in response to that. So I think there's lots of ways. Some people we can get them on board with just stopping certain rituals and they're able to do that in response to very specific situations. They might not be able to stop the whole thing, but if we're working on something, they might just be able to say, "Okay, I will work on just not doing this ritual and I will ride out this wave of anxiety that I'm having." Not everyone can just do that.

So other ways that we help people is usually rituals are pretty repetitive. Someone's washing their hands, they might be washing their hands multiple times. Usually the rituals take up quite a bit of time. So if there's a way we could say, let's say somebody always washes their hands like five times, can we go from five to four? Can we go from four to three? Can we go from three and fade out the hand washing over time? That's one way we might do it. Or maybe they're just at the sink for 20 minutes and they're just washing the whole time. Can we go from 20 to 15 to 10 to 5 getting down to what would be a normal 10 20 second hand washing? Sometimes we have to shape things in the right direction, slowly cut things out.

For other people; let's say some people get really stuck when they're leaving the house. They have a whole sequence of things that they have to check before they leave to make sure everything is safe. So maybe they check the lights and the stove and the door locks and make sure they unplugged anything that was plugged in anywhere and they go through this whole sequence before they leave.

In that case, what we might do is eliminate one step at a time. So for this week, could we eliminate this particular thing and you're going to do the rest of it, and then next week could we add another thing? Could we slowly cut down that? And so we have eliminated all of those things, but what we're always looking for is how to create a pathway for people to get to where we want to go at a pace and a way that they feel is doable. So if someone can just say, "I could just stop doing that," then we'll do that. If they can't do that, then we'll start thinking, "How do we get you from where you are to where we want to get you and how do we slowly break that down into smaller and smaller steps?"

Tori Steffen:  Okay, yeah, that definitely makes sense how that could be helpful to phase people out if needed. So that's great. And one thing we also touched on earlier is the success rates for treating OCD. They're often much higher than other mental health problems. Do you have any ideas what might cause the differences between the success rates?

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, that's a good question. So anxiety disorders, broadly speaking, have pretty high success rates. So I think part of it is as a field we understand fear a lot better than we understand a lot of other disorders. And I think our science has helped us figure out what are the strategies that worked for fear. And what's interesting is intuitively we all know that to get over fear, you have to do it. So the way you get over fear is by doing it. So it's like you're afraid of swimming, what you need to do is get in a pool. If you're afraid of flying, what you need to do is fly more. We know that as humans, but it's so hard to do that a lot of people just end up avoiding and not actually doing it.

So I think because we have some pretty good basic science around fear, what's actually happening in the brain around fear, what happens when you don't avoid that has really led to the development of treatments like exposure therapy, which turned out to be really effective because they're really linked to the science of what happens with fear and treating fear. And I think with other disorders we're still trying to understand better what's happening in the brain? What's some of the basic science of what's happening, and then how do we link treatments to those things? And then some other areas I think we just don't have that quite figured out as well. So exposure turns out to be a really powerful intervention that works well, which I think is why we see such big effect sizes in the studies that show that it works.

Tori Steffen:  Gotcha. That's great that we have those scientific backed up techniques on how to treat that.

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, I mean one of the things that's incredible to me is prior to the 1980s, OCD was really considered a form of severe mental illness that was largely considered untreatable. We did not have treatments really that worked well for OCD and it was considered a chronic untreatable or not very successfully treated illness. Then the '80s we had these two breakthroughs, we had the breakthroughs of SSRI medications that started to be found to be really effective. And then we have the development of ERP exposure therapy in the early '80s as well. What's amazing to me is just in the span of 30 years, 20, 30 years, we went from OCD being essentially a untreatable severe mental illness to the disorder that has some of the highest success rates in the whole field, all driven by science, all driven by evidence based procedures, which I think also just underscores the need for science backed treatments like that basic science that helped us understand what's happening in the brain when fear is activated, what happens when we do exposure and stick with the fear, how that changes things.

All that sort of led to the development of a treatment that now is highly, highly effective, which is super cool and exciting. And how in that span of... well, some people's lifetimes, I've treated clients who were much older who when they were kids, teens, early adults, there was no treatment for their OCD then by the time they were older, there now was a treatment for their OCD and then they finally got the treatment that they needed and it worked really well for them, which is pretty life changing.

Tori Steffen:  Absolutely. Yeah, that's really good to hear that a lot of people have been helped by that. So hopefully those scientific findings can keep coming and helping us for other disorders as well. So in an article, you mentioned that hoarders can sometimes perceive themselves as collectors. Could you explain maybe the difference between a hoarder and a collector for the audience?

Travis Osborne:  For sure. Yeah. I think the term hoarding and hoarder are so negative and have so many negative connotations in our culture. That makes a lot of sense to me that if somebody is struggling with clutter, it's way more comfortable to see oneself as a collector than as having a problem with hoarding. So I think people will gravitate toward that term because it's just not a term that has a lot of negative sort of bias and kind of stigma attached to it. When we look though at what collecting looks like and what hoarding looks like, they're totally different things.

So most people who are collectors, it is true, they might have a lot of possessions and they might have categories of things that they collect a lot of whatever, whatever it is they collect, whether it's baseball cards or fashion or artwork or cars or whatever it is they collect, they probably have a lot of those things and they may have a hard time actually getting rid of things that they collect because they're pretty attached to their collections, they like their collections and they've spent a lot of money and time on their collections.

So parting with those things could be pretty hard. However, they don't tend to have any issues with acquiring other stuff. They don't tend to have any issues with getting rid of other stuff. And most people who collect are super proud of their collections and will go to great lengths to display them in their homes, keep them really organized and beautiful. They get a lot of joy from sharing their collections with other people, showing people their room that has baseball memorabilia in it or whatever it might be. It's something that they get pride from, share with others, and there's a lot of joy around that.

In hoarding what we see is the complete opposite. So there's rarely organization, there's a lot of clutter and difficulty to navigate or find things. And most people with hoarding do not want anyone coming into their home. So whereas a collector might love having somebody over and sharing their collection with somebody, somebody with hoarding typically does not want anyone seeing the state of their home that would cause severe shame, distress, they actively work to actually keep people out of their homes and keep people away from their homes.

And most people with hoarding, some people with hoarding do only hoard specific things, but a lot of people with hoarding the stuff is the collecting is or the acquiring, accumulating is pretty broad based. They have too much of all over the place, too much of everything and it's not usually as specific to something like a collection. And then of course they also have the broad base difficulty with parting with things. So I think what the home looks like is pretty different between collecting and hoarding and then the fact that people with collecting want to share it, want to show it off, get a lot of joy from that versus the sort of shame and keeping people out away I think are some pretty big differences.

The other thing is that for most collectors it's not getting in the way of their lives and hoarding really gets in the way of people's lives. They usually can't socialize in their homes. They often can't have family or friends over to their homes. They can't find things. Sometimes in more severe situations there's health hazards or for older adults like falling hazards and tripping hazards. It actually gets in the way of living makes life harder. Whereas collecting usually doesn't make life harder typically.

Tori Steffen:  Right. Yeah, definitely some pretty big differences there between the two. So while treatment options are best and ideally done under the guidance of a licensed mental health professional, what are some things adults can do on their own to, or even children as well to potentially reduce or lessen any symptoms of OCD and hoarding disorder?

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, well for folks here in Seattle, and this is true in other major cities too, there actually is a free OCD and hoarding support group here in Seattle. That is an awesome resource, particularly for adults but also for family members and friends. So parents of kids or teens with OCD or hoarding behaviors, ocdseattle.org is the website for that. They have free meetings that are a huge source of support and help for folks. So looking for local support groups that are often easier to access sometimes than therapy, maybe less scary to access than therapy sometimes can be good. There's also great self-help books. That's so readily available online now, the internet has helped with that.

The IOCDF or international OCD foundation that I mentioned earlier has tons of not just resources, but they have an annual conference every year that's open not only to professionals but also people with OCD and hoarding disorder. They now actually have separate hoarding conference as well. Those are really helpful resources and they also run some other programs throughout the year that can be of help. And like I said, some great self-help books as well. I think all of those are kind of resources that can be useful to folks. I think the reality is most people with hoarding and OCD are going to need some form of professional help typically because it's just a very complicated problems to solve, but some people can often get a lot out of those other resources too.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, that's good to know. I'm glad to hear that there's those resources out there. So thank you for sharing that info. But yeah, like you mentioned, it's with the success rates, I'm sure it's most ideal to seek out professional help.

Travis Osborne:  Yeah, for sure.

Tori Steffen:  Well, Dr. Osborne, do you have any final words of advice or anything else that you'd like to share with our listeners today?

Travis Osborne:  I think just the key thing that like OCD has come so far in the past 30, 40 years. I mean, we really have great treatments if folks are willing to do them and just the awareness that folks should have that we are still figuring, hoarding out because it just became its own disorder just under 10 years ago, has really put the research behind. So we're moving in a good direction, but I suspect in another 10 or 15 years we're going to have even better treatments than we have today.

Tori Steffen:  Awesome. Yeah, I'm definitely hoping as well that the research continues for that. Well great. Well thank you so much Dr. Osborne. It's been really nice talking with you today and thank you for your contributing to our interview series.

Travis Osborne:  You're welcome. Thanks for having me.

Tori Steffen:  Absolutely. And thanks for everybody for tuning in and we'll see you later.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist David Rosmarin on Spirituality & Mental Health

An Interview with Psychologist David Rosmarin

David Rosmarin, Ph.D., ABPP is the founder of the Center for Anxiety (New York & Boston) a psychologist at McLean Hospital and an associate professor in the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Rosmarin specializes in the relevance of spirituality in one’s mental health.

Tori Steffen:  Hi everybody. Thank you for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview series. I'm Tori Steffen, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We are a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

I'd like to welcome with us today psychologist, David Rosmarin. Dr. Rosmarin is the founder of Center for Anxiety, which has offices in both New York and Boston. He's also a psychologist at McLean Hospital and an associate professor in the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Rosmarin's research at Harvard focuses on the relevance of spirituality to mental health. At Center for Anxiety, his team uses a combination of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and dialectical behavior therapy, also known as DBT. These approaches are used to help patients struggling with moderate to severe symptoms of anxiety, depression, and other concerns.

Before we get started, could you please let us know a little bit more about yourself, Dr. Rosmarin, and it sounds like you have two different aspects of your career, the spirituality and then the anxiety piece. Are these related?

David Rosmarin:  Well, first, thanks very much for having me on your program and I'm really happy to be here. They can be related for some individuals. Spirituality is an interesting variable. It's the kind of thing that most people in mental health don't get a lot of training in, and my program of research seeks to remedy that, to give clinicians tools to be able to assess for and address aspects of spiritual and religious life when it's relevant, which is more often than you would think, but it's not for all individuals.

In terms of anxiety, sometimes it's relevant and sometimes it's not. Center for Anxiety doesn't practice spiritual psychotherapy per se, unless individuals need specific spiritual and religious supports. I would say it is somewhat unique about our practice that it's a domain that we're not uncomfortable to address, unlike a lot of others. But it's not the only unique thing about Center for Anxiety.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. Very interesting. Well, getting down to basics, could you explain for our audience what spirituality is?

David Rosmarin:  Sure. Spirituality is any way of relating to that which is perceived to be sacred or set apart from the physical world. These kinds of beliefs are pretty common. In the United States, 80 to 90% of the general population has some sort of spiritual beliefs, and more importantly, in mental health settings, there's data to suggest that more than 80% of patients, even in some of the least religious areas of the United States, utilize spiritual ways of coping when they are distressed by mental health concerns.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, perfect. Thank you for explaining that for us. What are some connections that you have found between spirituality and mental health?

David Rosmarin:  Sure. Like any domain of life, it can be positive or negative, and spirituality is no different. In many cases, people have spiritual resources, and they might think that their faith gives them a lift. It might help them to deal with depression. It might protect them against certain things like substance abuse or alcohol abuse or suicidality. There's some very strong research to suggest that completed suicide is substantially less among people who have certain types of faith. It might give them a sense that they can get through difficult periods of life. We've seen some evidence here at McLean and elsewhere that when individuals have spiritual and religious resources at the beginning of treatment, that can help them to reduce quicker through their treatments even if the treatment has nothing to do with spirituality, interestingly.

On the other hand, though, it can be a source of strain, I mentioned. It can definitely be negative, and a lot of individuals struggle with their faith. They might think, why am I dealing with depression again? What's God doing to punish me? What did I do wrong? They might feel guilty or estranged from a faith community. They might feel bad about certain feelings they have; they might have certain conflicts which are sometimes very serious. To be able to discuss all of these, the positive and the negative and all points in between is just part of being a good psychotherapist, frankly.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. Yeah, it seems important to know about the spirituality piece, especially when you're treating patients with suicidality and it's great to know that that can help too. Well, could you describe for us how the methods of both CBT and DBT work as those naturalistic treatments for anxiety?

David Rosmarin:  Sure. You mentioned my career has two parts to it, and I would say there is some connection and overlap, but a lot of it is really disparate. At Center for Anxiety, we use a combination of cognitive and dialectical behavior therapy, which is somewhat innovative in the treatment of anxiety disorders. Most individuals treating anxiety concerns would really stick more to cognitive behavior therapy. But these days, anxiety, as I'm sure you're seeing out in Seattle, a lot of individuals come in with some pretty severe symptoms. They might have self-injury, they might be debilitated by their anxiety or other symptoms that they have. There's also high levels of what we call comorbidity where people have co-occurring anxiety with other concerns, whether it's substance abuse or depression, as I mentioned before, or any number of issues, obsessive compulsive and related disorders and these concerns and the complexity and the severity that people have today, they really, we have found can benefit from a broader toolkit of strategies that we can provide in psychotherapy to them, and that's why it spans both cognitive and dialectical behavior therapy in the practice.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, great. That definitely helps introduce our topic today with CBT and DBT. How effective would you say are both approaches, CBT and DBT in treating those symptoms of anxiety, depression, suicidality?

David Rosmarin:  Yeah, that's a scientific question and fortunately we have research to study it. Center for Anxiety has a research protocol and all patients at all sessions are administered measures, and we track over time their progress. We a couple years ago did an evaluation of our IOP, our Intensive Outpatient Program, which are individuals who needed three or more sessions per week.

One of the things that's unique about Center for Anxiety as I mentioned before, is that we provide really a higher level of care than just standard once a week outpatient. Individuals coming in with a lot more severe concerns and symptoms, I'd say about 50% of our patients at this point, require IOP, Intensive Outpatient Program or treatment, IOP we call it, and our data was very positive. We saw substantial reductions and clinically significant reductions in anxiety and depression for substantial decreases in those symptoms over the course of treatment. In fact, none of the patients in that study had an increase in their anxiety or depression over the course of treatment, which I think was particularly encouraging given the severity that they had when they came in.

Tori Steffen:  Wow. Yeah, that's definitely good to hear that there's those treatments out there to be able to help with those symptoms. Have you seen any limitations that might prevent the treatment of anxiety, depression using those?

David Rosmarin:  Being in an outpatient setting, one limitation is the cost of treatment. Unfortunately, with the era of managed care, and I'm sure you have a similar situation out in Seattle, these are out-of-pocket services, and it does limit the people who can come, which is really truly unfortunate. One advantage though that I think we have, and one way of addressing this is we do have a training program and many of our trainees are learning these techniques and they are able to be accessible at lower fees. Also, some of them move on to different sites which can provide services to individuals using insurance or having no insurance at all. I do feel like we're having an impact on the field more broadly, but in terms of our actual caseloads, that's a very significant limitation.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. Definitely makes sense. Well, your research discusses the ways that CBT and DBT involve behavior activation and mindfulness. Could you describe how those might work for audience?

David Rosmarin:  Yeah, so DBT is a broad set of tools, principles, really, and tools to help individuals struggling with severe levels of distress, moderate to severe levels of distress. One of the core tools is called mindfulness, that was the word that you mentioned. Mindfulness means being attentive to the present moment and not being judgmental of oneself. One of the things that happens is not only do people feel depressed or anxious or have other symptoms, but they judge themselves for feeling anxious, depressed, and that judgment instead of simply being anxious or being depressed and allowing oneself to feel that way, that judgment of oneself and negative perception of that feeds in and actually creates more of a surge of adrenaline. It suppresses dopamine, serotonin, other neurotransmitters and individuals are more likely to struggle substantially when they judge themselves. Mindfulness is a training of simply allowing oneself to be in the moment and to experience whatever they're going through without that critical eye.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, great. Thank you for explaining that for us. Your research was also discussing how psychoeducation plays a role in the treatment. How might that work to address those symptoms for anxiety and depression?

David Rosmarin:  There are a lot of basic facts around anxiety and depression and other symptoms that people don't know. For example, if you're feeling depressed, you probably will not want to engage in this much activity because hey, you're feeling sad, you're not enjoying things as much. You're struggling to have the energy and your sleep might be dysregulated. However, to the extent that people simply keep a schedule, even if they're feeling depressed, their depression can and often does remit.

Scheduling an activity which is supposed to be so to speak, pleasurable, even if it isn't, can actually be a part of that. Going to an exercise class, simply going for a walk, lacing up one's shoes, getting out of bed, not sleeping during the day. This is what we call behavioral activation, which is actually in some ways invented in Seattle in your backyard over there and certainly came to be a tour de force in the world of behavioral psychology in Seattle. But in any event, this is a concept that we can just educate patients.

Another one is with anxiety, the more you avoid, the more anxious you will be. If you're afraid of something and you avoid it, you're going to become more anxious of it, not less, even though it feels better in the moment. These are basic concepts that have been clarified through the literature, through experimental science, through clinical science, and they're grounded in theory that patients and anybody just needs to know. So, sometimes just some basic info can go a long way.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. Yeah, that definitely makes sense how important psychoeducation can be. Are there any other approaches than CBT or DBT that individuals can utilize to combat those symptoms?

David Rosmarin:  Yeah, one of the DBT approaches that we really love is called distress tolerance. People often think that one of the goals of treatment is to reduce the amount of distress they're experiencing, and to some extent that's true, but to a larger extent, one of the goals, a better goal, I would say, is to increase the amount of distress that we can tolerate. There's a big difference between trying to reduce my distress versus trying to increase my capacity to withstand distress, and when we think about it the other way, the increasing our distress tolerance in of itself, we're not expected to never be distressed. It's not a surprise when we're having a really rough day and the goal then becomes to weather the storm as opposed to getting the weather to change. As we all know today, climate's very hard to predict and to control, not that we shouldn't try, but we can and certainly should learn to tolerate more with the situation that we have, especially when it comes to our emotions.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, awesome. Thank you for sharing that. While CBT and DBT are best and ideally done under the treatment and guidance of a licensed mental health professional, what are some things one can do on their own to potentially reduce or lessen some of those symptoms of anxiety or depression?

David Rosmarin:  I'm thinking about another DBT module called emotion regulation and simply the idea of being aware, for example, on a scale of 0 to 10, how stressed are you right now?

Tori Steffen:  Myself, I would say maybe a four. Not too bad.

David Rosmarin:  Four, not too bad for a mid-morning west coast kind of vibe. I get that, even though it's a Monday. That's great and you're aware of it right away, and maybe that's because you're involved in the field. Other people will fumble, I don't know, is it high? Is it low? I don't have a baseline. Simply being aware of how sad you are, how anxious you are, and throwing a number to it. If you don't want to throw a number to it, at least is it high, is it medium, is it low?

Being able to share that with someone, that's another factor in emotion regulation. Being able to just communicate how you feel to other individuals, whether it's a professional, as you mentioned, or a friend. Whether it's a post on Twitter, hey, feeling a little bit sad today, whatever it is. Then these kinds of things, it's important to maintain awareness and then to recognize also that we can shift our emotional states. Sometimes you might all of a sudden feel really dysphoric and sad and part of that we can't necessarily control, but we might be able to indirectly influence that. Listening to reggae music, right? Hard not to bop. Going for a walk, calling up an old friend, eating ice cream. But sometimes those can have negative effects, as well. Being aware of our emotional states and how what we do affects those, that's really the core of emotional regulation and that's something everybody can benefit from today.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, great. Awesome advice. Well, do you have any final words of advice or anything else that you'd like to share with our listeners today?

David Rosmarin:  I guess I'll share this, that we're living in very challenging times. People have higher levels of anxiety and depression than ever before in history for a variety of reasons. It's very real, these concerns, and they have very significant and real effects on people's lives. Our phones are ringing off the hook. The other day, I think they're 22 intakes that came in and that's very significant for a modest practice of our size.

I think it's important for people to know that they're not alone today, that if they're struggling, there's plenty of other people that are there. More importantly, that there are treatments that really are helpful, and in not a lot of time. I mean, our treatments will often see people 5, 6, 7 sessions and see a decrease. They might stay on longer to target other aspects of their mental health, but A) people are not alone and B) there is hope to be had and a lot of hope, so I think those are probably some important messages to get out there.

Tori Steffen:  Definitely important to keep a positive perspective on things, so that's very helpful. Thank you so much. Well, it's been really great talking to you today, Dr. Rosmarin, and thank you again for joining us and contributing to our interview series.

David Rosmarin:  Thanks for having me on your series.

Tori Steffen:  Thank you very much. Hope you have a great day.

David Rosmarin:  You too.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Author John Purkiss on The Power of Letting Go

An Interview with Author John Purkiss

John Purkiss is the best-selling author of several books, including:“The Power of Letting Go: How to Drop Everything That’s Holding You Back” and “Brand You: Turn Your Unique Talents Into A Winning Formula.” He is an expert on the notion of “letting go” while utilizing mindfulness to improve performance and mental well-being.

Preeti Kota:  Hi, thank you for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Preeti Kota, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We are a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

I'd like to welcome with us author John Purkiss, who joins us from England today. Mr. Purkiss is the author of several books, including “The Power of Letting Go”, he began his career in banking and management consultancy. He now recruits senior executives and board members, he also invests in fast-growing companies. Before we get started today, can you let our listeners know a little bit more about you and what motivated you to write “The Power of Letting Go”?

John Purkiss:  Certainly. Well, thanks for inviting me. So what happened in my case was... like a lot of people, I got the message that if I was intelligent and hardworking, then everything would be fine, so I did that until I was 26, so I went through economics degree, banking, consulting, MBA and it all worked extremely well. And then, I was diagnosed with clinical depression, which nearly killed me, so that was my wake up. I now see it as a blessing, it was like the beginning of the destruction of the ego. But from a medical point of view, it was very bad news so that's when I realized. What I was offered, electroconvulsive therapy, Freudian psychoanalysis or pharmaceuticals. I didn't do the electrical thing but I did do the Freudian psychoanalysis and I did do the pharmaceuticals. And then, I just thought there has to be another way so I started searching for other options so that's how the journey began.

Preeti Kota:  Can you describe the Vedic tradition that inspired the concept of letting go?

John Purkiss:  Yeah, certainly. While I was searching around, I read lots of books. Everything from Californian self-help to Eastern philosophy. And what I found was pretty much everything points back to the Vedic tradition. So Veda simply means knowledge, it's a Sanskrit word which means knowledge. As you may know, science also means knowledge, scientia. The difference is that Western science is largely based on looking outwards, doing experiments in laboratories and social experiments. Whereas, the Vedic tradition is more of a download, so it's looking inwards. And people downloaded things thousands of years ago, which are now being tested in laboratories. So the Vedic tradition goes much faster because it doesn't have the empirical process, but it seems to be leading to very similar conclusions.

Preeti Kota:  How do you find the balance between letting go and giving up?

John Purkiss:  I don't give up. I think giving up is completely unhelpful. Answer, no balance. Letting go is not giving up. I don't recommend giving up.

Preeti Kota:  I feel like when people are trying to start to let go, they are afraid of giving up.

John Purkiss:  Yes. Well, it might be helpful if I distinguish between the two. So giving up is, you just stop trying and you lose hope. Well, you might just hope that somehow things will work out, which they might, but it's powerlessness, it's like, "I have no power, I can't do anything so I give up." And in some situations, I suppose, that could work, actually. I mean, I've never done it, but I've heard about it, if someone attacks you and you just give up, then they kind of loosen their grip, so there are situations maybe that works. But letting go isn't that at all. Letting go, at least as described in the book and in the Eastern traditions, letting go is... what you're actually doing is letting go of your ego.

So if I describe it this way, in the West most of us have been brought up to believe that we are the body-mind. So Eckhart Tolle to talks about this in “The Power of Now”, for example, he talks about the body-mind. And I studied economics. So economic, psychology, finance, arguably even engineering, medicine, there are so many disciplines which are based on the idea that you and I are body-minds. And we're trying to get what we want and avoid what we don't want, so like a brain and a body.

And so when we let go... If that's how you see yourself, it may feel like, "Oh, I'm giving up now, because I'm not trying anymore." The Eastern traditions of which the Vedic tradition is largely the origin is saying, "Your brain and body are part of something extremely intelligent, which is running everything all the time. And when you let go, you stop trying to figure everything out using your brain, and you basically tune into this universal intelligence, which is running everything."

And I think, if you've been brought up as an atheist, that's very hard, because you have this strong belief system that there's nothing beyond human intelligence. Whereas, if you've been brought up in any of the spiritual tradition... I mean, I was brought up as a Christian, at least when I was ill, I had some understanding that there was something extremely intelligent that was running everything. And then, when I let go, I very quickly began to tune into it. And then, things started to work out. I mean, one example is your body, even if you don't think about it, your body will run itself. In fact, most people interfere with their bodies and stop it from running correctly. But if you don't do anything crazy, your body will run itself without any intellectual intervention.

Preeti Kota:  Yeah. So, you're mentioning the ego, so a little bit on that. How does our ego affect us, particularly our mindset?

John Purkiss:  Okay. There are two definitions of ego. Two main ones. The one which is most common in the West is the Freudian definition, which is... I'm sure you know, you have the super ego, the ego, and the Id. And the Id wants to do kinds of crazy things, and the ego regulates the Id, and stops the Id from doing stupid things. So the ego is useful. I mean, ego is a Latin word. It simply means I. So that's the ego in the West. In the East, the ego is not helpful at all, because what the... for example, the Vedic tradition is telling us, is that you are not the body-mind. How should I put it? You are supreme consciousness. You are the consciousness which is running everything.

So the guru who I follow, he says, "I'm not here to convince you that I'm God. I'm here to convince you that you are God." So the message of the Eastern traditions is you are divine, and ego is hugely unhelpful because ego is when you start seeing yourself separate from the divine, from the cosmos. So clinical depression for me was an extreme example of that. I felt completely separate and desperate. I felt separate from everybody and everything. And I was running around trying to solve problems and I wasn't tuned in at all. And of course Freud died, I think, in 1939, that's very recent. The Eastern traditions have been talking about the ego for millennia. So two totally, completely different view points.

And I think, you used the word, mindset, is that right? Yeah. So mindset. So in the West we have this idea of the mind as a thing. The mind is like some box. And we try and fix the box using medication or using maybe some therapy or self-help books or whatever, that's the idea. Whereas, the mind in the Eastern traditions is more like a process. It's a series of patterns. And you can do this on your own, or you can have professional help. If you look very carefully, you can start to see all the patterns, the really unhelpful patterns which are causing the mess, I think. And so the definition of the mind is different. So the West, I would say, sees the mind as a thing, and the East sees the mind as a process.

Preeti Kota:  Okay.

John Purkiss:  Yeah. Or processes, as you would say in the US.

Preeti Kota:  How is the ego formed?

John Purkiss:  I don't know. I don't know what Freud's view was on the formation of the ego. So my guru is called Sri Nithyananda Paramashivam, the way he describes it, which I talk about in the Power of Letting Go is he says, "The ego is made up of incompletions." So for example, when you are a small child. Small children are generally blissful, and then, occasionally they cry when they're hungry or something. And then between the ages of two and seven, we have painful experiences. And those painful experiences form the ego. So for example, I'm sure you've had this experience, if you're in a meeting or a conversation and the other person suddenly gets annoyed with something you said or something that happened, it's because some pain pattern has been triggered. And that's the ego.

And I mean, in the West we tend to say, "So and so has a massive ego because they think they're superior to other people." For example, they might suffer from poverty when they're small, when they grow up, they have lots of money. So they have an ego relating to money, that's a common. But you can also have an ego, which makes you feel inferior to other people. So some people who feel inferior to other people, they actually have massive egos on the eastern definition because they have so much pain in their system, which they accumulated between two and seven. But it's still ego. It still makes you feel separate and it still causes suffering.

Preeti Kota:  So they project the opposite.

John Purkiss:  Unfortunately, ego, we project it all over the place. So if you have some pain pattern about racism, or unfairness, or dishonesty, or something, you project it onto other people, you start accusing other people of that. Yeah. So it causes chaos, unfortunately.

Preeti Kota:  How can you simply follow your intuition when you have a fear that you might be making the wrong decisions?

John Purkiss:  Okay, that's a good question. So my favorite definition of intuition is immediate insight without reasoning. So you have an insight. For example, you might have an insight that you should call your mother or that you should turn left, whatever it is. And that doesn't require a massive thought process. You just act on it. And real intuition comes out of love. It's guiding you to do the right thing. There is a thing called false intuition. So we just talked about the ego, these accumulated pain patterns. What can happen is that, false intuition is you have a reaction to something or someone, and it's coming from pain. And so it's not really intuition, it's just a pain pattern asserting itself.

For example, you might see someone from another ethnic group walking down the street and immediately avoid them, because you have some pain pattern. Or, you might see a dog, or a cat, or a spider, and it triggers some pain pattern. That's not intuition, that's just a pain pattern getting triggered. We'll talk about it later, but if you use the correct technique, you can remove those pain patterns and you stop getting triggered. And then, your intuition operates freely because you're not getting triggered the whole time, you're just seeing things as they are. And you have a feeling about what you should do next.

Preeti Kota:  Yeah. So how do you let go of the fear?

John Purkiss:  Well, the completion technique removes the fear. So we can talk about that now. So in chapter three of the book, I describe a technique called Completion. It's been trademarked, it's now called the Science of Completions. So I learned it eight years ago from Swamiji behind me. That's why I went to India to meet him. And it's very simple. I'll give you an example. So my first day at school when I was five, I arrive at school and I have this accent. So I don't know if you know, this is the accent which the BBC sells to foreigners. This is the export version of British English. I mean, the BBC in the UK uses all kinds of accents, but when they're talking to foreigners, they tend to use this accent, which is what I grew up with.

And when I was four, we moved about hour and a half, two hours north of London. And the accent there is different. So it's my first day at school and I'm five years old. This is my first day in the world without my Mum and I arrive at the school and I want to make friends. And they don't make friends, they just laugh at me. And someone says, "You're a bloody nutter, you're crazy." And I feel really bad. So that's how the pain pattern starts. So, Swamiji calls it, self doubt, self hatred, self denial. So the self doubt is, "I'm unacceptable." There are all these patterns. "I'm unacceptable. I'm a failure, I'm trying to make friends, but it's not working. Other people don't support me."

Then all those patterns start developing. As far as I can tell, it all happened within five minutes. And everybody has this before the age of seven. I mean, in some people, it can be something that seems far more traumatic or less traumatic, either way it happens. So when that happens, you then live the rest of your life based on those patterns because we suppressed the pain. So what happened in my case is I grew up in Lester, in the Central England, and after a while I realized that nearly all of my friends were not English or they were not White English people, they were Indian, or they were Jewish people from Central Europe, or they were Ukrainian or whatever they were, Irish.

And I was aware that I had this feeling that I was an outsider. I wasn't in the football team, soccer team, I felt like an outsider. And then many years later, I realized when I met Swamiji, I realized I had this pattern of, "I'm unacceptable." So I ended up hanging out with all the other people who felt unacceptable. And it was, in a way, it looked beneficial because a lot of us went to Oxford and Cambridge. I mean, because we didn't get any love from the other people. The only way to get on was to work hard. So we all worked hard and went to Oxford, Cambridge and did all this stuff.

But there's still this underlying pain pattern, which is, "I'm unacceptable," which is very bad news in terms of relationships, business, all kinds of things. And so the technique is incredibly simple. The technique is... I become five years old. I've got my mirror here. I've got this mirror that I use every day. So I become five years old. And I look at myself in the mirror, I'm talking to the person in the mirror, and I relive intensely those first few minutes at school.

So, I allow all those suppressed emotions to come out. So in my case it just feels bad and eventually it starts to die down. There have been cases, I mean, some people cry, some people throw up, they vomit. But basically this pain is stored in your body. And what happens is if you do the reliving intensely... and you can relive any episode in your life, what I find is, at some point it feels almost like an electrical charge has left my body. And what I'm left with is an empty memory. So it's a memory, which I can go and find a book in a library, but it's not a memory with an emotional charge, which is running my life.

Preeti Kota:  Okay.

John Purkiss:  And for me, it's such a powerful thing because, I mean, one of the really great things about it is you then become nonviolent. So much violence in the world is people being triggered, right?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah.

John Purkiss:  And then attacking each other, either mentally or verbally, so if you're not triggered, you won't fight people.

Preeti Kota:  That's true. So I guess you've already touched on this, but what are pain patterns?

John Purkiss:  Yeah, it's a good question. So pain pattern, that's a simple word. The Sanskrit word is samskara, like a scar. Swamiji uses the word incompletion. So one way to describe it is, in an ideal world, if you were completely conscious all the time, you would have a painful experience and you would live it from beginning to end. Or, a happy experience, so let's imagine you have a happy experience, you live it completely, and then it's finished. You've done it right, you've completed it. Or, you have a painful experience and you allow yourself to feel all of the pain. And then you complete the pain and then it's finished.

But what happens in reality is... By the way, British men are experts at this, is we have a painful experience and we don't like the pain, so we suppress it and we pretend everything's okay. And that suppressed pain is now stored in our bodies. I often do this. Well, I can do it with you if you want. You don't have to tell me the experience. But can you think of the most painful thing that happened to you before the age of seven?

Preeti Kota:  I don't really remember.

John Purkiss:  Okay. All right. The most painful experience you can remember at all doesn't have to be before seven.

Preeti Kota:  Okay.

John Purkiss:  Right. How old were you?

Preeti Kota:  Maybe 15.

John Purkiss:  15? Okay. So can you feel the pain of that experience now without telling me what it was?

Preeti Kota: Yeah.

John Purkiss:  Okay. And where is that pain in your body?

Preeti Kota:  I think in my mind.

John Purkiss:  In your mind. But where? Can you point to it? You can feel the pain. You're 15 years old. You can feel the pain. Where is it? Is it in your head or where?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah, I think in my head.

John Purkiss:  Okay. All right. So in 99% of cases, when I ask people that question... I say, "Okay, think of an event, feel the pain. Where is the pain?" 99% of cases, people can point to the pain in their body. They know where it is. It can be in their heart, it can be in their chest, or their stomach, wherever. But the point is it's been stored. Swamiji calls it muscle memory or bio memory. But the point is, it's not some abstract thing. I was in management consultancy for a while. I once asked this question as a former management consultant, and he said, he could feel the pain, but he didn't know where it was. Which strikes me, maybe that's very intellectual person, but most people like 99% of people, they can find it in their bodies, right?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah.

John Purkiss:  So the pain gets stored. Swamiji uses lots of analogies. My favorite one is, he says, it's like putting a carpet on a wound. So imagine you have a wound and it's all horrible, and then instead of treating it and disinfecting it, and you actually just put a carpet on it, which makes the whole thing worse. And that's what most of us do. We just suppress it because it's painful. And completion is removing all the pain. So the wound heals and then we would become whole, then you're fine.

Preeti Kota:  What is flow and what are its benefits?

John Purkiss:  I'm sure you know, there's a famous book called “Flow” by Csikszentmihalyi. Are you familiar with him? The Hungarian psychologist who invented the word flow. So it's a very thick book. I would say, for me, flow is a symptom. I mean, the state of flow has lots of benefits. So people experience flow when they are completely immersed in some activity, usually they really enjoy it. In my case, photography. If I'm immersed in photography or writing or something like that, there's a feeling of flow. You're not agonizing or analyzing, you're just enjoying the process and it happens very naturally.

But I would say, for me, that flow is more like a symptom. So maybe we'll get onto the topic of unclutching, as well. But if you are complete and you are unclutched, then flow happens naturally. One way of describing it is you become one with existence, or one with the cosmos. And so everything's happening very naturally. And you may have read about this, there are American football players, for example, who say that, when they're in a flow state, everything slows down. There's almost no thought involved and everything just happens really smoothly. But for me, there are ways of getting to that. It's a result rather than something you just do. Sorry.

Preeti Kota:  What are the benefits of it?

John Purkiss:  The benefits of flow are... of being in that state, are little or no stress, things happen very easily, relationships are easy, it's very productive. I mean, I have times when I can just sit down and write a thousand words in an hour or two. And a book is only 40,000 words. So yeah, I mean, flow is a fantastic thing. I mean, yeah, it's definitely good for your health. It's good for productivity, good for relationships, good for creativity. Yeah, definitely.

Preeti Kota:  Okay. How can people with anxiety or depression who are stuck in negative thought patterns about the past or future start to let go?

John Purkiss:  Okay, well there are two techniques. One of which I mentioned before when we were preparing for this. So we'll deal with them in a minute. So one is completion, which I've just described. So if you keep practicing the Completion Technique, you'll remove the negative thought patterns. And what happens is, that those repetitive negative thoughts start to die down. So for example, if I have a cognition from my first day at school that I'm a failure or that I'm unacceptable, if I complete that incident and remove that pain pattern, then I won't have thousands of negative thoughts about being unacceptable or being a failure, so that's one thing. You can remove the cause, which is the pain pattern. The second thing is... and this is a wonderful technique which fits beautifully with completion. This second technique is called Unclutching, which I didn't write about in the book I'm going to write about it in the next book.And I sent you a video. So there's a six minute video and a one hour video, which you can share with everybody. But the principle is very simple, unclutching is very simple. So, are you familiar with mindfulness?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah.

John Purkiss:  Yeah. Okay. So mindfulness has become huge in the West, and it also comes from the Vedic tradition. But mindfulness, there are various ways to do it, but my experience of mindfulness was... So I'm present, I'm sitting here quietly, and then I have a thought and I get distracted by the thought and my mind follows the thought, which morphs into another thought, and another thought, and another thought. And what I need to do is bring my attention back to the present. So that can be by putting my attention on my breath or the end of my nose or whatever, or the sensation of my hands on the table. There are all kinds of things I can do to bring my attention back to the present. And that works. I mean, I did that for six years and I talked about it in The Power of Letting Go. For some people that works perfectly well. Steve Jobs did zen meditation, which is similar, for decades. Unclutching is even simpler.

So what happens is... so Imagine you're sitting there and you have this negative thought, you now have a choice, you can either engage with the thought or you can unclutch from it. So if you engage with the thought, you might for example say, "That can't be true. Or, Oh dear, here's that thought again." Or get distracted and start thinking about whether or not that thought's true. A whole thing. You'll be there for hours. You can either engage with it and allow that to happen, or you can unclutch. Swamiji invented the term. Unclutch means, "I choose not to engage with it." It's a bit like, a small child is pestering you and you ignore the child.

So this thought comes up and you have the choice not to engage with it. Right?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah.

John Purkiss:  You just unclutch, you just step back mentally. You step back from it. And my experience as a Westerner is, initially, it felt to me like incredibly lazy. Surely if I have a thought, I should engage with it, and I should analyze it, and I should deal with it, and address it, and bladi, bladi, blah. Yeah, but then you're going to be in this mess. So what I do now is if I'm doing something and I have a negative thought... which can happen. I'm winning some business or working on a book or something I have a negative thought, I can just choose not to engage with it.

Preeti Kota:  Do you just distract yourself?

John Purkiss:  Sorry?

Preeti Kota:  You just keep distracting yourself?

John Purkiss:  No, don't distract about it. It's just a choice. Okay. I mean, we can do it now. You sit there, a thought comes up, you don't have to engage with it, you don't have to think about it. You can just notice it. And then, after a while it'll go away and another thought will come. And you don't engage with that one either. You don't think about it. You don't analyze it. You don't find evidence to contradict it. You don't suppress it. It's like bubbles in a fish tank. "Okay, there's a thought." And I encourage you and anyone listening to this or watching this to do this is, if you unclutch what you will notice is... Okay, so I'm doing something and I have a negative thought and I unclutch from it. Within a few minutes you'll find there's some other thought. And they are like bubbles in a fish tank, because... the way Swamiji describes it is, we create shafts.

So one thing we do is we have a painful thought or experience and we connect it to other painful thoughts and other pain. And we create this narrative like, "I'm a loser," or, "I'm a winner," or, "I'm a good father," or "I'm whatever, I'm a victim." We create this whole narrative. Whereas in reality, these thoughts are separate and unrelated. So if you slow down a film of bubbles in a fish tank, they're all separate, they're unrelated, right?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah.

John Purkiss:  So if you start treating our thoughts like that, if we just unclutch from them, they start losing their power over us.

Preeti Kota:  That's a good metaphor, the bubbles.

John Purkiss:  It's the simplest one. Yeah. I mean, that's the way Swamiji describes it. And I find that I still have negative thoughts. Sometimes I'm doing something really ambitious and I have a thought about how it's not going to work or it isn't working, and I just unclutch. I just carry on doing what I'm doing. Right?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah. I feel like that prevents you from spiraling then.

John Purkiss:  Yeah. Otherwise, you're going to spiral. Well, you're going to waste loads of time. You're going to feel terrible. You may go and say something to somebody which causes you a problem. Instead, all you need to do is unclutch. The metaphor, I didn't understand it first. In the US, I think you call it a stick shift gearbox in a car. So I know you have mainly automatic gear boxes. But with a stick shift gear box, the clutch enables you to disengage. So, basically the gears aren't running and the motor isn't driving the car anymore. It's a bit like that. You're having all these thoughts and you just disengage and you stop engaging with these thoughts which are coming up. And then the thoughts die down. And then you can start working. And when you start working, you may need to think, but you're thinking constructively. You're not just responding to random thoughts.

Preeti Kota:  How do you build faith or trust in the idea that good things will happen when you let go or surrender? What do you do with the thought? What if it doesn't get better?

John Purkiss:  So if you've been brought up in one of the big spiritual traditions, certainly the Asian ones, so Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Daoism, all of those traditions say that there's something extremely intelligent, which is running everything. They all say that in different ways. And the Vedic tradition specifically says, "This intelligence is blessing you all the time." It's beneficial. It's benign.

What we are doing is we block it. We block with our our egos. Our body is trying to run itself very efficiently and healthily, and we do crazy things. We put crazy things in our bodies which stop that from happening. So, that's those traditions. And then, we've got the Abrahamic traditions, which come from Abraham. So you've got Judaism, Christianity, Islam, which have a different view of God, but you've still got an intelligence which is running everything. So in my case, as I mentioned, I was brought up as a Christian, although I didn't understand what was going on, especially when I became ill. I did have this understanding there was something intelligent running things.

I think the difficulty is if you are an atheist. And as I understand it, there are two types of atheists. So one type of atheist is you don't believe in deities, you don't believe in a God because you haven't seen any enough evidence or whatever. Which for me is completely fine because you're being empirical. I mean, I just see how amazing nature is, and for me, that's pretty solid evidence. For some people that's not enough. But okay, so you might say, this world has been operating for 4.5 Billion years perfectly. But that's not enough evidence for me. Fine. It's okay. I think the real problem is … you can at least say by the way, when I was clinically depressed, one of the psychiatrist I talked to, he said, "Look at the animals. They're not running around being depressed, they're just getting on with things." And I do that.

But there's what I would call maybe militant atheism, which is being convinced that there is no intelligence running everything. And for me, that's completely unscientific viewpoint. I don't know. Are you familiar with Karl Popper?

Preeti Kota:  No.

John Purkiss:  Karl Popper was a very influential philosopher of science. And what he said was, "For a statement to be scientific, it has to be capable of being falsified." There has to be a means of proving it wrong. So for example, if you say the earth is flat as a hypothesis, there are ways of proving that wrong. But if you say there is no God, how do I construct an experiment to prove that's wrong? You see what I'm saying? It's an unscientific statement, but there are people who are absolutely convinced that there is no God and there's no intelligence running it and running their lives. And I would say, well, A, that's unscientific. B, I would suggest it's probably ego. And C, it makes life very difficult because if you are absolutely convinced of that, everything falls on your shoulders. It means the only way for you to be happy and successful is for you to do everything using your brain and your body.

And maybe that’s why … I mean, I don't know if you know the history, but after the Soviet Union ended, lots of people, Eastern European people came to the UK. And I've met lots of people in the West, as well. But I've met a lot of people who were atheists who were brought up as atheists. It's like atheism was a religion in the Soviet Union. And in those countries like Poland and all those. Well, Poland has a lot of Catholicism. Let's say Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, a lot of these countries they were taught atheism at school. And a lot of them are really depressed because they've been brought up to believe that the only way to do anything is using your brain and your body. And when that doesn't work, you're stuck.

So for those people, I would just say, I invite you to entertain the possibility that there's something extremely intelligent, which is running your body, which is running nature. And if you tune into it … To answer your question, when we let go, we start tuning into all of that and life gets much easier. We're not holding onto this idea that only my brain and my body can solve everything. Does that make any sense?

Preeti Kota:  Yeah.

John Purkiss:  Okay.

Preeti Kota:  So what are daily practices people can do to realize the power of letting go?

John Purkiss:  Okay. Well, what I do is, as I mentioned, I did mindfulness for six years. Then I learned transcendental meditation, which I've been doing in 20 years. I've done it twice today. And that is wonderful. I mean, it removes nearly all of my jet lag. For those who haven't experienced it, when you let go during transcendental meditation, you go into this state called Turiya, which is the fourth state of consciousness it is also from the Vedic tradition. You experience pure consciousness without any thoughts. So it's blissful and it's deeply restful.

And in terms of letting go, this was one of my early experiences of letting go was, if I have a problem or I need to have some creative idea, frequently it comes during or after transcendental meditation, because what you're doing is you're switching off your mind. You hear a mantra, you go into this state of pure consciousness, and then solutions to problems or ideas, they just come because what you've done is create a massive gap between thoughts. I mean, the gap could be up to 20 minutes. I mean, it might be just a few seconds. So, that transcendental meditation is great. Unclutching, which I've just described is also great.

So here's a really practical thing for anyone listening is, imagine you want to do something but you don't know how, and you're worried about it, you might be worried about it. So if you get really clear about what you want to create, and you can write it down, you can have pictures, whatever you want. First thing, is make sure that it's something you want to do. It's a genuine desire. It's not something you've borrowed from somebody else. It's loving. It's going to be for everybody's benefit. So it's a genuine desire. Now what you do is unclutch, so do that unclutching exercise, very simply, just disengage.

Actually, you can do this, write down on the paper. Your mind will tell you all the reasons why it can't happen. So if you pick something you want to happen and write it down, your mind will tell you all the reasons why it can't happen. Just write those down. And then, when you see all the reasons why it can't happen, that tells you where you need to complete, where you need to relive the original incident. It's like software. You've got all this software telling you bad things. So you can use the completion technique to remove all those negative patterns.

And then, when you unclutch, so what I do now is I want to do something I don't know how, is I get really clear about what I want to happen, and then I unclutch. I disengage from thinking. And then I have a flash of intuition, which tells me what to do. So having been brought up as a Christian, I would just ask myself, "Please guide me." It's in The Power of Letting Go. When I got completely stuck, I asked to be guided to the right job or business. And I was guided to the perfect job. What I do now? I mean, because Swamiji is 44, so now I just ask him to guide me. But essentially I'm letting go of the thought process asking to be guided, and I unclutch. And then I suddenly have an idea, I need to call this person, or send an email to that person, or go to that place. So you start functioning out of intuition instead of agonizing about everything.

Preeti Kota:  Yeah. Those are great useful techniques, I feel like, that are easy to implement.

John Purkiss:  Yeah, I mean they're not mine. I just found they're the easiest ones to do. And they work.

Preeti Kota:  So do you have any parting words of advice or anything else that you'd want to share with our listeners today?

John Purkiss:  If you like reading, please read The Power of Letting Go. If you don't like reading, well it's on audiobook, as well. The other thing is I would definitely take a look at Swamiji's videos on YouTube. If you type in Nithyananda, which is N-I-T-H-Y-A-N-A-N-D-A, if you type in Nithyananda... By the way, it means eternal bliss. At the end of his satsangs, his talks, he always says, "Be blissful." So step number one is be blissful. So if you type Nithyananda and unclutching into YouTube, you'll see the videos where he explains unclutching. If you type Nithyananda and completion into YouTube, there's a 20 minute video where he talks about how to use completion for health, wealth and relationships.

Preeti Kota:  Okay.

John Purkiss:  And in fact, any problem that I have, I just type Nithyananda and whatever. Like, Nithyananda and diabetes, a video will come up.

Preeti Kota:  Amazing.

John Purkiss:  So that's a great resource for people to use.

Preeti Kota:  Okay, great. Well, thank you so much for your time today and I really enjoyed hearing all the advice and strategies on letting go.

John Purkiss:  Well, thanks for inviting me. And if anyone wants to contact me, it's johnpurkiss.com. I've got a form on the internet.

Preeti Kota:  Thank you so much.

John Purkiss:  All right.

Preeti Kota:  Thank you.

John Purkiss:  Thank you very much. Thank you.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Julie Erickson on Aging & Anxiety

An Interview with Psychologist Julie Erickson

Julie Erickson, Ph.D., C.Psych is a Clinical Psychologist at the Forest Hill Centre for CBT in Toronto, Canada and adjunct faculty member for the Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development at the University of Toronto. She specializes in the treatment of anxiety disorders in older adults.

Tori Steffen:  Hi, everyone. Thank you for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Tori Steffen, a research intern at the Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We are a Seattle based psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders. I'd like to welcome with us today Clinical Psychologist, Julie Erickson. Dr. Erickson is an adjunct faculty member for the Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development at the University of Toronto.

She practices at the Forest Hill Centre for CBT in Toronto, Canada. She's an expert in the field of anxiety disorders and has written several articles on the topic, including “Anxiety Disorders Late in Life: Considerations for Assessment and Cognitive Behavioral Treatment”. As well as “Associations Between Anxiety Disorders, Suicide Ideation, and Age in Nationally Representative Samples of Both Canadian and American Adults.” Dr. Erickson is also planning to publish a CBT workbook for older adults with New Harbinger in the fall of 2023.

Before we get started today, could you please let us know a bit about yourself and what made you interested in studying anxiety disorders in older adults?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah, absolutely. Thanks for having me. I live and practice in Toronto, and maintain a pretty steady clinical practice and I do some teaching as well. In terms of what got me interested in this area, so it actually started way back in one of my first jobs when I was a teenager. I worked in the recreation department of a nursing home. As part of that job, I was helping facilitate different recreation programs for residents, and noticed that it was the same group of people coming to recreation programs all the time.

It tended to be a group of people that were maybe more optimistic. They tended to be more social. They also tended to be the same group of residents that had more people visiting them. Relative to other residents, who were maybe a little bit more withdrawn or isolated, maybe a little bit more pessimistic or had fewer visitors. Just seeing the contrast made me curious. Why did some people tend to thrive and do quite well, as they got older and were in nursing home care, versus some people really have a more difficult time?

Ultimately, wanted to understand some of the psychological and social factors behind aging well. How to help people live better lives as they grow older and to be more fulfilled. As part of that, how to manage the anxiety and the stressors that can come up for people in late life. Ultimately, this led me to the field of clinical psychology and the intersection between that and gerontology.

Tori Steffen:  Okay, great. Thank you. Would you say that older individuals experience anxiety similarly to younger people?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah. I would say generally speaking, there's probably more similarities than differences. The similarities being maybe focusing on worst case scenarios, feeling agitated or restless, having difficulties relaxing, struggling with indecision or doubt, difficulties concentrating, so a whole host of similarities. Where some of the differences might be though, might be the types of symptoms that end up getting endorsed. Older adults can tend to report more physical symptoms of anxiety or at least report those predominantly.

One of the first things they might report to their family doctor, could be the physical symptoms like upset stomach, or having a racing heart or shortness of breath. As opposed to going to their family doctor and saying, "I'm worried about what people are thinking about me in social situations." That's one difference. The other difference might involve more of the content of the worries that older adults have. That's going to be a little bit different than younger adults. It's less focused on things like academic success, or career building or parenting.

It tends to be a little bit more focused on things like changes in your physical health or mobility, caregiving concerns, or even identity shifts that might be happening because of things like retirement. The surface nature of the worries will be a little different, as well as sometimes the types of symptoms that older adults report.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. Yeah, that definitely makes sense. Would you say there are any limitations that you've found that might prevent the treatment of anxiety disorders in older adults?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah. There's several unfortunately, and several big ones that can get in the way of older adults getting treatment for anxiety disorders. The first one relates to something called mental health literacy. This relates to someone's ability to recognize the symptoms of a mental disorder. Knowing where to get information about mental health concerns, and knowing where and how to get help. Some research suggests that older adults tend to have lower rates of mental health literacy relative to younger adults.

That might be one of the things that prevents them from detecting that part of what I'm experiencing could be a psychological issue. It also might prevent them from knowing there're effective treatments out there and knowing where and how to get help. That's one of the first limitations. The second more has to do with a systems issue, so lack of access to qualified, geriatric mental health professionals. There's an undeniable shortage of us who specialize in treating older adults. That can certainly make it quite difficult to get qualified help.

Thirdly, also probably a societal or systemic issue, stigma. Some older adults may come from a generation or social or cultural background, where going to see a psychologist or a psychiatrist is only when someone is really sick. It still might be shrouded in a lot of their shame. That can be something that really gets in the way. Then finally, I would flag ageism as a potential issue that gets in the way of getting treatment. Sometimes symptoms of mental health conditions in late life can be missed by healthcare professionals.

They might be very well-intended, but maybe more inclined to look at some of the symptoms that older adults might be presenting with, as more attributed to a physical problem as opposed to a mental condition. It's not just maybe healthcare professionals, but also older adults themselves can hold some ageist types of beliefs. They might be inclined to see older adults as less capable of changing. If they hold that belief, which is an ageist stereotype, that can really defer them from seeking treatment as well. A whole host of different things that can get in the way of older people getting help.

Tori Steffen:  Right. Yeah. Those are some great points, as far as limitations go. Your research discusses the ways that CBT can defer among the younger and the older patients with anxiety disorders. Could you explain the differences for our audience?

Julie Erickson:   Absolutely. There's a few that I'll highlight. The first has to do with the pacing of treatment. It's important to know that with CBT, in particular with older adults, things might take a little bit longer for a number of reasons. It's longer to gather maybe a personal history from an older adult client. There's lots of background information to get. Depending on the client's experience with therapy, you may need to devote some extra time to socializing them to therapy. So they have more of a working understanding of what this is, what to expect as you engage in treatment.

There's also an issue of pacing if you're working with someone with cognitive impairment. Or even an individual with normal age-related changes in cognition, you might want to slow down the speed at which you're talking about interventions or introducing new things in session, or even consider having shorter sessions. I'm thinking for people who might have medical conditions that make sitting or sustaining their attention for full hour sessions more difficult. Pacing is one first thing to consider that would make treatment a little bit different with older adults.

The second issue relates to being more attuned to medical issues and how these might be likely to impact your conceptualization of a client and also treatment. Given that a sizable proportion of older adults are experiencing either chronic, physical health issues or more acute issues, there's likely going to be an interplay between some of those symptoms and the anxiety that they're reporting. For example, I had an older adult client diagnosed with tachycardia, and subsequently developed panic attacks every time she had an irregular heartbeat.

Doing a careful assessment and asking about physical health issues is particularly important, so you understand how this might be impacting an older adult in your treatment with them. Another potential difference and an issue to keep in mind, stems from cognitively how an older adult is doing. Cognitive issues require some assessment, even if it's just a brief screener at the outset of treatment. Just to take into consideration how that might impact treatment, and to consider how to best pace and deliver content.

Age-related, cognitive decline is pretty normal and primarily affects things like your short-term memory, your word finding, maybe speed of processing. This may or may not require any alteration in your treatment. But if you're seeing someone who's maybe got a cognitive impairment that's related to dementia, maybe they've got mild to moderate types of dementia. This is going to require some tailoring, in terms of your pacing, but also lots of use of memory aids, right?

Handouts, writing things down, even audio recording sessions, so clients can help retain what you're talking about in session.

Tori Steffen:  Okay.

Julie Erickson:  Then finally, what I'd flag in terms of how things look a little bit different with older adults, has to do with just the types of themes that might come up in treatments. There might be more themes to pay attention to around loss, right? Grief in a bunch of different forms, whether it's of people or of roles in your life.

Or grieving mobility, or functionality or independence. But also themes of isolation, identity changes, or even dealing with regrets. Being attuned to just some of the developmental concerns that can emerge in late life, I think is particularly important with older adults.

Tori Steffen:  Great. Thank you. Thank you for that. Then I know we spoke about it earlier, the somatic symptoms that older adults may experience. Can you explain what types of somatic symptoms that they typically experience and why that might be?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah. A lot of the somatic symptoms older adults experience, would be some of the typical ones we would see in early life as well, around whether it's upset stomach, or just feeling on edge, or restless or even elevated heart rate. Even things like feeling sweaty or short of breath, in cases like panic. Some of those somatic symptoms will look very similarly. As far as to why they might present more with some of those somatic symptoms. Well, we don't know for sure. There's a couple possible explanations.

One of which might be that there could be either biological or psychological, or social factors that influence how anxiety disorders are experienced or present, or seem more prominent in late life. It seems reasonable to expect that the types of symptoms that people might present with can change as one grows older. Due to things like different medical conditions or just age-related changes in things like sleep or emotion and how people experience it. It could just be that there are developmental changes in how anxiety disorders present.

But the other possible explanation relates back to something that I was talking about earlier around lower rates of mental health literacy in older adults. If older adults are less aware of what some of the different symptoms of anxiety disorders are, they may underrecognize some of the symptoms, for example, some of the cognitive symptoms. May be less likely report some of those symptoms, if they don't know that's in keeping with an anxiety disorder. If that's actually the case that this is more of a reflection of let's say a cohort effect, right?

That it's this generation of older adults who lack mental health literacy, we might expect to see that as younger generations of adults now as they get older, that they would be more aware of and more likely to endorse a greater array of anxiety symptoms. So we'll see, and probably research will have more to tell us in the coming decades about some of these age-related differences.

Tori Steffen:  Yeah. That'll be interesting to see the changes as time goes on and people grow older. Are there any other approaches than CBT, that older adults can utilize to combat the symptoms of anxiety disorder, maybe fear of aging?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah, it's a good question. The challenge is that there's probably relatively less therapy outcome research for older adults, compared to other age groups and most of it tends to focus on CBT. But if we look outside of this modality, there's some support for approaches like motivational interviewing or problem-solving therapy to have some success with older adults. One other approach that might be more useful and maybe more unique to late life.

Maybe more helpful too in dealing with issues like fear of growing older, or fear of aging or coming to terms with one's mortality, is the practice of reminiscence and life review, so reminiscing therapy. And while we all might reminisce about the past and recall the good, the bad, and the ugly of our lives, this is particularly important for older people as a developmental task. Older people use the process of reminiscing to help create meaning and integrate life's events.

Maybe even have a heightened awareness of things like the finiteness of life. And to work to create meaningful roles for themselves in their later years, which can be challenging given that society largely pushes older adults to the sidelines. This practice of reminiscence and life review has particular relevance to older adults, who might struggle with fears of growing older or come to terms with what that means for them.

Tori Steffen:  Okay. Yeah, that definitely makes sense. Your article also mentions that the presence of cognitive impairments. We were talking earlier, dementia as an example, can make it more difficult for older adults to engage in CBT as a treatment for anxiety.

Would you mind just explaining this a bit more? Do you think CBT could ever be a suitable treatment option for an older adult with a cognitive impairment?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah. Yeah. Cognitive impairment can vary in late life. There's a certain degree of cognitive change that's normal as people get older, like declines in short-term memory, forgetting names of people or forgetting where you left an object, or walking into a room and not remembering why you walked in there for. That's all pretty normal, versus dementia is not considered a normal part of growing older.

Dementia's an umbrella term for a wide variety of different conditions that can include things like Alzheimer's disease or vascular dementia, or Lewy body dementia. They can come with more severe difficulties with memory, attention, speed of processing, language. It can be much harder for these folks to learn and retain new information, especially as the disease progresses. Now, it's not to say though that older adults with dementia can't benefit from CBT, but it really depends what stage of the disease that they're in.

There is research to suggest that if you're in the more mild to moderate severity range of dementia, that you can still benefit from this type of approach. But you want to ensure that your CBT protocol maybe is streamlined and simplified, in terms of the level of complexity. And to make sure there's ample use of memory aids. Things like handouts, keeping written notes of what's happening each session, and having the client keep their own notes as well, audio recording each session.

Things of that nature, as much as you can do to help the client remember and encode the information you're talking about in session, the better. You might be able consider involving significant others in the client's life to help assist with remembering information. I'm thinking of one client in particular, who after our sessions, she would often talk to her daughter. And would talk to her daughter about part of what she learned in her CBT session that day.

Then part of that was just to help her remember and consolidate what she's learning. But also, to bring her daughter into the loop so her daughter's more aware of what's going on in her treatment. Those are some of the things to keep in mind that might still help an older adults with dementia, let's say, benefit from CBT.

Tori Steffen:  Great. Yeah. It's good to know that it can still be helpful for older adults with those cognitive impairments. The case study outlined in your article, showed that older adults who experience regular panic attacks can improve such occurrences with the help of CBT tactics. Could you speak a little bit about this and what may help with that?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah. Yeah. Let's start with in its simplest form how we conceptualize something like panic disorder. Most simply, panic disorder is a fear of fear. Where individuals who might be experiencing normal or benign physical symptoms of anxiety, become quite fearful of these sensations because they start to assume that they mean more catastrophic things, like having a heart attack or being on the verge of fainting, going crazy or losing control.

When anxiety symptoms are viewed in that way, of course, it's very distressing and can typically result in avoidance of activities or situations, or things where people think that those physical symptoms might be activated. They might start to avoid things like cardiovascular exercise, caffeine, or even things like taking the stairs. With some of those avoidance behaviors, this can really reinforce and even magnify some of the fears that people have around those physical sensations of anxiety.

It can sometimes be the case that for older adults with panic disorder, the onset of those difficulties can go alongside other medical issues, like the tachycardia example I discussed earlier, or even GI conditions. The onset of these medical issues can make people more hypervigilant to changes in physical sensations, to be a bit more anxious or on edge about them. Now, when you're doing CBT for panic with older adults, the overarching goal is to help people learn that the physical sensations that occurred during panic are uncomfortable but not dangerous.

They don't actually need to try to actively control these sensations, that they'll dissipate on their own. Part of how we do this is by cognitive restructuring, so helping older adults to change their minds about what these sensations mean. With some older adults, they've had pretty longstanding beliefs about what these sensations mean, that they're crazy or they're unable to control themselves. Good psychoeducation is going to help people start to shift the perception of these symptoms.

Now, the other thing though that's really going to go a long way, is doing interoceptive exposures, which is basically making active, intentional efforts to try to mimic the sensations of panic. In doing so, is going to allow people to learn that these sensations aren't going to result in some catastrophic outcomes, like going crazy or having a heart attack. We'll often encourage people to do things like breathe through a straw for one minute and plug your nose. Run on the spot as quickly as you can or purposely hyperventilate for 30 seconds.

Doing that repeatedly is going to help people start to learn that these are at most, uncomfortable but not actually dangerous feelings for me. Now, the thing that's maybe more important if you're doing those interoceptive exposures with older adults, is to make sure that you inquire about any medical conditions that might contraindicate some of these exposures or require you to adapt them. For example, there's some cardiopulmonary conditions that you might want to avoid.

Certain forms of interoceptive exposures where you activate either cardiovascular symptoms or respiratory symptoms. Likewise, if you've got individuals with asthma or COPD, or renal disease or seizure disorders, some of those folks are advised not to do certain forms of exposures that involve breathing through a straw or inhaling more CO2. For this, don't work in isolation. Check with your older adult's primary care physician to get clearance to do some of these exercises.

Well, collectively, some of the cognitive work and the exposures in CBT for panic, can really go a long way into helping older adults reduce the frequency of those panic attacks, and ultimately, to feel more confident about their abilities to deal with anxiety.

Tori Steffen:  Great. That's great to hear that those tactics can help with panic disorder and definitely good. I know that CBT is best and ideally done under the treatment and guidance of a licensed mental health professional.

Are there anything things that older adults can do on their own to potentially reduce or lessen those symptoms of anxiety?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah, absolutely. There's a number of important things that they can be doing. One of the first things I'd encourage older adults to do, is to try to be a detective with their anxiety. By that, I mean trying to make note of a few things when they feel anxious. To make note of where and when they tend to feel more anxious. Is it before trips to the doctor, while driving, before traveling? To also identify what thoughts that they may be experiencing at the time that they feel anxious.

What if I get into an accident? What if my doctor gives me terrible news and the like? Also to make note of what behaviors that they engage in when they feel anxious, whether it's avoiding driving or researching physical symptoms online. Making note of those different things can help understand the full picture of your anxiety and how it shows up in your life. That can ultimately help you be better situated to interrupt some of those usual things that go on when we feel anxious.

The second thing I think older adults can do is to talk to themselves like they would talk to a loved one or a close friend who was feeling anxious. If we had a loved one who was worrying about an upcoming medical appointment, we'd probably try to understand, to empathize and even to comfort them. Oftentimes, if we can do that for ourselves, that just tends to feel better and helps us feel a little bit better situated to cope with feelings of anxiety that might be coming up.

The third thing and final thing I'll mention that might help older adults in dealing with anxiety, has to do with experimenting with doing the opposite to what your anxiety pushes you to do. If you notice that your anxiety tends to make you want to avoid things like socializing, exercising, or trying new things, try to attempt to gradually face and overcome some of these fears by doing the opposite. If you notice perhaps that your anxiety makes you overdo things.

So over-come it, over-prepare for things, over-research, experiment with scaling back on some of those things. And people can find that if they change their behavior when they feel anxious, many of their feelings of anxiety can reduce over time. Those are some of main things I would encourage older adults to do, who feel anxious.

Tori Steffen:  Great. Thank you for sharing that. I'm sure it's helpful information and definitely relates to mindfulness and exposure therapy as well.

Well, Dr. Erickson, do you have any final words of advice or anything else that you'd like to share with our listeners today?

Julie Erickson:  Yeah, sure. I always like to plug some optimism for growing older. As much as there can be some negative stereotypes of aging and fear surrounding the process of growing older, there's also a lot to look forward to. The later years of life can bring a lot of freedom from responsibilities that were present earlier in life, so like child rearing or building a career.

Older adults acquire a lot of wisdom and emotional maturity that tends to peak in later life. Alongside that, they tend to have more clarity about the people and the things that are most important to them and tend to spend their time accordingly. As much as there are considerable challenges to growing older, there are a lot of upsides and things to look forward to.

Tori Steffen:  That's great. I love the optimistic perspective on that. Well, thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Erickson. It's been really great speaking with you today. Thank you so much for contributing to our interview series.

Julie Erickson:  You're welcome. Thanks for having me.

Tori Steffen:  Thank you. Have a great one.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Therapist Claire Jack on Autism Spectrum Disorder

An Interview with Therapist Claire Jack

Claire Jack, Ph.D. is an Anthropologist and Therapist based in Scotland. Dr. Jack specializes in working with women with Autism Spectrum Disorder and has published “Women with Autism: Accepting and Embracing Autism Spectrum Disorder as You Move Towards an Authentic Life”.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Hey, thanks for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Dr. Jennifer Ghahari, research director at Seattle Anxiety specialists. We are a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

I'd like to welcome with us anthropologist and therapist, Claire Jack, who joins us from Scotland today. Dr. Jack received her Ph.D. in anthropology and has subsequently trained as a therapist over 10 years ago. In her late forties, she was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and has sought to help others understand more about this often challenging disorder. Before we get started today, can you let our listeners know a little bit more about you and what made you interested in becoming an anthropologist as well as a therapist?

Claire Jack:  Okay. Yeah, actually, I suppose for me the two things link up really quite a long time ago. When I was 18, I started to train as a psychologist, I started to do my degree in psychology. For various reasons, it just wasn't really the right course for me. I shifted to archeology, so I've had a long route to get here, which led on to anthropology and history because, obviously, anthropology and archeology are quite closely related. I think there was just always that interest in how people work, how they communicate, so very much was studying that within anthropology.

I really got into therapy from my own personal experience. I had a really bad driving phobia and I had had hypnotherapy a long time ago, which was reasonably successful, but not fully successful. I had an incredible hypnotherapy session for my driving phobia and that just made me want to train. I trained in that, I did counseling, I did life coaching. That's it, really, I've been working as a therapist now I think for probably nearly 15 years and I've had a training school for 10 years, so I combined the two.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Great. Can you explain to our listeners what autism spectrum disorder is?

Claire Jack:  Okay. Autism spectrum disorder is a developmental disorder, so that means that you're born with the condition. When we're thinking about it, we can really think about three levels of autism, we've got level one, level two, level three. I think it's really important to remember, it's a huge spectrum, so very big spectrum of experience.

People with level one autism, that's what I've been diagnosed with, that's equivalent to what used to be called Asperger's syndrome. I think in 2013, you no longer have an official diagnosis of Asperger's. That is roughly equivalent to level one autism. People with level one lead independent lives on the whole; average or above average intelligence. They have symptoms, I think it's important not to downplay how difficult level one autism is, but most people can lead a certain completely independent life.

Level two autism, we're talking about people that maybe need some kind of assistance, might struggle to be lead independent lives.

Level three is often associated with learning difficulties; it might include people who non-verbal.

It seems like it's such a big spectrum that you almost think what have people, say like me, who's leading a completely independent life, with someone who has special needs and a lot of help, what have we got in common? It's really thinking about the traits. People with autism, we have sensory issues, difficulties processing sensory stimuli, communication and social difficulties. We might have difficulties with restricted interests. Emotional regulation difficulties are really common as well. Across the spectrum, people have these traits that they share in common.

Actually, I don't have anything visual that I can show this on, but I think when we think of a spectrum, we often think of a linear spectrum, from good to bad or difficult to easy, but actually, if you think of it as a pie chart and think of the symptoms and think, well, somebody might be much more affected in terms of communication difficulties, but maybe less affected in terms of restricted interests, or they might have difficulties with eye contact, but less emotional regulation difficulties. Instead of thinking of it a spectrum, we can think that people have really diverse experiences within autism as a whole.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow, great. Thank you for explaining that and the different levels. Unfortunately, without more information known about autism among the general public, those without it can often feel frazzled or annoyed at some of the ways it may present in people. It's fairly common to hear notions like, "Why can't they stop doing that? Why don't they act normal?" Can you explain what it's actually like to experience autism? What does it feel like?

Claire Jack:  Yeah. I suppose, first of all, there's not a choice in it. You are experiencing the world differently and you're processing the world differently, so you can't think yourself out of autism. I think that's the first thing for other people to remember. Actually, although I'm autistic myself, I come into contact with autistic people and we don't all necessarily get on together, so I can see it from both sides. An example might be, I do a lot of teaching, I teach students, and sometimes my autistic students need me to really explain things in a huge amount of detail, I need to spend an awful lot more time going over things, they might take things that I say very literally so I have to go over that, and just I end up spending a lot more time with them. I can understand that they need that time, but I can see that that could be frustrating for somebody else.

Yeah, and to come back to your question, it's important to know that when something is happening for somebody autistic, it tends to be happening in a really extreme way and there is nothing that they can do about that. For instance, when I was a child, because I think a lot of people learn about autism because they've got maybe autistic children, when I was a child, I was very well behaved; never, ever misbehaved. That was what I wanted to be like, I just wanted to be a really well-behaved kid. But if I was triggered, I was a monster; absolutely, I was horrific.

One time in the hospital, I was there for an operation, I attacked all the nurses, I got all the medical equipment, I threw everything everywhere. I scratched my mum so badly that she still has the scars. I was five, but there was no controlling me. It wasn't a choice; I never would've attacked like that. I think that's just really important to think, because autistic people have to process things in a different way, you have to understand it is different. It's not the same, no matter how they might present most of the time to somebody.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Great. You mentioned triggers, could that be something like lights or smells or sounds?

Claire Jack:  Absolutely. I think when I'm thinking about triggers, I'm usually thinking about emotional triggers and sensory triggers. What you're talking about is more in terms of sensory processing. An example might be going to the supermarket and dumping your bags because you can't be there any longer, or a huge one for me is people scraping their plates. As a kid, I couldn't stand, especially if we had unglazed plates in the house, that noise, I just couldn't be in the room. Even as an adult, I've learned to cover it a bit, but that kind of thing, I experience it very, very deeply. It's like a physical, horrific pain. Both my sons have that sensory thing as well, they're exactly the same.

Emotional triggers can also be a huge thing as well. I think often, if you're not being understood or you're not being listened to, maybe somebody's given you too much information. I had a client recently, a student, and she was just getting too much information that she wasn't able to take in and had a complete meltdown. I think those are two really big triggering things for autistic people.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Great, thank you. On your website, you mentioned that males and females with autism actually present differently. Can you explain the differences?

Claire Jack:  Okay. Well, I think there are a lot of similarities, in terms of the traits, there are really big similarities, but women tend to camouflage or mask their autism. We know from a really early age, girls tend to be driven to be more social than boys. That goes from neurotypical girls and autistic girls, but there is this drive. They want to engage a bit more, little autistic girls than little autistic boys, so they find ways of trying to appear "normal" so that they pass. For that reason, girls tend to be awful lot better at making eye contact, at having conversations, at just blending in.

Also, in terms of things like interests, there seems to be a difference. The classic, what we might think of, collecting Star Wars toys or little trains or something that boys might do, collecting things, girls often become really obsessed with other people. It could be crushes, it could be bands, film stars, even a best friend.

Again, they tend to go under the radar because they're presenting very differently to boys. They still have the restricted interests, still have the social difficulties, still have all of it going on, but it tends to look really different in girls and boys.

Jennifer Ghahari:  In terms of comorbid mental health conditions, what do those with autism tend to experience? Is it anxiety, depression, things like that, or any other?

Claire Jack:  Yeah, absolutely. They tend to have really high levels of anxiety and depression. What the research shows is that that tends to be linked to the degree of camouflaging. It's not necessarily linked to how autistic you are, how severe your autism is, but how much you try and cover that. Again, women tend to maybe have worse mental health than men and that tends to be linked to how much they mask it, because when you're masking all the time, it's absolutely exhausting. It's a strange just doing anything because you're putting on such a constant act. That's a big reason for the certain mental health issues.

Suicidality is also a really big problem with autistic people, higher levels of suicidality and also more of a likelihood that it's followed through on as well. A lot of autistic, well, I don't know a lot, I'm possibly using the wrong term, but certainly some autistic people are misdiagnosed with things like bipolar disorder as well, because meltdowns can seem horrific, it can seem like a bipolar episode. Some of the extreme behavior that autistic people present with as well can sometimes be misdiagnosed as bipolar. Some people do have autism and bipolar, but the misdiagnosis is something that comes to light quite often as well.

Jennifer Ghahari:  When we diagnosis this, is it a psychiatrist, a therapist?

Claire Jack:  It's usually a psychiatrist, sometimes clinical psychologist will diagnose, for a full clinical diagnosis. Therapists, such as myself, might offer a nonclinical diagnosis. I suppose one of the reasons certainly that I offer that is just the problems that people have getting a full clinical diagnosis. The wait times can be huge, the expense can be really extreme, and so sometimes people might go to someone like myself, even as a stop-gap, so that they have something to work with whilst they're waiting a couple of years for a diagnosis.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh wow; years.

Claire Jack:  Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I don't know about every country, and obviously in the UK we have the NHS, so it's a free diagnosis, but that can certainly be up to a couple of years waiting. It's a massive wait.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Which could lead, as you said, to the anxiety and depression.

Claire Jack:  Absolutely, yeah.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow. In terms of treatment, how would autism spectrum disorder typically be treated, from a therapeutic standpoint?

Claire Jack:  I think this is a really interesting question. The recognized treatment for autism is applied behavioral analysis, ABA. To be honest, it's not something that I've had and it's not something that I'm trained in, I'm no expert in ABA, but basically, it's... I'm trying to think of the best way to describe this. It's aimed towards people maybe having a more productive, and again, inverted commas, “normal” life. It's quite a rewards- and punishment-based therapy, as far as I know. It's not particularly popular within the autistic community, because the autistic community are of really working towards accepting autism and accepting yourself. But certainly, I think it's very common amongst autistic children, trying to almost train them to be less autistic. Like I say, it's not a very popular approach within the autistic community.

CBT can be effective, but I think what's really important is you need to go to somebody who understands autism. I've been trained in CBT and I do work with CBT, but it doesn't necessarily work with autistic people unless you really recognize the limitations, because trying to push yourself and change your beliefs and come up with new behaviors can be really impossible for people with autism. What I find is that a lot of people who have been down traditional therapy routes just haven't got the help that they need at all. A lot of them have talked about therapists, and actually I've had this experience looking for past trauma to explain what I'm experiencing, because it can present in a very similar way, and actually there's maybe nothing particular in the past that can explain what you're experiencing now.

There are autistic therapists out there. I think just having that level of understanding from a personal perspective and being able to educate your clients, I find with autistic clients, I'm educating them a lot more than I would with other clients and that's a hugely important part of therapy. But to me, therapy is all about accepting yourself, it's accepting you're autistic beginning to work to take the pressures off and work with, I don't like to call it limitations, differences. Just think, yeah, I'm different in this way, but this is a solution for it. It's all about acceptance.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, that's fantastic, thank you. In terms of self-care tips, are there any that you can recommend that people can try at home or just on their own without any therapy?

Claire Jack:  Yeah. I think one of the big problems people with autism have is emotional regulation. The worst effect of that is when people have meltdowns, which can be absolutely horrific. It can involve leaving your house, putting yourself in danger, breaking things, putting other people in danger, they can be horrendous. But there are signs at some point that you are probably heading from meltdown, so it's really important to begin to recognize your own signs. They don't come out of nowhere.

You might just recognize you're a bit tired, some people might stim, so it could be touching their face or rocking backwards and forwards or pacing, or even talking a bit loud, there will be something. If you can think about it as an emotional regulation timeline, you can begin to recognize that actually you need to stop and don't go to the supermarket. I'm mentioning supermarkets because I hate them, but don't go to the supermarket if you're starting to talk a bit quickly. At that point, you start to rest. I think that's a huge tip, start to think about a timeline and what you need.

Also, you need a recovery time. I think this is, again, autistic people are different. They take ages to recover from a meltdown. It might be hours, it could even be days. You need to think, “Do I need to rest here, do I need to avoid something?” There's a theory that lot of people use, called “spoons theory”, and it was actually developed by somebody with I think it was chronic fatigue, it was some kind of chronic illness. It's a great way to think about self-care. You need to think, “I have X amount of spoons this morning, so I've got 10 spoons. I'm not going to get anymore, when they're gone, they're gone.” I can think, “Right, I've got a meeting, that's two spoons, I've got the school run, that's going to be three, but I don't get any more at the end of the day.” You might actually only be starting with six. It's a real check in with yourself and thinking, I don't have limitless capacity, because fatigue is a huge thing as well.

I like to think of it in terms of pebbles, because I live by the coast. Literally, you have your pebbles. You can even take a pebble out with you, but you just don't get anymore. Again, without being negative or trying to think about limitations, it is a reality check, that you do need to look after yourself or you could end up being exhausted and frazzled and have a meltdown and all of these other things.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Yeah, I think you bring up a good point. I think a lot of people without autism don't realize how bad a meltdown can be, number one. Yes, people can witness it, but then, like you said, the recovery can be hours or days. Autistic people really need to do self-care. If they can't go to an event or if they're wearing noise-canceling headphones, it's not because they want to look stylish or interesting, it's because they actually need to do this for their own health.

Claire Jack:  Yep, yep, absolutely. I know a lot of my clients love noise canceling headphones and some will wear them in the house. I was talking to someone recently, big family, including stepchildren, and just the noise at dinner time was just too much to cope with, and she started to wear these. Her family thought it was amusing at first then they accepted it. It just made such a difference. Yeah, but yeah, it's not about trying to look for attention or anything else, it is about trying to keep yourself safe.

Jennifer Ghahari:  That's great. I'm glad that client found that way to do it.

Claire Jack:  Yeah, it's amazing. I think once you accept it, the solutions you come up with are really inventive.

Jennifer Ghahari:  This has gone by pretty quickly. I always think that's a good sign of a good interview. Usually, we wrap up our interviews by asking if you have any parting words of advice. I'm actually going to ask you that twice. First, do you have any parting words of advice that you'd like to offer for those diagnosed with autism disorder?

Claire Jack:  I think it's a really difficult thing at the beginning to come to terms with, particularly for adults. I think it's different if you've maybe known since you were younger, and certainly the way parents impart that knowledge to their children is really important. But I think just if you find out a bit later in life, as most of my clients have, you've got to be really patient with yourself. It can be scary, you can think, “My life's going to be limited, I can't have the career I want, can I have a family?” Yes, you can do all of these things, but you maybe need to just find different ways of managing it, but it really doesn't have to limit your life in any way.

To me, it's something that it can really open up doors and it can open up new ways of thinking and being once you've begun to accept it. I think that's the really important thing. If you keep battling against, it's always going to appear like this terrible thing that's going to hold you back, but if you can accept it... Autistic people tend to have different ways of viewing the world, they maybe have different talents, they might be particularly good in some areas, so once you can accept all of that, then you can lead this incredible, rich life. It might be slightly different or it might work in slightly different ways, and that's completely fine. I think it's accepting that that's completely fine.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Do you have any words of advice for those without autism that you want them to be aware and cognizant of?

Claire Jack:  Well, I think first of all, the client base that I work with, you wouldn't know they're autistic. I think some people think they're giving a compliment by saying that, “You don't look autistic at all,” which is actually really frustrating because they don't see what's happening in the background. When I went to my GP initially to ask for a referral to a psychiatrist, I was just completely knocked back on the basis that I can have a conversation, I can smile, I can look somebody in the eyes. I'd done tons of research and I really tried to explain why and what was going on for me, and it was, "You don't look autistic." I think it's terribly important, if you're not autistic, don't judge somebody, because you don't know how much effort they are putting into something.

It's also, I think, really important to recognize it's real. Most of the people that I work with tend to be really lucky in terms of their partners. I think autistic people are often drawn together anyway, but even if there is a non-autistic partner, most of my clients have had a lot of support, but I have had some clients who've had a really horrible experience from husbands and partners who will not believe that they're autistic and it doesn't seem to matter what they say. Even when they get a full diagnosis, they will not believe it.

I think if somebody has a diagnosis, even if they haven't, even if they're self-diagnosing and have done the research, what they're experiencing is very real. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's not real. Again, just thinking about autistic people having to be inventive with some of their solutions is a great opportunity for partners, children, parents, to be inventive with the autistic person as well, be open to it. Accept if they don't want to do something, they don't have to do that thing. You can probably work around it, you can come up with a different solution. If they don't want to come to your family party, fine. Do they have to go? Probably not.

It's about, I guess, looking at societal norms, which very much are made to fit neurotypical people. This is where I'm going into my anthropology bit here, and I'm thinking, well, do we have to adhere to these norms, and why would we? I think, again, it's a great opportunity, but people have to be really open to accepting their loved one or colleagues or whoever has autism and thinking I can either treat this in a way that's going to stress this person or I can support them, because this is absolutely real for them.

Jennifer Ghahari:  That's really great. Thank you so much. Dr. Jack, it's been wonderful talking with you today and we really appreciate your contributions to our interview series.

Claire Jack:  Thank you.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Have a good day.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Atmospheric Researcher Kyle Hilburn on Wildfire Anxiety

An Interview with Atmospheric Researcher, Kyle Hilburn

Kyle Hilburn, M.A. is an atmospheric researcher and research associate at the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere at Colorado State University. He specializes in the use of technology to study natural disasters, such as wildfires.

Theresa Nair:  Thank you for joining us today for this installment of The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Theresa Nair, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. I'd like to welcome with us atmospheric researcher, Kyle Hilburn, who is a research associate at the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere at Colorado State University. Kyle has a Bachelor's Degree in Atmospheric Science from the University Of North Dakota and a Master's Degree in Meteorology from Florida State University. He was recently a presenter at NASA's Earth Science Applications Week, where he discussed the most recent breakthroughs in the use of NASA satellites to assist emergency responders in tracking the directionality and impact of fires. Thank you so much for joining us today. Before we get started, can you please tell us a little bit more about yourself and what made you interested in studying meteorology?

Kyle Hilburn:  Thank you, Theresa. It's my pleasure to be here with you today. Growing up in Minnesota, I was fascinated by the weather for as long as I can remember. Minnesota has plenty of crazy weather to observe. I will admit that as a young child, I was afraid of loud noises. And so, thunder caused me distress. Some of my childhood interest in lightning was motivated by that. Even though I couldn't control it, I could at least understand it. And that helped me deal with the stress more effectively. I find it incredible that despite millennia of meteorological observations by humans, we are still learning new things about the weather.

For example, when I was in high school, the first photographic documentation of sprites was captured, which are electrical discharges from the tops of thunderstorm clouds. There are undoubtedly many new discoveries still to be made in meteorology. What makes new discoveries possible are advances in technology for observing the atmosphere. And while the public may joke about the accuracy of weather forecasts, there have been steady improvements in weather forecasts over the last 30 years, coming from increased computational power, more sophisticated weather models, and more observations.

It wasn't until I was living in Northern California that I had personal experiences with wildfire, and I realized its important role in the Earth atmosphere system. The growth rate of wildfires rivals that of thunderstorms. The first fire I witnessed relatively up close was the Valley Fire in 2015. It grew from 10,000 acres in the first six hours and 50,000 acres in the first 24 hours. Within two weeks, it had burned 76,000 acres. When fires become large enough and hot enough, they even begin to create their own weather, capturing the physical coupling between fires and the weather is an important theme in my current research.

Theresa Nair:  That's incredible. I mean, I think sometimes we don't realize how quickly fires can spread. Some of the comparisons that you're giving us are amazing. We don't realize that it can spread even faster than a storm.

Many of our audience members are in the Pacific Northwest where wildfires are becoming a growing concern. Since the time you began researching atmospheric behavior, are you noticing any significant changes to wildfires, either in frequency or behavior?

Kyle Hilburn:  Yes. What I've observed and what multiple studies confirm is that wildfires are becoming more frequent, they're growing larger, they're exhibiting more extreme fire behavior, and the fire season has gotten longer. And with population growth in what's called the wildland-urban interface, there are more people with greater exposure to wildfire risks. And it's not just droughts and fires that are becoming more frequent and more extreme, but heavy precipitation seems to be becoming more common as well.

For example, the six 1-in-1,000-year precipitation events that occurred in August in the United States or the recent flooding in Pakistan. This leads to the concept of cascading natural hazards, where heavy precipitation falling after a fire can cause erosion, debris flow, and have impacts on watershed, ecology, and water quality. This recently occurred with tropical storm Kay over Southern California. This cycle of drought, fire and flood is surprisingly common. And the National Weather Service actively monitors for these situations.

Throughout most of my career, the concept of attributing extreme weather events to climate change was considered impossible or at least dubious science. However, with advances in computing power, one can now simulate extreme events with and without the human influence on the climate and thus attribute those events to climate change with some level of confidence. This attribution is being performed almost in real time today.

Theresa Nair:  That's great. Yeah, I think those types of models are important for answering that question of whether we are affecting the atmosphere or not. In your recent presentation for NASA's Earth Science Application Week, you discussed extreme fire behavior and how some fires are large enough to create their own weather. I know you mentioned it a few minutes ago also in this interview. I was wondering if you could give us some examples of that and discussed what types of phenomenon you observe.

Kyle Hilburn:  A primary example is called a “pyrocumulonimbus” cloud, which is a type of thunderstorm that gets its buoyancy from a heat source, such as a wildfire. This type of cloud has only been widely recognized in meteorology in the last 24 years. There are even examples of pyrocumulonimbus clouds that get strong enough to produce lightning that ignite new fires, such as the pyrocumulonimbus cloud created by the Mallard Fire in Texas. Strong winds cause extreme fire behavior as we saw with the Marshall Fire in Boulder, Colorado. This was just a grass fire, but with winds stronger than 100 miles per hour, this fire was able to get out of control and enter an urban area causing so much destruction. People who thought they live far from the wildland-urban interface found out they are more vulnerable to wildfire risk than they thought. The Tubbs Fire in Santa Rosa, California in 2017 burned from Calistoga to Santa Rosa in just three hours’ time, propelled by very strong Diablo winds. Those winds are strongest along ridge-tops and created tendrils of fire that spread down into the valleys and neighborhoods, reaching within half a mile from my house.

The other ingredient in extreme fire behavior is heavy fuel loading, where the term fuel dispassionately refers to trees, shrubs and grasses. Drought, historical forest management practices, and pernicious species have played roles in creating the dead fuel conditions that we find ourselves with today.

In Lauren Johnson's interview on environmental justice, she described Native American forest practices of thinning trees to control fires. That practice is now referred to as a prescribed burn. Although New Mexico, this year, we witnessed a tragedy when a prescribed burn got out of control and became the Calf Canyon/Hermits Peak Fire, the largest in New Mexico history. The goal of my research is to use sophisticated weather models to provide improved decision support tools for prescribed burns and wildfires.

Theresa Nair:  That's really interesting. There's actually a couple follow ups I think I'd like to ask you on that. So with these weather systems that develop in fires, are some of the tools that are being developed able to begin predicting those?

Kyle Hilburn:  Yes, absolutely. We're able to put together all of the physical processes. And a lot of these have been understood for some time, but it's about having the computing power to be able to run these models fast enough to provide the information to people in the field, dealing with the fire.

Theresa Nair:  Okay, and one other thing. You had mentioned the benefits of controlled burns, but then also the risk if it gets out of control. Given the risk of it getting out of control, does it seem like it's better in general to do the controlled burn or is it maybe different in different circumstances?

Kyle Hilburn:  Yeah. I'm not a forest ecologist, but my understanding is that in general, controlled burns are an effective practice for controlling fuel-loads in forests.

Theresa Nair:  Okay, great. In your presentation, I did attend your NASA presentation, you were discussing the most recent applications for using satellites to assist in responding to fires. Could you tell us about the developments in that area and how it differs from previous methods that were used to track the directionality and impact of fires?

Kyle Hilburn:  Satellite remote sensing has been used to detect thermal signatures of active wildfires for over 20 years. Recent developments have improved the spatial and temporal resolution of the observations. For example, currently, the highest resolution satellite sensor with publicly available data has pixels that are 30 acres in area. However, that satellite is on a low Earth orbiting satellite, about 500 miles up, which only observes a given location twice per day. In contrast, geostationary satellites currently provide updates as fast as 30 seconds, but because they're so much farther from Earth, 22,000 miles up, they have pixels that are 1,000 acres in area.

So, part of my research concerns combining these observations from different sensors to get the best of both approaches. Over the coming decades, we will get new sensors and satellites with even finer spatial resolution and faster temporal refresh. These are being designed right now. While small satellite constellations and unmanned aerial vehicles will offer new observing approaches.

The other major development is how we forecast fires. Older models treat fire as an uncoupled system where you have wind blowing over a fire and they use simple assumptions to predict the fire spread based on the wind, but in those models, the fire does not in turn affect the winds. In my research, we're using a fully coupled model. Its name is WRF-SFIRE, which has physical processes in the atmosphere, the fire, and the vegetation coupled together and interact as they do in the real world. This is the only way that you can have fire that creates its own weather. Examples of fire atmosphere interactions include fire-induced winds that can further dry fuels and smoke shading that could inhibit air mixing. Uncoupled models do not represent those types of physical connections. I discussed more technical details about physical processes of WRF-SFIRE in my NASA Earth Science Applications Week presentation, and I've provided the link. (Kyle’s presentation starts 1 hour 32 minutes in.)

Theresa Nair:  That's great. Thank you. And that sounds like incredible research being able to combine all of those different factors and get more accurate predictions about how the fire will actually behave. Are these recent developments in the use of satellite data and the work you've been talking about, are they solely intended for the use of professionals and disaster responders, or is this knowledge that's available to the general public?

Kyle Hilburn:  I would encourage the general public, not to attempt to interpret forecasts from fire models for the same reason your doctor encourages you not to obsess on WebMD. You need to be a trained meteorologist to be able to understand the characteristics of the particular forecast system in order to understand what those forecasts mean. On the other hand, there are websites that provide information on fires, smoke, and weather that are suitable for the public, and I'll provide you links. You should also look for information at your state and local levels to get the information that is most specific to you.

Theresa Nair:  That is great. And we will be linking to all the resources that Kyle's talking about in the transcribed interview below. So if you're watching this interview or if you're on the podcast listening to it, there was a transcription available that we'll have all of the links that he's discussing. Let's talk for a little bit about the relationship between wildfires and mental health. You have extensive experience dealing with wildfires, both from a personal perspective and a professional perspective. When people find out that they may potentially be in the path of a wildfire or that they're in the general proximity of a fire, what steps do you believe would be the most helpful in dealing with the anxiety that might arise from that situation?

Kyle Hilburn:  Well, recognize that a fire doesn't need to be particularly close to cause major impacts on life and various impacts can last days to weeks to months. Even when a fire is 30 miles away, its impacts can make it feel very close. The smoke from a nearby fire can produce a suffocating sensation in a matter of seconds to minutes, which is anxiety provoking. The sky can darken, turning day into night and falling ash can produce an “end of the world” feeling. The smoke can make outdoor exercise impossible, which removes a potential coping mechanism, and it can trigger PTSD in people who have lived through previous fires. Having to leave everything behind at a moment's notice, not knowing what you'll come back to is incredibly stressful. And the aftermath of a fire in an urban setting looks like images from a war.

I've experienced living near fires in Santa Rosa, California, and Fort Collins, Colorado. The Cameron Peak Fire near Fort Collins started in August 2020, and it wasn't 100% contained until December. Fortunately, I was not directly in harm's way with any of these fires, but I still experienced some anxiety. The thing that produced the most anxiety for me was the lack of specific up-to-the-minute information given how fast conditions can change. While messages go out from emergency managers to people currently in evacuation zones, being close to, but not in an evacuation zone can be frustrating because it is hard to get the hyperlocal up-to-date information you want.

So, when confronted by wildfire hazards, one way to deal with the anxiety is practicing mindfulness by which I mean observing your environment and your thoughts about it. Some questions you can ask yourself, is the smoke aloft, or is it near the surface? That can make a big difference in terms of impacts on whether your air quality is healthy or not. How dense is the smoke visually? What is the color of the smoke and how does it affect your perception of the sun or the moon? What does the smoke smell like? Is it spicy and pungent like fresh wildfire smoke, or is the smell more muted? Indicating the smoke has traveled some distance. Is there falling ash? What is the wind direction?

By remaining mindful, you can avoid black and white thinking about the fire. You can observe that its impacts vary from day to day and over the daily cycle. And you can see that like everything, it comes, and it goes. Emergency managers also recommend staying observant in wildfire conditions, which they call maintaining situational awareness. So, staying aware has benefits both to your psychological state and your physical safety.

Another strategy for dealing with the anxiety, turn your focus outwards and practice gratitude for the wildland fire crews responding to the fire incident. Wildland firefighters work extremely hard, and they deserve our appreciation and support. Also, there may be evacuees who need support, but please listen to your local officials and make sure you don't get in the way of their response efforts.

One issue I've experienced during fires is obsession over the latest observations. I found I have to ask myself, is there really any new information? And, when do I expect new information? To keep myself from spiraling into an obsessive-compulsive cycle of refreshing websites repeatedly when fires are nearby. Finally, preparing for wildfire hazards can give you comfort and can make a big difference when the worst does happen. So, I've provided links from Ready.gov, CAL FIRE, and the Red Cross, discussing steps you can take to be prepared.

Theresa Nair:  That's great. And I think we've probably all been in situations where you're repeatedly refreshing that website, trying to get the latest news. Following up on that. You mentioned the importance of not only staying up to date with those resources, but also your own observational skills, keeping an eye out for things, like whether the smoke is closer to the ground or further up, whether there's ash falling from the sky. If somebody notices that their situation is changing, but maybe there aren't any alerts yet saying to evacuate, should they kind of follow their observational signs that they've observed or should they wait to receive specific instructions from authorities?

Kyle Hilburn:  That's a difficult question and it will depend on your own personal feelings about the situation. Things like ash can be transported for many, many miles, and aren't necessarily an indicator that you're in imminent danger. I would definitely recommend that people listen to their state and local authorities and to emergency managers. They will let you know if there is an immediate risk to your safety. But if you're uncomfortable, you can make the choice to leave at any point, if that makes you feel better.

Theresa Nair:  That's true. It never hurts to be more cautious, right? Are there any further developments in tracking or responding to wildfires that you think might be helpful for our audience to know about? And are there specific tools you would recommend for those who are concerned about fires in their area?

Kyle Hilburn:  Yes, I would recommend four websites. First is the AirNow website, which provides information about air quality. In particular, the quantity called PM 2.5, which measures the concentration of particles smaller than 2.5 micrometers, which is a key indicator of the severity of wildfire smoke. And whether it's healthy to be outside. Keep in mind that air quality sensors represent the conditions at a specific point and conditions can vary dramatically with your location. Second is the InciWeb website, which provides information on active wildfire incidents for the United States. You can click on specific incidents and read more information about the current situation and the outlook.

Third is the CIRA SLIDER website, CIRA is where I'm located, which provides access to satellite imagery of fires. When you go to that site, it defaults to the GeoColor product, which is very good for looking at smoke plumes during the daytime, because smoke generally has a darker color than clouds. Under “Product”, you can select fire temperature or natural color fire, and then zoom in on your location. There are color bars at the bottom of the image that tell you what each color means. Under add map, you can add cities, roads, and county boundaries, and other information to see where the fire is located. Keep in mind that clouds and even heavy smoke can obscure the heat signatures from fires. And finally, the National Weather Service at weather.gov is an excellent resource for the official weather forecast coming from human experts with local knowledge and to learn whether there are any watches or warnings for your area.

Theresa Nair:  This is some great recommendations. Thank you. And once again, for our audience, we will provide links for all of those in the description. So if you didn't quite catch that, you can just look at that on the transcript and they'll be there. As an atmospheric researcher who specializes in creating weather prediction models, do you have any other parting words of advice or anything else you'd like to share with our listeners?

Kyle Hilburn:  Well, nature is very restorative for the soul. Florence Williams described nature therapy, such as forest bathing in her interview. And so it is extremely distressing to see nature burning down, but we must remember that fire exists as part of a natural duality between creation and destruction. There are artists such as Erika Osborne, who are exploring this duality and human's relationships with fire. But the increasing rate of changes in our environment is very distressing and climate change anxiety is real. And so, I've provided a link discussing that. Thank you again, Theresa, for this opportunity to discuss managing wildfire anxiety.

Theresa Nair:  Thank you so much for speaking with me today and taking the time to participate in our interview series.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Social Worker Erin Maloney on the Innocent Lives Foundation

An Interview with Social Worker Erin Maloney

Erin Maloney, LCSW is the Director of Wellness for the Innocent Lives Foundation. She is a licensed clinical social worker specializing in trauma, addiction, ADHD, anxiety, depression, and other mood disorders.

Theresa Nair:  Thank you for joining us today for this installment of the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview series. I'm Theresa Nair, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. We are a Seattle-based psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy practice specializing in anxiety disorders.

I'd like to welcome with us clinical social worker, Erin Maloney, who is the Director of Wellness for the Innocent Lives Foundation. Erin earned her Bachelor Degree of Science and Psychology from St. Joseph's University in Philadelphia, and a Master's Degree in Social Work from Widener University in Chester.

She is currently a licensed clinical social worker specializing in trauma, addiction, secondary trauma, ADHD, anxiety, depression, and other mood disorders. Thank you for joining us today, Erin.

Erin Maloney:  Thank you for having me.

Theresa Nair:  Before we get started, can you please tell us a little bit more about yourself and what made you interested in studying clinical social work?

Erin Maloney:  Absolutely. I am a little bit about me. I am a mother of three. I also have a husband and a dog. I live in Scranton, Pennsylvania, like “The Office”. I have always been interested in mental health, actually since a very young age. I told my mom probably about five, six years old that I wanted to become a therapist and she just pushed me along to do whatever I wanted and follow my dreams.

I did, I entered into psychology and I loved it and I worked for quite a bit with my Bachelor's doing case management type work, but I realized I needed to further my education. While I was finished with my Bachelor's, I saw a plethora of therapists in the company that I worked for. It was a nonprofit behavioral health clinic and I saw everybody from LPCs to LSWs, LMFTs, every acronym in the book.

But my immediate supervisor was an LCSW and I found that she had the most, at the time for me, the most variety of opportunities. She could be a director of a program we might have had for behavioral health for children. Or, she could have actually done private practice type work, and I liked that because I could see a lot of settings.

That's when I decided to embark into Widener. I worked full time but got my Master's at night, and I really enjoyed finding that I wanted to keep pursuing from my Masters to license into the clinical license. That's how I got started in it. Always had an interest, always had an interest in people's minds and how it worked.

Theresa Nair:  That's great. It's wonderful when you feel like you're pursuing your purpose and even your calling.

Erin Maloney:  Yes, yes.

Theresa Nair:  For those who are not familiar with your organization, I'm wondering if you can tell us a little bit about the mission of the Innocent Lives Foundation and how it works to bring anonymous child predators to justice?

Erin Maloney:  Absolutely. I just want to say at this point, just a quick little trigger warning. My foundation does deal with trauma related to children and exploitation in any sort of assault. So just a little trigger if anybody is listening in to take care of yourself before or after. I don't think much will come up, but I always like to give that in advance.

Innocent Lives Foundation, what we do is our mission is to do that. We try to get the predators who are hiding online behind the scenes who are trying to exploit children or publish and/or share materials of, we call CSAM, Child Sexual Assault Material. That's our biggest mission is to bring to light the people hiding, to get them out of the dark and get them prosecuted properly.

Now, one of the things I always like to mention is we are non-vigilante. That is a very important part of our mission. We do not set ourselves up as young children. We do not try to entrap perpetrators. This is actually information we find on the open web. It's unbelievable what you would find on the open web, but we use what they call OSINT, which is open-source intelligence. It's basically anything any of us could find on the web, but they know where and how to look specifically for predators laying right within our children.

What we do at the ILF is we get leads and it could be come from, we have a form right on our website that people can enter. It could be a parent concerned about maybe who their children are chatting with. We might get law enforcement to say, "Hey, we could really use some good computer diving hacking skills to find out this case."

Or, it could actually come directly from somebody who might give it to us. Or, our researchers actually are doing the research and they can find a lead. Just be so maybe a username or somebody having an inappropriate photo up. We have, at ILF, different aspects that I wanted to go into because it sounds very confusing. What are you guys doing?

We have three distinct teams. We have what we call The PIT, which is Predator Identification Team, and they're our researchers and they are phenomenal hackers. We call them good guy hackers. They use their skills for good and they're all volunteers. But what they do is they are literally the ones behind the computer doing all the research for us finding this.

We have Education and Outreach Team, which those are our people who are more about putting out blogs, putting out educational materials, fundraising for us. They're really good for caregivers who might be struggling with anything like this.

Then lastly, we have a Development Team and what they do is they actually protect our PIT by developing tools that they can use to protect our PIT people from what they see. One of the big things we have is a blur tool so that our researchers are not seeing actual skin, they just see a blurred image and they can unblur it enough to maybe see a face if they need it, but it's to help them not be exposed to so much content in terms of that.

Those are our three distinct teams, and so what we do at ILF is we all work together in tandem to basically have that one common mission to help bring predators out of the light.

Theresa Nair:  That's great. I mean it's really interesting that you have the blur tool.

Erin Maloney:  Yes.

Theresa Nair:  Because I was wondering, how do you search for this without seeing all of it? So, that would be helpful.

Erin Maloney:  Yes, yes. We very much try to protect. Unfortunately, sometimes the text cases are some of the hardest because you're reading it and your mind goes there, but we still try to protect as much as can.

Theresa Nair:  Is that on the general internet or what's referred to as the dark web?

Erin Maloney:  Yes. Yeah. There is a whole dark web that we are aware of, but we actually try to leave that to law enforcement to do themselves because it is such a gray area. We keep everything above board. Like I said, we're trying to not be vigilantes, not get ourselves in trouble.

Everything people do, even our researchers do things on a device of ours so they're never caught with any sort of material or viewing. We would never want anybody be in trouble of any sort, so everything is done through a computer they have from us with tools and things like that to protect them.

Theresa Nair:  Okay, that's good. That helps to clarify how you even do something like this?

Erin Maloney:  Yes, yes, exactly.

Theresa Nair:  You spend a lot of your time working with volunteers within the organization, the people who are using their skills in order to help identify child predators. You're providing counseling services, I believe. Can you explain why it's important to provide this type of service to the volunteers, and what types of mental health impacts can result from this line of work?

Erin Maloney:  Absolutely. As this started, my CEO he realized quickly, he actually started Innocent Lives Foundation by accident. He is what they call a pen tester. His company does do security breaches for companies to help them learn how to improve the security of their companies.

In doing so, he accidentally stumbled upon child sexual assault material on somebody's device and was able to turn that into law enforcement. It was very validating and reassuring for him and he thought, "I did this so easily, why couldn't we do this as something like a nonprofit or a mission?" He started it from there, which really led to, but he knew the importance of the mental health piece. He said, "If we do this, we have to make sure we're not harming anybody in doing so."

That's how it's always been a proponent since day one. I'm part of every aspect from when they get onboarded. We have a very extensive onboarding. People go through various interviews, and one is a wellness assessment with me because again, we are trying not to damage anybody. If there's significant trauma that's maybe unprocessed or raw still, we're not going to want to have somebody in that capacity working right now with us.

By doing that now you had said, so there's the component of me meeting them early on and then I actually meet with them once a month if they are what we call The PIT, so at minimum they have to meet with me once a month. If you are in another aspect of our team like Education Outreach or Development, you only have to reach out with me once every three months because obviously they're not dealing with the content as much. Like I said, it's different timeframes for different people.

So, that's how I work with them. Now, if somebody has a already current mental health... Now remember, these people are coming voluntarily and not all of them have a psychological disorder. Not all of them have an Axis 1 diagnosis. However, some do and when they do, I make it very clear that I'm more of a wellness piece. If they need extensive work, if there's somebody that I sense needs almost weekly sessions or if they have an addiction they're struggling with or anything even more significant, then I definitely refer them out to a private therapist in their area and/or medication management or other resources.

Then I actually collaborate with any of the people they need me to collaborate with because it is such a unique setting situation. If a therapist needs a little bit of advice or what we do where we do, I'll consult with them as well. I'm involved with them quite a bit, at least once a month and I have a very good rapport with all the volunteers.

Theresa Nair:  Do you find that people may need more services the longer that they do this? Or maybe after particular incidents? Are there maybe something in particular that they find or is it steady?

Erin Maloney:  No, you know what it is? Actually, it's not the work that I notice, it's life changes that impact their volunteering with me. When I say that, we have new parents, for example. Let's say a volunteer has never been a parent, but suddenly they're a parent and they might be one of our researchers. They may not suddenly be able to stomach what they once stomached, and so they may very well say, "I cannot."

We actually have a pause program which is completely non punitive. It's something the volunteer can initiate, or myself if I really sense somebody's just not doing well, I'd encourage that. Really, up to 90 days they can just quietly stay with us. They can join meetings if they want, they can meet with me if they want, but they're not required to do any sort of minimal work for us to keep them active as a volunteer, which is nice.

Then the other option is we also have moving around. We had one PIT member who had a hard time, again with children, and almost sometimes people could actually put their child's face on a victim, which you'd never want to see happen. That is, we never want to damage anybody. So, that person actually still wanted to be with our mission so they stepped aside to Education Outreach and they write educational blogs, or they might speak publicly at a local community event for themselves.

It's really neat. You can still move around and help with that very same mission, but not damage yourself psychologically if you are struggling. I don't find the work... I feel like if people are already here in the mindset to do this type of work, then they've either been exposed to things or they're pretty prepared to compartmentalize their brain to step into this work and step out of this work.

Theresa Nair:  That's interesting because you would assume that maybe it was something that they saw. But it's interesting that it's more life changes that they might be going through.

Erin Maloney:  It truly is. Yep.

Theresa Nair:  And what they're able to view at different points in their life.

Erin Maloney:  We have a very strong level system, that when they start, they start at a very bare... it's more just finding leads. Maybe finding usernames that might be connected to something, and then there's levels. We're not going to have somebody brand new coming in exposed to something that might be very horrific.

I don't even, age is a big factor. Maybe younger children might be too difficult for them, so we're not going to do that. We're going to have them work up in levels and so that they're not really exposed to anything too much too fast because they could process with me the whole time they're doing it whether they're okay or not with that.

I'll check in on them with their case and how it's affecting them and generally fits good and they seem like they're confident with it, then they can move up in the level system, if you will.

Theresa Nair:  Sounds like there's a lot of options for volunteering.

Erin Maloney:  Yes, yes. We do not let it damage or harm anybody because they're helping us. They're volunteering for us, so we would never want to do anything that could hurt somebody.

Theresa Nair:  Okay. I know you've mentioned, and it says on the webpage as well, that you use cognitive behavioral therapy to assist your work with Innocent Lives Foundation.

Erin Maloney:  Yeah.

Theresa Nair:  Could you talk a little bit about how you use that, and then also if there's any other techniques that you find to be productive?

Erin Maloney:  Absolutely. Like I said before, my wellness sessions are typical check-ins. How are you doing, tell me what's going on in your life? But what I listen for and people know, all the volunteers know I use cognitive behavioral therapy because I'm listening for any sort of negative or illogical thoughts and they know that and they know when I can pinpoint that, what I might hear.

If I sense that somebody's really struggling with something, then we will start using cognitive behavioral techniques to see if we can figure out whether this is something more pressing, either a budding anxiety disorder. Or, if this is just something in their lives, maybe an adjustment to something that they're dealing with.

I do a lot of reframing. If I initially hear them say something negative, I might put it in a different reframe. If they're like, "Oh yeah, yeah, yeah" and they get that and I don't hear it again, then I realize they might have just been dealing with something. What I do a lot of with the volunteers is activity scheduling in terms of cognitive behavioral therapy. Because what we do is you would not be able to necessarily do this work in front of your family in the middle maybe of a work day. There's a lot of this content that cannot be exposed. We have to activity schedule, is it best to do this maybe an hour? But you don't want to do it right before bed either. Maybe there's an evening hour that this is best for. Or, perhaps you have a quiet hour in the day with nobody around you. We do that to find the best for a person to pick the time that they can do this type of work.

Role playing. If somebody's struggling with anything really in their lives, but in particular maybe wanting to switch gears in ILF, I might help role play with them. Maybe if they want to approach that with our COO and how they might be able to switch over into a different capacity.

So, I do a lot, now again, if I sense it's something more, then I will encourage them to seek out therapy on an ongoing basis so they can do real true weekly or even twice a week sessions if needed. But generally with some cognitive behavioral therapy, I could figure out if it's something more or not, and that's what I tend to do.

Theresa Nair:  Okay, and do you tend to see any increases in anxiety or depression from the volunteers when they work for maybe an extended period of time on this?

Erin Maloney:  Well, it's funny you said that. If I do sense that, then that's again where I will go into that pause option. "Hey, do you need to pause? Are things getting too much for you?" But it's funny you say that, I've actually seen it go both ways. Where I've seen it in the negative might be, again, if they have a, let's say they're starting a new job position and this is their volunteer position, they might have too much on their plate and so their anxiety's increasing and then they have guilt about not doing their volunteer work, then there's all that.

If I sense that, then we definitely encourage a pause and again, a pause could be 30 days. It doesn't have to be 90 days, but we just encourage that you take a little mental break, take a break from us and come back when you're refreshed and ready.

However, it goes on the other side where this work is very validating sometimes. Because a lot of our volunteers may either have been a survivor of assault in their past. They could have been groomed as a child themselves, or they have a family member who this maybe impacts. When they have a case that's a win, that is completely validating. It's a way to take power back from maybe where they've felt powerless in their past. It can actually be very, very good mentally as well.

The only struggle with that is the reality is we don't always get feedback from law enforcement of how our case is? We hand in a report to law enforcement, but it might not always be clear whether that case went to trial, whether that person was convicted.

We don't always get the information, and so I have to make sure the volunteer's okay with that, that we're not always going to know every win. Are you going to be able to stay motivated on cases you don't know the answer to? There's a lot of areas to poke around in there.

Theresa Nair:  That is interesting. There's that sense of empowerment, right?

Erin Maloney:  Yes, yes.

Theresa Nair:  When they're able to do something, but I'm sure it's a little frustrating when you just never know what happens?

Erin Maloney:  Yes. Exactly, exactly. But that's not our role. We don't want fame, we don't want to be associated with putting somebody away. We are really truly just totally behind the scenes trying to help. We have the computer skills to find a lot of people and we try to hand that over to law enforcement, and so we don't always get the answers.

Theresa Nair:  Do you think there's other areas of volunteer work, or perhaps other professions in general that would benefit from providing these types of mental health services to volunteers or to employees?

Erin Maloney:  Yes. It's funny you say that. We have some volunteers who are either currently or ex-military, or current or ex law enforcement. They have said many times that if they had somebody at their office to talk to, it could have made a major difference for them with some of the things that they endured or witnessed.

I know there's a lot of EAP programs for companies, but I think there is something at me being here every day for them that makes a very big difference. They just know. I get to know them very well. It's a stable, long-lasting relationship, and so they don't have to re-explain themselves to somebody new. I'm part of the team itself and employed there, so it makes a big difference I think in that consistency that they know I'm here and they could come to me at any time.

Theresa Nair:  It seems it might also be beneficial that you have a regular scheduled monthly meeting at least with everybody.

Erin Maloney:  Yes.

Theresa Nair:  Because I think sometimes in workplace mental health services, people are afraid to use them because they're afraid of being stigmatized even if somebody sees them going to talk to the person, or if the boss finds out that they're talking to the person. Do you think it's helpful just going ahead and scheduling appointments with everybody?

Erin Maloney:  Yeah, I really do. It's so funny you say that. Yeah, because I could definitely tell there's a resistance. Our team, for the most part, it is a lot of people who happen to be in cyber security type industry. When you're in that industry, you actually tend to be, not to stereotype an entire group, but sometimes you tend to be introverted and private.

Therefore, I do think this forces people a little bit out of their comfort zone and then they do realize, "Oh, this isn't so bad." Because I'm not deep diving way into their past, Freudian style. It is non-confrontational. I go at their pace and whatever they choose to talk about. Obviously, we talk about case work, but anything else they might need to address.

It gives them a huge shift if they already had a fear or resistance to therapy where it's not so bad for them after a while, once they get to know me better. Yeah, I agree. I think it's very good that it's almost forced upon them and I send out reminders and I reach out.

If they avoid me after a certain amount of time, then we have to do the whole, "Are you trying to pause? Is there something you need?" So, it's nice, but that's rare that I don't hear from somebody

Theresa Nair:  Then it's, "Well, I'm talking to her anyway. I may as well have a real conversation, right?"

Erin Maloney:  Exactly. The other thing to this is that again you mentioned, you asked about different fields. Well, law enforcement or some other heavy content type professions, they can't turn to their family or their loved ones and just spill what happened in their day, similar to this type of work. They're not going to turn and say, "Guess what this case is about?" You can't. You want to protect your own loved ones and family and friends.

A lot of our volunteers are anonymous, so this gives them a direct place to process what they need to process without feeling they're burdening anybody. Without feeling like they're going to hurt or harm anybody. It's just a safe space for them dedicated to them, and I feel like it gives them that open door.

Theresa Nair:  Then they can talk about that case work that they maybe couldn't discuss with other people.

Erin Maloney:  Exactly, exactly.

Theresa Nair:  I think that's a great model. I wish more places would do that.

Erin Maloney:  I do too. I do too. It's very nice, and I do feel like with law enforcement in particular, I think of that field and just the things that come home from, or anybody on the front lines really. After a really rough day of what you might witness or see or hear, and then you have to go home with that.

That's where I feel for people when they don't have any place to just unload that on, and making the time. That's the other thing you had mentioned. We all have a hard time making the time, and at least with this, it's mandatory so it's part of your volunteer. We ask people to volunteer if they're volunteering with us for about 10 hours a month if possible, but that includes a lot.

We have a team meeting, which is once a month. We have myself, would be an hour so that's already detracting right off their volunteer hours for us, so it helps that it's just built right in for them.

Theresa Nair:  Right, and then they don't have to take the initiative to seek out speaking to somebody. It's just a part of it.

Erin Maloney:  Exactly, exactly.

Theresa Nair:  Well, as someone who specializes in cognitive behavior techniques to support the mental health of those engaged in volunteer work, do you have any parting words of advice or anything else you'd like to share with our listeners?

Erin Maloney:  Sure. I mention this to volunteers all the time, and I would like for your listeners to know. I think balancing life is the key. You really have to balance your life, and volunteering is actually a very worthy and beneficial cause to you. This really helps fuel your soul. But if the plate's full and you just need to get rid of something, then that's generally, unfortunately some self-care things or things we do for ourselves might be some of the first things to go.

So, I just always say, "Stay balanced." But if you are realizing you can't manage everything, you can't problem solve, you're losing your focus, you don't want to burn out. Really, I always say we cannot, you do not want to burn out. Before you start, that's where, going back to the cognitive behavioral I therapy, I listen for the negative.

If I start hearing negative comments and negative thoughts that are just kind of untrue, I really try to help reframe. But if it's not possible, then we have to look at what they might have to cut out of their lives? What they might have to do to manage things? Balancing life, self-care is very important, but you need to know when you need to step back and maybe make some changes.

Theresa Nair:  That's great advice. Well, thank you so much for making the time to speak with us and participating in our interview series.

Erin Maloney:  Thank you. Thank you for having me. I just want to make sure I tell you guys that you can always go to our website, innocentlivesfoundation.com. There are great resources and tools on there. If anybody ever had to make a report of anything they were concerned with, again, it could be a parent, a caregiver, a teacher.

If somebody's concerned about maybe what a child's posting or who a child's speaking with or they're unsure of things that are online, you can always submit a report right there and we'll reach out and see what we can help investigate for you. Please use us as a resource as needed. Again, we have great blogs and articles on there and things that you might find very helpful.

Theresa Nair:  That's great, and we will also link to that website underneath our interview so that people can find it easily.

Erin Maloney:  Wonderful. That sounds great.

Theresa Nair:  Okay. Thank you so much for joining us today.

Erin Maloney:  Of course. Thanks for having me.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Jonice Webb on Childhood Emotional Neglect

An Interview with Psychologist Jonice Webb

Jonice Webb, Ph.D. is licensed clinical psychologist located in Boston. She specializes in identifying and treating childhood emotional neglect.

Preeti Kota:  Hi, I'm Preeti Kota, and I'm a research intern here at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. And today I'm joined by Dr. Jonice Webb. Dr. Webb is a licensed psychologist whose interests concentrate on childhood emotional neglect. She's a speaker and bestselling author of two self-help books, Running on Empty: Overcome Your Childhood, Emotional Neglect, and Running on Empty No More: Transform Your Relationships. She has increased awareness of the effects of childhood emotional neglect, and trained hundreds of licensed therapists in identifying and treating childhood emotional neglect in their clients. Dr. Webb, would you like to introduce yourself and share a little bit about your research?

Jonice Webb:  Yes, absolutely. Thanks for having me on. So, I am a licensed clinical psychologist located in Boston, and I've been practicing psychology for, I hate to admit it, but probably like 25 years now. And during that time, having worked in a lot of different settings, I noticed that I started seeing this pattern among my clients, and I got very curious. What is causing this particular group of symptoms to appear in people that seemed to have nothing in common? Otherwise they were from different socioeconomic backgrounds, different cultures, different diagnoses, different types of families, and backgrounds, and yet I kept seeing it over and over. And I just got very curious and started trying to figure it out and eventually realized that what I was seeing was a very pure form of emotional neglect that all these people had in common in their childhood homes. And when I saw that and realized what it was, I started doing research among the databases of the American Psychological Association, trying to find research on emotional neglect, specifically childhood emotional neglect in its pure form.

Meaning not necessarily accompanied by abuse, but just, and not physical neglect, but just pure emotional neglect. And I realized that there really wasn't... It wasn't being talked about it. Wasn't being written about it, wasn't being studied. And that's when I realized I needed to write my first book Running on Empty and it's just taken off from there. And so at this point, then I wrote another book and that was in 2012. In 2018, I wrote Running on Empty No More: Transform Your Relationships, which took the concept and applied it further. And I have a blog on Psychology Today and emotional neglect recovery programs on my website. So it's pretty much everything I do now. I'm very passionate about it.

Preeti Kota:  Wow. That's great. So to dive into the questions, can you talk about the process of early childhood emotional neglect, leading to a lack of self-trust?

Jonice Webb:  Sure. So, childhood emotional neglect happens when a parent fails to respond enough to the feelings of their child. And it doesn't have to be zero amount that they respond, but parents who tend to minimize the importance of feelings, or are even blind to feelings. And there are many, many people in this world who are good people who want to be good parents, but who just don't understand that emotions matter so much. So, when they're raising their child, things like just ignoring the child when they're really upset about something, pretending not to see it, or just not seeing it, not asking questions, not being interested in the child's inner life, or what they're experiencing and not responding to that. When a child grows up this way, they tend to get the message that is not necessarily ever said out loud, but is communicated by a lack of asking the right questions, and saying the right things.

So, sort of like if your parents just pretended that your right arm didn't exist, and just acted as if it wasn't there, you would grow kind of ashamed of your right arm. And you would be like, "Why do I see this, but no one else does?" And you'll try to hide it from other people and from yourself. And that's what children do when their feelings are ignored is they get the message their feelings are irrelevant at best, or bad at worst. And then they block them off so that they won't get in their parents' way. They won't have to deal with them themselves. They just sort of build this wall inside their brains, not consciously, it's just sort of an adaptive mechanism so that their feelings are cut off, and this might get the child through their childhood, but it doesn't really work as an adult because we really need our feelings.

Our feelings are the deepest expression of who we are, and they provide us guidance, and motivation, and all sorts of connection and great things that are really important as we go through our adult lives. So people who grow up with their feelings cut off, don't even realize it don't remember anything happening to them that could make them have problems in their adult life necessarily, and end up just sort of secretly struggling with it, and not understanding what's wrong. And that is the essence of childhood emotional neglect. It plagues a lot of people who aren't aware of it.

Preeti Kota:  And is it the parents that have the most impact on childhood emotional neglect, or can older siblings, or friends have the same effect?

Jonice Webb:  That's a great question. It's primarily the parents, because the human infant is wired to need affection, and emotional connection from their primary caretakers, which in most situations are the parents. Sometimes there can be like, I've heard stories of a nanny providing it when the parents couldn't so there could be a substitute stepping in to provide it, but to be deprived of it, it really is to be deprived of it from your parents.

Preeti Kota:  And then do those with childhood emotional neglect tend to be more prone towards any comorbid mental health disorders, such as anxiety or depression?

Jonice Webb:  Yes. First I want to say all people with childhood emotional neglect, which I call CEN, do not... It's not like everyone develops a comorbid disorder. I've seen lots of CEN people who don't have any history of diagnosis and don't qualify for one when I see them. But nevertheless, they're struggling in various ways, but it does make you more prone to both depression, and anxiety. And I think that it's because when you have your feelings walled off, you're not processing them as you go through life, which most people just do naturally, you get upset, you deal with it, and then you've dealt with it. So you move on. But when your feelings aren't, when you don't have that natural connection with your feelings, they just all sort of pool together on the other side of the wall.

And because you're not aware of them and you're not connected to them, they just kind of mix together and they can turn into basically three things that I've seen, depression, anxiety, or irritability. Some people just become very irritable people, and it's because they haven't dealt with their feelings, or they'll end up depressed or they'll end up having anxiety, free-floating anxiety, or anxiety about certain things. And it's because they haven't dealt with their emotions.

Preeti Kota:  Is there a certain factor that makes a person more prone to having irritability, or anxiety, or depression in reaction to the same thing?

Jonice Webb:  I wonder that myself, I wish I knew the exact answer, but I don't, but I can tell you what my hunch is, which is that it depends on the nature of the walled off feelings. If most of your walled off feelings have to do with sadness or loss, I think you're more prone to depression. If most of your walled off feelings have to do with fear, or trepidation, or any of the sorts of fear based types of feelings, you're more prone to anxiety. And if it's more anger, you're more prone to irritability. That's my guess.

Preeti Kota:  Interesting. So, how do you not confuse following, or listening to your emotions as a source of guidance with giving into your impulses?

Jonice Webb:  First, I'll just explain that one of the things I talk about a lot and try to teach people to do is to pay attention to their feelings, and to listen to them. So I think that's what you're referring to here in this question, and to follow them. But that doesn't mean just like knee jerk following, because emotions can be excessively strong. They can be misplaced at times. And sometimes we feel things really intensely that actually are, we're feeling it so intensely because it's touched off something from the past that we haven't dealt with that feeling enough yet. And so that feeling attaches itself to the current situation, and makes you feel you can have big feelings over something that seems kind of ridiculous, or small. And it's because it's just blown out of proportion by the past. So, there are many reasons why we can't just knee jerk trust our emotions.

So, the way it works well is to take note of what you're feeling, process it with your head, meaning, think it through what is this feeling? Because every feeling is a message from your body. So what is my body trying to tell me here, by making me feel angry right now, could it be this, could it be that? And you sort it out with your head, and then you say, should I be angry right now? Actually, yes, I should. Someone just insulted me. What should I do? And then you think it through, and that way your body informs your head, and your head informs your body, and the two work together to make a good decision, and choose a correct action or the most correct that you can.

Preeti Kota:  How do you find the balance of if you are using your head too much, it's like overthinking, but if you're using your emotions too much, it's kind of impulsive?

Jonice Webb:  Yeah. Well I think we all struggle with that, and it really is a matter of just trying to really consciously do this process enough that you get better, and better at it. And we all are going to mess it up. We all do. There's no way to be perfect at this, nor should anyone expect themselves to be. Really for every human being who's alive, it's a work in progress. Getting our brain to work with our body, to get good results is the essence of being healthy, and living well.

Preeti Kota:  And then how does indecisiveness relate to people's inability to trust themselves?

Jonice Webb:  So when your feelings, so our feelings, as I said a minute ago, really inform us, and they're our guide to what we really want, what we need, what we like, and dislike what we care about. It all is communicated to us through our feelings. And so when you're cut off, I think cut off is a strong word. When you don't have a good connection to your feelings, then you don't really have the sort of weather vane that your feelings should be providing you. Your feelings, or the rudder is what I meant. Not a weather vane. Your feelings are your rudder. And so to use a boat metaphor. So it's very important to be able to consult your body, and get answers that come from your deepest self, which is your feelings. And if you don't have a good ability to do that, it's kind of consulting your gut, right?

A lot of feelings occur in our gut. We now know there are neurons in our guts, in our GI system. And there's a reason why you feel things in your gut, but if you're disconnected from your feelings, then you're disconnected from your gut, and you don't end up trusting yourself nearly enough when it comes to making decisions. And you're much more vulnerable, and prone to asking other people, "What do you think I should do? What do you think? What do you think of this? What do you think of that?" And that's a kind of dangerous way to live because people can have all sorts of opinions and it doesn't mean it's right for you.

Preeti Kota:  So then how do you start to trust yourself if you think you're going to make the wrong decision?

Jonice Webb:  Get in tune, get in tune with your gut. And start the process of healing childhood emotional neglect. It really involves getting in touch with your feelings, starting to value your feelings more, and paying attention. I've probably told hundreds of people with childhood emotional neglect, what does your gut say? Let's ask your gut about that question. And it's a foreign, it can feel weird at first, but if you do it, if you keep doing it, and keep paying attention to your feelings and processing it with your brain, it's a matter of practice, and changing old habits and filling them with new ones.

Preeti Kota:  And then how are self-trust, self-esteem, and confidence related?

Jonice Webb:  When you have a good gut sense, and you trust your gut. No one's gut is right all the time. When you trust your gut, you're trusting your feelings, and you're trusting yourself, and you're valuing your own internal world, and your own internal process and sense of self. So when you have that, you trust yourself, and you can feel more confident. And that leads to all sorts of good things, feeling comfortable in your own skin, feeling comfortable around other people. It's the process of overcoming social anxiety, just becoming comfortable with who you are and trusting yourself so that it all goes together.

Preeti Kota:  So, you would say the first, are they kind of linear or..? Like increasing your self-trust, leads to an increase in self-esteem?

Jonice Webb:  Yes, I would say so.

Preeti Kota:  Okay.

Jonice Webb:  Vice versa though. It goes the other way too.

Preeti Kota:  Okay. How do you break the habit of dismissing your feelings to start accepting them?

Jonice Webb:  Yes, that is a whole process. I developed this technique for people to use, it's called the identifying and naming technique. It's in, I think I have it in both of my books, but it's definitely in Running on Empty. And basically it just involves turning your attention inward, and checking in with yourself and asking yourself, "What am I feeling right now?" And then following that up with some other questions that help you identify why you might be feeling it and what it's coming from. And just doing that check in with yourself if you can make yourself do it several times a day, even starting with once a day or at whatever level you can handle.

And it's okay if you come up empty and it doesn't feel like you have a feeling, because a lot of people with emotional neglect have that experience that they ask themselves, "What am I feeling?" And that they come up with nothing. But if you keep doing it, and keep trying to tune in, it's sort of like that process, it's so simple. But what you're doing is you're connecting your brain and your body. And every time that you try to forge that connection, you're chipping away at that wall that's blocking the two off. And even if you don't come up with a feeling, you're making progress and you just have to keep at it, keep at it.

Preeti Kota:  Is that kind of related to mindfulness?

Jonice Webb:  Yeah. It's a mindfulness technique, because basically you're turning your attention inward, and you're putting your full focus on your inner world. And that's something with people with emotional neglect are usually not very good at because they're used to focusing outward. Everybody else is what's important. Everybody else, everything else, the outside world, and this kind of makes you look inside at yourself.

Preeti Kota:  So, how does the need to belong relate to the need to trust yourself? Are they conflicting?

Jonice Webb:  The more you trust yourself... So, interestingly, I'm going to start somewhere else for a second. Interestingly, people with childhood emotional neglect have a proclivity to feel out of place. And they tend to have an almost verging on social anxiety, if not social anxiety. And it's because they feel disconnected from... They feel like when you have your feelings blocked off, some part of you feels something's not right. It's like you're missing something that everyone else has. And I've heard many emotionally neglected people put this into words and say, "I feel like I'm on the outside looking in on everyone else who's really living life." Or "I feel like I'm living in black and white and everyone else is living in color." Or "I walk down the street and I see other people smiling, and laughing, and walking together. And I feel like, why can they do that so easily? It doesn't come easily to me."

And when you're cut off from your feelings or disconnected from your feelings, it can feel like you're different than everyone else, and something is secretly strangely wrong with you. And that makes it hard to feel like you belong anywhere. And it makes it hard to feel like you can be yourself in any social situation. So, you can end up feeling like you need to be a certain way, or do a certain thing, or act a certain way in order to get accepted and fit in, because you just haven't figured out yet that what you need is just to be your true self, which includes your feelings, and your thoughts about those feelings, and that whole process that you're skipping over in your life it's needed in order to be able to be your true self and feel like you really belong and are worthy.

Preeti Kota:  But what about when during childhood, when you don't really have that mindfulness technique in hand, and you feel like with friends, or something and you feel like you want to belong, but you don't really know how to trust your feelings first?

Jonice WebbThere's no simple answer to that. I mean the real answer, the real, real answer is really work on being your true self. If you are your true self and your friends reject you, it means you're with the wrong people, and that's all there is to it. It doesn't mean you're bad. It doesn't necessarily mean they're bad. It just means you're trying to squeeze yourself into the wrong space with the wrong people. And it's hard to find the right people unless you are being your true self, and showing who you are so that those people can connect to your true self.

Preeti Kota:  How do you change your existing relationships with people who have already learned that you distrust yourself, and therefore don't respect you as much?

Jonice Webb:  Well, I think the most important thing to say about that is that people read each other on all sorts of levels that are not conscious. And we tend to trust people as much as they trust themselves. So, we sense how much someone trusts themselves, and that's how much we trust them, and how much we respect them. And so the best way to help people around you trust you more is to be yourself more, and to show your own true feelings more. And that doesn't mean all the time, just impulsively. It means being in tune with yourself so that other people can be in tune with you. And when people feel truly in tune with you, like you're authentic, and you're being your real self and they're allowed to see who you are, that's when they really value and trust you.

Preeti Kota:  But how do you overcome the possibility of rejection, or invalidation when you show your true self?

Jonice Webb:  It's always possible. And so part of this has to do with believing, with accepting who you are, and how you feel about things. And if there are things about one's self that you don't like, then you can work on changing yourself. You can even change your feelings to be the way to feel about something the way you want. So, in a way we all shape ourselves, but in order to truly shape ourselves, we have to be in touch with who we actually are, what our feelings are, and who we want to be. And so the key really is to tune into yourself, believe in yourself enough that if someone does reject you, you're able to weather that and say, "Okay, I guess that person doesn't value who I really am. Is that someone I really wanted to be in my life anyway?"

Preeti Kota:  And then a lot of people have a self critical part of their self that makes it hard to believe in themselves, so how do you suggest overcoming that?

Jonice Webb:  People with childhood emotional neglect tend to be very, very hard on themselves, and it could be, they had a critical parent and they internalized that. Or it could be that they had zero, or very little feedback about themselves growing up, which is true for many, many people with CEN. And if you're a child growing up and you don't have much feedback coming in, if your parents aren't giving you observations about who they see that you are, if they don't see your deepest self, and reflect that back to you, as a child, you have to fill in all the blanks, and children can develop a very harsh internal voice that's sort of like their creation of the parent they need. And that parent, kids don't really know necessarily, especially if they haven't received it, they don't know how to accept, or they don't know how to talk themselves through a difficult situation or a mistake. So it just turns into the mean parent, "What an idiot. How could you do that?" Talking to oneself the way you would never talk to a friend.

And so that can be a hard thing to overcome, except that the more that you can value yourself, and listen to yourself the more, and actually deal with your own feelings, then you can also start challenging that voice, catching yourself when you hear it, or catch yourself when you use it. And really start talking back to it, and say things like, "It's not true I'm stupid. Everybody makes mistakes." It really is a critical voice or a critical part of yourself is a really difficult thing to beat back, but it's absolutely not impossible. I've seen many people do it just by doing that whole process I just described.

Preeti Kota:  So I think you've already touched upon this, but what strategies do you have for listening to your emotions and turning inwards specifically any daily habits?

Jonice Webb:  Yeah. Doing that, identifying and naming, I think is the number one thing to do. The technique where you tune in and ask yourself, what am I feeling? And then there are other things you can do once you are identifying some feelings which involve processing the feeling and asking, and I created this technique also called the IAAA, where you identify the feeling, you accept it for what it is. Then you attribute it to a cause, and then you decide on an action. So that whole process pulls your brain and body together to start using your feelings instead of just shoving them away. So, practicing that another thing people can do is try to start identifying what other people are feeling, and if you're too good at that, it's not something to do, it means you're over focused on other people.

But just becoming aware of emotions, watching how other people handle their emotions, watching for emotions and other people, and what they do with them can be very instructive. I call it becoming a student of emotions and feelings. And just starting to... Once you make up your mind, I'm going to learn everything I can about how emotions work, what I'm feeling, and how my emotions work. Once you declare that to yourself, and start tuning in, it's really a great start towards fixing everything that didn't happen for you as a child.

Preeti Kota:  So, would you say, I think we touched upon this earlier, but about balancing between the mind and your emotions, would you say that's like the rational and irrational split or I don't know.

Jonice Webb:  Not necessarily, because feelings are not always irrational and thoughts are not always rational, so I wouldn't put it in that camp.

Preeti Kota:  Okay. And then do you have any parting words of advice or anything else you'd like to say to our listeners?

Jonice Webb:  Sure. I just want to emphasize that emotional neglect, childhood emotional neglect is not something your parents do to you. It's something they fail to do for you. And so it's not an act, it's not something that happened to you. It's something that failed to happen for you. And because of that, your brain as a child, doesn't record it, and then as an adult, it's really hard to remember childhood emotional neglect happening to you, because it wasn't an event. It was a non-event, right? And our brains don't record things that don't happen. So, it's hard for people to know whether they have childhood emotional, neglect or not, but people can go to my website, and take the emotional neglect questionnaire. And that will give them an idea of whether they fall in this camp or not. And when they take the questionnaire, they'll also be a member of my newsletter, and they'll be kept informed of every blog I write on Psychology Today, and every interview I do, and everything I write, and talk about, so.

Preeti Kota:  Great. Thank you so much. I learned a lot about childhood emotional neglect, and I think it's very helpful for people to go back and see how that could have affected them today and definitely has a very influential impact on our daily life. So thank you so much.

Jonice Webb:  Absolutely. Thanks for having me.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychiatrist Evelyn Nelson on Psychiatric Care

An Interview with Psychiatrist Evelyn Nelson

Evelyn Nelson, MD is psychiatrist at Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC. Dr. Nelson specializes in the treatment and medication management of anxiety related disorders.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Hey, thanks for joining us today for this installment of The Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Dr. Jennifer Ghahari, Research Director at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. I'd like to welcome with us psychiatrist Evelyn Nelson who's one of the psychiatric providers at Seattle Anxiety Specialists.

Evelyn specializes in the medication management of anxiety related disorders and utilizes a holistic approach in her patients' care. Before we get started today, can you tell our listeners a little bit about yourself?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, sure. Thank you for the introduction. I'm Dr. Evelyn Nelson, I am an adult psychiatrist. I live in Seattle, and I live with my husband and two-year-old daughter, Emmi. And so, we just moved into the area about a year ago, so we're just kind of getting used to the area, loving exploring, being outdoors. And originally I'm from California and so, it's a very different climate, very different environment, but yeah - just getting used to the area.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Nice. What are your favorite parts of the Seattle area, or Washington as a whole?

Evelyn Nelson:  Oh, I love being outdoors, and I love the greenery. I've always lived around water, so that's really important to me. So, being around the water, being around greenery, taking ferries just seeing the islands just is my absolute favorite, and was a big reason why I wanted to move into the area. And so, just the outdoors scene, and the greenery is just the best part honestly.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Do you have a favorite outdoor activity, or is it like everything?

Evelyn Nelson:  I love hiking with my daughter just because we're starting to get into hiking with her. And so, there are a lot of new things, and seeing her just kind of explore the trees, and slugs, and different animals is very cool and exciting.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow, that's awesome. Great. Thank you for sharing that.

Going back a little bit and a few years back now, what is it that got you interested in becoming a psychiatrist?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah so, it originally started with just an interest in, at baseline, “What motivates people? What drives people to do what they do?” And so, that interest started with my majoring in religious studies as an undergrad. So, that's kind of where this theme started. And over time, as I started to study religion and psychology, my interest expanded into more of an interest in being more active in that study, and being more active in the role of helping people. And then, so that's kind of how that developed into psychiatry.

There was a point where I was considering becoming a therapist. But I also was very interested in medication management. And so, that's why I went down the psychiatry route.

Jennifer Ghahari:  It's like the best of both worlds in your case.

Evelyn Nelson:  Exactly. And I wanted to make sure that I had the full realm of ability to help people. And I wanted to make sure that I wasn't kind of ruling anything out. And so, going into medical school, I actually knew that I wanted to be a psychiatrist. I was kind of one of those rare cases where I went into medical school to do psychiatry. Whereas, I think, a lot of people go in with an open mind, see what is interesting to them. And I always knew.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow, that's great. It was kind of a long-term calling for you.

Evelyn Nelson:  Exactly, yeah.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Can you speak to the reasons why a person may see, or should see a psychiatrist?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, of course. So, I mean, the reasons that people see a psychiatrist are just so expansive. I think there's a misconception that you have to be really struggling, or really not functioning, or just things have to be dire to see a psychiatrist. And that's just not true.

I see a full range of people. So, people who have been engaged in mental health care for years and are very involved in the system. But then, I also see people who don't really know what psychiatry is, don't even know if they want to take medications. They tell me their struggles, and sometimes we decide maybe medication isn't appropriate. So, I see a full range.

And so, what I hope for people is that they're not scared out of a misconception that we're going to push medication on you. Or you have to be at a certain point in your life to see a psychiatrist. It's a huge range. And really it's not harmful to just have a conversation to be able to just see what's going on, and see how I could potentially help. And sometimes it's not medication, sometimes it's therapy. Sometimes there's just kind of a natural transition in life, but it's hard to know without that initial conversation. So, the reasons are just huge.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Great. And at its core you are, as you said, a doctor, you went to medical school. And so, I think what might be helpful for people to know too is that they shouldn't be afraid to see a psychiatrist. It's really akin to going to any doctor in many regards.

Evelyn Nelson:  Exactly right. And you don't have to have an established diagnosis. You don't have to know that you want to take medication. That's part of our job to see if medication is even appropriate. In an intake and follow up appointments that's part of the conversation. People don't go into visits 100% needing medication. That's just not the reality. And so, it's important for people to know that.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Thank you.

Are there any disorders that you specialize in?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, so I specialize in anxiety disorders, PTSD, mood disorders, so including bipolar disorder and depression, and ADHD. Those are the multiple things that I specialize in, but I see a huge range of diagnoses.

Jennifer Ghahari:  And can you talk a little bit about your treatment approach?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah. So, the most important thing is that the person coming to me is on board with whatever plan that we have. So, the way that I approach medication management is just getting input from my patient, and just making sure I have an understanding of what's going on with them, and what is really bothersome for them. And then, understanding what they're feelings about medication is.

And then, from there, getting a sense of comfort level. Are they afraid of a certain type of medication? Are they afraid of a certain type of side effect? And it's really important for me to know these things before I even suggest a medication just because there are so many things that are avoidable, or things that we can kind of work around. Or if someone's really afraid of something, it's just so important for me to know. So, that's kind of my approach is just taking a team approach with my patient. And then, going from there.

I also tend to be pretty conservative in terms of starting medication slowly, monitoring for side effects. And that's just always been my approach. And I think it's helpful for people, especially who are afraid of taking medication to have that approach.

Jennifer Ghahari:  And, from my point of view anyway, it's really nice to hear that things are very customizable. It's not a one size fits all type of treatment where everybody just gets the same type of thing. So, that's great that you really take the time, and trust people's fears and concerns.

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, exactly.

Jennifer Ghahari:  So, let's say, that I sign up for an appointment with you. And right now, I have no idea what to expect from the process. I presume that there's some type of paperwork to fill out, like when I go to any doctor.

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Can you explain what the process actually is, and what I can expect in a first session with you?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah. So, initially, if somebody signs up for an appointment with me there's some paperwork, just getting some basic medical history, getting information about the medications they're on. And then, basic assessments in terms of mood, and anxiety, and other kind of psychiatric symptoms, just so I can get a sense of what the person can be potentially coming in with so I can prepare for the visit. So that's initially. And once the visit comes, the intake is usually scheduled for 60 minutes. And our interaction would be like 45 to 60 minutes is usually standard. And then, so initially what we talk about is just what's bringing them into the visit? What's been bothersome? What concerns do they have? So kind of getting a sense of current symptoms. And naturally, that can kind of go into some history. But then, we talk about any history with mental health, any medical history.

And then, after that, I get a sense of who they are as a person. Like what is day-to-day life for them? How is their life affected by what's been going on in terms of their current symptoms? What it was like for them growing up? Just to kind of get to know who they are as a whole person 'cause it all relates. It all comes together. And then, toward the end of the visit I take a pause and I say, "Is there anything that we didn't talk about or you feel like is important for me to know to kind of move forward?" And a lot of times people do bring things up because it's hard for me to know what's going on in the person's mind without taking that pause. And sometimes things are hard to bring up, or things can be scary, or embarrassing. And I just, I like to give that space and that option for people.

And then, after that, we just talk about if I can get a sense of diagnosis... Sometimes I can't there are a lot of times where in a intake appointment, I just got a lot of general information. But I do give some ideas. And then, I talk about how I could potentially help in terms of the plan. And, again, that can include changes to medication, starting a medication, or even not starting medication at all, or just referral to therapy. So, the ways that we can kind of go toward the end of the visit are pretty varied.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Great.

And you actually bring up a good point. So, if someone is receiving psychiatric care somewhere else, and it's maybe been a while, they're on certain medications, and they're maybe wondering, "Is this the right path for me?" They could always come to you for an intake maybe to see if they are on the right track, right path, or maybe there's another option?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, exactly. And so, just because we have an intake appointment doesn't mean that we necessarily have to continue. I can always throw out options, and my kind of opinion and recommendations. And they can see if that sits well with them.

Even if they have another psychiatrist that is managing their medications, I can throw out ideas. A lot of times I validate what their other psychiatrist is doing. But then, ultimately, we like to have people just have one psychiatrist managing medication, just so it's less confusion, and more safe. But there are a lot of times where I can kind of give my recommendation. And then, I give them the space to think about it, and they can always let me know. There's never any pressure to go down a certain route, or continue with me.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Fantastic.

At our practice, we have a form of psychiatric concierge care. Can you explain what that is and how it differs from a traditional practice?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah. So, that's a really good question. So, with the concierge model, people pay a monthly fee. And with that monthly fee it includes any follow up appointments. It includes any contact with me, so emails, or messaging, or phone calls. And follow up appointments we just charge a dollar, meaning that it's a really low fee. So, we can follow up as many times as we need to. And a lot of times people need a good amount of follow up, especially if they're kind of in this really acute phase, and maybe things are really difficult.

And so, in that way, people won't have to worry about paying for each follow up visit. And I can just follow up with them as many times as I feel like I need to with taking out that financial aspect. Whereas with other kind of private practices, they tend to charge per visit.

And so, this can work for a lot of people. But I think, for me, I prefer the concierge model because I think what dictates follow up is just based on clinical need, and not if they can pay for this next follow up visit or not, or if they want to pay for the next follow up visit. So, it's nice to just have this kind of catch all. All services are just kind of available with me without having to think about that financial aspect.

Jennifer Ghahari:

Great.  And you brought up a good point before that some people can have some trepidation, or nervousness about starting a new medication, or there might be side effects that... With any pill, you wonder, "Wait a minute, is this normal? Is this okay?" And so with our practice, patients would be able to reach out to you at any point, like you said, through an email, or a call, and that's all included there's no extra charges, right?

Evelyn Nelson:  Exactly.

Jennifer Ghahari:  That would provide some peace of mind, and also help get the right dosage, right?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, exactly. And so, the most common way that I communicate with my patients is through secure messaging. And I always encourage, especially if we're making a medication change, or if we're starting a medication for them to message me. I always counsel about side effects, but things can come up and people have questions about it. And so, a lot of times we don't need to have a follow up appointment. They can just ask me like, "This is going on. Is this normal? Will this go away? What do you think?" And it's really easy for me to just message back. And so, I love having that ability to communicate with my patients without thinking about charging an extra fee. It puts the patient at ease. And I think, for me, it's nice to be helpful in that kind of quick way.

Jennifer Ghahari:  That's great. It sounds like there's peace of mind on both ends. That sounds really helpful.

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah, absolutely.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Well, this has been flying by. So, for our final question, do you have any final words of advice, or anything else that you would like to say to our listeners today?

Evelyn Nelson:  Yeah. So, a couple of things. So, number one, is that no matter what provider you have, whether it's me, or anybody else, it's really important that you feel heard, and you feel like your concerns are being taken seriously. That is extremely important. And you deserve that relationship with your mental health provider. You just do. And so, for anybody pursuing care in mental health, I know it's really hard to even find a provider, but just know that you deserve that trust, and that kind of relationship.

The other thing too, is that if you are feeling apprehensive or afraid, it's okay to voice that to your provider. I think it's really helpful to be able to say that so that we can take a little bit more time into talking about the concerns, because a lot of times that's just as important as the symptoms that are going on. That can be a huge barrier to care. And so, I just encourage people to kind of advocate for themselves, and speak up to any fears, or concerns that they have because, again, they deserve to be open with their mental health provider. If you can be vulnerable and open with anybody, it should be your mental health provider.

So, I think those are the biggest things. And it's really important for my patients to know that and my future patients to know that.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Dr. Nelson, thank you so much for finding this time in your schedule to speak with us today...

If anyone is interested in scheduling an appointment with Dr. Nelson to discuss psychiatric care, any concerns that they may have, or medication management you can do so at seattleanxiety.com and we will be happy to set you up.

Thanks so much.

Evelyn Nelson:  Thank you.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Attorney Wendy Patrick on Predators & Manipulation

An Interview with Attorney Wendy Patrick, J.D., Ph.D.

Dr. Wendy Patrick is a deputy district attorney, author, media commentator, and veteran prosecutor. In addition to her law degree, Wendy Patrick has earned a doctorate in Theology. An accomplished trial attorney, Dr. Patrick’s research focuses on a variety of topics related to interpersonal violence and sexual assault.

Amelia Worley:  Hi. Thanks for joining us today for this installment at the Seattle Psychiatrist Interview Series. I'm Amelia Worley, a research intern at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. I'd like to welcome Dr. Wendy Patrick. Dr. Patrick is a deputy district attorney, author, media commentator, and veteran prosecutor. She's completed over 165 trials, including cases of domestic violence, hate crimes, stalking, human trafficking, and first degree murder. She has also been involved with the San Diego Domestic Violence Council, the San Diego Child Protection Team, and the Sexual Assault Response Team. Dr. Patrick researches, advises, and publishes on a variety of topics related to interpersonal violence, sexual assault, and working with victims, including her book, “Red Flags: How to Spot Frenemies, Underminers, and Ruthless People.” Before we get started, Dr. Patrick, can you please let us know a little more about yourself and what you made you interested in dealing with dangerous people, sexual assault, and domestic violence?

Wendy Patrick:  I've been a prosecutor for my entire career, I would say since before you've been born, but it lends a little bit of credibility to what I'm talking about. For whatever reason, during the 25 years plus I've been a prosecutor, I've dealt with a steady stream of dangerous people. One of the things that really struck me, Amelia, about this is the sometimes very worldly, intelligent, savvy victims, people you wouldn't expect to be victims because they don't strike you as particularly vulnerable in any arena, yet there they were. I went back to school to earn a Master in Divinity and then a PhD mid-career. It was my mid-career crisis if that's a term, and really became in love with research, as I suppose I was. That's what led me to want to go on and further my education because there's an enormous amount of research behind why, why people fall for dangerous people, how dangerous people corner victims, how they manipulate even very street smart savvy professionals. It is with that combination of the anecdotal, the empirical, and I would say the experiential, given the work that I've done for 25 years, that really brought me to a lot of the information that I cover in that book.

Amelia Worley:  Yeah. That's great. To begin, can you describe the acronym “FLAGs” that you created to separate the dangerous from the desirable?

Wendy Patrick:  Well, my first book was the revised version of the New York Times bestseller “Reading People,” which I coauthored with a famous jury consultant. That talked about the seven colors of what somebody looks like, how they behave. Red Flags is a deeper dive. Flag stands for focus, lifestyle, associations, and goals. Let me explain each one of those so your listeners can understand a little bit about why this gives you more of an idea of who is this person behind the persona.

Focus is the F, and the reason I wanted to use that for flag, it also talks about focus being attention reveals intention. For example, I think on the back cover of the book, the publishing company has the red flags on a first date, your body, your brain, or the ball game. What is somebody focused on when they're with you? Well, that tells them what they're interested in. If they're not interested in you, why are they spending time with you. Oftentimes in the child predator world it's because they're interested in the child. I cannot tell you how many trials I've had where you've had spouses and girlfriends and boyfriends that had no idea that honestly believed they were the prize. They were the ones that the perpetrator was after, but if they looked back at the focus, that was never really it.

Lifestyle is what you might imagine. I sometimes call this red flags after five. If you want to know what somebody is like, you have to know more about what they do during the work day. You may see them all day at work, nine to five, and have no idea who they really are unless you know what they do when they're off the clock. I say, lifestyle is personality revealed. What are their hobbies? What are their interests? Where do they go if they have a free day.

Now, Associations stands for who do we spend our time with? When I was growing up my parents used to say, show me your friends and I'll show you your future. My law students now tell me that, I suppose, the updated version of that is show me your friends and I'll show you who you are. Either way, it proves the point, birds of a feather. What sort of company do we keep? Are we guilty by association? I mean, who do we choose to spend our time with if we have a choice? What organizations do we belong to? What philanthropic activities capture our attention.

Then Goals is really a profile in priorities. If I knew, for example, Amelia, what you prayed for at night or what you wished for when you toss a coin into a wishing well, you're too young, but we used to do that back in the day, I would know a lot about you. Knowing what somebody's goals are tells you a lot about them as a person. All four of these FLAG areas taken in combination gives you a much deeper picture of what a person is really like.

Amelia Worley:  Yeah. What are some recognizable signs of people who have ulterior and self-serving motives then?

Wendy Patrick:  Well, one of the things you really have to look at goes back to that focus component. It would be like, I'm a Rotarian, so I'll use the rotary example. Lots of people join service organizations, but why are they there? Are they there to put it on a resume? Are they there because they genuinely want to help serve the homeless? When you're looking at somebody's motivation, some of the signs have to do with where they focus their attention and on what aspect of belonging, I'm just using that as an example, are they interested in when they go to a social hour or a networking event? If you look at their focus, if you look at the fact that they're not necessarily interested in building business, but gathering business cards to maybe put on a mailing list. So, it's really paying attention to what somebody does.

We used to say a picture is worth a thousand words. Actions speak louder than words. That is the takeaway from being able to tell what a person is really like. A dangerous person, their actions speak for themselves. They're not philanthropic actions. They're only asking questions designed to elicit the kind of information that might give them an idea of an area of vulnerability. I gave the example of the focus and some of the women, in particular, that were married to child predators or married to pedophiles. They would often find that looking back, right, that's always sadly the way that many people look at red flags, looking back, there were tons of signs that they really only wanted, they were almost only a conduit, a way in which the predator could gain access to the person they were really interested in. Some predators use people to gain access to resources, time, money, favors, all the kinds of things in a workplace setting, for example, that shows they're not really interested in a coworker, but in what that coworker can do for them. It's that end game that sometimes we have to really keep an eye on.

Amelia Worley:  Yeah. In your book, “Red Flags: How to Spot Frenemies, Underminers, and Ruthless People,” you talk about how dangerous people use selective attention to manipulate their victims. How and why does this work?

Wendy Patrick:  Well, it works because to somebody that's not used to receiving attention, that can be the most intoxicating experience of their life. I'll give the example of somebody that isn't drop dead gorgeous, somebody that's perhaps not attractive is not used to getting attention really from anybody. It's a terrible situation. As a Christian, my heart goes out to those people. They're the most beautiful people sometimes that I will ever meet, but their experience is not getting double takes on the street by men in whom they might potentially be interested in. If a manipulator, and we see this a lot in the human trafficking arena, if a manipulator, a trafficker, somebody that has ulterior motives, swoops in and gives them the kind of attention they've only dreamed about receiving, that is uniquely attractive to somebody that's not used to receiving that type of attention. Of course, a predator, a manipulator, somebody that's interested and has ulterior motives, of course they're going to use that approach.

Now they have to be careful because sometimes people that are not the most attractive people in the room might be the smartest, so they have to be very subtle about the way in which they're approaching these people so they don't raise the antenna. Let me tell you what the research shows. This is going to surprise some of our listeners and viewers. Sometimes, even when you have somebody that suspects somebody has ulterior motives, even they can't help being flattered by the attention. How do you like that? It's almost like an emotional cognitive override. Emotionally it feels so good that even though cognitively you suspect ulterior motives, you still respond favorably to the flattery. That is the bread and butter of people, dangerous people that have ulterior motives is knowing that people are susceptible to that kind of attention.

Amelia Worley:  That's really interesting. What role does physical appearance play in misjudgment and wrong perceptions? I know you've talked about this a little bit, but additionally, how does this relate to the halo effect?

Wendy Patrick:  Well, the halo effect stands for, and all of our psychiatrists and psychologist guests will appreciate this, as they know, it talks about this phenomenon that if somebody looks good, sounds good, is pretty, is attractive, we tend to ascribe to them all of these positive qualities they don't have. Some of the research, there's a lot of research behind the halo effect, maybe some people that work with you have even authored some of the studies, but it has to do with us saying things like, “Oh, I bet she's a really good mother. I'll bet he can be trusted,” only because they're good looking. There's many studies that show that attractive criminals, which is of course my line of work, are treated more leniently. They sometimes get more favorable plea bargains. Juries give them the benefit of the doubt.

I've tried about 160 cases. That's a lot of cases if you're a lawyer. In that time period, I've had the opportunity to speak to almost all of my jurors that have waited around after the fact and found that they often really do give my pretty defendants a break. It's one thing to say, this woman is charged with being a child molester and sleeping with her students at school and all the rest of these nasty things, it's quite another to look over and see those jurors smiling, looking at the pretty lady in the polka dot and pearls sitting at the defendant's table. That sometimes translates into a very lenient verdict or a non verdict in the form of a hung jury. It is very difficult to overcome the halo effect because, again, it's something that is emotional, not necessarily cognitive.

I'll tell you one exception of that. There's been some research that has shown that if a jury finds that a pretty or a handsome defendant used their looks to facilitate a crime, they don't like that because that's almost a counterintuitive backdoor way of using what they might otherwise have been susceptible to as the triers of fact in the way that they committed the crime.

Amelia Worley:  That's fascinating, actually.

Wendy Patrick:  It is.

Amelia Worley:  Also in your book, you talked about helping behavior. How can this create a power imbalance and eventually lead to a dangerous situation?

Wendy Patrick:  Well, helping behavior creates dependence. Many of the cases that I've tried have involved predators, child molesters, sexual assaulters. They gain access into the victim's life. They weaseled their way in by being helpful. They're the handyman. They can do anything. They can fix the internet. They can fix the car. If they engage in enough helping behavior, a victim becomes dependent. There have been some cases in which that's been illustrated, sadly, in grand fashion where you have a neighbor that's interested, for example, in a next door neighbor's child. He becomes indispensable to the next door neighbor. I mean, he's over there fixing her car, fixing anything that goes wrong in the house, sometimes even beginning to show up unannounced. It's a boundary probing kind of insidious progression, creating vulnerability.

Sometimes when he shows up unannounced, the neighbor that is so used to this man fixing everything, doesn't even stop him because she doesn't want to lose access to that free labor. Nothing's free. It's only a matter of time before this man will ask to babysit a child. Now, is it true that there are some really kind people that are helpers? Absolutely. That's why there are four flag areas and not just one. You just want to make sure that if something seems too good to be true that sometimes it is. Make sure you go through all the areas of interest, that some people are as good as they look, but not everyone. I'll leave it at that.

Amelia Worley:  Yeah. Once you realize someone in your life is manipulative or deceptive, it can be anxiety-inducing or depressing. What steps should you take when you realize someone like this is in your life? What if it's someone you love?

Wendy Patrick:  Ah, depression and anxiety are something that everybody struggles with. Those are conditions that transcend any kind of boundary, socioeconomic. I mean, no matter who you are, where you live, what you do, you're vulnerable. Part of the reason you're vulnerable is exactly what you just mentioned. Sometimes you find out the hard way that it's somebody very close to you that's manipulative. One of the ways in which you deal with this is exactly what you do in your line of work. You got to talk to somebody about it. People think, oh, I can handle this on my own. They can't. However, it's often very empowering to speak with those who've also gone through the same kind of circumstance. In my line of work, we call those survivors. Human trafficking victims are often helped along towards the path to survivorhood by other survivors who have been through the exact same thing.

So too, those who've had the wool pulled over their eyes, those that have been manipulated, who have been fooled by somebody they thought really loved them, are sometimes very much helped by others who have been there. Sometimes reviewing the red flags will empower them not to fall forward again. Part of what I often teach in connection with these programs I give, because I do this as a speaking series, I've done it all over the world, and I'm going to give you some takeaways along the lines of how can you prevent yourself from being in a position that you're asking a question, what do you do once you recognize you're in that scenario. Maximize first impressions. In other words, don't trade in your reading glasses for rose colored glasses. You're wearing reading glasses when you first meet somebody or first go on a date. Perceive as much as you can when you are most objective.

Be wary of under exposure. If there's an area of somebody's life that they don't share with you like that unaccounted for hour or two after work, you want to know where they are. Why are they off the grid during certain times of the day or night? Most people are very transparent. Sometimes we make the joke TMI, as my students say, too much information, that's preferable to too little information because secrets breed suspicion. Time lapse photography is the next one. You notice I'm on a photography theme, which of course was a thing when I was growing up. Observe somebody's behavior over time. You can't tell what somebody's like if you just have a snapshot of their day. Maybe a continual snapshot, like you work with them. You only know what they're like when they're on the clock. You have to know what they're like in different settings and across time to be able to get a good read on them.

That would also be, I suppose, using a wider angle lens. You're looking at behavior in different settings, in different contexts. Solicit multiple exposures. Introduce people to your friends and family. You may trade in your reading glasses for rose colored, but I guarantee you, your family and friends will not. Anybody who has been second guessed by an objective sounding board, i.e., parents, spouse, family, good friends, colleagues, coworkers, they're going to tell it like it is because they care about you. We live in a day and age of vision enhancement. You can go online and look at social media. Sometimes you look at other dating sites if that's the way you met somebody and see how they describe themselves on other dating sites. Shocker, news flash, yes, people use multiple dating sites and don't go off of those sites just because they start dating you.

There's a lot of information available to make sure that you are not the one that ends up in that scenario where you are involved and are just now recognizing that you're involved with the wrong person. Now, let me temper all of that with what we'll call, I don't know if we really want to put a word on it, but the tendency we have to believe. It's easier to believe. It's cognitively more challenging and difficult to doubt. When we first meet somebody, we're disinclined to go online and look up and fact check everything. Nobody has the time for that, and we don't want to do it because we're sometimes enamored with a new love interest. Those are some of the reasons that even very smart people sometimes fall for the wrong individuals.

Amelia Worley:  Yeah. That's really helpful. Thank you. Lastly, do you have any advice or anything you want to say to someone regarding dangerous or deceptive people?

Wendy Patrick:  I think I just said it. I think that laundry list of ways that you would make sure you don't allow somebody to get too close to you until you've gone through all of those steps is probably the best way to prevent yourself from being in that scenario to begin with. The reason my book has all those chapters, it talks about all the different ways that we are captivated by somebody when we don't really know who they are. That's one of the reasons that there are just so many ways, counter intuition, when the optics don't match the topics, make sure you use all of your senses all of the time when you're getting to know somebody. That is the single best way to make sure you are not fooled.

The last chapter in my book, as you know, is green lights because I don't want anybody to think that my years as a prosecutor made me a skeptic. Some people are as good as they look. Go figure. I'm going to give a big amen to that, because that sometimes is what we find out when we get to know somebody better is it's authentic, it's genuine, and that creates a healthy, happy relationship.

Amelia Worley:  Well, that's great. Thank you so much, Dr. Patrick. It was wonderful having you on our interview series today.

Wendy Patrick:  Thank you for having me.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.

Psychologist Larry Rosen on Technology & Parkinson's

An Interview with Psychologist Larry Rosen

Dr. Rosen is past Chair and Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California State University. He is a research psychologist and recognized as an international expert in the psychology of technology. Upon his diagnosis of Parkinson’s Disease, Larry Rosen has sought to educate, mentor and guide others utilizing both a humanistic and scientific approach.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Hey, thanks for joining us today! I'm Dr. Jennifer Ghahari, research director at Seattle Anxiety Specialists. I'd like to welcome with us Psychologist Larry Rosen. Dr. Rosen is past chair and professor emeritus of psychology at California State University. He is a research psychologist and recognized as an international expert in the psychology of technology.

He has given keynote speeches to Fortune 500 companies and nonprofit organizations in the US and internationally. Larry has been featured extensively in national television, print, and radio media. Before we get started today, can you let our listeners know a little bit more about you as well as your current research endeavors?

Larry Rosen:  Sure. Thanks for having me, and I'm looking forward to chatting with you. I've been studying what I now call the psychology of technology since the early 1980s when there were no laptops, no smartphones, no nothing. You wanted to use the computer, you punched cards. You handed them to somebody who went into a very cold room, and they ran them. If you were lucky, you got to print-out this thick. If you weren't, you got a print-out that thin, and it meant there was an error, and you had to do it all over again.

What I was interested in way back then was something called computer phobia. And this is when computers were coming out. People were trying to use them. People were a little scared of them, a little frightened, a little weirded by them. Then we just kept changing what we were studying as life changed.

So, we went from computer phobia to technophobia, and we then went to tech and stress. Back I can't remember how long ago, I wrote a book called TechnoStress, which is funny because I reread it the other day. Most of what we said in my book was true, and yet it's probably 15 years old, if not more. We were looking at TechnoStress that you had at work, at home, and at play. So, it was invading everything.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, wow.

Larry Rosen:  Then, since then, I've just kind of gone with the flow, whatever's interesting. I always tell people that whatever my kids are doing and my grandkids are doing is what I want to study.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Nice.

Larry Rosen:  I have a very low boredom threshold. So I'll study something for a while, and then I'll think I've got it. Then I'll move on and study something else. So I have worked my way to what I'm working on now. By the way, I'm retired, although retired just means I'm retired from teaching. I still do research, and I'm still very active on boards of directors for a lot of these groups.

One of the areas that I'm very interested in, I can only do this now that we've got newer technology, is what are people doing on their smartphones. As a corollary to that, what are teenagers doing? What are millennials doing? What are adults doing? We haven't really had the tools to do this until now, really till the iPhone got screen time and Android got digital wellbeing, I think they call it.

We were able to actually in the background have something track what people are doing, and what we get is an assortment of really valuable information. What I've done is had groups of teenagers and millennials at the end of their week when it pops up on screen time and says, "You've used 18 hours a day this week," or whatever the hour is, and then they can go back and get seven days' worth of data.

Because Apple doesn't allow them to download it, they take screenshots, they send us the screenshots. We then analyze them. What we're able to get from screen time is really quite a good picture of what people are doing. First of all, we get the gross amount of hours per week, hours per day. That sometimes can be telling if they're spending a lot, a lot of time on, particularly kids, perhaps video gamers, a variety of people who spend time on their phone.

We also get information on what apps they spent most time on. We get information on when they unlock their phone... Whether they have a face ID or a number ID or whatever or none, when they unlock their phone, what is the first app they tap? We also get how many times a day they unlock their phone, and we also get how many notifications they got each day and where they came from.

So, you can imagine we're compiling this set of data to be able to look at what everybody's doing out there because it's very clear. People are on their phones all the time. I mean, that's undeniable. I can't tell you how many times during the day I'll be at a stoplight, and there'll be a car in front of me. Light will turn green and be waiting and waiting. Oh, yeah. They're looking at their phone. Honk. "Oh, yeah. Sorry. I'll move on."

We take those 45 seconds and think we have to do something. We have to look at our phones, and we have to keep up. Otherwise, we think we're missing out on something, which is, by the way, why FOMO, fear of missing out, has developed because we have this sense that we're missing out on something.

Another attack that we tried to do, which, by the way, was a dismal failure, was to see if we could give teens and millennials strategies of how to treat their phone in a way that they might use less time on their phone. They might pick it up less often. We first tried giving them all sorts of choices. Some of them were take your icons for your social medias, put them in folders, scatter the folders all over the place so you don't know where they are thinking, "Well, they have to keep scrolling, and find the folders, and put the folders inside the folders, and whatever." That didn't work.

We tried to teach them how to meditate in order to be a little more calm when they approached their phone. That didn't work. We tried to teach them how to integrate technology into their work, such that instead of taking work breaks, they were taking tech breaks. That didn't work. I won't say it didn't work. It worked for the three weeks that we did it, and then as soon as we stopped, they went right back to where they were before. So then we tried it with fewer choices, but six weeks, and the same exact thing happened. They just went right back to where they were.

So, who's to blame for this? Because that's really what people are asking us. Who do we blame? Where do we point the finger at people who can maybe make changes? Obviously, one place to point your finger is at yourself. I think that's the first choice is you got here yourself. You didn't just stumble on it. You developed this habit, this way of treating your phone and in such a way that even if your phone is not in your pocket and you feel a little itch down there, you think that your phone is vibrating, which by the way is called pocket vibration syndrome, and is real. We experience it all the time.

The other thing we noticed is that when people walk around, say, from class to class at a campus or just walking around the campus, they are always carrying their phone in their hand because it is close. There is a point where women, girls used to put it in their bra, tuck it in there so that they really felt that vibration immediately, and then take a look, and see who's there.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Larry Rosen:  The feeling is... It's when someone beckons you, whether it's instant message or whatever. When they beckon you, you feel compelled to go. I use that word, compelled, as part of the phrase, OCD, obsessive-compulsive, compelled, compulsive, behavior because a lot of what's going on is we are acting based on anxiety.

What are we anxious about? Well, we're anxious about missing out on things. We're anxious about not being Johnny on the spot when somebody texts you and texting them right back. We're anxious about a lot of things that take place on our device. Usually, it's the smartphone. Some people, it's the iPad, but in general, it's a smartphone, and in general, it's an iPhone. I will use iPhone as the whole generic category of Android and all those.

What we find is that we have lost control. What I mean by losing control is that we really don't understand why we're doing what we're doing. We just feel compelled, and that's the anxiety part. For example, take a typical teenager. They unlock their phone. They tap on an icon. We even have them take a picture of what icons are on the front screen. They're almost all the connection, text messaging, other kinds of messaging, instant messaging, lots of icons for social media. They're all there. They're all sitting there, waiting.

So, of course, you open your phone, the first thing you do is tap. The one you tap first may very well be the one you use the most, or it's the one that stands out the most, or it's the one that notified you. We have a compulsion to do that because if we don't, then chemicals in our brain and body start to build up and make us more, and more, and more anxious. So when we can't do it, we get anxious.

One of my colleagues, Dr. Nancy Cheever, did a really interesting study. You can actually see the study in action. If you go on my website and look at the very top where it says, "Anderson Cooper. Watch Anderson Cooper on 60 Minutes." So Anderson Cooper came into our lab and, Jenn, really nice guy. Came into our lab. Nancy sat him down at a desktop and said, "Okay, what we're going to do is show you a video and have you answer some questions later. We just want to put a couple of little things on your fingers," which now most people recognize one's an oximeter. Because of COVID, they know that.

The other one is more important. It's called galvanic skin response, which is the sweat on your skin. The sweat on your skin is equated to arousal, and arousal can be either positive arousal or a negative arousal. I mean, if I'm going to give a speech, my hands get very sweaty. It's not that I'm anxious about it. It's I'm excited. I'm excited to do it. But if I'm facing a really difficult thing that I have to do that's very uncomfortable, my hands might sweat, and that's anxiety.

So told Anderson, "Just put your phone upside down next to you," and then Dr. Cheever gave him about a minute or so of starting. She said, "Wait, wait, wait. We have to stop. That phone that you put down to the side is interacting with the two little clips, and so we're just going to need to move it behind you." She put it on a table behind him, and then she started texting him, but he could not answer.

She texted him four times. Every single time, galvanic skin response... spikes.... spikes... spikes four times in a row. We've done this with a lot of people, famous people, news, media, whatever. The interesting thing is it's always the same, except for one case, and I'll tell you the one case. What Anderson Cooper told us very clearly is, yeah, as soon as that beep went off, he felt a little rush in his body, which is galvanic skin response, and he felt like he was missing out on something, and he had to-

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Larry Rosen:  He felt like he had to check it right now, but he couldn't because we wouldn't let them. Now, interesting enough, people have very different ideas of why they need to check it. couldn't because we wouldn't let him now. Katie Couric, for example, felt like when her daughter was texting, she needed to pick it up quicker.

Steve Aoki, who I don't know if you know who he is, but he's a very famous DJ, and he travels with an army of people, all who monitor his social media, so he showed nothing because he didn't need to. His social media was being monitored by all of his team, and so he didn't show anything.

Two teenage girls, however, were brought in, and they showed not just spikes, but spikes. It was like, "Oh my God. What am I missing out on?" Part of it is because you know that if you get a text, for example, from someone, and you don't respond immediately, they'll text you back and say, "Are you mad at me," or, "Why aren't you answering my text," or something.

This is part of the problem, and I think this is the main part of the problem, by the way, is anxiety. We simply build up this anxiety over, and over, and over again, and the chemicals build up. Then our job is to do whatever we're anxious about so that the chemicals get reabsorbed.

For most people, cortisol is a pretty well-known chemical in our body and our brain. And we know that cortisol is the fight or flight chemical, but it's also in little amounts, not fight or flight at all. It wakes you up. Cortisol is what wakes you up in the morning. You get a little drip of cortisol. During the day, you get cortisol, and it kind of keeps your level of intensity at a pretty good state.

Another interesting study, not by our lab, but another interesting one is that somebody took... They recruited families with a mother, a father, and a teenager. Then what they did is beforehand, they had them fill out all sorts of questionnaires. How many times a day do you check your social media? How much time do you spend on social media? How much time do you spend on email and all sorts of various questions?

They went to sleep. As soon as they woke up, they took a Q-tip, took a swab, saliva swab, put it in a jar, sealed it, put it in the refrigerator, and then eventually sent it into a lab that records how much cortisol, right? They did it right when they woke up, and they did it 30 minutes later. Then they did it other times during the day, but that's not the point.

The interesting point is they were looking at what would cause your cortisol to jump from when you wake up to 30 minutes later. Now, nothing with moms, nothing. No use in general. No use of technology specifically predicted an increase. The dads' email did. Those dads that used more emails showed a bigger response in 30 minutes, which makes sense because they're working, and they get a lot of emails, and first thing in the morning, they got to check them to make sure what's going on.

For teenagers, the only thing that predicted an increase was those who use more social media. So you can already see this building up. You wake up, and you're already anxious. Even the first 30 minutes, you get more and more anxious. You just get more and more anxious. So the anxiety can be very debilitated, and particularly because, I mean, this is not an unknown fact, you can't have a lot of anxiety in you all the time. I mean, it would make you crazy. I mean, if you're always anxious all the time, they'd probably lock you up someplace because anxiety's reached a big peak.

And so, what I have always been interested in is trying to figure out ways to help people be aware of this, first of all, and then figure out a way for them to reduce their anxiety because the anxiety gets in the way of everything. It gets in the way of your thinking, your choice of attention, your multitasking ability, pretty much everything. It all takes place, by the way, right here in the prefrontal cortex, but the anxiety chemicals are buried in the brain and in the body. And in the brain, they're typically right behind here in the amygdala, which then measures your emotions and a bunch of other things.

So, my interest has really moved over the years to trying to figure out what is going on and what can we do to fix it. The first part's easy. The second part's not easy because as I said before, we tried to fix it, tried our hardest. Couldn't do it. We tried. Now, that's not to say that there aren't strategies to do it. I have a lot of strategies that I recommend to people, not a lot, but that we know work. But we're still facing this anxiety reaction all the time.

Jennifer Ghahari:  For, I think, a delight for our listeners, we actually are going to hear about two topics from you because it seems that you're kind of budding into a specialist into another field as well. Unfortunately, you were diagnosed with Parkinson's disease a few years ago, and you have started researching this and writing about your own experiences through a blog.

So, I was wondering if you could talk and share with our listeners a little bit about that. What are some of the first signs that you experienced? Especially as a researcher, you're going to have, I think, a different take on this type of diagnosis than someone without your skills.

Larry Rosen:  Right. And Parkinson's is a disease. It is a confusing disease because you can exhibit myriad symptoms, and no two people exhibit the same symptoms at all.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, wow.

Larry Rosen:  I noticed, for example, that when I walked, my left arm did not swing. When we walk, our arms swing back and forth, back and forth. Yeah, they swing. My left arm did not swing, which, I mean, it's a little strange. I also noticed when I was brushing my teeth that my arm was rigid. My left, my other arm was rigid and not moving also.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Larry Rosen:  And didn't really know what it was, but I knew I'd better have an MRI to figure it out. Had an MRI done, and the MRI came up pretty clean in the sense that it really didn't show the Parkinson's because it's hard to do that, but Parkinson's is a biochemical issue. The chemical there, which is interesting, is dopamine.

Now, when we talk about kids being addicted to technology, for example, being addicted, dopamine is the main chemical we talk about. It's also the main chemical that those... part and parcel of Parkinson's. So one of the nice things is they can measure... Technology's so amazing. They can measure with a device sort of like a CAT scan or an MRI, but a simpler one, how much dopamine you have in your brain. They print you a nice, pretty picture, and the pretty picture has this orange-ish stuff showing the active dopamine. It usually looks like two little circles with commas coming out. If you have the requisite amount of dopamine, that's what you'll see. Mine had no commas-

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, interesting.

Larry Rosen:  ... just two circles. So that was pretty interesting. I am a scientist as you can tell from the science t-shirt. I am a scientist. This one says, "Science doesn't care what you believe, by the way," which I think is a good model for people to understand.

I had been looking at dopamine anyway, particularly with video gamers, because it's such an important part of what happens when you're addicted to video games, is this drive for more dopamine, this drive for more dopamine. You got to have it. You got to have it. You got to have it.

Well, so Parkinson's is a dopamine-related problem, and I started thinking about what to do about it. Now, you have to know that I'm a very open person, so I tell everybody everything, and so what I decided to do is to blog about it. I've been writing a blog for Psychology Today for years and years, and not very often, just maybe... Well, they yell at me if I don't do it every 90 days, so try to do it three or four times a year.

I like writing about technology because that's what I do. It's been writing about new generations, and kids, and video games, and all that stuff. All of a sudden, I'm sitting here looking at Parkinson's, and I go, "Well, why don't I write about Parkinson's?" So the first one I wrote called was called something like A Scientist Grapples with Parkinson's Disease because that's what I was grappling with.

I laid out in there some of the symptoms I have. I mean, for example, one's called micrographia. You write very tiny. Your writing gets tinier, and tinier, and tinier. There are other symptomologies that show up. Different people have different ones. Tremors. I have tremors in my left hand, but not my right, which was interesting, but that's not uncommon. Most people just have them on one side or the other to start. Sometimes they migrate.

So, I'm sitting here with a person sitting on my shoulder on this side, being the scientist, looking into it, and the person on this side being the person experiencing it. I thought I'm kind of in a unique place to be able to talk to people about what I'm feeling, and so I wrote that one. I wrote one the second year, and I just posted one for the third year a little late, mostly because I'm doing it kind of for me, my family, my kids, people I know.

I've seen symptoms come and go, more come than go, unfortunately. As you get deeper into Parkinson's and you start reading the research on Parkinson's, there are no two people who have the same Parkinson's. It just isn't. It isn't. Once it's diagnosed, you've can look at things. My neurologist has me always walk down the hall, watches my arm, whether it swings or not, but also watches how I turn to come back. Parkinson's people turn like this in little steps to turn around. I turn... I literally swivel like a ballet dancer. These are some common symptoms that you can see.

One of the interesting things is Parkinson's is a balance issue to people. People who have Parkinson's often fall, and that's really one of the major problems with... And people, by the way, do not die of Parkinson's. They die of something else that Parkinson's brought on, often Alzheimer's, often some form of dementia, often some other neurological problem, fall, hurt themselves. At the very end, you have trouble swallowing.

I just kept thinking, "What can I do to help myself?" Because part of the reading I found was, well, there's this boxing class, and boxing is good for your balance. I went to this boxing class. I joined a boxing class called Rock Steady Boxing. It's made for Parkinson's patients.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Larry Rosen:  It's a franchise. People open their own little gyms or use other gyms. Couple times a week, I was going to this boxing class. It was great fun, by the way, hitting a bag, bam. Just a picture of somebody you don't like, bam.

What happened out of that is... First, the pandemic started, and so you can't be in a closed gym with a bunch of people, but there were a group of us. At that point, there was a group of four of us who'd kind of gotten to know each other, just chatting here and there. We decided to form our own little support group. Now, this is the pandemic, so every week, we met on Zoom. For a year-plus, we met on Zoom.

Then we decided to branch out and meet out in the open where we had lots of fresh air coming and everything. That was an important step, I think, because what that said to me is support is really important. Now, obviously, I get support from my family. I get support from my wife, soon to be my wife. We've been together for 18 years. We're finally getting married.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, congratulations.

Larry Rosen:  Don't ask me why because I have no idea why we decided to do it, but 18 years seems fine. So they lend support, but it's a different kind of support when you get it from somebody who's experiencing the same thing. We talk about medications. We're all on different medications. We all have different symptomologies. One of the people walked in like this all the time. Why? Because he wasn't taking these meds.

Other people would talk about varying their meds. Their neurologist would let them take maybe a pill in the morning and another half if they felt uncomfortable. The medication, by the way, is exactly the same medication they've been using forever. It's called levodopa, which they always talked about that with Muhammad Ali and various other people who had Parkinson's. Levodopa is the drug of choice. It's actually called Sinemet because it's combined with another drug so you don't get nauseous and constipated, I think, are the two bad things for that.

I started on a very low dose, and my hands shook like this. Also, interestingly enough, my thumb would often stick to my finger, and I would have to pry it off. I've never met anybody with that symptom, by the way. It'd just stick.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, wow.

Larry Rosen:  I go, "That's weird." Well, I pry it off, and then it's fine.

I have had to increase my Sinemet, my medication quite a bit. The maximum you're supposed to take is 2,000 milligrams. I take 900. My doctor swears that's fine. I'm in a great range. Don't worry about it. We're really good. That took away all my tremors. I rarely have tremors, unless I get stressed. If I get stressed, the tremors come right back.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh.

Larry Rosen:  Yeah. Because stress-

Jennifer Ghahari:  Even with medication?

Larry Rosen:  Yeah. Stress exacerbates the symptomology that we ha, particularly the tremors. Stress just knocks the tremors back in. Along the way, I mean, I've experienced it. I've written what I've experienced. There's cognitive deficits that I have. There's physical deficits that I have.

The interesting thing is the cognitive deficits are hard to deal with now because I'm 72. How many of the cognitive things that happen to me, like not being able to remember names, happen because I'm 72, not because I have Parkinson's? So, trying to disentangle those is very difficult. You just have to kind of accept that they're either/or and talk to your neurologist about what they may be.

Then over time, I mean, the symptoms come and go. I have some interesting new ones. One's called REM behavioral disorder, which is when your REM sleep, we have movements. When we sleep, Parkinson's patients, those who have this disorder, will act out their dreams. I will pound things. My wife told me last night that she woke me up because she said I was just pounding and talking.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, wow.

Larry Rosen:  I was just literally acting it out. That's all again caused by the dopamine.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow. So in addition to these physical and cognitive implications, what about comorbid mental health conditions? Are anxiety and depression common or any other...

Larry Rosen:  Yeah, all of them. Anxiety and depression are common. In fact, when I was prescribed my first Sinemet, I was also prescribed an antidepressant-

Jennifer Ghahari:  Right off the bat?

Larry Rosen:  Right. Because my neurologist said, "You're going to be depressed for a while. Sorry." Then as things went on, I also was prescribed an antianxiety because certain things were making me anxious. So you have to balance the mental health aspects, but they're always going to be there. There's just no way you can skate through this and just go, "Ugh, I'm not feeling bad at all." It's depressing.

It's depressing particularly because the way they show Parkinson's is more end-state Parkinson's Michael J. Fox is not the Parkinson's norm. He's trembling all over the place, and his speech is problematic, and his throat closes up a bit. Yeah, he's not the norm. The norm are people who are like me. They have some symptoms. They try to get rid of the symptoms.

Part of what I'm trying to do in my life is give back because I taught for 45 years, a college profession, and I've done research, and I've participated out there, and given speeches, and all sorts of stuff. I felt like I needed to give back what I knew. Part of it came from our little support group.

I live in San Diego County. There's an organization here called Parkinson's Association of San Diego. There's Parkinson's associations everywhere. One of the things they did is open a mentor program, and so I immediately put my name in to be a mentor. I suggested that I'd rather mentor newly diagnosed people. Interestingly enough, I haven't really mentored any newly diagnosed people, but I've mentored a bunch of people who are really like me, kind of older, scared, concerned, everybody with different symptoms.

I talk to this one guy every week or so on the phone now. When I started talking to him, his mouth movements were not very good. He was a very slow speaker because of it. Over time, it's been interesting because he's now developing speech better, and so he and I can have a conversation where I'm not just sitting there waiting for the next word to come out.

Everybody's different. That's what's so interesting. Everybody's different. I feel like coming from a scientific tradition, I was really raised as a statistician, what that allows me to do is to look at the research and decide whether the research is good or maybe only suggestive. That's an important thing, I think, because research is tricky. Over the 40-some-odd years, plus graduate school, that I was doing research, there are tricks of the trade. There are ways to make a study good. There are ways to make a study bad. There's ways to make conclusions that shouldn't be there.

So, I read those things voraciously. People send them to me, and I read them. I don't talk about them on my blog because I don't want to shame anybody. But I do talk about with new people, here's some new things that are coming up, and I do talk in interviews like this about here's some of the things that might expect.

By and large, it is being diagnosed more, which I think is very interesting. Part of the reason why, by the way, it's diagnosed more is because now we have the testing, the DAT scan to really test it, and we have MRIs that are better. We have tests of fives or something the MRI takes, which is really great stuff, the fine brain stuff.

I will keep writing about it, and I will keep letting people know the symptomology that I have. By the way, because of my cognition problems, I did take a whole neuro workup. I just got the report, and I read part of the report. There are some neurological deficiencies, not horrible ones, but there are some neurological deficiencies, which is helpful for me to understand.

Interestingly enough, attention is one of the major ones right now, and I have a lot of trouble attending. I used to be a great multitasker. Don't do it. Can't do it. I used to think quickly. Sometimes my thoughts get a little muddled, and I have to kind of hold them inside until I get them out. I miss things. I see something on TV, for example, and somebody will say, "What did that person say?" Oh, I don't know. I don't know because my attention waned. So I'm able to say all those things, and I hope people who need it will read it.

Jennifer Ghahari:  So those issues that you just spoke of, how do you know what the difference is between a symptom of Parkinson's versus just normal aging-

Larry Rosen:  That's the million-dollar-

Jennifer Ghahari:  Or there's no real way to know, right?

Larry Rosen:  Million-dollar question. No, there's no real way to know. The interesting thing is I think it's good that there's no real way to know because as we get older, those aging symptoms will be there as well as the Parkinson's. Who cares whether it's aging or not? It's still interacting with your Parkinson's.

If I have trouble attending things, it's going to interact with my Parkinson's. If I have trouble remembering names because I can't pull them out of my hippocampus or whatever, it's going to be... Whether it's old age or Parkinson's, it doesn't really matter quite honestly. I mean, most of the people who get Parkinson's are older, so it's all mushed together. How can you tell?

But one of the things I do talk to people about is that they should be very careful to have someone watching over them because part of what happens and because this is dopamine... By the way, we always think of dopamine as the pleasure chemical, but it controls motor motions. And so if you have less dopamine in your body, you have poorer motor motion. One of the first questions the neurologist will ask, "Have you fallen in the last X amount of time?" Because that's a real strong indicator of potential Parkinson's problems.

So, I try to walk more. I try to make sure my balance is there. I also have a spiral staircase in my house, and I'll hold on. At times, I'll take two feet on one step, make sure that I'm not going to fall. I've not fallen yet, but I've definitely stumbled a lot and just been able to grab myself, but I've missed the bottom stair of our stairwell before a couple times. I stumble. Luckily, there's a wall right up there, so I put my hands against the wall. Saved my life.

Those are kind of all things that are individual. The anxiety, by the way, is pretty common. The depression is very common. And so from a psychological point of view, those are the kind of things. Yeah, am I depressed because I'm older? Am I anxious because whatever? Those things are also all tied up in one.

Interestingly enough, because of my work with technology, I'm able to talk about the biochemistry of it because of all the stuff that I've done with the biochemistry of the brain with technology. It's a pretty natural step, I found, to go from looking at that kind of biochemistry to looking at the biochemistry of Parkinson's.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Talking about social support and how important that is, you mentioned family, friends. You're part of this boxing group, which morphed into just a social support group. You're also mentoring people. In one of your blogs, you said something like, "I'm not complaining. I'm just reporting." I'm wondering, especially when you're trying to be in a supportive type of setting, whether you're talking to family or in a group, how many people feel like they are actually complaining and they might want to hold back what they're feeling? Is that common or are people more comfortable to talk about things?

Larry Rosen:  From my experience with Parkinson's patients, they are embarrassed. In our little group of four... ended up being five. Now, one passed away, so it's four of them.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Sorry.

Larry Rosen:  We don't meet anymore in the boxing because the person running the boxing program is not vaccinated. I mean, none of us... Even with Parkinson's, you don't want to be anywhere near that stuff that might have an effect on you. There's not been proven a link, but it's still there.

I think that the support you get is the way that you're able to judge aging versus not aging. In our group, there are people in their 60s, 70s, and one is in his 80s. We all reacted differently. I told everybody because that's me. One person only told her husband. That was it. Hadn't told her whole family that she has it. Another person told selective people. I think it's important to be able to see people in a similar situation as you are. I don't know if you know this, but Alan Alda has Parkinson's.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, I didn't know.

Larry Rosen:  It's funny. He's actually done a lot, and I like what he's been working on. He was in a movie. The movie was the one where Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver were getting divorced. He was playing Adam's attorney, and so they're sitting at a round table, and you see his right arm is down to the side, and his left arm is here. Then every once in a while, he brings his right arm up, and it's shaking a little, so he put it down. It's a little bit more... That wasn't maybe part of the script, and so they made it as innocuous as possible, but if you go on his Twitter, he talks about it a lot.

Having people do that helps normalize it. I think that's going to be real important for people. I mean, Parkinson's sounds like a really crazy, bad disease, which, I mean, on the whole, it is, but it's not as scary as we always thought it was. We're not going to be Michael J. Foxes. I mean, because he literally has a bad case of the tremors on both sides, as well as speech problems, and all sorts of things. He's at the end, and some of the people I know are spread out in there. I would consider myself maybe not at the other end, but sort of third of the way in because I don't tremor much.

Jennifer Ghahari:  And you were diagnosed how long ago?

Larry Rosen:  August 2019.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Okay. So you have had the disease for a few years now.

Larry Rosen:  Okay. So what's interesting is, yes, most people have Parkinson's for a lot longer than they know. One of the first symptoms is loss of sense of smell, and not everybody again, but it's a pretty common symptom. I lost my sense of smell, most of it, 10 years ago, which they would say is because you have Parkinson's.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Larry Rosen:  I don't know how long my left arm wasn't moving because I wasn't paying attention to it. My guess is it was a long time before I was diagnosed. The only reason I was diagnosed is because I felt like there were some things that were just different that I didn't understand neurologically.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow. That's great. And I appreciate that you're coming on here, and speaking with us, and showing, as you're saying, a more normalized version of Parkinson's, that not everybody's going to have the absolute extreme version, especially right off the bat. So, if anything, this is going to be a really huge help, I think.

Larry Rosen:  Michael J. Fox has had it for like 30 years and-

Jennifer Ghahari:  Right. Yeah, it's been a long time.

Larry Rosen:  Yeah. What I think in the long run is the diagnosis is going to be made more often. By the way, there's all sorts of sub-varieties of Parkinson's, essential tremors. There's a Lewy bodies part. There's a whole bunch of little subcategories. We can have those or full-out Parkinson's. They have different symptoms and different effects.

I think because of our technology now, and because we're just more aware of it... I mean, Michael J. Fox is out there. Other people are out there talking about Parkinson's. Because of that awareness, I think more people then go to the doctor and will be diagnosed. We'll get better ways of diagnosing them, and we'll get better ways of treating them.

There are a tremendous number of research studies going on right now on other treatments other than drug treatments. For example, there's something called DBS, direct brain stimulation, where you literally have a little thing here, and it stimulates... It's like a nine-volt battery and stimulates the prefrontal cortex, which has been shown to help with your thinking and your attention abilities if one of the symptoms is you're losing your attention.

I mean, I have high hopes that the more we see out there, the more we'll understand out there, but it's scary. I mean, I would tell anybody that has Parkinson's. The first thing I would say is, "I bet you're scared." The answer is always, "Yeah, I'm scared to death." They have a reason to be. I mean, it's not a death sentence, but in general, people who get Parkinson's, they live maybe 20, 30 years with Parkinson's, or it can go really quickly. You just don't know.

Again, the medications are much better. The medications are better. There's lots of other meds besides the one I'm taking. The one I'm taking just is the base one you start on. If that doesn't work, they can give you other meds on top of it, or interestingly enough, the meds stop working typically after... I think Sinemet, they say, in general, stops working maybe every about five years with that. You have to find something else.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Yeah. I think, as you said, it's almost the fear of the unknown. That's the biggest drive of anxiety for people, and so I think things like this where you're helping disseminate information and just experiences is a really huge help for people.

Larry Rosen:  And one of the things that I would recommend is... The Parkinson's Association of San Diego has done a really nice service for people, and what they've done is they've had professionals record very short videos, we know our attention span is way too short these days, eight, 10-min videos on different symptoms and different kind of things that happen. It's just pasd.org, I think. They're free. You can go look at the videos. There's probably 30 or 40 of them, maybe even more.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow.

Larry Rosen:  The PA for my doctor does a few, and other people who know what they're doing do a few. Then my doctor, my neurologist is involved in lots of research too along with it. So I get to kind of eavesdrop and hear what she's finding. She talks on there about her research. People talk about the REM behavioral disorder and what it means. People talk about how to know when your medication's not working. So they're just little blurbs. I encourage people... I think it's a really great idea to just go there and harvest what we can.

Now, having said that, when I was diagnosed, I did no reading. In retrospect, I was scared to death and I didn't want to know. Everybody else read for me. My kids reported. My wife reported. Everybody read for me. Then at some point after about six months, I found that I was able to dive in and see what's there. Also, I mean, I encourage people to not be afraid to say, "I'm afraid."

Jennifer Ghahari:  Wow. Thank you. So psychologist, who's an expert in technology, someone who's battling Parkinson's, do you have any parting words of advice or anything else that you'd like to share with our listeners?

Larry Rosen:  Well, on both sides, I can share a lot about the technologist stuff, but I think keep track of what you're feeling. If you need to, take a diary. Keep track of it in a diary. Mark down when something odd happens, something weird happens. It may be Parkinson's. It may be not. At least, it's noted.

Don't spend a lot of time reading research because it's in its infancy. We're talking about really the last 10 years maybe that there's been this new emphasis on Parkinson's, even though Michael J. Fox had his foundation for quite a while, but it's pretty much a new phenomenon. When you say to somebody, "Oh, I have Parkinson's," say, "Oh, my uncle had Parkinson's, and my mother's sister had Parkinson's." Everybody knows somebody that had Parkinson's.

And to just realize it's not a death sentence, but you also need to kind of be aware of your body and your mind because you can just go on gleefully unaware, and then the symptoms will definitely get worse left untreated. What you want to do is try to get the best treatment possible and really trust that...

You're not doing this through your family doctor or your internist. You're doing this through a neurologist who knows Parkinson's, whether it takes... Even if you have some of these symptoms, and you try to get an appointment and you can't get an appointment for four months, don't worry about it. Nothing's going to much change in four months maybe.

Keep track of your symptoms. Keep track of everything. Don't study the research on it. Go look at how you can diagnose Parkinson's. There's lots of things that talk about how you walk or do this. (Moves his hands) My right is faster than my left.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh.

Larry Rosen:  Typing, my right is better than my left. I can't type anymore. I mean, I can type. It's just I make lots of mistakes. Keep track of your symptoms. Keep track of them, and write them down. Make sure that you are being as dispassionate as you can, but yet accept the support of other people. Don't ever let somebody tell you you're going to die of Parkinson's because they will. They'll say, "Oh, my uncle had it for 20 years and then died."

Jennifer Ghahari:  Right. Well, thank you so much. If anybody wants to read more about Dr. Rosen's research or read more about his blog, you can do so at www.drlarryrosen.com, and we'll have that link on our site.

Larry Rosen:  And the doctor is just D-R. Mention that maybe.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Oh, perfect. Thank you. Yeah.

Larry Rosen:  Please feel free to message me too. I mean, I enjoy talking to people about this because I think I can maybe not... Don't I'm a great helper, but I'm a pretty good listener.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Aw.

Larry Rosen:  And I think that's important.

Jennifer Ghahari:  It does make all the difference, definitely.

Larry Rosen:  Yeah.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Thank you so much, Dr. Rosen, and we wish you all the best.

Larry Rosen:  Thanks. Thanks for having me on.

Jennifer Ghahari:  Thank you.

Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.


Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.