The Subtle Evil I Encountered Today

It's been an emotional day or two. Two former clients, one recent and one in the past, passed away this week. They both were good people and both moved me as a therapist with their spirit and their resiliance. The one from the past was one of the first clients I saw shortly after completing graduate school in 1991 and our work together gave me confidence in myself as a new psychologist. I paused today to remember him with gratitude. My work continues twenty years later. I have more experience now but the basics of respecting my client, listening mindfully and engaging in an active partnership for change remains the same. Today however, the realities of this brutal era in American history confronted me head on. In my perception, we have grown into a much more polarized society- Democrats over here, Republicans over there, corporations and profit versus individuals and well being. Almost every day, I hear stories of callous disregard for others and a new spirit of selfishness that seems to be gaining traction as the "new self-esteem". I became a psychologist I think because I deeply care about people and their suffering. Yes, I'm sure I had my own "selfish" reasons for pursuing this field- maybe to understand myself better, to ease my own pains, and maybe even searching for validation as a person worthy of the gratitude of others. I admit it. But I really do care. I couldn't do this work if I didn't care and I didn't hold myself to the highest standards that I can possibly reach in the work that I do. Compromising my values has never been something I could do without personal strife. That why today felt a bit like a body blow for a little while. I accepted a new client two months ago who was in desperate need of individual attention. She had been injured, was living in pain and was now in her third trimester of pregnancy. She had recently made a committment to herself to stop relying on medications, both for the sake of her baby and for her own quality of life. I've learned over the years in this field that living with pain is hard, VERY hard. Every fiber of our being tells us in every moment we feel pain that something is wrong and that danger is nearby. It is an exhausting, frightening and intense experience to have constant pain that doesn't go away and perhaps even has gotten worse with treatment. That's why today was particularly heinous in my opinion. My young client was injured on the job and was referred to me by her primary treating physician for six individual sessions. They pick the number six somewhat randomly, mainly because it is easier to obtain authorization for a lower number than to go for more. When clients come to me with a set number of authorized visits, if I need less, I use less and if I need more, I request more. It's very difficult to estimate exactly how many visits it takes to help someone feel better despite over twenty years of experience because each person is an individual- some with layers and layers of protection that come off slowly and some who open up quickly and are ready to make change when they walk in. In this case, she is a lovely, intelligent and articulate person who sincerely came for help. A bundle of fears and new skills for managing pain that she had yet to fully implement into her lifestyle. Near the end of our six sessions, she anxiously inquired about where we go from here. I reassured her that I would request more and that I would not leave her dangling as she approaches delivery. Within a week, I received notice that my request was denied by a physician with no mental health training or qualifications, a bizarre system from the start that allows health care professionals who have no contact with the actual client to make decisions that impact their treatment and their future (and get paid for it). I, of course, appealed on the grounds that a non-mental health professional could not ethically make the determination of what what necessary treatment and what was not. My appeal led me to a conversation by phone with another psychologist, who lives in Texas, who claims to have pain management expertise and sounds like she could be my daughter. Far from warm and empathic, she listened quietly to my rationale for continuing treatment, especially with delivery two weeks away and pain levels increasing as her spine tries to bare the extra load she adds each day. She's doing this without pain medication, I explained, and her fear about the delivery contributes as well. She replied with a cold "how has her function improved during the six sessions in which you have been seeing her"? "Improving function" is the new catch phrase in the Workers' Comp industry that signals whether treatment is a "success". I reminded her that improving function would be quite difficult during anyone's third trimester and that my major goal had been to help her reduce her worries and set reasonable expectations for herself. I shared my concerns that the delivery itself might be overwhelming psychologically, given hormonal shifts and the physical stress of it all. I guess I expected someone with similar values to mine as a psychologist, or as someone who had empathy for suffering or compassion for people in crisis. I found none of these qualities as she hastily stated that I would hear by the end of the week of her decision. Two hours later, I received a phone message from the insurance company consisting of a simple and impersonal "your appeal for more visits has been denied." My first response was to feel personally assaulted. It's hard to be in this business as long as I have, dealing with complex clients every day and trying to unlock the barriers to health and wellness, only to have someone who doesn't know you or your client decide that treatment is denied. I wonder why this person became a psychologist and how she lives with herself every day. The ego that it takes to believe that you can make the most intimate of decisions about a person in another state that you've never seen, never spoken with or taken the time to assess is mind boggling. To ignore a central ethical code of "do no harm" is unacceptable. Stopping treatment now would be devastating. To accept money for it is, well, just evil. Do not depair readers!! My ethics are still stronger than my desire for profit. I will see my client through her delivery no matter what. I am a human being with a soul and with empathy. We will look for other ways to get her treatment regardless of what Dr. Texas thinks. There's something very wrong with this system. I will continue to fight for what is right.

Me and the See

It's been an interesting couple of weeks in the news for the Vatican.

First, there was a question about how much the Pope's brother, Gerog Ratzinger, knew about the abuse of boys in the choir that he led for years. His first impuse was to deny and later Ratzinger eventually admitted to, and apologized for, slapping around a few boys.

Then there was the whole explosion of media attention around the sexual abuse of children that ran rampant in the Irish Catholic Church for years and then Benedict's letter of "apology", that condemned the abuse but dodged accepting responsibility.

And over the past week, we learned that the Pope himself apparently stopped the prosecution of U.S. priest who had systematically abused children over many years and was moved from diocese to diocese without consequence into positions that gave him continued access to children.

What seems surprising to me is the continued shock that people seem to have that (a) sexual abuse is rampant in the Catholic Church and (b) the hierarchy continues to deny that there was any organizational responsibility for these crimes despite losing huge court battles and paying out major settlements to victims The incredible, award-winning documentary, Deliver Us From Evil, does an amazing job of exposing the chilling callousness with which the case of a specific serial molester was handled by those in authority, even when he admitted his crimes and at some level wished for someone to stop him.

What I've really been thinking about however is less about the abuse itself, or even making judgment about the church's decision-making when these accusations arose, but more about the man himself, Joseph Ratzinger known now as Pope Benedict XVI.

He is a curious man, born in Germany in 1927 and as the official story goes, he was "forced" to join the Hitler Youth at 14, although he an "unenthusiastic member and refused to attend meetings" according to his Wikipedia bio. He had a long career in academia, as a professor of theology before working his way into higher and higher posts within the church until he reached the pinacle on April 19th, 2005, when he was elected to succede John Paul II.

He has spent much of his tenure fighting for conservative values and a return to the belief in absolute, rather than relative truth within the church, ironically paralleling the rigid dogma he supposedly was so opposed to in the Nazi era.

Here's where I have to admit what may already be clear: what I know of the man I do not like.

From my perspective, he has been irresponsible in the way that he speaks and teaches about homosexuality. His words have provided the foundation for hate crimes and violence against people who either are gay, or are perceived to be gay. It was Hitler's goal to dehumanize Jews. It is Ratzinger's goal to pathologize gays. His words and his actions speak for themselves.

I remember when things began coming out about the magnitude of the problem of sexual abuse within the U.S. church, the first public response (after finally being forced to admit that there was even a problem) was to blur the issue of pedophilia with homosexuality. I would like to believe that this strategy was just a vestige of ignorance about homosexuals within an aging hierarchy and not just a cynical, way to distract attention away from the failings of the church itself.

Of course raising the old "all homosexuals are pedophiles" slur goes way back. Although studies have shown that the majority of pedophiles identify as heterosexual and that pedophilia is a disorder separate from one's sexual identity, iit is still a favorite of right wing politicians, and others, who need to raise money or distract from the real issues.

In fact, one could explain the Pope's homophobia in three major ways.

First, he is deeply ignorant about the current and overwhelming scientific evidence about gay people that do not support his opinion that homosexuality in and of itself is a disorder. This however, is hard to believe, given his long tenure in the academic world, surrounded by scholars and scientists who have long recognized the errors of the church's teachings.

Second, if he is therefore aware of the disconnect between science and his tortured dogma regarding sexuality, then his homophobia may be symptomatic of his own deep-seated psychosexual confusion. As I have explored before in my posts, the same sad and irrational fears that drives the Larry Craigs of the world into denial may be responsible for the inept handling of sexuality by this Pope and on a larger scale the issue of sexuality within the priesthood.

Third, and hopefully least likely, he has risen to the peak of authority within the hierarchy not because of random chance or divine inspiration, but through hard work and ambition, much like the CEO of any large organization or the President of a country. That means then, that to maintain your authority, sometimes you have to tow the line, talk the talk and protect the company. This is the most cynical of the three I realize, and may have components from the first two mixed in like some fancy cocktail.

But, for whatever reason, I want to dislike him as a person VERY, VERY much.

And then I realized that I do not know the person, I only know the image.

I know Joseph Ratzinger only through his words and his actions (and sometimes inaction as in the case of the Uganda situation), not from real life conversation or connection.

It hit me that by judging him, based only what I have read or heard, which most certainly could be biased, I am doing to him what he does to me.

The Pope does not know me.

He in fact, may not know any healthy gay people.

He may only know the closeted men in robes who also struggle with their secrets and who advise him from their own biased lives as well.

Like me, much of the time he probably avoids what he doesn't want to feel and focuses on what he believes is truth.

I'm imaging the pressure that he must be under to hold together a large organization that appears fractured to the core on the precipice of breaking apart.

Compassion for one's "enemies" is central to Christianity I've heard. I feel sorry for him, despite whatever wrong choices I believe he has made.

I wish Benedict would do the same for me.