Tag Archive - openness

Openness and Authenticity Are Not Enough

July 27, 2011 in Marriage-Family, Ministry-Theology, Therapy-Psychology with 14 Comments

I’m currently reading a really great book, Restoration Therapy: Understanding and Guiding Healing in Marriage and Family Therapy by Terry D. Hargrave and Franz Pfitzer. In fact, I can’t recommend it enough.

But as I was reading last night this section of the book jumped off the page at me. It jumped off the page at me because they finally said what I have been thinking before regarding the role and risk of openness and authenticity, but have been unable to formulate myself.

There is a culture (Millennials, certain church environments, etc.) that highly values openness and authenticity, but it is often just about being those things…rather than what those things can lead to. So for example you hear people say, “This is just who I am…either you accept me or you don’t.” Or “I’m just being real.” Or, “I’m just being honest with you…that’s how God created me.”

We like talking about our flaws and imperfections in an authentic way with others. But the purpose of being authentic is not just about sharing our flaws and imperfections…nor is just about being open in order to be accepted for who we are. Rather, true openness and authenticity reflect back to us ways in which we need to grow as people. But too many of us stop short from allowing that reflection to transform who we are…we seem to just be content frolicking in our flaws and imperfections, demanding that others just accept who we are…because after all we tell ourselves, “Hey, this is just me…this is just who I am…God made me this way.”

But God wants more from us…He wants us to grow and to be transformed not only individually but in our relationships with others.

Glad I came across this passage that really brought some clarity to this issue for me.

“A person is only being human and worthy of respect and admiration when open about flaws and imperfections so he or she can deal with them honestly.

Openness is essential for us to be able to trust in relationships because it allows us to deal constructively with these elements of imperfection. If I know that I am imperfect, am unreliable in the way I perform my responsibilities, or irresponsible toward justice in relationships, then deep down I know that everyone copes with the same problem. When one is open about these flaws, the person is openly acknowledging that areas of deficiency; this makes it much more likely that the person will use the openness as an opportunity to correct shortcomings and to grow. Openness alone about flaws without addressing the shortcoming is unfortunate in relationships because it demands that the other relational partner simply adjust to the shortcoming and live as if a problem cannot be corrected or is actually no problem. While we agree acceptance in relationships is important (Jacobson & Christensen, 1998), we do feel that untrustworthy and unloving behavior in relationships is unacceptable….Openness is not about saying, ‘This is the way I am, and to be in a relationship with me means that you take me as I am.’ Rather, it means, ‘This is what I see in myself, and I believe that I can be better.’ When openness points towards growth, our imperfections and flaws and those of our relational partners actually pull us together more clearly in an intimate bond.” (pp. 27)

If You Use Social Media, Then You Have to Be Willing to Give Up Some Control

July 3, 2009 in Technology-Social Media with 8 Comments

So I wrote this post back in November of 2008, Community Organizer+Grasp of Web 2.0/Social Media=President Elect Obama.

And then I saw this on July 1, 2009.

And then this tweet by Tony Steward on July 2, 2009.

#churchonline political campaigns found leveraging online community wildly effective in finding and making “disciples” = Obama is president.

President Obama and his campaign did leverage social media technology like no other politician ever has…and I think that’s a huge part of their success, and eventual winning of the White House.

But I’m wondering if it will turn on him. And I don’t mean social media itself, but the people wielding it. People tend to come to social media loving the freedom and openness that it provides, along with the ability to empower everyone and to feel like you are giving them a voice. But sometimes eventually that freedom and openness is seen as a liability and threat, and eventually turns to control. I don’t know if this is happening in the Obama administration or not.

But I think it’s a lesson for all of us. When you invite social media to play a large role in your organization, you have to be willing to let go of some of the control as well. This is why I think many churches and leaders are skeptical…because they don’t want to give over control.

What do you think?

Can Community and Openness De-Stigmatize Therapy?

June 26, 2009 in Marriage-Family, Technology-Social Media with 7 Comments

This is Post 2/100 in my 100 posts in 100 days series.

2221841522_54f6359cf1
[image by tboard]


Yesterday I asked the question, Is There a Therapy Stigma? If you haven’t had a chance to answer that question…please take a moment to do so, as I’m interested in your opinion on this important subject.

One of the things that has been on my mind for the last couple of years is the question: Can the stigma be taken out of therapy if there was more openness and transparency in the process, rather than anonymity and secretness?

I have received various feedback on this subject…usually about 50/50. There are many who hold to the more traditional methods of anonymity and secretiveness in the therapy process (note: I’m not talking about client confidentiality here–obviously that is super important and must be upheld). While many, especially those raised in the internet age, are more prone to see the necessity of a more open therapeutic process. Wherever you fall on this question, I think the reality is that many things are changing in the field of therapy…and so it’s something we should be thinking about.

Two months ago I came across an interesting conference that I blogged about, Taking the Stigma Out of Mental Health with the Help of Social Media. I won’t spend this post talking about social media (because I will devote plenty of time to that soon), but I do want to mention some of the questions they were asking at the Mental Health Camp–a Conference about Mental Health and Social Media. The specific interest of the camp was “Erasing Stigma and Exploring Possibilities with Social Media.” And some of the questions they were asking were as follows:

* How can blogging help decrease the stigma of mental health?
* How does someone with a mental illness navigate the waters of anonymity in the transparent world of social media?
* How is the journaling that happens in blogging similar to or different from journaling for healing?
* How can social media participants with mental health issues help each other?

What’s interesting to me is that they were not only asking these questions, but they were getting at the idea that openness in mental health can de-stigmatize it. And more importantly, as we live more and more in an open society, especially with our reliance upon the internet…will therapy head more in that direction?

So I have been pondering various ideas in regards to my practice. And just a few questions come to mind that you might have some thoughts on.

What would it look like to have an office in a more public, highly visible and busy area? Say for example, in an office above retail shopping, or next to a coffee shop. Would you be attracted to that, or is that to open for you?

Do you think therapy should remain more anonymous and secretive?

If you were to see a therapist, would you keep it confidential, or is it something you would share with some people?

Do you think that therapy can be more beneficial if the client has a community of supportive people that are aware of the therapeutic process, and are able to lend support in and out of the office?

Non-Political Observations on Why I Think Many in My Generation and Younger are Voting for Barack Obama: Reason #1

March 3, 2008 in Uncategorized with 11 Comments

First of all, let me say that I never write on politics. I just never have. The topic is obviously very important and interesting, but it just doesn’t interest me and fire me up like some of my friends and family. Second, I don’t consider myself an expert on politics. I watch the news, read a lot, follow the candidates to a degree, but not to the extent that many of you. Third, these are just some observations that I have made and have talked to others about. I’m totally open to you then disagreeing/agreeing, debating me, showing me where I’m wrong/right.

But what I really want to do is just point out a couple of things that I have noticed recently. I wasn’t sure if I was on/off base, until I started talking to others, and they totally agreed. So I realize I’m not alone in these observations then.

Here is what I’m trying to point out basically: I think many of the main reasons that Barack is so popular among people have nothing to do with politics, his policy, his experience, etc. That may be shocking to many of you, but I don’t think it should be. Hence why these are non-political thoughts.

So over the next week I’m just going to point out several reasons why. Nothing extensive. Not lots of research on this. Just some observations. Also, I’m just looking specifically at my generation (I’m 33 yrs. old) and younger generations since I have more experience in working with them and more opportunities to observe them and be in conversation with them.

Therefore, I would be curious of your thoughts, and would appreciate your interaction.

Reason #1: Openness

This is one of the biggest and most important reasons I believe. First, let’s all agree that the political machine and campaigns of all the candidates can spin anything, in anyway that they want. So though many will blame the media’s spin on why candidates appear one way or the other…let’s just admit that Hilary Clinton, John McCain and Barack Obama are all quite adept at the political game. And that what we may see is not the true reality. So let’s all agree there.

Of all the candidates Barack appears to be the most open. And by open I mean lots of things. He appears more transparent in his debates and speeches. More vulnerable. When attacked, he seems to admit to making mistakes. No matter if you agree with him or not, you don’t get the impression that he’s in the back room shredding documents. This sets him apart from the suscpiciousness that the “old guard” and its candidates bring to the table.

His campaign is also seen as a more “open system” He was really one of the first to be all over Facebook with groups and interactive forums, and Facebook is very much an open system, allowing input and feedback by others. His place on Facebook and MySpace, etc, endeared him to a generation that has felt disengaged from politics as a whole.

And have you seen his website? Wow! He just gets it in ways that other candidates don’t get. He and his campaign understand the importance of the web and social networking in making people feel connected and important. His web presence presents a much more open image than the others (I know Clinton and McCain have websites also…but not to the same degree), and that speaks to younger generations in some powerful ways.

I have experienced the power of this openness in our own ministry. Facebook for example (which I will point out in my upcoming chapter in The New Media Frontier in Sept.) is an open, non-hierarchical network that allows input from others without having to go through the traditional “gate keepers”, etc. This is very important, and I think Barack’s savvy online has allowed younger generations to look at politics in a different way, and get involved without having to go through the traditional “old guard” in politics.

Barack’s openness signifies to many a new way of doing politics and allowing those who have felt excluded to be a part of the process, no matter how small or how big the contribution is. Whether or not a forum on Facebook has a great impact is not the point. The point is that people feel empowered, especially at a grassroots level. And that is what online social networking sites are all about. They are about disabling the traditional systems of “closed systems” and “gatekeepers”, and about giving voice to communities of people. It is a collaborative effort that has excited new generations.

And if you are going to capture the younger generations, then you have to understand this view. I work in a church, and so I understand it better from a church perspective….and churches that don’t understand that younger generations are now bypassing the traditional “gatekeepers” and “red tape” of the church, are going to be in a lot of trouble. It’s happening in Church, and it’s happening in politics and it’s going to pervade other areas of life as well.

This generation (my generation and younger) wants transparency to such an extent that it may not comfortable to some generations. With Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Digg, Delicious, Reddit, Google, etc. people’s lives are more of an open book than before, and Barack and his campaign seem to understand this.

Thoughts?