Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary: Politicans and Religion

I was recently asked if I think a presidential candidate should leave his religion at home if elected.

It seems to me that we would not expect a new president to leave behind his or her sense of humor, nor would we presume that (s)he would start liking broccoli and suddenly disdain a lifelong passion for stamp collecting. We are what we are.

However, if (s)he picked up a hitch-hiker on his or her way to the White House, we should not expect him or her to move the rider into the oval office. I think that more than a few politicans seeking national office suddenly become quite religious, especially when campaigning the bible belt. I personally have no objection to this practice, because I, as well as many other voters, have learned to ignore the rhetoric spewed forth in well-rehearsed campaign speeches as idle words which are rarely sincerely spoken. (Oh, that party-line voters would allow themselves to read between the lines!)

If a newly elected president wants us to believe that God is guiding his or her actions, then (s)he'd better have a history to back it up.

A person's personality is pretty much developed by the age of 21 (actually, there are amazingly few changes after the age of 5, unless something very dramatic occurs), but belief systems can and do change with proper motivation. If a person wants me to accept the fact that (s)he now has different beliefs than previously, then I want to know what prompted the change as well as to see a discontinuation of actions that resulted from the old beliefs.

If I vote for a person who has a history of clubbing baby seals but campaigns against the practice, then I should not be surprised if baby seals get clubbed a few months after the election.

Similarly, if a person normally sounds like a tv evanglist but then downplays his or her religion during a presidential race, I would certainly expect God to be asked His opinion at every cabinet meeting after the election.

I therefore must suggest that to ask a candidate to leave his or her religious beliefs (or lack thereof) at home is to ask a frog not to jump.

********************************************************************

Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary:  Children, Santa Claus, and God

Question:

Do you allow your children to believe in Santa Claus and if so. what effect---constructive or destructive--do you think imaninary characters have on children?

Same question regarding God.

Dr. Laipple's Answer

I believe that we should constantly strive to stimulate the imaginations of our children. Without imagination and fantasies there is no creativity, and life without creativity is like pizza without toppings.

There is certainly the risk of a child feeling angry and resentful when (s)he discovers that (s)he has been the victim of a wide-spread conspiracy to perpetuate the ruse that Santa brings toys each Christmas, but the benefits far outweigh that risk.

My children all believed in Santa Claus, and in a way, they still do, because they still believe in the spirit of Christmas, and Santa is a big symbol of that spirit. Whenever they expressed skepticism I advised them that I had it on good authority that when a child stopped believing in Santa , the gifts stopped appearing under the tree. When my older daughters were around 11 and 12, I took them aside and told them that, even though there was not a real Santa coming to our house each year, they should not reveal that fact to their younger siblings, who were still highly energized by the myth and still very much regaling in the excitement of the season. My daughters' reaction was somewhat surprising. They told me with a shocked expression (with a hint of slyness) that I was wrong and that there was a real Santa who visited each year, and that they were not about to risk missing their presents from him. Even now, in their 30's, they still believe, and are still rewarded with filled stockings every Christmas morning.

I do not react in horror when one of my grandchildren or one of my young patients has an imaginary friend or professes to believe in the Easter Bunny or in ghosts, etc. I try to let them know that I am comfortable with their statements as something they truly believe, regardless of the fact that I'm unable to hear or see what they are experiencing, and accept the fact that their imaginations are healthy and productive. Most of the time, this turns out to be a very good approach, because the end result is a creative individual who benefits from the experience. One does need, however, to keep an eye out for signs of a true psychosis which might cause problems on down the line. This is usually evident in an older teenager or adult who has imaginary friends or enemies outside the common public domain.

As far as God is concerned, my stance is that, regardless of whether God or Allah or any Creator or Supreme Being exists and guides our footsteps, the BELIEF is generally a helpful concept, and just as in the case of Santa but even far more so, it should not be challenged. The results of having faith in religion and following the moral tenets of a religious structure, which is helpful to all of society and not just to individuals. are far-reaching and profound. It is obvious to me that societies with strong wholesome religious beliefs are much more peaceful and productive, and its citizens are far happier than those who have no religious system at all.

And we must keep in mind that God might very well be real and that those of us who stop believing might no longer get the "presents under the tree."

I am reminded of an old Bing Crosby song in the movie "Say One for Me", the words of which went something like this: "It's not the glow you feel when snow appears. It's not the Christmas  cards you've sent for years.   But may I suggest the secret of Christmas is not the things you do at Christmastime, but the Christmas things you do all year

through."   

*******************************************************

Dr. Douglas Laipple 

Commentary: Women discounting other women.

Question : I am a professional woman who has concluded that women frequently discount other women in small ways they probably wouldn't do to a man.

For instance: Cancel appointments at the last minute ... or not at all. Show up late without calling. Expecting female friends to baby-sit if or when their regular sitter is not available ... and think you are supposed to show up for every child's birthday party ... or their own ... and etc. into subjective and inconsiderate behavior.

Do you have similar office problems and may I ask when was the last time a female or male friend asked you to baby-sit?

Dr. Laipple's Answer

To answer your last question first, never that I recall, but my memory is worse than that of an Irish Setter.

Do I have similar problems? Definitely ... but I don't see a sexual difference. I think I have just as many male patients cancel or fail to keep appointments as female patients ... and running late seems also to be evenly distributed.

Therefore, perhaps you are correct ... if I were a female doctor women might be more inclined to discount my feelings.

It seems to me that the old adage "A man works from sun to sun, but a woman's work is never done." is probably true. We men are truly lazy cusses, and we seem to have a sense of entitlement which we don't deserve. We feel that, when we get home in the evening, women should continue to take care of us, fixing and serving our food and pampering us.

Therefore, since many women still buy into that belief system, it seems to be perpetuated, and women accept being "dumped on" as a way of life. These women expect other women, professional or not, to accept it as their role to be "on duty" 24 hours a day, therefore not being miffed when someone shows up late or expects them to attend every birthday party, or assist with child care. 

 **************************************************************************************************

Dr. Douglas Laipple 

Commentary:   Veterans and Psychiatrists

Question:

I happen to know that you are an Army Vietnam veteran and that you treat many veterans. i have had two family members and some friends killed in action, and I oppose war. How can you veterans live with yourselves knowing what grief you have caused? Is that problem why so many veterans need psychiatrists? 

Dr. Laipple's Answer:

You must keep in mind that the person who hates war the most is the soldier. I assure you there is no pleasure being in a war zone, having to kill or be killed. So to chastise a soldier for fighting is to kill the messenger for the message.

However, to the spurious question, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?", the answer is that our country would fall rapidly to the enemy, and we would all be under the control of a new regime with loss of democracy, loss of personal freedom, and certainly loss of life, with ethnic cleansing creating the worst bloodbath anyone can imagine.

That is why our country sends soldiers into battle ... to protect our way of life. People can question whether a certain battle, or even a certain war, is in fact necessary, but what if they are wrong ... and it is in fact necessary? There may not be a chance to reflect on the decision.

Getting back to the original question, the soldier does not derive any pleasure in fighting, but (s)he derives a great deal of satisfaction in knowing that his or her efforts may be saving our freedoms and keeping the people safe at home. If the lives of my family were threatened by an intruder, and I could stop him or her with a weapon (after all dialogue and pleas had failed), I would reluctantly use the weapon. Afterwards, I would be emotionally scarred by that trauma, and I would question what I could or should have done to keep the intruder out in the first place or wonder what I could have done or said which would have made my use of the weapon unnecessary, and I may have flashbacks to that horrifying moment when I pulled the trigger in fear and anger.

Such is the plight of the veterans and one of the reasons why they need psychiatric help.

There is also the lingering question of  "Why did I survive when my friend, Chris, and others died?", as well as problems created by long separations from family and the difficulties of helping children know why daddy or mommy has not been there for them.

A veteran is similar to a senator who has been elected by his or her constituents. When it comes time to vote, (s)he needs to put aside his or her own personal opinions and vote the way the constituents want their senator to vote. A veteran feels an overwhelming, sometimes burdensome, sense of duty that (s)he has been elected by God or fate to live his or her life, not only for himself or herself, but also for all of the comrades who have given theirs.

 Every day, but especially this Veterans Day, you should thank veterans for their unselfish service. They are the wind beneath our country's wings.
 

 **************************************************************************************************

Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary: Child abuse.

Question: If you know child abuse of any nature is going on in the home of one of your patients are you required to report it, and do you think the silent parent who is aware of the abuse and does nothing is a guilty as the abuser?

Dr. Laipple's Answer:

All mental health workers, social workers, etc. (other than possibly clergymen) are required to report child abuse if we become aware of it. I believe that is a very good law and one to which I strictly adhere (not that I break other laws whenever I feel like it).We must always remember that children are essentially helpless and need their families and the rest of  society to protect them. If the family fails to do so (or, even worse, causes harm to the child), then the rest of society must intervene.

I therefore feel that any other adult family member should have just as much responsibility to report child abuse as does a mental health worker. To say that they are JUST as guilty is a bit of a stretch, but they certainly are perpetuating the abuse, which would be equivalent to aiding and abetting a criminal.

I might also answer an unasked question, and that is, "Do you feel that geriatric abuse should fall under the same reporting rules?" My answer to that question would also be "Yes", assuming the aged person is unable to protect himself/herself. I think that society in general grossly  underestimates the amount of geriatric abuse which takes place in the world.

***********************************************************************

 Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary: Maiden Name vs Husband's Name?

Question:

When over half of American marriages now end in divorce, and when it is not uncommon for individuals to be divorced and remarried three or more times, how do you feel about a woman giving up her maiden name when she gets married the first time?

Let's say she has two children by her first husband, one by a second husband, divorces husband number two, then petitions the court to get her maiden back. Where does that leave her children?

And what would be so horribly wrong with a woman keeping her maiden name, all the female children use her last name, and all the male children use their father's last name?

Isn't giving up her maiden name just one more way a society discounts women?

Dr. Laipple's Answer

I've never been a strong advocate of a woman having to take a man's name when they marry. I think it should be a matter of choice. My personal preferences would be:

A. Both should generally adopt the same last name, be it his, hers, or a new one. This makes everything easier when doing banking, business, et cetera, but it also makes it easier when children come along. There is no confusion as to what the child's last name should be, and it will give the child (and even the parents) more of a sense of FAMILY and PERMANENCY.

B. Keep it simple, without hyphens. It makes it so much easier to have a short and simple name to give other people without having to spell it out for them every time. Your children will also appreciate it being simple and easy to pronounce. This is particularly true if you give the child a first name which has an unusual spelling or a difficult pronunciation.

C. If you are choosing between the husband taking the wife's name or vice versa, then (unless her last name is more complicated than his is simple) it makes more sense to me that HE should take HER name. All of this tradition about wanting a male child to continue the family name and to provide a well chronicled lineage and blood line is pure poppycock. If we assign the female name to the marriage, then we will KNOW that the family name and bloodline is being continued because we know that the children are HERS. If we assign the male name to the marriage, only she can be 100% sure who the true father is, and the bloodline may ba a falsehood for generations to come.

********************************************************

Dr. Douglas Laipple
 

Commentary: The characteristics of faith. 

Question:

Do you have an easier time with patients who go to church and appear to have a strong God-faith as opposed to those who don't?

Dr. Laipple's Answer

Yes. In general it is easier to counsel and treat patients with strong religious convictions because they have already decided, before they walk in my door, that I will respect their religion and that God (in whatever form they have placed their belief) will be working through me to ease their emotional pain.

If they had not reached that decision, they would not have kept their appointment.

Some of them may have previously been skeptical that medications could be helpful, and they may have tried prayer, pastoral counseling, confession, self-help, and psychotherapy alone, but they have finally resolved themselves to the fact that their God has answered their prayers by guiding them to the office of a person to whom (S)he has given the ability to diagnose and treat mental and neurological disorders. Persons with no or merely superficial religious beliefs will come to the office with the skepticism unresolved and will have to be convinced that there are medical interventions which can be helpful.

One of my beliefs, which i share with many patients, is that, if a person has a lot of side effects to a medication, it may very well be God's way of telling us that I have chosen the wrong medicine and that it should be discontinued.

My biggest difficulty is not with patients who feel that God knows more than I do, for neither they nor I have any reservations about that fact.

The biggest difficulty arises when they put their trust in Dr. Oprah Winfrey, Dr. Tom Cruise, Dr. Aunt Millie or Dr.-Chris-next-door-who's-cousin's-wife-read-an-article-about-

depression, and my only recourse is to point out that I've had over 9 years of formal medical education and over 30 years of clinical experience, leaving the patient to choose who's advice they should follow.

***********************************************************************

 Dr. Douglas Laipple

Question:

What credence do you give the science---if it is a science---of body language? Do you use it yourself and if so, can you share what you "see" on your first session with a patient?
We're talking subtleties, here, not the obvious "language" of some maniac waving a gun and screaming his head off.

Dr. Laipple's Answer

The use of body language is definitely a science ... and it is a USEFUL science.
In fact, we all use body language every day in our interactions with other people.  Those of you who use the internet a lot to communicate with others know this to be true because you are frequently frustrated that you can't easily make an emotional point with a gesture, a foot stomp, a hand wave, or a shoulder shrug as you would do in person. Emoticons help a little, but are sometimes very inadequate.
EVERY good poker player watches other players' body language and tries to hide his own.  Conversely, bad poker players usually are oblivious to body language.
Blind people will admit that their limited ability to see a person's body language is one of the most frustrating aspects of their blindness.
All psychiatrists use body language with every visit with every patient, although we do so unconsciously for the most part.  After a visit, when we are making notes (written or just in the backs of our minds), we include our impression or "Gestalt" about a patient, which includes not only WHAT the person said but HOW he said it, and the body language he used WHEN he said it.  If his wife, father, etc are in the room, we are also watching for their body language while the visit is going on.
The first visit is a little different in that there is no pattern with that particular patient, making judgements about twitches, etc. a bit more unreliable.  However, with each subsequent visit, patterns begin to emerge such that when Mrs. Smith drums her fingers I know she's lying through her teeth.  Of course, if the patient is an attorney, I know he's lying from the start.
Although we usually don't verbalize our observations of body language, I will give one example from a first interview with a patient where I learned something by indirectly commenting on the body language.
The patient was a middle aged man who, when he sat down in the chair opposite me, wrapped his arms around the arms of the chair and curled his feet around the legs of the chair.  After a bit, I asked him about medical problems and, when he said nothing about neurological illness, I asked if anyone had ever told him he might have Huntington's Chorea, knowing that people with that disease of uncontrollable muscle twitches and involuntary movements of extremities frequently wrap their limbs around chairs to keep from drawing stares.
He laughed and said, "I've been asked that before.  You're wondering about my hands and feet ... no, I do this because my Obsessive Compulsive counting is so bad that, if I didn't keep my hands and feet occupied, I would be tapping my foot 3 times repeatedly or pointing at objects throughout the room, putting them into groups of three."  As it was, I had already noticed that he had a habit of bobbing his head, which I had tentatively attributed to a palsy or a tic, not yet realizing he was doing it 3 quick times in succession, as he organized everything in the room into groups of three. 
The study of body language helps people perfect a process which they already do constantly.

Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary: Muslim men 

Question:

As a physician, can you explain the mind-sets of radical Muslim men who obviously fear and despise "free women"? And do you think their use of violence to solve problems is rooted in that fear?

 Dr. Laipple's Answer

I know that disclaimers are generally a deterent for persons to read what follows and yet, in all due conscience, I must preface my remarks with the note that, although I am an expert in the field of human behavior, I do not profess to have experience in the area of religion, especially the Islamic faith.

Radical Muslims are like any other group of people in that they cannot really be considered a cohesive group of people. In other words, the group is still made up of persons with their own identities, belief systems, and personalities which may vary considerably from many of the other persons in that group. What makes them a "group" is that they profess to believe and practice the same written set of beliefs as everyone else in the group, even though they may not TRULY have as firm a conviction as the next guy. (And, if you have trouble with this, just think about a group or church to which you belong...and consider the varying levels of committment therein.)

My answer to the first question must therefore include my suspicion that quite a few Muslims become a lot more radical once they leave their front door and link up with other guys.

That is when they rekindle their chronic mass hysteria on a daily basis, reminding each other that women should stay in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant (Oops. I'm sorry. I lapsed into the Western equivalent.) and that children , especially if they are handicapped with ovaries, should be seen and not heard.

That is what they are taught from birth to believe, and it is just as hard for them to accept otherwise as it would be for us to accept someone's notion that baseball was invented in Sweden 100 years before Abner Doubleday was born.

I believe they "fear and despise" free women because:    

     1. It goes against their religious beliefs, and

     2. They are afraid females in their society will covet the freedoms and benefits that women in civilized countries have and will revolt which, in essence, will undermine one of the foundations of the Islamic faith.

I do not think their use of violence to solve problems is rooted in that fear. It does, however, provide one more motivational factor to justify a Jihad.If they can prove to the world that their religion is the strongest---by destroying countries of other faiths---then they can convince their women that Allah is supporting all of the tenets of the Islamic faith . There are, however, a lot of other tenets which they feel are equally or even more important.Basically their use of violence to solve problems appears to  be due to a small but dangerous number of Islamic extremists believing, similar to Judeo-Christians, that eternal life can only be achieved by believing in that religion, but extending that belief to the extreme that the only good Judeo-Christian is a dead Judeo-Christian. (That sounds vaguely familiar to me.)

As to your second question, do I personally find anything of a spiritual nature in any religion that treats women like second-class citizens in God's world?My answer would be, yes, there are a lot of valuable spiritual nuggets in every religion despite the fact that no religion is perfect. They all have Achilles heels, including the fact that almost all of them  (as far as I can tell) exhibit some form of bias against women.

***********************************************************************

Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary: Puppets of genetics?   

Question:

Are we mere puppets of our genetics ...DNA...etc.? And in your initial sessions with an individual do you determine quite quickly their mental potential or limitations?

Dr. Laipple's Answer

 When a train leaves San Diego it will come a point where the track splits and diverges in two different directions. If the switch is off, the train will proceed toward Los Angeles, but if it is on, the train will head toward Phoenix.

Each of us has a million genetic switches, and the direction each switch is turned has a great deal to do with our size, our appearance, our personalities, our health, etc.

But it's not just the direction of the switch that matters. I might have been born in a line of people who don't have a particular switch. Pursuing the same example , my train might not have the option of switching to still get to Phoenix. Oh, sure...if the train goes far enough, it might find enough switches to still get to Phoenix, but it will take longer than your train which has a direct track.

So too it is with illness. I might well have a genetic switch (predisposition) for OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), and it may run rampant through my family, but, if certain stressors don't happen to flip my switch, I won't develop the manifestations of OCD. My friend Fred, however, may not have the OCD switch present at all and his family might be the least OCD people you've ever met, but, if he is subjected to an overwhelming number of certain stressors, his train might take the circuitous route, and he may still reach OCD after all.

So ...my thought is no, we are not mere puppets of our genetics, although they certainly have a tremendous influence on every aspect of our lives.

Dr. Douglas Laipple

Commentary: Mental potential vs limitations

Question:

In your initial sessions with an individual do you determine quite quickly their mental potential or limitations?

That is a sore subject for me, since I feel it is perhaps my biggest failing as a psychiatrist. I believe that MOST psychiatrists are able to quickly determine a patient's mental potential or limitations. But, alas and alack, I think that I missed that genetic switch, for I have been burned many times by over or under estimating a patient's mental capacity. My saving grace is that I have recognized this shortcoming and learned to withhold judgement until I can learn a little more about the patient.

*******************************************************

You may contact  Dr. Laipple at  

angels@treefamilyfoundation.com

The Tree Family Foundation reserves the right to screen all letters and is in no way responsible for the opinions expressed by  our columnists.