A Sample of Recent Employment Class Action Cases:
Date Amount Class Size Defendant Allegations
1/10/01 $28 million settlement 7,700 Norfolk Southern Corp. (freight company) Race discrimination
1/3/01 $5 million settlement 346 American Cast Iron Pipe Co. Sex and race discrimination for excluding insurance coverage for children not living with the employee
1/3/01 $5 billion claimed 7 initially Microsoft Race discrimination in compensation and promotions, wrongful termination and retaliation
12/19/00 $10.5 million settlement 10,000 to 15,000 Publix Super Markets, Inc. Race discrimination
12/12/00 $97 million settlement 12,000 Microsoft Permatemps missed out on benefits, particularly employee stock purchase plan (wage case)
11/17/00 $9 million settlement 1,043 Ford Sexual harassment
11/16/00 $192.5 million settlement 2,000 Coca Cola Race discrimination in pay, performance, and evaluations
10/25/00 $8 million settlement 200 CBS Sex discrimination in salary, overtime, promotions, and training; sexual harassment and retaliation
10/11/00 $3.705 million settlement 1,000-2,000 Thom Thumb (grocery store) Race discrimination in hiring, promotion, compensation and training
10/10/00 $33 million award (reduced from $132 million) 17 Interstate Brands Corp. (IBC) (California Wonder Bread) Race discrimination
10/4/00 Filed for unknown amount 4,900 Microsoft Race and sex discrimination
7/7/00 $2.1 million settlement 1,200 Rent-a-Center Disability, Title VII, and psychological testing discrimination
6/20/00 over $176 million claimed 300 Nextel Race, sex and age discrimination
3/24/00 $508 million settlement 1,100 USIA and Voice of America (Government) Sex discrimination
1/12/00 $5 million settlement 400 Storage Technology Corp. Age discrimination
9/30/99 $14.2 million settlement 15,000 Boeing Race discrimination in promotions, training, transfers and discharge
7/9/99 $25 million settlement 10,000 Pacific Telesis Group Co. Pregnancy discrimination: pregnant employees forced to take personal leave
7/1/99 $24 million total settlement 300-500 Amtrak Race discrimination in compensation, promotions, hiring, and discipline, as well as harassment and retaliation
4/15/99 $16.65+ million settlement 39,000 Ingles Markets Inc. (Grocery Chain) Sex discrimination in hiring, pay, transfers
4/9/99 $12.1 million settlement 15,000 UPS Race discrimination in promotions: hostile work environment against part time employees of color
2/99 $1.9 million settlement NA Tanimura & Antle Sexual harassment and retaliation
1/99 $3.1 million settlement 186 Texaco Sex discrimination
1/99 $1 million settlement 62 Fina, Inc. Race discrimination
1/99 $28.1 million settlement NA Winn-Dixie Stores Inc. Race discrimination
However, when employees are abusive and threatening to coworkers, they may be obliged to engage in therapy with puts them in closer and more intimate contact with their victims in a misguided attempt to teach them to demonstrate a still higher level of arousal (sensitivity) to the same stimuli. In some cases, this lack of professional awareness of symptom levels and risks has resulted in increased resentment and even murderous rage and suicide. Standard mental health techniques available in all other cases have not been available in intervention with the color-aroused.
When an employee’s symptoms indicate depression, for example, the first step toward treatment is a competent diagnosis of the illness, including a determination of the degree of depression and impairment. It is generally understood not all levels of depression respond to all treatments and that a failure to respond appropriately could be unhelpful or dangerous.
No such scientific approach prevails with those whom employers or educational institutions find to have color-aroused behavioral problems. There simply have been no agreed upon diagnostic modalities, no accepted manner to determine the extent of the impairment(s) or risk(s) presented to self and others. As a result, there has been and can be no scientific treatment of a condition that the US Government and private industry spend many hundreds of millions of dollars annually to prevent, deter and punish. An enormously expensive and consuming societal effort is being compromised by the continuing lack of rigorous empirical attention to a psychiatric matter by competent psychiatric professionals. While society is at war against unlawful discrimination and hate crimes based on color-aroused emotions and thoughts, psychiatry and it’s traditional tools have been inexplicably missing from the battlefield.
When a problem resides beneath the hood of a car, we automatically call upon mechanics for help to understand and solve it because he is the professional whose specialty is cars. If the problem is lack of gasoline during a fuel shortage, there may be nothing the mechanic can do to diagnose or treat the cause of the problem. But if the problem is a faulty fuel pump, we reasonably expect the mechanic to use what tools are available to diagnose and correct the problem, because that within the scope of his responsibilities.
There is no class of mechanical problem which a competent mechanic will refuse to diagnose for ideological or philosophical reasons, nor is there an entire class of cars which competent mechanics refuse to repair. A determination that certain auto repairs are impractical or unadvisable can only logically be made after the problem has been diagnosed. If all mechanics refused to treat windshield wiper dysfunctions or brake problems for example, we would be dismayed and angry. Our roads would soon become littered with auto wrecks and our hospitals filled with accident victims. Mechanics protect us everyday from what would occur in the absence of their expertise.
At times, it must be tempting for psychiatrists, as for the rest of society, to revile extreme color-aroused offenders to such a degree that we want to do nothing at all to help them. At such times we must remember the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. whose crusade for justice set us on our present road to color integration: "Don't ever let anyone pull you so low as to hate them. We must use the weapon of love. We must have compassion and understanding for those who hate us. We must realize so many people are taught to hate us that they are not totally responsible for their hate."
These words are as true in the therapy room as in the lunch counters of Mississippi. If blacks in the segregated south could show compassion for those who hated them, then surely today’s psychiatrists can find sufficient compassion to meet and treat those who hold color-aroused beliefs, at least for an hour at a time, because as with any patient this is the only therapeutic alternative. Dr. King also said, “I am convinced that love is the most durable power in the world. It is not an expression of impractical idealism, but of practical realism. Far from being the pious injunction of a Utopian dreamer, love is an absolute necessity for the survival of our civilization. To return hate for hate does nothing but intensify the existence of evil in the universe. Someone must have sense enough and religion enough to cut off the chain of hate and evil, and this can only be done through love. Martin Luther King, Jr., 1957 http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/about_king/warandpeace/wpquotes.htm
Dr. King’s compassion was based on a pragmatic appreciation that people who hated extremely and acted out of prejudice were not entirely to blame for what they had learned previously. Unlearning and adopting new behaviors may be particularly difficult to the extent that they are deeply engrained, offer some pleasure, and may be reinforced by some aspects of our surroundings. Because of this, people confronting demands that they change any deeply engrained behavioral pattern, be it substance abuse, compulsive eating or extremely color-aroused abusive behaviors, need to be guided and assisted compassionately in their efforts to change, if we are to help them to change at all. Compassion, therefore, is a therapeutic necessity.
All non-autonomic behaviors are initiated in the mind, based on perceptions, feelings thoughts, emotions and decisions. There is no reason to believe a priori that extreme color-aroused behaviors present an exception to this rule, or that professionals who traditionally treat disorders of the mind can have nothing to contribute where diagnosis of extreme color-aroused behavior is concerned. To the contrary, there is every reason to expect that the diagnosis and treatment of patients with extreme color-aroused behavior will benefit immeasurably from the involvement of those professionals - psychiatrists - who are most prepared by training and experience to diagnose and treat extreme disorders that involve feelings, thoughts, decisions that result in disordered behavior.
Through anti-discrimination laws and criminal sanctions, society has made it clear that extreme color-aroused behaviors will not be tolerated. Yet, psychiatry has made an ideological judgment, not based on any empirical evidence, that people who have extreme color-aroused behavior, emotion and ideation can and should change entirely on their own, if at all, without the normal benefit of therapeutic intervention. This is actually an insidious form of discrimination against these potential patients, based perhaps on a combination of societal stigma against those who have extreme color-aroused symptoms, fear of identify in other an extreme form of feelings that are present to a significantly lesser degree in ourselves. In the absence of competent diagnosis and treatment, color-aroused perpetrators are going it alone in the attempts to cope, often with disastrous consequences for themselves and others.
Corporations are concerned with maximizing profit and limiting their exposure to liability in civil suits anti-discrimination suits. Law enforcement officials would like to refer color-aroused offenders for appropriate treatment before their behavior is so serious that arrest is mandatory. Spouses and family members would like to help affected individuals to lower their stress and rededicate themselves to their families instead of martyring themselves in the service of extreme and dysfunctional color-aroused ideas. Above all, patients themselves are clamoring for ways to reduce their stress and function more effectively in an increasingly diverse society, particularly when the requirements of their employment and law enforcement mandate painful and torturous changes in individual behavior patterns.
This book focuses on the variables of stress, competition and change, and how they interact with individual susceptibilities, social and political forces, giving rise in individuals to horrific but entirely preventable violence. The violations of law criteria identifies possible civil causes of action to which the actor makes himself liable and criminal charges that might be applicable, were the actor to survive his own violent outbursts or those of the people against whom he acts. It may be observed that in many cases of extreme color-aroused violent behavior the actor progresses from offensive non-violent to most extreme violent behavior, while first experiencing consequences of outside intervention when his behavior results in his death or imprisonment.
By focusing on the cases below and making observations that are supported by statistics, we demonstrate that Psychiatry can immediately improve its diagnosis of Extreme Color-aroused Ideation and Behavior Disorders, resulting in significant strides forward with prediction, prevention, diagnosis and treatment. We demonstrate that the most extreme cases are also those where diagnoses are clearest and where intervention is can be most efficient and cost-effective.
The treatment of ECEIBD entails identifying the ideational framework or “Outlook Rules” that are extreme and generate problematic “Outlook Emotions” and “Outlook Behaviors”. As the patient reevaluates his Outlook in the context of traditional cognitive behavioral therapy, he becomes able to assume responsibility for his feelings, thoughts and actions and to make more informed and responsible decisions about the degree to which he will conform his behavior to legal requirements, workplace regulations and societal standards.
In the following chapters, we explain how the diagnosis and treatment of extreme color-aroused emotional, ideational and behavioral symptoms can lead to happier and more effective lives for sufferers and their families, increased productivity and profitability for employers and more effective and efficient empirically-based interventions by societal institutions, potentially resulting in savings of millions of dollars for individuals, Government and the private sector.
Extreme Color Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder (ECEIBD): Toward a New Listing for the DSM-IV
Severe Color, Emotion, Ideation and Reaction Disorder (SCEIRD)
What is ECEIBD?
Extreme Color-aroused Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder (ECEIBD) is an illness in which extremes of emotion, ideation and behavior arise and become harmful in conjunction with the perception of and reaction to the skin-color of a person or persons. In patients with ECEIBD, perception of skin color is the stimulus or “cue” that elicits feelings and thoughts in the patient that may become manifest in extreme behaviors. In ECEIBD, these extremes of emotions, ideation and behavior are sufficient in quality and quantity to impair the individual’s functioning in one or more areas of life.
When afflicted with extremely color-sensitive emotion, ideation and behavior, people who are otherwise law-abiding and respectful of others may commit acts that are unlawful, violent, risk loss of employment and social position, and rend the fabric of society.
ECEIBD is not a uniquely American illness. Rather, ECEIBD has historically been present to some degree in and between most societies where there were differences in skin color have been present.
Many of us harbor amusing ideas and misperceptions about people associated with their color, sometimes based on anecdotal experience or complete lack of experience. This is common. However, extreme or delusional misperceptions of others and their values and intentions, particularly when negative motives are ascribed to others, can lead to extreme and unreasonable fear, severe and prolonged stress, overwhelming anxiety and anger, depression, violent outbursts and physical violence against other individuals, groups and property.
Spectrum Anonymous
The ECEIBD 20 Questions Diagnostic Test
Questions 1-5
1. Do you feel afraid or angry around certain people because of your skin color and/or their skin color?
2. Can you usually tell the good people from the bad ones based on their skin color?
3. Do you prefer not to socialize, live or work near certain people because of their skin color?
4. Do you feel there are some rights and privileges that you should have and others should not because of your skin-color or because of their skin color, or that you feel you do not deserve because of your skin color?
5. Do you ever feel uncomfortable or unhappy when you see people of different colors socializing or dating or working together?
Questions 6 - 10
6. Do you feel angry when you see people of certain skin colors interacting with people of another group?
7. Have you harmed friendships or social opportunities because of how you acted toward people of a certain skin color?
8. Have you taunted or ridiculed someone at work or at school because of some aspect of their skin color?
9. Do you feel superior or inferior to all people of a certain color group because of your skin color?
10. Have you ever been the subject of a complaint or been disciplined or lost wages or been fined due to how you acted toward people with because of your skin color or their skin color?
Questions 11-15
11. Do you sometimes tell your co-workers jokes about people of a certain skin color or play jokes on co-workers because of their color?
12. Have you ever missed work or gotten into financial or legal troubles after you treated someone differently based on their skin color?
13. Do you feel disappointed or angry when people of a color-group succeed and happier when they fail?
14. Have you ever been disciplined or ordered to participate in sensitivity training because of your participation in behavior perceived as harmful to a skin-color-group or groups at school or at work?
15. Have you made racial slurs or insults to strangers because you don’t like their something about their skin color?
16-20
16. Have you spent time with certain individuals or groups because they share your goal of promoting one skin-color group’s supremacy over another?
17. Have you ever gotten into legal trouble because of your behavior toward people of a color-group at work or at school or in public?
18. Do you feel that just about any punishment would be better than having to get along with people of some particular skin-color group?
19. Have you ever struck a person with your hands or feet or an object or targeted their property for theft or vandalism because of the person’s skin color?
20. Have you disregarded you own welfare or that of your friends, family or employer in order to hurt other people or groups because of their color?
If you answered “yes” to one or more of questions numbered 1-5, then you have at least some color-aroused emotions, thoughts and actions that could limit your involvement with people of diverse backgrounds, your career advancement and your social opportunities.
If you answered yes to any of questions 6-10, you have at least mild color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior that is causing you to violate laws and risk your employment and your financial well-being.
If you answered “yes” to any of questions 11-15, the chances are that you have ECEIBD and are at serious risk of loss of employment, life, property or liberty because of your color-aroused behavior. You also pose serious risks for your employer and those close to you.
If you answered “yes” to one or more of questions 15-20, you definitely have ECEIBD and you should immediately seek psychiatric help because of the serious risk of criminal prosecution, loss of employment, life, liberty and property.
Historically, Americans have used various different terms in attempts to grasp aspects of ECEIBD as a psychological, social or political matter, (e.g. “bias”, “prejudice”, “racism”, “intolerance”). However, no single term has been sufficiently precise and comprehensive to reflect all of the interrelated functional components that, when appearing in conjunction, constitute this diagnosable psychiatric illness. No single-word term has (and perhaps ever could) convey the complex cluster of interdependent emotive, cognitive and behavioral components that, in combination, constitute ECEIBD.
According to Borenstein, past president of the American Psychiatric Association speaking with respect to “racism”, for example,
“Such attitudes may be shaped by environmental influences, social pressures, or our own insecurities. Prejudice is often accompanied by distrust and suspiciousness. The next step along this continuum may be dislike or even hatred toward others who belong to a particular group. In extreme cases, prejudice can lead to violence. Racism exists when one racial group is prejudiced toward and discriminates against another racial group. Extreme racism fosters violence toward members of another race.”
Dr. Borenstein further observes that:
“Although we have evidence of strong genetic influences for some psychiatric illnesses, there is none for what I see as a continuum in humans from nonjudgmental to racist attitudes. We do not come into this world possessing judgmental thoughts toward others. However, during our upbringing, we all develop preferences as to what is good or better. We may prefer to associate with some groups more than others and may even develop judgments that the group we prefer is better than other groups. These normal human tendencies are central to the development of prejudices. Preference becomes prejudice when we develop negative judgments toward groups of people who have done nothing to deserve our critical attitudes toward them. They are just different from us in some way—ethnic, cultural, religious, for example.”
Although color-arousal exists on a spectrum between the normal and the extreme, it is critically important to distinguish between different points along the spectrum. In general, what distinguishes “normal” psychological phenomena from the extreme is the degree to which a condition impairs the functioning of an individual, for example his ability to interact with others, care for his and others safety, and maintain his employment and family relationships. Severely disordered mental patterns are characterized by an impaired ability to function successfully in one or more critical areas of functioning.
For example, persons with extreme mental impairment such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder frequently engage in conduct that destroys crucial familial, professional and social relationships while also violating civil and criminal laws and regulations that are promulgated for their protection. Their behavior, when untreated, may entail unreasonable risks to their own and others safety. Although the vast majority of person exhibiting color-aroused behavior do not exhibit extreme behavior or impairment of functioning, those who do may do vast and lasting harm to themselves and others. In the area of color-aroused psychological phenomena as with all areas of psychiatry, it is vitally important to have the means to effectively distinguish between that which is normal and that which is potentially dangerously extreme. In this chapter we offer two examples of persons with ECEIBD that was extreme and severely damaging to themselves and others. We then analyze the patterns of emotion, ideation and behavior which, as we demonstrate in subsequent chapters, can form the basis for empirically based diagnosis, treatment and prevention modalities.
For our first example of ECEIBD, we turn to the case of Doug Williams, the facts of which were recounted in the July 10, 2003 edition of the New York Times. Mr. Williams was normal many respects. He held a stable job, lived with a girlfriend, drove a pickup and had an ongoing relationship with his father and children. He also had ready access to shotgun and other firearms. What separated Mr. Williams from person without ECEIBD was overwhelming emotions, ideation and behavior aroused by the perception of dark skin color.
Factory Killer Had a Known History of Anger and Racial Taunts, New York Times
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/health/article-page.html?res=9405E5D6133DF933A25754C0A9659C8B63
By DAVID M. HALBFINGER, Published: July 10, 2003
A Mississippi factory employee who had allegedly threatened black co-workers shot and killed five people yesterday at the aircraft parts plant where he worked, wounding eight others before committing suicide, authorities said.
Workers ran for the exits as the gunman, identified as Doug Williams, walked through the Lockheed Martin plant firing a 12-gauge shotgun at them shortly before 10 a.m., Lauderdale County Sheriff Billy Sollie said. Williams had stepped away from a workplace ethics training session only minutes before. He returned with a semiautomatic rifle, which he did not fire, and the shotgun that he turned on employees at their work stations, authorities said.
The death toll at the military aircraft parts plant outside Meridian, Miss., was the largest in a U.S. workplace rampage since late 2000, and it chilled this city of 40,000, which bills itself as the safest in the state.
"This isn't supposed to happen in Meridian, Mississippi," said Mayor John Robert Smith, 54, a lifelong resident of the city, which lies 93 miles east of Jackson in central Mississippi, near the Alabama border. "Nothing like this has ever happened near our hometown, nor did we expect anything like this to happen."
Investigators said that the motive for the shootings has not been determined and that there is no clear indication that race was a factor. Four of the slain workers were black. Williams and another worker were white.
A cousin of slain worker Lanette McCall -- a 15-year plant employee with two children and two grandchildren -- said yesterday she had complained to supervisors that Williams had threatened to kill black employees and had regularly used racial epithets.
McCall, who was black, "was constantly concerned; she's been worried about this for a year," said her cousin, who asked not to be identified.
McCall's husband, Bruce, told the Associated Press that "she said [Williams] made a threat against black people."
A former plant employee also told reporters that the gunman had a reputation for racism and had threatened to kill people before. "When I first heard about it, he was the first thing that came to my mind," Jim Payton told the Associated Press. Williams had talked about wanting to kill people, saying: "I'm capable of doing it," said Payton, who worked with Williams for about a year before retiring.
The notion that race might have played a role in the killings saddened Jackie Burns, sister-in-law of Sam Cockrell, a black worker who died in the plant where he had worked for 22 years.
"We're supposed to be above things like that now; I know Sam was," she said. "We're praying for strength to hold us together. We're a close-knit family, a close-knit community."
No information about the gunman's work history was immediately available. A Lockheed Martin spokeswoman said the company has a zero-tolerance policy toward racial harassment.
Williams worked as a parts assembler at the plant. Sheriff's deputies found two pistols, a rifle with a scope and "a large quantity" of ammunition inside his vehicle in the company parking lot.
As news of the shooting spread, a tearful, deeply shaken crowd gathered across the street from the plant, which makes parts for the C-130J Hercules and F-22 Raptor aircraft. Clergy from throughout the region drove to the scene, Smith said.
"All you can see is saddened eyes," he said.
Betty Ward, a Meridian bar owner, drove into the industrial park where the plant is located as soon as the news broke. She feared the worst for her nephew, J.D. Dearman, 33, who was on the job when the loud report of shots rang inside the plant.
After anxious moments that seemed like days, Ward said she saw Dearman walk out, rattled but safe, thanks to a heart-revving escape over the hill behind the plant.
Dearman had taken work breaks with Williams, Ward said, and was shocked that he could have turned violent. Ward knew the gunman, too, having seen him often at the Poisson Country Store, where they both shopped.
"I always thought he was pleasant," Ward said. "He always said hi."
At Ward's bar, Betty's Rendezvous, she and her customers settled in to wait for the dead to be identified, certain there would be friends and acquaintances to visit in the hospital, or to bury, in this place where everyone seems to know everyone.
Meridian is a pre-Civil War railroad boomtown that is now Mississippi's sixth-largest city. It is in mostly rural Lauderdale County, which logged three killings last year -- two at a state prison. It took only a few awful minutes yesterday to nearly double the county's homicide rate.
"You cannot know the human mind or heart," Smith said, "and the destruction it can cause.
Had Mr. Williams been interviewed by a psychiatrist prior to the day of the multiple murder-suicide, the following facts, which were known to co-workers and supervisors, might well have been discovered:
1. Mr. Williams expressed harbored simmering longstanding resentments at black people and experienced extreme and persistent anger in response to their presence and participation in the workplace.
2. Mr. Williams was subject to and had a history of angry outbursts and antagonistic behavior in the workplace, at blacks and whites whom he perceived as allied with or tolerant of them blacks.
3. He regularly expressed his resentment overtly, through hostile symbolism and speech to which he subjected black and others present.
4. In the workplace, Mr. Williams was subject to escalating discipline because of his color-aroused behavior.
5. Escalating discipline in the workplace often precedes suicidal and homicidal behavior, particularly toward those with whom one has had a dispute and those responsible for the discipline.
6. Because Mr. Williams openly expressed thoughts, fantasies or plans about killing co-workers, particularly black ones, co-workers were afraid of Mr. Williams.
7. Like 30% of Americans, Mr. Williams had ready access to guns and ammunition.
8. The triggers or cues that aroused Mr. Williams to kill others and himself inlcuded a burning antipathy toward people whose skin color was darker than his own and a determination to stop others from engaging in heterchromatic dating and other activities.
9. Because he also killed a white person, his anger, although aroused by color, was not focused only upon blacks but also at whites whom Williams perceived as also violating his color-based Outlook Rules, specifically those heterochromatic interpersonal interactions.
Co-workers and supervisors were well aware all of these facts in the years and days before the murder-suicide. Had Lockheed-Martin or another party referred Mr. Williams for competent psychiatric evaluation, and had he once again expressed the feelings that he shared so freely on the shop floor and to supervisors – e.g. that he was capable and desirous of killing co-workers, had ready access to guns, and felt ready to die for this cause – then Mr. Williams might well have been psychiatrically committed as a danger to himself and others. At a minimum, an occupational and organizational psychiatrist would have recommended that Mr. Williams not return to the shop floor until there was greater reason to believe he was willing and able to control his rageful impulses.
Though our angry may be great, our laws and the regulations of societal institutions such as employers nonetheless restrict the ways in which we can express anger at one another regardless of the race of our targets. Yet, if we simply repress anger without addressing the reasons why we feel angry, we risk depression.
Assessment Of Mode Of Anger Expression In Adolescent Psychiatric Inpatients - Statistical Data Included, Adolescence, Spring, 2001 by Robin L. Cautin, James C. Overholser, Patricia Goetz
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2248/is_141_36/ai_76498126
Anger can play an important role in depression and suicide risk among adolescents. The present study evaluated internalized and externalized anger in 92 adolescent psychiatric inpatients. Results indicated that adolescents who internalized their anger were more likely to be depressed and to experience feelings of hopelessness. In addition, adolescents who internalized their anger made more serious suicide attempts than did those who externalized their anger. In contrast, adolescents who externalized their anger were more likely to have alcohol-related problems. Thus, different modes of anger expression appear to be related to different manifestations of psychopathology. It was concluded that assessment of mode of anger expression in adolescents may enhance our understanding of suicide and its risk factors.
There is a strong empirical link between depression and suicide. However, the relationship between depression and suicide appears to be complex and includes other negative emotions. The severity of depression has been found to be positively associated with levels of hostility and anger (Riley, Treiber, & Woods, 1989). In a retrospective chart review, depression, anger, and impulsivity were the most predominant characteristics reported among adolescent suicide attempters (Withers & Kaplan, 1987). In addition, a 3-year longitudinal study (Myers, McCauley, Calderon, & Treder, 1991) found that the experience of anger was a major variable in the prediction of later suicidality. Thus, the assessment of anger may play an important role in understanding adolescent suicidal behavior.
Despite its importance, anger has been a difficult construct to assess. Many investigators have quantified levels of anger based on either subjective means of assessment (e.g., Gispert, Wheeler, Marsh, & Davis, 1985) or retrospective chart reviews (e.g., Withers & Kaplan, 1987). Only a few studies have used psychometrically reliable measures of anger (e.g., Johnston, Rogers & Searight, 1991; Maiuro, O'Sullivan, Micheal, & Vitaliano, 1989). Another confound involves difficulties differentiating internalized anger from behavioral signs of depression. In fact, in a study designed to assess hostility and depression in relation to violent behavior in three groups of males (assaultive, suicide attempting, and nonviolent), a positive correlation was found between covert anger expression and depression severity (Maiuro et al., 1989). However, other research has supported the distinction between covert anger and depression (Johnston et al., 1991). Thus, mode of anger expression is an important component of anger assessment.
Anger can vary in its mode of expression (Spielberger, 1988), that is, the manner in which anger is manifested in different individuals. Externalized anger is expressed outwardly, toward people or things in the environment (e.g., assaulting or striking others, making verbal threats, using profanity profusely), whereas internalized anger is suppressed or directed inwardly (e.g., seetning or becoming agitated).
Aggression is a common manifestation of anger (Averill, 1983), and it is also related to suicide. One study (Cairns, Peterson, & Neckerman, 1988) found that suicidal adolescents did not differ from nonsuicidal, aggressive adolescents in terms of severity of aggressive acts, implying that many aggressive adolescents are at risk for suicide. Another study (Pfeffer, Plutchik, & Mizruchi, 1983) identified associations between suicide attempts and aggression in children.
Externalized anger may also be related to other forms of psychopathology, such as substance abuse (Milgram, 1993). Further, alcohol abuse has been found to be a very strong predictor of suicidal behavior (Pfeffer et al., 1988). In addition, substance abuse has been found to be more closely associated with suicide attempts than with suicidal ideation in children and adolescents (Kosky, Silburn, & Zubrik, 1990; Hoberman & Garfinkel, 1988).
High levels of externalized anger have been reported to be associated with lower levels of depression. In a study by Apter and colleagues (1991), two groups were matched on demographic variables as well as risk for suicide, differing only in terms of violence levels. In the nonviolent group, there was a high correlation between sadness and risk for suicide. There was no such correlation for the violent suicidal group. There was also a low prevalence of affective disorders in the violent group. These findings suggest that either severe depression or high levels of aggression signal risk for suicidal behavior. In another study, depression and hopelessness were found to be related to internalized anger but not to externalized anger in a sample of adolescent suicide attempters (Lehnert, Overholser, & Spirito, 1994).
A day after the New York Times published the story above, the Washington Post recounted additional facts about Mr. Williams, all known to co-workers and supervisors, which would have been crucial to any evaluation of Mr. Williams’ mental state before the murder-suicide:
Five Killed, Eight Wounded at Miss. Factory
Gunman Targets Co-Workers Before Committing Suicide
By Manuel Roig-Franzia
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 9, 2003; Page A03
http://www.genocidewatch.org/HateCrimesJuly9Miss.htm
When he overheard a black man complimenting a white woman a couple of years ago on the factory floor, Doug Williams stepped up to the man and, using a racial slur, angrily told him blacks had no business being with blond women, witnesses recalled today.
When a black colleague complained last month that the white protective shoe-covering Mr. Williams was wearing on his head looked like a Ku Klux Klansman's pointy hood, and his boss at the Lockheed Martin aircraft parts plant a few miles outside of Meridian told him to take the bootie off his head or go home, Mr. Williams went home, company officials said today.
On Monday, Mr. Williams, 48, told his father he was ticked off that he would have to attend an ethics and sensitivity training course the next morning, the authorities say. A few minutes after it began, Mr. Williams left the room, returned from his pickup truck armed to the teeth, and began blasting away at close range at people who had known him, and known of his quick temper and simmering hatred, for years.
In less than 10 minutes, the authorities said, five people were dead, including at least one who had been offended by the bootie stunt three weeks earlier. An additional nine were wounded, at least one trying to wrest a shotgun away from Mr. Williams, as he stalked through the plant floor, shooting at some people, letting others live, following no discernible pattern.
At last, he came upon Shirley J. Price, the girlfriend he lived with, who begged Mr. Williams to stop, the authorities said. He did, but only after turning his shotgun around and firing one last shot, at his own upper left chest. He fell and died before her.
Co-workers said Mr. Williams's racial prejudice, along with his short temper, were well known inside the plant, which makes parts for C-130J Hercules transports and vertical stabilizers for F-22 Raptor jets.
Tonight, the president of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Dain Hancock, provided what few details were held in Mr. Williams's personnel file, dating to his hiring in 1984. From those details and interviews with the authorities and co-workers, a picture emerged of a hard-working but troublesome, troubled employee who had already come to the attention of officials at the company's headquarters in Fort Worth, Tex.
In December 2001, when co-workers say Mr. Williams confronted the black male co-worker for complimenting the white woman, Mr. Hancock said the incident was recorded in Mr. Williams's personnel file. He was described as making threatening remarks to the man. He was suspended and sent for professional anger-management counseling for two weeks at a psychological facility in Meridian, Mr. Hancock said.
Mr. Williams was then cleared for work and was monitored for a year afterward. ''By all indications, he had changed remarkably,'' Mr. Hancock said.
The incident on June 12 involving Mr. Williams's protective gear did not get written up, Mr. Hancock said, because the man who complained to a supervisor wanted to remain anonymous. Mr. Hancock said that Mr. Williams, in a ''playful mood,'' had denied meaning anything racially inflammatory by wearing the bootie, and claimed instead that he had been ''hazing'' a new employee, also white, by making him also wear one on his head.
But when Mr. Williams refused to comply with the supervisor's order to remove it, he was told to leave until he was ready to follow instructions. He did not come back for five or six days, Mr. Hancock said.
Janice Jenkins, a senior shop steward of the plant's machinists' union, which Mr. Williams elected not to join, said workers at the plant wore the white Tyvek gear to protect their clothing and hair from paint, dirt and sprayed lubricant. She said no head coverings were available, so Mr. Williams put a shoe covering on his head. Some workers laughed, but a few black workers, among them Sam Cockrell, objected, and one went to a supervisor.
On Tuesday morning, Mr. Williams showed up at the training session reluctantly, witnesses said. But when he was seated at a table with three black men -- Brad Bynum, Alvin Collier and Mr. Cockrell -- ''he got up and left and said, 'You all can handle this,' '' said Brenda Dubose, who was wounded.
When Mr. Williams returned minutes later and began firing, a white co-worker, Micky Fitzgerald, spoke up to stop him.
''Micky Fitzgerald was in the wrong place at the wrong time,'' Ms. Jenkins said. ''He stood up and he says, 'Doug, you really don't want to do this.' Doug says, 'Yeah, I want to do this.' ''
He then shot Mr. Fitzgerald fatally in the face, she said.
After Mr. Williams shot up the training room a first time, he walked onto the factory floor, where he killed three people and wounded two, said Sheriff Billy Sollie of Lauderdale County. At some point Mr. Williams returned to the training room, but those who had not been killed now played dead. Mr. Williams left again -- and this time, the survivors barricaded the door.
One co-worker, Pete Threatt, tried to stop Mr. Williams but was thrown aside ''like a rag doll,'' Sheriff Sollie said. And as Mr. Williams was reloading, Mr. Collier, already shot in the left midsection and right shoulder, grabbed for his shotgun, according to Mr. Collier's relatives.
Struggling for control of the gun, Mr. Williams finally pulled the trigger and blew a hole in Mr. Collier's hand. By today, Mr. Collier had been through three operations and lost two fingers, but doctors were trying to save his hand, said one of his 22 sisters and eight brothers, many of whom had driven down in a convoy from Tunica, Miss., to take turns by his side.
Mr. Williams left a son and daughter, both in their early 20's, from a marriage that ended in divorce in the 1980's. Several of his relatives declined to be interviewed, as did Ms. Price, with whom he shared a double-wide mobile home nestled against the woods along a two-mile-long dirt road just east of Meridian.
Sheriff Sollie said Mr. Williams, who had taken to working Sundays and frequent overtime shifts, had not always been sleeping there lately, but he did not know why. This morning, chickens roamed the yard, five old cars were parked under the pine trees out back, and a kiddie pool and jungle gym lay unused in the shade. A man who did not identify himself came outside only to ask visitors to leave.
Many of the workers at the plant were religious people, and through them, it seemed, nearly everyone in this tight-knit city of 40,000 was touched in one way or another by the shootings. Charlie Miller, 58, who was killed, owned his own masonry company but had returned to the plant full-time in March. He was also the pastor of the First Tabernacle Church of God. Charles Scott, 54, who was wounded, is a deacon at 31st Street Baptist Church. And Mr. Cockrell, 46, who was killed, was a part-time chaplain at the county jail.
This afternoon, disbelieving co-workers and their relatives were still comparing notes about Mr. Williams. The family of Lynette McCall, 47, who was killed, said she had felt she was a target of Mr. Williams because she was black. But she put up a brave face, her daughter, Sharita, said.
''She had told my dad, 'Don't worry about me, because I work in an area with a lot of metal, and if anything happens I can jump behind that,' '' she said.
Based on the above, had a psychiatrist interviewed Mr. Williams, he might also have discovered that:
1. Mr. Williams believed that black men and white woman should not interact socially.
2. For Mr. Williams, observing interactions between black men and white women was so disturbing and distressing that he physically confronted and verbally abused others in the workplace to prevent such interaction, even after having been ordered by supervisors to refrain from doing so. (Fully half of color-aroused hate crimes share the same motivation.)
3. In the workplace Mr. Williams expressed color-aroused feelings using symbols of hatred such as a (Klu Klux Klan hood) that are typical of those who engage in criminal acts motivated by extreme hatred.
4. Mr. Williams risked his employment through color-aroused insubordination.
5. Mr. Williams’ emotional reaction to interracial interaction was so strong that he could not or would not control his behavioral response to this stimulus when aroused, even in the workplace where consistently disruptive behavior resulted in discipline could result in dismissal.
6. Mr. Williams had previously been repeatedly suspended for threatening color-aroused behavior, and was obligated to attend a two-week anger-management training.
Before we submit this case to our structured evaluation for ECEIBD, we make reference to an editorial written by the local Mississippi newpaper immediately afterward, arguing with additional critical facts that Mr. Williams’ behavior was so “extreme” prior to the murder-suicide that his ultimate actions were “foreseeable” and preventable.
Structured Steps of ECEIBD Analysis
List verbal declarations, statements and exclamations raising ECEIBD concern (e.g. expressions of anger, hate, envy, jealousy, vigilance, opposition in association skin-color stimuli)1
List symbolic expressions raising ECEIBD concern (cross burning, wearing of clothing or tattoos traditionally symbolic of color-aroused animosity and/or opposition)
List expressions of emotion raising ECEIBD concern (e.g. expressions of anger, hate, envy, jealousy, vigilance, opposition in association with skin-color stimuli)
List expressions of ideation raising ECEIBD concern (e.g. color-associated animosity superiority, privilege, impunity, or any emotion perceived as having been aroused or appearing in the presence of a skin-color cue.)
List overt acts or behaviors raising ECEIBD concern (e.g. spitting, changed posture,
List subject’s corroborating physiological changes (or lack thereof) in the presence of skin-color stimulus (if known), including changes in pulse, heart rate, flushing, perspiration in the palms or otherwise, light-headedness, rapid breath or shortness of breath, etc.)
List consequences to subject resulting from actions aroused in association with skin-color stimulus.
List arrests, convictions, court-involvement, punishments and restrictions arising in association with skin-color.
List patient’s impairments and/or crises in major life areas.
List patient’s interpersonal, occupational, social and political difficulties perceived, expressed or presented, with particularly specificity for those that have raised concern in the patient, therapist or others with regard to the possibility of skin-color-arousal.
Determine whether the feelings are extreme (would be considered extreme in the context of another mental illness and/or are persistent and/or pronounced and have or might well tend to lead the patient into unlawful or extreme behaviors or have caused marked distress or impairment in the patient or in his interactions in one or more areas of life).
Determine whether the thoughts are extreme (would be considered extreme in the context of another mental illness and/or are obsessive, compulsive or tend toward, motivate or “authorize” the patient to commit unlawful acts or engage in behaviors that have or may well cause significant impairment of the patient or in his interactions in one or more areas of life.
1 “In association with skin-color stimuli” means “in the presence of” or “when thinking about” skin color stimuli or “in association with presence or perception of skin-color stimuli”.
In evaluating symptoms, it is crucial that they evaluator avoid subjective judgements by (1) specifying the presence or absence of signs and objectively observable symptoms and consequences in each of the above areas; (2) determining the severity of any signs and symptoms, including (3) determining whether the symptoms arised in association or in response to color-cues; (4) determining whether each symptom is color-aroused; (5) evaluating and specifying the functional limitations imposed and consequences suffered because of symptoms in order to determine (4) whether the symptoms are truly extreme as defined above; and finally, (5) determining each symptoms is color-aroused. If the symptoms are not color-aroused, then the person different has a different mental illness and standard techniques for differential diagnosis should be applied. ECEIBD may be co-morbid with another mental illness and emotions, ideation and behavior symptomatic of ECEIBD may be symptomatic of other mental illnesses as well. Emotional, ideational and behavioral symptoms that would be severe if present in another mental illness are severe if present in ECEIBD.
If the patient has emotions, ideation and/or behaviors that are extreme as defined above then the patient has a severe mental illness. If the emotions, ideation and/or behavior are color-aroused, then the patient has Extreme Color-Aroused Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder.
http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/2003-07-08-Doug-Williams-Miss-07-09.htm
EDITORIAL - A tragedy that could have been prevented Thursday July 17, 2003
by DM Editorial Board
July 09, 2003
Our View - Doug Williams' shooting spree in Meridian could have been prevented.
A lesson should be taken from Tuesday's shooting spree at Lockheed Martin's Meridian plant. Doug Williams was known by his coworkers as a staunch racist. He repeatedly made racial threats against black workers at the plant.
He was clearly unstable.
So perhaps what's even more tragic than the families that lost mothers, fathers, sons and daughters is the fact that gunman Doug Williams' killing spree likely could have been prevented.
This is a man who bragged to line-mates about his desire to kill people, telling one, according to The Clarion-Ledger, that he knew he was "capable of doing it."
Some Lockheed Martin workers even said Williams was the first person to come to mind when they'd heard what had happened in the morning hours Tuesday.
Clearly, the warning signs for disaster were present in Meridian, yet appropriate measures were never taken to report or stop the harassment Williams was inflicting on some of his coworkers. Instead, he remained employed by the plant; and security was so lax, Williams was able to sneak a small arsenal in to act out his sick scheme.
A man in camouflage bearing a shotgun and a rifle and allowed to walk right into a factory run by the nation's largest defense contractor is outrageous and unacceptable.
Threats of murder or destruction, no matter how innocently intended, have no place in today's society.
The only real solution is to turn to a zero-tolerance policy on anything that can be construed as a threat on someone's life.
It's the same painful lesson we learned after the Pearl, Paducah and Columbine school killings. It's the same painful lesson we learned after the Sept. 11 attacks. It should have been applied to the workplace environment long ago.
Mississippians continue to fight the racist stereotype with which they are commonly tagged. It is discouraging for the rest of the country to assume this racist behavior serves as an accurate depiction of the views of all Mississippi citizens, when in fact it does not.
It's just that: extreme.
The DM Editorial Board is composed of Editor Laura Houston, Managing Editor Suzanne McKay, English major Joel Moore and Online Editor Joy Douglas.
http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/2003-07-08-Doug-Williams-Miss-07-09.htm
Were Mr. Williams symptoms characteristic of ECEIBD?
In most cases, competent psychiatric diagnoses are based on the statements of the patient and observation of the psychiatrist with useful reference made to reports from family, friends, co-workers and others. A close analysis of this case demonstrates that the elements of extreme color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior here constituted ECEIBD mental disorder. In this case, we cannot interview the decedent, we are able to consider the individual’s own reported statements as well as the observations of co-workers and supervisors.
Of course, “a forensic evaluation is not simply a matter of reviewing a list of symptoms and establishing a diagnosis. It is, rather, a finely tuned process that attempts to achieve an in-depth understanding of a person. The process includes a review of the individual's personal history, family history, his or her own developmental history (including school history), interpersonal functioning, vocational functioning, employment history, medical history, psychiatric history, role functioning in different areas and, finally, a review of his or her current cognitive and emotional state.”
To the extent that those areas are addressed in press reports, they are reflected in our analysis; however, our perspective is admittedly limited here to the details reported. That said, to make a posthumous forensic diagnosis of ECEIBD, we must first identify the emotions and ideation that precipitated the disordered behavior and we must determine whether these symptoms were color-aroused. If we determine that Mr. Williams did show color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior, then we still must determine whether the symptoms were sufficiently extreme and persistent to constitute a mental illness. By “extreme”, we mean that the symptoms would have to be sufficiently pronounced to impair Mr. Williams in one or more areas of his life.
Recent research indicates that, particularly with anxiety disorders such as phobias, structured interviews and analysis leads to correct diagnosis much more often. As one researcher focusing on anxiety disorders has observed, “"If you can define your patients by the full range of symptoms they have instead of just focusing on the major complaints, you have a better chance of understanding how these symptoms come together in nature in a normal population. Then you have information that can feed back into a revision of DSM."
Certainly, we would all have preferred that Mr. Williams seek actual psychiatric treatment during his lifetime to address rather than speculate posthumously as to the nature of his condition. If he were alive, we would certainly advocate first and foremost that he engage in psychiatric treatment. Yet, to prevent other such tragic cases and offer help to people such as Mr. Williams who still live amongst us, we must learn what we can from these cases forensically. It is all too easy to second-guess the judgments of any profession based upon “20-20 hindsight”. To determine posthumously whether Mr. Williams had ECEIBD, we must imagine that we are interviewing and assessing Mr. Williams during his lifetime using only the information that was apparent to others present or would reasonably have been adduced from an intake interview.
First of all, in making an ECEIBD diagnosis, we consider all unlawful color-aroused behavior to be extreme unless it reflects reasonable goals of the individual pursued in a reasonably adaptive manner and in the absence of less violent and destructive lawful alternatives. For example, in the absence of the right to vote for changed integration policies, a considered decision by a person to engage in a structured non-violent sit-in at a lunch counter might be reasonable although unlawful, because it pursues the reasonable goal of integration using a non-violent alternative that minimizes unreasonable consequences for the individual and others. However, pursuing the same goal by shooting others at random based on color could not be reasonably expected to achieve the goals of the individual, and would not be the least violent and destructive alternative. A person who hates black people and kills them is likely to be imprisoned in close quarters with even more of those people whom he hates the most, so his solution cannot be considered to be adaptive and must be considered irrational and “extreme”.
Although the merits of violent versus non-violent change may be discussed at length academically, yet a cursory analysis of most violent and unlawful acts using the above analytical framework reveals that such a discussion is not at all applicable in the vast majority of cases of color-aroused illegality. Most unlawful color-aroused acts are not committed in the pursuit of lawful or reasonable goals, cannot reasonably be expected to achieve the purposes of the offender, and are demonstrably not the least violent courses of action available to the offender. Unlawful ECEIBD acts are by definition maladaptive because they expose the individual to societal sanctions without aiding the individual in resolving his conflicts.
Even to a layman, Mr. Williams clearly would seem to manifest “disordered” behavior, which Webster’s defines as “not functioning in a normal orderly healthy way”. That is why he was ordered to attend anger management therapy for two weeks instead of reporting to work, because his behavior was grossly abnormal and disruptive in the context of his workplace. But did he have a cognizable mental illness? Specifically, Did Mr. Williams suffer from ECEIBD?
Did Mr. Williams experience color arousal?
Everyone perceives the color of others, just as we perceive the color of apples and oranges in order to distinguish between them. If we hate oranges because we believe them to be low in vitamin C, it is not our perception of color that is problematic but instead our ideation associated with color and the resulting emotions. If color-blindness were a reasonable solution to the problem of color-aroused discrimination, then an employer might reasonably require all employees or all affected employees to wear glasses at work that prevented them from distinguishing one color from another.
Or our eyes could be surgically altered or removed to achieve the same result. If these solutions seem extreme, it is because the problem lies not in our ability to perceive color but in the ideation and emotion attached to that perception. The problem derives not from our ability to perceive color but from our thinking and emotions in association with color perception. Our desire to alter our physical senses in order to alter our ideas, our desire to be “color-blind” simply reflects how desperately out of control our ideas and emotions are. A person who would have to be insane to damage his eyes in order to stop “seeing things” or to damage his ears in order not to “hear voices”. Yet our desire to be “color-blind” with respect to skin-color is indicative of the degree to which our thoughts and feelings are out of control, even within bodies whose five physical senses function normally.
Some observers argue that color-blindness is impossible, but it is not. It can be achieved through surgical alteration of the eyes, blinders or special glasses. Before resorting to these extreme measures, we would have to apply the same test to this strategy that we apply to all color-aroused behavior: Does it reflect reasonable goals of the individual pursued in a reasonably adaptive manner and in the absence of less violent and destructive alternatives. Given a choice, between losing part of our vision and engaging in therapy to correct our cognition, most of us would prefer the therapy alternative.
Returning now to Mr. Williams, it is apparent that he does perceive color-arousal, because he says and because he is persistently and extremely aroused to anger and fear in association with that perception.
Was Mr. Williams’ color-arousal “extreme”?
“Phobias involve persistent, unrealistic, intense anxiety and fear in response to specific external situations. People who have a phobia avoid situations that trigger their anxiety and fear, or they endure them with great distress.” Mr. Williams’ reaction to the perception of blacks in his environment, even when they were not harming him in a manner that others could perceive, was of the intensity and irrationality associated with phobias and involved functional limitation, preventing him from engaging successfully in work activities. Therefore his color-arousal was extreme.
Did Mr. Williams have extreme color-aroused emotions?
Mr. Williams’ anger toward people with darker skin was extreme its duration, lasting over a number of years. It was not associated with any quality of the targeted individuals’ interaction with him, except their presence and the color of their skin, and his awareness that they were interacting socially with others who were of a different color. Mr. Williams aversion to seeing people interact with one another heterogeneously, even at work, was so extreme that he risked losing his employment in order to physically confront and threaten individuals who engaged in this behavior. Although aversion to heterochromatic interaction is not abnormal statistically speaking, this level of reaction is decidedly inconsistent with societal norms and statistically abnormal as well as maladaptive for this individual. So, Mr. Williams did have extreme emotions and they were aroused by perceptions of color.
Was Mr. Williams’ fear of blacks and whites interacting socially an “extreme” fear?
Webster’s defines “concern” as a “marked interest or regard usually arising through a personal tie or relationship,” and “an uneasy state of blended interest, uncertainty, and apprehension”, “a care, trouble, or distress.” Webster’s defines “fear” as “an unpleasant often strong emotion caused by anticipation or awareness of danger,” “anxious concern.” Although many people in our society are concerned about the merits of interacting and dating across color lines, it is nonetheless abnormal to be as fearful and as preoccupied as Mr. Williams was. When a fear of innocuous social interactions – whether one’s own or someone else’s – is so strong that it causes one to confront others physically and threaten co-workers with death, then this can be said to be an “extreme” fear.
Indeed, this fear manifested in a severe and persistent apprehensive hyper-vigilance that became obsessive and compulsive, compelling him to confront others whenever his fear was activated by the dreaded skin color-cue. [Insert and apply DSM-IV definition of obsessive compulsive disorder.] So, Mr. Williams did have extreme color-aroused fear.
Did Mr. Williams have color-aroused extreme ideation?
Mr. Williams believed that blacks and whites should not interact, even in the workplace. Such a conviction in isolation may not be terribly unusual statistically. However, Mr. Williams also believed he should and could enforce strict rules of segregation with respect to others’ interactions as well. Effectively, he gave his life to enforce the proposition that one individual may coerce and obligate his white and black co-workers not to interact with one another. This belief set him on a collision course with the policies of his employer and with Federal and state laws that require workers to conduct their work activities with others irrespective of color.
Indeed Mr. Williams thoughts may have had an obsessive-compulsive quality if they were characterized by the presence of recurring, [unwanted] intrusive ideas, images, or impulses that may even seem silly, weird, nasty, or horrible (obsessions) to the person experiencing them, accompanied by urges to do something that will relieve the discomfort caused by the obsession (compulsions). Mr. Williams had persistent thoughts that all people of different colors should not interact, and these thoughts were accompanied by persistent unlawful actions at work that impaired his ability to function in the workplace. As such, he did have color-aroused ideation that was extreme. Although Mr. Williams was entitled to his ideation in a free country, it was extreme when it compelled him to engage in behavior that was both unlawful and threatened his own job security and physical wellbeing.
Indeed, this ideation even without outward behavior toward others could be considered extreme if it was sufficiently intrusive to impair Mr. Williams’ functioning. Aside from the belief that black men and white women should be forcibly prevented from interacting socially with one another, we can only speculate deduce and surmise as to other facets of his ideation. Was maintaining a homogenous workforce in this way perceived as more and more important than keeping his job?
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Obsessive-compulsive disorder is characterized by the presence of recurring, unwanted, intrusive ideas, images, or impulses that may even seem silly, weird, nasty, or horrible (obsessions) to the person experiencing them, accompanied by urges to do something that will relieve the discomfort caused by the obsession (compulsions).
Obsessive-compulsive disorder occurs about equally in men and women and affects about 1.5% of the population during any 6-month period.
The obsessions are usually related to a sense of harm, risk, or danger. Common obsessions include concerns about contamination (for example, worrying that touching doorknobs will cause disease), doubts (for example, worrying that the front door was not locked), fear of loss, and fear of physically injuring someone.
More than 95% of people with obsessive-compulsive disorder feel compelled to perform rituals—repetitive, purposeful, intentional acts. Rituals used to control an obsession include washing or cleaning to be rid of contamination, checking to allay doubt, hoarding to prevent loss, and avoiding the people who might become objects of aggression. Most rituals, such as excessive hand washing or repeated checking to make sure a door has been locked, can be observed. Other rituals, such as repetitive counting or making statements intended to diminish danger, cannot be observed. Obsessions are not always accompanied by compulsions.
Most people with obsessive-compulsive disorder are aware that their obsessive thoughts do not reflect actual risks and that their compulsive behaviors are ineffective. Obsessive-compulsive disorder, therefore, differs from psychotic disorders, in which people lose contact with reality. Obsessive-compulsive disorder also differs from obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (see Personality Disorders: Obsessive-Compulsive Personality), in which specific personality traits are defined (for example, being a perfectionist). Because people with obsessive-compulsive disorder are aware that their compulsive behaviors are excessive to the point of being bizarre and are afraid they will be embarrassed or stigmatized, they often perform their rituals secretly, even though the rituals may occupy several hours each day.
About one third of people with obsessive-compulsive disorder are depressed at the time the disorder is diagnosed. Altogether, two thirds become depressed at some point.
Treatment
Exposure therapy is effective in treating obsessive-compulsive disorder. Exposure therapy involves exposing the person to the situations or people that trigger obsessions, rituals, or discomfort. The person's discomfort or anxiety will gradually diminish if he prevents himself from performing the ritual during repeated exposure to the provocative stimulus. In this way, the person learns that rituals are unnecessary for decreasing discomfort. The improvement usually persists for years, probably because people who have mastered this self-help approach continue to practice it as a way of life without much effort after formal treatment has ended.
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and clomipramineSOME TRADE NAMES
ANAFRANIL
, a tricyclic antidepressant, are effective. Certain other antidepressant drugs are also used, but much less often. Many experts believe that a combination of behavior therapy and drug therapy is the best treatment for people with obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Psychodynamic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis have generally not been effective for people with obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Did Mr. Williams’ Extreme Color-Aroused Emotion and Ideation Lead to Extreme Color-Aroused Behavior?
To make an ECEIBD diagnosis, the color-aroused feelings must be sufficiently extreme to be lead to extremes of behavior. Many people feel antagonisms toward others aroused by their skin-color or for other factors. What distinguishes normal levels from abnormal and extreme may be the level of these feelings, the degree of insight and the ability to control the manner in which these feelings become manifest in behaviors. Many people adopt a “live and let live” attitude toward those whom they dislike. Others avoid those they dislike because of color and/or may be subtly hostile toward them. The unlawfulness of the determination to physically confront, intimidate and kill others based on their color is an expression of the abnormality of this behavior.
Mr. Williams made clear though his own declarations to coworkers and supervisors that it was extreme color-aroused emotion and ideation that motivated his workplace behavior. By storming out of a sensitivity training to murder his co-workers and then commit suicide, Mr. Williams case implores us to acknowledge and address this extreme color-aroused psychopathology.
What can we learn from Doug Williams?
In 98.5% of cases considered to be “hate crimes”, it is the offenders own “negative comments hurtful words and abusive language” at the time of commission of the crime that enables us to make the link between color-aroused emotion, ideation and action. (p.3). Hate crime offenders are “wearing their feelings on their sleeves” and effectively imploring society to respond appropriately.
The Times article states the Mr. Williams had a history of persistent anger expressed through color-associated taunts in the workplace. One witness said Williams “had threatened to kill black employees and had regularly used racial epithets.” He “had a reputation for racism and had threatened to kill people before. People who knew and worked with Mr. Williams perceived him as someone with persistent anger and inappropriate and unlawful angry behavior (workplace threats, harassment and intimidation) who threatened to act upon his feelings in the most inappropriately extreme possible ways. It seems reasonable to conclude that Mr. Williams had a pervasive, consuming and persistent anger that was aroused when he perceived the color of others in his environment. Because there were many blacks in his environment, his anger was persistent.
According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, for example, “about 3 in 10 victims of hate crimes committed by whites attributed the crime to race based on the offenders statements, while an equal number of victims, 3 in 10, ascribed the attack to characteristics of the associates of the victim, such as the associates skin color.” Mr. Williams fell squarely within a group of offenders whose cue to engage in violence is simply observing blacks and whites interacting with one another. Might psychiatrists improve the quality of diagnosis and treatment for extremely color-aroused persons by employing such empirical data in conjunction with psychiatric techniques?
Why, exactly, did Mr. Williams object so strongly to the presence of brown-skinned workers in the workplace and interaction between black men and white women? To view the answers as either self-evident or non-existent would lead us to the conclusion that Mr. Bowman was not ill (but of couse, he was) or that his illness is so incomprehensible as to be without cure. Fortunately, Mr. Williams’ disordered behavior becomes more comprehensible when we study the case of Dusty Bowman (below).
Typical of those with an obsessive anger, Mr. Williams’ feelings and actions fed into cycle in which he acted out his feelings inappropriately, was disciplined, and became even angrier as a result without insight into his own role in his difficulties.
Finally, when ordered to the final sensitivity training he acted out in rage by killing himself and others.
Arguably, had the employer obtained and followed competent recommendations from a psychiatrist, the tragic workplace violence could have been avoided. Had a psychiatrist evaluated Mr. Williams, would a psychiatrist have recommended a homochromatic sensitivity workshop as treatment for a man who had already returned violently angry from two weeks of anger management therapy? The referral to sensitivity training seems to have been an inappropriate intervention because it did not correspond with his overtly displayed level of anger. If anything, Mr. Williams was oversensitive prior to the training. Had his supervisor referred him for competent psychiatric evaluation, where diagnostic tools could be used to distinguish between mild, moderate and extreme color-aroused disorder, then it might have been discovered beforehand that sensitivity training was an inappropriate and counterproductive intervention.
According to the APA publication “Treating Panic Disorder: A Quick Reference Guide”, panic disorder can often be successfully treated with panic-focused cognitive-behavioral therapies, individually or in groups, “administered in weekly sessions for approximately 12 weeks” in combination with anti-depressant medications and benzodiazepines for early symptom control.
At present, there are no generally accepted diagnostic tools to distinguish those who are dangerously color-aroused from those who present no danger of physical violence. Had such diagnostic tools been available with recommendations for treatment based on levels of dysfunction and dangerousness, it is unlikely that Mr. Williams would have been selected for participation in a non-therapeutic mixed group sensitivity training. However, the Mr. Williams supervisor lacked diagnostic tools to distinguish between a man who needed a two hour “consciousness raising” seminar and a man in need of urgent psychiatric evaluation for dangerousness to self and others.
If the employer had referred Mr. Williams for a psychiatric evaluation, the psychiatrist might have identified Mr. Williams’ obsessive thinking and prescribed anti-depressants and anxiolytics. Might such a treatment have facilitated Mr. Williams’ reinsertion into the workplace after the intensive anger management treatment? Might a psychiatrist also have evaluated whether Mr. Williams’ constant struggle with extreme phobic color-aroused obsessions ultimately lead to a co-morbid clinical depression?
But isn’t Doug Williams’ case really isolated? The 2,500 hate-oriented sites on the Web. The following article and many others like it posted on the Internet by white supremacists after Mr. Williams’ murder-suicide death indicate that there are many others who suffer from potentially dangerous color-aroused psychopathology. In posthumous support of Doug Williams, a white nationalist wrote the following to a white superiority website:
Matthew Proulx
I plan to put my pride into effect by not associating with any people who are against it.
Use of symbols touted to build strength, identity
VANCOUVER - Doug Williams killed himself because he was forced to work with different ethnic groups. That's pretty bad. I've had to work with them, although I don't like to. I have to work to survive. My plans for the future are that I would like to be part of a pro-white group. I have a few people I know who agree with me, already.
I want to show my pride. I see all different ethnic groups all about their "pride," so I decided to show people that I'm proud to be white. It was my own choice. I wouldn't have done it just because somebody told me to. I think that it is good to show symbols of pride.
I see myself as winning our fight and actually being in charge in my own country and this world, in days to come. After all, that is what I'm fighting for. The sense of pride that I have I want to share with others. I ain't afraid if someone wants to call me a "racist," go right ahead. I'm better than any rapper. I needed to make a political statement. Any Nationalist should be fit, first off. It goes with the Movement.
Although the above editorial writer says that he would not kill anyone to prevent integration, yet he admires Doug Williams’ and his determination to avoid working with black people. He may express through writing some of what Mr. Williams did through his acts.
Unfortunately, we lack direct evidence of other aspects of Mr. Williams’ ideational framework, the latticework “supporting” and animating his beliefts. When seeing a client such as Mr. Williams in therapy, it is of the utmost importance to precisely understand his cognition in order to help him repair it. For example, we do not know if Williams believed that all whites are inherently superior to all blacks, or whether he personally felt inferior or superior to blacks. Although we have Mr. Williams’ own statement that a black man should not interact with a blonde woman, the reports do not explain why he believed this to be so. Fortunately, the case of Dusty Bowman (below) sheds some light on these mysteries.
Dusty Bowman was sentenced to a jail term after an acute attack of ECEIBD. The following Cincinatti Post artice further illuminates the contours of this disorder, for example, that whites are nearly as likely as blacks to become victims of ECEIBD-inspired violence. This case also anecdotally confirms statistical evidence that a considerable part of color-aroused violence is committed with the intent of discouraging people of different colors from voluntarily engaging in social contacts.
Man gets six months for [color-aroused ] assault
Cincinatti Post, March 16, 2005
http://www.cincypost.com/2005/03/16/bowm031605.html
An avowed white supremacist will spend six months in jail for assaulting his girlfriend after an African-American man nodded at her.
The woman, not being named by The Post because of the crime against her, testified Tuesday that she was living with Dusty Bowman last May when they went to a fast-food restaurant downtown.
While in line there, she testified at Bowman's Tuesday trial, an African-American man working at the restaurant's grill looked up and nodded at her, which triggered a line of angry accusations from Bowman.
Under questioning from assistant Hamilton County Prosecutor J. Bartley Cosgrove, the woman said she tired of Bowman's questions and lied -- saying she not only knew the man but had had a sexual relationship with him -- to get Bowman to shut up.
Instead, she said, Bowman took her back to their home, stripped her and, as he was ranting against blacks, sexually assaulted her.
"He told me if I said anything or did anything, he would cut my throat because he had his knife open," the woman testified.
Bowman sexually assaulted her "for five to 10 minutes," she said.
For the next two weeks, Bowman never left her alone, she said, even checking restaurant bathrooms after her to ensure she hadn't left a note seeking help.
"He wouldn't let me out of his sight, so I couldn't go and tell," she testified.
Two weeks later, she said, Bowman finally left the apartment and she ran upstairs to her landlady and told her of the abuse.
"It was my opportunity to go, and I took it," she testified. "I said, 'To hell with it. I'm tired of being abused,' so I left."
She also told police of the abuse.
After Bowman was arrested, he consistently denied he had violated the woman. But he gave police a taped statement that was a rambling racist rant, expressing his hatred for blacks and Jews, using the crudest terms.
Bowman was indicted for rape, a charge that carries a 10-year prison sentence.
Ironically, Bowman's case was randomly assigned to Common Pleas Court Judge Melba Marsh, the only black female judge handling such cases.
Probably because Bowman's taped statement to police could have swayed a jury against him, Bowman chose to have the judge hear his case without a jury.
Instead of the rape charge, though, Marsh found Bowman guilty of assault.
She immediately sentenced him to six months in jail.
Had Dusty Bowman been referred for evaluation for ECEIBD in connection with his arrest and conviction, the following facts might have been revealed about his emotions, ideation and behavior:
1. Mr. Bowman strongly believed that white people are or should be superior to blacks and further that he, personally, should act to assert and enforce this superiority.
2. Mr. Bowman violently attacked someone of his own color in order to enforce color-determined rules and obligations.
3. In the view of Mr. Bowman, color-determined superiority and segregation is not merely a privilege to be enjoyed; it is a also an obligatatory social rule to be faithfully carried out, or suffer punishment at the hands of other members of the superior group. Superiority, within Mr. Bowman’s ideation framework, is a rigid social order that members of all groups are obliged to adhere to and enforce, regardless of their personal preferences. Individuals are authorized and indeed obligated to observe the social order with with the force of invective and violence against intimates and strangers alike.
4. Mr. Bowman did not believe that his superiority was merely a passive and static fact resulting from his skin color. In addition to that or instead, he believed that superiority implied a privileged social status that he, personally, must rigorously and vigilantly maintain by enforcing special rules of social interaction between blacks and whites, in this case, preventing his girlfriend from exchanging pleasantries with blacks. When the black restaurant worker exchanged said hello to Mr. Bowman’s girlfriend, the exchange threatened the social status that Mr. Bowman believed he was entitled to as a result of his skin color. People like Mr. Bowman may be extremely vigilant and antagonistic toward heterochromatic interactions wherever they occur because these interactions are perceived as posing an immediate threat to a social status that is essential to their sense of themselves. In contrast to those who view color superiority as strictly a static genetic fact, those who view it as a social status to be enforced present a greater risk of violence whenever they perceive that their superior social status is threatened. In fact, every instance in which a person of darker skin color improves or threatens to improve his condition may be seen as threatening situation requiring affirmative redress. (For anyone who believes his color-group to be superior to another, even isolated instances of success by members of the group perceived as inferior may nonetheless be ego-distonic and and cause cognitive dissonance for those who believe themselves to be superior. Even for persons who have a static understanding of superiority, it may be difficult to resist all attempts to enforce that superior when individual instances of success by the group perceived as inferior result in ego distonia, role confusion, and cognitive dissonance for those who believe themselves to be statically superior. Unfortunately, when people believe themselves to be superior (intellectually, physically or morally) they may also believe that members of the inferior group “shouldn’t succeed”, because this is consistent with their inferiority. It is but a short step from this belief to actions consistent with enforcing and implementing this view. Those who believe themselves superior may believe they have an inherent “right” to succeed and become indignant and beligerant when they fear they might not do so.)
5. Mr. Bowman believed that, because of his whiteness and/or his girlfriend’s whiteness, they should maintain rigid rules of social segregation that preclude social greetings between a black man and a white woman. When his girlfriend refused to assume her “responsibility” for enforcing these social rules, Mr. Bowman erupted in rage and violence. Not all people erupt in rage and violence when their conceptions about societal roles are contradicted. Those who do are relatively more dangerous. For instance, They are the ones who feel aroused to commit “hate crimes” when they see heterochromatic
6. For those who believe that superiority is a status is that enforced rather than static, overt public acts which force others to accept this conception may be required, and this may be and important difference between those who quietly hold themselves superior and those who manifest their beliefs publicly.
In addition, the following questions about his treatment and prognosis might well have been posed and discussed:
7. Mr. Bowman apparently confessed to police that he was a member of a white supremacist group while they were deciding how to charge him for the criminal acts in which he had engaged. Did this confession show professing his hate ideology was more important to Mr. Bowman than compliance with laws and his own freedom? If so, does this not indicate a high risk for recidivism in the absence of treatment? Was his judgment impaired?
Ideation-Based CEIBD Severity Scale
With which one of the following statements do you most agree?
1. Regardless of their skin color, I take people as individuals, deducing each person’s capabilities and characteristics from his own words and deeds and then I behave accordingly.
2. I believe that, on the whole, some groups of people are inherently better than others based on their color, and I believe that their words and actions generally will bear this out.
3. I believe that all persons of some skin-color groups are inherently superior to all persons of certain other skin-color groups.
4. I believe that some color-groups and all individuals within those groups are inherently superior to all individuals from certain other color-groups, regardless of personal characteristics, qualities or accomplishments. I believe that the superior group(s) have inherent vested social and political rights that devolve from genetic racial superiority.
5. In my view, the superiority of my color-group is a political and social status that we preserve by enforcing it through government regulations, social institutions, and business, professional and social interactions.
6. In my view, the superiority of my skin color-group is a political and social status that we preserve by enforcing it through government regulations and social institutions. However, when I see someone of another skin-color group taking rights and privileges that don’t belong to them, I get angry and I want to do whatever it takes to put them in their place. When I see people of my own skin color group treating others as if they were as good as us, I get angry at members of my own skin-color group and I want to teach them a lesson.
Explanation: Although one way of understanding the above statements is as a dichotomy between “equality” versus “superiority” , they actually represent a dichotomy between empirical judgments about individuals based on information versus ideological opinions about groups which are then applied to individuals. There are also individuals who argue that empirical proof exists for general superiority of one race compared to another. However, in the light of the lack of data to support such generalizations, they remain an ideological viewpoint in search of scientific support rather. The purpose of this text is not to advance one particular ideology over another but rather to empirically identify the psychiatric implications for emotions and behavior that result from particular ideologies and ideation.
Behavioral Implications of Outlooks Types and Outlook Rules
Outlook Types Emotional Implications Behavioral Implications
Outlook Type 1 Feelings do not vary much in interactions according to the color of the subject and other participants. Endeavors to treat people with similar characteristics similarly, regardless of their skin-color.
Outlook Type 2 May experience cognitive consonance when color-expectations are confirmed and dissonance when circumstances contradict pre-established views. May discriminate in favor of members of a skin-color group perceived as superior while discriminating against others seen as inferior based on skin color.
Outlook Type 3 Feels angry or fearful Prefers to discriminate between people according to rigid color-determined beliefs. Depending on levels of anger, fear, envy jealously
Outlook Type 4 Feels angry when persons from the group perceived as inferior attempt to partake of privileges which subjects believes are reserved to the superior group. Prefers to discriminate between people according to rigid color-determined Outlook Beliefs. Seeks observance of Outlook Rules. Depending on levels of anger, fear, envy, jealously that result from unfulfilled behavioral expectations, patient may ridicule, berate, insult, intimidate and/or assault others those who violate subject’s Outlook Rules. Patient’s antagonistic behaviors are intended to punish previous violations of Outlook Rules, deter future violations and vindicate the Outlook Rules in general.
Outlook Type 5 May discriminate between people according to color-determined Outlook Beliefs. Votes for candidates and supports political and social policies consistent with Outlook Type. May support formal and informal rules and measures that promote skin-color superiority and privilege. In his professional social and personal life, prefers to behave in ways consistent with the Outlook Type. Observes and advocates Outlook Rules when called upon.
Outlook Type 6 Prefers to discriminate between people according to rigid color-determined Outlook Beliefs. Requires other people to obey his color-determined Outlook Rules. Extreme vigilance for instances of Outlook Rule violations. Depending on levels of anger, fear, envy, jealously that result from unfulfilled behavioral expectations, patient may ridicule, berate, insult, intimidate and/or assault those who violate his Outlook Rules. Believes his own Outlook Rules take precedence over other laws and regulations and expresses extreme explosive resentment and hostility toward institutions and persons who disagree with or fail to enforce his Outlook Rules.
Did Dusty Bowman have ECEIBD?
A particular mental disorder can only be diagnosed in an individual by comparing the symptoms presented with the established symptoms that characterize a given disorder, applying clinical judgment and experience. To determine if Mr. Bowman’s particular symptoms meet those listed for ECEIBD, we carefully study his emotions, ideation and behavior, both in terms of their persistence and severity.
Did Mr. Williams experience extreme color arousal?
Unless Mr. Bowman’s symptoms were color-aroused, his actions in this instance cannot be said to be symptomatic of ECEIBD. Here, Mr. Bowman’s own behavior facitlitates our analytical task because he specifically stated that his anger was aroused by the interaction between his girlfriend and a black man because of the skin-color of the black man. He stated as much to all those present in the restaurant, as well as later to his girlfriend and in a “rant” to police that served as a confession.
Did Mr. Williams have extreme emotions?
Like Doug Williams, Dusty Bowman expressed extreme and intense color-aroused emotions including anger and fear. Was he “jealous” of white woman, in the sense that he was “intolerant of rivalry”, “hostile toward a rival or one believed to enjoy an advantage” and “vigilant in guarding [what he regarded as] a possession”?
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
jealous
One entry found for jealous.
Main Entry: jeal•ous
Pronunciation: 'je-l&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English jelous, from Old French, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin zelosus, from Late Latin zelus zeal -- more at ZEAL
1 a : intolerant of rivalry or unfaithfulness b : disposed to suspect rivalry or unfaithfulness
2 : hostile toward a rival or one believed to enjoy an advantage
3 : vigilant in guarding a possession
- jeal•ous•ly adverb
- jeal•ous•ness noun
His behavior included color and ethnicity-associated eptithets toward people with whom he had apparently had no previous contact or experience. “And the envy that drives negative prejudices in turn often comes from the inability to have what another has.” “Envy can also arise when people are conflicted about their own capabilities.” “Yet even negative prejudices that are born out of fear or envy or some other negative emotion become fully malignant only when people act on them.” “For example, a negative prejudice becomes malevolent when someone shows hostility. Or a negative prejudice becomes vicious when it leads to a physical assault.”
Did Mr. Williams have extreme color-aroused ideation?
He was determined to prevent black men and white women, particularly his girlfriend, from engaging in voluntary social interactions with one another. Like Mr. Williams, he was so highly aroused by and vigilant for signs of heterochromatic interaction in public that the increasing presence of these cues in his environment generally may have been excruciatingly painful for him.
In the restaurant, however, Mr. Bowman expressed such intense concern (fear) that his white girlfriend might be attracted to a black man or vice versa that even a social pleasantry with a member of the restaurant staff was highly threatening. Even had Bowman correctly perceived romantic interest on the part of one or both parties to this transient interaction, yet his reaction was grossly out of proportion to the cues present. His judgment seems to have been impaired, both in terms of the threat perceived and his willingness to risk his own liberty to address the perceived threat. Either he was in a constant state of very intense anger and fear, or he had a dangerous emotional lability and impulsivity. Randy Bowman was “out of control.”
Did Mr. Williams’ Extreme Color-Aroused Emotion and Ideation Lead to Extreme Color-Aroused Behavior?
What can we learn from Doug Williams?
Like 98.5% of those convicted of hate crimes, Mr. Bowman openly expressed a hate motivation at the time of his offense. Bowman, however, was not charged with a hate crime so his offenses, like many others not charged as hate crimes, will not appear among the hate crime statistics. When calculating the prevalence of ECEIBD it is important to realize that many color-aroused violent crimes, like Mr. Bowman’s, may not appear in hate crime statistics even when the offender unambiguously claims a hate motive.
Although Mr. Bowman expOf course, jealousy is a common emotion and views against heterochromatic dating are likewise widespread. Although 83 percent of adults in the US say they approve of interracial marriage (compared with 70 percent in 1986), the 17 percent (37,000,000 adults) who oppose it may feel increasingly isolated and troubled as society continues to change around them. This may lead to stress. Here we focus our discussion on who literally violently oppose heterchromatic interactions, such as Randy Bowman. What separates him from the 17 percent of other adults who share his concern is the intensity and persistence of feelings (two week imprisonment of his girlfriend) and his willingness to commit and confess to gross violations of law in opposition to others’ behavior. In committing his violent acts, Mr. Bowman made explicit through his own statements that the skin-color of the persons present was the particular cue that incited his fury. 98.5 percent of those convicted of hate crimes explicitly state their hate motivation.
http://www.prb.org/Template.cfm?Section=PRB&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=12690
U.S. Attitudes Toward Interracial Dating Are Liberalizing
by Alison Stein Wellner
(June 2005) . . . The percentage of all U.S. married couples that are interracial nearly doubled from 2.9 percent to 5.4 percent between 1990 and 2000, to a total of more than 3 million.1 And recent surveys reveal that American attitudes toward intermarriage have also steadily improved: While 70 percent of adults in 1986 said they approved of interracial marriage, that figure had climbed to 83 percent by 2003, according to a Roper Reports study.2 "We are seeing declining levels of objection to interracial marriage," says Smith.
More Than One-Half of Americans Have Interdated
Neither the Roper Report nor the General Social Survey specifically queried respondents on their attitudes or practices concerning interracial dating. But a study by George Yancey, a sociologist at the University of North Texas, found that interdating today is far from unusual and certainly more common than intermarriage.3
Yancey collected a sample of 2,561 adults age 18 and older from the Lilly Survey of Attitudes and Friendships, a telephone survey of English- and Spanish-speaking adults conducted from October 1999 to April 2000. He found that 35.7 percent of white Americans had interdated, along with 56.5 percent of African Americans, 55.4 percent of Hispanic Americans, and 57.1 percent of Asian Americans. Men and those who attended racially or ethnically integrated schools were significantly more likely to interdate . . .
http://www.prb.org/Template.cfm?Section=PRB&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=12690
References
1. Sharon M. Lee and Barry Edmonston, "New Marriages, New Families: U.S. Racial and Hispanic Intermarriage," Population Bulletin 60, no. 2 (2005).
2. RoperASW, Roper Reports 03-3 (unpublished study).
3. George Yancey, "Who Interracially Dates: An Examination of the Characteristics of Those Who Have Interracially Dated," Journal of Comparative Family Studies 33, no. 2 (2002): 177-90.
4. USA Today/Gallup Poll, "Interracial Teen Dating," October 13-20, 1997.
Gallup: Americans Overwhelmingly Favor Interracial Dating
AR Articles on Miscegenation
The Racial Revolution (May 1999)
Miscegenation (Dec. 2002)
The Tragic Mulatto (Nov. 1999)
More news stories on Miscegenation
Editor and Publisher, Oct. 11
NEW YORK—Americans of a certain age recall vividly when interracial dating was widely frowned on, and even led to the lynching of many black men. Those days have seemingly passed, however, according to a new Gallup Poll.
The results, released Tuesday, find that Americans of all races overwhelmingly support interracial dating, with younger people approving nearly unanimously.
Putting these views into action, almost half of all Americans say they have personally dated a person of a different racial/ethnic group, again with younger people in the lead.
Somewhat fewer whites than blacks accept interracial dating, but their support is still strong.
There is no longer even a double standard on the gender involved, with 71% the entire sample approving a black man dating a white woman and 75% backing a white man dating a black woman.
In all, 69% of Hispanics say they have dated someone of a different racial or ethnic group, 52% of blacks say this and 45% of whites. There is some gender difference among blacks, with 64% of African-American men saying they have dated a non-black and 42% of black women saying this.
The survey was based on polling 1,116 total adults.
Original article
(Posted on October 11, 2005)
It seems unlikely that such a heightened state of arousal and vigilance was the product of one interaction. Rather this extreme attack would be indicative of a persistent pattern of intense fear and anger over a period of months or years. “[P]rejudices are not fixed entities and, when fueled enough by fear, envy, or other negative emotions, can grow from sparks of dislike into flames of loathing and finally into conflagrations of hate.” Explore Roots of Prejudice And How It Can Be Contained, Joan Arehart-Treichel , Psychiatric News February 1, 2002, http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/37/3/13-a?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=%22prejudice%22&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1135929470924_36&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1&journalcode=psychnews
That Mr. Bowman attacked his white girlfriend to prevent her from engaging with a black man is consistent with FBI statistics that half of those attacked because of color are attacked because of the color of their associates. This means that in an increasingly integrated society, whites are increasingly at risk from other whites with ECEIBD.
The fact that Mr. Bowman confessed and indeed “ranted” about his color-aroused hatred in the context of a law enforcement interrogation into this crime offers an important window into his mental state. Apparently, he believes that it is more important to express his color-hatred than to innocent when police are deciding whether to charge him with a crime. This must lead us to question his rationality, his ability to care for his own interests and his impulsivity. Although Mr. Bowman did not kill his girlfriend in this instance, yet these factors would indicate that he might well be at risk of killing her or someone else were the same internal or external cues to be repeated.
This provides valuable information for the prevention of ECEIBD attacks. FBI statistics confirm that those most likely to commit violent ECEIBD attacks are those who openly and publicly express ECEIBD emotions and ideation. Therefore, focusing prevention efforts on these individuals may be more effective in prevention of ECEIBD offenses such as hate crimes.
This case also illustrates extreme arousal and vigilance to color-associated cues
White men expressed considerable concern that black men might rape white women. The above story of kidnapping of a girlfriend indicates a fear not that she would be raped, but that she would voluntarily engage in sex with a man of another race. As noted above, “For victims reporting white offenders, about 3 in 10 attributed the crime to race, 3 in 10 to characteristics of the associates of the victim [such as the skin color of their associates], 3 in 10 to their ethnicity, and 3 in 10 to sexual orientation.” (p. 7) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
We all are aware of examples of people at both extremes and in the middle of this continuum of affect and behavior. We all agree that grossly distorted perceptions wholly divorced from reality are often dangerous. What is needed is a scientifically valid means to diagnose and treat those whose perceptual, affective and behavioral conditions are manifested in violence or whose disorders
What should be the role of Psychiatry? If a child who is involved in the above white-supremacist websites comes to the attention of school authorities, should they interview him to determine if he fits additional diagnostic criteria for ECEIBD? Or should they tell him his behavior is “normal”, even though he is bullying other students based on their color? What interventions might be appropriate, and what might be the potential outcomes without intervention? If he shows the signs of anger and depression mentioned by Ms. Singer, above, are the color-antagonistic symptoms relevant or even causative in this context? Would fantasies about acts that would constitute hate crimes be relevant to the clinical picture?
By raising these questions here and offering structured recommendations for diagnosis and treatment modalities in subsequent chapters, we hope to encourage psychiatrists to accept for treatment clients who present symptoms such as those of Mr. Williams, secure in the knowledge that the illness they present is both diagnosable and treatable.
Cycles of Antagonism – ECEIBD as an Interpersonal and Societal Disorder
Although any color perception can lead to ideas, emotions and behavior, we are concerned here with color perception focus on color perception that eventually has lead to extreme behavior, both because it is the most problematic and because it is most easily studied. Extreme behavior is more easily studied because, by definition, it brings the actor to the attention of authorities who are able to punish the behavior and significantly affect the life of the actor in a negative way. This may include loss of job, demotion or loss of pay, civil suits, criminal investigation and prosecution, administrative investigation and charges, etc. The assumption here is that any of these adverse consequences may bring the actor to the attention of psychiatrists at the precise moment when he may be most amenable to reflection, insight treatment, redecision, and changes in the behaviors that have become demonstrably self-destructive.
When the color-aroused person acts out in extreme ways upon his ideations and emotions, usually after a disordered and sometimes delusional thought process, his behavior causes reactions in his environment that feed back into his feelings and ideation. For example, if he loses his job after discriminating against a co-worker, he may become angrier still and this anger may feed increasingly extreme behaviors. Because emotions, ideation and behaviors tend to “feed upon” each other and become self-reinforcing, it is important to offer interventions before the resulting behavior becomes magnified exponentially in those persons most susceptible to extreme behavior.
The ECEIBD disordered individual may also arouse a color-aroused reaction in the victims of his extreme behavior.
As with people exposed to mood altering substances, not all will experience all of the effects potentially resulting from substance abuse. Nor are all susceptibility factors completely understood. In some persons color aroused emotions may include a general sense of well-being, self-assurance and pride in one’s heritage. In others, it may extend to fear of other’s success, resentment of other’s presence, anger at the implicit challenge posed by others, desire for revenge, or “evening scores”. With alcohol, some individuals’ alcohol associated feelings may never graduate beyond a short-term feeling of relaxation which does not threaten their well-being in any way. For others’, including those particularly susceptible to desire to repeat pleasureable moods, the momentarily positive sensations may lead to reinforcing pleasure seeking behavior which subsequently becomes problematic.
When people hate other people and behave toward them antagonistically, the responses they receive may be antagonistic as well and their relationships with their targets become antagonistic.
When I was representing clients at a poverty law center, a low-income white client was referred to me for intake and evaluation. The client was angry and excited and was clearly under stress. She had a new Hispanic neighbor with whom she was having increasing difficulties. As soon as her neighbor moved in, she told me, “I knew she this lady was trouble because, how had this woman paid for her house? These people don’t work. She must be a drug dealer.”
This ideation alone could not explain the acrimony between her and her neighbor, so I asked to describe her behavior as well. My client told me that she had gone to new neighbor and asked her “how a Puerto Rican could afford such a nice house?” She knew the woman was Puerto Rican, she told me, “because all people who speak Spanish are Puerto Rican.” In addition, she had warned her new neighbor to “watch yourself, because I’m going to be watching you,” after which every day brought a new conversation with her neighbor filled with mutual anger and fear.
Upon hearing how this conflict had begun – a conflict that was about to become a legal contest - I began to feel tremendous sympathy for my potential client’s neighbor and pity for the client. When, having been asked for my opinion, I inquired whether her increasingly hostile relationship with her new neighbor perhaps stemmed from her own preconceived (color and ethnicity-aroused) beliefs, and from the things she had said to her neighbor based on those beliefs, my potential client became indignant. She now insisted on raising the matter with my manager, which I encouraged her to do, asking only that she recount the same facts for him that she had shared me.
Unfortunately, my client’s conflict did not have a legal solution because she had no legal right to prevent this neighbor from moving to the neighborhood. My potential client’s only hope for serenity lie in evaluating how her own emotions, thought and behavior had led to the conflict that had stolen her serenity. I would have liked to refer her for therapy, however, neither she nor any therapist whom I knew recognized that preconceived notions based on color could lead to anger, anxiety, prolonged and pronounced stress, relational conflict and even violence and physical injury and impairment. So the client left my office with neither a legal solution nor an emotional one.
Francis L. Holland, Esq.
People who hate others may engage in behaviors that engender and perpetuate confict in their environment. Out of anger, they may intentionally offend others who, in turn, respond in kind. Although there may be an historic reason why they hate as they do, it ultimately may matter little “who offended who first”, because both parties become locked in a conflict from which each party obtains relief only by accepting responsibility for his own thoughts, feelings and actions and making a determined effort to make amends, “live and let live”. Although as a political matter it may seem preferable to continue to seek to vindicate grievances through conflict, on the individual level only reconciliation can lead to feelings of wellbeing, decreasing the anger, stress, anxiety and fear for which the psychiatric patient seeks relief through treatment.
ECEIBD vs. “Racism”, “Prejudice” “Bias” and Discrimination Concepts
What Differentiates the ECEIBD Diagnosis from “Racism”, “Prejudice” “Bias” and Discrimination Concepts? According to a cautionary statement in the introduction to the DSM-IV, "The purpose of the DSM-IV is to provide clear descriptions of diagnostic categories in order to enable clinicians and investigators to diagnose, communicate about, study and treat people with various mental disorders. It is to be understood that inclusion here, for clinical and research purposes, of a diagnostic category such as Pathological Gambling or Pedophilia does not imply that the condition meets legal or other nonmedical criteria for what constitutes mental disease, mental disorder or mental disability. The clinical and scientific considerations involved in categorization of these conditions as mental disorders may not be wholly relevant to legal judgments, for example, that take into account such issues as individual responsibility, disability determination and competency." DSM-IV Criteria for Pedophilia, Medem Medical Library, http://www.medem.com/MedLB/article_detaillb.cfm?article_ID=ZZZUZRUZGLC&sub_cat=355#DSMIV_Criteria_for_Pedophilia
Although the DSM-IV has not defined the quality or quantity of extreme color ideation and behavior that would constitute mental illness at any level, one can begin to hypothesize based on analogy to other listed illnesses.
In the following paragraphs, I offer the diagnosis of pedophilia as an example of the diagnosis and assessment of severity of an illness, as well as because some of the feeling states experienced might be found similar to those of ECEIBD after careful scientific investigation. An explanatory DSM-IV section for diagnosing pedophilia explains:
“To make a DSM-IV diagnosis, the psychiatrist assesses the individual for either clinically significant distress or clinically significant impairment. Most individuals with psychiatric symptoms experience a subjective sense of distress that may include feelings such as pain, anguish, dysphoria (unpleasant mood), shame, embarrassment or guilt. However, there are numerous situations in which the individual has symptoms or exhibits behaviors that do not cause any subjective sense of distress, but nonetheless would be judged "clinically significant" and warrant a diagnosis of a mental disorder if they come to the attention of a psychiatrist. In such situations, this judgment is based on whether the presentation causes significant impairment in one or more areas of functioning, including social, relational, occupational and academic functioning.
For example, it is well recognized that many individuals who are experiencing serious problems related to substance abuse (e.g., violent behavior, poor work or poor school performance due to alcohol or other drug use) deny that their substance abuse is causing them any distress. Such individuals would be given a diagnosis of substance dependence or substance abuse, in spite of their denial, if the psychiatrist determines that these substance-induced problems are causing significant impairment. Similarly, many individuals who act on their pedophiliac urges claim that their behavior is non-problematic and may even claim it is "beneficial" to the child. Nonetheless, the DSM-IV would consider such individuals to have pedophilia because, by definition, acting on pedophiliac urges is considered to be an impairment in functioning.” DSM-IV Criteria for Pedophilia, Medem Medical Library, http://www.medem.com/MedLB/article_detaillb.cfm?article_ID=ZZZUZRUZGLC&sub_cat=355#DSMIV_Criteria_for_Pedophilia
The question of when “racism” is sufficiently pronounced to be considered a mental illness was hotly debated at the workshop "Racism and Psychopathology," held at American Psychiatric Association’s 2000 annual meeting (in April) in Chicago.” “Extreme racists are mentally ill and need psychiatric treatment”, agreed many panelists at the workshop. However efforts were stymied because, although the workshop was open to all APA conference participants, it was organized exclusively by black psychiatrists and not one white American doctor attended the discussion.
Although black doctors tackled the problems of defining “racism” at this conference workshop, their discussion was unlikely to lead to a new DSM-IV definition because they lacked the participation of white doctors in defining the illness, a participation that would ultimately be necessary were dysfunctional race based behavior to be listed in the DSM-IV. From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html
Unfortunately, the black doctors may have posited the issue in a manner that provided defensive white doctors with an excuse to avoid the workshop. The question apparently was posed in the following manner: “When does white racism against blacks in the United States become psychopathology? http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-07-21/roots.html Since no other DSM-IV conditions are diagnosed based on the race of the patient rather than the patient’s ideation, the whites psychiatrists might have perceived that the black psychiatrists had gotten of to a bad theoretical start. From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html
“An[ ] important aspect of the DSM diagnostic system is that the diagnoses are described strictly in terms of patterns of symptoms that tend to cluster together; the symptoms can be observed by the clinician or reported by the patient or family members. Since the cause of most mental disorders is currently unknown and subject to much speculation, the DSM avoids incorporating unproven theories in its diagnostic definitions. This feature has been an important element in the widespread acceptance of the DSM. Clinicians from widely differing theoretical orientations can still use the DSM because it focuses on manifest symptoms.”
Frequently Asked Questions
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, http://www.psych.org/research/dor/dsm/dsm_faqs/faq81301.cfm
Single-word definitions have been unavailing because the cluster of interrelated emotions, thought processes and behaviors that are operant in hate crimes and unlawful discrimination simply cannot be described in a single word. In law, all crimes have elements, each of which must be present in a given case in order for a crime to have been committed. Likewise, the DSM-IV-TR states minimum specific criteria for symptoms which must be present in order for a psychiatric illness to be diagnosed in an individual. In the area of color-associated illness, attempts to utilize single-word definitions not supported by clearly stated underlying criteria simply discourage and stifle the analysis and explication that are necessary if ECEIBD is to be diagnosed and treated. Just as the first step to diagnosis of medical problems in the human body was identifying and discovering the function of its constituent organs, so efforts to treat color-aroused illness cannot advance without general agreement as to its constituent parts.
(The term “racism” is effectively an advocacy tool.) Although such agreement might seem impossible in light of the interminable debates about “racism”, for example, our society has nonetheless already defined in law those color-aroused behaviors which are thought to be so damaging to society and individuals that they must be prohibited, and must be punished when they occur. Our existing laws represent our society’s best efforts at agreement to date as to what behavior is unreasonably extreme and therefore unacceptable and unlawful. Effectively, our legislatures, judges, and juries of our peers have have determined the minimum standards of behavior that we must observe in our interactions with one another. The generalized observation of these standards is a requirement for a cohesive society. When psychiatric phenomena such as emotions, ideation and behavior are so extreme that they are manifested in violation of minimal societal standards, it presents a very serious problem both for the individual and society.
Examples are readily available. Depression can become so severe that a parent is unable to care for children and instead is severely neglectful, which is criminal. Gambling, drug and alcohol addictions involve or lead to behavior which violates the requirements of criminal law. Studies show that prison populations include many persons whose psychotic, schizophrenic or manic depressive states have become manifest in criminal actions. Were treatment for these illnesses to suddenly be unavailable, our jails would explode with patients who could not or would not control their behavior without psychiatric intervention. Extreme color-aroused emotions and ideation also regularly lead to criminal behavior, and relatively higher prison imprisonment of sufferers must some degree be a function of lower access to psychiatric care.
When severe depression endangers children in the depressive’s care, psychiatry intervenes to help the patient cope but also indirectly supports patient compliance with child endangerment laws. Without effective treatments for depression, alcohol and drug abuse, for example, there would inevitably be an increase in child endangerment. Although psychiatry’s role is not principally to address social problems at a societal level, yet many societal problems cannot effectively be addressed without psychiatric treatment of patients.
Although compliance with society’s legal requirements is often a baseline and threshold requirement for engaging in society, simply refraining from violating the law does not guarantee success in relationships, sports or professional life. Many behaviors violate social norms and lead to relational and occupational failure without being at all. In fact the vast majority of symptomatic behaviors treated by psychiatry are not illegal but merely dysfunctional and maladaptive. Generally, a psychiatrist will help patients to avoid illegal activities that clearly would compromise the project of improving the patient’s life. But the goal of therapy is much broader because therapy seeks to unburden the individual and unlock his potential.
Just as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia impair the ability of individuals to comply with
Like all mental illnesses, the study of color-aroused illness is more complicated that
Attempts to develop theories of racism have Theories of the causes of color-aroused phenomena have likewise failed when order for a groups of people to agree upon the nature of phenomena. that is necessary in do so stifle analysis The science of anatomy seeks to understand the human body by studying the form and function of its constituent parts, each of which must be named with particularity. "Prejudice" means "prejudgment," according to the dictionary. And prejudices can be neutral or at least benign.” As such, the word “prejudice” cannot be sufficient to describe a phenomenon which is always harmful.” Although the term “prejudice” correctly conveys a thought process with a predetermined result, it lacks specific and inherent reference the feelings and behaviors without which prejudice is not necessarily harmful. The term “racism” approaches the study of color-aroused phenomena with certain prejudices presumed within the definition of racism itself. The term racism, such as the requirement that questions of institutional and societal “power relationships” be resolved before determining whether an indiscriminate act of hate against a person based on color
But more often than not, he said, prejudices are pejorative—that is, negative beliefs or feelings about other people.Analysts Explore Roots of Prejudice And How It Can Be Contained, Joan Arehart-Treichel , Psychiatric News February 1, 2002, http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/37/3/13-a?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=%22prejudice%22&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1135929470924_36&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1&journalcode=psychnews
Merriam-Webster Online provides five different definitions of the word “race” which have been applied to humans, and also provides one definition which by its terms is applicable to “animals”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race Wikipedia provides a history of the word “race” showing, if nothing else, that enumerable theories exist as to what “race” is and what it means - if anything - biologically, socially and politically. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race The task of defining “race” in a manner subject to general agreement cannot be accomplished here and, after thousands of years, has not been accomplished anywhere else. “In fact, there is little consensus on what race actually means” (Alba, 1992. For discussions on the meaning of race, see Anderson and Fienberg, 2000; Appiah, 1992; Fredrickson, 2002; Jones, 1997; Loury, 2002; Omi, 2001; Winant, 2001).
Psychiatrists and people “in recovery” from various illnesses have recognized that the tendency to see life in terms of polar opposites is a symptom as well as a cause of many continuing emotional difficulties. “Black and White Thinking” is a recognized symptom of # of psychiatric disorders currently listed in the DSM-IV.
BLACK & WHITE THINKING
by Mark Sichel, LCSW and Alicia L. Cervini
"Always" and "never," polar opposite words, tend to characterize the vocabulary of black and white thinkers. Black and white thinking means seeing the world only in terms of extremes. If things aren't "perfect," then they must be "horrible." If your child isn't "brilliant" then he must be "stupid." If you're not "fascinating" then you must be "boring." Yikes! What a tough way to live! In real-life, situations are almost always shades of gray, not black or white. Falling victim to black and white thinking tends to exacerbate depression, marital conflict, anxiety, and a host of other everyday problems. Give yourself and the ones you love a break and discover the beauty of shades of gray.
When small children are learning to use words and organize their thoughts, it is normal and expected for them to see and express their world in very black and white terms. When a young child feels they are not loved, they feel they must be hated. When a child feels his or her parents don't pay enough attention to them, that child will say, "You never pay attention to me." Developmental psychologists call this primitive thinking.
Unfortunately, under duress, adults often regress to primitive thinking. Adults are most prone to regressing to primitive thinking when they are having a hard time and feel overwhelmed by their own emotions. A regression, in psychoanalytic parlance, is a backsliding from mature functioning and thinking to immature ways of functioning and thinking. For that one moment, when the adult starts relying on the words "always" or "never," and seeing the world in black and white terms, they are slipping back to the way they saw the world as a child.
Here are some examples of people who fell prey to black and white thinking. Listen to the language that they use to express themselves:
Charlotte*, a married woman in her forties with a young child, was suffering from what is called dysthymia, or mild depression. She came into my office telling me that she never felt happy any more, that she always felt disappointed with her husband, and that she feared she would never feel good again as long as she lived. She said that she had nothing to look forward to anymore. She reported that she had always been a person who was not easily satisfied and that she only prayed that her daughter would not be like her. As Charlotte realized that her extreme language was making her situation seem worse instead of better, she learned to correct her black and white thinking. Charlotte was able to get a better handle on the events that triggered her chronic reactions of depression.
Joseph, an aspiring actor who supported himself as a carpenter, also had a problem with black and white thinking whenever he felt anxious. Despite favorable reviews in several plays and some success being cast in commercials, Joseph reported feeling overwhelming anxiety whenever he had to audition for a role. He always prepared thoroughly for his auditions, and he always became uncontrollably anxious starting a week before the audition. He was never able to do a good job in the audition, he told me, and he felt he would never overcome his anxiety. He felt sure he would always have to support himself as a carpenter. When Joseph realized that black and white thinking can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, he made an effort to see his situation for what it was: a mix of the good and the not-so-good. With his newfound appreciation for shades of gray, Joseph was much happier, less anxious and more successful in his career.
When you learn to recognize the spectrum of gray in the difficult experiences you encounter in your life, you will be better equipped to come out on top. Regression is not a foregone conclusion when you feel stressed, angry, overwhelmed, confused, or just plain fed up with another person. You CAN start to recognize when you are giving-in to black and white thinking, and then make the choice to banish those extreme thoughts in favor of healthy living.
http://www.psybersquare.com/me/me_back_white.html
The tendency to insist that human beings’ skin color is either “black” or “white” is the epitomy of black and white thinking, flying in the face of information that is “right before our eyes”. Of course this tendency alone is not the entire essence of the disorder thought pattern. But when combined with a conviction that what is extremely white is extremely good while what is extremely black is extremely bad, the insistence that people are whiter or blacker than they actually physically are guarantees a distorted and exaggeratedly conflict ridden view of ourselves and of others. As the above article indicates, when we see ourselves and others in black and white terms, we are unable to acknowledge the failings of those deemed “all good” and likewise unable to appreciate the positive aspects of those deemed “all bad”. We seek information that will confirm and not contradict our “split” and dichotomous world view, and we feel antagonism toward anyone and anything who presents information is not consistent with our view that things and people are “all good” or “all bad”.
Most people think of "race" as a biological category - as a way to divide and label different groups according to a set of common inborn biological traits (e.g., skin color, or shape of eyes, nose, and face). Despite this popular view, there are no biological criteria for dividing races into distinct categories Lewontin, 1972; Owens & King, 1999. No consistent racial groupings emerge when people are sorted by physical and biological characteristics. For example, the epicanthic eye fold that produces the so-called "Asian" eye shape is shared by the !Kung San Bushmen, members of an African nomadic tribe.
The visible physical traits associated with race, such as hair and skin color, are defined by a tiny fraction of our genes, and they do not reliably differentiate between the social categories of race. As more is learned about the 30,000 genes of the human genome, variations between groups are being identified, such as in genes that code for the enzymes active in drug metabolism (Chapter 2). While such information may prove to have clinical utility, it is important to note that these variations cannot be used to distinguish groups from one another as they are outweighed by overwhelming genetic similarities across so-called racial groups (Paabo, 2001).
The strongest, most compelling evidence to refute race as a biological category comes from genetic analysis of different racial groups. There is overwhelmingly greater genetic variation within a racial group than across racial groups. One study examined the variation in 109 DNA regions that were known to contain a high level of polymorphisms, or DNA sequence variations. Published in one of the most respected scientific journals and in agreement with earlier research, it found that 85 percent of human genetic diversity is found within a given racial group (Barbujani et al., 1997).
Race is not a biological category, but it does have meaning as a social category. Different cultures classify people into racial groups according to a set of characteristics that are socially significant. The concept of race is especially potent when certain social groups are separated, treated as inferior or superior, and given differential access to power and other valued resources. This is the definition adopted by this Supplement because of its significance in understanding the mental health of racial and ethnic minority groups in American society.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat5.section.991
In this text and in the diagnostic definition proposed here, we use the word “color” instead of the term “race”. The existence of colors and of the color spectrum is universally upon as a matter of physics. Arguably there is no concept in the field of science and physics that has a higher degree of acceptance than the proposition that colors exist and can be distinguished from one another by human, by animals, by plants by insects and by spectrometers and other instruments created by humans.
ECEIBD Color-Arousal Cues/Stimuli
ECEIBD-Associated Physiological Reactions
breathlessness,
dizziness,
excessive sweating
, nausea,
dry mouth,
feeling “sick to one’s stomach”,
shaking,
heart palpitations,
See other physiological responses to fear, anger, stress, envy, jealousy, hate
ECEIBD-Associated Ideation/Beliefs
Does the student feel unfairly treated?
Was the student's identity attacked or threatened?
Was the student's sense of security threatened?
Were the student's morals or values attacked?
Did the student feel humiliated?
Working With Strong Emotions in the Classroom
A Guide for Teachers and Students
Compiled by Heidi Burgess, Co-Director, University of Colorado Conflict Research Consortium
http://www.beyondintractability.org/user_guides/teaching_with_emotions/?nid=6578
ECEIBD-Associated Thought Process
ECEIBD-Associated Behaviors
Use of color-antagonistic epithets
Outbursts
Violence toward Individuals, e.g. pushing, shoving, spitting, punching, kicking
Armed assualts, eg. Assaults with guns knives and other objects
Terroristic Verbal Threats
Terroristic Assaults, e.g. bombing, arson
daubing racist graffiti on mosques
derogatory comments
hand gestures
Maiming (“sprayed the victim's face with black paint”, testimony of Lawrence Russell Brewer in the dragging by ankles behind pickup truck murder of James Byrd, Jr. http://www.texasnaacp.org/jasper.htm#brewer
Dragging on Chain behind pickup truck, http://www.texasnaacp.org/jasper.htm#brewer
racist jokes, slurs and threats, “told that the country would be better off if the South had won the Civil War”, “co-workers talked about lynching and slavery” “a supervisor who did nothing about the harassment”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201974.html?nav=rss_business
Inability or unwillingness to perceive people as individuals rather than as part of an undifferentiated color group. http://www.airforceonesource.com/ctim/index.aspx?ctim=105.372.1154.5899
Rigid unwillingness to engage with person because of their skin-color. http://www.airforceonesource.com/ctim/index.aspx?ctim=105.372.1154.5899
Teaches color-based intollerance and rejection to children. http://www.airforceonesource.com/ctim/index.aspx?ctim=105.372.1154.5899
Feels guilty for treating people differently based on color but continues to do so in spite of guilty feelings.
Feels no remorse for acts toward persons of one color but does or would feel remorse for committing the same acts against persons of different color.
Experiences pleasure, happiness, elation when adversity befalls a person or group of people and these feelings would not be aroused but for perception of skin color.
Has taken or would take overt or covert actions of any kind for the purpose of causing adversity or suffering or unpleasantness for others based on skin color.
Has apportioned or would apportion advantages or disadvantages based upon skin color. (The issue of “mixed motives” often arises in a legal context when there may be many motives for an action and it is difficult to determine which really most proximally caused a given behavior. For the purposes of this analysis, it is sufficient that color-arousal plays ANY role in motivating an illegal behavior.)
Felt encouraged to commit or attempt to commit an unlawful act by the perception, real or imagined, that the penalties (legal, social, financial, professional etc.) would be different because of the color of the offender and/or of the victim and/or of any party relevant to evaluating the wrongfulness of the offense.
Evaluates the credibility of individuals partially or entirely based on the color of their skin.
However, for those students who feel that they are not wanted, be it in the subtle glance of the eye, which indicates. "What are you doing here?" the loathsome look past one, when conversing with other members of the majority group indicating the "invisibility" of presence, the sudden quietness, which occurs upon approach or the intimidation experienced when attempting to converse with faculty members of the majority race, all can have a devastating impact on African American and other minority students (Feagin, J., Hernan, V. & Imani. N. 1996). Psychological barriers associated with matriculation of African American students in predominantly white institutions, Journal of Instructional Psychology, Sept, 2003 by Debra F. Lett, James V. Wright
These acts of discrimination and campus racism, no matter how subtle, can cause enduring harm to the psyche, inclusive to evoking a lessessened self-esteem, underdeveloped personal identities, retarded cognitive and affective development, thereby, shaking confidence and leading to feelings associated with a sense of isolation and alienation, depression, dissonance and even at times the discontinuance of education. Having to endure such feelings, can present with repressed rage, anxiety and anger, which can result in psychopathology (Smith 1985: Williams & Williams-Morris 2000).
ECEIBD-Associated Emotions
Extreme Fear (fear of losing, fear of dying, fear of being humiliated
Extreme Anger
Rage
Sadness
Dejection
Hopelessness
Self-Hate
Pride
“lost interest in life”, “loss of self esteem, depression, grief, anguish, embarrassment, anger, stress, weight loss, sleeplessness, withdrawal from friends, co-workers and family and a general loss of enjoyment of life.” Truell v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 07A30056 (September 3, 2003), http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/digest/xv-1.html#findings.
regularly used racial epithets
(Mississippi Multiple Shooting), http://www.genocidewatch.org/HateCrimesJuly9Miss.htm
Suicide?
(Mississippi Multiple Shooting), http://www.genocidewatch.org/HateCrimesJuly9Miss.htm
ECEIBD-Associated Functional Limitations
inability to speak or think clearly, or a or a
a becoming mad
losing control,
sensation of detachment from reality
full blown anxiety attack.
ECEIBD-Associated Emotions In Targets/Victims of Extreme Behavior (Leading in turn to CEIBD behaviors in victims)
Extreme Fear (fear of losing, fear of dying, fear of being humiliated
Extreme Anger
Rage
Sadness
Dejection
Hopelessness
Self-Hate
“lost interest in life”, “loss of self esteem, depression, grief, anguish, embarrassment, anger, stress, weight loss, sleeplessness, withdrawal from friends, co-workers and family and a general loss of enjoyment of life.” Truell v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 07A30056 (September 3, 2003), http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/digest/xv-1.html#findings.
“constantly concerned; she's been worried about this for a year” Shooting victims of ECEIBD, re: Lanette McCall, Washington Post, http://www.genocidewatch.org/HateCrimesJuly9Miss.htm
“Marketplace discrimination involves the differential treatment of customers in the marketplace based on perceived group-level traits that produce outcomes favorable to "in-groups" and unfavorable to "out-groups". Importantly, the arrangement of in-groups and out-groups is likely to be consistent with the existing structure of racial inequality, such that Whites receive the most favorable treatment and Blacks the least.” (see Bobo and Massagali 2001). http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3896/is_200301/ai_n9195211#continue
The Prevalence of ECEIBD
ECEIBD and Criminal Offenses, Including Hate Crimes
Color-aroused violence is a serious national problem. Since 1992, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has compiled statistics on hate crimes based on reports of law enforcement agencies, through the Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf “The UCR aggregates specific crimes reported to police from jurisdictions across the nation, including approximately 17,300 law enforcement agencies representing 93.4 percent of the US population in 2003”, with about 4,200 agencies reporting more detailed information to an enhanced UCR program, the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS).
Many states have enacted laws against hate crimes. Hate laws do not outlaw color-aroused emotions or ideation, but do target illegal conduct that is motivated by color-aroused such emotions and ideation. In spite of state and federal efforts, hate crimes continue. For the year 2002, state and local law enforcement agencies reported 7,462 hate crime incidents that involved 8,832 offenses reported to police. FACT SHEET FOR HATE CRIME STATISTICS, 2002. “Racial” bias accounted for 48.8 percent of the single-bias incidents while bias against an ethnicity or national origin motivated 14.8 percent. http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel03/02hcfactsh.htm
Almanac of Policy Issues
http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/hate_crime.shtml
National Criminal Justice Service
August, 2003
Hate Crime: A Summary
Hate crime is defined as "the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability." (Community Relations Service, 2001)
These crimes have been plaguing our country for centuries, tearing at the very foundation of our country and destroying our neighborhoods and communities.
"A total of 11,987 law enforcement agencies in 49 states and the District of Columbia reported 9,730 bias-motivated incidents - 9,271 single bias and 9 multiple bias" (Hate Crime Statistics, 2001)
Since an individual's biases are incidental circumstances to a particular crime, collecting statistics and information on hate crimes is difficult. Over the past 12 years, Congress has passed many pieces of legislation to help shape the future of hate crime initiatives and preventative measures. These anti-hate crime legislated acts include the
• Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999
• Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996
• Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act
• Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990
Hate crime activities are being investigated at the Federal level by the FBI’s Bias Crimes Unit and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) church arson and explosives experts. BATF investigations also focus on regulating the illegal sale and possessions of firearms to potential perpetrators of hate crimes. Programs are also being developed to bring communities together to fight hate crimes through mediation, dialogue and discussion, and innovative strategies to introduce and educate youth on attitudes and behavior.
In order to understand the scope of the hate crime problem, the Justice Department was mandated, with the passage of the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990, to collect statistics and gather information on the prevalence of these bias-motivated crimes:
• The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR) is the only national data collection program. As part of the UCR Program, the FBI publishes hate crime statistics in their annual publication, Hate Crime Statistics, 2001.
• As part of the Attorney General’s Hate Crime initiative, the Bureau of Justice Statistics has examined ways to improve participation by law enforcement agencies in collecting and reporting hate crime statistics to the FBI and to profile local responses to hate crime. The findings will assist the Federal government in identifying the accuracy of hate crime statistics and reporting practices, produce trend data and developing a model for hate crime reporting.
• In addition to collecting statistics, several agencies are funding researchers to conduct studies on hate crimes.
The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) all sponsor and fund grantee agencies to develop programs, and to provide training seminars and technical assistance to individuals and local agencies regarding hate crimes.
• OVC is working to improve the justice system’s response to victims of hate crime
• OJJDP funds agencies to develop training for professionals and to address hate crimes through preventative measures and community resources
• BJA has a training initiative for law enforcement agencies to generate awareness and to help in identifying, investigating, and taking appropriate action for bias crimes, as well as arming agencies with tools for responding effectively to incidents.
The latest in hate crime statistics and facts.
• Of the 9,721 single-bias incidents, 44.9 percent were motivated by racial prejudice, 21.6 percent were driven by a bias toward an ethnicity/national origin, 18.8 percent motivated by religious intolerance, 14.3 percent by sexual-orientation bias, and 0.4 percent by disability bias. (Hate Crime Statistics, 2001).
• "During 2001, 4,367 of the single-bias incidents were victims of racial bias, 1,828 were victims of religious bias, 1,393 were victims of sexual-orientation bias, 2,098 were victims of ethnic or national origin bias, and 35 were victims of disability bias."
(Hate Crime Statistics, 2001).
• Criminal incidents can involve more than one offense, victim, and/or offender. In 2001, there were 9,730 bias-motivated incidents, 12,020 victims, and 9,239 known offenders. A breakdown of the 12,020 victims shows that 64.6 percent were crimes against persons and 34.7 percent were victims of crime against property.
(Hate Crime Statistics, 2001).
• "In 2001, law enforcement agencies reported a total of 9,239 known offenders associated with 9,730 bias-motivated incidents (9 incidents were multiple-bias). Of these known offenders, 65.5 percent were white, 20.4 percent were black, 0.9 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 0.6 percent were American Indian/Alaskan Native." (Hate Crime Statistics, 2001).
• "Residences and homes were the scenes of 30.9 percent of the total 9,730 hate crime incidents in 2001. Incidents perpetrated on highways, roads, alleys, or streets accounted for 18.3 percent of hate crime incidents, and 10.1 percent occurred at schools or colleges." (Hate Crime Statistics, 2001).
• According to the most recent survey, of 2,117 prosecutor offices, 20.2% prosecuted felony hate crime cases. (Prosecutors in State Courts, 2001).
• Twenty-three percent of college campuses with 2,500 enrolled students had a special hate crime program or unit operated by campus law enforcement agencies.
(Campus Law Enforcement Agencies, 1995).
• From 1997 - 1999, sixty-one percent of hate crime incidents were motivated by race, 14 percent by religion, 13 percent by sexual orientation, 11 percent by ethnicity, and 1 percent by victim disability. The majority of incidents motivated by race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or disability involved a violent offense, while two-thirds of incidents motivated by religion involved a property offense, most commonly vandalism.
( Hate Crime Reported in NIBRS, 1997-99).
• From 1997 - 1999, younger offenders were responsible for most hate crimes. Thirty-one percent of violent offenders and 46 percent of property offenders were under age 18. ( Hate Crime Reported in NIBRS, 1997-99).
• Among the reports analyzed, five States reported incident-based statistics in the form of hate-bias crimes in their annual reports. These incidents were usually classified by motivation for hate-bias which includes race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, and disability (State Use of Incident-Based Crime Statistics).
• State Statistical Analysis Centers (SACs)
For State-level data on hate/bias crime, search the following SAC websites:
California: http://caag.state.ca.us/cjsc/
Hawaii: http://www.cpja.ag.state.hi.us/
Illinois: http://www.icjia.org/public/index.cfm
Minnesota: http://www.mnplan.state.mn.us/
New York: http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/
Oklahoma: http://www.state.ok.us/~ocjrc/sac.htm
Utah: http://www.justice.state.ut.us/
Vermont: http://www.norwich.edu/socsci/cj/vcjr.html
Virginia : http://www.dcjs.state.va.us/research/
To obtain contact information for additional SACs that maintain data on hate/bias crimes:
Delaware: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/de.htm
Kansas: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/ks.htm
Kentucky: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/ky.htm
Louisiana: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/la.htm
South Dakota: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/sd.htm
Tennessee: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/tn.htm
Wyoming: http://www.jrsainfo.org/sac/wy.htm
Lists full text publications available online.
2003 National Crime Victims' Rights Week Resource Guide
Office for Victims of Crime, 2003
Hate Crime and Hate Incidents in the Commonwealth of Kentucky
Kentucky Criminal Justice Council, 2002
Hate Crime Statistics, 2001
Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2002
Indicators or School Crime and Safety, 2002
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2002
National Victim Assistance Academy: Hate and Bias Crime
Office for Victims of Crime, 2002
Safety and Security Information Report for 2002
University of Maine, 2002
"WE ARE NOT THE ENEMY" Hate Crimes Against Arabs, Muslims, and Those Perceived to be Arab or Muslim after September 11
Human Rights Watch, 2002
Gender Dimensions of Racial Discrimination
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2001
Hate Crimes on Campus: The Problem and Efforts to Confront It
Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2001
PDF File and ASCII Text File
Hate Crime: The Violence of Intolerance
Community Relations Service, 2001
Hate Crimes Reported in NIBRS, 1997-99
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2001
Home Office Research Study 223 - Crime, Policing and Justice: the Experience of Ethnic Minorities Findings from the 2000 British Crime Survey
Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2001
Reporting Hate Crimes
Attorney General's Civil Rights Commission on Hate Crimes, 2001
Hate Crime in California
California Department of Justice, 2001
Does Race Influence Police Disciplinary Processes?
Justice Research and Policy, 2001
Searching for the Denominator: Problems With Police Traffic Stop Data And an Early Warning System Solution
Justice Research and Policy, 2001
Implementing Controversial Policy: Results from a National Survey of Law Enforcement Department Activity on Hate Crime
Justice Research and Policy, 2001
Hate Crime Reporting: Understanding Police Officer Perceptions, Departmental Protocol, and the Role of the Victim
Justice Research and Policy, 2001
Opening the Door to Diversity
National Middle School Association, 2001
Hate on Display: A Visual Database of Extremist Symbols, Logos, and Tattoos
Anti-Defamation League, 2000
Improving the Quality and Accuracy of Bias Crime Statistics Nationally: An Assessment of the First Ten Years of Bias Crime Data Collection
The Center for Criminal Justice Policy Research and Justice Research and Statistics Association, 2000
Implementing Controversial Policy: Results from a National Survey of Law Enforcement Department Activity on Hate Crime
Justice Research and Policy, 2001
Responding to Hate Crime: A Multidisciplinary Curriculum for Law Enforcement and Victim Assistance Professionals
National Center for Hate Crime Prevention Education Development Center, Inc., 2000
Responding to Hate Crime: A Police Officer's Guide to Investigation and Prevention
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), 2000
Resource Guide on Racial Profiling Data Collection Systems: Promising
Practices and Lessons Learned
U.S. Department of Justice, 11/00
PDF File and ASCII Text File
Improving the Quality and Accuracy of Bias Crime Statistics Nationally
Hate Crimes Research Network, 9/00
Local Prosecutor's Guide for Responding to Hate Crimes
The American Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI), 8/00
Promising Practices Against Hate Crimes: Five State and Local Demonstration Projects
Bureau of Justice Assistance, 5/00
PDF File and ASCII Text File
Addressing Hate Crimes: Six Initiatives That Are Enhancing the Efforts of Criminal Justice Practitioners
Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2/00
PDF File and ASCII Text File
101 Ways to Combat Prejudice
Anti-Defamation League, 1999
Hate Crime Training: Core Curriculum for Patrol Officers, Detectives, and Command Officers
U.S. Department of Justice, 1998
Hate Crimes Laws
Anti-Defamation League, 1999
A Policymaker's Guide to Hate Crimes Bureau of Justice Assistance, 11/99
PDF File and ASCII Text File
1999 Annual Report on School Safety
Department of Justice and Department of Education, 11/99
Hate Crime Data Collection Guidelines: Uniform Crime Reporting
Federal Bureau of Investigations, 10/99
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics, 1997: Data for Individual State and Local Agencies With 100 or More Officers
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999
State Use of Incident-Based Crime Statistics
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2/99
PDF File and ASCII Text File and HTML File
Close the Book on Hate: Responding to Hate Motivated Behaviors in Schools
Anti-Defamation League, 1999
Responding to Hate Crimes and Bias-Motivated Incidents on College/University Campuses (May 2000)
Community Relations Service, 5/2000
PDF File and HTML File
Responding to Hate at School: A Guide for Teachers, Counselors and Administrators
Southern Poverty Law Center, 1999
Ten Ways to Fight Hate: A Community Response Guide
Southern Poverty Law Center, 1999
OJJDP Annual Report (1996-1997)
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 8/98
PDF File and HTML File
One America in the 21st Century: The President's Initiative on Race
Community Relations Service, 3/98
PDF File and ASCII Text File
Psychologists Call for Assault on Hate Crimes
American Psychological Association, 1/98
Hate Crime in America Summit Recommendations
International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1998
Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe In Modern Dress
American Psychological Association, 1998
Preventing Youth Hate Crime: A Manual for Schools and Communities
Department of Education, 1998
PDF File and HTML File
Healing the Hate: A National Hate Crime Prevention Curriculum for Middle Schools
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1/97
Stopping Hate Crime: A Case History From the Sacramento Police Department
Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1/97
Campus Law Enforcement Agencies, 1995
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 12/96
PDF File and ASCII Text File and HTML File
Prosecutors in State Courts, 1994
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 10/96
PDF File and ASCII Text File and HTML File
Hate Crime's Legislation
National Center for Victims of Crime, 1996
Violence Against Gays and Lesbians
National Center for Victims of Crime, 1996
Hate Crime
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 8/95
National Bias Crimes Training for Law Enforcement and Victim Assistance Professionals
(Full text not available, only overview of publishing and ordering information provided)
Office for Victims of Crime, 1/95
This document is not necessarily endorsed by the Almanac of Policy Issues. It is being preserved in the Policy Archive for historic reasons.
Racial, ethnicity and national origin bias, often against people based on their skin color, accounted for 63.6 percent of hate crimes in 2002. According to FBI statistics, “Of the known offenders, 61.8 percent were white, 21.8 percent were black, 1.2 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 0.6 percent were American Indian/Alaskan native. Groups comprised of offenders of varying races made up 4.9 percent of the known offenders, and the races of 9.8 percent of the offenders were unknown.” FACT SHEET FOR HATE CRIME STATISTICS, 2002, http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel03/02hcfactsh.htm
A November 2005 study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics entitled “Hate Crimes Reported by Victims and Police” based on interviews with 500,000 persons, found that 210,000 victimizations motivated by hate or bias occurred per year. The National Crime Victimization Survey that found 210,000 hate crimes annually did not count reports of hate crimes from institutions, organizations, churches schools and businesses, although individuals who reported crimes that occurred in these institutions were included in the study. It was also estimated that only 44% of hate crimes are reported to police. (p. 1). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
The NCVS study found that in 56% of hate crime victimizations the offenders motive was color-arousal, (referred to as “race” in the survey), while 27.9% of victims perceived the offender’s motive to be the victim’s ethnicity, which in many cases are also crimes against a person of another color. If race and ethnicity are combined, 83.9 percent of hate crimes are aroused by either race or perceived ethnicity.
In fifty-two percent of violent hate crimes, the perpetrator did not know the victim prior to the attack. (p. 7) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
Although hate crimes may be publicly perceived as a phenomena that victimizes minorities, these national statistics indicate that whites are equally likely to be victims of color-aroused hate crimes, with 0.09 per 1000 whites, 0.07 per thousand blacks and, 0.09 per one thousand Hispanics reporting that they were victims of hate crimes reported to the National Crime Victimization Survey (p.1). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf The NCSV study found that approximately 43.5% of hate crime offenders were white and 38.8 percent black with 17.6 percent other or multi-racial. 72.2 % of all hate crime offenders were male; however, 79% of violent hate crimes included at least one male among the offenders.” (p. 7) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf In one study by the State of California found that 11% of hate crimes motivated by race or ethnicity were committed against whites. http://ag.ca.gov/publications/civilrights/reportingHC.pdf
Hate crimes are so numerous in California that when Attorney General Lockyer began a statewide Rapid Response Team, he urged that resources be directed first toward cases, “that involve any of the following: (1) serious bodily injury or death or appear calculated to cause such, (2) acts of arson or attempted arson and/or (3) use of explosives.” http://ag.ca.gov/publications/civilrights/Hate%20Crime%20Response%20Team.pdf California’s is but one example of state governments’ felt need to take effective measures to reduce color-aroused violent crime.
Three quarters of those identified as Asian or American-Indian reported that their race (color-arousal) was the offenders’ motivation and these reports were based on the statements of the offenders themselves 98.5 percent of the time. Fully half of all white and black hate-crime victims reported that they were victimized because of their skin color. (p.6) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf Three quarters of Hispanic victims of hate crimes perceived the reason to be their ethnicity, which may have been perceptible principally because of their of their skin color. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
In 98.5 percent of the cases where the police find that a crime was motivated by hate, the evidence of hate is the offender’s own derogatory color-associated negative comments, hurtful words and abusive hate-filled language uttered at the time of the offense. Effectively, hate crime statistics reflect only those offenses in which offenders actually confess that their behavior is motivated by hate. Where this verbally self-incriminating evidence is not present, law enforcement agencies do not conclude or report that a hate crime has occurred. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
It is not know how many more violent crimes are motivated by hate where the offender does not confess that the crime is color-aroused. Since self-incriminating statements are not the rule in the law enforcement context, and since a confession that a crime is color-aroused may result in an enhanced criminal penalty, it seems safe to assume that many more color-aroused crimes than these statistics suggest. http://ag.ca.gov/publications/civilrights/reportingHC.pdf
“Victims revealed to the NCVS that they perceived the motive of three in ten hate crimes was the victim’s association with persons who have a certain characteristics, for example a multi-racial couple.” (p.3) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
Most hate crimes described by victims accompanied violent crimes - a rape or other sexual assault, robbery, or assault (84%). In about half of hate crimes, the victim was threatened verbally or assaulted without either a weapon or an injury being involved. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/hcrvp.htm When crimes are color-aroused, they are more likely to be violent. 84% of all hate crimes are violent as compared with 23% of all non-hate crimes. (p.3). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
To grasp the magnitude of the hate crimes as a social problem, it also important to note that each hate incident is counted as one hate crime even if multiple victims are involved. For example, a church burning or arson fire in a home effectively victimizes all of the congregants or family members, but is counted as one hate crime incident. Although an offender fires a gun into a crowd, that will be counted as one hate crime regardless of the number of casualties involved.
(p.2 ) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
“According to victim reports, hate crimes are generally committed by one offender. A sole offender committed about 68% of violent hate crimes. When violent crimes involved hate, they were more likely to be carried out by two or more offenders (32.5% of cases) than when violent crimes did not involve hate but were multiple offender crimes (18.2%).” (p. 7) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
Although the methodology of the FBI and NCVS studies is different, the results are sufficiently similar to support one another and indicate a problem of significant problem that constitutes a danger for the public regardless of race.
Perhaps the most thought-provoking difference between the results of the studies is that although 25% of victims of violent in general report that the perpetrator was black, a much larger portion – 38% of victims of hate-related violent crime in the NCVS study sample – said the offender was black. “When hate crime victims reported that the person committing the crime was black, nine in ten victims said they thought the offender’s motive for the crime was their race”, while in two in ten cases they thought the motive was their ethnicity. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
The NCVS definition of hate crime requires that evidence of hate motivation be present at the incident, i.e. “the offender used derogatory language”, the “offender left hate symbols”, or “the police confirmed that a hate crime had taken place”. (p.3) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdfIf offenders were asked about other hate crimes they may have committed in a confidential environment, such as the psychotherapy context, it is likely that many more hate offenses would be related that were not identified or prosecuted as hate crimes because they were not reported, because the perpetrator could not be identified, or because the available evidence did not meet the evidentiary requirements stated above or found in applicable laws. It is not know how many hate crimes the average offender commits before his behavior comes to the attention of law enforcement officers.
Most hate crimes reported by victims accompanied violent crimes – rape or other sexual assault, robbery or assault (84%). The remaining 16% were associated with property crimes – burglary or theft.” (p.1) "Victims reported a major violent crime – a rape, robbery or assault in which a victim was injured or threatened with a weapon – in a third of hate incidents.” (p.1.) In about half of all hate crimes, the victim was threatened verbally or assaulted, but not with a weapon or a resulting physical injury (p.1). Because people of any color can be victims of hate crimes, any reduction in color-aroused crime will make all people safer, regardless of their color. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
The Prevalence of ECEIBD – Unlawful Discrimination in the Workplace
Allowing color-aroused feelings (animus) or thoughts (prejudices) to influence the terms of a person’s employment is illegal. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it illegal to make hiring, firing and promotion decisions on the basis of color-arousal. http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html Title VII created minimal color-associated behavioral standards that cover all private employers, state and local governments, and education institutions that employ 15 or more individuals, as well as private and public employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor management committees controlling apprenticeship and training. “Virtually all employers are subject to the provisions of this Act.” http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html.
Nonetheless, In FY2004, the US Equal Opportunities Commission processed 29,631 allegations of “race” based discrimination with approximately fourteen percent, or 4,015 resolved with a monetary award or other benefits to the complainant. http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/race.html. “Charges of racial harassment filed with EEOC have more than doubled over the past decade from 2,849 charge filings in Fiscal Year 1991 to approximately 6,550 charge filings in FY 2000, about 8% of all charges filed with the agency.
The Bias Breakdown
Asians and Blacks Lead in Perceived Discrimination at Work
By Amy Joyce
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 9, 2005; D01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/08/AR2005120802037_pf.html
Fifteen percent of all workers say they have been discriminated against in their workplace during the past year, according to a new Gallup Organization poll.
The survey was conducted to discover workers' perceptions of discrimination in their workplaces during a year that marks the 40th anniversary of the formation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC's chairwoman, Cari M. Dominguez, said the information will help the agency compare employee perceptions of discrimination with complaints actually filed with the agency.
For example, 31 percent of Asians surveyed reported incidents of discrimination, the largest percentage of any racial or ethnic group, with African Americans the second-largest group at 26 percent. But Asians generally file fewer discrimination complaints than other groups, according to the EEOC.
"We need to go back and track . . . what are the differences" between people's perception of discrimination and the actual filings, Dominguez said. "Then we can do a better job of outreach."
The survey was reported on the day Best Buy Co., the nation's largest electronics retailer, was sued by six current and former employees who claim they were passed over for promotions and raises based on their sex, race and ethnicity, and when the EEOC filed a class-action lawsuit in Chicago against AutoNation Inc., alleging that the auto retailer subjected employees at its Elmhurst, Ill., Kia dealership to racial, national origin and religious harassment.
The EEOC suit was based on a complaint of discrimination filed by Halit Macit, a former sales associate with AutoNation, who said he was routinely harassed by a manager based on his Muslim religion and Turkish national origin.
The EEOC's investigation also concluded that other nonwhite employees were harassed at the dealership and threatened that if they complained about the harassment, they would be fired. AutoNation sold the dealership to the Napleton Fleet Group, which was not named in the lawsuit, according to the EEOC.
"The company has cooperated with the EEOC's investigation of the allegations, but has not yet seen the EEOC's complaint. Therefore, we cannot address any of the specific allegations," Marc Cannon, AutoNation's vice president of corporate communications, said in an e-mail. "AutoNation is proud of its diverse workforce. The company is an equal opportunity employer and is fully committed to maintaining a work environment that is free from all forms of discrimination and harassment."
"Our investigation found that AutoNation's management allowed rampant bigotry in the workplace, with Macit being called various anti-Arab epithets and being told that Muslims 'should die,' " John P. Rowe, the EEOC's Chicago district director, said in a written statement. "African Americans, Hispanics and Indians were openly referred to by all of the all too well-known and ugly racial slurs. This is unacceptable at any workplace, and employers need to take forceful and effective action to stop it."
The number of complaints of religious discrimination involving Muslims has doubled since Sept. 11, 2001. "They don't seem to be going away and I suppose with everything that continues to go on in the Middle East and with the war in Iraq, that kind of thinking remains in the forefront of some people's consciousness," said John C. Hendrickson, an EEOC regional attorney in Chicago.
According to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Best Buy, female employees were told they could not be on the sales floor because "girls can't sell" and African American men were disproportionately given jobs in the warehouse, rather than higher-paying jobs in sales. The complaint seeks class-action status so that thousands of workers at the major retailer can be a part of the suit.
"Best Buy reserves the most desirable job assignments and positions -- and the sales experience necessary to achieve them and advance in the Company -- for white male employees. Best Buy's predominantly white male sales employees are better paid and receive greater opportunities for advancement than Best Buy's female and minority employees who overwhelmingly are segregated in the lowest paying positions with the least chance of advancement," according to the suit, filed in San Francisco.
Nationwide, more than 80 percent of Best Buy store managers are white men, while fewer than 10 percent are women, and fewer than 10 percent are African American or Latino, according to plaintiffs' attorneys.
"We have seen the [plaintiffs' attorneys'] press release and vigorously deny the discrimination claims described in that release. The behaviors that are alleged in the press release are absolutely inconsistent with our policies, values and cultures," said a Best Buy spokeswoman. "We do not tolerate discriminatory practices."
The suit adds to a wave of high-profile, class-action lawsuits and settlements during the past two years involving large employers.
In July 2004, investment bank Morgan Stanley agreed to pay $54 million to settle claims that it underpaid and did not promote women. A few days later, aircraft manufacturer Boeing Co. agreed to pay up to $72.5 million to settle similar allegations. That same month, a group of black employees sued Eastman Kodak Co. accusing the company of systemic race discrimination, and an Alabama judge held a hearing on an ongoing race discrimination case against BellSouth Corp. In June last year, a federal judge ruled that a sex discrimination case against Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the nation's largest retailer, could proceed as a class action involving as many as 1.6 million women. The company is hoping to have its class-action status thrown out on appeal.
The Gallup poll found that the most frequent type of discrimination cited by respondents reporting bias (26 percent) was sex bias, followed by race (23 percent) and age (17 percent). Women were more than twice as likely as men to say they had encountered bias. Some types of discrimination reported in the poll are not clearly covered by federal law, including favoritism, sexual orientation and language. The percentage of workers reporting types of bias covered by federal statutes was 9 percent. Gallup conducted telephone interviews with 1,252 adults during two days in May. The poll's margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
The most frequent reports of discrimination were in promotion decisions (33 percent of those claiming bias) and pay (29 percent). But workers interviewed during the poll also reported bias manifested in harassment, work conditions and assignments.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
By The Associated Press, Friday November 17, 2000
http://wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/94/63/01_91_m.html
Coca-Cola to pay discrimination settlement
ATLANTA - The Coca-Cola Co. agreed to pay $192.5 million to settle a racial discrimination suit by black workers.
The settlement, announced yesterday, includes $113 million in cash, $43.5 million to adjust salaries, and $36 million for oversight of the company's employment practices.
Coke also will pay $20 million in attorneys' fees and plans to donate $50 million to its foundation for community programs. And it agreed to create an ombudsman post and have its employment practices reviewed by an outside group.
Shares of Coca-Cola were up 12.5 cents to $61.63 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
The settlement given preliminary approval by U.S. District Judge Richard Story, in whose court the suit was filed in April 1999. Details of the settlement will be sent to about 2,000 current and former employees beginning next month.
The lawsuit claimed Coca-Cola discriminated against salaried black employees in pay, promotions and evaluations. The company denied the claims. The settlement covers salaried black employees in the United States who worked for Coke between April 1995 and June 2000.
The seven-member watchdog group, charged with making sure Coca-Cola is fair in pay, promotions and performance evaluations, was a centerpiece of the settlement. The task force will recommend changes and ensure they are carried out; Coke retains the option of challenging changes it feels are not financially or technically feasible.
A toll-free telephone line will be established to receive complaints 24 hours a day.
The task force is modeled after a similar group established four years ago in the settlement of a discrimination lawsuit against Texaco. Coca-Cola's will include former government officials in labor and civil rights, professors, lawyers and diversity consultants.
IN THIS ISSUE
HOLIDAY HEADACHES
COKE SETTLEMENT
CLASS ACTION
OSHA STANDARD
THE EEOC WANTS YOU
http://www.fordharrison.com/fh/publications/mu/pdf/200012.pdf.
Coca-Cola Settlement -
Management
Update - A Warning to Employers
The record-breaking $192.5
million settlement paid by The
Coca-Cola Company to a
class of race discrimination plaintiffs
sounded an alarm for many employ-
ers. The Coca-Cola case shows that
no employer is immune from
potentially devastating class action
suits.
While the amount of the settlement
grabbed headlines, some of the
other terms of the agreement caught
the attention of employers and
employee advocates. In an unusual
step, Coca-Cola agreed to have an
outside panel monitor, and possibly
make sweeping changes to, its
human resources policies. The
company must accept the panel’s
recommendations unless a court
orders otherwise. While Coca-Cola
agreed to this provision voluntarily,
plaintiffs in future lawsuits may seek
to have courts impose such
conditions on employers who are
found to have violated anti-
discrimination laws. Many employers
would be concerned
about giving a group of
outsiders such broad authority.
Employers who want to avoid
costly lawsuits and the possibil-
ity of oversight by an outside
group should take preventative
steps now to avoid discrimina-
tion in the workplace. One
method that may help avoid
discrimination suits, the use of
ombuds, was also part of the
Coke settlement agreement.
According to F&H attorney
(and former Chairman of the
National Mediation Board) Josh
Javits, the use of ombuds
(formerly called ombudsmen) is
an excellent way to help avoid
discrimination complaints. An
ombuds program involves
that often plague corporate
executives who handle discrim-
ination complaints.
Proactive
management of
complaints, resourceful and
effective methods of handling
discrimination claims, open
lines of communication, and
sensitivity by upper manage-
ment to discrimination issues
can go a long way in avoiding
costly litigation such as this
case.
Amy W. Littrell
alittrell@fordharrison.com
1275 Peachtree Street, N.E. • Suite 600
Atlanta,Georgia 30309
The Management Update is a service to our
clients providing general information on
selected legal topics. Clients are cautioned
not to attempt to solve specific problems on
the basis of information contained in
an article. For information, please call Creel
McCormack at (404) 888-3858 or write to
the Atlanta address below.
Editor Amy W. Littrell
alittrell@fordharrison.com
1275 Peachtree Street, N.E. • Suite 600
Atlanta Georgia 30309
(404) 888-3800 • FAX (404) 888-3863
In addition to unlawful discrimination eminating from the employer and supervisors, workers have often confronted color-aroused harrassment from coworkers. “Racial harassment is a form of race discrimination which includes racial jokes, ethnic slurs, offensive or derogatory comments, or other verbal or physical conduct based on an individual's race or color. Such conduct may create an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment, or interfere with workers' performance, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” When companies permit or encourage such harrassment, the companies also become liable for damages. EEOC SEEKS TO JOIN CLASS RACE HARASSMENT SUIT AGAINST DEFENSE GIANT LOCKHEED MARTIN: Commission Intervention Aims to Protect Public Interest, Remedy Egregious Bias, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/12-5-00.html
Corporations and individuals paid $61.1 million in monetary benefits levied by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2004, yet these corporations lack the diagnostic tools to determine which of their employees may be most at risk for repeating the same behavior. While corporations may refer individuals for counseling, they cannot be diagnosed against a commonly agreed benchmarks, and cannot know whether individual’s relevant symptoms and signs are increasing or decreasing. We cannot determine scientifically who is most at risk and we cannot empirically evaluate the success of our many and costly interventions. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity, Race/Color Discrimination, http://www.eeoc.gov/types/race.html.
According to the EEOC, the following discriminatory behaviors result in liability for corporations and individuals:
Discriminatory Practices
II. What Discriminatory Practices Are Prohibited by These Laws?
Under Title VII, the ADA, and the ADEA, it is illegal to discriminate in any aspect of employment, including:
hiring and firing;
compensation, assignment, or classification of employees;
transfer, promotion, layoff, or recall;
job advertisements;
recruitment;
testing;
use of company facilities;
training and apprenticeship programs;
fringe benefits;
pay, retirement plans, and disability leave; or
other terms and conditions of employment.
Discriminatory practices under these laws also include:
harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or age;
retaliation against an individual for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in an investigation, or opposing discriminatory practices;
employment decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about the abilities, traits, or performance of individuals of a certain sex, race, age, religion, or ethnic group, or individuals with disabilities; and
denying employment opportunities to a person because of marriage to, or association with, an individual of a particular race, religion, national origin, or an individual with a disability. Title VII also prohibits discrimination because of participation in schools or places of worship associated with a particular racial, ethnic, or religious group.
Employers are required to post notices to all employees advising them of their rights under the laws EEOC enforces and their right to be free from retaliation. Such notices must be accessible, as needed, to persons with visual or other disabilities that affect reading.
Note: Many states and municipalities also have enacted protections against discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation, status as a parent, marital status and political affiliation. For information, please contact the EEOC District Office nearest you.
http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html
findarticles.com
Industry must build on learning experiences to improve racial equality in the workplace
Nation's Restaurant News, Nov 14, 2005 by Ellen Koteff
. . . In April of this year, Sodexho Inc. agreed to pay $80 million to settle a lawsuit brought by thousands of African-American employees who said they routinely were barred from moving up through the corporate ranks. And Sodexho is hardly the only foodservice operation to face such charges. . . .
. . . Joe's Stone Crab, McDonald's, the Palm Restaurant, Ruby Tuesday, Aramark and Applebee's all have found themselves penalized recently following charges of discrimination. The fines range from the $32,000 paid by Ruby Tuesday to the $500,000 paid by the Palm. . . .
It makes sense that some companies are learning from their mistakes, but despite those steps forward, claims of racial bias continue to persist, making up about 20 percent of all discrimination suits in foodservice, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
When surveyed anonymously, 18 percent of foodservice employees admitted to making fun of co-workers based on their race or gender, according to a study of 600 foodservice workers compiled in 2003 by Plano, Texas-based consulting firm Batrus Hollweg International.
And the discriminatory actions do not necessarily stop at name calling or joking, as 7 percent divulged in the survey that they failed to assist a co-worker because they did not like that person's race. And how do you screen for hidden prejudices in job interviews? It certainly is beyond the scope of most human beings to see into another's heart to ascertain his or her true diversity quotient.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3190/is_46_39/ai_n15861246#continue
According to American historian John Hope Franklin, Ph.D., writing in the foreword to “Black Psychiatrists and American Psychiatry, a 1998 book edited by Jeanne Spurlock, M.D., "The remarkable fact is that in some fields of inquiry, where scientific truth should be the hallmark for judging persons or, indeed, discoveries, some of the most rigid and inhospitable attitudes toward certain human beings working in the same field have been manifested http://www.psych.org/pnews/99-04-02/racism.html
The fact that we now have state and federal agencies, laws and administrative courts instituted after copious study to prevent and punish racial assaults on blacks’ dignity, liberty, life and property is both proof of the severity of the abuse and of the ongoing need to root it out..
ECEIBD is “a concise technical description of a taxon” resulting from “the art or act of identifying a disease from its signs and symptoms” and is “the decision reached by diagnosis,” with “investigation or analysis of the cause or nature of a condition, situation, or problem” and a diagnosis of ECEIBD is “a statement or conclusion from such an analysis”. Although anyone is entitled to have an opinion about the presence of ECEIBD in a person or in society, only a person competent to render a psychiatric diagnosis is competent to diagnose ECEIBD in a particular individual, and then only after deliberate and careful application of steps and procedures such as are explicit and implicit in the definition of the term “diagnosis”.
Characteristics of a “Diagnosis”
The Characteristics of a “Diagnosis”
Websters, http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/diagnosis
A Diagnosis is:
a concise technical description
of a taxon
resulting from the art or act
of identifying a disease
from its signs
and symptoms, with
investigation or analysis of the cause
or nature
of a condition, situation, or problem, and
a statement or conclusion from such an analysis.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/diagnosis
The determination that ECEIBD exists in a particular individual is
a “decision reached by diagnosis,” with “investigation or analysis of the cause or nature of a condition, situation, or problem” and a diagnosis of ECEIBD is “a statement or conclusion from such an analysis”. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/diagnosis
Although anyone is entitled to have a lay opinion about the presence of ECEIBD in a person, an organization or society, only a person competent to render a psychiatric diagnosis is competent to diagnose ECEIBD in a particular individual, and then only after deliberate and careful application of the kinds of steps and procedures such as are explicit and implicit in the definition of the term “diagnosis”. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/diagnosis
Taxonomy, of course, is “the study of the general principles of scientific classification”, and a “taxon” is an entity classified according to scientific principles. The principal American effort to classify abnormal conditions of mind is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. This text discusses advantages and perceived disadvantages of including the ECEIBD diagnosis within the taxonomy of the scientific taxonomy of the APA Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.
It is natural to be able to distinguish between colors. If we could not distinguish between and green and red, for example, it might be hard to distinguish a ripe apple from an unripe one, or to distinguish an apple tree from a pear tree. The ability to distinguish between colors is naturally occurring and highly useful biological characteristic. Our sight, along with smell and taste, help us to find ripe fruit and vegetables and to distinguish between poisonous berries and nutritious ones. Vision is the ability to distinguish between colors. Distinguishing between at least some colors is a necessity of existence, for if all of use were unable to distinguish between colors, even between black and white, then we would effectively be blind. In short order, we would cease to thrive as a species.
However,
What are color-aroused emotions/feelings?
What are “color-aroused thoughts”?
What is color-aroused ideation?
A color-aroused ideation is a group of interrelated thoughts that arise in association with the perception of skin color.
Because we can have complex thoughts about our own skin color, it is important to note that color-aroused ideation may occur in conjunction with perception of the skin color of ourselves and others.
That matter identifying the color of human beings is actually far more complex for us than identifying the color of wall paint, cars or flowers. When identifying the color of inanimate objects This is because although our eyes perceive difference in skin color much as they perceive differences in the color of objects, yet our ideation about skin color determines the name we give to the color rather than the name being an attempt to as do
Similar to a computer program or algorithim that determine in any given moment the manner in which we process perceptions of color. In this text, when we use the term “color-aroused ideation” ideation aroused in connection with “skin-color, ” unless otherwise specified.
Most of us believe it is a simple matter to observe and identify the color of a person. Because of our learning and conditioning it is actually far more complex than identifying the color of a flower. When identifying the color of a flower, for example, particularly if we wanted to use that color in the color-scheme of our house, we would make every effort to be as specific as possible. This is because we are able to observe minute differences in color
how we that inform (or misinform) A color aroused thought is a thought that arises after and in association with the perception of color. In this text, however, when we use the term “color-aroused thought”, we refer to thoughts that arise in association with the perception of skin color.
When we say that a person is “black” or “white” we are expressing a color-aroused thought. WAlthough discussing wall paint and car colors can become very complex, it is relatively simple compared to discussing the color of people. There are several reasons for this. When we discuss wall paint colors and car colors, we make every effort to distinguish precisely between them so that we can combine them and according to the preferences of ourselves and others.
choosing between people Although observing color is a relatively simple matter when discussing objects such as bicycles we may believe that observing a person’s color is a simple matter of perception, the terminology we use to describe color reflects a complex set of assumptions that are not matter of physics but are, in fact, matters of learning
The ability to perceive the color of objects is largely a matter of evolutionary biology.
What makes color-aroused emotions “extreme”?
What makes color-aroused feelings “extreme”?
What is “color aroused behavior”?
How is “extreme” color-aroused behavior defined?
In order for an individual to be convicted of a hate crime, a jury must determine unanimously, and beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, out of an excess of feelings of racial hatred, committed an act which was unlawful. Acts that are crimes and are motivated by hate are by definition extreme within the context of a society defined its commitment to laws.
Color aroused behavior is behavior aroused in whole or in part by color-aroused thoughts and and/or feelings. Non-autonomic behavior originate in the brain, with emotion and thought. Thoughts often reflect complex assumptions about ourselves and our surroundings. Thoughts that seem very simple may actually reflect complex assumptions. Observations, though they may appear to be mere sensory perception, often reflect complex assumptions also. For example, the observation that “It is raining outside” assumes that there is an inside and an outside, that various possible weather conditions are possible, or may reflect complex
Color-aroused thoughts and emotions may occur when one is aware of his own color and has thoughts and emotions in association with that awareness. It may occur when in the presence or when aware of the existence of persons of another color.
What, then, might be included in definition of Extreme Color Ideation and Behavior Syndrome? We might start by examining behaviors prohibited by discrimination laws to see if these prohibited behaviors and underlying thought patterns cause extreme distress for those who engage in them. From there, we might study the peculiar ideation most often involved when these behaviors are manifested.
Apologists
Just as there are those who do not consider pedophilia to be a mental disorder, there are members of the APA who do not consider extreme and persistent color-aroused feelings and thoughts manifested in violence to be a mental illness. Responding the discussions of black members of the American Psychiatric Association, the president of the APA, Daniel Borenstein, M.D, wrote in the Psychiatry News that, “Some of our members have suggested that racism is a form of psychiatric illness. They believe that failure to recognize it as a psychiatric disorder means that racist individuals will not receive the treatment they need to end their false beliefs. They have even suggested that racism should be included in the DSM.” Although, “in the past one of the DSM work groups seriously evaluated racism and concluded that it did not meet the criteria for a psychiatric illness.” From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html
Although Dr. Borenstein acknowledges that racists may be “brutal”, “violent”, “antisocial”, and “develop negative judgments toward groups of people who have done nothing to deserve the critical attitudes toward them” He also notes that this mindset has lead to the horrors of Auscwitz and the hate crimes of neo-Nazi groups in Idaho. He might even agree that three hundred years of American slavery and the American Civil war are examples color ideation and behavior that were ultimately extremely damaging to the self and to society. http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html Yet Dr. Borenstein argues that normal discriminatory behaviors and extreme ones cannot be sufficiently distinguished from one another. He argues that, “Brutal, violent hate crimes are usually committed by mean, not sick, individuals and groups”, but he does not offer empirical information to support this hypothesis. In any case, this is a very circular reasoning. From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html
The same argument could be made about pedophilia. Indeed, some psychiatrists have argued for delisting pedophilia in the DSM . The arguments offered for and against highlight the interaction between listing of a disease in the DSM and the effects that has on the larger society. For example, Dr. Charles Moser of San Francisco's Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented conferees with a paper entitled "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal."
”People whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden or religiously proscribed should not necessarily be labeled mentally ill, they argued.” Psychiatric Association Debates Reclassifying Pedophilia, Lawrence Morahan, CNSNews.com, June 11, 2003. http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive%5C200306%5CCUL20030611c.html
Dr. Borenstein also argues that because color based ideation and behavior exists on a continuum from the innocuous to the extremely harmful – with behavioral manifestations ranging from uncomfortable insults to genocide – so ECIBS cannot or should not be listed because it is impossible to sufficiently distinguish between these extremes. It would be impossible, Dr. Borenstein argues, to prevent a group’s “healthy self-esteem” and “feeling good about ourselves” from being grouped with “Auschwitz”. From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html.
Until the APA defines extreme and persistent and obsessive color ideation resulting in the commission of brutal and violent crimes as a peculiar “sickness”, it will be impossible for those committing those crimes to be found to have that sickness. This sickness has not been identified in criminals because the APA has not yet defined color ideation that leads to brutal violent crimes as a “sickness”. If schizophrenia were not considered an illness, it is fair to expect that it would be mentioned much less frequently in patient’s medical files and court records, although the persistently disordered behavior and violence would be nonetheless present.
Color-aroused feelings and thoughts are not unlike other emotions that may be damaging to the self and others. While we all may experience some level of greed, yet it is a small subset of us whose greed leads to unlawful theft and fraud. Although we all experience fear, yet a small minority are so disabled by fear as to find themselves unable to function. If psychiatry neglected to study any disease whose symptoms were shared to any degree by those not “sick”, then we would not study anorexia because “everyone eats”, nor would be treat murderous rage because “everyone gets angry at times”. It is precisely because extremes of normal behavior may be harmful that psychiatry seeks to distinguish that which is normal from that which is extreme.
Essentially, that has been the position of the APA with respect to “racism” – that although extreme racism is a disfavored “opinion”, often with attendant violent and sadistic behavior, it does not amount to a mental disorder. When speaking of pedophilia there is overwhelming consensus that it is a disease, not only because it revulses the public. The idea that pedophilia is not a disease flies in the face of logic and experience for at least two reasons that are equally applicable to ECEIBD: (1) The harm that pedophilia inflicts on his victims, particularly when the offender is a parent or other relative, means that the environment is dysfunctional and destructive for the child victim. We intuitively know that a behavior cannot be considered “normal” and “healthy” when it does so much profound and lasting harm to its victims. To the contrary, the ability to do so much harm to another human being while denying that the harm exists is a sign of profound denial and narcissism. The vast majority of us are readily able to identify that harm and to determine that such harmful behavior cannot be regarded as “normal” without defiling the definition of “normal” and debasing our sense of who we are as human beings.
When Michael Jackson slept with children of his acquaintance, a jury was unable to find him guilty of child molestation because his behavior could also be interpreted merely eccentric. Had he kidnapped stranger’s children sequestered them at Neverland, while publicly stating his attempt to abuse them, I have no doubt that he would have been convicted and universally considered sick. His behavior exists on a continuum, but continuums have lines and that behavior would clearly cross the line. When a man murders six of his co-workers and then commits suicide out of color-aroused hatred, his behavior exists on the same continuum as normal behavior, yet it separated to a degree that it can be seen as clearly criminal and extremely emotionally disordered.
ECEIBD cannot be different in that respect. Dragging person behind a pickup truck out of an excess of color-aroused hate and disregard is not typical of us, but rather is aberrant and unacceptable. And acts of similar color-aroused barbarity occur with astounding regularity.
The second reason that we eschew “man boy love” is more still within the province of the psychiatric profession: In the context of our society where most people believe pedophilia is a highly disorder and destructive behavior, immoral and shameful behavior, engaging in pedophilic thought processes and behavior is extremely corrosive to the perpetrator. When the perpetrator has to hide and deny his behavior central to his self-concept, lying, creating alibis, dissembling and secretly grooming, this leads to low self-esteem and a progressive detachment from others who do not share and in fact revile this process. As the behavior escalates, only those who share the same desires are suitable social contacts for a person actively engaging in pedophilic behavior.
Once the offending individual begins to rely on those covert networks for support of that which is illegal and generally believed to be immoral and vile, the isolation of the offending individual increases and a cycle begins. Progressive isolation and resort to people of like mind progressively loosens societal controls in the individual and reinforces those of the covert subculture. For this reason, many of those who engage or have engaged in sex with children describe it as an addiction that left them isolated and full of self-hate. Perhaps, as some argue, this self-hate would not be characteristic of pedophilia if our only society accepted adults who expressed sexual attraction for children.
Whether that be true or not, this society has reached a moral, political and legal consensus that sexual activity with children simply will not be tolerated. The same is true of crimes in which extreme color-aroused hate motivates individuals to commit heinous acts of barbarity. The difference is that, although pedophilia is recognized as a mental illness in the DSM, extreme and repetitive acts of hateful violence motivated by race are not acknowledged as disordered behavior within the DSM-IV.
Pedophilia, like ECEIBD is a selective unlawful and harmful behavior directed toward one or more individuals that is aroused by an immutable physical characteristic of the other person(s) Acts of sex with children are non-consensual regardless of the facts of the particular case because children are not able to give consent under our laws. Acts of extreme abuse based on color may be symptomatic of ECEIBD even when occurring between individuals in a consenting relationship if they reflect an extreme devaluation of the offender and/or the other participant(s) based on the color of either participant such as would normally cause significant psychological or emotional damage.
The analogy is not entirely apt of course, but is applicable in some ways to ECEIBD. That lynching, church burnings and riotous stompings are harmful to its victims is indisputable. That only a tiny fraction of Americans currently engage in this disordered behavior while the overwhelming majority of us revile it also shows that it is abnormal. These are behaviors not within the ambit of “private behavior” but intentionally public in nature. As with pedophilia, there is but a handful of people in our country who would argue that color-aroused beatings of strangers is justified or can be considered “normal” in any sense.
Like pedophilia, if the cluster of emotions, feelings and thought processes that were manifested in lynchings and stompings were defined as a cognizable disorder, then there would be a greater likelihood that the condition could be researched, diagnosed in affected individuals, and treated or contained. Just as delisting pedophilia would have important legal consequences, the failure to list ECEIBD has significant legal and social ramifications, for those who have the untreated symptoms, for their victims and for society.
Unlike the case of pedophilia, the DSM has not defined ECEIBD as a mental disorder. Many continue to view extreme color-aroused discrimination as not sufficiently distinguishable from that which is “normal.” Here, there is another parallel between pedophilia and ECEIBD. Even though pedophila involves such abhorrent behavior as kissing and touching children, we are able to distinguish both in law and in the DSM between those acts as practiced by a loving parent and those acts as practiced by a molesting parent. Yet, there are still those who argue that color-aroused acts lie on a continuum in which the unacceptable and the acceptable cannot be distinguished sufficiently to declare what is acceptable and what is not. In pedophilia, the very same acts that in once circumstance are evidence of love are in another evidence of abuse. We all know the difference and we all accept responsibility for policing the line between the two. Although there is a risk of erring at the margins, the far greater danger is to fail to police the extremes.
It is precisely because we so revile the acting-out behavior of pedophiles that we must make treatment alternatives available to them. We might viscerally like to kill them all, but our laws and our consciences would not allow it. We might like to imprison them all, but they are much more likely to come forward for treatment than for jail terms. So we are left with only mundane alternatives: to design programs to diagnose their illness as best we can, to acknowledge pedophilia as an illness and thereby encourage potential offenders to come forward for treatment, and for those of us whose professional calling is compassion to hear and understand and guide them in their efforts to refrain from what we and they know to be a horrible temptation.
In that regard, our response to racist needs to be as compassionate and constructive as that toward pedophiles. We must acknowledge the force of the feelings that compel them to act, we must treat the low self-esteem that makes destroying others seem like a worthy alternative for their lives, and we must offer them pathways to constructive and peaceable engagement with society. Like pedophiles and children, if they cannot be trusted to engage, they must at least learn to leave them be.
Editor's Note: Removes 1st Add at the request of one of the report's authors.
(CNSNews.com) - In a step critics charge could result in decriminalizing sexual contact between adults and children, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) recently sponsored a symposium in which participants discussed the removal of pedophilia from an upcoming edition of the psychiatric manual of mental disorders.
Some mental health professionals attending an annual APA convention May 19 in San Francisco proposed removing several long-recognized categories of mental illness - including pedophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism and sadomasochism - from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).
Most of the mental illnesses being considered for removal are known as "paraphilias."
Dr. Charles Moser of San Francisco's Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented conferees with a paper entitled "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal."
People whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden or religiously proscribed should not necessarily be labeled mentally ill, they argued.
Different societies stigmatize different sexual behaviors, and since the existing research could not distinguish people with paraphilias from so-called "normophilics," there is no reason to diagnose paraphilics as either a distinct group or psychologically unhealthy, Moser and Kleinplatz stated.
Participants also debated gender-identity disorder, a condition in which a person feels discomfort with his or her biological sex. Homosexual activists have long argued that gender identity disorder should not be assumed to be abnormal.
"The situation of the paraphilias at present parallels that of homosexuality in the early 1970s. Without the support or political astuteness of those who fought for the removal of homosexuality, the paraphilias continue to be listed in the DSM," Moser and Kleinplatz wrote.
A. Dean Byrd, vice president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and a clinical professor of medicine at the University of Utah, condemned the debate. Taking the paraphilias out of the DSM without research would have negative consequences, he said.
"What this does, in essence, is it has a chilling effect on research," Byrd said. "That is, once you declassify it, there's no reason to continue studying it. What we know is that the paraphilias really impair interpersonal sexual behavior...and to suggest that it could be 'normalized' simply takes away from the science, but more importantly, has a chilling effect on research."
"Normalizing" pedophilia would have enormous implications, especially since civil laws closely follow the scientific community on social-moral matters, said Linda Ames Nicolosi, NARTH publications director.
"If pedophilia is deemed normal by psychiatrists, then how can it remain illegal?" Nicolosi asked. "It will be a tough fight to prove in the courts that it should still be against the law."
In previous articles, some mental health professionals have argued that there is little or no proof that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to minors. Indeed, some have argued that many sexually molested children later look back on their experience as positive, Nicolosi said.
"And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if children can be forced to go to church, why should 'consent' be the defining moral issue when it comes to sex?" Nicolosi said.
But whether pedophilia should be judged "normal and healthy" is as much a moral question as a scientific one, according to Nicolosi.
"The courts are so afraid of 'legislating someone's privately held religious beliefs' that if pedophilia is normalized, we will be hard put to defend the retention of laws against child molestation," Nicolosi noted.
In a fact sheet on pedophilia, the APA calls the behavior "criminal and immoral."
"An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act that never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior," the APA said.
However, the APA failed to address whether it considers a person with a pedophile orientation to have a mental disorder.
"That is the question that is being actively debated at this time within the APA, and that is the question they have not answered when they respond that such relationships are 'immoral and illegal,'" Nicolosi said.
Dr. Darrel A. Regier, director of research for the APA, said there were "no plans and there is no process set up that would lead to the removal of the paraphilias from their consideration as legitimate mental disorders."
Some years ago, the APA considered the question of whether a person who had such attractions but did not act on them should still be labeled with a disorder.
"We clarified in the DSM-IV-TR...that if a person acted on those urges, we considered it a disorder," Regier said.
Dr. Robert Spitzer, author of a study on change of sexual orientation that he presented at the 2001 APA convention, took part in the symposium in San Francisco in May.
Spitzer said the debate on removing gender identity disorder from the DSM was generated by people in the homosexual activist community "who are troubled by gender identity disorder in particular."
Spitzer added: "I happen to think that's a big mistake."
What Spitzer considered the most outrageous proposal, to get rid of the paraphilias, "doesn't have the same support that the gender-identity rethinking does." And he said he considers it unlikely that changes would be made regarding the paraphilias.
"Getting rid of the paraphilias, which would mean getting rid of pedophilia, that would not happen in a million years. I think there might be some compromise about gender-identity disorder," he said.
Dr. Frederick Berlin, founder of the Sexual Disorders Clinic at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, said people who are sexually attracted to children should learn not to feel ashamed of their condition.
"I have no problem accepting the fact that someone, through no fault of his own, is attracted to children. But certainly, such an individual has a responsibility...not to act on it," Berlin said.
"Many of these people need help in not acting on these very intense desires in the same way that a drug addict or alcoholic may need help. Again, we don't for the most part blame someone these days for their alcoholism; we don't see it simply as a moral weakness," he added.
"We do believe that these people have a disease or a disorder, but we also recognize that in having it that it impairs their function, that it causes them suffering that they need to turn for help," Berlin said.
ECEIBD-Associated Behaviors Victims
Outbursts
Violence toward Individuals, e.g. pushing, shoving, spitting, punching, kicking
Armed assualts, eg. Assaults with guns knives and other objects
Terroristic Verbal Threats
Terroristic Assaults, e.g. bombing, arson
daubing racist graffiti on mosques
derogatory comments
hand gestures
Children's responses vary in accordance to their level of exposure to the terrorist activities, either directly or indirectly. The degree of exposure to terrorist actions is related to the prevalence of PTSD. The more severe the traumatic event, the greater the risk of developing posttraumatic symptoms (Bat-Zion and Levy-Shiff, 1993; Pynoos et al., 1987; Thabet et al., 2002). Children who directly experience loss are more symptomatic (Bat-Zion and Levy-Shiff, 1993; Pfefferbaum et al., 1999). Physical injury, or witnessing death and physical injury of others, is associated with higher rates of PTSD and comorbid depression and anxiety. The degree of personal loss (i.e., the child's relationship to the victim) has also been correlated with the number of posttraumatic stress symptoms in less exposed children. Knowing an injured or deceased person increased the risk of symptom development (Nader et al., 1990). In addition to the level of trauma, the duration of exposure to violence predicts risk for development of psychiatric problems in children (Goldstein et al., 1997; Pynoos and Nader, 1989).
The differential response to trauma depends, in part, on the child's age and level of psychological maturity (Osofsky, 1995). Children age 5 and under may exhibit regressive behaviors such as bed-wetting, thumb-sucking or fear of the dark. They may have increased difficulties separating from their parents. Repetitive play may occur in which themes or aspects of the trauma are expressed. Their dreams may be frightening, but without any recognizable content. School-age children (ages 6 to 11) may have attention problems and schoolwork may suffer. Signs of anxiety include school avoidance, somatic complaints, irrational fears, sleep problems, nightmares, irritability and angry outbursts. They may appear to be depressed and more withdrawn. Adolescent (ages 12 to 18) responses are more similar to adults and include intrusive thoughts, hypervigilance, emotional numbing, nightmares, sleep disturbances and avoidance. They are at increased risk for problems with substance abuse, peer problems and depression. Trauma is often associated with intense feelings of humiliation, self-blame, shame and guilt, which result from the sense of powerlessness and may lead to a sense of alienation and avoidance.
Predisposing risk factors may cause some children to be at greater risk to develop symptoms of anxiety and depression. These include past exposure to traumatic events during childhood, childhood conduct problems and childhood anxiety, as well as antisocial behavior or a family history of psychiatric disorders (Applied Research and Consulting, LLC et al., 2002; Breslau and Davis, 1992).
Wanda P. Fremont, M.D. , Childhood Reactions to Terrorism
Induced Trauma, (2005) http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=171201495
ECEIBD-Associated Functional Limitations
inability to speak or think clearly, or a or a
a becoming mad
losing control,
sensation of detachment from reality
full blown anxiety attack.
Because of the social ills and upheaval that have arisen where ECEIBD is present and unchecked, (eg. “race” riots”, “racial” apartheid, segregation) our society has invested many hundreds of millions of dollars in an effort to overcome the effects of ECEIBD. Yet this closely-associated array of thoughts and behaviors - commonly believed to involve matters of fear, self-image, and perception - has not yet been formally defined, studied or treated by American Psychiatry in the way that other serious disorders have been (e.g. Trichotillomania (pulling one’s hair out DSM-IV 312.39) and Sleep Disorder, Insomnia Type (DSM-IV 780.52).
“. . . Acts of discrimination . . . no matter how subtle, can cause enduring harm to the psyche, inclusive to evoking a lessessened self-esteem, underdeveloped personal identities, retarded cognitive and affective development, thereby, shaking confidence and leading to feelings associated with a sense of isolation and alienation, depression, dissonance and even at times the discontinuance of education. Having to endure such feelings, can present with repressed rage, anxiety and anger, which can result in psychopathology.” (Smith 1985: Williams & Williams-Morris 2000). Psychological barriers associated with matriculation of African American students in predominantly white institutions, Journal of Instructional Psychology, Sept, 2003 by Debra F. Lett, James V. Wright
When Races Interact, Their Bodies React - increase in heart rates when seeing someone of a different race - Brief Article
USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), Jan, 1999
In the search to understand race relations in this country, Scott Vrana and David Rollock, associate professors of psychological sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Ind., are finding the answers are more than skin deep. They are looking at interactions between persons of different races and sexes.
"People may think they feel comfortable with a person of another race, but their body's initial physical reaction to that person may tell a different story," Rollock indicates. For instance, when any stranger enters the room, most people experience an increase in heart rate. The researchers found that when the stranger is of another race, the heart rate generally goes up more than it would if the person were of the same race. The increase is most pronounced in men. There is one exception to the different-race rule--the presence of an African-American man sets hearts racing in both black and white men.
"We found that for white males, heart rates went up almost 10 beats per minute when a black man entered the room," Vrana explains. "This is a really large change." Heart rates in this instance stayed elevated throughout the encounter. Black males also showed a higher heart rate in reaction to other black males, though the increase was not nearly as great--around two beats per minute. Jumps in heart rates were about two beats per minute less in black males when the interactor was a white male.
The researchers are not certain why the sight of a black man would have such a profound effect. "It could be that people are just not used to seeing African-Americans in some settings," Rollock suggests. Stereotyping and negative media portrayals may have an effect as well.
USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), Jan, 1999, cited in
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1272/is_2644_127/ai_53630935#continue
“Stressors are the conditions, threats, or cues that give rise to psychological or physiological reactions called strains (Wolfe and Lazarus 1966). Current stress research connects both psychological and sociological stressors to physiological/biological responses. For instance, some stressors such as a sense of loss, unfulfilled needs, or violations of self-image are classically psychological, but social-psychological phenomena like blocked aspirations, or perceived physical harm are also included (e.g. Pearlin 1989). The basic components of the stress process include (1) objective and perceived stressors, (2) experienced strain and global stress outcomes, and (3) stress moderators such as individual differences and coping mechanisms.” Race-related strain occurs as the result of both acute and chronic encounters with racial discrimination at all levels (Utsey and Ponterotto 1996). Harrell (2000) describes race-related strain as the interaction between individuals (or groups) and their environment that emerge from the dynamics of racism and discrimination. Race-related strain may tax or exceed existing individual and collective resources or threaten well-being. A number of scholars have elucidated the exact physiological and psychological mechanisms associated with the stress response in relation to racism and discrimination (see Clark, Anderson, Clark and Williams 1999). At the psychological level, perceptions that a stressful situation taxes or exceeds one's ability to cope may result in feelings of anger, anxiety, paranoia, helplessness, hopelessness, frustration, resentment, and fear. Physiological reactions to stress are thought to occur as a result of unsuccessful coping responses. The primary physiological stress reaction involves immune, neuroendocrine and cardiovascular system functioning. Clinical researchers have found connections between racial stressors and medical ailments such as hypertension, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease (Krieger and Signey 1996; Fray 1993) and low levels of life satisfaction (Phillipp 1998).
Other research on racial discrimination describes its acute and chronic psychological consequences, citing frequently expressed feelings of being looked down upon, worthlessness, helplessness, powerlessness, sadness, and fearfulness (e.g. Feagin and Sikes 1994; Essed 1991). Population surveys conducted in a diverse array of American communities has consistently demonstrated a positive association between self-reported experiences with racial discrimination and psychological and physiological distress (e.g. Williams, Yu and Jackson 1997; Sanders-Thompson 1996; Rumbaut 1994; Amaro, Russo, and Johnson 1987; Salgado de Snyder 1987). Geronimus (1992) suggests that compared to other racial/ethnic groups, racial and other forms of discrimination for African-Americans are more prevalent, more chronic, and its effects more likely to be cumulative.
The cited empirical evidence supports the contention that perceived discrimination constitutes a significant stressor, potentially jeopardizing the physical and mental health of racial minority group members, particularly African-Americans. However, this literature has typically not been concerned with (1) the conditions under which discrimination is attributed to particular interpersonal interactions; and (2) the sources of individual variability in response to these stressors (e.g. coping mechanisms). Yet in the context of marketplace discrimination such considerations are paramount. Thus, we turn our attention briefly to extant literature on perceived discrimination and coping.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3896/is_200301/ai_n9195211#continue
ECEIBD-Associated Emotions
Extreme Fear (fear of losing, fear of dying, fear of being humiliated
Extreme Anger
Rage
Sadness
Dejection
Hopelessness
Self-Hate
Pride
Feeling superior to a person of another color for no particular reason, or in spite of all evidence to the contrary
Feeling angry or disappointed when a person of another color succeeds
ECEIBD-Associated Physiological Reactions
breathlessness,
dizziness,
Excessive sweating
, nausea,
dry mouth,
feeling “sick to one’s stomach”,
shaking,
heart palpitations,
ECEIBD-Associated Ideation
Believe that we “should” be better than another person because of our race or because of his race.
Believing that, because of the color of another person’s skin, his success diminishes us.
ECEIBD-Associated Perception (that provoke feelings?)
Does the student feel unfairly treated?
Was the student's identity attacked or threatened?
Was the student's sense of security threatened?
Were the student's morals or values attacked?
Did the student feel humiliated?
Working With Strong Emotions in the Classroom
A Guide for Teachers and Students
Compiled by Heidi Burgess, Co-Director, University of Colorado Conflict Research Consortium
http://www.beyondintractability.org/user_guides/teaching_with_emotions/?nid=6578
ECEIBD-Associated Thought Process
ECEIBD-Associated Behaviors in Perpetrators
Outbursts
Violence toward Individuals, e.g. pushing, shoving, spitting, punching, kicking
Armed assualts, eg. Assaults with guns knives and other objects
Terroristic Verbal Threats
Terroristic Assaults, e.g. bombing, arson
daubing racist graffiti on mosques
derogatory comments
hand gestures
Taunting http://2ssw.che.umn.edu/rjp/Resources/Documents/COMMUNITY%20PEACEMAKING%20PROJECT.pdf
Bullying http://2ssw.che.umn.edu/rjp/Resources/Documents/COMMUNITY%20PEACEMAKING%20PROJECT.pdf
Commission of crimes against people based on skin color on days of significance to people of that color. http://ag.ca.gov/civilrights/pdf/HC_English.pdf
Membership in a hate group. http://ag.ca.gov/civilrights/pdf/HC_English.pdf
ECEIBD FACT SHEET
Based on DSM Pedophilia Fact Sheet found at > Medical Library
Fact Sheet: ECEIBD
(Extreme Color-aroused Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder)
Most individuals who engage in extreme color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior that is unlawful or extremely emotionally or physically abusive toward a person based on color are considered to have Extreme Color-aroused Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder (ECEIBD), a mental disorder proposed for listing in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-V. An individual who engages in extremely damaging activity toward a person because of skin color is performing an act that is both immoral and, in many cases, a violation of normative criminal and civil laws, and such acts can never be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior.
ECEIBD is may be categorized in the DSM-IV as one of several (________) mental disorders. The essential features of ECEIBD are recurrent, intense, arousing emotion and ideation, urges and/or behaviors aroused by the skin-color of persons, the suffering or humiliation of oneself and/or another person or persons motivated by color.
The Characteristics of ECEIBD
According to this proposed DSM-V definition, ECEIBD involves extreme skin-color-aroused emotion, ideation and harmful behavior toward a person. The ECEIBD offender has extreme skin-color-determined ideation and emotion about his own skin color and that of others, and is unable to separate the characteristics of individuals from what he sees as characteristic of all or most people with a particular skin color. Because extreme fears are not subject to effective reality testing, offenders may experience pronounced anxiety, anger and hate in the physical or mental presence of others based on skin-color. Extreme rigid thinking, splitting, faulty reality-testing and rationalization lead to an unrealistic self-image, vengeful fantasies and unlawfully abusive behavior toward and conflict with targets and others. Particularly when symptomatic behaviors are unlawful, they may covert. Some individuals choose to target persons of a color similar to their own (homochromatic offenders) while others target persons of another color (heterochromatic offenders) based on color. Some target persons both heterochromatically and homochromatically. Acting upon extremes of emotion that result from disordered color-associated thinking patterns, offenders verbally or physically target strangers and others people not logically, individually or directly responsible for the wrongs they seek to right, and/or may target themselves because of their color. Symptoms may result in extreme isolation and/or chronic conflict with physiological symptoms of anxiety, hyper-alertness and stress. In any case, the choice of target(s) results from pervasive extreme ideation and emotion in association with skin-color stimuli. Because thinking and emotional patterns are rigid, offenders may have multiple targets, simultaneously and/or serially. ECEIBD is not an addiction but is a faulty and destructive coping mechanism. According to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), there are persons of every skin color among ECEIBD offenders in the United States, while “whites”, “Blacks” and “Hispanics” are almost equally likely to be victims of violent ECEIBD crimes. http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel03/02hcfactsh.htm. ECEIBD offenders are present to some degree among virtually all populations. http://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N05/622/85/pdf/N0562285.pdf?OpenElement
ECEIBD symptomatic activity is always aroused by skin-color but may be directed against persons and property, groups and organizations. ECEIBD activity may involve criminal acts such as murder, robbery, rape and other sexual assault, enslavement, kidnapping, extra-judicial lynching, castration, physical mutilation or maiming, arson, larceny, and vandalism. ECEIBD violent criminal acts are usually associated with expressive verbal acts that indicate the color-aroused motivation. ECEIBD activity often includes a persistent pattern of harmful verbal acts such as ridicule, abuse, insults or derogatory comments or remarks that are intimidating, hostile or offensive and would be considered unlawfully discriminatory if committed in the workplace, and these may be committed either in isolation or in conjunction with ECEIBD symptomatic physical acts. To be considered ECEIBD, these behaviors must interfere with and adversely affect the work and/or private life of the offender and other person(s), and may subject the offender to criminal or civil prosecution. Such activity may occur in public, in the workplace or in the context of the offender’s private life.
All of these activities are psychologically harmful to the offender and the target(s) and some are physically harmful. Although ECEIBD may involve intense phobic aversion or antagonism toward the target, it may also involve aggressive efforts to engage the target in harmful interactions wherein the offender commits other ECEIBD symptomatic acts. ECEIBD interactions are characterized by overt or covert conflict and stress in which the offender may also be a target of another offender’s ECEIBD behavior.
In some cases, the offender may seek to create or take advantage of situations in which the offender can use psychological or physical force that derives from the circumstances, for example, the offender’s relatively greater physical size, agility, authority, numerical superiority or even the element of surprise to commit or perpetuate the offensive act(s). Offenders may act alone or in conjunction with others.
ECEIBD offenders may express extreme color-aroused emotions and ideation through behaviors that typify unlawful sexual harrassment in conjunction with, or in the absence of, violent ECEIBD behaviors.
ECEIBD offenders are often highly capable and functional in other areas of life. The consequences that the offender suffers from symptomatic emotions, ideation and behaviors may be more or less severe depending upon the circumstances. For example, extreme, harmful color-aroused verbal acts that are not unlawful when committed in personal life may nonetheless result in progressive discipline, dismissal and civil liability if committed at work. Offensive and provocative verbal acts often escalate into ECEIBD physical confrontations and offenses that are punishable criminally and civilly wherever they occur.
Offenders commonly explain their activities with excuses or rationalizations that the activities are “justified” by the offender’s color or by the target’s color; that the target “deserves” to be subject to this behavior because of his skin-color; that because of the target’s skin color, the offender’s behavior is appropriate although it admittedly would not be were the target of another color. However, psychiatrists and other development experts maintain that the extreme color-aroused behaviors typical of ECEIBD are harmful to the offender and the target regardless of their color. Furthermore, since ECEIBD acts harm the offender and the target, psychiatrists condemn publications or organizations that seek to promote or normalize ECEIBD behaviors.
Individuals with ECEIBD may limit their symptomatic activities to the workplace, social life, public places, family and personal interactions or may target persons in any combination of these places. Some threaten the target to prevent the target from telling others. Some develop complicated techniques for gaining access to targets. They may select a job, hobby or volunteer work that brings them into contact with targets. Others may win the trust of a target or engage in the commercial exchange of targets with other offenders. Because ECEIBD acts are unlawful in many contexts, the ECEIBD offender may seek to engage in acts covertly while overtly the offender may appear kind and attentive to the target’s needs in order to gain his or her affection, interest and loyalty, and also to prevent the target, law enforcement and others from successfully prosecuting the offender activity. ECEIBD emotions and feelings may be learned, adopted and manifested at any time, from early childhood into adulthood. Often the ECEIBD behavior increases or decreases according to the psychological and social stress level of the individual and proximity to targets.
According to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, in the year 2002 there were 4,583 crimes color-aroused crimes (“hate crimes” on the basis of “race”) reported by 12,073 state and federal law enforcement agencies. In 98.5 percent of the cases, the motive was determined on the basis of verbal statements made by offenders at the time of the crime. In a 2005 US Justice Department National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) based on interviews there were 116,340 reported hate crimes annually, with 32.5 percent of these offenses committed by groups of two or more offenders, and at least 191,845 individual offenders directly participating in these color-aroused crimes. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf 67.5 percent of ECEIBD crimes were committed by one offender while 16.3% were committed by two or more offenders and 16.2% were committed by four or more offenders. An estimated 1.49 percent of all violent crimes are estimated to be color-aroused.
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel03/02hcfactsh.htm. Most color-aroused crimes accompanied violent crimes, i.e. a rape or other sexual assault, robbery or assault (84%). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf
In addition to ECEIBD criminal acts, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received 29,910 complaints of color-aroused employment discrimination and resolved 6,303 with findings that the offenders were liable in FY2002. http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/race.html. The sum of NCVS offenders and EEOC liable offenders reveals that 198,148 offenders (0.02% of the population of the United States or 2/1000) were found by the government to have committed one or more offenses in 2002.
Individuals with ECEIBD rarely seek help from a psychiatrist or other mental health professional because ECEIBD has traditionally not been considered a mental illness and therefore no organized diagnosis or treatment protocols have been offered. However, the pervasive efforts of government and industry to address ECEIBD activity, the growth of organized color-hate groups, the large number of individual visits to websites dedicated to color-aroused hate, and the pervasive presence of ECEIBD-related cases in the criminal courts and administrative forums suggest that pervasive ECEIBD related conflict is present. The presence of offenders in the community exceeds the number convicted of an ECEIBD offense in any given year. Offenders generally come to the attention of other their employers, law enforcement, social service workers and lawyers when they are the subject of workplace discrimination complaints, when they commit hate crimes and are arrested, when they seek representation in criminal or civil actions against them, or when their targets seek medical attention, psychological treatment, civil rights advocacy and legal representation. Offenders often come to the attention of psychiatrists when expert testimony is required concerning the mental state of the offender and the emotional damage to the target(s). Violent ECEIBD crimes are committed by males 75% while other offenses may be committed equally by males and females. Offenders and victims may be of any skin color.
How Psychiatrists Diagnose ECEIBD
When evaluating who may have ECEIBD, psychiatrists may apply three criteria spelled which may be spelled out in the DSM-V. (See "Proposed DSM-V Criteria for ECEIBD," below.) All three must be present for the diagnosis to be made. Whether or not all three criteria are present, an individual who has committed a symptomatic criminal or unlawfully discriminatory act may be subject to criminal prosecution and civil liability. Psychiatrists nationwide support the federal and state statutes that define the unlawfulness of color-aroused criminal and/or unlawfully discriminatory acts.
Treatment for ECEIBD
Psychosocial treatments are essential components of a comprehensive treatment program. Although controlled studies are non-existent, the available data, along with clinical experience with other maladaptive behaviors patterns, indicate that the following forms of treatment are effective for selected patients with ECEIBD: cognitive behavioral therapies, behavioral therapies, psychodynamic/interpersonal therapies, group and family therapies, and participation in self-help groups. http://www.psych.org/psych_pract/treatg/pg/pg_substance_1.cfm Psychoeducation about the disorder is often appropriate and helpful from both a clinical and risk management perspective. When appropriate, employers, family members, peers, classmates, friends or co-workers may be included, with attention to particular attention to safety, confidentiality issues, and the professional, academic and legal interests of the patient. At the appropriate time and with thorough preparation, therapeutic guided meetings with past targets may be appropriate, often as part of a court-supervised alternative sentencing or administrative mediation. Psychoeducation should include discussion of the risks inherent in unlawful disordered behavior and the benefits of alternative coping strategies. When clients are motivated to treatment by sequelae of past offenses in the workplace, at school or elsewhere, treating psychiatrists often closely collaborate in efforts involving courts, employers, employment assistance program (EAP) officers, corporate counsel, probation officers, school officials, restitution programs, family members and others.
Safety Issues
Particularly with patients with a history of past violent acts, plans and fantasies, safety for the patient and potential targets is paramount. If patients appear unable to control violent impulses or activating fears, anti-depressants and /or anxiolytics may help to temporarily stabilize the patient and protect his interests and others while psychosocial therapies are undertaken. The illness is not principally biological in nature and medication alone is unhelpful. Because some offenders may function well when not engaged in targeting behaviors, functional areas may be preserved and success may increase with timely interventions that minimize the risk of additional offenses with attendant criminal and civil penalties and occupational consequences.
With psychiatric help to reevaluate color-based ideation and emotion, reality test and reconsider offending criminal or unlawfully criminal behavior in light of the offender’s occupational and personal goals and other behavioral and existential alternatives, and gain a sense of self and self-worth based on positive individual characteristics, the outlook for successful treatment is good.
Additional Reading
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), 1994, 886 pages, ISBN 0-89042-062-9, paperback, $42.95 (plus $5.00 shipping), Order #2062. Order From: American Psychiatric Press, Inc., 1400 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.
Proposed DSM-V Criteria for ECEIBD
Over a period of at least six months, recurrent, intense, color-aroused fantasies, rehearsals, and antagonistic or otherwise abusive behaviors toward a person, aroused by skin color.
Has the person had extreme color-aroused emotion and ideation, fantasies or urges or instances of engaging in unlawful or extremely harmful activity directed toward a person based on color? If a psychiatrist sees an individual who has engaged in an unlawful or extremely harmful color-aroused activity, the diagnosis of ECEIBD should be strongly considered. (An individual who committed a single unlawful or extremely harmful act color-aroused act while under the influence of drugs, for example, but who had not intentionally targeted a person based on color, or was unaware of the person’s color, would not receive the diagnosis. However, this of course in no way diminishes the seriousness of the act of act.) A person need not actually commit an unlawful color-aroused act to be diagnosed with ECEIBD. A person who is preoccupied with color-aroused ideation, emotion, urges and fantasies that disturb his functioning (that is, negatively affect or impair his ability to work effectively, alone or with others) could also be diagnosed as having ECEIBD, even without ever committing an unlawful or immoral color-aroused act against a person. As with alcohol abuse, acute symptomatic behavior may be continual or intermittent; however, serious consequences may result even from intermittent relapse behavior.
The color-aroused emotions and ideation, urges or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning.
Is the problem clinically significant? That is, has it caused "significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning?" (Note: The same criterion is applied throughout the DSM-IV to other mental illnesses.) Under this criterion, a color-aroused criminal or other unlawful act constitutes "clinical significance." Although offenders may offer plausible wrongs they seek to address through criminal or otherwise unlawful or extremely harmful color-aroused acts, the psychotherapist should assist the offender to re-consider whether the particular unlawful act and the particular target are not appropriate to further the goals which the offender espouses, particularly in light of potential penalties and other harmful consequences to the self, the target and others with a philosophical preference for nonviolent solutions.
To make a DSM-IV diagnosis, the psychiatrist assesses the individual for exposure to criminal or civil penalties, either clinically significant distress or clinically significant impairment. Most individuals with psychiatric symptoms experience a subjective sense of distress that may include feelings such as anger, pain, fear, anguish, dysphoria (unpleasant mood), shame, embarrassment or guilt. However, there are numerous situations in which the individual has symptoms or exhibits behaviors that do not cause any subjective sense of distress, but nonetheless would be judged "clinically significant" and warrant a diagnosis of a mental disorder if they come to the attention of a psychiatrist. In such situations, this judgment is based on whether the presentation causes significant impairment in one or more areas of functioning, including legal, occupational, social, relational, and academic functioning. For example, it is well recognized that many individuals who are experiencing serious problems related to substance abuse (e.g., violent behavior, poor work or poor school performance due to alcohol or other drug use) deny that their substance abuse is causing them any distress. Such individuals would be given a diagnosis of substance dependence or substance abuse, in spite of their denial, if the psychiatrist determines that these substance-induced problems are causing significant impairment. Similarly, many individuals who act on their ECEIBD urges claim that their unlawful behavior is nonproblematic and may even claim it is "beneficial" or “necessary” for themselves and others. Nonetheless, the DSM-IV would consider such individuals to have ECEIBD because, by definition, unlawful acting out on color-aroused urges is considered to be impairment in functioning.
Possible Harassment Conduct
http://www.nonprofitrisk.org/ws-ps/topics/wv/harass-ps.htm
Some common examples in of conduct that might be deemed harassment found in Sexual Harassment published by Fisher & Phillips Ltd., attorneys at law, include:
Physical actions:
• giving a neck or shoulder massage;
• touching a person’s body, hair, or clothing;
• hugging, kissing, or patting another;
• standing close to or brushing up against a person;
• touching or rubbing oneself in a private area or with sexual overtones near another person;
• touching, leaning over, cornering, or pinching someone; or
• snapping a woman’s bra strap.
Verbal actions:
• referring to another as a “girl,” “doll,” “babe,” “hunk,” or “honey”;
• whistling or making cat-calls at another;
• making comments about a person’s body, clothes, looks, anatomy, or manner of walking;
• turning work discussions into sexual topics;
• telling sexual jokes or stories;
• discussing one’s love life;
• asking about sexual fantasies, preferences, or history;
• repeatedly asking a person for a date who clearly is not interested;
• making kissing sounds, howling, or smacking lips; or
• telling lies or spreading rumors about a person’s sex life.
Non-Verbal actions:
• looking a person up and down;
• staring at someone;
• physically blocking a person’s path;
• making sexual gestures with one’s tongue or hands or other body movements;
• following a person around;
• giving unwanted personal gifts;
• displaying sexually-suggestive visuals (calendars, pictures, comics, food displays);
• making facial expressions such as winking, throwing kisses, licking lips; or
• requiring an employee to wear provocative clothing.
These actions and others constitute sexual harassment depending on their severity, frequency and whether or not they were unwelcome by the recipient. The action must be “welcomed” per the U.S. Supreme Court from the perspective of the victim and a reasonable person in the victim’s situation. The proper inquiry focuses on the recipient’s response to the specific sexual advance(s) at issue.
Indications of “unwelcomeness”
• the staff member did not solicit or incite the sexual advance;
• the staff member regarded the advance as undesirable or offensive;
• the staff member grimaced, frowned, or otherwise exhibited disagreement or resistance to the advance;
• the staff member turned away or pretended not to hear the sexual comments;
• the staff member pulled away, backed up, or attempted to avoid the perpetrator's touch; or
• the staff member immediately complained to management about the incident, or complained within a reasonable period under the circumstances.
Taking Notice
Be advised, a public entity should take a “notice” of sexual harassment seriously and consult legal advice. The entity would be unwise (without attorney advice) to dismiss the complaint on the basis that its entity has too few employees to be covered by any law (local, state, or federal) or because it deems it has no employer-employee relationship with the complainant.
There are two kinds of notice: “actual notice” and “constructive notice.” Actual notice happens via an employee complaint or via observation by the nonprofit’s supervisors that harassment is occurring. Constructive notice is when the facts or circumstances are such (i.e., loud, obnoxious employees who use profanity, vulgarity or sexually explicit terms) that any reasonable person would or should have known that harassment was occurring.
http://www.nonprofitrisk.org/ws-ps/topics/wv/harass-ps.htm
Extreme Color-Associated Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder
Diagnostic Matrix
Not Present Mild Moderate Extreme Persistence of Attitudes
(scale of 1-5 with 1=momentary and five=persistent over at least six months) Persistence of Plans, Fantasies
(scale of 1-5 with 1=momentary and five=persistent over at least six months)
Signs of Biological Susceptibility to Stress, e.g. depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder
Learned Susceptibility to color-associated stress, ie. dogged familial or community resistance to color-associated change(s).
Perception or belief that color-associated change has been, is being or will be experienced.
Opposition to the perceived color-associated change(s),
strong and persistent negative emotions associated with change(s),
Negative ideation associated with the change(s),
past reported behavior of the individual arising out of opposition or adaptation to color-associated change(s),
plans or fantasies for present and future actions in opposition or resistance to color- associated change(s)
Lawful color-avoidance behaviors in personal life, work, church, etc.
Unlawful color-avoidance behaviors in personal life, work, public behavior, etc.
Losses experienced, perceived and actual, as result of color-aroused emotions, ideation and behavior,
Other psychiatric diagnoses or symptoms present to indicate lack of judgment, impulsivity control
ECEIBD - Case Studies
Color-Arousal Disordered Persons Cry out for Diagnosis and Treatment
“In 1980, a then 34-year-old Darlin June Cromer abducted and killed a 5-year-old black boy named Reginald Williams in Oakland, California. Cromer was on probation for assaulting a Chinese woman at the time she committed her murder of Williams. Cromer had been a life long psych patient and was an avowed white surpemacist. She admitted to and boasted about her crime. There was no doubt she did it.” “Cromer was convicted and her conviction was upheld on appeal in 1989.” CROMER v. SUPERIOR COURT (1980) 109 CA3d 728 [Civ. 49557 Court of Appeals of California, First Appellate District, Division One Aug., 27, 1980], http://online.ceb.com/calcases/CA3/109CA3d728.htm; The Andrea Yates Trial: It Didn't Have To Happen Infoshop News, November 13 2005. http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=04/12/16/9700256
“There was no question that Cromer, who attracted suspicion because she had a history of talking about "killing niggers" and trying to lure black children into her car, had abducted Reginald from an Oakland, California, supermarket, strangled him, and buried his body near her home. She had told police as much when they questioned her. Neither was her motive in doubt. She explained that "it is the duty of every white woman to kill a nigger child," telling a jail psychologist she hoped to ignite a race war.”
“How should a court decide whether someone like Darlin June Cromer is a paranoid schizophrenic or merely a racist murderer? And if it decides she is a schizophrenic, is that diagnosis enough to show that she should not be held responsible for strangling a 5-year-old-boy? In theory, the jury in her case could have decided that she was a schizophrenic but still responsible for her actions, since the legal definition of insanity--which generally requires that the defendant either did not know what he was doing, did not know it was wrong, or could not stop himself--is not the same as the criteria for a psychiatric diagnosis. Cromer's repeated attempts to kidnap black children, her explanation of her motive, and the fact that she tried to hide the body all suggest she knew what she was doing, which presumably helps explain why the jury found her guilty. But the defense argued that her appalling actions and statements all were symptoms of her disease--indeed, that they were so appalling they had to be. "If she isn't crazy," one of the expert witnesses asked, "who is?" Jacob Sullum, (Review of Szasz Under Fire: The Psychiatric Abolitionist Faces His Critics, edited by Jeffrey A. Schaler, Chicago: Open Court), Reason, (May, 2005), http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_1_37/ai_n13593350
If ECEIBD has been a diagnosed illness, Darlin June Cromer certainly would have been referred for ECEIBD treatment.
Emotional disorders are thought to be by a combination in some measure of genetic susceptibility plus environmental factors, often stresses, that may cause the genetic susceptibility to become manifest in disease. Examples of this interaction between “nature and nurture” include depression, alcoholism, suicide, manic depressive illness, drug abuse, and possibly pedophilia. Although there may be no one gene that causes pedophilia, yet the those who have been subjected to sexual abuse as children and also carry the genetic vulnerabilities of their parents may be at increased risk
at many pointFrom the beginning of the 20th Century, America was on a began to strive for integration of the population across color lines, r integration of the races,
According to Measuring Racial Discrimination, “Most people’s concept of racial discrimination involves explicit, direct hostility expressed by whites toward members of a disadvantaged racial group. Yet discrimination can include more than just direct behavior (such as the denial of employment or rental opportunities); it can also be subtle and unconscious (such as nonverbal hostility in posture or tone of voice). Furthermore, discrimination against an individual may be based on overall assumptions about members of a disadvantaged racial group that are assumed to apply to that individual (i.e., statistical discrimination or profiling). Discrimination may also occur as the result of institutional procedures rather than individual behaviors.” Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), p. 39, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001
ECEIBD emotions, perceptions and attitudes were implicated in the US Civil War and in racial segregation. ECEIBD ideation and behavior has been known to lead to verbal abuse, individual discrimination, physical abuse, group discrimination, and even lynching, enslavement and genocide and may be present to some in many societies.
Removing the Stigma of ECEIBD
If stigma dissuades people of color from seeking psychiatric help, how much more might it prevent people from acknowledging color-associated phenomena and seeking or offering treatment? So stigmatized are color-aroused pathologies that many psychiatrists find the idea of offering treatment abhorrent, fearing that any treatment offered might inadvertently humanize and de-stigmatize the disease itself. Can Psychology Cure Racism?, Slate, http://www.slate.com/id/72826/entry/72878
“Stigma was portrayed by the SGR as the "most formidable obstacle to future progress in the arena of mental illness and health" ( DHHS, 1999). It refers to a cluster of negative attitudes and beliefs that motivate the general public to fear, reject, avoid, and discriminate against people with mental illness (Corrigan & Penn, 1999).
Stigma is widespread in the United States and other Western nations Bhugra, 1989; Brockington et al., 1993 and in Asian nations (Ng, 1997. In response to societal stigma, people with mental problems internalize public attitudes and become so embarrassed or ashamed that they often conceal symptoms and fail to seek treatment Sussman et al., 1987; Wahl, 1999. Stigma also lowers their access to resources and opportunities, such as housing and employment, and leads to diminished self-esteem and greater isolation and hopelessness Penn & Martin, 1998; Corrigan & Penn, 1999. Stigma can also be against family members; this damages the consumer's self-esteem and family relationships (Wahl & Harman, 1989). In some Asian cultures, stigma is so extreme that mental illness is thought to reflect poorly on family lineage and thereby diminishes marriage and economic prospects for other family members as well Sue & Morishima, 1982; Ng, 1997).
Stigma is such a major problem that the very topic itself poses a challenge to research. Researchers have to contend with people's reluctance to disclose attitudes often deemed socially unacceptable.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Search&db=books&doptcmdl=GenBookHL&term=racism+AND+hstat%5Bbook%5D+AND+317290%5Buid%5D&rid=hstat5.section.1179#1210
There was in addition a fear that creating a diagnosis would remove some of the stigma from the disease, perhaps encouraging symptomatic persons to commit crimes in the hopes that their illness would excuse their otherwise reprehensible behavior.
Treating the Sick - The Role of the American Psychiatric Association
Research on the intrapsychic effects of extreme color-aroused behavior has focused almost exclusively on the effects it has on those who are the objects of discriminatory or unlawful treatment. Reports of the Surgeon General, Mental Health: Culture, Race, and Ethnicity(supplement), http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Search&db=books&doptcmdl=GenBookHL&term=racism+AND+hstat%5Bbook%5D+AND+317290%5Buid%5D&rid=hstat5.section.1179#1210
In arguing against viewing racist ideas as
While many people believe it appropriate to discriminate under some circumstances, yet most people believe that there are types of discriminatory ideation and behaviors ideations which are outrageous and intolerable. “The nation has reacted to these hate crimes with energy and ingenuity. Responses include clear and strong condemnation from religious, civic, and governmental leaders; efforts to strengthen state and federal hate crime laws;
innovative preventive programs in schools; and additional resources for training police officers and prosecutors. Police officers generally are the first professionals responding to the scene of a hate crime.” Stephen Wessler, Addressing Hate Crimes: Six Initiatives That Are Enhancing the Efforts of Criminal Justice Practitioners, (2000),
http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles1/bja/179559.txt
Many of these behaviors are also unlawful, yet the ideation leads to these behaviors remains undefined.
Psychiatry has failed to offer formal tools to distinguish between innocuous, mild and severe skin-color ideation and behavior illnesses. We have been unable, therefore, to focus medical and societal resources on those most in need of diagnosis and treatment. Is racism correlated with depression, anxiety, fear, trauma, a combination or none of these. Psychiatry, the profession which diagnosis and treats these states has offered very little formal guidance concerning their role in the genesis of skin-color ideation and behavior disorders.
“The DSM-IV has been designed for use across settings--inpatient, outpatient, partial hospital, consultation-liaison, clinic, private practice, and primary care, and with community populations and by psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, nurses, occupational and rehabilitation therapists, counselors, and other health and mental health professionals. It is also a necessary tool for collecting and communicating accurate public health statistics.” DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, http://www.psych.org/research/dor/dsm/dsmintro81301.cfm.
The formal listing of related symptoms together in the DSM has at least two closely-related and interdependent functions: “Listing” is a formal expression by the psychiatric community of the perceived seriousness of a disorder; and listing focuses the attention of the psychiatric community and of society at large on discovering the causes, and potential treatments for a disorder.
Many extreme and debilitating mental disorders have high treatment success rates once formally defined and diagnosed, (e.g. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (65%), Dysthymic Disorder (a chronic low-level depression) (65%), and eating disorders such as Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia (78%) all equal or exceed those for Schizophrenia (60%), Major Depression (65%), and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (60%), Panic Disorder (80%) and Bipolar Disorder (80%)). Testimony for the Record of The American Psychological Association Regarding the
Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations Committee on Education and the Workforce, March 13, 2002, http://www.apa.org/practice/testimony.html.
Because the DSM-IV is central to the study and treatment of serious mental illness, it follows logically that public health statistics cannot effectively be collected or disseminated about ECEIBD until it is listed in the DSM. DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, http://www.psych.org/research/dor/dsm/dsmintro81301.cfm. Attendant upon its role as the “the voice and conscience of modern psychiatry” is the obligation to diagnose and treat and provide “leadership” with respect to the most serious mental health disorders. About APA, APA Website, http://www.psych.org/about_apa/.
The DSM has gone 53 years without defining a definition for that condition wherein consciousness of the color of another person results in a range of conscious and unconscious perceptual and behavioral mutations in the subject, over which the unaware subject may have no control.
However there is no popular or professional agreement as to the definition of “racism”, the symptoms or the causes of “racism”. The failure of the psychiatric community in general and the APA in particular to define the set of thought patterns and emotions in individuals, known as “racism”, has left our society virtually powerless to treat or prevent it. After forty years in the battle, we have yet to define the foe with scientific precision.
In the context of evaluating disabilities, for example, “severity is measured according to the functional limitations imposed.” In the color-sensitivity context, if a person’s sensitivity results in behavior which causes repeated loss of employment or loss of liberty, this person might well be said to be severely impaired by ECEIBD. The perpetrators of 4,612 race and ethnicity based hate crimes reported annually to the federal government are examples of people whose life and liberty is threatened by their extreme color oriented ideation and behavior. http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel03/02hcfactsh.htm.
Likewise, those committing acts leading to the nearly 30,000 complaints of racial discrimination filed annually with the US Equal Opportunities Commission may be committing unlawful acts that jeopardize their jobs and their livelihoods. http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/race.html It is not known how many more crimes against property and person are inspired in color ideation because there is little scientific agreement as to the specific feeling and ideation states in which these crimes are committed. Without a working definition, and specific assessment tools, it has been impossible to determine who was particularly at risk for committing acts implicating ECEIBD.
When a worker is dismissed from his employment for extremely inappropriate color ideation perception and behavior, (e.g. repetitive slurs and inappropriate discrimination for example) he may have ECEIBD. At present, however, he cannot be referred for psychiatric treatment, because psychiatry has neither defined his illness with particularity nor developed a treatment for his specific symptoms. From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html
Among the Principles of Medical Ethics of American Medical Association, of which all psychiatrists must be members, we find various relevant portions:
Section 1
A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights.
Section 5
A physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, maintain a commitment to medical education, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation, and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated.
Section 7
A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health. The Principles of Medical Ethics With Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry
2001 Edition (Including November 2003 amendments), http://www.psych.org/psych_pract/ethics/ppaethics.cfm
As with most illnesses, there is considerable controversy over the causes, yet the feelings, emotions and behaviors are measurable and subject to considerably less controversy. Of course, as with pedophilia, some sufferers will argue that what others consider to be an illness is actually normal and constructive behavior “if done properly”.
Although we will never all agree on any matter, yet the majority of us are able to arrive at a consensus on some essentials that become the basis of our society’s and Psychiatry’s approach to a problem. E.G. many DSM diagnosis are still the subject of debate at the fringes. We may not agree about the behavior of neutrinos, yet we are able to reach the moon with considerable agreement as to physics and the essentials of rocket propulsion.
How does membership in the color majority group in a society or a minority group influence development of severe color ideation and behavior? These are matters for careful research. While disposition may be impossible to immediately resolve conclusively, yet the damage done by the severe behavior and ideation are matters of historical fact. Although psychiatrists and society may well debate endlessly who is most disposed to this behavior, as susceptibility to schizophrenia is debated, yet we do not postpone the treatment of schizophrenia while the matter of susceptibility is resolved. The treatment today of those whose behavior and ideation indicate they are suffering from severe color aversion and behavior syndrome should not be postponed while the matter of disposition to the illness is conclusively resolved. In fact that matter cannot be resolved until the behaviors and ideation are agreed upon.
What Causes ECEIBD?
ECEIBD and Competition: and Superiority/Inferiority
Winning is an American passion and most of us like to do so as often as possible. When challenged compete, we accept the challenge to avoid the appearance of weakness. In light of this general fact, it seems peculiar that blacks were for so long forbidden to compete in so many arenas of American culture and industry. If superior whites wanted to demonstrate their superiority, would it not have been more effective to invite blacks to compete and then to vanquish them, effectively banning them from the upper levels of competition, where “only the cream rises to the top”? The history of American competition after integration shows that as soon as whites allowed blacks to compete, blacks rose to the top in many high-visibility areas. Sonny Liston, Joe Foreman and Muhamad Ali showed that some blacks were better fighters than some whites. Tiger Woods has demonstrated that, when allowed to compete on a level course, he can play better than many if not all white golfers. Serena Williams and her sister have played in the top ten of tennis since 1999(?).
It may be that whites forbade blacks to participate partly because, in a country where most whites believed themselves superior to blacks, the results of free competition would have been ego-dystonic. If whites were inherently superior, then whites would remain dominant in all areas of competition. But if whites were not inherently superior than blacks might eventually dominate some areas, which would prove a major embarrassment to those who espoused or inherent white superiority.
Many have posed the question, “Why do blacks succeed primarily at music and sports.” Another way of positing this question is, “After the end of legal segregation, wherein blacks could not compete at all with whites, why did they first excel at music and sports?” Was this a reflection of African-American’s higher aptitude for sports and music relative to other areas of endeavor? Or was there something different about the terms of competition in these areas that allowed blacks to succeed?
What most differentiates pugilism from a poetry contest is the “knock-out”. Although poetry contests may depend upon subjective judgments, in boxing the last competitor standing typically wins, with a multi-racial televised audience on hand to judge whether the fight was fair. This may explain why African-Americans have made more progress in sports, where objective measures of achievement predominate once the contest is joined. In boxing, tennis, golf, baseball, and football, blacks have proven that – when measured by objective standards, they can succeed. Blacks are also succeeding in areas not traditionally associated in the public mind with blacks, such as the ranks of top management of America’s Fortune Five Hundred corporations.
This creates additional competition.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on color, and is enforced by the US Office for Civil Rights. What we lack is a formal and broadly accepted functional definition of the extreme color ideation and behavior that leads to the cases we see in these forums.
One would think that having recognized the peculiar and lasting once-legally mandated and governmentally-sponsored assault on blacks, wherein blacks could be owned, forced to work and whipped on a daily basis, and lawfully forced to engage in sex and parenthood with the subsequent sale and forced alienation of their babies, mates and other family members, that there would be a corresponding by psychologists and psychiatrists of the unique psychological traumas to the victims as well as of the peculiar mindset the perpetrators. Certainly, the fact that the perpetrators included entire legislatures, the courts and the presidency does not diminish but rather increases and proves the need for a thorough study of the effects.
It has never been unlawful in the real of private interactions to refuse to associate others based on the color of their skin. Indeed our constitutional freedom to associate with other includes a negative freedom not to associate with others as well. It was well understood at the time of the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that while the Federal Government could forbid states to discriminate against blacks, it could not prevent individuals from discriminating in the realm of their personal and private interactions. The question for psychiatry is a different one: to what degree do efforts to avoid interaction with people of another color circumscribe one’s life, or generate fear that in spite of all of one’s efforts, one will be obliged by circumstance to interact with another whose color arouses unpleasant feelings, thoughts and associations? Although we all have a right to avoid elevators and airplanes, the fears aroused by conveyances can become phobias that restrict one’s freedom of movement and reduce chances for success in a complex and highly mobile society.
As more blacks become affluent and structural barriers to their success in professions decrease, it becomes increasingly harder for those who are uncomfortable with black to avoid blacks altogether. Likewise, as opportunities for black mobility increase, blacks are confronted with new coping challenges that may prove emotionally insurmountable for some portion of the black population. Those who continue to strive for success in an other-majority environment may feel conflicted, guilty, even angry. Meanwhile those who cannot or do not succeed in integrating become increasingly stigmatized and isolated from whites and from their more successful blacks.
Most of us like to win. In a highly competitive society, it is normal to be concerned that one may lose employment or educational opportunities to someone else who has more education, more experience, better contacts, or simply is luckier. Even mating is a competitive venture with competitive pressures, so it is natural to fear that romantic opportunities may become more limited as competition increases.
During slavery, there was intense competition for the fruits of the labors of the slaves. The most obvious competition for these fruits was between the slaveholders and the the slaves themselves, for if the slaves were freed then they and not their owners would be the beneficiaries of their labors. Slaveholders were justifiably concerned that slaves might try to escape, “stealing away” the fruits of their labors from those who had purchased slaves at auction or inherited them from relatives. These whites lived in constant fear of losing their holdings.
The role of the overseer on a slave plantation was to manage the risk of loss that might occur were the slaves to escape or refuse to work. At times extreme cruelty was needed to exert pressure of slaves not to compete with their masters for the fruits of their labors. Slaves felt intense anger and hopelessness while masters felt anxiety, anger.
When one believes that one is better than those with whom he competes, it is natural for him to feel resentment if he loses in the competition.
In every group of people there are individuals with low self-esteem who will feel diminished
In every aspect of society, there is competition. When we go to restaurants, we sometimes have to wait in line. If there is not an empty seat on the bus, we may have to stand and hold on to a strap, swaying with every bend in the road.
Segregation guaranteed that although whites might have to compete with each other, they would never not have a thing simply because a black person had it. The rule that blacks had to ride on the back of the bus or surrender their seats to whites guaranteed that if they were lacking something, every single black person present was lacking that thing as well.
Miscegenation laws assured that although whites might compete with each other for white women they at least would not lose white women to blacks. Meanwhile white men also competed with black men for the black women who were available. The cardinal rule, enforced by law and extra-judicial lynching was that black men would not compete for with white men for the affections of white women.
This seems indicative of a profound color-aroused inferiority complex. Laws against marriage between people of different skin colors were not meant to prevent forced sex; they were intended to prevent consensual unions. The inevitable implication is that white men who made these laws were concerned that some white women would marry black men if allowed to do so.
Competition in Sports, Education, The professions, Romance in the slave colonies, Seat on buses and trains, Access to bathrooms, Seats in restaurants. Integration meant free competition and was understandably resisted by those
California State University, Northridge
Stress
by Ingrid M. Cordon
(spring 1997)
At one time or another, most people experience stress. The term stress has been used to describe a variety of negative feelings and reactions that accompany threatening or challenging situations. However, not all stress reactions are negative. A certain amount of stress is actually necessary for survival. For example, birth is one of the most stressful experiences of life. The high level of hormones released during birth, which are also involved in the stress response, are believed to prepare the newborn infant for adaptation to the challenges of life outside the womb. These biological responses to stress make the newborn more alert promoting the bonding process and, by extension, the child's physical survival. The stress reaction maximizes the expenditure of energy which helps prepare the body to meet a threatening or challenging situation and the individual tends to mobilize a great deal of effort in order to deal with the event. Both the sympathetic/adrenal and pituitary/adrenal systems become activated in response to stress. The sympathetic system is a fast-acting system that allows us to respond to the immediate demands of the situation by activating and increasing arousal. The pituitary/adrenal system is slower-acting and prolongs the aroused state. However, while a certain amount of stress is necessary for survival, prolonged stress can affect health adversely (Bernard & Krupat, 1994).
Stress has generally been viewed as a set of neurological and physiological reactions that serves an adaptive function (Franken, 1994). Traditionally, stress research has been oriented toward studies involving the body's reaction to stress and the cognitive processes that influence the perception of stress. However, social perspectives of the stress response have noted that different people experiencing similar life conditions are not necessarily affected in the same manner (Pearlin, 1982). Research into the societal and cultural influences of stress may make it necessary to re-examine how stress is defined and studied.
There are a number of definitions of stress as well as number of events that can lead to the experience of stress. People say they are stressed when they take an examination, when having to deal with a frustrating work situation, or when experiencing relationship difficulties. Stressful situations can be viewed as harmful, as threatening, or as challenging. With so many factors that can contribute to stress it can be difficult to define the concept of "stress". Hans Selye (1982) points out that few people define the concept of stress in the same way or even bother to attempt a clear-cut definition. According to Selye, an important aspect of stress is that a wide variety of dissimilar situations are capable of producing the stress response such as fatigue, effort, pain, fear, and even success. This has led to several definitions of stress, each of which highlights different aspects of stress. One of the most comprehensive models of stress is the Biopsychosocial Model of Stress (Bernard & Krupat, 1994). According to the Biopsychosocial Model of Stress, stress involves three components: an external component, an internal component, and the interaction between the external and internal components.
The external component of the Biopsychosocial Model of stress involves environmental events that precede the recognition of stress and can elicit a stress response. A previously mentioned, the stress reaction is elicited by a wide variety of psychosocial stimuli that are either physiologically or emotionally threatening and disrupt the body's homeostasis (Cannon, 1932). We are usually aware of stressors when we feel conflicted, frustrated, or pressured. Most of the common stressors fall within four broad categories: personal, social/familial, work, and the environment. These stressful events have been linked to a variety of psychological physical complaints. For example bereavement is a particularly difficult stressor and has provided some of the first systematic evidence of a link between stress and immune functioning. Bereavement research generally supports a relationship between a sense of loss and lowered immune system functioning. Health problems and increased accidents are also associated with stressful work demands, job insecurity and changes in job responsibilities (Bernard & Krupat, 1994). Stressors also differ in their duration. Acute stressors are stressors of relatively short duration and are generally not considered to be a health risk because they are limited by time. Chronic stressors are of relatively longer duration and can pose a serious health risk due to their prolonged activation of the body's stress response.
The internal component of stress involves a set of neurological and physiological reactions to stress. Hans Selye (1985) defined stress as "nonspecific" in that the stress response can result from a variety of different kinds of stressors and he thus focused on the internal aspects of stress. Selye noted that a person who is subjected to prolonged stress goes through three phases: Alarm Reaction, Stage of Resistance and Exhaustion. He termed this set of responses as the General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS). This general reaction to stress is viewed as a set of reactions that mobilize the organism's resources to deal with an impending threat. The Alarm Reaction is equivalent to the fight-or-flight response and includes the various neurological and physiological responses when confronted with a stressor. When a threat is perceived the hypothalamus signals both the sympathetic nervous system and the pituitary. The sympathetic nervous system stimulates the adrenal glands. The adrenal glands release corticosteroids to increase metabolism which provides immediate energy. The pituitary gland releases adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) which also affects the adrenal glands. The adrenal glands then release epinephrine and norepinephrine which prolongs the fight-or-flight response. The Stage of Resistance is a continued state of arousal. If the stressful situation is prolonged, the high level of hormones during the resistance phase may upset homeostasis and harm internal organs leaving the organism vulnerable to disease. There is evidence from animal research that the adrenal glands actually increase in size during the resistance stage which may reflect the prolonged activity. The Exhaustion stage occurs after prolonged resistance. During this stage, the body's energy reserves are finally exhausted and breakdown occurs. Selye has noted that, in humans, many of the diseases precipitated or caused by stress occur in the resistance stage and he refers to these as "diseases of adaptation." These diseases of adaptation include headaches, insomnia, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular and kidney diseases. In general, the central nervous system and hormonal responses aid adaptation. However, it can sometimes lead to disease especially when the state of stress if prolonged or intense.
Richard Dienstbier (1989) questions the emphasis the GAS places on the role of chronic stress and proposes another model of stress, Physiological Toughening, which focuses on the duration of stressful events. He points out that stressors vary in their durations. Acute stressors are the briefest and often involve a tangible threat that is readily identified as a stressor. Chronic stressors are those of a longer duration and are not readily identified as stressors because they are often ambiguous and intangible. Because chronic stressors have become such a part of modern life, they may be taken for granted and can therefore pose a serious health risk if they are not recognized and properly managed. Physiological Toughening is concerned with the third category of stressors, intermittent stressors. Intermittent stressors are the most variable in duration, alternating between periods of stress and calm. If an intermittent stressor is viewed as a challenge, it may improve one's physiological resistance to stress by causing repeated, periodic increases in sympathetic arousal which conditions the body to better withstand subsequent stressors. This can be seen from research indicating that experienced subjects show few or none of the deleterious effects of environmental stressors. For example, Astronauts are trained to have available response sequences, plans, and problem-solving strategies for all imaginable emergencies. Emergencies are therefore transformed into routine situations decreasing the intensity of the stressful situation (Mandler, 1982).
Mandler's (1982) Interruption Theory of stress provides a transition between the internal component of stress and the interaction component. Mandler defines stress as an emergency signaling interruption. The basic premise is that autonomic activity results whenever some organized action or thought process is interrupted. The term interruption is used in the sense that any event, whether external or internal to the individual, prevents completion of some action, thought sequences, or plan and is considered to be interrupted. Interruption can occur in the perceptual, cognitive, behavioral, or problem-solving domains. The consequences of the interruption will always be autonomic activity and will be interpreted emotionally in any number of ways, ranging from the most joyful to the most noxious.
The third component of the biopsychosocial model of stress is the interaction between the external and internal components, involving the individual's cognitive processes. Lazarus and colleagues (1984b; 1978) have proposed a cognitive theory of stress which addresses this interaction. They refer to this interaction as a transaction, taking into account the ongoing relationship between the individual and the environment. Their theory places the emphasis on the meaning that an event has for the individual and not on the physiological responses. Lazarus et al. believe that one's view of a situation determines whether an event is experienced as stressful or not, making stress the consequence of appraisal and not the antecedent of stress. According to this theory, the way an individual appraises an event plays a fundamental role in determining, not only the magnitude of the stress response, but also the kind of coping strategies that the individual may employ in efforts to deal with the stress.
According to the Transaction Theory of stress, the cognitive appraisal of stress is a two-part process which involves a primary appraisal and a secondary appraisal. Primary appraisal involves the determination of an event as stressful. During primary appraisal, the event or situation can be categorized as irrelevant, beneficial, or stressful. If the event is appraised as stressful, the event is then evaluated as either a harm/loss, a threat, or a challenge. A harm/loss refers to an injury or damage that has already taken place. A threat refers to something that could produce harm or loss. A challenge event refers to the potential for growth, mastery, or some form of gain. Lazarus argues that we cannot assess the origins of stress by looking soley at the nature of the environmental event, rather stress is a process that involves the interaction of the individual with the environment. These categories are based mostly on one's own prior experiences and learning. Also, each of these categories generates different emotional responses. Harm/loss stressors can elicit anger, disgust, sadness, or disappointment. Threatening stressors can produce anxiety and challenging stressors can produce excitement. This theory helps to integrate both the motivational aspects of stress and the varying emotions that are associated with the experience of stress. Secondary appraisal occurs after assessment of the event as a threat or a challenge. During secondary appraisal the individual now evaluates his or her coping resources and options. According to the theory of transactions, stress arises only when a particular transaction is appraised by the person as relevant to his or her well-being. In order for an event to be appraised as a stressor, it must be personally relevant and there must be a perceived mismatch between a situation's demands and one's resources to cope with it.
Dienstbier (1989) offers a reformulation of the Transaction theory, which focuses on the emotional consequences of appraising an event as a stressor or as a challenge. He asserts that when an event is appraised as a challenge, it lead to different physiological consequences than when it is appraised as a harm/loss or threat. Dienstbier uses the term stress to refer to transactions that lead only to negative emotions and he uses the term challenge to describe a transaction that could lead both to positive and negative emotions. A series of studies by Marianne Frankenhaeuser (1986) and colleagues provide some support for Dienstbier's assertion that a stressor evaluated as a challenge should be viewed more positively than a harm/loss or threat event. According to Frankenhaeuser, physiological reactions to stressors depend on two factors: effort and distress. She found that there are three categories of physiological responses to stress. Effort with distress leads to increases of both catecholamine and cortisol secretion and result from daily hassles. These stressors are experienced as negative emotions. This category corresponds to Dienstbier's characterization of the negative emotions present in an event appraised as a harm/loss or as a threat. Effort without distress leads to an increase of catecholamine and suppression of cortisol secretion. These stressors are experienced as positive emotions. This category corresponds to Dienstbier's characterization of the positive emotions present in events appraised as challenging. Distress without effort leads to increased cortisol secretion but not necessarily to catecholamine secretion. This is the pattern often found in depressed individuals.
Traditionally, stress research has been oriented toward studies involving the body's reaction to stressors (a physiological perspective) and the cognitive processes that appraise the event or situation as a stressor (a cognitive perspective). However, current social perspectives of the stress response have noted that different people experiencing similar life conditions are not necessarily affected in the same manner. There is a growing interest in the epidemiology of diseases thought to result from stress. It has been noted that the incidence of hypertension, cardiovascular ailments, and depression varies with such factors as race, sex, marital status, and income. This kind of socioeconomic variation of disease indicates that the stressors that presumably dispose people toward these illnesses are somehow linked to the conditions that people confront as they occupy their various positions and status's in the society. Pearlin (1982) observes that individuals' coping strategies are primarily social in nature. The manner in which people attempt to avoid or resolve stressful situations, the cognitive strategies that they use to reduce threat, and the techniques for managing tensions are largely learned from the groups to which they belong. Although the coping strategies used by individuals are often distinct, coping dispositions are to a large extent acquired from the social environment.
The orientation toward stress research is changing as awareness of the social and cultural contexts involved in stress and coping are examined. The biopsychosocial model of stress incorporates a variety of social factors into its model that influence stress reaction and perception. However, research into the cultural differences that may exist in stress reactions are also needed to examine how various social and cultural structures influence the individual's experience of stress. Culture and society may shape what events are perceived as stressful, what coping strategies are acceptable to use in a particular society, and what institutional mechanisms we may turn to for assistance (Fumiko Naughton, personal communication). Pearlin (1982) suggests that society, its value systems, the stratified ordering of its populations, the organization of its institutions, and the rapidity and extent of changes in these elements can be sources of stress. For example, Merton (1957) suggests that society can elicit stress by promoting values that conflict with the structures in which they are acted upon. Merton argues that the system of values in the United States promotes attainment of monetary and honorable success among more people than could be accommodated by the opportunity structures available. As a consequence, many of those individuals who internalize these culturally prized goals are doomed to failure.
As researchers incorporate a social-cultural perspective to stress research, the definitions of stress, which currently incorporate the physiological and cognitive components of stress, need to be re-examined and re-defined to reflect both social and cultural differences. These social and cultural differences may increase our knowledge about stress and how stress can be effectively managed given the constraints imposed upon the individual by the existing values in a particular culture. A re-definition of stress, that would reflect cultural mediation in the experience of stress, might be that "stress is a set of neurological and physiological reactions that serve an adaptive function in the environmental, social, and cultural values and structures within which the individual acts upon."
Resources on the World Wide Web
The Different Kinds of Stress
This Web site provides information on the characteristics of three different types of stress: Acute, Episodic, and Chronic stress. The information is adapted from The Stress Solution by Lyle H. Miller and Dell Smith. The authors point out that stress management is complicated by the fact that there different types of stress that have their own characteristics, duration and treatment approaches. The different types of stress and their impact on health is discussed.
The American Institute of Stress
This Web site is a non-profit organization that serves as a clearing house for information on stress related subjects. The Board of Trustees includes physicians and health professionals with expertise in various stress related subjects. Among the founders of the AIS were Hans Selye and Norman Cousins. They maintain a large library of information on stress related topics.
The Stress Axis at Work: How the body copes with life's changes
This Web site provides information on the stress axis involving the neurological and physiological reactions of stress. It is taken from an article in Research News, 1995.
Plain Talk About Stress
This Web site discusses how a certain amount of stress is necessary and beneficial. Suggestions are provided on how to manage stress so that it can be used in a positive way and prevent it from becoming distress.
S.T.A.R.: Stress and Anxiety Research Society
The STAR organization is a multidiciplinary, international organization of researchers who exchange research findings and clinical applications on a wide range of stress and anxiety related phenomena.
Bibliography
Aldwin, C.M., ed. (1993). Stress, Coping and Development: An integrative perspective. New York: Guildford.
Bernard, L. C., & Krupat, E. (1994). Health Psychology: Biopsychosocial Factors in Health and Illness. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Cannon, W.B. (1932). The Wisdom of the Body. New York: Norton.
Dienstbier, R. A. (1989). Arousal and physiological toughness: Implications for mental and physical health. Psychological Review, 96:84-100.
Emmons, R.A., & King, L.A. (1988). Conflict among personal strivings: Immediate and long-term implications for psychological and physical well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54:1040-1048.
Franken, R.E. (1994). Human Motivation, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Frankenhaeuser, M. (1986). A psychobiological framework for research on human stress and coping. In M.H. Appley and R. Trumbll, eds. Dynamics of stress: Physiological, psychological, and social perspectives. New York: Plenum.
Frijda, N.H. (1988). The laws of emotions. American Psychologist, 43:349-353.
Holroyd, K.A., & Lazarus, R.S. (1982). Stress, coping, and somatic adaptation. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz, eds. Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. New York: The Free Press.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Guilford.
Lazarus, R.S., & Launier, R. (1978). Stress-related transactions between person and environment. In L. A. Pervin & M. Lewis, eds. Perspectives in Interactional Psychology. New York: Plenum.
Mandler, G. (1982). Stress and Though Processes. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz, eds. Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. New York: The Free Press.
Merton, R.K. (1957). Social structure and anomie. In R. K. Merton, ed. Social Theory and Social Structure, 2nd ed. New York: Free Press.
Pearlin, L. I. (1982). The social contexts of stress. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz, eds. Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. New York: The Free Press.
Selye, H. (1956). The Stress of Life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Selye, H. (1976). Stress in health and disease. Reading, MA: Butterworth.
Selye, H. (1982). History and present status of the stress concept. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz, eds. Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. New York: The Free Press.
Selye, H. (1985). History and present status of the stress concept. In A. Monat & R.S. Lazarus, eds. Stress and Coping, 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University.
Zakowski, S., Hall, M.H. & Baum, A. (1992). Stress, stress management, and the immune system. Applied and Preventative Psychology, 1:1-13.
http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/students/stress.htm
An American History of the Disorder
As with most mental illnesses, the precise cause(s) of ECEIBD are not well understood; it may be caused by a variety of influences. It is generally believed that mental diseases result from a combination of genetic predisposition and social learning, both “nature and nurture”. Perhaps additional research will lead to findings that some people are more susceptible to the constituent feelings and thought patterns that make color-arousal extreme, e.g. fear, hate, anger, low, self-esteem, distrust. However, it seems highly unlikely that any particular color group is biologically more susceptible to these feelings or thought patterns.
Although biological factors may play a role, our nation’s recent history indicates that environmental factors are much more important in determining the prevalence and degree of color-aroused ideation and the relative degree to which it becomes manifest in severe behavior. Until the 1960’s virtually every aspect of American life was segregated according to color. Because even public bathrooms had signs indicating the color of people authorized to enter, everyone – white and black – was legally obliged to be aware of their own color and that of others in order both to avoid violating the law and to ensure that these laws were observed by others.
Yet, when these laws changed and blacks and other color minorities began to be seen in the same bathrooms that whites used and vice versa, for example, the degree of color arousal elicited by these sighting decreased until it became barely if at all perceptible in most individuals. Integration itself reduced color arousal, the learned emotional reaction to the sighting of persons of a different color in certain circumstances.
When considering discussing the disadvantages to adoption of change, it as important to discuss the perceived disadvantages as it is to discuss the real ones. This is because foreseeable resistance to change is as likely to result from perceived or feared disadvantages as from real ones. When in the last century America was weighing and moving toward an end to de jure discrimination and separation of people by color, there was extreme fear in some quarters as to what this would mean for individuals and society.
Home Previous Story Next Story View Comments Post a Comment Send This Page
New Bid to Find Truth About Old Race Riot
AR Articles on Black Myths
White Might, Black Fright (Feb. 1994)
What Race Were the Pharaohs? (Sep. 1994)
Loony Tunes (Mar. 1992)
More news stories on Black Myths
Patrik Jonsson, Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 22, 2005
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/12/new_bid_to_find_truth_about_ol.php
RALEIGH, N.C.—As a horse-drawn machine-gun regiment fired into crowds and frightened blacks fled into the cold swamps, the dream of a Reconstructed South died on the streets of Wilmington, N.C., on Nov. 10, 1898—more than 30 years after Gen. Robert E. Lee’s surrender at Appomattox ended the Civil War.
The uprising began a day after the election in Wilmington, then North Carolina’s largest city. The city’s Democrats, who regained power from the Republicans, proceeded to wrest control of the government immediately. Supported by para-military networks, historians now say, white Democratic leaders staged a planned insurrection resisted by bands of black men. The party mob, which grew to as many as 2,000, smashed the press and toppled kerosene lamps in a black newspaper office, setting the press ablaze. As many as 100 people were killed in the race riot.
For more than a century, the only violent overthrow of a local government in US history has been hidden in mystique.
Now, a new report challenges the view that held sway for many years—that a provocative statement about white women and black men by a mixed race (then known as mulatto) newspaper editor caused the 1898 riot in a South gripped by fears of miscegenation.
Instead, LeRea Umfleet, a state government historian, writes that a group named the Secret Nine, made up of white businessmen and politicians, played a Wizard of Oz-like role, pulling strings on trained paramilitaries to take control of the city—and the state. It set the stage for Jim Crow laws of the early 20th century.
“Conspiracy is the proper word to be used for the things that happened, which makes it so difficult to write what happened,” says Ms. Umfleet. “There are so many layers of conspiracy going on within the Democratic Party, within the leadership in Wilmington, within the white business community, so many layers of people planning for the same end result.”
The report is seen as another milestone for a country still trying to come to terms with its violent racial history. It follows similar race riot commissions in Florida and Oklahoma, the US Senate’s apology earlier this year for blocking anti-lynching legislation, and renewed investigations into civil rights-era crimes.
“Wilmington was center stage for the country and it said: If you cross this line, violence will be the answer … and it shattered the American dream,” says former Wilmington Mayor Harper Peterson. “We’re still trying to recover what we lost.”
To some, the report is a way of getting to the truth of an event wrapped in family memories and rumors. Critics say it attempts to judge a former era by modern standards. Wilmington race riot commissioners, however, hope that the report will provide a fuller understanding into how a seemingly spontaneous riot can have conspiratorial roots, and how a long-ago event can affect African-Americans today.
“We do have a national amnesia about these incidents and about the degree to which force and terrorism were part of American politics, especially in the Southeast,” says Brooks Simpson, a Civil War historian at Arizona State University and the author of “Let Us Have Peace,” about the Reconstruction era.
Umfleet says that the coup d’etat ended the social progress blacks had made in Wilmington after the Civil War.
“North Carolina can point to 1898 and say, ‘This is when Jim Crow started,’“ says Umfleet. “Wilmington happened, and it was that catalyst that proved that the Democrats could do whatever they wanted and get away with it.”
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/12/new_bid_to_find_truth_about_ol.php
For example, it was feared that black men would rape white women if allowed to be in close proximity to them. It was feared that “mixing of the races” would lead to a diminished “white species”. It was feared that some whites would lose cherished privileges and the sense of being “chosen people” as the benefits of American society became freely open to competition across color lines. Only the latter fear turned out to be realistic, and the vast majority of whites have adapted successfully to cope with that consequence of desegregation.
As governor of Alabama in the 1960’s, George Wallace strenuously resisted integration and promised to “stand at the schoolhouse door” to bar black people from admission to the University of Alabama. In a campaign speech in 1962, Wallace said, "As your governor, I shall resist any illegal federal court order, even to the point of standing at the schoolhouse door in person, if necessary [to prevent black students from studying with whites]." Yet, by 1982 he had changed and embraced integration, and had achieved the support of many black voters. Speaking to a meeting of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in 1982, he said, "I did stand, with a majority of the white people, for the separation of the schools. But that was wrong, and that will never come back again." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/wallace/sfeature/quotes.html
Diversity a matchless plus: when racial segregration came under attack in the 1950s, Bob Webb defended it in his columns and editorials. But he came to see things differently
For A Change, Dec, 2004 by Bob Webb
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KZH/is_6_17/ai_n8694088#continue
DARK-SKINNED Salvadoran-born Ingris Reyes, 22, had been a legal resident of Alexandria, Virginia for 17 years when she received the emotional jolt of her lifetime.
Reyes and her five brothers and sisters had known discrimination--in the look they sometimes saw in people's eyes, for example. 'If a Hispanic had recently been charged with a (publicized) crime, people would look at one of my brothers as though he were a criminal,' she says.
Nothing, however, prepared her for that morning she attended traffic court with her older sister, who was there for an alleged violation. A lawyer, who had nothing to do with the case, suddenly heaped abuse on them, saying that people like them should be returned to their native lands if they broke the law. The incident left her distraught and weeping. This was not the America Reyes had been taught about.
Her experience demonstrates that while African-Americans continue to bear the brunt of most discrimination and abuse, other minorities suffer too. Martin Luther King's dream of a society where character, not colour, counts falls somewhat short of fulfilment.
But clearly much has been achieved. When the Brown ruling shook the South with the emotional force of a hurricane, I was a reporter in New Orleans, where segregation was as rigid as anywhere. Blacks knew 'their place' and were expected to stay in it. Most did.
Segregation was so much a part of me I defended it in articles after becoming associate editor of the State Times in Jackson, the capital of Mississippi, where I was reared. It took a transforming experience at a Moral Re-Armament (now Initiatives of Change) conference in 1957 to shake my faith in the system I had defended. The result was I began to write to unite instead of divide, to heal rather than hurt, to reach out to African-Americans in a different way and to bring people of every race, colour and creed into my heart.
The Supreme Court's school decision has been the major catalyst for a new way of thinking in America not only about education but about multiracial and multicultural diversity. For all its failure to make every classroom truly diverse, the ruling brought new respect for the Constitution across the divides of race, religion and ethnicity. It removed the stigma of 'legal' segregation.
Attempts to halt or slow white flight to the suburbs and achieve integration have largely failed. Moreover, many black parents put a higher premium on academic rather than multiracial achievements of schools. In 1998, the Chicago-based Heartland Institute cited a poll which showed that 'by an 80 per cent to nine percent margin, African-American parents want public schools to focus on academics over promoting integration and diversity'. When an African-American reporter and I did a neighbourhood survey in Cincinnati in the mid 1960s, we could only find one parent who favoured busing her child to another school for racial integration. The others preferred the local school.
But racial and ethnic diversity remains the ideal. Where it exists, it offers a matchless plus to education. Ingris Reyes says that one of her best friends at high school was a scarved Sudanese Muslim girl. 'We had students from all over. In the lunchroom white students would be with other white students, but with an African-American, Hispanic and maybe a Muslim with them. African-Americans would be together, with maybe someone from the other groups, and Hispanics, who can be any colour from white to black, would be with one or two from other groups.'
However limited this diversity, it taught different cultures, traditions and behaviours. There may be no grades for that education: but most educators would rank it as one of the most important learning experiences.
Bob Webb is a former columnist and editorial writer for the 'Cincinnati Enquirer'.
COPYRIGHT 2004 For A Change
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KZH/is_6_17/ai_n8694088#continue
“Since its inception, America has struggled with its handling of matters related to race, ethnicity, and immigration. The histories of each racial and ethnic minority group attest to long periods of legalized discrimination - and more subtle forms of discrimination - within U.S. borders ( Takaki, 1993). Ancestors of many of today's African Americans were forcibly brought to the United States as slaves. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 forced American Indians off their land and onto reservations in remote areas of the country that lacked natural resources and economic opportunities. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 barred immigration from China to the U.S. and denied citizenship to Chinese Americans until it was repealed in 1952. Over 100,000 Japanese Americans were unconstitutionally incarcerated during World War II, yet none was ever shown to be disloyal. Many Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Pacific Islanders became U.S. citizens through conquest, not choice. Although racial and ethnic minorities cannot lay claim to being the sole recipients of maltreatment in the United States, legally sanctioned discrimination and exclusion of racial and ethnic minorities have been the rule, rather than the exception, for much of the history of this country.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Search&db=books&doptcmdl=GenBookHL&term=racism+AND+hstat%5Bbook%5D+AND+317290%5Buid%5D&rid=hstat5.section.1179#1210
After much of the legally mandated segregation was outlawed with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, America experienced a number of “first” – those astounding moments when the first black participated in a given activity after the legally prohibitions ended. Each one was shocking and frightening for some, while it caused elation in others. Included among the life occurrences known to be primary causes of stress are marriage, divorce, death of a loved one and moving. If moving to any neighborhood causes stress under the best of circumstances, then imagine the stress of being the first black to move to a white neighborhood or being among the whites challenged to integrate these new and previously forbidden neighbors!
was largely extinguished in most individualsually diminished until in many people it seems relatively non-existent. This bodes very well for the extreme treatment of color-aroused disorder. many seem all but extinshBlacks were not permitted to enter upon areas reserved for whites, but whites also were forbidden by law to associate with blacks. For example, heterochromic intermarriage was punishable by a prison sentence both for the white and black partners and also for the minister who might preside over the marriage ceremony. As a result, the first thing that the minister was obliged to do when a couple asked to marry was to confirm that both parties and their ancestors were of the same color group. In this legal climate, awareness of one’s color and that of others was a legal necessity. The mere prospect of a heterochromatic marriage would evoke fear if only because it could result in a lengthy prison sentence.
Although any intercourse outside of marriage was illegal in many states, there was a significantly enhanced penalty for heterochromatic intercourse outside of marriage – an act that could only occur outside of marriage because any heterochromatic marriage was not legally possible.
Because of this highly color-determined legal and social environment, if for no other reason, individual Americans were bound to be highly color-selective and color-aroused.
Of course, seeing blacks in areas reserved for whites or vice versa aroused feelings of surprise, shock, disdain and disgust if only because of the awareness that the law was being violated. Just as we are surprised to see someone steal from a store today, we would have been surprised to see a black person at all in certain places in 1950.
What happened when these laws ended ought to give great hope to those who favor treating patients with extreme color-arousal. Although there was great empassioned resistance to the end of legally mandated segregation, with church burnings, bombings
o one is obliged by biology to commit color-aroused offenses.
Any attempts to identify such a biological cause that differentially affects people depending on their skin color would be unsuccessful at this time and unnecessarily delay efforts to treat current patients using the therapeutic techniques that are presently currently available or susceptible to development.
Environmental Influences
Although controversial, the environmental influences that have encouraged color-arousal have been documented extensively and are more easily identified. Although there are varying theories about the causes of racism, the most important consideration for the therapeutic relationship is to understand those that have a sound basis in research and the most bearing on patient outcomes.
ECEIBD – An Intergenerational Disorder with Social, Cultural and Political
Dimensions
ICEIBD is an intergenerational disorder, at least partially learned, with social, cultural and political components. From the 1880’s through the 1960’s, some American parents exhibiting more-extreme ECEIBD symptoms brought their children with them to participate in lynchings, Klu Klux Klan rallies and cross-burnings on other’s private property (see citations below), thereby exposing their children to severe violence that would now be unlawful.
By seeing their parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents participate in and celebrate the murder and dismemberment of others (see research below) may have modified and solidified the children’s view of the role of law in society, of the relative status of their victims in society, of their status in society relative to those who were lynched or whose homes were burned. Those experiences may have become powerfully imprinted upon the children as well as the adults present.
In a country where the presence of people with that is rapidly increasing, conflict is inevitable.
Derek Black is a 12 year-old boy from West Palm Beach, Florida. With his father and mother, he operates an internationally known website dedicated to “animated Confederate flags, sound files of white-pride songs, an inflammatory article about Martin Luther King Jr.” The family website, the Web's first hate site, Stormfront.org, draws five thousand unique visits per day. His mother’s ex-husband is David Duke, a Louisiana segregationist former grand wizard of the Klu Klux Klan. Don Black, Derek’s father, keeps a framed photo above his desk of Derek dressed in a Confederate soldier's uniform. ''People say, 'You're teaching your son Satan,' says Mr. Black, but ''I think anyone who is critical of me for instilling in my son my worldview has lost track of how a society should function.'' Father and son target kids in a confederacy of hate, USA Today, July 16, 2001, reported at http://www.rickross.com/reference/supremacists/supremacists50.html.
“Cultural and social factors contribute to the causation of mental illness, yet that contribution varies by disorder. Mental illness is considered the product of a complex interaction among biological, psychological, social, and cultural factors. The role of any one of these major factors can be stronger or weaker depending on the disorder” ( DHHS, 1999). For example, “Cultural and social factors have the most direct role in the causation of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD is a mental disorder caused by exposure to severe trauma, such as genocide, war combat, torture, or the extreme threat of death or serious injury ( APA, 1994). These traumatic experiences are associated with the later development of a longstanding pattern of symptoms accompanied by biological changes. (Yehuda, 2000).” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Search&db=books&doptcmdl=GenBookHL&term=racism+AND+hstat%5Bbook%5D+AND+317290%5Buid%5D&rid=hstat5.section.1179#1210
Meanwhile the children whose homes or churches were bombed may have learned that trying to achieve success was very dangerous; efforts to take jobs previously held exclusively by whites would lead to destruction and death. “The goal of terrorism is to use violence or the threat of violence to inflict psychological fear and intimidation at any time, during periods of peace or conflict. Terrorist activities result in severe trauma and cause visible damage, which creates strong emotional responses. Unlike family or community violence, or trauma resulting from war, terrorist activities may occur suddenly without any forewarning, and the threat persists indefinitely. Terrorist threats and actions are enhanced by media coverage, which exacerbate underlying anxieties.” Wanda P. Fremont, M.D., Psychiatric Times, http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=171201495
These violent and emotionally arousing experiences in formative years may have predisposed participants – children and adults – to have a modified view of the victims’ value to society as well as of the acts in which they could safely engage for the purpose of perpetuating
Although ECEIBD is an intergenerational disorder with social, cultural and political causes, recovery from ECEIBD, as with other mental illnesses, cannot occur without the determination of the individual so afflicted. The individual must be willing to explore his emotions and ideation, changing and rejecting patterns that lead to heightened fear and anger, patterns that would otherwise have been manifested in unacceptable behavior.
As discussed here in the “American History” chapter, there has been much opportunity historically for people to learn and be reinforced for holding color-aroused emotions and ideation, and for engaging in color-aroused behavior. Much color-aroused discrimination was required by law mandatory, both of blacks and whites, until in the United States, until just two generations ago.
Although it is probably ridiculous to believe that some people are predisposed to hate others based on their skin color, it is not difficult to imagine that some people might be more susceptible to intense fear and anger than others. We take no position on possible biological causes for ECEIBD because there is not empirical evidence on which to base an informed opinion and, more importantly, understanding of any genetic mechanism of the illness is not a necessary prerequisite to successful diagnosis and treatment. As with other mental diseases, we must for the moment largely content ourselves - and can accomplish much – when we competently identify and treat the symptoms.
Change and loss are inevitably stressful. When change is forced upon us, others may promise that our new circumstances will be better in some way than what we have lost, offering opportunities and advantages that we cannot yet imagine. Yet we yearn for the familiar with whatever advantages it may have held. The future advantages may seem speculative and relatively unimportant relative to the advantages of the present which are known and may be relatively reliable.
For example, people whose skin is white have been asked to give up exclusive access to many public and private amenities over the last half-century. The promise has been that the benefits of realizing the “dream” of equality will outweigh the advantages lost. Whites are offered the hope that peace will prevail as society become more just.
This unfortunately is small comfort for a worker who may fear that his skills are inferior to those of someone who has previously not participated in the labor market do to a skin color ineligibility. The worker who has a job in the present may fear that as competition increases with an increase in the potential labor force, “his” job may be lost. Although employment is at will in America, and no one acquires a property right in his employment, we nonetheless feel that it is “ours” unless someone takes it away from us.
This addresses the public sphere of life but not the private. When certain forces in private experience are excluded from operation, then the action of the remaining
forces becomes more predictable. At this time, 97% of whites marry other whites. It is impossible to predict how family relationships and societal ones might change and be challenged were more whites to heterogeneously. What is certain is that this evolution would involve new and different stresses than those we have become accompanied to. The 1960’s movie, “Look Whose Coming to Dinner” was about the novel stresses that visited a white family when a black man dated and married one of the daughters.
While the protagonist in the movie was the “movement” toward equality and freedom of movement within a freer society, yet the parents were predictably concerned with encountering the unpredictable. How would friends and neighbors respond to this change in the expectations for others children and potentially their own? Would marriage to a black man limit the social attainment and acceptance that the daughter would receive, that any grandchildren might receive? How would these heterochromatic spouses relate with one another over time? In the context of American society these were entirely new challenge and novel issues, which could arise only because laws and rigid social strictures against intermarriage had begun slowly to fall away. In this atmosphere, predictions of the outcome would have been speculative at best.
What was predictable and manifest is that the revolutionary changes of the fifties and sixties in relationships between blacks and whites would occasion enormous stresses for all societal groups. Although some people were eager for change, there were those in every social group who were ambivalent or adamantly against change. The resulting “struggle” between these parties as each tried to convince the other and gather more adherents, guaranteed that individuals would experience tremendous stress regardless of the outcome of this vast social experiment.
In South Africa, strictly enforced separation of blacks and whites and rigid limitation on blacks’ participation in society has given way to electoral democracy in which adults are eligible to vote regardless of the hue of their skin. Although this transition to universal suffrage has been relatively peaceful, it nonetheless was the result of thirty years of civil strife which many believed might devolve into all-out civil war. Many whites expressed fears that blacks would dominate them once a black voting majority expressed itself in national politics. Although others argued that this would not occur, yet South African whites truly could not predict the results of this proposed change.
What was certain was that, in the absence of “pass laws” that limited blacks’ freedom of movement geographically and socially, blacks would now be present in areas that whites had come to know as their exclusive preserve. They were predictably concerned with the loss of benefits, status and privileges that this would entail. The competition for all that they previously took for granted would now inevitably increase. They were frightened, and many outside observers thought they would resort to killing blacks en masse rather than accept the changes which were coming to be seen as otherwise inevitable.
In the United States, the fears that blacks and whites would intermarry in large numbers have not been realized thus far. But they could be realized. To the degree that people hold the belief that people should interact and marry with others of their own hue, they will be concerned with good basis in fact that increased mobility of blacks will result in increased opportunities for heterogeneous interaction and increase interracial sex, parenting, marriage and divorce. More children will have skin that is harder to
Human beings prefer certainty. The “one-drop“ rule that any non-white genetic material in an individual made him “colored” enabled whites to know exactly which laws would apply to the children of intermarriage, even as intermarriage inevitably mixed the genes of those of African origins with those of European origins. The hues might change over time, but the “color lines” would remain strictly and reliably enforced, it was hoped. Many hoped that the vigorously and rigidly and vigilantly these rules were enforced, the more predictable would be their future. Voting was the unique preserve of a few, for example, and the “one drop” rule, if strictly and successfully enforced, would guarantee that interracial sex would not confound a clear division, expanding the voting pool beyond the group which then held voting as its unique privilege.
When any person or group “bets the farm” on static social relations, change will predictably come entail resistance, with stress for change-proponents and antagonists. Stress is a known risk factor for irritability, anger, outbursts, depression,
strict racial Jim Crow” laws of the pre-Civil Rights era
In retrospect, it seems inevitable that America would become more racially diverse and more integrated throughout the twentieth century. It is easy to forget from out vantage point that integration was never a certainty. There were those who favored it, those who reluctantly accepted it and those who adamantly opposed it and vowed that it would never come to pass. Everyone was “stressed” at every turn. The “firsts” for black participation in so many aspects of American life were met by some as a sign of hope that people of different colors would eventually interact seamlessly with one another, while others saw the advent of “mixed” activities as the beginning of the end of the world.
The stresses of modern life are enormous and various, and normally no single stress in isolation will can be predicted with certainty to produce extreme emotional disturbances in any particular individual. For example, although the disorder Bulimia is known to involve body-image and self-esteem, and may be treated with medications that address anxiety and depression, yet no one knows precisely what causes Bulimia to occur in any particular individual.
The relationship between blacks and whites in America - including the roles and privilges that each would enjoy - have been in a constant state of change since the arrival of the first slaves. There was constant adversarial competition between blacks, initially over the crucial matter of whether the white masters would benefits from the slaves' labor because they were slaves, or whether blacks would benefit from their labor because they had escaped to freedom. Losing a slave then was as financially damaging as losing a car now, and ruling whites did everything in their power to create stasis so that they would not lose what they had.
Change and the threat of change and the adaptation to change caused immense stress in blacks and whites. They mutually viewed the source of their stress either as the other's unwillingness to change or as the other's unwillingness continue without change. Everyone was stressed over the issue of change, either insisting upon it or insisting upon resisting it.
Symptomatic of stress are such feelings as anger, sadness, fear, "fight or flight" etc. When we feel these feelings, we want to do something to make the feelings subside. We may try to order our surroundings in a way that limits our exposure to the stress-causing objects. We may strike out at whatever we perceive as the source of the stress.
The capability of people to deal with stress rides on a continuum from those who like and need change and cope well with new circumstances to those who are morbidly afraid of change, are fragile. The determinants of ability to cope with the stress of change seem to be partly biological and partly the result of experience.
It is possible that those who are most negatively affected by the stress of change, and who perceive change as being most destructive to them, will develop the greatest antipathy toward those people, forces and objects viewed as the change agents.
Vulnerability to change alone will not determine who develops antipathies. Rather there must be a combination of vulnerability to stress and change generally - which again might be due to a combination of nature and nurture - combined with negative ideation against a particular change and/or against particular change agents. The degree of negative ideation and the resulting stress and emotional charge may be related to the direction of change that one forsees in a particular situation as well as degree to which one expects to be negatively affected by that change.
In some individuals, behavioral changes in response to the stress of change may be actually be positive, for example, creative adaptations to take advantage of new opportunities. The greater are the individual's expectations of negative change, or his conviction that things have already changed too much, the greater will be the individual's stress and stress-related emotional symptoms such as fear, anger and panic, as well as physiological symptoms such as sweaty palms, flushing, and perspiration. As the negative emotional states increase in intensity and frequency, and the sense of the power to govern or limit or direct change and stress decreases, so the likelihood of extreme behavioral symptoms increases.
In some individuals the resulting behavioral manifestations may be modest and manageable, even reasonably adaptive. Behavioral symptoms may avoidance of stressful situations and stress vectors, distracting activities, and other stress reduction techniques that do not inordinately limit the individual’s abilty to carry on his significant life activities as her perceives them. However, those who feel that the change substantially prevents them from living life in the manner deemed necessary may be at increased risk for extreme adverse reactions against the perceived source of the stress. If the perceived source of the stress is “black people”, then they may lash out at black people in ways that are socially unacceptable (and so harm the individual’s social standing) or even illegal, and so increase the individuals liability to civil and/or criminal sanctions.
What is “Race” Anyway?
Because the existence of the color spectrum and of individual colors is subject to agreement throughout our society and in other cultures, and because the color spectrum per se is not an inherently or principally political concept, the term “color” has tremendous advantages over “race” for the purpose of studying an individual’s reactions to color. Even if the individual perceives colors differently from others, it is possible and feasible to identify and specify with great particularity any differences in the perception of colors. The question of color is then has that open-ended quality so useful in plumbing the client’s inner life rather than the closed-end quality. In America, the question of one’s “race” only has two answers, neither of which tells the therapist much about an individual’s patient’s inner life. It as likely to end a discussion as to begin one.
On the other hand, the question of one’s color, when asked with a color chart in hand, can be the beginning of a fruitful and revealing discussion. As a five year old what color he is and he quickly becomes confused. Ask him with a color chart in hand and he quickly learns something about the nature of the color spectrum, about the broad variety of beautiful colors in the world, of which his own is only one of many. Black and white thinking impoverishes us with respect to our skin color as much as in any other area of our lives.
Indeed, for the purposes of indicating colors to be displayed in pages on the Internet and on computer screens, color charts have been developed that displaying colors in precisely identify almost three hundred colors and shades of colors in a way that can reliably be reproduced by anyone with a computer through reference to a standardized color code. (See chart below.) This innovation makes it possible for clinicians to measure with specificity a human being’s preferences for, and reactions to, a variety of colors for wall paint, floral arrangements and human skin tones.
The reader is encouraged now to compare the color of the back of his hand to the color chart below to find the HTML color code most similar to the color of his own skin. Now please turn to the following page to find the name of the color that corresponds to the skin color you have identified as your own. What will become readily apparent is that few if any of us is truly white or black. The idea that our society is divided between “whites and blacks” is an example of the “black and white thinking” that characteristic of many mental disorders currently found in the DSM. The problem with black and white thinking is that it narrows our alternatives for resolution of problems and backs us into corners from which our thinking does not let us escape.
Of course some will argue that “black” and “white” are sociological constructs that have sufficient currency in our culture to be useful for the purposes of sociological theory and argument. While this might or might not be so, a medical diagnosis simply cannot be founded upon social constructs which are intentionally vague rather than specific, which cannot be confirmed by the tools available for measuring the phenomenon in question to measure and determine the color of physical objects) and about which there is no general agreement. Color charts and spectrometers will not and cannot confirm that “white people” and “black people” exist. They can only confirm for the most part that such people do not exist.
In order to measure a subject’s reaction to “black” people, we would first have to find someone whose skin was black, which blackness we would confirm using instruments competent for the task, such as a spectrometer. We would soon find that any experiments calling for black people as stimuli or as subjects could not be carried out because such people simply do not exist. We would then be forced to abandon all empirical study altogether (which is what most of us have done), or to measure subjects’ responses to a variety of skin colors that do exist in nature rather than only in our minds.
This would lead to the observations that (1) there is a broad spectrum of colors to be found on the skin of human beings, and (2) these colors can be identified for the purposes of scientific and sociological inquiry with 100 times greater particularity than is currently the case.
Although this might not be practical for the purpose of conducting the US Census, it is highly useful and indeed essential in the clinical practice of psychiatry when discussing the emotions and feelings that arise in an individual in conjunction with his own skin color and the skin color of others. If we are to encourage individuals to avoid the extremes of thought that lead to dangerous extremes of emotions, then we can begin by acknowledging the “shades of grey” between skin colors and that none of resides at the extremes of the spectrum, whether in our skin color or in our color-aroused thoughts and emotions. http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p990854.html
Color* Names Chart:
GRAY Background
(Colors may not be viewable with some browsers.)
Hexidecimal RGB Color Spectrum
These are the more common colors
EEEEEE DDDDDD CCCCCC BBBBBB AAAAAA 999999
888888 777777 666666 555555 444444 333333
222222 111111 000000 FF0000 EE0000 DD0000
CC0000 BB0000 AA0000 990000 880000 770000
660000 550000 440000 330000 220000 110000
FFFFFF FFFFCC FFFF99 FFFF66 FFFF33 FFFF00
CCFFFF CCFFCC CCFF99 CCFF66 CCFF33 CCFF00
99FFFF 99FFCC 99FF99 99FF66 99FF33 99FF00
66FFFF 66FFCC 66FF99 66FF66 66FF33 66FF00
33FFFF 33FFCC 33FF99 33FF66 33FF33 33FF00
00FFFF 00FFCC 00FF99 00FF66 00FF33 00FF00
FFCCFF FFCCCC FFCC99 FFCC66 FFCC33 FFCC00
CCCCFF CCCCCC CCCC99 CCCC66 CCCC33 CCCC00
99CCFF 99CCCC 99CC99 99CC66 99CC33 99CC00
66CCFF 66CCCC 66CC99 66CC66 66CC33 66CC00
33CCFF 33CCCC 33CC99 33CC66 33CC33 33CC00
00CCFF 00CCCC 33CC66 33CC33 00CC99 00CC66
00CC33 00CC00 FF99FF FF99CC FF9999 FF9966
FF9933 FF9900 CC99FF CC99CC CC9999 CC9966
CC9933 CC9900 9999FF 9999CC 999999 999966
999933 999900 6699FF 6699CC 669999 669966
669933 669900 3399FF 3399CC 339999 339966
339933 339900 0099FF 0099CC 009999 009966
009933 009900 FF66FF FF66CC FF6699 FF6666
FF6633 FF6600 CC66FF CC66CC CC6699 CC6666
CC6633 CC6600 9966FF 9966CC 996699 996666
996633 996600 6666FF 6666CC 666699 666666
666633 666600 3366FF 3366CC 336699 336666
336633 336600 0066FF 0066CC 006699 006666
006633 006600 FF33FF FF33CC FF3399 FF3366
FF3333 FF3300 CC33FF CC33CC CC3399 CC3366
CC3333 CC3300 9933FF 9933CC 993399 993366
993333 993300 6633FF 6633CC 663399 663366
663333 663300 3333FF 3333CC 333399 333366
333333 333300 0033FF FF3333 0033CC 003399
003366 003333 003300 FF00FF FF00CC FF0099
FF0066 FF0033 FF0000 CC00FF CC00CC CC0099
CC0066 CC0033 CC0000 9900FF 9900CC 990099
990066 990033 990000 6600FF 6600CC 660099
660066 660033 660000 3300FF 3300CC 330099
330066 330033 330000 0000FF 0000CC 000099
000066 000033 00FF00 00EE00 00DD00 00CC00
00BB00 00AA00 009900 008800 007700 006600
005500 004400 003300 002200 001100 0000FF
0000EE 0000DD 0000CC 0000BB 0000AA 000099
000088 000077 000055 000044 000022 000011
Have Fun Bringing Color Into Your Life!!
ALICEBLUE
(#F0F8FF) GOLD§
(#FFD800) NAVY
(#000080)
ANTIQUEWHITE§
(#F0E8D0) GOLDENROD§
(#D0A020) NAVYBLUE
(#A0B0E0)
AQUA
(#00FFFF) GRAY†
(#808080) OLDLACE
(#FFF0E0)
AQUAMARINE§
(#80FFD0) GREY‡
(#808080 or #00E000) OLIVE
(#808000)
AZURE§
(#F0FFFF) GREEN§
(#008000) OLIVEDRAB§
(#609020)
BEIGE
(#F0F0E0) GREENYELLOW
(#B0FF30) ORANGE§
(#FFA000)
BISQUE§
(#FFE0C0) HONEYDEW§
(#F0FFF0) ORANGERED§
(#FF4000)
BLACK
(#000000) HOTPINK§
(#FF68B0) ORCHID§
(#D070D0)
BLANCHEDALMOND
(#FFE8D0) INDIANRED§
(#D05860) PALEGOLDENROD
(#F0E8A0)
BLUE§
(#0000FF) IVORY§
(#FFFFF0) PALEGREEN§
(#90F790)
BLUEVIOLET
(#8028E0) KHAKI§
(#F0E890) PALETURQUOISE§
(#B0F0F0)
BROWN§
(#A02820) LAVENDER
(#E0E8F0) PALEVIOLETRED§
(#D07090)
BURLYWOOD§
(#E0B880) LAVENDERBLUSH§
(#FFF0F0) PAPAYAWHIP
(#FFF0D0)
CADETBLUE§
(#60A0A0) LAWNGREEN
(#80F800) PEACHPUFF§
(#FFD8B0)
CHARTREUSE§
(#80FF00) LEMONCHIFFON§
(#FFF8D0) PERU
(#D08040)
CHOCOLATE§
(#D06820) LIGHTBLUE§
(#B0D8E0) PINK§
(#FFC0C0)
CORAL§
(#FF8050) LIGHTCORAL
(#F08080) PLUM§
(#E0A0E0)
CORNFLOWERBLUE
(#6090F0) LIGHTCYAN§
(#E0FFFF) POWDERBLUE
(#B0E0E0)
CORNSILK§
(#FFF8E0) LIGHTGOLDENRODYELLOW
(#F0F8D0) PURPLE§
(#800080)
CYAN§
(#00FFFF) LIGHTGREEN
(#90F090) RED§
(#FF0000)
DARKBLUE
(#000080) LIGHTPINK§
(#FFB8C0) REDVIOLET
(#FF00E0)
DARKCYAN
(#008880) LIGHTSALMON§
(#FFA070) ROSYBROWN§
(#C09090)
DARKGOLDENROD§
(#B08800) LIGHTSEAGREEN
(#20B0A0) ROYALBLUE§
(#4068E0)
DARKGRAY
(#A0A8A0) LIGHTSKYBLUE§
(#80D0F0) SADDLEBROWN
(#804010)
DARKGREEN
(#006000) LIGHTSLATEBLUE
(#0000E0) SALMON§
(#F08070)
DARKKHAKI
(#C0B860) LIGHTSLATEGRAY
(#708890) SANDYBROWN
(#F0A060)
DARKMAGENTA
(#800080) LIGHTSTEELBLUE§
(#B0C0E0) SEAGREEN§
(#308850)
DARKOLIVEGREEN§
(#506830) LIGHTYELLOW
(#FFFFE0) SEASHELL§
(#FFF0F0)
DARKORANGE§
(#FF8800) LIME
(#00FF00) SIENNA§
(#A05030)
DARKORCHID
(#9030D0) LIMEGREEN
(#30C830) SILVER
(#C0C0C0)
DARKRED
(#800000) LINEN
(#F0F0E0) SKYBLUE§
(#80D0E0)
DARKSALMON
(#E09870) MAGENTA§
(#FF00FF) SLATEBLUE§
(#6058D0)
DARKSEAGREEN§
(#90B890) MAROON§
(#800000) SLATEGRAY§
(#708090)
DARKSLATEBLUE
(#403880) MEDIUMAQUAMARINE
(#60C8A0) SNOW§
(#FFF8F0)
DARKSLATEGRAY§
(#305050) MEDIUMBLUE
(#0000D0) SPRINGGREEN§
(#00FF80)
DARKTURQUOISE
(#00D0D0) MEDIUMORCHID§
(#B050D0) STEELBLUE§
(#4080B0)
DARKVIOLET
(#9000D0) MEDIUMPURPLE§
(#9070D0) TAN§
(#D0B090)
DEEPPINK§
(#FF1090) MEDIUMSEAGREEN
(#40B070) TEAL
(#008080)
DEEPSKYBLUE§
(#00C0FF) MEDIUMSLATEBLUE
(#7068F0) THISTLE§
(#D0C0D0)
DIMGRAY
(#606860) MEDIUMSPRINGGREEN
(#00F890) TOMATO§
(#FF6040)
DODGERBLUE§
(#2090FF) MEDIUMTURQUOISE
(#40D0D0) TURQUOISE§
(#40E0D0)
FIREBRICK§
(#B02020) MEDIUMVIOLETRED
(#C01080) VIOLET
(#F080F0)
FLORALWHITE
(#FFF8F0) MIDNIGHTBLUE
(#101870) WHEAT
(#F0E0B0)
FORESTGREEN
(#208820) MINTCREAM
(#F0FFF0) WHITE
(#FFFFFF)
FUCHSIA
(#FF00FF) MISTYROSE§
(#FFE0E0) WHITESMOKE
(#F0F0F0)
GAINSBORO
(#E0D8E0) MOCCASIN
(#FFE0B0) YELLOW§
(#FFFF00)
GHOSTWHITE
(#F0F7FF) NAVAJOWHITE§
(#FFE0B0) YELLOWGREEN
(#90C830)
The existence of colors ; because reactions human reactions to skin color are measurable and subject to impirical study and confirmation. If race does exist then, because color is commonly believed to be the foremost characteristic of race, the use of the term color in scientific investigation would be a very simple and elegant shorthand. If, on the other hand, race does not exist, we are still able to study reactions to color that studies show do exist for the purpose of diagnosing and treating mental illnesses in which this reaction to color becomes
Therefore, we use the term “color-aroused” here because color is readily observable and reactions to it more susceptible to empirical study.
The problem is immediately apparent when one looks at Webster’s dictionary definition of racism:
racism
One entry found for racism.
Main Entry: rac•ism
Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi-
Function: noun
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
- rac•ist /-sist also -shist/ noun or adjective
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/racism
We must ask ourselves, “In what ways does this definition differ from a DSM-IV listing. Obvious differences are that the symptoms are not listed, and that there is no discussion of how to diagnose this disease or distinguish between varying levels of severity, from the innocuous to the extreme. There is no discussion of how this disease would limit a person in major life activities, which is how psychiatry determines whether there is a level of severity present such that the patient would require treatment. In summary, the above definition “gets us nowhere” on the path toward psychiatric diagnosis and treatment. To prevent an illness, one must first be able to identify it when it appears. Because the above definition offers no descriptive symptoms to assist in identifying cases of the disease or its state of progression in the individual, progression, it is unlike that this definition could be useful in prevention campaigns.
If race does not exist as a scientific fact, then how can “racism” effectively be studied, relying as it does upon scientific premise which itself that has little or no basis in fact.
According to social scientists, “To be able to measure the existence and extent of racial discrimination of a particular kind . . . . , it is necessary to have a theory (or concept or model) . . . The theory or model, in turn, specifies the data that are needed to test the theory, appropriate methods for analyzing the data, and the assumptions that the data and analysis must satisfy in order to support a finding of discrimination. Without such a theory, analysts may conduct studies that do not have interpretable results and do not stand up to rigorous scrutiny.” Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), p. 55, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001, citing (Essed, 1997; Feagin, 1991).
In contrast, ECEIBD diagnosis, like the diagnosis of other psychiatric illnesses, focuses first and foremost upon an individual patient’s signs and symptoms, with the diagnosing professional utilizing differential diagnosis, specialized training and judgment to determine which if any diagnostic category(s) apply to a particular patient.
The presence of ECEIBD racial discrimination Although psychiatrists may opine, based on training, experience and professional judgment, as to the presence of ECEIBD, in the individual self-reported and observable symptoms, with resort to information reports from friends, family, co-workers and others who have been in a position to observe the patient.
Discrimination is often understood primarily in legal terms because, once unlawful discrimination has been identified, legal consequences may ensue. ECEIBD, on the other hand, is a psychiatric diagnosis which may or may not have legal implications in a given patient’s case. Of course, it is possible to have a serious and debilitating psychiatric illness (e.g. depression and bulimia) without violating any laws at all. Most of the acts and behaviors that are listed as symptomatic of emotional illnesses in the DSM-IV are not unlawful.
[T]the goals of the legal system are very different than the goals of the medical system," said Saul J. Faerstein, M.D., a clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine. During a 25-year career, Faerstein has testified in more than 350 cases, and he has been involved in several high-profile proceedings, including the O.J. Simpson murder case. "There are huge differences between the way lawyers think and the way psychiatrists think," he stated.
In the legal system, Faerstein said, there is an "average reasonable man" standard, in which everyone has free will, and everything is reduced to "black and white, good or bad." Then along comes the psychiatric expert who says that everything is not clear-cut, that there is an element called psychic determinism that can affect free will, and that there just aren't any simple solutions in an often unfair world. "It's a whole different set of standards and beliefs that some lawyers have a difficult time assimilating," Faerstein said, and this defines the divide between the professions.
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p990854.html
The definition of ECEIBD offered in this text is encompasses more than do legal definitions of unlawful discrimination and criminal definitions because psychiatric disorders that can and do severely debilitate individuals, often without any outward behavior that is violative of civil or criminal laws. While the purpose of law enforcement is to protect society and the individual, the concern of the psychiatrist is the mental health of the individual and his ability to engage in a healthy and productive manner with society.
definition addresses emotions, thoughts, thought processes and cognito-behavioral processes, with associated acts that may or not be unlawful.
Racism in defined in sociological and political terms, principally with respect to the consequences for its victims and society.
legal definitions focus primarily on , because much extreme and persistent color-aroused thought and emotion that is not unlawful is nonetheless extremely corrosive to the individual harboring and nursing those thoughts, feelings and behaviors. For example, a white student who refuses to speak with a black teacher because of color arousal violates no law but may nonetheless severely damage his educational opportunities. A white candidate for political office who does not visit potential black constituents because of color arousal violates no law but may severely prejudice his opportunities for election in a mixed district. A soldier who cannot interact successfully with co-workers of another race may not be court-martialed but may reduce opportunities for promotion and be unable to request assistance from others in life and death situations. Because many behaviors that are not illegal may nonetheless be harmful to the individual patient who engages in them, it is important to consider full gamut of behaviors when evaluating and individual for extreme color-aroused disorder. Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), p. 39. http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001
Traditional Racism Concepts vs. ECEIBD Assumptions
with
Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment of Color-aroused Disorders
“Racism” Opinions ECEIBD Analysis Implications For ECEIBD Sufferer/Offender
“Racism” is a complex political concept which cannot successfully be defined here because, after decades of debate, there is no generalized agreement as to what racism consists of, where it exists, or whether it exists at all. Although many people believe they “know it when they see it”, there are no consistent and objective criteria which can be applied to determine whether “racism” exists in a particular person or to what degree. ECEIBD is a psychiatric diagnosis which is:
“a concise technical description
of a taxon”
resulting from “the art
or act
of identifying a disease
from its signs
and symptoms”.
In keeping with the Webster’s definition of the term “diagnosis”, the determination that ECEIBD exists in a particular individual is
a “decision reached by diagnosis,” with “investigation or analysis of the cause or nature of a condition, situation, or problem” and a diagnosis of ECEIBD is “a statement or conclusion from such an analysis”.
Although anyone is entitled to have an opinion about the presence of ECEIBD in a person or in society, only a person competent to render a psychiatric diagnosis is competent to diagnose ECEIBD in a particular individual, and then only after deliberate and careful application of steps and procedures such as are explicit and implicit in the definition of the term “diagnosis”.
Because the existence of “racism” is a matter of opinion without objectively defined criteria, any member of the public is qualified to opine as to the existence of racism in an individual, with or without discussion with the individual or observational data. Because ECEIBD is a psychiatric diagnosis with clearly defined criteria based on self-reporting and
Everyone is equally competent to diagnose “racism” in themselves and others. Professionals with training in the use of patient interviews, psychological observation and interview techniques, using psychological diagnostic tools and the differential diagnosis techniques are able to identify the symptomatic emotions, feelings and behaviors that together comprise ECEIBD and therefore are able to diagnose ECEIBD with a high degree of agreement.
“Racism” sociologists and the public is a matter of personal opinion. “People who discuss racism are primarily concerned with describing and ameliorating its effects upon its victims.o the psychological impacts on mental, physical and the psychological health of its victims.” Psychological barriers associated with matriculation of African American students in predominantly white institutions, Journal of Instructional Psychology, Sept, 2003 by Debra F. Lett, James V. Wright, citing
(Reynolds & Pope 1994). http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCG/is_3_30/ai_108836887#continue ECEIBD is clearly defined by psychiatrists as a set of emotions, ideas and behaviors which are considered extreme when they cause impairment for the individual in major life functions, e.g. results in loss of employment, physical confrontations that result in harm and/or imprisonment or other loss of liberty.
However, f Psychological barriers associated with matriculation of African American students in predominantly white institutions, Journal of Instructional Psychology, Sept, 2003 by Debra F. Lett, James V. Wrightor those students who feel that they are not wanted, be it in the subtle glance of the eye, which indicates. "What are you doing here?" the loathsome look past one, when conversing with other members of the majority group indicating the "invisibility" of presence, the sudden quietness, which occurs upon approach or the intimidation experienced when attempting to converse with faculty members of the majority race, all can have a devastating impact on African American and other minority students (Feagin, J., Hernan, V. & Imani. N. 1996).
Psychiatric treatment is available for those whose color-aroused emotional and ideational and symptoms and behaviors cause or threaten to result in impairment of major life functions. An individual is referred for evaluation when overt acts or verbal statements may constitute violations of anti-discrimination or criminal laws or otherwise indicate an extreme or progressive condition.
Racists are evil, irredeemable people who are not deserving of compassion or help. Extreme racists are sick people who commit evil acts because of a cognitive-emotional illness so, in addition to limit-setting, they need our compassion to create opportunities for diagnosis and treatment opportunities in an environment that is safe for them and others.
Psychiatry has nothing to offer people whose extreme acts of cruelty out of color-aroused emotions and thoughts. As with all illnesses that involve behavior, early intervention, diagnosis and treatment can improve outcomes for individuals and protect the interests of society.
Color-aroused behavior is largely a matter of personal preference that doesn’t affect other. Color-aroused emotions, ideation and behavior are found on a continuum from those that are benign to those that are extremely destructive and corrosive for the individual, family, co-workers and society. When victims recognize that their emotions, ideation and behavior are unacceptably harmful to self and others, they may seek appropriate treatment, with support friends, family, work and society.
Sensitizing and educating the public are the most effective ways to prevent hate crimes. In individuals whose sensitivity to the color of others has escalated to intense hate and fear combined with violent fantasies, plans for violent action and a history of past violent or bullying offenses and access to weapons, sensitivity training may actually escalate emotions and catalyze violent responses. In such individuals, interventions must be calibrated to the quality and severity of the illness after competent psychiatric diagnosis. Successfully identifying those most likely to engage in behavior that constitutes hate crimes and unlawful discrimination is the most efficient and cost-effective way to prevent harm to the individual and society from unlawful discrimination and hate crimes. The failure to attempt to identify such individuals prior to sensitivity trainings constitutes actionable negligence if foreseeable harm results from failure of due care. Individuals who act on color-aroused feelings and ideation by unlawfully verbally or physically victimizing others at work or at school or by committing violent or assaults or other crimes
Everybody has racism and it will never go away. Color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior lies on a continuum wherein the most “extreme” unlawful behaviors are practiced by a limited subset of persons. Identification, diagnosis and treatment of this most dangerous subset should be the first priority of workplace interventions and relevant law enforcement activities. Persons whose overt behavior and expressed thoughts and emotions indicate a higher likelihood of unlawful or violent color-aroused activity will be more readily identified
“Racism” is untreatable. Feelings, emotions and behaviors that can lead to job loss and imprisonment must be diagnosed and treated before they impair or destroy the lives of the individual, family and co-workers. Increased availability psychiatric services for those with extreme emotions, thoughts and behaviors leads to new options and avenues for those who have extreme feelings about others related to their color.
“Racism” is mostly innocuous. CEIBD behaviors, in some individuals, progresses from normal to the extreme and unlawful. Identifying and intervening in this progression with proper diagnosis and treatment saves lives and property. ECEIBD sufferers receive interventions and treatment appropriate to the level of their symptoms, with the availability of psychiatric diagnosis and treatment of extreme escalating emotions and ideations that may lead to violent behavior. With appropriate diagnosis, “Bandaid” solutions are no longer prescribed for those who are found to be hemorrhaging.
Psychiatry has no role to play in “racism” because it is a big social problem. When individuals present with intense color-aroused emotions and ideation that impair normal functioning and manifest in extreme or illegal behavior that may lead to loss of employment or loss of liberty, it is in the interest of the patient and society to diagnose and treat this illness proactively.
So many people have CEIBD that it is beyond treatment. The prevalence of diseases such as diabetes and high blood pressure and ECEIBD properly motivates us to increase our efforts at diagnosis and treatment. More effective diagnosis and treatment improves the lives of sufferers, their families and communities with the hope that a cure may eventually be found.
“Racism” is a learned behavior that can only be treated with education and sensitivity training. Because ECEIBD, like clinical depression, involves extremes of emotions such anger and fear, more study is needed to identify physiological aspects of the illness and to determine the possible role of biological factors. In cases where ECEIBD emotions and thoughts seriously impair judgment and impulse control, medication should be offered if the short term if it will help the patient to avoid acting out that would result in job loss, legal jeopardy or imprisonment. Early intervention focuses on extreme thoughts and feelings that have lead or may lead to unlawful behaviors, enabling sufferers to prevent progression of the disease and the consequences of increased impairment.
Racism is incomprehensible. Racism involves feelings, thoughts and actions aroused by color that can be identified in the individual through discussion and contacts with others who have had an opportunity to observe relevant behavior.
Racism is not treatable. ECEIBD is treatable using the models of established behavioral techniques and re-decision therapies, group therapy, and medication in cases where the patients experiences extremes of emotions make therapy impossible and might endanger the patient and others.
Likewise, The ICERD (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) defines racism as:
“Any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, or any other field of public life.” http://www.sahrc.org.za/definition_of_racism.htm No symptoms or signs are provided that would allow us to identify the phenomenon in an individual.
As one observer has observed when discussing the work of Dinesh D’Souza that,
“Racism is a danger which has plagued America throughout it's existence as a nation. In years following the heyday of the Civil Rights movement of the 60's this danger has both increased and receded. Many pundits have offered their opinions, explanations and accusations. Few persons since Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. have offered a clear path toward a resounding resolution to this issue which can be readily embraced by all concerned. But where has this really left us?”
Racism In Modern America, Dinesh D'Souza | Is Affirmative Action Legal? http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Hills/8908/rframe.htm
The undeniable premise that many current solutions have not been “embraced by all concerned” is obvious to even the casual observer. This is a simple but necessary observation, and may explain may explain the attention that the work of Dinesh D’Souza has received, because this premise is undeniable.
It is telling that in the entire 159-page UNHCR Report of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (Durbin 2001), the words “psychiatrist”, “psychologist” and emotion and do not appear even once. The word mental appears once in the context of effects of racism on the victims and but once again, in urging others to make a “mental effort” to consider what responsibility they may have for societal racism. Apparently “racism” is most commonly conceived as a principally a social and political problem. http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/e06a5300f90fa0238025668700518ca4/cb95dc2388024cc7c1256b4f005369cb/$FILE/N0221543.pdf
In the absence of medical description of the symptoms involved, the public and other professionals have referred to ECEIBD simply as “racism” or, previously, “bigotry”, “bias “and” “prejudice”. In the absence of definitional assistance from psychiatry, the terms “bias” and “prejudice” eventually fell out of usage in favor of the term “racism”. While “bias” and “prejudice” were more concrete terms, few people admitted to having them and, in any case, psychiatry offered no specific diagnosis or treatment. The term “racist”, once adopted, quickly became an epithet so offensive, diffuse and disputed in its meaning and interpretations as to be counterproductive as a diagnostic and treatment tool. The same is true of the names “bigot”, “prejudiced” and “biased”.
Unlike terms scientific diagnoses susceptible to qualification, such as “depression” and “anxiety”, which may be “mild”, “moderate” or “severe” or “clinical”, the terms “racist” and “racism”, “bigot”, “prejudiced” and “biased” are universally used without modifiers like “mild”, “moderate” or “severe”. The predominant belief seems to be that “either you are or you’re not”. However, this is an undifferentiated, unscientific and counterproductive approach with a predictably limited record of achievement. Almost everyone agrees that we have not made the progress we should have in this area over the last five decades.
In the absence of a system of tools for diagnosing ECEIBD conditions in graduated severities, most Americans have refused to identity with an extreme mindset typified in its extreme by Adolf Hitler, the Klu Klux Klan and more recently the notorious cases of preventable racial attacks highlighted in this book. Most Americans have correctly concluded that they are not “extreme” in racists, and they therefore are not those most in need of help. The general public and professionals are equally in need of a more nuanced and descriptive scientific nomenclature such as that used by psychiatrists when discussing levels of depression and anxiety. In the absence of a new nomenclature, we may have a very long and dubious battle still ahead of us, even in the fight against the most violent, predictable and preventable acts.
The matter is all the more complex because even the underlying concept of “race” has been found to be ambiguous and controversial precisely because it cannot be defined in a scientifically meaningful manner. Arguably, the problem is not that we are different because we are of a different race; the problem is that we think we are different because we perceive that we are of a different color. While empirical studies and double blind research may provide some answers, however experience gives some examples of this concept. Although “black” and “white” blood was once thought to be so different as to be incompatible, scientific research eventually showed that they are somewhat different but are nonetheless completely compatible.
In response to assertions that one group held stereotyped color-aroused ideations, emotions and behavior, the targeted groups often have argued correctly that all groups display some preference behavior. The term ”racism” began to be used to distinguish between those thought to have the power to do the most harm and those thought to be relatively powerless, with only the former thought definitionally to be capable of being racist. For lack of agreement on these matters, the argument has essentially not developed toward resolution or consensus over the last four decades.
EDITORIAL OBSERVER
Why Race Isn't as 'Black' and 'White' as We Think
• http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/31/opinion/31mon4.html?incamp=article_popular_2
By BRENT STAPLES
Published: October 31, 2005
People have occasionally asked me how a black person came by a "white" name like Brent Staples. One letter writer ridiculed it as "an anchorman's name" and accused me of making it up. For the record, it's a British name - and the one my parents gave me. "Staples" probably arrived in my family's ancestral home in Virginia four centuries ago with the British settlers.
The earliest person with that name we've found - Richard Staples - was hacked to death by Powhatan Indians not far from Jamestown in 1622. The name moved into the 18th century with Virginians like John Staples, a white surveyor who worked in Thomas Jefferson's home county, Albemarle, not far from the area where my family was enslaved.
The black John Staples who married my paternal great-great-grandmother just after Emancipation - and became the stepfather of her children - could easily have been a Staples family slave. The transplanted Britons who had owned both sides of my family had given us more than a preference for British names. They had also given us their DNA. In what was an almost everyday occurrence at the time, my great-great-grandmothers on both sides gave birth to children fathered by white slave masters.
I've known all this for a long time, and was not surprised by the results of a genetic screening performed by DNAPrint Genomics, a company that traces ancestral origins to far-flung parts of the globe. A little more than half of my genetic material came from sub-Saharan Africa - common for people who regard themselves as black - with slightly more than a quarter from Europe.
The result that knocked me off my chair showed that one-fifth of my ancestry is Asian. Poring over the charts and statistics, I said out loud, "This has got to be a mistake."
That's a common response among people who are tested. Ostensibly white people who always thought of themselves as 100 percent European find they have substantial African ancestry. People who regard themselves as black sometimes discover that the African ancestry is a minority portion of their DNA.
These results are forcing people to re-examine the arbitrary calculations our culture uses to decide who is "white" and who is "black."
As with many things racial, this story begins in the slave-era South, where sex among slaves, masters and mistresses got started as soon as the first slave ship sailed into Jamestown Harbor in 1619. By the time of the American Revolution, there was a visible class of light-skinned black people who no longer looked or sounded African. Free mulattos, emancipated by guilt-ridden fathers, may have accounted for up to three-quarters of the tiny free-black population before the Revolution.
By the eve of the Civil War, the swarming numbers of mixed-race slaves on Southern plantations had become a source of constant anguish to planters' wives, who knew quite well where those racially ambiguous children were coming from.
Faced with widespread fear that racial distinctions were losing significance, the South decided to define the problem away. People with any ascertainable black ancestry at all were defined as black under the law and stripped of basic rights. The "one drop" laws defined as black even people who were blond and blue-eyed and appeared white.
Black people snickered among themselves and worked to subvert segregation at every turn. Thanks to white ancestry spread throughout the black community, nearly every family knew of someone born black who successfully passed as white to get access to jobs, housing and public accommodations that were reserved for white people only. Black people who were not quite light enough to slip undetected into white society billed themselves as Greek, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, South Asian, Native American - you name it. These defectors often married into ostensibly white families at a time when interracial marriage was either illegal or socially stigmatized.
Those of us who grew up in the 1950's and 60's read black-owned magazines and newspapers that praised the racial defectors as pioneers while mocking white society for failing to detect them. A comic newspaper column by the poet Langston Hughes - titled "Why Not Fool Our White Folks?" - typified the black community's sense of smugness about knowing the real racial score. In keeping with this history, many black people I know find it funny when supposedly white Americans profess shock at the emergence of blackness in the family tree. But genetic testing holds plenty of surprises for black folks, too.
Which brings me back to my Asian ancestry. It comes as a surprise, given that my family's oral histories contain not a single person who is described as Asian. More testing on other family members should clarify the issue, but for now, I can only guess. This ancestry could well have come through a 19th-century ancestor who was incorrectly described as Indian, often a catchall category at the time.
The test results underscore what anthropologists have said for eons: racial distinctions as applied in this country are social categories and not scientific concepts. In addition, those categories draw hard, sharp distinctions among groups of people who are more alike than they are different. The ultimate point is that none of us really know who we are, ancestrally speaking. All we ever really know is what our parents and grandparents have told us.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/31/opinion/31mon4.html?incamp=article_popular_2
Spectrum Anonymous – A 12-Step Program for People with ECEIBD
The slogans of Spectrum Anonymous include “live and let live”, “no self-help”, let the government take care of it, “How important is it?”, “Keep the focus on yourself”,
The Serenity Prayer
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change
The courage to change the things I can
And the wisdom to know the difference.
The Slogans of Spectrum-Anonymous
One Day at a Time Think Let Go and Let God
Easy Does It Listen and Learn Together We Can Make It
First Things First Live and Let Live Principles Above Personalities
Keep It Simple Love, Learn and Grow Progress, Not Perfection
How Important Is It? Just For Today Mind My Own Business
Keep An Open Mind But for the Grace of God Let It Begin With Me
The History of Color-Aroused Conflict in America ECEIBD – An Historical Perspective
The identification of groups so oppressed is inevitably followed by disputed attempts to quantify the problem – the percentage of the population that is alcoholics and children of alcoholics, battered and batterers and children of batterers. Meanwhile, the America conservatives decry this “victim society”; while they cannot deny the numbers of victims, they hate being obliged to particular attention and consideration to the people who have been abused, with the exception perhaps of victims of violent crime.
Psychiatrists and other physicians have studied, named, and quantified both the psychopathologies of the perpetrators, such as alcoholism and drug addiction. They have similarly studied, named and prescribed such treatments as may be available and helpful for the victims, such as the battered women, rape survivors and even survivors of foreign civil wars. We have the “rape trauma syndrome”, the “battered wife syndrome”, and “post traumatic stress disorder”. Psychiatrists and psychologists lift their voices to support funding for prevention and treatment, both of the victims and the perpetrators,
Yet, with respect to the largest and most visible group of victimized and suffering American, no DSM-V diagnosis identities the trauma of the battered or the psyche of the perpetrators. There are thirty million blacks in then United States, mostly sharing a history of enslavement and demonstrably still subject today to myriad assaults on their dignity, life and property on a daily basis. “With the possible exception of Native Americans, no American minority group has been as victimized as have African Americans,” declares Dr. David Pilgrim, Professor of Sociology at Ferris State University and curator of the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia. http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/FAQ.htm
In 18 , the US Supreme Court addressed the issue of black’s place in America posing the questions as follows: “Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen? One of which rights is the privilege of suing in a court of the United States in the cases specified in the Constitution . . . .” “The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement [people of Aftican ancestry] compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2933t.html
It should not be surprising, then, that many whites may residually believe themselves superior to blacks when the very Supreme Court of the United States once asserted this to be so. “It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race, which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopted....” Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857). http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2933t.html
They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery. . . . He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics, which no one thought of disputing, or supposed to be open to dispute; and men in every grade and position in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.” Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857). http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2933t.html
According to the US Supreme Court in Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896), “Slavery implies involuntary servitude,-a state of bondage; the ownership of mankind as a chattel, or, at least, the control of the labor and services of one man for the benefit of another, and the absence of a legal right to the disposal of his own person, property, and services.” It was under this very state of “involuntary servitude”, subjugation and “bondage” that black lived from before the founding of the nation at least until the Emancipation Proclamation 1856.
Yet even having fought a civil war in which hundreds of thousands from the north and south died just to decide whether to end slaver, whether blacks would have the status of people or that of chattel, like cows, chickens and dogs, the nation’s respect black personhood remained little improved. The US Supreme Court declared forty-two years (two generations) later in Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896), that “the enforced separation of the races [by government] . . . neither abridges the privileges or immunities of the colored man, deprives him of his property without due process of law, nor denies him the equal protection of the laws . . . ” The Court stated that among the accepted discriminations which the Government might enforce were apartheid in the schools, apartheid in public transportation, laws against interracial marriage,
Thus the government of the United States and presumably the majority of its white citizens were united in a determination oppress blacks and deprive them of rights which whites themselves enjoyed. Only after another half century of subjugated status for blacks did the Supreme Court finally disavow the previous statement and determine that state-enforced racial discrimination was injurious and unlawful to blacks.
It was only in 1954, when my mother and father were adults, that the US Supreme Court finally announced audibly that official state-enforced apartheid in education hurt black’s self-esteem and prospects and that this was a serious enough problem that it should be unlawful. In Brown vs. Board of Education (1954), the US Supreme Court determined that:
“Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.” http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=347&invol=483
Yet, at the time of that decision, Blacks had already been denied education in many states as a matter of law for over three hundred years. What prompted whites to so victimize an entire group of people and what were the effects upon the group so victimized? In the cases where the victimization continues today, how are individuals effected and what is the psychopathology of the victimizer. Although these are the greatest questions of our time, the psychiatric and psychological communities have no authoritative answer and have not even organized themselves to ask the question.
The US Supreme Court found that:
"Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law; for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system."
In 1964, color-based discrimination was a systematic and entrenched feature of life in the United States. People of color were prevented by law or practice from holding jobs, voting, attending school, eating in restaurants and staying at hotels by others who reacted negatively to the color of black people’s skin. Black people had developed negative outlooks toward themselves and others based upon this history of mistreatment.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was intended “To enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes.” Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html. At the time, color-based discrimination was a serious problem, with some form of de jure discrimination practiced by local, state and federal government officials in all of the fifty US states.
Three decades later, in 1991, the US Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1991 because, in spite of thirty years of efforts at all levels of government, “additional remedies under Federal law are needed to deter unlawful harassment and intentional discrimination in the workplace”, and new “legislation is necessary to provide additional protections against unlawful discrimination in employment.” The Civil Rights Act of 1991, http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/cra91.html.
Now, four decades after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discrimination based on color remains a serious problem in the United States. “The The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has observed an increasing number of color discrimination charges. Color bias filings have increased by 125% since the mid-1990s, from 413 in FY 1994 to 932 in FY 2004.” Race/Color Discrimination, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, http://www.eeoc.gov/types/race.html.
In 1964, color-based discrimination was a systematic and entrenched feature of life in the United States. People of color were prevented by law or practice from holding jobs, voting, attending school, eating in restaurants and staying at hotels by others who reacted negatively to the color of black people’s skin. Black people had developed negative outlooks toward themselves and others based upon this history of mistreatment.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was intended “To enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes.” Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html. At the time, color-based discrimination was a serious problem, with some form of de jure discrimination practiced by local, state and federal government officials in all of the fifty US states.
Three decades later, in 1991, the US Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1991 because, in spite of thirty years of efforts at all levels of government, “additional remedies under Federal law are needed to deter unlawful harassment and intentional discrimination in the workplace”, and new “legislation is necessary to provide additional protections against unlawful discrimination in employment.” The Civil Rights Act of 1991, http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/cra91.html.
Now, four decades after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discrimination based on color remains a serious problem in the United States. “The The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has observed an increasing number of color discrimination charges. Color bias filings have increased by 125% since the mid-1990s, from 413 in FY 1994 to 932 in FY 2004.” Race/Color Discrimination, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, http://www.eeoc.gov/types/race.html.
Delusional Beliefs and Reality Testing
When I was a boy, a stranger much older than us approached my twin brother and me on the street and offered to sell us firecrackers at a good price; however, he said he would have to borrow one of our (new) bicycles in order to go and get these firecrackers. Not knowing this person at all and having no reason to trust him, I refused to lend my bicycle. But then he said, “You can trust me; I’m a “brother”. The man was black, so my brother trusted him and lent his bicycle to him, because of the color of his skin. The stranger had encouraged us to rely on his and our skin color alone when forming our opinions about his truthfulness, trustworthiness, his solidarity with us. We did so, and that was the last time we saw the bicycle, but the stranger had taught us a valuable lesson: not to form opinions of people – positive or negative – based upon the color of their skin and in the absence of other relevant information. Whites who believe that other whites will be trustworthy simply because they are white are at risk of making the same mistake as my brother and I did when we lost our bicycles.
I suspect that most white people have had a similar experience, feeling relatively comfortable to engage in business with someone because he was white, only to be tricked and disappointed.
Many years later, as managing attorney for an immigrants’ rights program of our Catholic Diocese, I went to our state capitol as leader and spokesman of an advocacy group. We had a prearranged meeting a member of the legislator, so when we arrived at his office, I introduced myself as managing attorney for the Catholic Church, offered my business card, and introduced him to the other professional who were members of advocacy team. The legislator was started. He said, “Are you a lawyer?” Again, I brought his attention to my business card and assured him that I was, before beginning to speak of the reason for our visit. Several minutes later, he asked again, “You are a lawyer?”
Apparently, in spite of having graduated from college and law school and having passed the bar exam and risen to a position of prominence within my profession, there was something else he was perceiving that made it difficult to believe that I could be a lawyer, even a bad one. I believe there was another stimulus present – my skin color - that aroused doubt in him of any assurance that I might offer, even when all other information available indicated that what I was saying was true. If so, a corollary might be true also: that if I were white he could accept me as a lawyer even in the absence of a prearranged appointment, a business suit, a business card and seven witnesses. Needless to say, I and the group of whites with me left with a negative impression of this representative who would soon be up for reelection.
Do whites reliably refrain from misleading or swindling each other such they can rely upon each other’s whiteness of strangers as indicia of truthfulness and trustworthiness? The composition of the US Congress suggests that whites may rely at least partially on skin color in deciding whether to trust congressional candidates. Yet, the public’s dissatisfaction with Congress suggests that skin color is not sufficient to ensure reliability among whites any more than it assures reliability among blacks.
Moving Beyond Rhetoric: A Descriptive Diagnostic Criteria
for Prevention and Treatment of ECEIBD/
Assessing and Treating ECEIBD – Methodology/Diagnosing ECEIBD in Patients
If this theory is correct, it should be possible to developed to diagnostic tools to identify who feels the most negatively affected by changes that are perceived by the individual to have occurred, to be occurring in the present, or seem likely to occur in the future. This information, combined with information as to the perceived source of the change, and information as to the emotions that the individual experiences in response to the perceptions, may reliably indicate who is most at risk for color- aroused behaviors. A diagnostic matrix including the following variables might well diagnose Color Emotion, Ideation and Behavior disorders (“racism”) and predict its behavioral outcomes in tested individuals.
The variables are: (1) biological susceptibility to stress, (2) learned susceptibility to stress, (3) perception that color-associated change has been, is being or will be experienced, (4) opposition to that change, (5) strong and persistent negative emotions associated with change, (6) negative ideation associated with the change, (7) past reported behavior of the individual arising out of opposition or adaptation to the change, (7) plans or fantasies about future actions in response the change(s), (8) other psychiatric diagnoses or symptoms present to indicate lack of judgment, impulsivity control.
A diagnostic tool that measures the seven above factors will predict extreme color-aroused behaviors with a high degree of accuracy. This will permit costly interventions to be focused on those individuals whose nature or nurture has made them most at-risk for acting out behaviors. Treatments that address the ideation associated with change, and the resulting emotions of anger, fear and panic, will predictably and successfully treat a large number of those who might otherwise engage in hate crimes.
To facilitate transparency of methodology and fact, we focus our attention on national newspaper and other media accounts, as well as supporting documents from court records, governmental agencies with jurisdiction over these crimes, and reported mental state indicia from the actors themselves. In cases, of color-aroused murder suicides, we necessarily rely on reports from co-workers, etc., to explore the emotions and ideation and behavior patterns that typically precede these attacks. If racism is a beach on the day of a hurricane than half of America is drowning just a feet from shore. Saving those imperiled is risky, but leaving them to drown is equally problematic.
Over the last half century, the formal rules that govern color roles and interaction and have dramatically changed toward formal egalitarianism, while explicitly rejecting formal role and privilege assignments by race. Government at all levels and private industry have played a crucial in preventing new cases of ECEIBD by abandoning institutions which perpetuated color-assigned roles and privileges while also setting behavioral limits for those who might previously have felt free to exhibit extreme CEI behaviors.
As recourse to psychiatry became less stigmatized over the last four decades, many more Americans have sought psychiatric help and hospitalization to deal with a range of problems. (See examples below of actors and politicians who have acknowledged having mental illnesses. See also statistics showing changed public attitudes toward mental illness.) Public acknowledgement of emotional difficulties has also become less stigmatized, with “self-help” being formed for recovery from a broad range of EIB maladies, from alcoholism and compulsive gambling to compulsive overeating and adult-child- of-alcoholics-syndrome. The literature shows that, for people who are motivated to change, these programs are an essential tool for acquiring self-knowledge, finding support and avoiding relapse.
It is also well-established that there may be tremendous resistance to acknowledging behavior patterns which involve pleasure. Often it is only when extreme and acute negative consequences of the behavior arise that the sufferer, “hits bottom”. It is at this time, when intimate associates, employers or law enforcement impose unacceptably painful penalties for continued “acting out” that the sufferer may become willing to seek help. Often, this leads to a vital reassessment, wherein the sufferer compares the value of continued negative behavior with the risk of losing other valued attachments that the sufferer holds dear, for example, relationships, property, personal health and liberty, all of which may be imperiled by uncontrolled engagement in certain compulsive behaviors. Many people seek help when the results of their behaviors generate a personal crisis.
Effectively, many thousands of people each year arrive at such crises as the result of ECEIBD behaviors. At least thirty thousand people become subject to complaints with the federal government alone due to allegations that they have victimized others based on color. Thousands more, of every hue of skin, are arrested, tried and convicted for acts each year which were consciously color-aroused or in which color-aroused emotions and ideation played a significant role. Political careers are ended or circumscribed when it becomes public knowledge that one has engaged in unacceptable color-aroused speech or other behavior. (See Trent Lott article, Jesse Jackson hymietown remark.) These are just the sorts of life-shaking events which often cause substance abusers to reevaluate their addictions and seek professional help to support their newfound willingness to change.
An alcoholic or substance abuser who arrives at this “moment of truth” and desired help will find numerous professional listings in his local telephone book, where he can anonymously and confidentially acknowledge the problem, discuss acts that may have been unconscionable, and discuss ways to change. Meanwhile, if he confides his condition to his employer, he may be referred to Alcoholics Anonymous and/or granted time off to participate in inpatient therapy. In this case, his insurance may cover the cost of this treatment.
In the telephone book, the alcoholic will find free Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. If he attends, it may be suggested that he seek psychiatric counseling, or even inpatient hospitalization, depending in part upon the threat his ongoing behavior poses to himself and others.
If so, he may seek out a member of the American Psychiatric Association, who will apply standard DSM-IV criteria and the body of his professional training and experience to determine if the patient meets criteria for alcoholism. If so, this determination will lead in turn to a recommendation and referral for appropriate treatment for alcoholism.
The referral for psychiatric evaluation may in many cases save the alcoholic’s life. In addition to assessing the patient’s use of alcohol, the psychiatrist will interview the patient to determine if he suffers from depression, anxiety, suicidality and other symptoms that might be effectively treated with therapy and medications. These intervention are for the immediate safety of the alcoholic and others, and they also increase his likelihood of success in abstaining from alcohol. Although denial is significant problem with alcoholism and other mental illness, the popular shorthand diagnostic criteria is often whether it has become “a problem for oneself and others.”
Alcoholism is a well recognized illness for which help is readily available. In effect, there is a considerable variety of supports available to alcoholics when their behavior conflicts with employer policy, family obligations or our laws, and this causes them to “hit bottom.
The same cannot be said for persons suffering from ECEIBD. The children who shot their classmates at (Columbine) expressed extreme color-associated hatred and fantasies, yet they were not referred for psychiatric assessment because they did not show symptoms of any recognized illness. If they had been referred for psychiatric assessment, it seems unlikely that they would have been closely questioned to determine if color-associated emotions and thoughts were contributing to their hate and hateful fantasies. Even had hateful fantasies been expressed, there we cannot be certain that they would have been perceived as a distinct indicative of a distinct illness requiring treatment.
ECEIBD – A Disease Model?
Although extreme color-aroused behavior may lead to impulsivity and compromised decision-making, there is currently no clear evidence to suggest that ECEIBD leads to significantly shorter life expectancy for the offender compared with others not so afflicted, or that it is progressive and tends to get worse over time. Like substance abuse and gambling, ECEIBD is substantially a learned behavior which may or may not involve a biological disposition.
ECEIBD does have share some characteristics with addictive diseases, both terms of the dynamics of the disease and the indicated treatment modalities. As with alcoholism, it would be imprudent to deny treatment in the present in the hopes that a biologically-based cause and cure would be found in the future.
As with substance abuse, patterns of severe color-aroused disorder tend to appear relatively early in life and, once present leave may leave an individual susceptible thereafter in the absence of a determined effort to refrain from the associated belief and behavioral patterns. When people do progress in their color-aroused thinking, they tend to gravitate toward others who will accept, support or encourage them, and this may lead to an aggravation of symptoms with increased danger for the patient. An example is participation in hate groups such as Skinheads, the Klu Klux Klan and other groups who seek to assure privileges to one color group while denying them to others. In the hothouse environment of these groups, with validation and encouragement for increasingly disordered thinking, the individual may limit his own potential and commit acts that lead to severe penalties detrimental to the life and interests of the color-aroused individual.
As with alcoholism, to change and refrain from the dysfunctional behavior, it may be necessary to change the reference group. As members of Alcoholics Anonymous are found of saying, “We had to change our play-friends, our playpen and our playthings.” An individual accustomed to engaging in acting out behavior, as a member of the Skinheads or another hate group, may need to be encouraged to change his associations if he is to successfully change his own behavior.
As with alcoholics and other substance abusers, it is not helpful when speaking with a color-aroused person to label the individual or his behaviors as “bad.” To the contrary, therapy is more successful when the therapist refrains from value judgments and helps the color-aroused individual to see how his behaviors are “dysfunctional” and self-destructive in light of his own goals.
Does the patient value serenity? Unreasonable fears cannot result in serenity. Does the patient value career advancement? Being the subject of discrimination complaints may stall or reverse career advancements in today’s environment. Does the patient value his family and children? Being convicted of a hate crime could result in imprisonment and separation from family, while probation could prevent a teenager from participating in family vacations. Although these may seem spurious reasons to refrain from destructive behavior, often mundane concerns are foremost in patient’s mind when considering a course of action. A suicidal person may decide to postpone suicide because no one else is available to feed his cat.
As with substance abuse, it is crucial that an alternative behavior be offered to replace the one which is being discarded. People whose acting out behavior reflects fear of competitive pressures from people of another color should be encouraged to focus on and engage in efforts to improve their own skills and marketability, because that will increase their chances for success regardless of the color of other competitors. This positive focus offers considerable hope for those with color-aroused discriminatory behaviors.
For example, attempts to secure one’s role in the workplace by overtly ridiculing others may lead to discrimination complaints and fights that will limit and individuals advancement potential. If the individual is disciplined for his behavior without gaining insight, it may lead to a cycle of increasing resentment and acting out with increased risk to the interests of the patient. Because the nation is rapidly becoming more diverse, reflexive antagonism toward others based on color will lead increasing to conflict for the individual and society.
Clinical improvement with the severely color-aroused client may not require that he embrace diversity make friends with people of another race. If an individual is acting out on his color-aroused hatred by committing assaults and threatening others, then a decision to express himself through creative writing or by increasing his job skills would be an improvement both for him and for society.
A person who feels intense fear of losing something of value to someone of another color can be encouraged to improve his skills, making him more competitive with others regardless of their color. Competition is inevitable in a competitive society, but our egalitarian society increasingly rewards competition as individuals rather than as groups.
As with addictions, it is crucial to the success of therapy that the clinician assess the patient for other disorders such as depression, bi-polar disorder, paranoia and schizophrenia which might endanger the patient if not evaluated and treated and whose untreated presence would undermine opportunities for success with cognitive behavioral therapy.
Rather, , the danger from ECEIBD is that Spouses of alcoholics should confront the alcoholics and tell them how their drinking causes misery. Spouses of drug addicts should stop “enabling” by supplying money for drugs, by lying to explain why the addict is absent from work.
When, precisely, have psychiatry and psychology studied these “detrimental effects”? To what degree have these detrimental effects created a syndrome, like post-traumatic stress disorder, that would indicate psychological support and treatment for the victims as their immediate and distant progeny? When blacks present with psychiatric trauma or symptoms, certainly inquire whether they have been the victims of incest or child abuse. Do we ask them if they have been victims of overt or covertly racist acts? If not, what is the reason. Do we believe that, unlike the effects of
When an intake evaluation determines that the abuse is ongoing, the first priority is the safety of the patient from continuing abuse. Therefore, we have battered women’ shelters and child protection agencies that provide a safe harbor for victims while they work to regain their lives or are placed in relative safety. But where, in America, can blacks find safe harbor from continuing racism? When whites burn our houses or deny us rental housing and mortgages, where is our temporary shelter?
"Housing discrimination [based on racism] provokes "severe and lasting emotional symptoms" in some individuals, who can rightfully be diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), said a New York City psychiatrist who is a consultant for the Fair Housing Clinic of Columbia University School of Law.
In a 1997 article in Clinical Psychiatry News [25(10):1-2, 1997. © 1997 International Medical News Group] the findings of Dr. Hugh F. Butts regarding the effects of racist housing discrimination on minority victims are presented. Dr. Butts examined 30 victims of housing discrimination who were minorities. The article states, in part:
"Speaking at the annual convention of the National Medical Association, Dr. Hugh F. Butts described symptoms of profound shock, anxiety, and despair suffered by people turned away by landlords because of the color of their skin. In his evaluations of 30 people referred by fair housing groups, Dr. Butts found that most react with stunned anger and momentary confusion to slammed doors or mysteriously rented apartments that were available just moments before."
It is to be expected that resistance to the diagnosis and treatment of ECEIBD will be great, both among potential patients and health care providers. “Mistrust toward health care providers can be inferred from a group's attitudes toward government-operated institutions.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Search&db=books&doptcmdl=GenBookHL&term=racism+AND+hstat%5Bbook%5D+AND+317290%5Buid%5D&rid=hstat5.section.1179#1210
Psychiatry has failed to define a serious illness and pervasive illness in which heightened emotions and perceptions lead to violence and civil strife. As a result, our nation has spent three generations, at least since the US Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, struggling through the use of laws, educational and social programs to address effects for which there are no broadly agreed upon causes, symptoms or treatments. While government, private industry and the public have been at war with an extreme state of mind that remains formally unidentified, the diagnostic and therapeutic skills of the American Psychiatric Association have been inexplicably missing from the battlefield.
Fortunately, as this book demonstrates, we need not resolve all of these intractable doctrinal issues in order to improve our diagnosis and treatment of ECEIBD. Americans including psychiatrists, other scientists and the general public broadly agree upon the following proposition: “Normal” people often experience a range of little-understood and often uncomfortable feelings and perceptions in reaction to perception of another’s skin color. Few people deny that this sometimes occurs in themselves or those they know well.
However, in extreme cases that are not normal, there may be entrenched and extreme beliefs and attitudes associated with another’s skin color, coupled with feelings of extreme fear, intense and overwhelming anxiety, intense and overwhelming aversion and phobia which may be manifested in violent fantasies, conspiratorial planning, and mild or extreme violence that endanger the person with this disorder as well as the community. Most of us agree that this reaction is not normal and we would be in favor of effective tools for prevention and treatment of this disorder were they available. By studying recent notorious cases of ECEIBD, with a focus on undisputed instances of ECEIBD some of which led to death of the sufferers and others, we demonstrate that a functional diagnostic tool based on empirically observable and confirmable data is quite feasible and indeed urgently and desperately and needed for psychiatric clinicians and researchers.
This book analyzes recent and historical extremely violent race-associated eruptive behaviors as reported in newspapers, to determine if there were discernible symptoms characterizing the actors that might, if diagnosed, have led to earlier intervention and saving the lives and livelihoods of the persons “acting out” on color-aroused ECEIBD as well as their victims. This book also discusses present diagnosis, prevention and treatment modalities to determine whether they, alone, are adequate to prevent the most disturbing recent cases of extreme color-aroused violence in individuals. Because psychiatry is primarily a professional for treatment starting with the individual, we focus here on the preventable acts of individuals. Although there may be societal and systemic interventions that would be appropriate, this book only addresses systemic solutions to the extent that improved work with individuals can be systematized and institutionalized.
Psychiatric Expertise is Necessary to Address ECEIBD
What causes hate crimes? The simple answer is, “thoughts and feelings”. Perpetrators have extreme thoughts and feelings which become manifested in violent “acting out” behavior. In society at large, when complex emotional states become extreme and overwhelming, we call upon psychiatrists to consult and to offer psychopharmacological and other therapeutic interventions. Only psychiatrists are thought to have the required medical and psychological training necessary to understand and diagnose the complex neurological and physiological processes underlying feelings states that manifest in behavior.
According to the website of the American Psychological Association, “By far the largest determinant of hate crimes is racial [color-aroused] bias, with African Americans the group at greatest risk. In 1996, 4,831 out of the 7,947 such crimes reported to the FBI, or 60%, were promulgated because of race, with close to two-thirds (62%) targeting African Americans. Furthermore, the type of crime committed against this group has not changed much since the 19th century; it still includes bombing and vandalizing churches, burning crosses on home lawns, and murder.” Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe In Modern Dress, The Special Nature of an Extreme Expression of Prejudice, APA Public Affairs (1998), http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/hate/#racial
To sort out the role that emotions play in crimes, expert opinion from psychiatrists is required in Federal courts. Only a person “qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education” may be allowed to offer and opinion when “scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge” may render his opinion about the causes and severity of emotional conditions. Moreover, the opinion offered must be “the product of reliable principles and methods” applied “reliably to the facts of the case.” Because of this exacting standard, a psychiatrist is often the only witness qualified to evaluate and opine concerning complex physiologically-based emotions, ideation processes, and their manifestations in extreme or violent behaviors. Testimony by Experts, Rule 702, Federal Rules of Evidence, http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm#Rule702.
Legal cases that turn on psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses simply cannot be resolved without recourse to experts. Government benefits for the mentally ill cannot be granted without professional diagnosis of the illnesses involved. Private insurers deny reimbursement where psychological symptoms are not confirmed by psychiatric reports.
Because of their peculiar expertise, in many cases only psychiatrists are legally competent to determine what conditions rise to the level of “extreme”. So, for example, under the Federal Violence Against Women Act, only licensed psychiatrists are thought to have sufficient medical training and judgment to interview a woman (or child), examine her medical, therapy and other records, and determine whether she has suffered sufficiently “extreme” cruelty to qualify for certain benefits available under the Act. INA: ACT 204 - PROCEDURE FOR GRANTING IMMIGRANT VISAS, Sec. 204. [8 U.S.C. 1154] (a)(1)(A)(iii)(I)(bb), (a)(1)(A)(iii)(I) (I)(aa)(CC)(ccc), (a)(1)(A)(iv), (v)(I)(cc). http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-22/slb-1478?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act204, 8 CFR 204.2 (c)(1)(i)(E), http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-10281/slb-12852/slb-12954?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-8cfrsec2042.
To be considered “extreme”, an abuse must result in “physical or mental injury” and may include “psychological” exploitation. 8 CFR204(e)(1)(vi). Psychological abuse, exploitation and mental injury may be shown to be extreme by submitting “reports and affidavits . . . from medical personnel . . .” As such, the failure to include reports and evaluations from medical personal may lead to an inference that the abuse was not extreme, because people with extreme emotional difficulty generally seek help from competent medical professionals, i.e. psychiatrists.
The “extreme” quality of the cruelty or abuse is determined partly with reference to the emotional effects it has had on her, and only a psychiatrist is thought competent to evaluate and report on the nature, quality and severity of her emotions. 8 CFR 204.2 (c)(1)(i)(E). , 8CFR204(e)(1)(vi).
For an applicant to be determined eligible for federal disability benefits due to a mental illness, the opinion of a medical doctor – usually a psychiatrist – is required. The psychiatric signs and symptoms reported by the psychiatrist, as well as his diagnosis, are necessary in determining whether an illness exists and, if so, whether it is “mild”, moderate, or severe. 20 CFR 404.702, § 404.1521, http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1521.htm
Were psychiatrists to refuse to evaluate Americans in these contexts, it would be impossible for patients to receive treatment and impossible for the Federal Government to determine whether to grant or deny Federal benefits and protections. Although the government spends many millions of dollars annually in the fight against unlawful discrimination and hate crimes, there is has been little medically expert guidance as to the psychosocial causes of even the most extreme behaviors. We cannot diagnose the condition that might suddenly erupt in violence.
Corporations and individuals paid $61.1 million in monetary benefits levied by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2004, yet these corporations lack the diagnostic tools to determine which of their employees may be most at risk for repeating the same behavior. While corporations may refer individuals for counseling, they cannot be diagnosed against a commonly agreed benchmarks, and cannot know whether individual’s relevant symptoms and signs are increasing or decreasing. We cannot determine scientifically who is most at risk and we cannot empirically evaluate the success of our many and costly interventions. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity, Race/Color Discrimination, http://www.eeoc.gov/types/race.html.
Psychiatrists are perceived to have the academic and clinical training to render professional opinions concerning the physiological and neurological mechanisms underling mental states such as fear, anger, anxiety, anguish, and panic depression, and other feeling states that are coming to be seen, at least in part, as neurochemical processes with neurochemical origins.
ECEIBD – Differential Diagnosis:
Applicability of the ECEIBD Diagnosis
Many people who are prejudiced and biased in their thoughts and feelings will not meet the ECEIBD criteria because they do not exhibit the required extreme outward behavior. It is precisely this sensitivity of the diagnostic criteria which enables those most in need of help to be identified while those less in need of help can take prophylactic measures if they so choose. In most cases, the patient will come to the attention of a psychiatrist either when their behavior becomes observably problematic for their bosses, coworkers family members, police or others, or when they themselves become aware that their thoughts and feelings are restricting important activities in important areas of their life.
ECEIBD perpetrators may have experienced been subjected inappropriate and damaging stimuli, such as appeals to color-aroused bigotry, they may not have experienced this stimuli as “shocking”, intensely fearsome or horrific at the time that it occurred. Being exposed to superiority enforced by legal subjugation of other may have left them feeling . . .
Whites may have acquired a subconscious sense of inadequacy, first when all competition from blacks was precluded by law or practice, and then later, when competition by blacks inevitably allowed some blacks to prove that they could outperform some whites in some areas. Just as lowering trade tariffs can “shock” national industries, lowering barriers to black competition may have shocked whites participating in areas where competition had increased. Examples of areas in which blacks excelled when permitted to compete include positions such as basketball player, musician, singer, US Secretary of State, US Congressman and US Senator. Although we may agree that the world is better when everyone participates equally, yet we must agree that there are only 100 seats in the US Senate and each seat to which a black is elected by his constituents represents a seat which a white person may not fill. Although all competition involves winners and losers, those who feel superior to blacks may feel an added sense of injustice when blacks whom they deemed inferior nonetheless win positions that they would have liked to hold. Therefore, rather than leaving them feeling hopeless, they may have felt falsely empowered.
The DSM-IV definition of the PTSD syndrome is little changed from earlier DSM editions. However, the stressor criterion in DSM-IV clearly departs from earlier DSM editions. Traumatic experience was originally defined as an overwhelming experience outside the usual range. The DSM-IV redefined traumatic experiences in subjective terms. The current definition is 2-part: the first part (Criterion A1) defines the range of qualifying stressors, and the second part (Criterion A2) requires that “the person’s response involved intense fear, helplessness, or horror.” Criterion A1 broadens the variety of qualifying traumatic events. In addition to the original core category of traumas used to define PTSD (military combat, disaster, and criminal violence), the expanded DSM-IV definition attempts to cover all possible events that clinicians might regard as potentially culminating in PTSD symptoms. Although stressors classified as less extreme are explicitly excluded (for example, spouse leaving or being fired [3, p 427]), the DSM-IV list of examples is clearly more inclusive than earlier DSM editions. For the first time, death of a loved one from any cause (including natural causes) qualifies as a stressor, as long as it was “sudden and unexpected.” Being diagnosed with a life-threatening illness is another example of the wider range of traumatic events included in the new definition. The DSM-IV revision—the broader range of qualifying traumatic events and the added criterion of a specific emotional response—deemphasizes the objective features of the stressors and highlights the clinical principle that people may perceive and respond differently to outwardly similar events.
Naomi Breslau, PhD, Epidemiologic Studies of Trauma, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, and Other Psychiatric Disorders, The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, December, 2002, 1 http://www.cpa-apc.org/Publications/Archives/CJP/2002/december/breslau.asp
Had a psychiatrist determined that treatment was indicated, it might not have been covered by medical insurance, if it consisted “merely” of intense fear of blacks or whites, and violent fantasies toward them. If so, a patient desperately in need of treatment and amenable to treatment, might nonetheless receive no treatment whatsoever. “Everybody holds some discriminatory ideas”, the psychiatrist might rightly or wrongly conclude. In the absence of criteria to distinguish between “normal” and extreme color-aroused hate, the psychiatrist might miss an opportunity for intervention with a potentially violent patient who subsequently acts on his fantasies.
What would be the medical alternative? If the psychiatrist were aware of a standard set of ECEIBD diagnostic criteria, he might have asked probing questions to determine whether the presenting patient met the “extreme” criteria and, if so, whether his present level of emotions, ideations and plans made him “danger to himself and others”. Even were he not immediately dangerous, additional questions would be asked to determine whether the color-aroused symptoms unreasonably limited the patient’s activities.
The psychiatrist might ask how long the patient had been angry at people of a particular color and what colors aroused that anger. If the person lived in Vermont and was only angry at Black people whom he saw on television, then the psychiatrist might conclude that the patient posed little danger, regardless of the extreme nature of his hate. However, if it was determined that the person was angry at white co-workers had been angry and increasingly depressed for months, and was fantasizing about “getting even”, then a more engaged posture would be warranted by the facts elicited.
In the latter case, weekly meetings to discuss emotions and ideation, combined with anti-depressants and a self-help group might well prevent a lethal outburst of violent behavior.
Of course, at this time there are no widely available self-help groups for people with extreme CEIBD. The illness has not been recognized as such, regardless of the extreme nature of the symptoms, so there is no organized help available. There is no body of literature that would enable him to identify and his symptoms, evaluate their severity, and make a decision to seek competent help. If a person has extreme ECEIBD symptoms, he may at best be referred to an “encounter group, a solution that no psychiatrist would recommend in isolation for extreme depression or morbid alcoholism.
Can Those Who Perpetrate and those who are victimized suffer from the same illness?
Metaphors and Analogies: In societies that where color-aroused ideation and emotion is prevalent, it is as if the very water we drink caused our illness, and we are all drinking the same psychopathogenetic water supply. Using a different metaphor, let us return to the day of the hurricane. Can the looters and the looted share the same problem? In a sense they do, although it manifests itself differently in these diverse populations. The looters may be shot and imprisoned when the social order breaks down to the point that generalized chaos seems to invite lawless behavior. Meanwhile, the looted also are victims of the same generalized chaos and lawlessness, which is why we all benefit from laws that seek to prevent chaos. When the sun shines again, some of the looters may be dead or in prison, while the looted count their losses and file insurance claims, yet all of their lives would have been different had they not shared a hurricane. A robbery may be as threatening to the life and liberty of the robber as it is to the person robbed, due to the forces initiated by one yet acting upon both.
Blacks and whites are afraid of each other in America. We perceive a limited amount of benefits and are afraid we may not get the portion that we deserve. We disagree only about the proper division, but not about the fact of division itself. To the degree that one or both parties feels shortchanged, an ongoing struggle is assured – a struggle which leaves all of us fatigued and apprehensive, regardless of how we fare.
The destruction of the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 affected Americans differently. While some immediately lost their lives, family members or property in the direct destruction, others lost of their sense of American security. Increased security and safety measures dramatically changed our society and the experience of the general public as least as much as it hopefully changed the prospects for potential attackers. Although we were affected differently – the killed and hurt, the attackers and the attacked - based on whom we are, yet the key to understanding the effects is identical: We all were changed on September 11, and the experience of that day is essential to understanding whom we are today.
When blacks were forbidden to read and whites forbidden to teach them, blacks became sub-educated and some eventually began to doubt their ability to learn what whites new, just as did whites. It was hard to imagine that those who were illiterate and could not speak English as whites did would someday practice medicine shoulder to shoulder with white physicians, and teach white people’s children. A social and political order developed of lower expectations for everyone.
When it causes us to go mad, some may attack and others may be attacked, yet our challenge is identical – to change the water supply.
Day-care operator's husband is neo-Nazi leader
By BOB MAHLBURG
bob.mahlburg@heraldtribune.com
State records call a recent inspection at a Sarasota child- care home "routine," but some activities at the house are anything but typical.
The child-care center, in a modest residential neighborhood, is also home to a self- professed white supremacist and neo-Nazi who has hosted a well-known Web site and Internet radio show.
Michael Herbert Blevins, who calls himself "Von Bluvens," has been a leader in the white supremacist movement, according to national watchdog groups.
In interviews posted on various Web sites, Blevins, whose wife, Bernadette, operates the day care, has advocated "shipping blacks back to Africa," deporting Mexicans and wholesale "extermination" of non-whites. He also has called for "putting Jews to sleep" and produced artwork of an apparent gas chamber with the title "Holocaust: This Time It's for Real."
A neighbor says she has seen a Nazi flag in a back bedroom of the home, down the hall from where young children spend the day.
Sarasota County officials, who regulate child-care homes under a state contract, say they have no reason to close the day care. They stress they have found nothing that violates health and safety regulations, and they must also consider Blevins' constitutional right to free speech.
Bernadette Blevins, formerly Bernadette Heikkila, has run the day care for a decade with no serious violations, according to county regulators. She has been married to Michael Blevins for less than a year.
And because the home is following the rules, the county has no reason to inform parents about his racist views, said Homer Rice, the county Health Department manager who oversees child-care regulation under the state Department of Children & Families contract.
"I can only go by rules and procedure," Rice said. "I cannot put my personal feelings into something. As far as we know, the children are safe. The rules right now are not being violated. There's no reason I can give for denying this family child-care home."
Rice said he was surprised when he recently learned of Michael Blevins' white-supremacist ties. He said the situation troubles him personally, but legally there's nothing he can do.
"It's the parents' responsibility to look into the personalities of the day care and our responsibility to look into the legality of the day care," Rice said. "It's not our responsibility to do the due diligence. The parents should take the time to know them." Day-care operator's husband is neo-Nazi leader
HeraldTribune.Com, http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050306/NEWS/503060524/1060, also reported at http://www.rickross.com/reference/supremacists/supremacists141.html
At times otherwise law-abiding community officials participated in these acts of lawlessness (see citations below), and because the acts served to reinforce segregation that was mandated by law, the response of law enforcement may have been limited. Although these behaviors seem extreme to us now, they were, nonetheless, largely consistent in their goals with what was then the public policy of maintaining rigid color-based segregation. The very impunity with which these acts were carried out was at once a manifestation of the social status of the perpetrators and the victims as well as an effort to reaffirm, propagate and perpetuate the unequal statuses.
Because the goals of the actors was consistent with public policy at the time, participation in these acts may actually have improved the status of the perpetrators amongst their peers and social group if the perpetrators were perceived as defending, enforcing and perpetuating social rules essential to the social status of the group. (See color-aroused remarks of Senator Bird in the 1930’s, which he has since disavowed.)
The success of the Civil Rights movement demonstrates that those fearing change were correct in their belief that dramatic change in color-roles was about to occur. The extreme behaviors were an attempt to forestall the changes in color-roles. These crimes may have grown more extreme and terroristic as the threat of changed was perceived to the perpetrators to be imminent. (Citations to church bombings from Alabama.) The bombers expressed well-founded fear that their legally relatively higher status vis a vis colored people as about to change, threatening their accustomed role in society and community.
The children of perpetrators may have learned, by watching their parents and other adults, to experience intense fear of change and to view violent terroristic behavior as a reasonable and logical manner in which to address their fear, manifest their anger, and forestall additional change. However, more thorough research into may reveal the degree to which adults who suffer from EICEBD intentionally or unintentionally “teach” ECEIBD to their children.
Responses of community members in populations exposed to terrorism have an important influence on children's coping skills. Children's resiliency to traumatic events is influenced by the degree of social support and positive community influences (Garbarino et al., 1992). Community ideology, beliefs and value systems contribute to resiliency by giving meaning to dangerous events, allowing children to identify with cultural values, and enabling children and adults to function under extreme conditions (Melville and Lykes, 1992). Wanda P. Fremont, M.D. , Childhood Reactions to Terrorism
Induced Trauma, (2005) http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=171201495
Additional Research Topics
Child ECEIBD Hate Violence Statistics
Children’s Color Views (polling, research data)
Research Data on reactions to color
Individuals convicted of heinous crimes based on color. Case Studies and quotes from them that prove the feelings and thoughts they had. Psychiatric reports from the courts in which they were tried.
NYTimes.com
Black Families File Bias Suit in Md. Arson
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 3, 2005
Filed at 4:53 p.m. ET
COLLEGE PARK, Md. (AP) -- Black residents in an upscale housing development filed a civil rights lawsuit against five white men accused of setting the subdivision on fire last year, claiming the act was racially motivated.
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt on behalf of 32 Hunters Brooke development residents, seeks unspecified damages.
The lawsuit said the suspects violated federal and Maryland fair housing laws by trying to intimidate black home buyers moving into the development. One suspect, Jeremy Parady, has said the group targeted the homes because they knew the buyers were black.
''If one of their goals was to intimidate us to the point we would sit back and do nothing, they did not succeed,'' said resident Beverly Rowe.
The Dec. 6 fires in the homes, which were mostly under construction and unoccupied, caused $10 million in damage and were described by officials as Maryland's worst case of residential arson. Many residents had to push back move-in dates to rebuild.
Two of the five men pleaded guilty to arson and conspiracy, and a third was convicted in September of masterminding the arson; all await sentencing. A joint trial for the other two on arson and conspiracy charges is scheduled for next year.
An attorney for suspect Roy McCann said the lawsuit was ''grandstanding'' that would make it more difficult for his client to get a fair trial in February.
''I defy the plaintiffs to produce one shred of evidence that Mr. McCann did anything at all, let alone with a racial motivation in mind. It ain't there,'' Joshua Treem said.
The lawsuit also names the security company responsible for the development, Security Services of America, because it employed one of the suspects.
http://nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Homes-Burned.html
Psychiatric Expertise is Necessary to Address ECEIBD
According to the website of the American Psychological Association, “By far the largest determinant of hate crimes is racial [color-aroused] bias, with African Americans the group at greatest risk. In 1996, 4,831 out of the 7,947 such crimes reported to the FBI, or 60%, were promulgated because of race, with close to two-thirds (62%) targeting African Americans. Furthermore, the type of crime committed against this group has not changed much since the 19th century; it still includes bombing and vandalizing churches, burning crosses on home lawns, and murder.” Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe In Modern Dress, The Special Nature of an Extreme Expression of Prejudice, APA Public Affairs (1998), http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/hate/#racial
What causes hate crimes? The simple answer is, “thoughts and feelings”. Perpetrators have extreme thoughts and feelings which become manifested in violent “acting out” behavior. In society at large, when complex emotional states become extreme and overwhelming, we call upon psychiatrists to consult and to offer psychopharmacological and other therapeutic interventions. Only psychiatrists are thought to have the required medical and psychological training necessary to understand and diagnose the complex neurological and physiological processes underlying feelings states that manifest in behavior.
Because of their peculiar expertise, in many cases only psychiatrists are legally competent to determine what conditions are rise to the level of “extreme”. So, for example, under the Federal Violence Against Women Act and, only licensed psychiatrists are thought to have sufficient medical training and judgment to interview a woman (or child), examine her medical, therapy and other records, and determine whether she has suffered sufficiently “extreme” cruelty to qualify for certain benefits available under the Act. INA: ACT 204 - PROCEDURE FOR GRANTING IMMIGRANT VISAS, Sec. 204. [8 U.S.C. 1154] (a)(1)(A)(iii)(I)(bb), (a)(1)(A)(iii)(I) (I)(aa)(CC)(ccc), (a)(1)(A)(iv), (v)(I)(cc). http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-22/slb-1478?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act204, 8 CFR 204.2 (c)(1)(i)(E), http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-10281/slb-12852/slb-12954?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-8cfrsec2042.
To be considered “extreme”, an abuse must result in “physical or mental injury” and may include “psychological” exploitation. 8CFR204(e)(1)(vi). Psychological abuse, exploitation and mental injury may be shown to be extreme by submitting “reports and affidavits . . . from medical personnel . . .” As such, the failure to include reports and evaluations from medical personal may lead to an inference that the abuse was not extreme, because people with extreme emotional difficulty generally seek help from competent medical professionals, i.e. psychiatrists.
The “extreme” quality of the cruelty or abuse is determined partly with reference to the emotional effects it has had on her, and only a psychiatrist is thought competent to evaluate and report on the nature, quality and severity of her emotions. 8 CFR 204.2 (c)(1)(i)(E). , 8CFR204(e)(1)(vi).
For an applicant to be determined eligible for federal disability benefits due to a mental illness, the opinion of a medical doctor – usually a psychiatrist – is required. The psychiatric signs and symptoms reported by the psychiatrist, as well as his diagnosis, are necessary in determining whether an illness exists and, if so, whether it is “mild”, moderate, or severe. 20 CFR 404.702, § 404.1521, http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1521.htm
Expert opinion from psychiatrists is also required in Federal courts. Only a person “qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education” may be allowed to offer and opinion when “scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge” may render his opinion about the causes and severity of emotional conditions. Moreover, the opinion offered must be “the product of reliable principles and methods” applied “reliably to the facts of the case.” Because of this exacting standard, a psychiatrist is often the only witness qualified to evaluate and opine concerning complex physiologically-based emotions, ideation processes, and their manifestations in extreme or violent behaviors. Testimony by Experts, Rule 702, Federal Rules of Evidence, http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm#Rule702.
Legal cases that turn on psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses simply cannot be resolved without recourse to experts. Government benefits for the mentally ill cannot be granted without professional diagnosis of the illnesses involved. Private insurers deny reimbursement where psychological symptoms are not confirmed by psychiatric reports.
Were psychiatrists to refuse to evaluate Americans in these contexts, it would be impossible for patients to receive treatment and impossible for the Federal Government to determine whether to grant or deny Federal benefits and protections. Although the government spends many millions of dollars annually in the fight against unlawful discrimination and hate crimes, there is has been little medically expert guidance as to the psychosocial causes of even the most extreme behaviors. We cannot diagnose the condition that might suddenly erupt in violence.
Psychiatrists are perceived to have the academic and clinical training to render professional opinions concerning the physiological and neurological mechanisms underling mental states such as fear, anger, anxiety, anguish, and panic depression, and other feeling states that are coming to be seen, at least in part, as neurochemical processes with neurochemical origins.
When he tells us, “I feel afraid interacting with Blacks (or whites)”, we may secretly agree with him without probing further. We may thereby miss an opportunity to prevent a criminal act by someone whose emotions and fantasies are, in fact, of a quality and prevalence very different from our own. (See statistics on crime by color of victim and color of perpetrator.)
If the person is of a minority color, his cues that race is the underlying factor in his depression may be missed or considered unimportant. “Ethnic and gender differences in mental health service utilization are well documented. Individuals from ethnic and racial minority groups in the United States have been reported to underutilize mental health services when compared to those from the majority group. Once they have accessed services, individuals from racial minority groups have been found to average significantly fewer treatment sessions than white clients and to drop out of therapy at significantly higher rates (Sue, 1977; Vail, 1996; Vernon and Roberts, 1982).” Joseph A. Flaherty, M.D., and Susan Adams, Ph.D. , Psychiatric Times January 1998 Vol. XV Issue 1 (2005), http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p980141.html. Increased use of psychiatric services by blacks might decrease the need for more costly interventions, such psychiatric hospitalization and imprisonment. Ibid.
Blacks and the Under-Use of Psychiatry – The Great Malpractice
“Many of the factors purported to influence accessing mental health services by men and ethnic minorities are systemic in nature, ingrained within our culture, and consequently, difficult to change (e.g., gender differences in attitudes toward help-seeking, ethnic differences in the use of alternative healing resources).” Although many factors may contribute to underuse may be beyond the purview of psychiatrists , the single most important factor may be that they suffer from an illness that may not be recognized as such, by themselves or by their doctors, because the illness, however prevalent or severe, has yet to be diagnosed and recognized as an illness.
Advantages and Perceived Disadvantages of Inclusion of ECEIBD in the DSM
The Black Rage Defense
In Detroit, Michigan, in 1925, an esteemed African American doctor, Ossian Sweet, and his wife had moved into an all white neighborhood. For two days after they moved in, an angry crowd of over 500 whites surrounded the house. Dr. Sweet's 22 year old brother Henry eventually fired a rifle into the mob killing one man and wounding another. Everyone in the The William Freeman case as well as most of the other trials discussed in this article (Dr. Sweet, James Johnson, Stephen Robinson, Felicia Morgan and Patrick Hooty Croy) are written about extensively in Paul Harris, Black Rage Confronts the Law, (N.Y.U. Press 1997) Using transcripts, media reports and interviews with the participants, the author discusses the legal strategies and places the cases in their political context.
The book also recreates cases such as the Colin Ferguson mass shooting on the long Island Commuter train, the Los Angeles riot cases of 1992, the Inez Garcia self defense case and many others. It analyzes the state of the law, the misuse of the defense, its potential in civil cases and how to effectively use the environmental hardship defense.
house - Dr. Sweet, his wife, two brothers and seven friends - were arrested and charged with murder.
The NAACP recruited Clarence Darrow and renowned civil liberties lawyer
Arthur Garfield Hays for the defense along with three local African American attorneys, Cecil Rowlette, Charles Mahoney and Julian Perry. This legal team thrust racial reality evidence into the traditional doctrine of self-defense. The rule in a self-defense case is that one can use deadly force if one has a reasonable belief of imminent harm of serious bodily injury. In the Sweet case, Henry had fired before the crowd attacked. In order to show that his actions were reasonable, the defense put on evidence of the history of white mobs beating and killing black people, especially in the context of attempts to move into segregated white neighborhoods. The evidence also was particularized to Dr. Sweet's and Henry's personal experiences and knowledge of such incidents.
The all-white jury hung. The prosecution, amidst national publicity,
decided to retry only Henry Sweet. Judge Frank Murphy, later to be a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court once again presided. This time the jury acquitted and all charges were dismissed against the other ten defendants. Henry Sweet returned to college and later became a lawyer.
Paul Harris, The Black Rage Defense, http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:GCPkFMUBdd4J:www.law.uconn.edu/journals/
cpilj/contents/archives/vol1/harris.pdf+California+insanity+robbery+black&hl=en
When African-Americans present to psychiatrists with symptoms such as anger, rage, severe anxiety, low self-esteem and depression, should the psychiatrist necessarily explore the patient’s history to rule out ECEIBD? Might a failure or reluctance to do so be implicated in low return rates for black patients? One study found that:
Mental Health Care for African Americans: Appropriateness and Outcomes of Mental Health Services
Upon entering treatment, do African Americans receive effective care? That effective treatments do exist was documented in the Surgeon General's Report on Mental Health (DHHS, 1999b). The questions that remain are whether novel, standardized treatments and treatment-as-usual are equally effective when administered to African Americans, and whether in settings where African Americans receive care, clinicians diagnose their problems correctly and assign effective forms of treatment.
Studies on Treatment Outcomes
Clearly, an effective treatment is better than no treatment at all. However, for psychosocial interventions that might be sensitive to social and cultural circumstances, there is the question of whether interventions are as effective for African Americans as they are for whites. Few researchers have addressed this question when considering either novel, standardized treatments or treatment-as-usual. Among the handful of studies available for review, many included small samples of participants and lacked adequate controls.
One preliminary effort showed that African Americans and white Americans responded in a similar manner to treatment for PTSD (Rosenheck & Fontana, 1994; Zoellner et al., 1999). “Cognitive-behavioral therapy, which focuses on altering demoralizing patterns of thought, has been shown to be equally effective in reducing anxiety among African American and white children and adults (Friedman et al., 1994; Treadwell et al., 1995). . . . A study of persons suffering from severe and persistent mental illness found that a heavily African American sample, drawn from an intensive psychosocial rehabilitation program located in an urban, predominantly African American area, demonstrated increased levels of adaptive functioning in the community (Baker et al., 1999).”
“On the other hand, African Americans were found less responsive than white Americans in a pilot study of behavioral treatment for agoraphobia (Chambless & Williams, 1995). In another study of treatment for depression, African Americans proved similar to whites in response to psychotherapy and medication, except that African Americans had less improvement in their ability to function in the community (Brown et al., 1999). In a study of treatment as usually provided in the Los Angeles County mental health system, African Americans improved less than whites and members of other racial and ethnic minority groups (Sue et al., 1991). Exposure therapy, which involves overcoming fears in graduated steps, proved ineffective as a treatment for panic attacks among African Americans (Williams & Chambless, 1994).”
Diagnostic Issues
Appropriate care depends on accurate diagnosis. Carefully gathered evidence indicates that African Americans are diagnosed accurately less often than white Americans when they are suffering from depression and seen in primary care (Borowsky et al., 2000), or when they are seen for psychiatric evaluation in an emergency room (Strakowski et al., 1997).
For many years, clinicians and researchers observed a pattern whereby African Americans in treatment presented higher than expected rates of diagnosed schizophrenia and lower rates of diagnosed affective disorders (Neighbors et al., 1989). When structured procedures were used for assessment, or when retrospective assessments were made via chart review, the disparities between African Americans and whites failed to emerge (Baker & Bell, 1999).
One explanation for the findings is clinician bias: Clinicians are predisposed to judge African Americans as schizophrenic, but not as suffering from an affective disorder. One careful study of psychiatric inpatients found that African Americans had higher rates of both clinical and research-based diagnoses of schizophrenia (Trierweiler et al., 2000). The clinicians in the study were well trained and included both African Americans and white Americans. However, it was found that they applied different decision rules to African American and white patients in judging the presence of schizophrenia. The role of clinician bias in accounting for this complex problem has not yet been ascertained. Mental Health Care for African Americans: Appropriateness and Outcomes of Mental Health Services, http://www.mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/cre/ch3_appropriateness.asp.
In those cases where African-Americans are actively being discriminated against in the community, would it not be harder for them than for whites to adapt to their surroundings?
Do color-aroused emotions, ideations or behavior affect either the patient or the psychiatrist in a way that makes African-Americans seem more schizophrenic to white psychiatrists? Is the answer crucial to the psychiatric care available to African-American patients? Although the evidence does not support a conclusion, the study results call for additional inquiry.
“One explanation for the findings is clinician bias: Clinicians are predisposed to judge African Americans as schizophrenic, but not as suffering from an affective disorder. One careful study of psychiatric inpatients found that African Americans had higher rates of both clinical and research-based diagnoses of schizophrenia (Trierweiler et al., 2000). The clinicians in the study were well trained and included both African Americans and white Americans. However, it was found that they applied different decision rules to African American and white patients in judging the presence of schizophrenia. The role of clinician bias in accounting for this complex problem has not yet been ascertained.” Mental Health Care for African Americans: Appropriateness and Outcomes of Mental Health Services, http://www.mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/cre/ch3_appropriateness.asp.
There are (30,000,000? Blacks in the United States, the vast majority of whom are the grandchildren or great grandchildren of slavery. 50%? Of blacks were raised by parents who could attend a movie theatre or go to a hospital because of the color of their skin. Ninety percent of blacks did not freely choose their spouses, because the vast majority of marriageable American women were statutorily prevented from marring black men. They lived in segregated housing and attended segregated schools.
Misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment often occurs in minority communities. Factors that can contribute include a general mistrust of medical health professionals, cultural barriers, co-occurring disorders, socioeconomic factors, and primary reliance on family and the religious community during times of distress (NMHA, 2000). Did you know?, National Mental Health Association, http://www.nmha.org/infoctr/didyou.cfm (See this study cited, by NMHA!)
Did these conditions lead to open or repressed anger, sadness or submission in blacks? The riots of the 1960’s and early seventies suggests that they did. Was the anger and fear as extreme, pronounced and enduring as segregation itself? Was this anger, sadness and hopelessness and futility manifested in familial relations, or in the documented increases in alcohol use and drug abuse? If growing up in a family affected by alcohol has predisposed children to certain illnesses, might growing up in a family whose income, housing, education, entertainment and health care were systematically limited by color have ill and lasting effects on children?
“One of the most important factors that determine children's response to violent events and their ability to cope is the influence of their parents' responses to the trauma. Terrorist incidents affect adults profoundly, and they may not be able to provide the support and reassurance needed to help avoid potential long-term emotional harm to their children. The importance of parental involvement in mediating stress reactions in children has been studied in families exposed to terrorist attacks (Bat-Zion and Levy-Shiff, 1993; Laor et al., 2001). Increased levels of stress and morbidity were noted in children whose parents responded to traumatic events with negative emotions including depression and poor psychological functioning. Positive coping responses in children were associated with parents who responded with positive emotional reactions to trauma (Bat-Zion and Levy-Shiff, 1993). Children with adequate family cohesion manifest less stress in reaction to trauma and are better able to recover from the initial impact of the trauma (Laor et al., 2001).” Wanda P. Fremont, M.D. , Childhood Reactions to Terrorism-Induced Trauma, (2005) http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=171201495
Children's responses vary in accordance to their level of exposure to the terrorist activities, either directly or indirectly. The degree of exposure to terrorist actions is related to the prevalence of PTSD. The more severe the traumatic event, the greater the risk of developing posttraumatic symptoms (Bat-Zion and Levy-Shiff, 1993; Pynoos et al., 1987; Thabet et al., 2002). Children who directly experience loss are more symptomatic (Bat-Zion and Levy-Shiff, 1993; Pfefferbaum et al., 1999). Physical injury, or witnessing death and physical injury of others, is associated with higher rates of PTSD and comorbid depression and anxiety. The degree of personal loss (i.e., the child's relationship to the victim) has also been correlated with the number of posttraumatic stress symptoms in less exposed children. Knowing an injured or deceased person increased the risk of symptom development (Nader et al., 1990). In addition to the level of trauma, the duration of exposure to violence predicts risk for development of psychiatric problems in children (Goldstein et al., 1997; Pynoos and Nader, 1989).
The differential response to trauma depends, in part, on the child's age and level of psychological maturity (Osofsky, 1995). Children age 5 and under may exhibit regressive behaviors such as bed-wetting, thumb-sucking or fear of the dark. They may have increased difficulties separating from their parents. Repetitive play may occur in which themes or aspects of the trauma are expressed. Their dreams may be frightening, but without any recognizable content. School-age children (ages 6 to 11) may have attention problems and schoolwork may suffer. Signs of anxiety include school avoidance, somatic complaints, irrational fears, sleep problems, nightmares, irritability and angry outbursts. They may appear to be depressed and more withdrawn. Adolescent (ages 12 to 18) responses are more similar to adults and include intrusive thoughts, hypervigilance, emotional numbing, nightmares, sleep disturbances and avoidance. They are at increased risk for problems with substance abuse, peer problems and depression. Trauma is often associated with intense feelings of humiliation, self-blame, shame and guilt, which result from the sense of powerlessness and may lead to a sense of alienation and avoidance.
Predisposing risk factors may cause some children to be at greater risk to develop symptoms of anxiety and depression. These include past exposure to traumatic events during childhood, childhood conduct problems and childhood anxiety, as well as antisocial behavior or a family history of psychiatric disorders (Applied Research and Consulting, LLC et al., 2002; Breslau and Davis, 1992). Wanda P. Fremont, M.D. , Childhood Reactions to Terrorism-Induced Trauma, (2005) http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=171201495
If an African-American patient perceives himself to be a victims of significant color-aroused behaviors, might this be relevant or even central to his treatment? Let us imagine that he has been convicted of a color-aroused or associated violent crime. Would his attitudes toward the color of his victim then make these issues worth exploring as part of his diagnosis and treatment. Or should the matter of color continue to be willfully or unknowingly ignored?
Is it worth posing these questions in discussions between psychiatrists and African-American patients, or are these questions “better left alone” If these matters are not explored,
Although people with ECEIBD regularly are interviewed by employee assistance officers, court-appointed psychiatrists and probation officers, there is no diagnostic criteria that would permit identification and treatment of ECEIBD. There is no succinct way to refer to this illness when recommending that an affected employee, student
Schools, , by creating a social climate more supportive of equal
To the degree that these experiences were repeated over time, “kindling” may have occurred that predisposed participants and observers to rapidly escalating feelings of fear, anger, fight or flight.
Assessment of functional limitations is one way to determine the severity of a condition. In the evaluation of mental conditions, declares the US Social Security Administration, “Assessment of functional limitations is a complex and highly individualized process that requires us to consider multiple issues and all relevant evidence to obtain a longitudinal picture of your overall degree of functional limitation.” 20 CFR 404.702 §404.1520a Evaluation of mental impairments, http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1520a.htm In the year 2004, the US Social Security Administration received and considered 1,895,500 applications for disability benefits and granted 777,500, even though all of these awards required careful assessments of the severity of physical and/or psychiatric disabilities. Annual Statistical Supplement, 2004 - OASDI Awards to Disabled Workers (6.C), http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2004/6c.html.
For purposes of the Social Security Administration, in the disability context, “an impairment or combination of impairments is not severe if it does not significantly limit your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Considered is whether a condition impairs, for example, inter alias, “Capacities for seeing, hearing, and speaking . . . Understanding, carrying out, and remembering simple instructions . . .Use of judgment . . . and Responding appropriately to supervision, co-workers and usual work situations . . . Dealing with changes in a routine work setting.” . 20 CFR 404.702, §404.1521 What we mean by an impairment(s) that is not severe. http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1521.htm
Although not all ECEIBD is sufficiently severe to impair any or all of these capacities, clearly some ECEIBD does so impair workers, for example, those who are punished or dismissed for discriminating against other on the job. Particularly if testing shows severe impairments of, for example, cognitive/communicative function; social function; concentration, persistence, or pace”, then an illness may be found to be disabling. However, in the disability context a “mild” impairments in these areas would not be found to be disabling. 112.00 C. Mental Disorders - Assessment of Severity Appendix, 20 CFR 404 Subpart P — Listing of Impairments, http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-ap10.htm.
In concluding that psychiatrists and the public cannot learn to assess or distinguish between severities of ECEIBD, I believe Dr. Borenstein underestimates the perceptiveness of psychiatrists and of our nation in general. Beyond the disability context, the DSM-IV and our nation’s civil and criminal laws are full of examples of “drawing the lines” between varying degrees of severity. Psychiatrist are trained to and experienced in making drawing distinctions based on diagnostic criteria.
By closely studying the relevant factors, psychiatrists can distinguish, for example, the difference in severity of illness between one person who masturbates weekly by himself at home, on the one hand, and another person who masturbates hourly at a public restaurant or other public venue. It is partly by clearly defining extreme behavior that we prevent “normal” behavior from being considered extreme. Providing a definition of extreme behavior might well provide guidance, comfort, and an effective defense for those whose behavior is not extreme. The lack of normative behavioral guidelines leaves professional and society conceptually and behaviorally at sea without a vessel.
However, even genetically determined behaviors deserve definition and study when they become so dysfunctional as to cause extreme distress for the individual with lost cohesiveness and productivity for the society. The instinct to provide affection and care for our children, for example is necessary to human survival, yet the DSM-IV rightly distinguishes between these impulses and “pedophilia”, which involves “recurrent, intense, sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 or younger).” Although it might not be readily apparent to strangers the difference between a doting father and a grooming child molester, it is nonetheless necessary to draw a distinction in law and in the public conscience. One of the purposes of the DSM-IV is to identify persons whose behavior is harmful to themselves and others so that they can be treated and society can be protected.
Although many not everyone’s color behavior rises to the level of Severe Color Ideation and Behavior Syndrome, it still useful and necessary to have a tool to identify those whose behavior is extreme. And though pedophilia becomes an epidemic that grips all or part of society, we will not remove its definition from the DSM-IV or reduce our efforts to treat and prevent it.
Dr. Borenstein argued that against listing color ideation and behavior syndrome because most of us display these patterns of thought and behavior to some degree. They may even be effectively “hard-wired” in us to help us to avoid danger coming from the unknown or from members of “other” groups. As one writer observed after the conference, the difficulty arose that racism could not be considered a uniquely white disease since blacks and persons of other colors might arguably also be susceptible to the symptomatic behaviors and thought patterns that are thought to comprise “racism”.
The DSM-IV is not the place for speculation concerning what groups or individuals may be more susceptible to displaying any particular behavior, although this might be an appropriately be a separate area of research for interested psychiatrists and others. Following the example of other diagnoses that have achieved listing in the DSM-IV, it is important to first identify the behavior and ideation.
Psychiatrists regardless of their skin color may be justified in resisting a new DSM definition wherein skin color, rather than specific observable patterns of thought and behavior, determine who fits the diagnosis.
Some researchers and clinicians may be interested in determining whether some groups are more susceptible than to ECIBS than others, but this a matter for empiric scientific study rather than anecdotal reasoning and conjecture. Historically, much has been accomplished in the diagnosis and treatment of mental illnesses whose causes and propensities remain unresolved.
If the mental problem commonly called “racism” were defined as a psychiatric illness, certainly the ideation and behavior involved would have to cause "significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning" in order to be considered “extreme”. DSM-IV Criteria for Pedophilia, http://www.medem.com/MedLB/article_detaillb.cfm?article_ID=ZZZUZRUZGLC&sub_cat=355#DSMIV_Criteria_for_Pedophilia
But what emotions, ideation and behavior would be included as symptomatic of ECEIBD?
According to the website of the American Psychological Association, “By far the largest determinant of hate crimes is racial [color-aroused] bias, with African Americans the group at greatest risk. In 1996, 4,831 out of the 7,947 such crimes reported to the FBI, or 60%, were promulgated because of race, with close to two-thirds (62%) targeting African Americans. Furthermore, the type of crime committed against this group has not changed much since the 19th century; it still includes bombing and vandalizing churches, burning crosses on home lawns, and murder.” Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe In Modern Dress, The Special Nature of an Extreme Expression of Prejudice, APA Public Affairs (1998), http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/hate/#racial
What causes hate crimes? The simple answer is, “thoughts and feelings”. Perpetrators have extreme thoughts and feelings which become manifested in violent “acting out” behavior. Where do these thoughts and feelings come from? In many cases, only psychiatrists are thought to have the required medical and psychological training necessary to understand and diagnose the complex neurological and physiological processes underlying feelings states that manifest in behavior. Only psychiatrists are thought to have the academic and clinical training and experience to render professional opinions concerning the physiological and neurological mechanisms underling mental states such as fear, anger, anxiety, anguish, and panic depression, and other feeling states that are coming to be seen, at least in part, as neurochemical processes with neurochemical origins.
Dr. Borenstein further argues that, “Brutal, violent hate crimes are usually committed by mean, not sick, individuals and groups.” From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html Whether or not “brutal, violent hate crimes” are committed by “sick” people really depends upon the definition of “sick”. When the public hears that three men in a pickup truck dragged another man by a rope on the ground for over a mile because he was of a different color, they might viscerally respond, “Well, they must be sick!” This doesn’t mean that they aren’t culpable or that they think pigs can fly. Webster’s defines “sick” as, “affected with disease or ill health”, or “mentally or emotionally unsound or disordered”, e.g. “sick thoughts.” Sick is merely a synonym for “disordered”, and the public believes that a dragging by pickup truck is much more than “mean”, it’s “disordered”. Webster’s in turn describes “disordered” as “not functioning in a normal orderly healthy way”.
On June 7, 1998, three white men in pickup truck in Jasper County, Texas, stopped alongside a black man, James Bird, Jr., who was alone on a country road and whom they did not know; slit the man’s throat while his hands were in front of his face in self-defense; referred to him as “nigger”; tied a logging chain around his ankles, and dragged him to bits behind a speeding pickup truck. (From self-incriminating testimony of participant Lawrence Russell Brewer at his capital murder trial.) http://www.texasnaacp.org/jasper.htm#brewer, citing San Antonio Express-News, Friday, September 17, 1999; Police Report, http://www.texasnaacp.org/jasper5.gif Of the two who seemed to have led the attack, both had color-antagonistic tattoos (SS lightning bolts and Ku Klux Klan symbols) as well as well-known ties with a white supremacist group. King embraced white supremacy openly, loudly and regularly denouncing blacks, Jews and Asians. While they were in jail in Jasper County, Brewer wrote a note to King proudly boasting that after Byrd's death, "we are bigger stars, or should I say hero of the day, than we ever expected." The Jasper myth, http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/10/25/jasper/index1.html
On a continuum of behaviors, should the above be considered “not normal” i.e. “disordered” and “sick”, and “not functioning in a normal, orderly healthy way”? To call this behavior “mean” would certainly be to minimize it. Granted, there is a wide continuum of color-aroused behavior, but distinctions are nonetheless necessary and possible. Dragging a man behind a pickup truck both unlawful and not an example of functioning in a “normal, orderly, healthy way”. If we say this is “normal” and not “sick”, then we are saying that the vast majority of us are not unlike the men who committed this act.
In the 1971 case of Detroit auto worker James Johnson, an African-American, early intervention could have helped to prevent a violent and deadly ECEIBD attack, yet subsequent recognition of his ECEIBD could not absolve him of responsibility for his actions.
Black Rage" or Extreme Color-aroused Emotion, Ideation and Behavior Disorder?
In 1971, in Detroit, Michigan, James Johnson shot and killed three men at a Chrysler factory. During the legal proceedings that followed, in criminal court and in his Worker’s Compensations hearings, these were the findings of fact and law: (1) Johnson had a pre-existing mental
tendency toward schizophrenia and paranoia. This mental condition was
"nondisabling" - that is, Johnson was able to perform his job adequately; However, his condition was significantly aggravated the long-term work environment at the factory, including being unfairly assigned undesirable work at the oven, being passed over for a better job for which he was qualified, being addressed by a foreman as "nigger" and "boy," being denied his medical benefits, being suspended improperly for taking a legal vacation, and being suspended under clouded circumstances; (3) these job-related actions caused his breakdown on July 15, 1970.
In his defense, his lawyers exposed these oppressive working conditions in the Detroit auto plants and Johnson's case gained the support of the community, minority workers and revolutionary organizations, with a favorable article and photo appearing in Newsweek magazine. His insanity defense combined his individual psychiatric problems with the poverty and racism he suffered growing up on a Mississippi plantation, and the discrimination he experienced at the Chrysler auto plant. A legal strategy rooted in the anger and despair caused by racism had been successful and had motivated lawyers nationwide to rethink their cases and to risk criticism as they fought to shatter the myth of the colorblind courtroom. The trial received national publicity, including a James Johnson was acquitted with respect to the murder charges, but served five years in a mental hospital for the criminally insane.
Later, another young attorney, Ron Glotta, also of Detroit, saw the applicability of the principle of this extreme “environmental hardship defense” to workers' compensation cases, and he brought a claim on behalf of James Johnson arguing that in effect "Chrysler had pulled the trigger" by creating a "plant culture" which would inevitably lead to a worker exploding. Admidst a conservative and media outcry the Workers Compensation Referee agreed with the argument.
After his release James Johnson was interviewed by the Detroit Free Press:
"I think your mind has something like a release valve, like a pressure cooker on a stove. If it doesn't get released, it'll explode, blow up the kitchen and you with it. I don't know why mine didn't get released, I just lost control completely. All I wanted to do was to go to work, come home and get my paycheck once a week. It was either that job or welfare."
6
This case is presented neither as an example of a successful legal strategy nor as victory for the mentally ill. This case was not resolved successfully, because three men were killed and another lost six years of his life in psychiatric confinement. Rather, this case is presented for the purpose of exploring the emotions, ideation, and behaviors involved, and to determine what interventions might have prevented a deadly outcome.
Did James Johnson Exhibit ECEIBD?
Was the workplace rampage of James Johnson an example of Extreme Color-aroused Emotion, Ideation and Behavior? For purposes of psychiatric diagnosis, “color-aroused” does ought not to be equated with “legally justifiable or reasonable.” (In law, a voluntary physical assault is never a legally justified response to insults, unless the person who receives the insults reasonably believes he is in imminent physical danger. Burgess, 245 Kan. 481, State of Kansas v. Walker, No. 84261, http://www.kscourts.org/kscases/ctapp/2001/20010323/84261.htm, citing Burgess, 245 Kan. 481, and 40 Am. Jur. 2d, Homicide § 142.)
Rather than looking for justification for an act or behavior, the Color-arousal criterion looks only at “stimuli”, seeking only to determine whether the stimuli leading to the behavior in question was color-associated. Nor should color-arousal be confused with “causation”; Color-aroused stimuli such as epithets does not “cause” homicide in a legal sense, but it does often lead to physical confrontations. We seek only to determine whether an awareness of skin color was associated with arousal of subsequent emotions, ideation. Only by considering each of the elements of the ECEIBD diagnosis can we know whether Mr. Johnson suffered from this disorder. We must consider his ideation, emotions and behavior each in turn to see if they were he had CEIBD and if it was extreme.
Was Mr. Johnson’s Behavior “Extreme”?
Mr. Johnson’s behavior must be considered extreme because the behavior that brought him to the attention of the courts was violent, violated criminal laws, terminated his employment, resulted in his incarceration pending trial and sentencing, resulted in his psychiatric confinement, and also resulted in the deaths of three co-workers. For purposes of diagnosis, all color-aroused behavior that is illegal must be considered “extreme,” because illegal color-aroused behavior – even when it does not result in death - frequently and forseeably results in loss of life, liberty, property, employment or social status for the patient and/or others. Nor is it necessary that all of the above consequences already have been experienced by the patient for diagnostic purposes of ECEIBD. It is sufficient that any one of the above consequences could forseeably result, in light of applicable laws and regulations and the use good clinical sense.
Did Mr. Johnson have Color-Aroused Ideation?
When a person perceives skin color and has thoughts related to this perception, then the person has color-aroused thoughts. The skin color is the stimuli. Any thought the person has about, connected to, or arising from the skin color is a “color-aroused” thought. The skin color that arouses the thoughts or ideas may be his own skin color or someone else’s. It is not the fact of having the thoughts per se but rather the nature of the thoughts, the presence or lack of reality testing, and the relationship between these thoughts and subsequent feelings that is the locus of the disorder.
When a person says, speaking of skin color, that “I don’t see color,” they cannot mean literally that they do not perceive color unless they are color-blind. they are expressing a personal policy of ignoring skin color. Instead of encouraging patients to sublimate the thoughts and emotions that occur in response to perception of skin color, (which sublimation may not be possible or advisable if the emotions and thoughts are leading to extreme behavior) it is important therapeutically to explore and examine these thoughts and feelings to determine how they may be manifested in behavior and evaluating whether that behavior is consistent with the client’s goals and values.
At some point, the idea occurred to Mr. Johnson to take a gun to work, and he subsequently acted upon the idea by shooting his white co-workers. The shooting arose out of thoughts and feelings associated with the difference in their skin colors. We can infer these ideas from his behavior, that he shot those who tormented him and discriminated against him associated with his skin color. Undoubtedly, over the weeks and year preceding the shooting, Mr. Johnson had many additional ideas arising from being African-American in America and associated with and arising from his awareness of the skin colors of those around him. Withholding all moral judgments for the moment, to the degree that this ideation was about or influenced by influenced by skin color, whether his own or others’, we will conclude that he had color-aroused thoughts.
Mr. Johnson was taunted with color-associated epithets and then killed the people who tormented him. He, himself, reported that he reacted in response to color-associated stimulus. The starting point in evaluating a patient from a psychiatric standpoint must be the stimuli he believes are leading to his emotional state. Self-reported signs are very helpful in psychiatric diagnosis. Because Mr. Johnson, the criminal court and the Worker’s Compensation Court found that Mr. Johnson’s color of others was the immediate source of Mr. Johnson’s stressful stimuli implicated in Mr. Johnson’s emotional state, it is safe to conclude that his condition leading to his emotions, ideation, and subsequent behavior was color-aroused.
Did Mr. Johnson’s Have Color Aroused Emotions?
In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Mr. Johnson said that he eventually blew up “like a pressure cooker” when he concluded, based on the discriminatory acts against him, that his ability to “go to work, come home and get my paycheck once a week” and stay off “welfare” were threatened. It seems clear that he felt anger and fear. In a recently tried color-aroused discrimination case, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) found that, even in a “well-adjusted and productive”person, not permitting a person to compete for a position for which he is qualified caused “lost interest in life”, “loss of self esteem, depression, grief, anguish, embarrassment, anger, stress, weight loss, sleeplessness, withdrawal from friends, co-workers and family and a general loss of enjoyment of life.” Truell v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 07A30056 (September 3, 2003), http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/digest/xv-1.html#findings.
When a person has feelings that involve color, we can conclude that they have color-aroused emotion. In determining whether emotions are color-stimulated, his subjective perception of the nature of the source of his emotions is relevant, as well as objective circumstances. In this case, we are inquiring not into “legal justification”, but only into the factual matter of whether the racial epithets and employment discrimination present aroused the emotions. Clearly, in this case, they did. It is important to note that it is not the color of others that causes feelings. The feelings are an internal response to based on internal associations with an external stimulus.
One set of emotions may arise in immediate response to stimulus, such as anger at being insulted. They may also arise in response to thought, such as anger in response to a belief that the problem will continue, will grow in quality and quantity. In addition to the work-related stimuli, Johnson had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and paranoia prior to his lethal actions. With such a person, the color-aroused stimulus might not have to be extreme to cause Extreme CEIBD.
Since James Johnson experienced color-arousal stimuli over a prolonged period that affected his emotions and ideation, and his behavior in response was extreme, he may be said to have manifested an extreme color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior disorder, or ECEIBD.
Did the Whites who taunted Johnson have ECEIBD Also?
Did the whites who taunted and discriminated against Mr. Johnson also meet criteria for the ECEIBD diagnosis? Again, we must weight their ideation, emotions and behavior in turn, and determine whether they were extreme, in order to begin to diagnose their mental state. Because they were not available after the fact to report their emotions and ideation, the clearest and most objective remaining evidence here is their own behavior toward Mr. Johnson.
When Mr. Johnson’s supervisor called him “Nigger” and “Boy”, they were doing several very important things at once: they committing unlawful discrimination by denying Mr. Johnson the protection of the Civil Rights Act; as such, they were violating the terms of their employment; they were intentionally behaving in a manner that could forseeably lead to physical confrontation, they risked civil legal action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Although these might not all have been likely outcomes of their behavior, the lethal confrontation in which they died was reasonably foreseeable.
Once again, for purposes of diagnosis, all color-aroused behavior that is illegal must be considered “extreme,” because illegal color-aroused behavior – even when it does not result in death - frequently and forseeably results in loss of life, liberty, property, employment or social status for the patient and/or others. Nor is it necessary that all of the above consequences already have been experienced by the patient for diagnostic purposes of ECEIBD. It is sufficient that any one of the above consequences could forseeably result, in light of applicable laws and regulations and the use good clinical sense.
Because they were unable to testify at Mr. Johnson’s murder trial, we must infer their ideation and emotions from the circumstances until he killed them
First, let us look first with eyes of compassion at the situation of the white auto workers: Was their behavior “extreme”? Any behavior that may foreseeably cause this much damage to self and others must be suspect for purposes of psychiatric diagnosis. For diagnostic purposes, it is not necessary that the illegal behavior actually have caused so the level of damage that the behavior might have caused. Prevention of harm to the patient and others can only be accomplished with intervention before the foreseeable harm occurs. Therefore, it is sufficient in this case that the unlawful behavior had the potential to cause the harm which the law seeks to prevent in forbidding the unlawful behavior. Epithets toward coworkers are extreme because they are illegal and potentially very harmful.
Although racial epithets were once considered to be “normal”, they are now unlawful in the many Title VII contexts, precisely because they can invite physical harm to oneself and others, while having the effect of denying others an opportunity to participate fully in governmentally protected areas of activity.
Like anyone struggling to cope with rapid change, the white workers may have felt scared of what was to come and angry that the changes were occurring at all. The Civil Rights movement had culminated in laws that increased opportunities for blacks while increasing competition for whites. To the extent that whites felt superior to blacks and more deserving because of it, they may have felt indignant and angry in the face of the new equality challenges blacks were posing. The white workers at the Ford factory may correctly have perceived that change was inevitable. IALHI New Service reviewing Heather Ann Thompson’s Whose Detroit?: Politics, Labor in the Modern American City, http://www.ialhi.org/news/i0207_4.html. That perception may have led to fears of lost jobs and of having the to share a work environment with people whom they believed to be inferior to themselves and inherently less deserving, people whom public policy had previously excluded.
Any belief in their inherent superiority may have left them feeling indignant and when public policy was enforced that did not recognize their superiority. Because they were still in the majority in the workplace and in positions of power as supervisors, they clearly did not immediately accept the changes that were taking place. Instead the resisted the change in ways that were unlawful, including derogatory remarks toward Mr. Johnson, retaliatory work actions, and a generally hostile work environment. What is important to recognize here is the pervasive stress of very real competition and the conflict that predictably resulted.
Of course these whites would be forced to compete with each other even in the total absence of Blacks, yet their feelings of superiority to blacks may have made particularly galling to contemplate losing any competition to blacks. If so, all whites with superior attitudes may have been relatively susceptible to pervasive anger, fear and resentment.
What interventions, then, might have helped the white workers and supervisors to cope, adapt and even prosper in the face of pervasive change? Because the whites’ epithets and job discrimination actions were illegal and abusive, it was important that plant supervisors clarify that these actions would not be considered “normal”. Instead, these actions should have been addressed as clear violations of company policy, law and public policy. However, since the supervisor immediately responsible for this intervention was himself a perpetrator of the violations, it is not surprising that this intervention did not occur.
The culture of the workplace in the context of the larger society was also problematic. Because epithets and discrimation had been “normal” since the time when blacks were considered chattel, there was a “new normal” that needed to be implemented. Laws and government itself are meaningless if violations of normative laws and obligations are themselves considered “normal”. Society functions on the basis of mutual obligations, violations of which lead to chaos if unchecked. Therefore, violations of law must always be considered abnormalUnless these actions must be considered abnormal and aberrant,
facing rapid change and dislocation, these white workers might arguably have benefited from interventions designed to help them cope constructively with change. To avoid anger, the needed to see that these jobs were not a white birthright, not “theirs” by virtue of their color. Although this had very recently been true, laws had been enacted that dramatically changed the circumstances.
Here, an African-American was locked in a struggle with white co-workers over valued opportunities for promotion, increased status and pay. There were a limited number of higher paying jobs, whatever that number was, and white workers preferred to retain those jobs for themselves, as they had historically.
In the wake of the Civil Rights of 1964, which was meant to assert and protect equal opportunities in employment for African-Americans, white co-workers might reasonably have foreseen that some jobs would which previously reserved for them would now be subject to increased competition. If so, they may have felt prolonged fear and intense anger.
When Mr. Johnson’s addressed him directly as “nigger” and “boy”, the boss may have intended to discourage Mr. Johnson from asserting the rights he had won in the Civil Rights Act. In addition to an attempt to maintain their relatively preferential status, these verbal assaults were attacks on Mr. Johnson’s self-esteem (when they called him “nigger”) and on his manhood (when they called him “boy”). He may have felt constant pressure to relinquish potential financial benefits that were the purpose of his work. He may have despaired of “getting ahead” in America even while others were getting ahead around him. The purpose of exploring his feelings is not to absolve him of responsibility, but rather to analyze how they led to his actions. Psychiatry is nothing if not a study of the interface of emotions, thoughts and behaviors.
Instead of acquiescing and relinquishing those rights under pressure, and instead of availing himself of what legal avenues might have been available under the Act, Mr. Johnson exploded in a murderous if defensive “rage”
weared In the context of the civil rights movement and riots in detroitThe There is much to be learned from this case, about Far from a case, with a happy ending, this case
More importantly, if in our official capacity as arbiters of what is “normal”, we fail to define this behavior as extremely “abnormal”, then we effectively condone it; then, our attitude toward these acts then becomes nearly as problematic as the acts themselves. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary. It is only by defining this extreme behavior as grossly and patently abnormal and unhealthy that we can begin to look at prevention modalities that might diagnose extremely disordered thinking and emotion where possible, before it manifests itself in acts such as these. Although some thoughts and behaviors are disordered, the purpose of making these judgments is not to stigmatize people with ECEIBD as “bad” people; rather the goal is to provide support in identifying and changing destructive ruminations and fantasies before they lead to unacceptable consequences for the individual.
Imagining arguendo that there were an ECEIBD diagnosis at that time, and that these men were referred for psychiatric evaluation, before they met Mr. Byrd, might not the SS insignia and Klu Klux Klan tattoes have been deemed key symptoms of ECEIBD? If these same symptoms were present in a high school student being seen by a guidance counselor, would it not be prudent to compare that child’s other symptoms with established diagnostic criteria?
If a child with such tatoos were evaluated for angry outbursts, would it not be appropriate to ask if he belonged to an organized color-antagonist hate group, and if he had access to guns or other weapons? Where are the diagnostic criteria that would suggest such a course? What treatment would be available and appropriate if the child met all diagnostic criteria? We have no good answers at this time, and that is not a good enough response from the psychiatric community.
Supremacist Charged in Machine Gun Sales
Newsday/February 15, 2005
By Gene Johnson
Seattle -- Federal agents arrested three men on gun and explosives charges Tuesday, including a white supremacist who once served time for plotting to kill Martin Luther King Jr.
Keith Gilbert, 65, a former associate of late Aryan Nations founder Richard Butler, was arrested at his Seattle home, FBI spokeswoman Robbie Burroughs said.
He and the others arrested -- William D. Heinrich, 50, and John P. Hejna, 44 -- were ordered held until detention hearings later this week. Court-appointed lawyers for the three did not comment following separate appearances in federal court.
A complaint said Gilbert had sold AK-47 assault rifles and other weapons to a confidential informant working with the federal government over the past two years. He was charged with five counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm, possession of a machine gun and possession of an unregistered gun.
He faces a maximum 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each count.
"The defendants were doing this to make money," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Friedman. "There is no evidence of any plot to use the weapons or explosives against any target."
Gilbert was arrested in 1965 and convicted of stealing 1,400 pounds of TNT, which authorities said was part of a plot to kill King by blowing up a stage while he spoke at an Anti-Defamation League convention in Los Angeles.
After serving five years in San Quentin for the plot, Gilbert moved to northern Idaho and became involved with Butler's neo-Nazi group. They had a falling out in 1977.
Gilbert was convicted in 1983 of assaulting a teenager from a racially mixed family.
His son, Joshua Gilbert, told television reporters Tuesday his father is "a nice guy" and "pretty laid back. I don't know of any machine guns in the house."
A separate complaint accused Heinrich of selling a pistol to an informant, and Hejna was accused of being involved in selling the plastic explosive C-4.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/supremacists/supremacists138.html
.
Alcoholism and drug abuse are listed in the DSM-IV, yet there is unanimity throughout the United States that being an alcoholic or drig addict, or being under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of commission of a crime, do not absolve a defendant of criminal responsibility or “get him off”, as it were. If listing a mental illness in the DSM-IV automatically absolved all sufferers from criminal responsibility, than the APA might decide not to list any illnesses at all in the DSM-IV.
Carmen Cirincione and Charles Jacobs (1999) contacted officials in all 50 states and asked for the number of insanity acquittals statewide between the years 1970 and 1995. They received data from 36 states. Few states could provide information for the entire 25-year period, but the following results were obtained:
• The median number of insanity acquittals per state per year was 17.7.
• California and Florida had the highest annual averages (134 and 111, respectively); New Mexico (0.0) and South Dakota (0.1) had the lowest.
• Most of the acquittals were for felonies rather than misdemeanors.
Source: Wrightsman, Lawrence S. Edie Greene, Michael T. Nietzel, and William H. Fortune. (2002). Science of the insanity defense: how successful is it?” Chapter 11 of Psychology and the Legal System, 5th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lockheed Sued In Harassment Of Black Worker
EEOC Says Defense Contractor Ignored Complaints, Retaliated
By Renae Merle and Amy Joyce
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, August 3, 2005; Page D01
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Lockheed Martin Corp. yesterday, accusing the Pentagon's largest contractor of ignoring a black employee's complaints of racial harassment and retaliating after he complained.
Charles Daniels, an electrician who worked on the P-3 Orion surveillance plane at several Lockheed facilities, was subject to racist jokes, slurs and threats by white co-workers and a Latino supervisor daily for about a year, according the EEOC and Daniels's lawyer. They said Daniels was also told that the country would be better off if the South had won the Civil War, and that co-workers talked about lynching and slavery.
A Lockheed Martin employee killed other workers in Meridian, Miss., two years ago. The EEOC cited a hostile work environment for blacks. (By Rogelio Solis -- Associated Press)
A spokesman for Bethesda-based Lockheed declined to comment on the lawsuit because it had not been reviewed but said the company has "strong policies" against discrimination.
Daniels, while working on a project in Washington state, complained to a supervisor who did nothing about the harassment, according to the EEOC. Daniels was transferred in 2001 to Hawaii with the same team of workers and subjected to the same harassment there, the EEOC said. When Daniels complained, a supervisor threatened to fire him, said William R. Tamayo, an EEOC regional attorney based in San Francisco.
Daniels, 43, said in an interview yesterday that he was laid off later in 2001 when he refused to rejoin the team that included the workers who harassed him. "In a way I feel vindicated" that the EEOC sued, Daniels said. "Hopefully justice will be served."
The agency files about 400 lawsuits a year against all employers, based on about 80,000 complaints. About one-third of the lawsuits are filed on behalf of more than one person.
"Unfortunately, 40 years after the Civil Rights Act was passed, this is still going on," Tamayo said of the Daniels case, which was filed in federal court in Hawaii. "This is straight-up harassment."
TYPES OF DISCRIMINATION
In an impressively thorough review and analysis of the literature and data on discriminatory ideation and behavior in American society, “the Committee on National Statistics convened the Panel on Methods for Assessing Discrimination in 2001 to define racial discrimination; review and critique existing methods used to measure such discrimination and identify new approaches; and make recommendations regarding the best of these methods, as well as promising areas for future research. Because of wide interest in this topic, several funding agencies sponsored the study: the Ford Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Education.” Preface, Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001
The panel’s work is impeccable, representing the collaborative efforts and consensus of dozens of professors from representing a variety of disciplines, hailing from the foremost colleges and Universities in the United States; since I am unable to approve upon it, I simply provide it for the reader’s reference, quoting relevant sections verbatim as follows:
In the United States, large differences among racial and ethnic groups characterize many areas of social, economic, and political life, including such domains as the criminal justice system, education, employment, health care, and housing. For example, racial differences—which generally disadvantage minorities—exist in arrest and incarceration rates, earnings, income and wealth, levels of educational attainment, health status and health outcomes, and mortgage lending and homeownership. There are many possible explanations for such differences; one explanation may be the persistence of behaviors and processes of discrimination against minorities.
In this context, the Committee on National Statistics convened the Panel on Methods for Assessing Discrimination in 2001 to define racial discrimination; review and critique existing methods used to measure such discrimination and identify new approaches; and make recommendations regarding the best of these methods, as well as promising areas for future research. Because of wide interest in this topic, several funding agencies sponsored our study: the Ford Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Education.
The work of this panel is a direct outgrowth of the project that resulted in the two-volume report America Becoming: Racial Trends and Their Consequences (National Research Council, 2001a). Several of the panel members who were involved in producing these volumes held conversations around the question “What do we need to know to understand more about the role of race in American society?” At least one answer was “We need better methods to identify and understand the effects of race-based discrimination.”
The panel comprised a diverse group of experts in the fields of criminal justice, law, economics, psychology, public policy, sociology, and statistics. This diversity added a great deal to the creative debates among the panel members but also added to the difficulties in writing this report. It took time to develop a language and an intellectual framework with which we were all comfortable. In our report, we provide an extended discussion of definitions of discrimination and race, consolidating many aspects of a large social science literature on these topics. We also discuss various approaches to modeling and measuring discrimination in different fields. The interdisciplinary and diverse nature of the panel helped broaden these discussions, and we hope that our presentation of the definitional issues provides insight to those interested in the conceptualization of discrimination, just as we hope that our discussion of the methodological issues introduces new ideas to those engaged in measuring discrimination.
The breadth and complexity of the topic of discrimination and its effects posed a challenge for maintaining a tight focus on our charge, which was to define discrimination and review methods for measuring it. To keep to that charge, we spend no time discussing policies intended to alleviate discrimination (such as affirmative action or programs to build recruitment pools). We acknowledge, however, that the panel members have diverse opinions about appropriate policy options to address problems of discrimination, and inevitably our debates over policy issues at times crept into our debates over methodological issues.
Because of the charge and constraints on our time and resources, we focus our analysis on racial discrimination, particularly discrimination against African Americans, for which there is a very large literature. We do not address discrimination on the basis of nonracial factors, such as gender or age, nor do we discuss so-called reverse discrimination. Under the rubric of racial discrimination, we do include discrimination against ethnic groups, particularly Hispanics. The reasons have to do with the discrimination that has affected them coupled with the blurred nature of the definition of race and ethnicity for many Hispanics.
All of the panel members recognize the difficulties in defining racial discrimination in a clear way and in finding credible ways to measure it. There are different types of discrimination, different venues in which it can occur, and different ways in which it can have an effect. This report cannot address all of these topics comprehensively, but we have attempted to focus on at least some of the more important definitional and measurement problems. The measurement issues we address are relevant for understanding and measuring other types of discrimination. Despite the difficulty of our task, the panel members are all persuaded that accurate methods to identify and measure discrimination are highly important, and as scholars and researchers, we were committed to carrying out our charge in the best way possible.
* * * * *
A number of outside experts contributed valuable information for this study. Those who wrote commissioned papers for the panel included George Farkas, Pennsylvania State University; Harry Holzer, Georgetown University; Jens Ludwig, Georgetown University; Roslyn Mickelson, University of North Carolina-Charlotte; Robert Nelson and Eric Bennett, Northwestern University; Stephen Ross, University of Connecticut; James Ryan, Yale University; Thomas Smith, University of Chicago, National Opinion Research Center; and John Yinger, Syracuse University. Others testified to the panel on important issues. They included David Harris, University of Michigan; Rebecca Fitch, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education; Richard Foster, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education; Susan Offutt, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Todd Richardson, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; Dan Sutherland, Chief of Staff, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education; Clyde Tucker, Senior Statistician, Bureau of Labor Statistics; Katherine Wallman, Chief Statistician, U.S. Office of Management and Budget; and Matthew Zingraff, North Carolina State University.
The panel also appreciates the useful assistance and insight of many colleagues during its deliberations. They include Ronald Ferguson, Harvard University; Joan First, National Coalition of Advocates for Students; Willis Hawley, University of Maryland; Judith Hellerstein, University of Maryland; John Kain, University of Texas-Dallas; Valerie Lee, University of Michigan; Jeanette Lim, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education; Michael Rebell, Campaign for Fiscal Equality, Inc.; Francine Blau, Cornell University; David Card, University of California-Berkeley; Lindsay Chase-Landsdale, Northwestern University; Celina M. Chatman, University of Michigan; George Galster, Wayne State University; Robert Hauser, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Christopher Jencks, Harvard University; Nancy Krieger, Harvard University; Susan Murphy, University of Michigan; and Christopher Winship, Harvard University.
* * * * *
“Most people’s concept of racial discrimination involves explicit, direct hostility expressed by whites toward members of a disadvantaged racial group. Yet discrimination can include more than just direct behavior (such as the denial of employment or rental opportunities); it can also be subtle and unconscious (such as nonverbal hostility in posture or tone of voice). Furthermore, discrimination against an individual may be based on overall assumptions about members of a disadvantaged racial group that are assumed to apply to that individual (i.e., statistical discrimination or profiling). Discrimination may also occur as the result of institutional procedures rather than individual behaviors.” Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), p. 56, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001
* * * * *
“In 1954, Gordon Allport, an early leader in comprehensive social science analysis of prejudice and discrimination, articulated the sequential steps by which an individual behaves negatively toward members of another racial group: verbal antagonism, avoidance, segregation, physical attack, and extermination (Allport, 1954). Each step enables the next, as people learn by doing. In most cases, people do not get to the later steps without receiving support for their behavior in the earlier ones.” Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), p. 56, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001
“Verbal antagonism includes casual racial slurs and disparaging racial comments, either in or out of the target’s presence. By themselves such comments may not be regarded as serious enough to be unlawful (balanced against concerns about freedom of speech), but they constitute a clear form of hostility. Together with nonverbal expressions of antagonism, they can create a hostile environment in schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods.” Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), p. 56, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001,
citing (Essed, 1997 Feagin, 1991).
Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), pps. 56-65, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001, citing (Essed, 1997; Feagin, 1991).
Verbal and nonverbal hostility are first steps on a continuum of interracial harm-doing. In laboratory experiments (see Chapter 6 for detailed discussion), verbal abuse and nonverbal rejection are reliable indicators of discriminatory effects, in that they disadvantage the targets of such behavior, creating a hostile environment. They also precede and vary with more overtly damaging forms of treatment, such as denial of employment (Dovidio et al., 2002; Fiske, 1998; Talaska et al., 2003). For example, an interviewer’s initial bias on the basis of race will likely be communicated nonverbally to the interviewee by such behaviors as cutting the interview short or sitting so far away from the interviewee as to communicate immediate dislike (Darley and Fazio, 1980; Word et al., 1974). Such nonverbal hostility reliably undermines the performance of otherwise equivalent interviewees. In legal settings, verbal and nonverbal treatment are often presented as evidence of a discriminator’s biased state of mind; they may also constitute unlawful discriminatory behavior when they rise to the level of creating a hostile work environment.
Avoidance entails choosing the comfort of one’s own racial group (the “ingroup” in social psychological terms) over interaction with another racial group (the “outgroup”). In settings of discretionary contact—that is, in which people may choose to associate or not—members of disadvantaged racial groups may be isolated. In social situations, people may self-segregate along racial lines. In work settings, discretionary contact may force out-group members into lower-status occupations (Johnson and Stafford, 1998) or undermine the careers of those excluded from informal networks.
Becker (1971) describes a classic theory about how aversion to interracial contact—referred to as a “taste for discrimination”—can affect wages and labor markets (more complex versions of this model are provided by Black, 1995; Borjas and Bronars, 1989; and Bowlus and Eckstein, 2002). Laboratory experiments have measured avoidance by assessing people’s willingness to volunteer time together with an outgroup individual in a given setting (Talaska et al., 2003). Sociological studies have measured avoidance in discretionary social contact situations by report or observation (Pettigrew, 1998b; Pettigrew and Tropp, 2000). In legal settings, avoidance of casual contact can appear as evidence indicating hostile intent.
Avoidance may appear harmless in any given situation but, when cumulated across situations, can lead to long-term exclusion and segregation. It may be particularly problematic in situations in which social networking matters, such as employment hiring and promotion, educational opportunities, and access to health care. Avoiding another person because of race can be just as damaging as more active and direct abuse.
Segregation occurs when people actively exclude members of a disadvantaged racial group from the allocation of resources and from access to institutions. The most common examples include denial of equal education, housing, employment, and health care on the basis of race. The majority of Americans (about 90 percent in most current surveys; Bobo, 2001) support laws enforcing fair and equal opportunity in these areas. But the remaining 10 percent who do not support civil rights for all racial groups are likely to exhibit intentional, explicit discrimination by any measure. The data indicate that these hardcore discriminators view their own group as threatened by racial outgroups (Duckitt, 2001). They view that threat as both economic, in a zero-sum game, and as value based, in a contest of “traditional” values against nonconformist deviants. Moreover, even the 90 percent who report support for equal opportunity laws show less support when specific remedies are mentioned (see Chapter 8).
Physical attacks on racial outgroups have frequently been perpetrated by proponents of segregation (Green et al., 1999) and are correlated with other overt forms of discrimination (Schneider et al., 2000). Hate crimes are closely linked to the expression of explicit prejudice and result from perceived threats to the ingroup’s economic standing and values (Glaser et al., 2002; Green et al., 1998; for a review of research on hate crimes, see Green et al., 2001).
Extermination or mass killings based on racial or ethnic animus do occur. These are complex phenomena; in addition to the sorts of individual hostility and prejudice described above, they typically encompass histories of institutionalized prejudice and discrimination, difficult life conditions, strong (and prejudiced) leadership, social support for hostile acts, and socialization that accepts explicit discrimination (Allport, 1954; Newman and Erber, 2002; Staub, 1989).
Our report focuses more on the levels of discrimination most often addressed by social scientists. In most cases involving complaints about racial discrimination in the United States, explicit discrimination is expressed through verbal and nonverbal antagonism and through racial avoidance and denial of certain opportunities because of race. Racial segregation is, of course, no longer legally sanctioned in the United States, although instances of de facto segregation continue to occur.
Subtle, Unconscious, Automatic Discrimination
Even as a national consensus has developed that explicit racial hostility is abhorrent, people may still hold prejudicial attitudes, stemming in part from past U.S. history of overt prejudice. Although prejudicial attitudes do not necessarily result in discriminatory behavior with adverse effects, the persistence of such attitudes can result in unconscious and subtle forms of racial discrimination in place of more explicit, direct hostility. Such subtle prejudice is often abetted by differential media portrayals of nonwhites versus whites, as well as de facto segregation in housing, education, and occupations.
The psychological literature on subtle prejudice describes this phenom enon as a set of often unconscious beliefs and associations that affect the attitudes and behaviors of members of the ingroup (e.g., non-Hispanic whites) toward members of the outgroup (e.g., blacks or other disadvantaged racial groups). Members of the ingroup face an internal conflict, resulting from the disconnect between the societal rejection of racist behaviors and the societal persistence of racist attitudes (Dovidio and Gaertner, 1986; Katz and Hass, 1988; McConahay, 1986). People’s intentions may be good, but their racially biased cognitive categories and associations may persist. The result is a modern, subtle form of prejudice that goes underground so as not to conflict with antiracist norms while it continues to shape people’s cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses. Subtle forms of racism are indirect, automatic, ambiguous, and ambivalent. We discuss each of these manifestations of subtle prejudice in turn (Fiske, 1998, 2002) and then examine their implications for discriminatory behavior.
Indirect prejudice leads ingroup members to blame the outgroup—the disadvantaged racial group—for their disadvantage (Hewstone et al., 2002; Pettigrew, 1998a). The blame takes a Catch-22 form: The outgroup members should try harder and not be lazy, but at the same time they should not impose themselves where they are not wanted. Such attitudes on the part of ingroup members are a manifestation of indirect prejudice. Differences between the ingroup and outgroup (linguistic, cultural, religious, sexual) are often exaggerated, so that outgroup members are portrayed as outsiders worthy of avoidance and exclusion. Indirect prejudice can also lead to support for policies that disadvantage nonwhites.
Subtle prejudice can also be unconscious and automatic, as ingroup members unconsciously categorize outgroup members on the basis of race, gender, and age (Fiske, 1998). People’s millisecond reactions to outgroups can include primitive fear and anxiety responses in the brain (Hart et al., 2000; Phelps et al., 2000), negative stereotypic associations (Fazio and Olson, 2003), and discriminatory behavioral impulses (Bargh and Chartrand, 1999). People have been shown to respond to even subliminal exposure to outgroups in these automatic, uncontrollable ways (Dovidio et al., 1997; Greenwald and Banaji, 1995; Greenwald et al., 1998; Kawakami et al., 1998; for a review, see Fazio and Olson, 2003; for a demonstration of this effect, see https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ [accessed December 5, 2003]). However, the social context in which people encounter an outgroup member can shape such instantaneous responses. Outgroup members who are familiar, subordinate, or unique do not elicit the same reactions as those who are unfamiliar, dominant, or undifferentiated (Devine, 2001; Fiske, 2002). Nevertheless, people’s default automatic reactions to outgroup members represent unconscious prejudice that may be expressed nonverbally or lead to racial avoidance, which, in turn, may create a hostile, discrimina tory environment. Such automatic reactions have also been shown to lead to automatic forms of stereotype-confirming behavior (Bargh et al., 1996; Chen and Bargh, 1997).
The main effect of subtle prejudice seems to be to favor the ingroup rather than to directly disadvantage the outgroup; in this sense, such prejudice is ambiguous rather than unambiguous. That is, the prejudice could indicate greater liking for the majority rather than greater disliking for the minority. As a practical matter, in a zero-sum setting, ingroup advantage often results in the same outcome as outgroup disadvantage but not always. Empirically, ingroup members spontaneously reward the ingroup, allocating discretionary resources to their own kind and thereby relatively disadvantaging the outgroup (Brewer and Brown, 1998). People spontaneously view their own ingroups (but not the outgroup) in a positive light, attributing its strengths to the essence of what makes a person part of the ingroup (genes being a major example). The outgroup’s alleged defects are used to justify these behaviors. These ambiguous allocations and attributions constitute another subtle form of discrimination.
According to theories of ambivalent prejudice (e.g., for race, Katz and Hass, 1988; for gender, Glick and Fiske, 1996), the ambivalence of subtle prejudice means that outgroups are not necessarily subjected to uniform antipathy (Fiske et al., 2002). Outgroups may be disrespected but liked in a condescending manner. Versions of the “Uncle Tom” stereotype are a racial example. At other times, outgroups may be respected but disliked. White reactions to black professionals can exemplify this behavior. Some racial outgroups elicit both disrespect and dislike. Poor people, welfare recipients, and homeless people (all erroneously perceived to be black more often than white) frequently elicit an unambivalent and hostile response.
The important point is that reactions need not be entirely negative to foster discrimination. One might, for example, fail to promote someone on the basis of race, perceiving the person to be deferential, cooperative, and nice but essentially incompetent, whereas a comparable ingroup member might receive additional training or support to develop greater competence. Conversely, one might acknowledge an outgroup member’s exceptional competence but fail to see the person as sociable and comfortable—therefore not fitting in, not “one of us”—and fail to promote the person as rapidly on that account.
All manifestations of subtle prejudice—indirect, automatic, ambiguous, and ambivalent—constitute barriers to full equality of treatment. Subtle prejudice is much more difficult to document than more overt forms, and its effects on discriminatory behavior are more difficult to capture. However, “subtle” does not mean trivial or inconsequential; subtle prejudice can result in major adverse effects.
For example, Bargh and colleagues (1996) demonstrated how categori zation by race can activate stereotypes and lead to discriminatory behavior. In their study, the experimenter first showed white participants either black or white young male faces, presented at a subliminal level. The experimenter then either did or did not provoke the participant by requiring that the experiment be started over because of an apparent computer error. Compared with other participants, those who saw the black faces and were also provoked by the experimenter behaved with more hostility as revealed in a videotape of their immediate facial expressions and in their subsequent behavior, as rated by the experimenter.
Generally, an emerging pattern of results from laboratory research (see, e.g., Dovidio et al., 2002) suggests that explicit measures of prejudice (e.g., from responses to attitudinal questionnaires) predict explicit discrimination (verbal behavior), whereas implicit measures of prejudice (e.g., speed of stereotypic associations) predict subtle discrimination (such as nonverbal friendliness). In any event, the implicit measures have been shown to be statistically reliable (Cunningham et al., 2001; Kawakami and Dovidio, 2001).
Some of these laboratory findings have been generalized to the real world—for example, in contrasting subtle and explicit forms of prejudice (Pettigrew, 1998b) and in research on specific phenomena, such as ingroup favoritism (Brewer and Brown, 1998). The discussion of experimental methods in Chapter 6 elaborates on this point.
Statistical Discrimination and Profiling
Another process that may result in adverse discriminatory consequences for members of a disadvantaged racial group is known as statistical discrimination or profiling. In this situation, an individual or firm uses overall beliefs about a group to make decisions about an individual from that group (Arrow, 1973; Coate and Loury, 1993; Lundberg and Startz, 1983; Phelps, 1972). The perceived group characteristics are assumed to apply to the individual. Thus, if an employer believes people with criminal records will make unsatisfactory employees, believes that blacks, on average, are more likely to have criminal records compared with whites, and cannot directly verify an applicant’s criminal history, the employer may judge a black job applicant on the basis of group averages rather than solely on the basis of his or her own qualifications.
When beliefs about a group are based on racial stereotypes resulting from explicit prejudice or on some of the more subtle forms of ingroupversus-outgroup perceptual biases, then discrimination on the basis of such beliefs is indistinguishable from the explicit prejudice discussed above. Statistical discrimination or profiling, properly defined, refers to situations of discrimination on the basis of beliefs that reflect the actual distributions of characteristics of different groups. Even though such discrimination could be viewed as economically rational, it is illegal in such situations as hiring because it uses group characteristics to make decisions about individuals.
Why might employers or other decision makers employ statistical discrimination? There are incentives to statistically discriminate in situations in which information is limited, which is often the case. For example, graduate school applicants provide only a few pages of written information about themselves, job applicants are judged on the basis of a one-page resume or a brief interview, and airport security officers see only external appearance. In such situations, the decision maker must make assessments about a host of unknown factors, such as effort, intelligence, or intentions, based on highly limited observation.
Why is information limited in such cases? The decision maker typically views an individual’s own statements about himself or herself as untrustworthy (e.g., “I will work hard on this job” or “I am not a terrorist”) because they can be made as easily by those for whom they are not true as by those for whom they are true. Instead, decision makers look for signals that cannot easily be faked and are correlated with the attributes a decision maker is seeking. Education is a prime example. If an employer checks a job applicant’s education credentials and finds that he or she has a degree from a top-rated college and a 4.0 grade point average, that individual likely has a proven track record of intellectual ability and effort. It is difficult to “fake” this information (short of outright lying about one’s education credentials) because it really does take effort to accumulate such a record.
Only so much information can be transmitted, however, and many aspects of a person’s record and qualifications are difficult to document even if the individual should be committed to doing so truthfully. Hence, decision makers must regularly make judgments about people based on the things they do know and decide whether to invest in acquiring further information (Lundberg, 1991). In the face of incomplete information, they may factor in knowledge about differences in average group characteristics that relate to the individual characteristics being sought. The result is statistical discrimination: An individual is treated differently because of information associated with his or her racial group membership.
Faced with the possibility of statistical discrimination, members of disadvantaged racial groups may adopt behaviors to signal their differences from group averages. For example, nonwhite business people who want to signal their trustworthiness and belonging to the world of business may dress impeccably in expensive business suits. Nonwhite parents who want their children to get into a first-rate college may signal their middle-class background by sending their children to an expensive private school. An implication of statistical discrimination is that members of a disadvantaged racial group for whom group averages regarding qualifications are lower than white averages may need to become better qualified than non-Hispanic whites in order to succeed (Biernat and Kobrynowicz, 1997). Thus, the practice of statistical discrimination can impose costs on members of the targeted group even when those individuals are not themselves the victims of explicitly discriminatory treatment.
Moreover, statistical discrimination may be self-perpetuating, since today’s outcomes may affect the incentives for tomorrow’s behavior (Coate and Loury, 1993; Loury, 1977; Lundberg and Startz, 1998). If admissions officers at top-ranked colleges believe, on the basis of group averages to date, that certain groups are less likely to succeed and admit few members of those groups as a result, incentives for the next generation to work hard and acquire the skills necessary to gain admittance may be lessened (see Loury, 2002:32–33, for a more extensive discussion of this example). Similarly, if black Americans are barred from top corporate jobs, the incentives for younger black men and women to pursue the educational credentials and career experience that lead to top corporate jobs may be reduced. Thus, statistical discrimination may result in an individual member of the disadvantaged group being treated in a way that does not focus on his or her own capabilities. It can affect both short-term outcomes and long-term behavior if individuals in the disadvantaged group expect such discrimination will occur.
Organizational Processes
The above three types of racial discrimination focus on individual behaviors that lead to adverse outcomes and perpetuate differences in outcomes for members of disadvantaged racial groups. These behaviors are also the focus of much of the current discrimination law. However, they do not constitute a fully adequate description of all forms of racial discrimination. As discussed in Chapter 2, the United States has a long history as a racially biased society. This history has done more than change individual cognitive responses; it has also deeply affected institutional processes. Organizations tend to reflect many of the same biases as the people who operate within them. Organizational rules sometime evolve out of past histories (including past histories of racism) that are not easily reconstructed, and such rules may appear quite neutral on the surface. But if these processes function in a way that leads to differential racial treatment or produces differential racial outcomes, the results can be discriminatory. Such an embedded institutional process—which can occur formally and informally within society—is sometimes referred to as structural discrimination (e.g., Lieberman, 1998; Sidanius and Pratto, 1999). In Chapter 11, we discuss the interactions among these processes that occur within and across domains.
One clear example of this phenomenon occurs in the arena of housing. In the past, overt racism and explicit exclusionary laws promoted residential segregation. Even though these laws have been struck down, the process by which housing is advertised and housing choices are made may continue to perpetuate racial segregation in some instances. Thus, real estate agents may engage in subtle forms of racial steering (i.e., housing seekers being shown units in certain neighborhoods and not in others), believing that they are best serving the interests of both their white and their nonwhite clients and not intending to do racial harm. Likewise, banks and other lending institutions have a variety of apparently neutral rules regarding mortgage approvals that too often result in a higher level of loan refusals for persons in lower-income black neighborhoods than for equivalent white applicants. Research also suggests that ostensibly neutral criteria are often applied selectively. Credit history irregularities that are overlooked as atypical in the case of white mortgage applicants, for example, are often used to disqualify blacks and Latinos (Squires, 1994; Squires and O’Connor, 2001).
Another example of this sort of biased institutional process that has been debated in the courts is the operation of hiring and promotion networks within firms. Many firms hire more through word-of-mouth recommendations from their existing employees than through external advertising (Waldinger and Lichter, 2003). By itself such a practice is racially neutral, but if existing (white) employees recommend their friends and neighbors, new hires will replicate the racial patterns in the firm, systematically excluding nonwhites. Such practices do not necessarily entail intentional discrimination, but they provide a basis for legal action when the outcome is the exclusion of certain groups. Seniority systems that give preference to a long-established group of employees can produce similar racially biased effects through promotion or layoff decisions, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that seniority systems are generally not subject to challenge under Title VII on this basis.1
Institutional processes that result in consistent racial biases in terms of who is included or excluded can be difficult to disentangle. In many cases, the individuals involved in making decisions within these institutions will honestly deny any intent to discriminate. In dealing with such cases in the courts (disparate impact cases; see Chapter 3), weighing the benefits to an organization of a long-established set of procedures against the harm such procedures might induce through their differential racial outcomes is a complex and difficult process. Thus the panel does not wish to condemn any specific organizational process. In most cases, each situation needs to be analyzed with regard to the particular history and reasonable organizational needs of a specific institution. But we do want to emphasize that facially neutral organizational processes may function in ways that can be viewed as discriminatory, particularly if differential racial outcomes are insufficiently justified by the benefits to the organization. We noted above that large and persistent racial differentials, although not direct evidence of discrimination, may provide insight on where problems are likely to exist. In this way, persistent racial differences in access to or outcomes within institutions (e.g., hiring or promotions) can be used to provide information on which processes and which institutions may deserve greater scrutiny.
Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, (2004), pps. 56-65, http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001, citing (Essed, 1997; Feagin, 1991).
According to the American Psychiatric Association,
The diagnostic classification is the list of the mental disorders that are officially part of the DSM system. "Making a DSM diagnosis" consists of selecting those disorders from the classification that best reflect the signs and symptoms that are afflicting the individual being evaluated. Associated with each diagnostic label is a diagnostic code, which is typically used by institutions and agencies for data collection and billing purposes. These diagnostic codes are derived from the coding system used by all health care professionals in the United States, known as the ICD-9-CM.
For each disorder included in the DSM, a set of diagnostic criteria that indicate what symptoms must be present (and for how long) in order to qualify for a diagnosis (called inclusion criteria) as well as those symptoms that must not be present (called exclusion criteria) in order for an individual to qualify for a particular diagnosis. Many users of the DSM find these diagnostic criteria particularly useful because they provide a compact encapsulated description of each disorder. Furthermore, use of diagnostic criteria has been shown to increase diagnostic reliability (i.e., likelihood that different users will assign the same diagnosis). However, it is important to remember that these criteria are meant to be used a guidelines to be informed by clinical judgment and are not meant to be used in a cookbook fashion.
Finally, the third component of the DSM is the descriptive text that accompanies each disorder. The text of DSM-IV systematically describes each disorder under the following headings: "Diagnostic Features"; "Subtypes and/or Specifiers"; "Recording Procedures"; "Associated Features and Disorders"; "Specific Culture, Age, and Gender Features"; "Prevalence"; "Course"; "Familial Pattern"; and "Differential Diagnosis." DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, http://www.psych.org/research/dor/dsm/dsmintro81301.cfm.
“The DSM-IV has been designed for use across settings--inpatient, outpatient, partial hospital, consultation-liaison, clinic, private practice, and primary care, and with community populations and by psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, nurses, occupational and rehabilitation therapists, counselors, and other health and mental health professionals. It is also a necessary tool for collecting and communicating accurate public health statistics.” DSM
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, http://www.psych.org/research/dor/dsm/dsmintro81301.cfm.
If DSM-IV is truly central to the study and treatment of serious mental illness in our society, it follows logically that, with respect to Severe Skin-Color Ideation and Behavior Disorder, public health statistics cannot effectively be collected or communicated with respect to this illness unless and until it is listed in the DSM. DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, http://www.psych.org/research/dor/dsm/dsmintro81301.cfm.
Every other significant institution in our society has engaged the matter of color ideation disorder. Since the advent of the Civil Rights movement, academia has tirelessly compiled study after study demonstrating and quantifying the existence and harmful effects of color ideation and behavior on the thought patterns of perpetrators as well as on the victims and society. Federal, state and local governments, corporations and and educational institutions passing laws, regulations and policies prohibiting injurious color-elicited behaviors that are harmful to individuals, communities and our society. However, these powerful institutions of society have neither the expertise nor the moral authority to investigate or proscribe the ideation, mental processes and feeling states leading to the destructive behaviors that academia seeks to understand and government seeks to proscribe. Without the active engagement of American Psychiatry, society is unable to address the social ill that arguably most bedevils it. For a half centurty, the psychiatric community has sat on the sidelines while the psychological underpinnings of color ideation have remained bedevillingly mysterious. The psychiatric community has simply refused to engage the problem in earnest.
Without an understanding of the psychiatric foundations of color ideation, the best scholarly work of the social sciences and legal interventions by legislatures and the courts have been unable to stem the tide of even intentional discrimination. Goverment and private industry interventions have remained unnecessarily impoverished theoretically and also substantially ineffectual. In spite of billions of dollars spent to eradicate the effects of color ideation since 1954, we by many measures barely ahead of where we started. Meanwhile, in the half century since the US Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board of Education, psychiatry has largely sat on the sidelines, in the apparent belief that unlike such illnesses as “sleep disorder” color ideation and behavior is not sufficiently destructive to individuals or definable or troublesome to merit the concerted attention of American psychiatry.
According to the Tuskeegee Institute, there were some 4700 lynchings in the United States between 1882 and 1951. http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1979/2/79.02.04.x.html “Many were of a more hideous nature—burning at the stake, maiming, dismemberment, castration, and other brutal methods of physical torture. Lynching therefore was a cruel combination of racism and sadism, which was utilized primarily to sustain the caste system in the South. Many white people believed that Negroes could only be controlled by fear. To them, lynching was seen as the most effective means of control.” Senate Apologizes for Past Failures to Outlaw Lynching, http://www.civilrights.org/issues/enforcement/details.cfm?id=32397
The first edition (DSM-I) was published in 1952, and had about 60 different disorders, but made no mention of color-oriented animus among the sixty mental illnesses first identified. In June 2005, the US Senate passed Resolution 39, apologizing for more than 4,700 recorded cases of lynching in America between 1882 and 1963--three-quarters of which were committed against Blacks.
“The mere act of diagnosis has been influenced by the sociopolitical and cultural norms of the times, and the same appears true with the development of the DSM . . . Significant elements of history and culture, as well as biology in it’s relation to the physical environment, are always incorporated into the way in which illness and problems are presented, interpreted, classified, and treated.” “The DSM-III (1980) labeled homosexuality as a personality disorder. However, “this diagnosis was changed to an ego-dystonic disorder in the DSM-III-R (1987), and ultimately dropped altogether in DSM-IV (1994). The life of this disorder has followed the sociopolitical climate regarding homosexuality in the United States.” Ethical Diagnosis: Teaching Strategies for Gender and Cultural Sensitivity, http://www.shsu.edu/~piic/summer2001/HernandezSeem.htmCitations omitted.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids Harassment on the basis of race and/or color violates, including ethnic slurs, racial "jokes," offensive or derogatory comments, or other verbal or physical conduct based on an individual's race/color constitutes unlawful harassment if the conduct creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment or interferes with the individual's work performance. Race/Color Discrimination, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, http://www.eeoc.gov/types/race.html. Considering that this behavior is unlawful, engaging in this behavior might presumeably interfere with the work performance and continued employment of the perpetrator as well.
The layman’s understanding of the condition commonly called “racism” includes an appreciation that fear is a significant component and, in the extreme, can cause sufferers to commit barbarous acts of brutality. Interactions between persons of different skin colors are universally recognized as a source of fear. “Psychosocial stress can certainly trigger mental disorders.” DSM-IV Diagnostic Criterion for Clinical Significance: Does It Help Solve the False Positives Problem? http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/156/12/1856#R15612CHDFEDAE.
Would the impulse toward rigidly enforced segregation based on skin color alone be evidence of an obsessive or compulsive quality, including “recurrent and persistent thoughts, impulses” “at some time during the disturbance, that are inappropriate, intrusive and result in marked anxiety or distress?” Would the definition include “thoughts, impulses, and beliefs that are demonstrably not based in reality but that nonetheless order significant aspects of the person’s behavior, resulting in excessive worries? DSM-IV DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE DISORDER, http://anxiety.psy.ohio-state.edu/ocd1.htm
If “the person attempts to ignore or suppress such thoughts, impulses, or images, or to neutralize them with some other thought or action”, but is unsuccessful, might that be included in the definition?
What if the person engages in self-destructive and “repetitive behaviors” (e.g., repeatedly and illegally uttering racial epithets to co-workers that lead his dismissal or demotion, refusal to work with others of a different color even when this results in loss or lack of increased pay, refusing to provide services and commodities to eligible applicants based on skin color while granting it to unqualified applicants based on their skin color, even when this results in lost sales and/or profits; avoiding all participation in groups and other contact with others based on their color, even when this results in diminished sales and profits or pleasurable social interactions?) What is the person feels anger, fear and/or panic when required to compete or collaborate with another person based on the color of that person?
I purposely avoid using the term “other” because the above definition is applicable regardless of color of the person experiencing the extreme ideation and behaviors and regardless of the color of the person in response to whose skin color a reaction occurs. If the extreme reaction is based solely on color and attendant ideas about color, then the above definition would be applicable for evaluating an individual regardless of the skin colors (s) involved in the interaction.
What if the person reports that his geographical, professional or social movement are abnormally restricted by this ideation and behavior?
What if the above behaviors are accompanied by mental acts regarding others based on their color (e.g., praying for others to be absent or disappear, strategizing to exclude others, silently and repetitively rehearsing statements that would be unlawful and harmful to oneself if spoken out loud, planning to do physical harm to others, planning and conspiring to deprive others of life, liberty or property based on their skin color)? Thus unburdened by historical concepts of the influence of color on ideation and behavior, we can begin to empirically study using double-blind studies and other generally agreed upon scientific methods – the effects of skin color on the perceptions, ideation and behavior of all people of various colors.
What if “the person feels driven to perform in response to an obsession, or according to rules that must be applied rigidly”? And finally, what if “the behaviors or mental acts are aimed at preventing or reducing distress or preventing some dreaded event or situation; however, these behaviors or mental acts either are not connected in a realistic way with what they are designed to neutralize or prevent or are clearly excessive?”
After forty years since the term “racism” came into vogue, we simply have been unable to agree what ideas and behaviors are “racist” and which ones are not. The term “racism” itself at least tacitly accepts the proposition that “races” exist, which is itself an increasingly controversial proposition. What is known is that most people can perceive differences in skin color between themselves and others, and many people continue to believe, even against the weight of the evidence that myriad innate or learned differences exist based on these differences in skin color. While some real differences may exist, history tells us that they and their importance are grossly exaggerated. For example, it was once argued that black people were innately and universally lacking in the intelligence necessary to do attend college and perform professional in professional functions. History and experience proves that this is not universally true. Yet some few people continue to believe that all white people, regardless of their educational and professional attainments are
Meanwhile, we have enacted literally thousands of laws at the local, state and federal level to prevent discrimination based on color, never having accomplished a definition of the peculiar thought and behavioral patters that cause a person to commit these unlawful acts of discrimination.
The fact that the term “racism” has not been adopted by psychiatry is a much a function of its own definitional we simply have not able to agree have not been able to agree what
Prolonged Hate, According to Oregon’s Criminal Code, for example, “harassment” includes intentionally harassing or annoying, subjecting another to offensive physical contact, publicly insulting another with abusive words or gestures in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response. It also harassment when one “Subjects another to alarm by conveying a false report, known by the conveyor to be false, concerning death or serious physical injury to a person, which report reasonably would be expected to cause alarm”; “Subjects another to alarm by conveying a telephonic, electronic or written threat to inflict serious physical injury on that person or to commit a felony involving the person or property of that person or any member of that person’s family, which threat reasonably would be expected to cause alarm”, or knowingly permits another to use a phone for the same prohibited purposes. 166.065 Harassment. http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/166.html.
But would these behaviors, without more, be evidence of an Extreme Color Ideation and Behavior Syndrome? In the context of our present society, the condition might only be considered extreme if, like pedophilia under the DSM-IV, it persisted “over a period of at least six months”, [accompanied by] recurrent, intense, [] arousing fantasies, urges or behaviors.”
Like alcoholism, behaviors listed in the DSM-IV are distinguished in part by the quality of being in some way harmful to the self and/or others, even while they may involve a measure of transient pleasure, satisfaction or even material gain for the person engaging in these behaviors and processes. Arguably, getting fired or sued for repeatedly making remarks on the job that color based and are unrelated do not contribute to performance of the job description would be an extreme but not unusual example of Color Behavior and Aversion Syndrome. Diagnosis of and treatment of this condition before it leads to the worker’s dismissal might well lead to greater success - and less severe distress - for the individual and the organization.
Would merely defining severe color aversion behavior not give moral, if not legal, license to the “sick sufferers” to engage in injurious symptomatic behavior with impunity? To the contrary, even unintentional behavior (like speeding and negligent driving) can be punished under our criminal laws and civil laws. “The insanity defense is based on the principle of Anglo-American law that before an individual can be punished for a wrongful act, he must have appreciated the criminality of his conduct.” http://www.massbar.org/publications/journalists_handbook/index.php?sw=3154&plate=print Although one may be an alcoholic, he is not thereby excused for his behavior when he drives drunk or accidentally kills a pedestrian. It is a settled principle of law that it is sufficient that the perpetrator “appreciate the criminality” for a punishment to be meted out. And even when insanity precludes criminal liability, a perpetrator may be remanded an institution for isolation and treatment.
Determining whether an accused understood that his actions were prohibited is often not terribly difficult. Any attempt to deny or obscure the fact of having committed and or to hides one’s identity is significant indicia of the perpetrator’s appreciation that the acts were prohibited. Therefore, a person who uses a color epithet when referring to a co-worker and then denies against the weight of the evidence having said it could not also use the defense that used the epithet but was “insane”. Any attempt to conceal one’s identity or the fact of one’s acts could lead to a presumption that the perpetrator did appreciate that his conduct was prohibited. For example, the wearing of a hood or a ski mask while committing an act under cover of darkness may well indicate awareness of the “criminality of his conduct”, that his conduct is indeed forbidden and punishable.
The question will then arise whether persons committing prohibited acts because of severe Color Behavior and Aversion Syndrome should be punished or receive treatment. This statement of the matter unnecessarily juxtaposes options that are often complimentary and useful when used in conjunction. When a person who exhibits alcoholic behavior misses work and endangers himself and co-workers, often he is initially notified and warned about his behavior, with the emphasis being on its negative effects for the him and the organization. At this time, because the organization understands that the behavior might be symptomatic of an illness, the worker is encouraged and even ordered to visit an employee assistance center for evaluation and referral.
It is only upon repeated incidents of proscribed behavior that a worker may be punished with dismissal. However, if he shoots his coworkers in an alcoholic rage, he will be dismissed and prosecuted regardless of his alcoholism. If he is indeed suffering from na alcoholic syndrome, he will hopefully receive treatment while he is in prison.
If a worker has severe and disabling EICBS, should that person be eligible for disability benefits? In the case of alcoholism, the US Congress has made a public policy decision to deny disability benefits to those who would not be disabled but for their current use of alcohol or drugs. Likewise with EICBS, if it is the persons engaging in symptomatic abusive behaviors that prevents him from getting and keeping a job, then perhaps a similar decision would be made to deny benefits as a matter of public policy.
In like manner with the diagnosis of Color Behavior Aversion, the appropriate intervention would depend on the severity of the illness and the effects on the individual, the organization and society. The nature of the interventions, like those in the above example, would be determined by one’s supervisor, by one’s organization and by the courts in appropriate cases, and while psychiatry may has certain influence in the matter, this is not a decision made primarily by psychiatrists.
Although the United States has self-help for just about every situation and affliction, we seem to have none to specifically treat the psychological effects of for the children and grandchildren of those who lived in slavery. If living with an alcoholic creates peculiar set of symptoms and behaviors, would not living in bondage and then in enforced racial apartheid have an effect on blacks equally worthy of study and treatment?. et if living with a alcoholic to understand the peculiar in the United States, we have none for the children of slaves.
Yet he argues that, “Embracing our roots and feeling good about who we are is a part of healthy self-esteem. At times, feeling good about ourselves includes feeling superior in relationship to others. Recognition of such prejudicial tendencies in ourselves is essential in overcoming them. Introspection about these tendencies is important for individuals. As psychiatrists, it is imperative.” http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html
According to American historian John Hope Franklin, Ph.D., writing in the foreword to “Black Psychiatrists and American Psychiatry, a 1998 book edited by Jeanne Spurlock, M.D., "The remarkable fact is that in some fields of inquiry, where scientific truth should be the hallmark for judging persons or, indeed, discoveries, some of the most rigid and inhospitable attitudes toward certain human beings working in the same field have been manifested http://www.psych.org/pnews/99-04-02/racism.html
Among the Principles of Medical Ethics of American Medical Association, of which all psychiatrists must be members, we find various relevant portions:
Section 1
A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights.
Section 5
A physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, maintain a commitment to medical education, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation, and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated.
Section 7
A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health. The Principles of Medical Ethics With Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry
2001 Edition (Including November 2003 amendments), http://www.psych.org/psych_pract/ethics/ppaethics.cfm
If the DSM Book is a Product, who is its target audience? When considering modifications to the DSM, there are a variety of classes of people whose interests must be carefully weighed and considered. The DSM is a tool for understanding psychiatric condition; as with any tool, the design must reflect its purpose and the manner in which it is used in practice, with an eye toward improved functionality. The number of copies of the DSM that can be sold is a function of the degree to which the DSM central to the work of professional who evaluate individual’s psychological information as part of their job responsibilities. Therefore, it is reasonable to imagine that any increased functionality will increase the sales and influence of the DSM itself.
In considering the functionality of the DSM, it is essential that the APA consider the psychiatrist and non-psychiatrist “constituents”, the buyers present and future of the DSM, the “stakeholders” who daily will use the DSM in the conduct of their work and therefore have a legitimate and compelling professional interest in the outcome of any revisions. Some tools are useful for measuring phenomena while others are useful in changing the nature of the materials on which the tool is used. The ECEIBD analytical framework and therapeutic implications are useful in both ways. To demonstrate this, the following is a list of such stakeholders to the DSM, analyzing how inclusion of the ECEIBD listing will empower each stakeholder group to more efficiently and effectively achieve its fundamental professional objectives.
Stakeholders in the DSM
Who Should Attend – Stakeholders in Behavioral Health and Wellness http://www.worldcongress.com/events/NW624/who_should_attend.cfm?confCode=NW624
Executive Delegates in Attendance:
Primary:
Employers:
• Corporate Medical Directors, Medical Director: Behavioral Health, Health Promotion, Prevention, Wellness, Director of Wellness
• Nurse Executives
• Vice President, Finance, Employee Benefits
• Benefits Director, Human Resource Director
Providers- Hospitals & Physician Group:
• Chief Executive Officer, Chief Medical Officer, Chief Operating Officer
• Executive Vice President
• Psychiatrists, Clinical Psychologists, Social Workers
• Vice President, Disease Management; Director, Disease Management
• Director of Training, Case Management
• Health & Wellness Director
Health Plans:
• Chief Executive Officer
• Chief Financial Officer
• Medical Director
• Vice President, Disease Management
• Director, Disease Management
Government – Federal, State, Local:
• Behavioral Health Program Director
• Wellness Program Director
• National Institute of Mental Health
• Medicare & Medicaid
• Veterans Administration
• Agency for Health Care Policy & Research
• Centers for Disease Control
• Army, Navy, Airforce
• State Mental Health Departments, Community Mental Health Departments
Academia:
• Professor of Psychiatry, Psychology, Social Work, Wellness
Secondary:
• Pharmaceutical Product Managers, Pharmacy Benefit Managers
• Behavioral Health Companies: President, Chief Executive Officer, Medical Director, Vice President
• Wellness Companies: President, Director
• Consultants
Psychiatrists have an important role in diagnosing and treating extreme color-aroused disorder and also in orienting others who are professionally responsible for interventions in response to extreme color-aroused behavior. Because of the influence of the DSM in the work of other professions, the latter role is as important as the former.
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040626.html
© 2005 Psychiatric Times. All rights reserved.
What Is Organizational and Occupational Psychiatry?
by Ronald Schouten, M.D., J.D.
Psychiatric Times June 2004 Vol. XXI Issue 7
Organizational and occupational psychiatry (OOP) is the subspecialty of psychiatry that focuses on work, its importance in the lives of individuals and work organizations. The importance of work to the mental health of individuals is reflected in the quote attributed to Sigmund Freud: "Love and work are the cornerstones of our humanness." Freud is also purported to have said that the goal of psychotherapy is to be able to "love and work" and that the ability to "love and work" defines mental health. Precise sources for these quotes are difficult to find, but Freud was certainly not alone in this view, with multiple thinkers and researchers sounding the same theme (Hazan and Shaver, 1990).
Organizational and occupational psychiatry represents the extension of psychiatric knowledge and skill to the day-to-day functioning of individuals in the workplace and their organizations, with the goal of helping both function better. To this end, psychiatrists have played an important role both in the treatment of workers and consultation to organizations since the early part of the 20th century. These roles have included service as in-house medical directors to major corporations, retained consultants and providers of employee assistance program (EAP) services (Sperry and McLean, 2003). The level of psychiatric involvement in work-related issues has fluctuated over the years; however, the importance of mental health issues in the workplace has grown steadily.
Recognizing that patients and their employers would benefit from the services of psychiatrists who are knowledgeable about workplace issues, the American Psychiatric Association formed the Committee on Psychiatry/Business Relations in 1998. That committee has given rise to the National Partnership for Workplace Mental Health, among other projects.
Organizational and occupational psychiatry is a field with tremendous growth potential and practice opportunities for those psychiatrists who are open to understanding the business world, interested in functioning outside traditional clinical settings and willing to take on the challenge of building a new area of practice.
What Does OOP Do?
Broadly speaking, OOP can be divided into issues related to the functioning and health of the larger organization (organizational) and issues related to individual work-related mental health concerns (occupational). Yet the distinction is not always clear, as the interface between individual and organizational workplace issues is often significant and complex.
Perhaps more than any other subspecialty of psychiatry, OOP provides an outlet for the diverse training and interests of psychiatrists. The field offers opportunities for those with interests ranging from psychoanalysis to psychopharmacology, from executive coaching to disaster medicine. Organizational and occupational psychiatry services can be as straightforward as a single session Social Security disability evaluation or as complex as a consultation to a large organization experiencing disabling conflicts among leadership. The educational offerings at the most recent meeting of the Academy of Organizational and Occupational Psychiatry (AOOP) reflect the diversity of OOP; AOOP information is available on their Web site at
In many cases, OOP involves consulting to and working as part of a team, with the OOP consultant playing a leading role. The pressure on the consultant can be significant, as important business decisions that may affect an individual's employment or the financial status of a company may turn on the consultant's recommendations. Organizational and occupational psychiatry consultations are often clinical in nature and aimed at improving the functioning of an individual or organization. In some cases, the entire organization is the patient, while in others, it is a single employee. Engagements may be short- or long-term, with the successful consultant commonly re-engaged by the same client for assistance on similar and sometimes unrelated issues.
The best way to explain the work of OOP specialists is to offer some examples of the assignments frequently undertaken by practitioners.
Brief Evaluations
Social Security disability or workers' compensation evaluations. These are single session evaluations (one to two hours) that include record review and follow guidelines established by the Social Security Administration or state administrative agency requirements, respectively. Of the many OOP activities, these evaluations and initial workers' compensation evaluations are most similar to standard psychiatric evaluations (Williams, 2001, 1999). They are an excellent way to become familiar with workplace issues and meet attorneys and others involved in the field. Second-opinion evaluations in both settings are more complex, requiring the review of additional records, administrative decisions and reports.
Disability insurance evaluations. These evaluations may be requested by employers, insurers or attorneys representing individual applicants, insurance companies or employers. They can range from fairly straightforward to more complex assessments, depending upon the issues involved, the stage of the application and whether the matter is headed toward litigation. Medical and personnel record review is involved, as well as direct evaluation with a detailed work history, and interviews with collateral sources, including family members. Insurers generally provide a set of questions to guide the examination and report-writing. As practitioners gain experience and exposure in the field, they tend to be asked to evaluate claims at higher levels of the process (e.g., second opinions of previous evaluations).
Fitness for duty evaluations. These are primarily requested by employers who have concerns about an employee's cognitive abilities or emotional stability as they relate to ability to function or the employee's potential for violence. Like disability evaluations, these can range from fairly simple to highly complex. Fitness for duty evaluations rely even more heavily on interviews with collateral sources familiar with the evaluee and the job functions. In some cases, background investigations, police reports and other nontraditional information sources are utilized. An appreciation of organizational dynamics and an understanding of such concepts as "person-environment fit" increase the quality of these evaluations (Sperry, 1993).
Medium-Term Engagements
Assessment of impaired or disruptive executives and professionals. These evaluations are requested by regulatory agencies, diversion programs, employers, practice groups, or partnerships and attorneys. They can be highly complex, with significant consequences for the evaluee's and the organization's future. In addition to the direct examination, record review and information from collateral sources required for other assessments, these involve significant clinical questions. The requesting party generally wants to know the nature of the problem and whether something can be done about it, and if so, what. The evaluator may be asked for specific recommendations regarding potential referrals to provide the recommended interventions (e.g., finding a therapist to treat the disruptive executive).
Interventions for impaired or disruptive executives and professionals. Organizational and occupational psychiatry practitioners may be called upon to provide direct interventions, either by a third party, the individual or a colleague who has performed the initial assessment. These interventions involve our traditional psychiatric skills, such as psychotherapy and medication management, but must be informed by knowledge of the patient's field, organization and its specific stresses.
Organizational consultations. These consultations are among the more complex activities of OOP specialists. They tend to be requested when one or more members of a work group engage in behavior that is disruptive to the organization or where conflict among individuals and its impact can no longer be ignored. Diagnosis of the problem generally requires extensive interviews with individuals at all levels of the organization and an understanding of both the micro and macro environments of the organization. Solutions are generally found in looking at the system as a whole and how individual behaviors and pathology interact with that system.
Policy and procedure development. Organizational and occupational psychiatry practitioners with expertise in workplace violence, sexual harassment and disaster management are retained to help organizations develop policies and procedures. In addition, they may be retained to help provide training to the organization and its staff.
Long-Term Engagements
In-house consultants. Organizations with an appreciation for the importance of mental health issues may retain an OOP specialist as a consultant or, in some cases, as a full- or part-time employee.
Employee assistance program services. Employee assistance program services have traditionally been the province of alcohol counselors, social workers and psychologists. Psychiatrists are often sought out to provide consultation to EAPs and several psychiatrists have developed and operated successful EAPs.
Threat assessment/crisis management team members. Psychiatrists with expertise in workplace violence and crisis management, especially those who have helped develop disaster plans or workplace violence policies, can be valuable members of organizational threat assessment or crisis management teams on an ongoing basis.
These are just some examples of areas where OOP specialists practice. Some of this work can be, and has been, done by general psychiatrists or other subspecialists. Organizational and occupational psychiatry subspecialists are generally preferred for these assignments, however, because their interest in and familiarity with the world of business adds value. Beyond the standard mental status examination that is used as part of a fitness for duty evaluation, for example, OOP specialists apply their knowledge of the stresses inherent in the evaluee's specific occupation; the status of the industry; conflicting business, personal and legal concerns; organizational dynamics; psychotherapy; psychopharmacology and general medicine. As noted above, few aspects of psychiatry provide such an opportunity to integrate as much of our psychiatric skill sets.
Getting Started
Organizational and occupational psychiatry is not an easy field in which to get started. The business world has traditionally been skeptical of psychiatry and its potential contributions to the workplace. It is unclear whether this is due to the association of psychiatry with severe pathology, a perceived bias against business on the part of psychiatrists, or a combination of these and other factors. Psychiatrists who have been successful in the field have done so by building it as a part of their general or other subspecialty practice. For example, forensic psychiatrists who develop expertise in employment-related forensic matters and relationships with employment attorneys may be called upon to assist with other workplace mental health issues. Psychotherapists who work with executives and professionals may be asked to work with larger groups to assist them with organizational issues. Regardless of the starting point, personal relationships and trust are essential to building a practice in OOP. The party seeking the service, whether it is an insurer, attorney, employer or government agency, must have confidence in the psychiatrist's ability to consider the often-complex individual and organizational issues, to be sensitive to the needs and concerns of the workplace, and to be objective and accurate. Perhaps most importantly, the psychiatrist must be able to express how psychiatric theory applies to the situation at hand, and to do so in plain English. The successful OOP consultant blends into the business environment through language, dress and interest in the field. The psychiatrist who fulfills these qualifications on the first assignment is often asked to provide additional consultation or other services.
One of the dilemmas when offering a new service is deciding what to charge. Organizational and occupational psychiatry services are generally not covered by insurance, although certain types of government-ordered evaluations may have a set hourly rate. There are no hard and fast rules in setting a fee, but there are certain pitfalls to avoid. Organizational and occupational psychiatry consultation services can generally be charged at the psychiatrist's fee for service rate for psychotherapy (assuming that the psychotherapy rate is within the standards of the community). An additional premium can be charged above and beyond that rate, depending upon the complexity of the assignment and the experience level of the consultant. The fee and how it is charged, i.e., flat fee or hourly rate, should be established before the assignment is begun. The consultant should be prepared to negotiate the fee with the client. Common errors, in addition to failing to set the fee in advance, include overcharging, failing to itemize the charges for services provided, poor record-keeping and lack of responsivity to client needs.
Training and Resources
At present, there are no fellowships in OOP. Subspecialty continuing medical education courses are offered, such as the Door County Summer Institute, and isolated OOP-related presentations can be found at the annual meetings of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, APA, and the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. The greatest concentration of OOP courses and practitioners is at the AOOP annual meetings. The AOOP is the subspecialty body dedicated to OOP issues and development, with the largest offering of seminars and training.
Dr. Schouten is director of the law and psychiatry service at Massachusetts General Hospital and associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. He is the immediate past president of the AOOP.
References
Hazan C, Shaver PR (1990), Love and work: an attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59(2):270-280.
Sperry L (1993), Anatomy and physiology of organizations. In: Psychiatric Consultation in the Workplace. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press, pp17-47.
Sperry L, McLean AA (2003), Psychiatry, productivity, and health: a brief history of psychiatry in the workplace. In: Mental Health and Productivity in the Workplace: A Handbook for Organizations and Clinicians, Kahn JP, Langlieb AM, eds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp71-87.
Williams CD (1999), Social security disability evaluations. Available at http://aoop.org/archive-bulletin/1999winter04.shtml. Accessed April 23, 2004.
Williams CD (2001), Worker's compensation IMEs-Part 1. Available at http://aoop.org/archive-bulletin/2001fall04.shtml. Accessed April 23, 2004.
Antiharassment Training: An Ounce of Prevention
Credit Union Magazine, May 2004 by Saul, Karen
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3808/is_200405/ai_n9423612
. . . Employers must remain vigilant against harassment because it takes only one person who engages in it, or one supervisor who fails to respond appropriately to a complaint about it, to generate a lawsuit. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the number of harassment charges rose significantly during the 1990s. They comprised only 3% of complaints during the 1980s, but they surpassed 18% of total charges the EEOC received in 1999. . . .
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3808/is_200405/ai_n9423612
Workplace Employee Assistance Programs (EAP’s) are “worksite-based program[s] designed to assist in the identification and resolution of productivity problems associated with employees impaired by personal concerns, including, but not limited to, health, marital, family, financial, alcohol, drug, legal, emotional, stress, or other personal concerns that may adversely affect employee job performance.” Employee Assistance Programs – Fact Sheet, http://workplace.samhsa.gov/WPResearch/EAP/FactsEAPfinal.html Co-workers, supervisors and the employee themselves often call upon EAP when an employee has emotional difficulties that interfere with his work, for example, when or an employee’s behavior becomes verbally or physically abusive or threatening. “33% of all nonpublic work sites have assistance programs, serving more than 55% of all employees in U.S. work sites with 50 or more employees in 1993. In 1991, a national survey indicated that 45% of full-time employees had access to an EAP provided by their employer.” Employee Assistance Programs – Fact Sheet, http://workplace.samhsa.gov/WPResearch/EAP/FactsEAPfinal.html
According the the US Department of Health and Human Services Employee Assistance Program Fact Sheet, An effective EAP should include:
• Expert consultation for employees and managers;
• Training in helping to resolve behavioral, health, or job performance problems;
• Confidential, appropriate, and timely problem assessment services;
• Referrals for diagnosis, treatment, and other assistance;
• Establishment of referral links between the worksite and community services;
• Follow-up services;
• Education and information designed to prevent alcohol and other drug problems;
• Consultation about environmental change that could prevent or minimize employee problems; and
• Coordinated statements concerning alcohol and other drug use and related sanctions. http://workplace.samhsa.gov/WPResearch/EAP/FactsEAPfinal.html
Employee Assistance Programs are often the first line of contact for persons making complaints of workplace discrimination, and so are in a position to know of workers whose observable behavior may be unlawfully color aroused. “Employee assistance program services have traditionally been the province of alcohol counselors, social workers and psychologists. Psychiatrists are often sought out to provide consultation to EAPs and several psychiatrists have developed and operated successful EAPs.” http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040626.html In cases where employee behavior is disruptive, abusive verbal and/or physical behavior is present and/or the employer has a concern about the employee’s mental stability or dangerousness, a fitness for duty evaluation may be conducted.
Organizational and Occupational Psychiatrists. According to Ronald Schouten, M.D., J.D., Associate Professor at the Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital Departments of Psychiatry,
“Organizational and occupational psychiatry (OOP) is the subspecialty of psychiatry that focuses on work, its importance in the lives of individuals and work organizations. The importance of work to the mental health of individuals is reflected in the quote attributed to Sigmund Freud: "Love and work are the cornerstones of our humanness." Freud is also purported to have said that the goal of psychotherapy is to be able to "love and work" and that the ability to "love and work" defines mental health. Precise sources for these quotes are difficult to find, but Freud was certainly not alone in this view, with multiple thinkers and researchers sounding the same theme (Hazan and Shaver, 1990).”
“Organizational and occupational psychiatry represents the extension of psychiatric knowledge and skill to the day-to-day functioning of individuals in the workplace and their organizations, with the goal of helping both function better. To this end, psychiatrists have played an important role both in the treatment of workers and consultation to organizations since the early part of the 20th century. These roles have included service as in-house medical directors to major corporations, retained consultants and providers of employee assistance program (EAP) services (Sperry and McLean, 2003). The level of psychiatric involvement in work-related issues has fluctuated over the years; however, the importance of mental health issues in the workplace has grown steadily.”
“Recognizing that patients and their employers would benefit from the services of psychiatrists who are knowledgeable about workplace issues, the American Psychiatric Association formed the Committee on Psychiatry/Business Relations in 1998. That committee has given rise to the National Partnership for Workplace Mental Health, among other projects.”
“Organizational and occupational psychiatry is a field with tremendous growth potential and practice opportunities for those psychiatrists who are open to understanding the business world, interested in functioning outside traditional clinical settings and willing to take on the challenge of building a new area of practice.”
Fitness for duty evaluations. “These are primarily requested by employers who have concerns about an employee's cognitive abilities or emotional stability as they relate to ability to function or the employee's potential for violence. Like disability evaluations, these can range from fairly simple to highly complex. Fitness for duty evaluations rely even more heavily on interviews with collateral sources familiar with the evaluee and the job functions. In some cases, background investigations, police reports and other nontraditional information sources are utilized. An appreciation of organizational dynamics and an understanding of such concepts as "person-environment fit" increase the quality of these evaluations (Sperry, 1993).” http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040626.html
Threat assessment/crisis management team members. “Psychiatrists with expertise in workplace violence and crisis management, especially those who have helped develop disaster plans or workplace violence policies, can be valuable members of organizational threat assessment or crisis management teams on an ongoing basis.” http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040626.html
The level of psychiatric involvement in work-related issues has fluctuated over the years; however, the importance of mental health issues in the workplace has grown steadily.
Recognizing that patients and their employers would benefit from the services of psychiatrists who are knowledgeable about workplace issues, the American Psychiatric Association formed the Committee on Psychiatry/Business Relations in 1998. That committee has given rise to the National Partnership for Workplace Mental Health, among other projects.
Organizational and occupational psychiatry is a field with tremendous growth potential and practice opportunities for those psychiatrists who are open to understanding the business world, interested in functioning outside traditional clinical settings and willing to take on the challenge of building a new area of practice.
What Does OOP Do?
Broadly speaking, OOP can be divided into issues related to the functioning and health of the larger organization (organizational) and issues related to individual work-related mental health concerns (occupational). Yet the distinction is not always clear, as the interface between individual and organizational workplace issues is often significant and complex.
Perhaps more than any other subspecialty of psychiatry, OOP provides an outlet for the diverse training and interests of psychiatrists.
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040626.html
Trial Attorneys depend upon psychiatrists to deliver valid scientific opinions. “Psychological testimony is required in more than half the civil trials that unfold each year in the nation's courtrooms, and it is a rare criminal case that doesn't include a psychiatric evaluation during some stage of the proceedings.” Bridging the Divide: Can Forensic Psychiatrists and Lawyers Just Get Along?
by Michael Jonathan Grinfeld, Psychiatric Times August 1999 Vol. XVI Issue 8 http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p990854.html
As clinicians and researchers, psychiatrists want and need for the DSM to be as complete and descriptive as possible, because this allows them identify and successfully treat more of the severe illnesses that they encounter in the daily practice of psychiatry and medicine. Psychiatrists want to respond to the degree possible to the demands of persistent psychiatric illness present in society. Extreme color-aroused violence as well as unlawful discrimination in public accommodations has been identified by the US Congress, state governments and industry as a high-priority social and political and economic phenomenon, because it is so costly in lives and money. Yet this is a phenomenon that resides principally in the minds of those who are extremely color-aroused, those persons whom numerous government and industry programs are presently working to identify and treat.
Every day across America, employers, policemen, teachers and others discover through interviews and personal observation of behavior that individuals are suffering with a debilitating preoccupation with race that clouds their judgment, makes them violent and abusive, and impairs their ability to work productively with others. Of course this group of affected individuals is not all of America, or America would devolve into dysfunctional chaos. However the group is sufficiently large that entire government agencies, courts and departments within industry as well as legal specialties have developed to confront the problem.
However none of these professionals can presently refer these psychiatrically impaired individuals for psychiatric evaluation, even if the individuals are perceived as mentally instable and dangerous, because psychiatry has not developed diagnostic tools for this psychiatric phenomenon and even refuses to admit that any such emotional problem exists. Effectively, by refusing to acknowledge a mental problem that is apparent to so many others, psychiatry closes the door to potential referrals and limits its usefulness to other professionals concerned with a major psychiatric phenomenon.
In the absence of professional guidance from psychiatry, government has turned to advertising professionals, educators, television producers in an effort to modify the behavior of those committing extreme color-aroused acts, but with no broadly agreed upon psychological theory of why these acts are committed, neither government nor private industry has been able to accomplish its goals. Until psychiatrists have diagnostic and treatment tools that enables them to influence the psychological phenomena that Government and industry are so vitally concerned with, psychiatrists cannot realize the professional potential of their role.
Let us consider an analogy: When government determined that auto emissions were a significant health problem, they mandated emissions controls on automobiles. If these controls were to be successful, auto mechanics, whose unique societal role is to fix automobiles, would have to learn to diagnose and adjust cars to prevent excessive emissions. Within a few short years, auto mechanics bought and learned to operate new equipment that dramatically decreased the amount of pollution in our air and water. Of course more visits to mechanics were necessary because they now perform an additional function – environmental protection one car at a time - that is essential to the health and viability of our society.
With the advent of emissions control equipment and diagnostic tools, cars rapidly became much more complex such that only trained mechanics were competent to diagnose and repair the pollution control equipment. Fortunately, automotive mechanics were able to perceive that their own income would increase as they gained a monopoly on the repair of pollution controls, a monopoly dictated by the very complexity of the mechanism being repaired. With respect to car engines, back yard fixes became impractical. We suddenly appreciated the complexity of a good working engine and the experience and training that would be needed to maintain it.
Nothing is more complex than the human mind. Although government enacted antidiscrimination and anti-hate crime legislation that mandates controls emissions of particularly violent and dangerous hate behavior, there currently is no profession with sufficient training and expertise that is willing to assume the diagnostic and repair functions which the laws have made necessary. It is as if government had mandated pollution controls without providing a mechanism for individual auto owner to bring their equipment into compliance.
The world of antidiscrimination is full of compliance officers who try to help industry to understand and implement its government-mandated responsibilities. Who will help individuals to evaluate themselves and implement the mental changes necessary to comply with antidiscrimination and anti-hate laws? What we have is a government mandate that is lacking an essential mechanism a sine qua non- of its successful implementation. Without mechanics, auto emission control would be impossible. The state of anti-discrimination and anti-hate efforts in the United States attests that without technicians for the diagnosis and repair of affected human mental functions in those with extreme conditions, control of extreme color-aroused behavioral emissions will not be successful.
When auto emissions controls are not successful, we perceive a haze of pollution over our cities and fish die in our lakes and streams. To prevent this, an effort must be made one car at a time. When color-aroused emissions controls are unsuccessful in individuals, we have riots, full jails, and an ever-present sense of danger in our cities. The only solution to these societal problems is a person by person assessment of emissions control equipment and an expert remediation of the equipment most found to be in need of repair.
In retrospect government was remiss in not mandating that those who were violated hate emissions laws seek competent remediation that would repair their emissions control equipment. Instead, government focused on fines and prison terms, much akin to passing out fines to auto owners with defective equipment in the absence of any program to repair the emissions defects.
Fortunately, when government imposed auto emissions standards, auto mechanics accepted the responsibility for implementing those standards with respect to individual cars. Psychiatrists, on the other hand, are still at the stage of denying that color-aroused behavioral pollution exists, is a serious problem or can ever be remediated.
Unlike auto mechanics, psychiatrists have not stepped forward and have persistently resisted offering their expertise. The persistent resulting color-aroused pollution is clear for all of the rest of us to see.
But what can psychiatry do about such a persistent and intractable problem? By accepting the responsibility for having a working theory of the dynamics and treatment of color-aroused disorder, psychiatrists dramatically increase their universe of potential clients to include those who are severely impaired professionally and socially (dismissed from employment, in jail or on the way there) due to their morbid preoccupation with color. Of course, psychiatric practice has become increasing specialized and just as all psychiatrists do not specialize in the treatment of alcoholism, not all will want or need to specialize in the treatment of extreme color-aroused disorder. Not all mechanics are specialist in pollution control equipment, and not all psychiatrists will specialize in the installation, diagnosis and repair of equipment for control of color-aroused emissions. Yet there is an immediate demand for this sub-specialty to be developed and those who meet the demand will be immediately rewarded professionally and financially.
The question arises, “if such a rewarding industry with readily available clients is available, why have not professionals offered their services.” While no one knows the answer, the problem is reminiscent of that which faced white restaurant owners in the American south when a huge market of black clients was available to ´purchase lunch, but the lunch counters were only opened to whites. Should they stop discriminating against one class of customer and thereby sell more meals? Or should they dig in their heels and resist this new customer, even when to do so would result in lower sales? Happily for the restaurant owners and for American society generally, the restaurants ultimately chose to serve this new and remunerative class of clients. When will psychiatrists open their doors to this immediately available and readily discernible group of needy clients instead of discriminating against them?
Once the APA adopts a theory of color-aroused disorder and begins to test and implement treatment modalities, an entirely new subspecialty will develop to receive referrals from other professions such as employee assistance officers, personnel managers, law enforcement and criminal justice officials, teachers and other educators, family members, dispute resolution teams and others who regularly come and must make professional decisions about the those found to have committee and to be at risk of committing color-aroused offenses. People who recognize that extreme color-arousal and behaviors impairs their functioning may well begin seek psychiatric help, just as alcoholics, drug addicts and depressed persons are led by their existential difficulties to seek psychiatric help with the goal of reducing their afflictions and realizing their potential.
If psychiatry is unsuccessful in treating these psychiatric phenomena, it will at least join the ranks of other societal institutions in their frustrated problems solving efforts, for it is better to try and fail in one’s responsibilities than to not try at all. However, if psychiatry achieves even modest insights, and develops even a modestly successful program for those most seriously affected, then 0many lives and many millions of dollars may be saved, proving its mettle and its centrality in American society.
Present and Potential Patients are more successfully helped when their severe symptoms are cognizable and treatable within the terms of the DSM. Although it is not known how many present and potential patients are suffering from difficulties meeting the new regulatory demands of anti-discrimination and anti-hate campaigns, it is reasonable to assume that the massive societal changes that oblige persons of different colors to interact with one another, often against their will, are presenting emotional challenges with which individual patients need help. Each new listing in the DSM that correctly diagnoses and offers treatment possibilities for a pressing mental condition facilitates the development of treatment modalities within the psychiatric profession and also the organization of diagnosis and treatment protocols within the society at large. Persons with severe illnesses need for their illnesses to be cognizable within the DSM so that appropriate treatment
will be readily available.
Employers have a direct stake in the mental health of their employees, both because mentally healthy employees are more productive and because employees who behave in a seriously disordered manner may violate laws and make the employee liable for monetary damages and other sanction. It is crucial to employers that those mental disorders –particularly those that most frequently lead to financial liability - be diagnosable and treatable within the terms of the DSM so that protocols and programs can be developed to limit the exposure to financial loss that results from employees mental illnesses.
Law enforcement officers are more effective in their work when the psychiatric problems that present themselves have readily available solutions. When a particular mental illness presents itself regularly in police work, officers want to have a general understanding of that illness so that they can make appropriate referrals in cases where the alternatives may limited to arresting an individual for a criminal infraction or referring him for psychiatric help. For example, if it is determined that a manic depressive committed a theft while in a manic state, then the prosecutor and judge may opt to impose a lesser sentence if they offender will agree to undergo treatment for his manic depression. This is a “win-win” alternative for all parties, since the offender receives treatment and may “get his life together” while he is also less offend again, be arrested, appear in court as a defendant or find himself in prison. If referred for treatment the manic depressive offender may be among the 60% of manic depressives for whom treatment is successful and therefore not appear again as a defendant in a criminal trial.
Likewise, courts could impose lesser penalties on corporations and individuals, where those found liable for
Criminal and Civil Courts work best when the resolve problems in addition to punishing offenses. While punishment successfully deters many behaviors, both among those punished and among those who otherwise might otherwise have engaged in an illegal behavior, there are often alternatives which, when combined with punishment, may better serve to rehabilitate the offender and prevent recidivism. When an offender is found to have a cognizable illness for which treatment is available, then judges, prosecutors and probation officers may, in addition to punishment, promote constructive alternatives whose employment may enhance outcomes for the offender and for society at large.
Criminal Defense Attorneys have a legal and ethical obligation to present all information to prosecutors, judges and juries that might help to explain behavior and result in lesser sentences and more appropriate alternative sentencing. Although only 1% of defenses involve pleas of insanity and fewer still are successful, the mental health of the offender is often relevant in probation, penal and alternative sentencing decisions crucial to outcomes for defendants. Criminal defense lawyers
lead to In an increasingly enlighten society, private industry is taking an increasingly large roll in To the extent that patients present with cluster of emotional symptoms Pragmatic judgments must be made as to which course of action most helps psychiatrists, other users of the DSM, institutions charged with assisting persons who have serious mental illnesses, and the public at large.
Because so many institutions and professionals in our society depend upon the DSM, it is crucial that decisions to list or not list a particular illness must consider the interests of these stakeholders, those who purchase the DSM and rely upon it to conduct their professional responsibilities. Although no illness can be listed simply or principally for the convenience of those outside the psychiatric profession, it is equally important that no prevalent and diagnosable mental illness be overlooked in disregard of those who depend upon the DSM to diagnose the cases presented to them. Because the DSM is a proprietary product of the APA, the APA may decide not to list an extreme illness even though it is diagnosable, treatable and prevalent. However, in making such a decision the APA should consider the interests of those who will purchase the DSM, making every effort to include those diagnosable and treatable mental illnesses which confront purchasers of the DSM in their professional activities.
Recovery from ECEIBD – Intervention and Treatment Methodologies
Among the principles of restorative justice are that “Crime is an offense against human relationships”, “The offender has personal responsibility to victims and to the community for crimes committed”, and “The offender will develop improved competency and understanding as a result of the restorative justice experience”. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/assist/nvaa99/chap4.htm
© 2005 Psychiatric Times. All rights reserved.
Beyond 'Handholding': Supportive Therapy for Patients With BPD and Self-Injurious Behavior
by David J. Hellerstein, M.D., Ron Aviram, Ph.D., and Kim Kotov, Ph.D.
Psychiatric Times July 2004 Vol. XXI Issue 8
“There are numerous models (or perhaps flavors) of supportive therapy, which range from psychodynamic to interpersonal to cognitive-behavioral to atheoretical (Kernberg, 1984; Luborsky, 1984; Novalis et al., 1993; Pinsker, 1997; Rockland, 1989). For our adaptation, we primarily used models defined by Pinsker (Hellerstein et al., 1994; Pinsker, 1997) and Novalis (Novalis et al., 1993). Pinsker's model defined supportive therapy as a treatment that emphasizes building self-esteem, reducing anxiety and enhancing coping mechanisms. Hellerstein's previous work at Beth Israel Medical Center had been involved in the development of this model. By this definition, supportive therapy is conversational in style and commonly uses techniques such as clarification, suggestion, praise, education and examination of the influence on present life of patterns originating in the past. Also, supportive therapy rarely uses techniques such as prolonged silent listening, neutrality, confrontation of resistance or transference interpretations. Wherever possible, therapy-induced anxiety is avoided (Hellerstein et al., 1998, 1994; Pinsker, 1997; Rosenthal et al., 1999).
Clearly this is a different approach from merely "being supportive"--this approach is disciplined, thoughtful and goal-oriented.”
Developing a Model
“The more that we worked on developing our model, the clearer it became that supportive therapy might actually be a good treatment approach for BPD. Borderline personality disorder has been conceptualized as a disorder of affective dysregulation and high impulsivity (Siever and Davis, 1991) and is also characterized by cognitive distortions and intense interpersonal reactivity. Supportive therapy techniques, including those mentioned above, might be helpful in improving affective regulation, decreasing impulsive behavior and gradually correcting cognitive distortions. And the "real" relationship with the supportive-therapy therapist might be very helpful in de-intensifying relationships and might provide a model for improving other relationships in the patient's life. Some aspects of supportive therapy might be particularly beneficial for patients with BPD; for instance, the goal of decreasing (rather than increasing) anxiety in therapy sessions. The supportive-therapy therapist rarely asks patients why they did something; instead, the therapist may make a comment that allows patients to choose whether or not to respond. The question why may be very threatening for people with a fragile sense of self.”
“Beyond this, there is supportive therapy's conversational style, rather than prolonged periods of silence that might provoke dissociation, paranoia or regression. Supportive therapy is conversational, but not merely conversation. The supportive-therapy therapist directs this dialogue toward mutually agreed-upon goals. Another potential advantage: Unlike psychodynamic therapy, supportive therapy minimizes the exploration of transferential feelings--transference is addressed only in situations where the therapy is threatened. This could also be calming and nonthreatening to the patient. The focus of supportive therapy on the present, rather than the past, might be particularly useful for patients with BPD, minimizing regression and identity diffusion. Finally, the fact that supportive therapy allows the patient to set the goals of treatment (in collaboration with the therapist) might be helpful for many individuals with BPD who often feel controlled and manipulated by others.”
Self-Injurious Behavior
What about suicidal and self-injurious behavior? Unlike DBT, which has a strict protocol for dealing with such activities, many supportive-therapy models (Pinsker's, for instance) offer little overt guidance. Obviously, the supportive-therapy therapist wants to prevent patients from injuring themselves, but the main work in supportive therapy occurs when patients are calm. We therefore decided that the general clinical management approaches of the American Psychiatric Association's practice guidelines make sense in such situations (Jacobs et al., 2003; Oldham et al., 2001). These include contracting for safety. Patients have their therapists' beeper numbers and can contact them if acutely suicidal. Patients may call their therapist daily, or more often during times of crisis, and may increase the frequency of visits.
Clearly some valuable supportive therapy work could be done during such crises. For example, "Ms. A" paged her therapist one night, thinking her mood was depressed and suicidal. In speaking with her therapist, Ms. A began to recognize that she was angry at someone, and this helped her connect her feelings to actual events and to no longer feel suicidal.
However, the main goal in supportive therapy is prevention of such suicidal crises, in particular, by helping patients develop more adaptive alternatives. One key in supportive therapy is the word and. Patients may want to kill themselves or may feel compelled to cut or to take an overdose and yet they may have other choices: to call a friend, to go for a walk, to "do nothing" and so on. Suicidal behavior is always one choice and there may be other choices, which patients may not initially be aware of. In supportive therapy terms, the therapist tries to help the patient to improve adaptive skills--that is, to use more positive behaviors, both intrapsychic and interpersonal. The supportive-therapy therapist repeatedly, and in a low-key way, works with patients with BPD to introduce and into their world (see Aviram et al. [in press] for a fuller discussion of these issues).
It became clear early on in our work with these patients that there were other challenges. Harsh self-judgment clearly is common in patients with BPD: a sense of being worthless, an outsider, all bad and so on. Obviously, this may contribute greatly to self-injurious behavior. Therapists use core interventions of supportive therapy to address this issue, continually working to find things that are praiseworthy and adaptive, which may help to deflect such harsh feelings. With an angry, impulsive, desperate patient, finding something that the therapist can honestly praise may be a challenge, but it is essential. Patients with BPD often cannot see or acknowledge their real strengths, which the therapist can repeatedly point out: "It is important for you to be a good parent," "You showed a lot of initiative in dealing with that problem at work." Or even: "As frustrating as it is, it's clear that you're really trying to find better alternatives." Supportive therapy focuses on two areas: building self-esteem (i.e., feeling more positive about oneself) and enhancing psychological functions (i.e., using more adaptive defenses such as suppression or intellectualization, rather than using regression, splitting or projective identification).
One's sense in working with such patients over time is that one is building up from fragments of their personality, trying to reinforce and strengthen these using various supportive therapy techniques and trying to prevent the patient from being overwhelmed by aggressive or fearful reactions. Interventions like reframing, clarification, advice, education and anticipatory guidance are used repeatedly throughout the course of supportive-therapy treatment. Perhaps on a neural level, such interventions may dampen amygdalar hyperactivity and increase higher-level synaptic connections and, eventually, lead to top-down control over what have previously been impulsive limbic and paralimbic-driven behaviors (Siegel, 1999).
Phases of Treatment
In early stages of treatment, much time is spent dealing with suicidality--with self-injurious behavior being a key aspect--and helping patients to develop more adaptive alternatives. Other aspects include dealing with derealization/dissociation, idealization/devaluation, harsh self-evaluation, and anxiety and depression. Later in treatment, therapists focus on helping the patient develop positive aspects of their life-working on relationships, improving work functioning, and establishing and maintaining positive feelings about themselves. In this phase, patients may benefit from naming feelings ("when he speaks to you like that, it sounds like you feel enraged"), from anticipatory guidance ("you dealt with that very well last time, how would you like to address it next time?") and from offering control ("you can choose to walk away at that point, rather than to answer back"). Many patients find their intimate or work relationships improving over time, which gives them increased confidence.
Finally, given that our research study is based on a one-year treatment, there is the issue of termination. In supportive therapy, the therapist works to help the patient not regress around this phase. This includes a realistic discussion about the ending of the therapeutic relationship and the feelings that the patient may have, as well as planning for further treatment. Supportive therapy differs from many other treatment approaches in working to normalize and contain (rather than explore) the feelings around this phase of treatment. Patients are completing a "course" of treatment--they may take many such courses in life (similar to college courses) and the goal is to take something away from the treatment experience that may be useful in later life.
In general, the types of interventions used are ones that are standard with other populations, but we obviously have modified them to deal with individuals who may be volatile, fearful and impulsive. Perhaps most notably, there is the constant challenge of developing (and maintaining) the therapeutic alliance with patients with BPD. With patients who have Cluster C PDs the therapeutic alliance may not involve continual attention, whereas with patients with BPD the supportive-therapy therapist must constantly modulate distance from the patient, trying to not be too close, yet not too far. Otherwise, the patient may decompensate or flee from treatment. Therefore, our current model of supportive therapy is probably more relational than Pinsker's original definition. In its continual work on reframing and dealing with black-and-white thinking, it may have more of a cognitive slant as well.
In conclusion, after three years, our clinical impression is that supportive therapy may be a promising treatment approach for patients with BPD. It appears to be adaptable for many treatment settings and probably is better than having an unfocused, eclectic approach with poorly defined goals and therapeutic interventions. Given findings from a longitudinal study of outcome in BPD (Stone, 1992), the flexible yet disciplined approach of the supportive-therapy therapist may meet the evolving needs of this population on a long-term basis.
© 2005 Psychiatric Times. All rights reserved.
Beyond 'Handholding': Supportive Therapy for Patients With BPD and Self-Injurious Behavior
by David J. Hellerstein, M.D., Ron Aviram, Ph.D., and Kim Kotov, Ph.D.
Psychiatric Times July 2004 Vol. XXI Issue 8
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040758.html
Elements of a Therapy Model
Elements of a Therapy Model
Patterns of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships might be addressed by clarification ("this is the pattern you find yourself in"), by education ("this is common with BPD") and by "striking while the iron is cold" (Pine, 1984)--finding ways to de-intensify personal relationships. Chronic feelings of emptiness, impulsive behavior and inappropriately intense anger could be addressed by various supportive therapy techniques. Emptiness could be addressed by clarification, psychoeducation and naming feelings. Impulsive behavior could be addressed by expanding available choices and discussing issues when the patient was no longer upset. Intense anger might be addressed by offering control.
Introduction
Traditionally, America's systems of criminal and juvenile justice have focused on crimes committed against the state, on seeking justice through what many view as an "adversarial process," and on punishment of the offender. In the United States, victims' involvement in the criminal justice system has emanated from their roles primarily as witnesses rather than as active, welcome participants. While this involvement has changed with the advent of increasing victims' rights and programs, the justice system still tends to be more "offender directed" than "victim centered."
This traditional approach has been challenged by the new paradigm of a more balanced vision. Restorative justice, the guiding philosophical framework for this vision, promotes maximum involvement of the victim, the offender, and the community in the justice process, and presents a clear alternative to sanctions and intervention based on retributive or traditional treatment assumptions (Bazemore and Umbreit 1994, 1). Restorative justice is both a philosophy and an approach that seeks to balance the interests and needs of crime victims, offenders, and the community (Seymour 1997).
Unlike America's framework for criminal justice and juvenile justice, restorative justice is not a system or a network of agencies. Rather, restorative justice is based upon a shared set of values that determines how conflicts can be resolved and how damaged relationships can be repaired or improved. This value-based approach to justice can cause confusion in justice professions that have traditionally been based on structures and agencies. However, the ultimate goal of restorative justice is to infuse its shared values and practical applications into America's traditional approaches to criminal and juvenile justice.
The History of Restorative Justice
In Restorative Justice: An Overview (1998), Tony Marshall described the genesis of the idea of restorative justice:
The first use of the term is generally ascribed to Barnett (1977), referring to certain principles arising out of early experiments in America using mediation between victims and offenders. These principles have been developed further over time, as commentators have thought them through further, and as other innovative practices have been taken into account, but their basic justification is still grounded in practical experience. Innovation in criminal justice has mainly been in response to frustrations that many practitioners have felt with the limitations, as they perceived them, of traditional approaches. In the course of their normal work, these practitioners started to experiment with new ways of dealing with crime problems. Practice developed through experience of "what worked" in terms of impact on offenders, satisfaction of victims, and public acceptability. In particular, it was realized that the needs of victims, offenders, and the community generally were not independent, and that justice agencies had to engage actively with all three in order to make any impact. For instance, public demands for severe punishment, which those working to reform offenders found to be counter-productive, could only be relieved if attention was paid to victims' needs and healing the community, so that offender rehabilitation could only occur in parallel with the satisfaction of other objectives. Similarly, the overloading of courts and other justice agencies was due to the increasing lack of capacity of local communities to manage their indigenous crime problems, so that escalating costs could only be prevented by agencies working in partnership with communities to reconstruct the latter's resources for crime prevention and social control.
Restorative justice is not therefore a single academic theory of crime or justice, but represents, in a more or less eclectic way, the accretion of actual experience working successfully with particular crime problems. Although contributing practice has been extremely varied (including victim support, mediation, conferencing, problem-oriented policing, and both community- and institution-based rehabilitation programs), all these innovations were based on recognition of the need for engagement between two or more of the various parties (victim, offender, community). Coming from very different directions, innovating practitioners found themselves horning in on the same underlying principles of action (personal participation, community involvement, problem-solving, and flexibility). As practice is refined, so is the concept of restorative justice.
In the course of this development, there has been much inspiration from examples of "community justice" still in use (or recently so) among other non-western cultures, particularly among the indigenous populations in such New World countries as North America (Native American sentencing circles) and New Zealand ("Maori justice"). These practices have particularly contributed to the development of "family (or community) group conferencing," and were effective in moving restorative justice ideas away from the excessive individualism of victim/offender mediation practices, providing a new community-oriented focus . . .
Guiding Principles and Values of Restorative Justice
The transition from an adversarial justice process to one that is more restorative requires significant change in both practice and principles. While there are many practical applications of restorative justice, it is important that such practices be based upon a shared set of principles and values. In a 1996 national teleconference on restorative justice sponsored by the National Institute of Corrections, participants offered seven basic principles of restorative justice upon which stakeholders can begin to evaluate existing efforts and create new approaches to justice practices:
• Crime is an offense against human relationships.
• Victims and the community are central to justice processes.
• The first priority of justice processes is to assist victims.
• The second priority is to restore the community, to the degree possible.
• The offender has personal responsibility to victims and to the community for crimes committed.
• The offender will develop improved competency and understanding as a result of the restorative justice experience.
• Stakeholders share responsibilities for restorative justice through partnerships for action (National Institute of Corrections 1997).
FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
In 1997, the Mennonite Central Committee published Fundamental Concepts of Restorative Justice, which focuses on three key theories that form the foundation of both the philosophy and practices of restorative justice.
Crime is fundamentally a violation of people and interpersonal relationships.
• Victims and the community have been harmed and need restoration.
- The primary victims are those most directly affected by the offense but others, such as family members of victims and offenders, witnesses, and members of the affected community, are also victims.
- The relationships affected (and reflected) by crime must be addressed.
• Victims, offenders, and the affected communities are the key stakeholders in justice.
- A restorative justice process maximizes the input and participation of these parties--particularly victims as well as offenders--in the search for restoration, healing, responsibility, and prevention.
- The roles of these parties will vary according to the nature of the offense and the capacities and preferences of the parties.
- The state has circumscribed roles, such as investigating facts, facilitating processes, and ensuring safety, but the state is not a primary victim.
Violations create obligations and liabilities.
• Offenders' obligations are to make things right as much as possible.
- Since the primary obligation is to victims, a restorative justice process empowers victims to effectively participate in defining obligations.
- Offenders are provided opportunities and encouragement to understand the harm they have caused to victims and the community and to develop plans for taking appropriate responsibility.
- Voluntary participation by offenders is maximized; coercion and exclusion are minimized. However, offenders may be encouraged or required to accept their obligations if they do not do so voluntarily.
- Obligations that follow from the harm inflicted by crime should be related to making things right.
- Obligations may be experienced as difficult, even painful, but are not intended as pain, vengeance, or revenge.
- Obligations to victims, such as restitution, take priority over other sanctions and obligations to the state, such as fines.
- Offenders have an obligation to be active participants in addressing their own needs.
• The community's obligations are to victims and to offenders and for the general welfare of its members. The community--
- Has a responsibility to support and help victims of crime to meet their needs.
- Bears a responsibility for the welfare of its members and the social conditions and relationships which promote both crime and community peace.
- Has responsibilities to support efforts to integrate offenders into the community, to be actively involved in the definitions of offender obligations, and to ensure opportunities for offenders to make amends.
Restorative justice seeks to heal and put right the wrongs.
• The needs of victims for information, validation, restitution, testimony, safety, and support are the starting points of justice.
- The safety of victims is an immediate priority.
- The justice process provides a framework that promotes the work of recovery and healing that is ultimately the domain of the individual victim.
- Victims are empowered by maximizing their input and participating in determining needs and outcomes.
- Offenders are involved in repair of the harm insofar as possible.
• The process of justice maximizes opportunities for exchange of information, participation, dialogue, and mutual consent between victim and offender.
- Face-to-face encounters are appropriate in some instances while alternative forms of exchange are more appropriate in others.
- Victims have the principal role in defining and directing the terms and conditions of the exchange.
- Mutual agreement takes precedence over imposed outcomes.
- Opportunities are provided (but not expected) for remorse, forgiveness, and reconciliation.
• Offenders' needs and competencies are addressed.
- Recognizing that offenders themselves have often been harmed, healing and integration of offenders into the community are emphasized.
- Offenders are supported and treated respectfully in the justice process.
- Removal from the community and severe restriction of offenders are limited to the minimum necessary.
- Justice values change above compliant behavior.
• The justice process belongs to the community.
- Community members are actively involved in doing justice.
- The justice process draws from community resources and, in turn, contributes to the building and strengthening of community.
- The justice process attempts to promote changes in the community to prevent similar harms from happening to others.
• Justice is mindful of the outcomes, intended and unintended, and its responses to crime and victimization.
- Justice monitors and encourages follow-through, since healing, recovery, accountability, and change are maximized when agreements are kept.
- Fairness is assured, not by uniformity of outcomes but through provision of necessary support and opportunities to all parties and avoidance of discrimination based on ethnicity, class, and gender.
- Outcomes that are predominately deterrent or incapacitative should be implemented as a last resort and involve the least restrictive intervention while seeking restoration of the parties involved.
- Unintended consequences, such as the co-optation of restorative processes for coercive or punitive ends, undue offender orientation or the expansion of social control, are resisted (Zehr and Mika 1997).
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/assist/nvaa99/chap4.htm
Most Americans would probably deny being white supremacists. It's a label associated with the Ku Klux Klan and their latter-day counterparts, skinheads.
Precious Blood Fr. Clarence Williams thinks most Americans are wrong. Americans fail to recognize that they are white supremacists, he believes, because the attitude is so deeply rooted as to constitute the very backbone of our culture.
Williams, who heads the Office for Black Catholic Ministries for the Detroit archdiocese, has developed a "Recovery from Racism" program to help people, black and white, to examine their own negative racial attitudes and move beyond them. The program, in its fourth year, borrows techniques from 12-step programs. National Catholic Reporter, Jan 18, 2002 by Pamela Schaeffer, http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_11_38/ai_82479244#continue
Weighing the Advantages and Disadvantages of Listing ECEIBD in the DSM
“Racism” and Stigma
Undoubtedly, were “racism” added to the DSM-IV, those so diagnosed would be stigmatized. Even if the term “racist” were given gradation in extremity, the term would discourage self-identification and participation in treatment. The ECEIBD diagnosis need not be stigmatizing, because sufferers can have extreme emotions resulting in perpetrating or resulting from being victimized. Effectively “we’re all in the same boat”. A Martin Luther King, Jr. said, you can not hold someone down in the mud unless you stay there with him. The curse of superiority is the anxiety that comes from being oliged to maintain it at any cost. The all powerful slave master was always in fear that his slaves would revolt and perhaps do him bodily harm. Hundreds of blacks slaves in New York secretly For every person who has maintained a position of superiority,
The Historical Contribution of the American Psychiatric Association
The Culpability of the Mentally Ill
Dr. Borenstein, President of the American Psychiatric Association, has posed the question, paraphrasing now, ‘Should there be no diagnosis of color-aroused disorder because the mere diagnosis of the condition would encourage sufferers to commit crimes in the mistaken belief that a successful insanity defense would ultimately and absolve them of criminal responsibility?’ From the President, President—Prejudice—Racism, Psychiatric News, September 15, 2000, Daniel Borenstein, M.D., http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-09-15/pres9b.html. He concludes that “racism” should not be diagnosed for this reason, among others.
However, when a joint committee of the American Medical Association and the APA In 1985, considered this question in 1985, they ultimately issued a joint “Insanity Defense Position Statement” in which they concluded that:
“As a matter of sound public policy, the criminal justice system must seek to assure a reasonable balance between the public's legitimate interest in protection from potentially violent offenders, and the mentally disordered defendant's entitlement to fair and humane treatment. Thus, both associations agree that mental impairment should exonerate criminal behavior only in a narrow class of cases, and that defendants so exculpated should not suffer punishment or hardship as a result. Insanity Defense
POSITION STATEMENT, Joint Statement of the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association Approved by the Assembly (1985),
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:BdYRCXn3UjMJ:www.psych.org/edu/other_res/lib_archives/archives/198503.pdf+psych.org+insanity+defense&hl=en.
The principal that "idiots and lunatics are not chargeable for their own acts, if committed when under these incapacities” is as old as our nation itself, with roots in English common law. 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries *24-*25, U.S. Supreme Court
FORD v. WAINWRIGHT, 477 U.S. 399 (1986). As, Dr. Borenstein correctly suggests, a policy of not diagnosing mental illnesses at all might well have the effect of thwarting insanity pleas, both justified and unjustified. Nonetheless, the AMA/APA Joint Committee found it considerably more important that diagnosis of mental illnesses leads to “assurance of proper medical and psychiatric treatment to disordered criminal offenders.” As the Joint Committee stated in its report,
“There are many criminal offenders who, whether or not they successfully plead the insanity defense, are simply not receiving adequate psychiatric treatment. Such people are currently in jails, prisons, and mental hospitals for the so-called “criminally insane.” In our view, this deficiency needs to be addressed in a positive fashion. Not only is it inhumane to deny appropriate medical (including psychiatric) care to mentally ill offenders, it is also likely to be counterproductive. While there is no established correlation between mental illness and crime, the persistence of mental illness in a convicted offender can only impede the effective reduction of future criminal behavior by that offender.” Insanity Defense
POSITION STATEMENT, Joint Statement of the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association Approved by the Assembly (1985),
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:BdYRCXn3UjMJ:www.psych.org/edu/other_res/lib_archives/archives/198503.pdf+psych.org+insanity+defense&hl=en.
In fact, the insanity defense is very difficult to use successfully. Insanity is presented as a defense in less than one percent of criminal cases. The crazy world of insanity law, http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-turley11nov11,1,2677000.story “In 80 percent of the cases where a defendant is acquitted on a “not guilty by reason of insanity” plea, the prosecution and defense have agreed on the appropriateness of the plea before the trial.” NMHA Policy Positions: In Support of the Insanity Defense, National Mental Health Association http://www.nmha.org/position/ps18.cfm#2, citing The Insanity Defense, retrieved from APA www.psych.org website on 5/5/03.
Although the lay public views successful insanity pleas as prevalent, (an imagined 37 percent of all felonies), yet they are rare and rarely successful. [Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 7, 199-202 (1979)]. “A 1994 study found that insanity pleas are only offered in about one percent of all cases. Of that minuscule number, only 26 percent of insanity pleas are successful.” Insanity Defense Rattles Skeletons in Murderer's Closet, The Forensic Echo, http://echo.forensicpanel.com/1999/5/1/insanitydefense.html,
citing Silver, Cirinsione, & Steadman, Law and Human Behavior 19,375-388 (1994). Juries generally must decide which defendants will be exculpated by reason of insanity and juries are as skeptical as the above lay poll suggests; most defendants are unable to convince juries. With the odds so heavily stacked against the insanity defense, it seems unlikely that its availability will serve to promote or exculpate ECEIBD crimes. Instead, as the AMA/APA Position Statement states, diagnosing mental illnesses leads, above all, to treatment of those illnesses.
Dr. Borenstein is correct to point out that, “We must not provide the convenient excuse of mental illness for those who are not genuinely ill. In the instances in which an individual has a psychiatric illness, our criminal justice system makes a clear distinction between those whose illness prevents them from knowing right from wrong in contrast to those whose illness has little bearing on their criminal behavior. Should individuals with antisocial personality disorders and no other psychiatric illnesses be excused for their crimes because they are "mentally ill"? Of course not. ”
All agree that the issues raised by the insanity defense are social and moral in nature, although the manner of their resolution has important medical and legal ramifications.” Insanity Defense POSITION STATEMENT, Joint Statement of the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association Approved by the Assembly (1985),
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:BdYRCXn3UjMJ:www.psych.org/edu/other_res/lib_archives/archives/198503.pdf+psych.org+insanity+defense&hl=en.
As the Joint Statement points out, it is psychiatrists themselves who will be called upon to provide expert testimony should the insanity defense be offered. Testimony by Experts, Rule 702, Federal Rules of Evidence, http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm#Rule702.
At such times, “it is necessary that they not stretch their medical opinions beyond legitimate, established scientific and clinical knowledge. When physicians do overreach . . . they bring disrepute on themselves and their profession. Society will not, and in our view should not, tolerate the misuse of medical expertise to serve unrelated legal ends. We should also point out that we believe that most physicians who participate in the legal process do so in a responsible way.” .” Insanity Defense Rattles Skeletons in Murderer's Closet, The Forensic Echo, http://echo.forensicpanel.com/1999/5/1/insanitydefense.html,
citing Silver, Cirinsione, & Steadman, Law and Human Behavior 19,375-388 (1994).
CONCLUSION
In anticipation of the next major revision of the DSM, which is not scheduled to appear until 2010, the APA should immediately develop and disseminate a listing-like tool for psychiatrists and others who currently rely on the DSM-IV, so that this essential tool may be used to measure the prevalence and severity in our society of Severe Color Ideation and Behavior Syndrome, leading to effective prevention, treatments and public policy responses.
To insure that that the listing is empirically based on the wealth of scientific studies researched and written over the last century, and to ensure that this listing will have the broadest possible validity and acceptance, the APA should immediately sponsor a multi-disciplinary committee with the scale and quality of the Committee on National Statistics Panel on Methods for Assessing Discrimination, which was sponsored by National Academies with funding from the Ford Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Education.” Measuring Racial Discrimination, National Academy Press, Preface, (2004), http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091268/html/39.html#p2000a4fb9970039001.
1988 Brian Zebley v Otis R. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services / US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (No. 87-1692)
Whether the Secretary has violated the Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984 by Refusing to promulgate new children's disability listings, and whether children's mental impairment listings are arbitrary and capricious~ based as they are~ on outmoded medical and scientific concepts of disability assessment.
One study showed hate crimes increasing 15.5% on 481 college campuses of five thousand or more students since 1998. Data revealed that in 1997 reported crimes of hate encompassed 155 such acts and in 1998 reported crimes of hate totaled 179 heinous acts. (Chronicle of Higher Education 2000), cited in Psychological barriers associated with matriculation of African American students in predominantly white institutions,
Journal of Instructional Psychology, Sept, 2003 by Debra F. Lett, James V. Wright
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCG/is_3_30/ai_108836887/pg_3
During that lengthy period
various “tests” of insanity have been used at different times and in different federal and state courts. The effect of
these tests on important issues−the manner in which the defense has been administered, the types of offenders who
have (or have not) successfully raised the defense, and the degree to which humane consideration and effective
psychiatric treatment have been afforded to mentally disordered offenders, whether acquitted or not−largely has
remained unanswered. Unfortunately, the available data are, at best, fragmentary and incomplete.
In recent years various states and the federal government have enacted insanity defense reform legislation, creating a
diversity of legal structures for resolving the moral, administrative, and therapeutic quandaries posed by the criminal
justice system's need to accommodate mentally impaired offenders. These reform measures include, among others,
__________
*APA's representatives to the committee were John J. McGrath, M.D. (chairperson); Loren H. Roth, M.D.; and
Thomas Pfaehler, M.D.
Page 2
APA Document Reference No. 85003
Insanity Defense (2 of 2)
The American Psychiatric Association 1400 K Street NW Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone: (888) 357-7924 Fax: (202) 682-6850 Email:
apa@psych.org
the approaches advocated by the AMA and the APA. The testing of these diverse concepts in the “social
laboratories” of the different jurisdictions will produce significant opportunities for generation of the very data that
are conspicuously lacking at present. Thus, both associations recognize that there may well be a need to modify their
positions in future years, in light of experience and critical evaluation. Indeed, it is the firm belief of the
representatives of both the AMA and the APA who met to discuss these matters that further information is likely to
lead to a consensus on whether there should be an insanity defense and, if so, how it should be structured.
This belief is buttressed by the fact that the motivating concerns and basic judgments of both associations in this
area essentially are the same. Both start from the proposition that, as a matter of sound public policy, the criminal
justice system must seek to assure a reasonable balance between the public's legitimate interest in protection from
potentially violent offenders, and the mentally disordered defendant's entitlement to fair and humane treatment.
Thus, both associations agree that mental impairment should exonerate criminal behavior only in a narrow class of
cases, and that defendants so exculpated should not suffer punishment or hardship as a result. Beyond that
paramount concern, there are two other matters directly affected by thc: insanity defense that are of special
importance to the medical profession: 1) assurance of proper medical and psychiatric treatment to disordered
criminal offenders; and 2) establishment of an appropriate role for physicians who testify in legal proceedings.
The first concern has been an active one for both the AMA and the APA. There are many criminal offenders who,
whether or not they successfully plead the insanity defense, are simply not receiving adequate psychiatric treatment.
Such people are currently in jails, prisons, and mental hospitals for the so-called “criminally insane.” In our view,
this deficiency needs to be addressed in a positive fashion. Not only is it inhumane to deny appropriate medical
(including psychiatric) care to mentally ill offenders, it is also likely to be counterproductive. While there is no
established correlation between mental illness and crime, the persistence of mental illness in a convicted offender
can only impede the effective reduction of future criminal behavior by that offender.
There is also a shared concern on the part of the AMA and the APA over the role of medical testimony in the legal
system. While this concern is by no means limited to the use of psychiatric testimony in criminal trials, that use is
nevertheless one of high public visibility. In general, the adversary system does not facilitate lay comprehension of
reasoned medical judgment. To the contrary, the adversary system, by its nature, tends to polarize expressions of
medical opinion and to highlight the differences even when a large degree of agreement is present. Although this
may be an inevitable byproduct of our current legal system, the AMA and the APA continue to believe that
corrective steps are appropriate. It is especially important that the law not seek to mask basic policy decisions in the
guise of medical expertise. To be sure, medical knowledge is often critical to effective policy analysis, but the need
for clear lines as to where medical expertise ends and value judgments begin is essential.
This admonition is equally applicable to physicians who are called upon or choose to testify. While it is perhaps
understandable that some physicians may become caught up in the combat of litigation, it is necessary that they not
stretch their medical opinions beyond legitimate, established scientific and clinical knowledge. When physicians do
overreach, they may make it easier for the side that they support in a case, but they bring disrepute on themselves
and their profession. Society will not, and in our view should not, tolerate the misuse of medical expertise to serve
unrelated legal ends. We should also point out that we bclieve that most physicians who participate in the legal
process do so in a responsible way.
Lockheed Let Racism Brew, EEOC Says
12 Black Workers Shot at Miss. Plant in '03
By Amy Joyce
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 13, 2004; Page E01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45118-2004Jul12?language=printer
Lockheed Martin Corp., the Bethesda-based defense contracting giant, permitted a racially hostile work environment for black employees "to grow in intensity" at its Meridian, Miss., plant until an employee shot 14 workers -- 12 of them black -- there last summer, an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigation has found.
The July 8, 2003, shootings by Lockheed worker Doug Williams left six of the victims dead, four of whom were black. Williams killed himself at the scene.
_____Lockheed Martin Corp_____
• (LMT) Stock Quote and News
• Historical Chart
• Company Description
• Analyst Ratings
_____Post 200 Profile_____
• Lockheed Martin Corp.
_____Lockheed Martin_____
• Stock Quote and News
• Historical Chart
• Company Description
• Analyst Ratings
_____Related Articles_____
• Air Force to Require Lockheed Cost Details (The Washington Post, Apr 14, 2005)
• President Nominates Cheney's Son-in-Law (The Washington Post, Apr 1, 2005)
• Defense Dept. to Supervise Acquisitions for Air Force (The Washington Post, Mar 29, 2005)
• Pakistan's Order Lifts Lockheed F-16 Plant (The Washington Post, Mar 26, 2005)
• More Company News
Free E-mail Newsletters
• TechNews Daily Report
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Finance
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Tech
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
The determination was made in a private letter dated July 6 from the EEOC's Jackson, Miss., office. It was made available by a lawyer for the victims' families, who have filed a civil suit against the company. Lockheed said in a statement that it was not responsible for the shootings, which it called "a senseless tragedy."
The letter, written by EEOC area office Director Benjamin Bradley, said that starting in December 2001, Williams created a racially hostile work environment through "hostile, threatening and demeaning comments" and threats to kill black co-workers. Lockheed's reaction to the threats was inadequate, the letter said, and the racially charged atmosphere grew in intensity until the shootings.
Furthermore, the agency added, Lockheed's "response to this violent and fatal act of hostility toward African American employees has been inadequate in reducing the level of hostility in the workplace. We find that this hostile environment exists as to all African American employees employed at the Meridian, Mississippi, location."
The plant makes aircraft parts.
Following EEOC procedures, Bradley invited Lockheed and the affected families to seek an informal resolution of the matter. If the two sides cannot agree, the case would go to EEOC headquarters in the District, where the five-member commission could vote on whether to sue the company. The EEOC wouldn't comment on the letter yesterday.
In its statement, Lockheed said: "While we disagree with the Jackson EEOC office's determination in these matters, it would be inappropriate for us to comment because of the pending litigation related to the Meridian tragedy."
The statement said the company had been cleared of responsibility by state and federal authorities, including the local sheriff and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and "is confident that the same conclusion will be reached by the court."
"Out of respect for the victims, their families, our employees and the judicial system, we will have no further public comment on the litigation or the reported findings of the Jackson EEOC office," the statement said.
Tyrone Means, a Montgomery, Ala., lawyer representing the family of one of the dead workers, Lynette McCall, said yesterday the EEOC letter is "a significant progressive move for this family."
"Nothing will ever bring these persons back," Means said. "But it validates their claims that the killings were racially motivated and that something could have been done to have prevented these incidents from ever occurring."
Means said workers at the plant had brought Williams's conduct to the company's attention, and Lockheed sent him to anger management classes. Among other things, Williams once wore a Ku Klux Klan hood to work, according to Means, and brought unconcealed weapons into the building the morning of the shooting.
