What About the 21-Year-Old Drinking Age?
Taking a formal position on whether the current minimum drinking age should be changed is one that at first glance seems easy to defend. To make such a decision, however, and do so based on fact rather than emotion--something we Americans are not prone to do, by the way...we want what we want and we want it right now...is clearly an act that should result from a formal vetting process; there are pros and cons on both sides of the issue that need to be discussed and then considered.
That said, I believe that having a frank and thoughtful discussion on the subject is a good thing. This can be argued in light of the fact that no one under the age of 25 was alive the last time this topic was aired publicly and completely. As a result, many under the age of 21 now see the 21-year-old drinking law as “arbitrary and capricious” and resulting from the efforts of old timers who are looking to cramp the style of contemporary young people.
There are many groups qualified to weigh in on the debate, although I am not prepared at this time to do so on the “pro change side” or the “maintain 21 side” of the debate. Think about what has changed as regards what we know about alcohol and those who consume it today as opposed to the last time it was publically debated in 1984. Although it is true that the then Reagan administration held highway safety dollars hostage until individual states signed on to the 21-minimum drinking age law, the issue was publicly debated and the latest science on both sides was on the radar screen of the popular media. Whether the age remains the same, is lowered or—and this is not proffered facetiously—raised to 25 (hey...car rental companies have discriminated against under 25 drivers for years) based on the new brain research, I, for one, think that INCASE can champion this discussion.
So much has been learned about alcohol, its affects on the body, how it affects the behavior of those who consume it, risk facts for alcohol use disorders, not to mention the development of the human brain. Suffice it to say that at the end of the day, increased access to more (rather than less) evidenced based information vetted via the scientific method regarding this topic is a good thing.
What do you think?
Robert
19 February 2010
04 February 2010
Can we train students to be empathetic?
Although it is true that there are certain skills associated with being empathetic and I can teach students to display (feign?) these, but is this conveying empathy? Is the “genuineness” we seek something that can be instilled or rather are we relegated to simply cultivate that which is present when a student arrives for training? I tend to lean towards the latter. As I question my ability to teach empathy, I have resigned myself to teach about it and include experiential exercises and assignments that tend to hone existing skills in an effort to expose the “empathy” within, like the gemologist cleaves the raw crystal to reveal the gemstone within.
Here are 2 sample exercises I use to accomplish this:
1. Attend open 12-step meetings…and not just one, but a minimum of 2 and preferably a number. By hearing recovering people share their stories…their experience, strength, and hope…students are able to understand addiction and recovery and see the “person who may have the diagnosis” as opposed to just the diagnosis that needs to be addressed when working with a person. A byproduct of this exercise is the opportunity to talk about “listening with the heart” rather than just “hearing with the ears.” And what is empathy if not understanding those with whom we work on a more affective level?
2. Change a personal behavior…in this exercise, students are instructed to “add, eliminate, and significantly change” a personal behavior and do start this within the first week of class and report on the experience at the end of the course. Students are told they can, “add 20-minutes of exercise 3X/wk, eliminate eating chocolate chip cookies, or shower in the evening rather than the morning”…in short “anything” is acceptable as a personal behavior change. The must keep a journal, they must report in the journal regularly, and they must write a detailed personal account of their experience that chronicles the entire experience.
a. This is often done in concert with classes/readings related to stages of readiness to change
b. Students almost always discover early on that what they thought was going to be an “easy ‘A’ grade” is at least a challenge if not a “pain in the a__,” but this then becomes a wonderful opportunity to discuss how change is almost never accomplished by changing only one thing…to add 20-minutes of exercise 3X/wk, e.g., I have to “dress to exercise,” go to the gym, shower after, schedule my day to “find the time, etc. NOTE: As students become more familiar with the stages of readiness to change, they often realize they are at an “action stage” of readiness regarding one aspect of the change challenge but at a contemplative if not pre-contemplative stage at other associated changes…this can do wonders as regards understanding, nay, empathizing with how difficult change can be for a person in counseling
c. Students learn to appreciate how difficult change can be to make, and if this challenging when they want to make the change in something “as simple/easy” as exercising or not eating chocolate chips cookies for example, then how challenging it must be to quit drinking/drugging/smoking, etc. And if I can better understand how difficult change is “first hand,” am I not better able to empathize with the “struggling changer in counseling” who says he/she wants to change but is sputtering and hesitating in working on identified changes in the treatment plan?
What do you think?
Robert
Although it is true that there are certain skills associated with being empathetic and I can teach students to display (feign?) these, but is this conveying empathy? Is the “genuineness” we seek something that can be instilled or rather are we relegated to simply cultivate that which is present when a student arrives for training? I tend to lean towards the latter. As I question my ability to teach empathy, I have resigned myself to teach about it and include experiential exercises and assignments that tend to hone existing skills in an effort to expose the “empathy” within, like the gemologist cleaves the raw crystal to reveal the gemstone within.
Here are 2 sample exercises I use to accomplish this:
1. Attend open 12-step meetings…and not just one, but a minimum of 2 and preferably a number. By hearing recovering people share their stories…their experience, strength, and hope…students are able to understand addiction and recovery and see the “person who may have the diagnosis” as opposed to just the diagnosis that needs to be addressed when working with a person. A byproduct of this exercise is the opportunity to talk about “listening with the heart” rather than just “hearing with the ears.” And what is empathy if not understanding those with whom we work on a more affective level?
2. Change a personal behavior…in this exercise, students are instructed to “add, eliminate, and significantly change” a personal behavior and do start this within the first week of class and report on the experience at the end of the course. Students are told they can, “add 20-minutes of exercise 3X/wk, eliminate eating chocolate chip cookies, or shower in the evening rather than the morning”…in short “anything” is acceptable as a personal behavior change. The must keep a journal, they must report in the journal regularly, and they must write a detailed personal account of their experience that chronicles the entire experience.
a. This is often done in concert with classes/readings related to stages of readiness to change
b. Students almost always discover early on that what they thought was going to be an “easy ‘A’ grade” is at least a challenge if not a “pain in the a__,” but this then becomes a wonderful opportunity to discuss how change is almost never accomplished by changing only one thing…to add 20-minutes of exercise 3X/wk, e.g., I have to “dress to exercise,” go to the gym, shower after, schedule my day to “find the time, etc. NOTE: As students become more familiar with the stages of readiness to change, they often realize they are at an “action stage” of readiness regarding one aspect of the change challenge but at a contemplative if not pre-contemplative stage at other associated changes…this can do wonders as regards understanding, nay, empathizing with how difficult change can be for a person in counseling
c. Students learn to appreciate how difficult change can be to make, and if this challenging when they want to make the change in something “as simple/easy” as exercising or not eating chocolate chips cookies for example, then how challenging it must be to quit drinking/drugging/smoking, etc. And if I can better understand how difficult change is “first hand,” am I not better able to empathize with the “struggling changer in counseling” who says he/she wants to change but is sputtering and hesitating in working on identified changes in the treatment plan?
What do you think?
Robert
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)