Sunday, July 31, 2016


7/31/16

I'm unarmed: Don't shoot!

The political conventions have come and gone.  I kinda miss the pageantry and the speeches and the spectacle.  While I'll certainly have lots more to say over the next three months on the Democratic and Republican campaigns, today I want to revisit the shooting of Charles Kinsey.

As you may recall, a North Miami police officer shot Kinsey, a behavior therapist, as he lay unarmed on the ground, trying to protect his charge, a person with autism.  
 
There’s lots to unpack here and plenty to stir outrage  (this is yet another shooting of an unarmed black man, the officer said he was aiming for the patient, and so on), and I've got an essay on the subject in the works, but today I’d like to focus instead on one of the reasons Mr. Kinsey was probably very, very concerned about his charge: Encounters between law enforcement and people with mental disorders can be unpredictable and even disastrous for the parties involved.

Back in the 70s I taught Abnormal Psych for several years to state troopers whose degrees required the course.  The first time I had these guys in my class, they very politely told me that what I was teaching them wouldn’t be really helpful out on the street.  (What they actually said was, “Ma’am, we’re not shrinks.  What you’re teaching us could get us killed.) I could definitely see that, so I found a set of protocols that had just been published by the University of Louisville on the best ways for law enforcement officers to deal with various types of mentally ill people who were acting out.  

Things have changed a lot since then.  There are now well-documented training programs that significantly improve both officer safety and the outcomes for the person in distress.  For example, I have a friend whose husband served as the commandant of his area's police academy. He said that their curriculum contains many hours of training on mental disorders, people with special needs, Alzheimer's, developmental disabilities and so on.  That's a big improvement on my cut and paste response to those students so many years ago.  Anyway, here’s a sample of the kind of training that's available today:



In coordination with a Crisis Intervention Team, outcomes can improve even more, reducing the time it takes to get the officer back on the street and reducing the return calls for the same person.  There’s a lovely report, funded by the MacArthur Foundation and the Justice*Center that speaks directly to this. The authors concluded that:

Law enforcement–based specialized responses can create positive changes for all individuals involved, including the following:

improving officer safety
increasing access to mental health treatment, supports, and services
decreasing the frequency of these individuals’ encounters with the criminal justice system
reducing certain costs incurred by law enforcement agencies

You can find the entire report here:

North Miami Police Department, take notice. Also, look up how the Las Vegas Metro Police Department has successfully reduced shootings of unarmed citizens.  And BTW, get everyone back to the firing range.  Please. 

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

7/27/2016

Narcissists in Politics

Narcissism is a loaded term.  Formally, it’s a personality disorder that results in significant disruption of interpersonal relationships and personal coping skills.  It includes traits like grandiosity (I’m the Greatest; worship me!) and vulnerability (Everyone HAS to like me or I will feel awful.) and lack of remorse for actions that hurt others.




Informally, it’s used to describe people who are all about themselves...







It's  been hard to distinguish some types of narcissists from psychopaths/anti-social personalities, but I’m going to avoid all these problems and define narcissism in a very narrow way, which I am cheerfully stealing from the work of Ashley L. Watts* and her colleagues:

Narcissists are flamboyant and socially dominant people who love to be the center of attention. They can be very good at selling themselves as innovative when they may not be. They may also be overconfident decision makers who put their own needs before the needs of others. 

Narcissists say “yes” to questions like these:
  • I have a natural talent for influencing people.
  • I know that I am good because everybody keeps telling me so.
  • If I ruled the world it would be a better place.
  • I like to be the center of attention.
  • I see myself as a good leader.
  • I always know what I am doing.


Donald J. Trump, I’m looking right at you. 

So Trump is a narcissist. That’s probably not news, right?  A better question would be: is narcissism a good thing or a bad thing in presidents? And the answer is, it’s a mixed blessing.  In general, this kind of narcissism was highly related to things like leadership ability, willingness to take risks, and imagination. It was also related to negative things like impeachment.  Oops, Ms. Lewinsky.

For me, it boils down to this: Do I, personally, as someone trained in psychology, think Trump would make a good president? Absolutely not. He lacks the practiced skills in governance to accomplish his goals but will never be able to see that in himself and to then take advice from others, or otherwise to correct his course. I think he would be a disaster.

For those of you keeping score, here are the most narcissistic presidents, in order:

Lyndon Johnson
Teddy Roosevelt
Andrew Jackson (soooo not a surprise)
Franklin Roosevelt
John Kennedy
Richard Nixon
Bill Clinton


*Watts, Ashley;  Lilienfeld, Scott; Smith, Sarah; Miller, Joshua,;Campbell, W. Keith; Waldman, Irwin; Rubenzer, Steven and Faschingbauer, Thomas. (2013).  The double-edged sword of grandiose narcissism: Implications for successful and unsuccessful leadership among presidents. Psychological Science, 24(12), 2379-2389