For many good people, even more difficult than the challenge to forgive others is the challenge to forgive ourselves. It can be deeply disheartening to face the self-disappointment that follows violating our own moral code, letting down people we love, or betraying our self-expectations. Even when we do the necessary work of recognizing our faults, changing our minds and behavior, apologizing and confessing to those we wrong, making restitution, and upholding our commitment not to repeat our wrongs we can mourn the loss of the person we once were before we knew we were capable of such betrayals. Even things like failing to achieve a goal, losing a job, or avoiding a challenge can make self-forgiveness difficult. Although we may deeply believe in a God who forgives sin or will help those who struggle, we can wonder if forgiveness is “enough.”  Without fully realizing it, we may long for some sort of magical (and impossible) return to our former state of innocence and well-being – the time before we knew we were capable of such betrayals or losses. When we can’t figure out how to turn back the clock, feelings of deep disappointment, anxiety, depression, shame, guilt and hopelessness may take over.

Essential to this process is making the distinction between guilt for our moral failures and shame for our mortal weakness.  However, even when we have taken the necessary steps to personal change, self-forgiveness can remain elusive for some. Certain personality types seem to struggle more with self-forgiveness, and seeing the thought patterns that go with each of these personality types can help us discover our own thought patterns that make self-forgiveness more difficult. Correcting some of these thought patterns can help us take action to more fully claim our right to self-forgiveness and peace. These forgiveness-resistant thought patterns are common in people with obsessive-compulsive tendencies, depression, narcissistic traits, passive-aggressive styles, or a history of trauma or abuse. People who have committed extremely serious moral breaches, and parents, are two other groups that can have particular difficulty with self-forgiveness.

In the end self-forgiveness is not necessarily a state we arrive at once and for all but a choice we make again and again. That choice is based in valuing learning over stagnation, compassion over innocence, and humility over illusion. When we come to see self-condemnation as a temptation to be ignored instead of a truth to be acknowledged we are able to claim more fully our right to the self-compassion that also makes us more compassionate with others, more resilient in the face of setbacks, and more grateful for our rich but imperfect lives.

Founder of Sixteen Stones Center for Growth, Wendy is a licensed psychologist with over twenty-five years of clinical experience with adults and families. She has taught at the University of Michigan and Brigham Young University and has provided training and consulted for a number of major corporations.  The author of Forgiving Ourselves (Deseret Book, 2008) and Weakness is Not Sin (Deseret Book,  2009), along with numerous professional articles and book chapters. She is a popular speaker, touring with Time Out for Women in 2009 and speaks frequently to both lay and professional audiences on the topics of personal growth, healing, spirituality, and change. She has served as president of the Association of Mormon Counselors and Psychotherapists.

Join us Wednesday, May 16th at 5 pm  for this insightful and compassionate discussion on forgiving ourselves.  

This program will be broadcast live on KHQN 1480 AM and will simulcast via live streaming video on healingtalkradio.utahvalleylive.com

Please forward this email to those who would value it.

This week’s program of Healing Talk will feature an interview with Dr. Jacob Hess.   Dr. Hess is a psychologist, writer, and research director at Utah Youth Village, a nonprofit for abused children and families in crisis.  Dr. Hess has authored and co-authored two published books and 12 peer-reviewed published articles.

In his exploration of the debate about holistic mental health, Dr. Hess describes an extremely comprehensive view of research in the field:  “we have identified approximately 200,000 studies immediately relevant to . . .  interventions for depression, anxiety, eating disorders and ADHD in our treatment. . .”.

Dr. Hess’s  review of the research suggests that the scientific model of mental health is dramatically changing in several ways.  Several new concepts are particularly noteworthy.

First, The brain is now understood to be “neuroplastic”, changing and adapting throughout a person’s lifespan.   This means that disorders previously viewed as permanent (my child is ADD) can now be viewed as a temporary condition that can be alleviated if the brain is effectively retrained (my son is having some struggles with attention right now.)

Second, many mental illness and brain disorders have been classified as being caused by “genetics.”   However, scientists are discovering that the genetic sequences for all sorts of health problems  can often be turned on and off (a concept known as epigenetics).   These genes tend to be activated or deactivated by environmental factors, many of which can be altered.

Third, from a perspective of both neuroplasticity and epigentics, many components of our modern culture appear to be toxic to emotional health.   A huge number of risk factors are related to emotional problems, including the stress of a very fast-paced lifestyle, the reduction of the  identity of women to sexual objects, the neurological changes created by hours of computer, television and video game use, poor habits of diet and exercise, the fragmentation of nurturing family systems; and the sense of helplessness created by a belief in the “chemical imbalance” paradigm of mental illness.

Although this information has been widely discussed in scientific journals, newspapers, prominent talk shows, books and other publications, it is frequently absent in in discussions between mental health professionals and individuals/family members with mental health challenges.

In his book  A long-term view of serious emotional problems: “Is there such a thing as „getting better‟ from this or not?”  Critical issues along the journey to an answer, Dr. Hess describes how the information  given to clients by other professionals is frequently not just condensed, but oversimplified in misleading ways.

“I often heard . . .  pronouncements by . . . therapists or doctors that science had clearly proven certain theoretical explanations and treatments.  . . . that research had already provided proof of the treatments that worked best.  Yet from my own exposure to the relevant research literature, I knew that basic treatment questions regarding [these] problems . . .remained deeply contested—at least among scientists.

“Why then, was the general public being told so confidently that certain answers had been found? After discussing some of the research debates with a medical doctor colleague recently, I suggested that perhaps we should let clients know more about the areas where conflicted findings exist. (Italics added) His response was telling.  ‘Oh, no,’  he said with a tone of admonishment. ‘You don‘t want to do that. Families and individuals facing these kinds of problems shouldn‘t have to deal with that kind of confusion.’ He went on to explain that exploring complex issues was a realm best reserved for doctors and researchers who had the training to know best how to make sense of the contradictions.

“Perhaps this kind of attitude explains some of the certainty families hear from helping professionals and other mental health educators. . . But here‘s the point: What if we don‘t really know? What if there are questions that haven‘t been settled yet and issues not fully explored? If this were the case, what would it mean to take one available view and promote it as  ‘established’, perhaps prematurely? What if that view, after it became widespread, turned out to be misleading in fundamental ways?

“And what about other less dominant positions? Would they be heard as well or would they be overlooked or even minimized? What if one of these views turned out to be a breakthrough discovery, with wide implications for treatment?

“. . . With all due respect to my doctor friend, I believe that those facing severe emotional problems, their families and others who seek to assist them (friends, neighbors, teachers, counselors, consultants, etc.), all deserve clear and comprehensive information on any issue relevant to the problem they are facing. This might include issues concerning the range of potential explanations for the problem or it might take up a similar range of issues pertaining to possible answers for the same problem. Rather than sparing‘ families the full scope of ambiguities and nuances associated with the range of these issues, it seems not only fair, but also ethical, for social service practitioners and researchers to help such families and individuals be more aware of critical issues, tough questions and thorny debates. In this, the educational role of a doctor or therapist or mental health advocate is more akin to a mentor or advisor who helps others think through issues, than a missionary or school teacher that aims to deliver ‘the truth’ about emotional problems.”

In this program Dr. Hess will discuss some of the most important controversies in mental health, some of the most promising breakthroughs in holistic treatment, and the need for a more open, honest and complete dialogue about what we really know and don’t know about mental health.   Dr. Hess  proposes some profound changes in the way we talk about mental and emotional challenges, and in the way we view both the potential causes and the potential solutions for mental illness.

You may download Dr. Hess’ full text at the following link:

A long-term view of serious emotional problems: “Is there such a thing as „getting better‟ from this or not?”

Ron Cottle was a successful businessman and a popular public speaker, receiving numerous awards both for his career achievements and his generous service to the community.

Then he developed the symptoms of bipolar disorder, a disabling and serious condition, manifesting itself with cycles of manic episodes and depressive periods. Sometimes extreme manic or cycles can include high risk behaviors, grandiose thinking, and disastrous business and financial decisions. Extreme cycles of either mania or depression can produce hallucinations and delusions.

So disruptive are these symptoms that suicide is the leading cause of premature death among bipolar individuals; 15 to 17 percent of bipolar individuals commit suicide.
Although medications can help with managing symptoms, the medications have such problematic side effects (such as inability to feel pleasure) that compliance with medications is quite low.

Bipolar has generally been considered a chronic or permanent condition. The National Institute of Mental Health states that “Bipolar disorder usually lasts a lifetime”, and “Bipolar disorder tends to worsen if it is not treated,”

For Ron, the disorder devastated his career, and placed enormous stress on his family. Determined to get his life back, and to transcend the limitations of the traditional medications, Ron began a journey that would take him into the leadership of a mental health recovery group, the exploration of a broad variety of alternative treatments, and the development of a very personal structure of mental discipline.

Join us this week as Ron Cottle and his wife Lois share the challenges and discoveries of Ron’s journey back from bipolar disorder.

For more information about Recovery International, go to lowselfhelpsystems.org

If your child has been diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder within the last fifteen years, get a second  opinion.

This is the advice showing up on more and more mental health information sites.   And with good reason.

In the years 1994 to 2003, the diagnosis of childhood bipolar disorder increased 4000 %.   Since 2003, no one has done another study.  No one even knows what the diagnosis rate is today.
This astonishing pattern has sparked some heated controversy in mental health and medical circles.  Bipolar Disorder, (previously called Manic-Depressive Disorder), in considered to be a very serious, relatively permanent, and generally genetically-induced disease.   A label of Bipolar Disorder can have a very serious impact on a child’s future.  In addition, the medications used to treat bipolar disorder are dangerous and have serious side effects, including death, siezures, numbness, loss of consciousness, weight gain, diabetes, permanent movement disorders, and loss of the ability to feel pleasure, to name a few.

What caused this increase  in the diagnosis of Bipolar?    At the time that the diagnosis began to multiply, several other important events occurred.

First, several researchers published articles, followed by the release of the book “The Bipolar Child”in 2002 .  This book offered a checklist and description that completely redefined the diagnostic criteria for childhood bipolar disease, expanding it to include what other specialists were classifying as “oppositional defiant disorder, Conduct Disorder, Intermittent explosive Disorder, and some non-official diagnoses such as Sensory Integration Disorder,  Developmental Trauma Disorder, Attachment Disorders, and family dysfunction symptoms.

“Childhood Bipolar Disorder” became the easy catch-all for a broad variety of problems that manifest themselves through rapid mood swings, sensory dysregulation and anger management problems.  (To see how broad the definition for bipolar disorder became, you can view the “checklist” for identifying “Childhood Bipolar Disorder”  at  http://bpchildresearch.org/cbq/cbq_survey.cfm. )

Its important to note that this was not an official or organizationally endorsed redefinition:  It was just a theory proposed in a book, based on the clinical experiences of Dr. Demitri Papolos and his colleagues, and some published papers by other psychiatrists such as Janet Wozniak at Harvard.

Childhood Bipolar Disorder is not presently a diagnosis in the DSM-IV, nor are the 65 items on the checklist considered diagnostic criteria for the existing Bipolar Disorder currently listed in the DSM-IV.   In addition, they are not on their way to being accepted  in the DSM-V.   In fact, in an attempt to curb the accelerating categorization of acting-out children as “bipolar”, the American Psychological Association has announced that the DSM-V will include a new diagnostic category, “Temper Dysregulation Disorder” to allow for a more accurate diagnosis that is not considered a permanent, severe mental illness.

What Wozniak, Papolos and other began calling bipolar disorder had certainly been noticed and studied by other psychiatrists, other medical schools, other treatment centers.   There is a good argument that more and more children were displaying these symptoms.   But other clinicians were making very different assumptions, and assigning very different names (and causes) to the disorders they studied.

Why was it that “Childhood Bipolar Disorder,” an unofficial and unapproved diagnosis, seized the reins of child psychiatry for over a decade?

The answer is likely related to advertising tactics and business profits.   Other diagnostic categories that could have been used, such as conduct disorder or developmental trauma or oppositional defiant disorder, were not considered to be particularly responsive to medication.   Bipolar Disorder, on the other hand, was viewed as something that should usually be medicated.  It didn’t take the pharmaceutical companies very long to catch on.   Soon doctors were being inundated with flyers from pharmaceutical companies stating that “you are missing Childhood Bipolar Disorder”, and suggesting medications that should be used to help.    All this was done without any research to show that these clusters of symptoms were actually helped by these medications, that these symptoms actually turned into true Bipolar Disorder in adults, or that these medications were safe for children.

This aggressive marketing to doctors was part of an overall campaign by the pharmaceutical companies to push atypcial antipsychotic and other psychotropic medications for use in children.

A large number of psychiatrists and general practitioners received the marketing information with little question.  Unfortunately, research show that the bipolar diagnosis was most often being made by primary care physicians.   Unfortunately, most general practitioners  cannot keep track of the legitimate research in a multitude of specialties and literally hundreds of medical journals, and have generally assumed in the past that pharmaceutical companies were quoting legitimate research when the stated that a specific drug was an effective, safe treatment for a given disorder.

This trust was not well-placed.   In the last few years the major drug manufacturers in the US have collectively been fined the largest fines in medical history for illegally pushing antypical antipsychotics to doctors for use in children for which these drugs have not been approved or proven effective,  and for downplaying the risks of those medications (many of which have serious side-effects.  Eli Lilly paid out 1.42 billion in 2009 for selling Zyprexa to doctors for use in children.   ($615 million of this amount was to settle criminal charges).   Bristol Myers Squibb paid $515 million in 2007 for promoting the drug Abilify to child psychiatrists.   Pfizer paid out 301 million for abuses relating to the drug Geodon.    Astra Zeneca paid out 520 million to mismarketing and misrepresentations over the drug Seroquel.   Most recently on April 11 this year Johnson and Johnson were fined more than 1.2 billion for minimizing or concealing the dangers associated with using Risperdal, and this judgement was only the most recent in a series of 4 recent judgments against Johnson and Johnson and its subsidiaries over Risperdal that have currently come to a total of 1.94 billion dollars.

In an attempt to curb the child bipolar disasters, the American Psychological Association has announced that a new diagnosis will be included in the DSM-V, “Temper Dysregulation Disorder”, which is not to be regarded as having the permanence or the genetic underpinnings associated with Bipolar Disorder.  A body of the nation’s top trauma therapists led by Bessel VanderKolk is also pushing for the inclusion of “Developmental Trauma Disorder”, a diagnostic category that encompasses many of the symptoms attributed to Childhood Bipolar Disorder, but which directs treatment towards rebuilding and repairing regulatory systems in the brain, rather than medicating long- term.

These trends and developments strongly suggest that an individual diagnosed with bipolar disorder within the last fifteen years should get a second opinion, and it should be from a up-to-date specialist in mental health.

To learn more about childhood bipolar disorder, the other childhood disorders that have been mistaken for it, and the medications that are currently being used for it, watch the program.

Sources used in this program include:

Risk of strokes increases 50% in individuals taking Risperdal or zyprexa:

1.  Wooltorton E. Risperidone (Risperdal): increased rate of cerebrovascular events in dementia trials. CMAJ. 2002;167(11):1269-1270.

2. Wooltorton E. Olanzapine (Zyprexa): increased incidence of cerebrovascular events in dementia trials. CMAJ. 2004;170(9):1395.

 Pharmaceutical companies are fined record amounts for illegally pushing anti-psychotic medications to children: 

3. Szalavitz, M. Drugging the Vulnerable:  Atypical Antipsychotics in children and the Elderly.  Time Healthland.  May 26, 2011:  http://healthland.time.com/2011/05/26/why-children-and-the-elderly-are-so-drugged-up-on-antipsychotics/

4. Szalavitz, M. Why are so Many Foster Care Children Taking Antipsychotics? Time Healthland  Nov 29, 1011 http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/29/why-are-so-many-foster-care-children-taking-antipsychotics/

5. Thomas, K, J.&J Fined $1.2 Billion in Drug Case, The New York Times, April 11 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/12/business/drug-giant-is-fined-1-2-billion-in-arkansas.html

American Psychological Association announces new diagnosis “Temper Dysregulation Disorder to reduce use of “Childhood Bipolar Disorder”

6. Spiegel, A. Children Labeled ‘Bipolar’ May get a New Diagnosis; NPR Feb 10, 2010 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123544191

Brain tissue shrinks with treatment from atypical antipsychotic medications

7. Bankhead, C Antipsychotics May Shrink Brain Volume, MedPage Today, Feb 8, 2011 http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/Schizophrenia/24763

Marilee VanWagenen, LCSW

This week’s broadcast of the Healing Talk segment of Prime Time Health will feature guest host Marilee VanWagenen, Licensed Clinical Social Worker.

After many years of counseling couples, as well as experiencing, nurturing and strengthening her own marriage of 40 years, Marilee will address the topic of “Maintaining Closeness in Your Marriage”

According to Marilee, most adults want to be happily married. Marriage exists in every culture and has been around for all of recorded history. So why is happiness so difficult to achieve in marriage? Why do married couples rarely discover the vast potential for joy and companionship that marriage promises?

Research shows that happy couples and unhappy couples have the same number of problems in their lives. What allows the happy couple to strengthen their relationship through difficulties while the unhappy couple’s relationship deteriorates?

What’s really going on in romance, the “honeymoon period”, and the all-too common disillusionment that can follow? Although many things are happening, a little neuroscience sheds light on some very characteristic experiences. When an individual falls in love, the brain gets a huge surge of the neurotransmitters dopamine and nor epinephrine. These neurotransmitters make a person feel like life is wonderful, everything is possible, the couple is invincible, and most of life’s pain is solved. But the brain cannot sustain this incredible burst of neurotransmitters for more than a few months. What happens when these neurotransmitters go back to normal levels?

What happens at this point if the couple is not committed, or married with unrealistic expectations, or simply doesn’t understand what is happening?

What happens if we have cultural notions of romantic love make it impossible for our spouse to meet our expectations?

The answers offer immediate help to individuals who desire to realize their marriage’s potential.

A variety of factors have been suggested as the cause of the increase, most of them based on correlational studies. Correlational studies suggest a relationship, but do not prove a cause of the disease. To prove causality, the causative agent must be shown to create the disease. Although it would be unethical to “prove” causality in humans, it can be done in animals.  Recently a prominent neuroplasticity researcher, Dr. Michael Merzenich, has done just that.

After reviewing research showing that closer proximity to loud, erratic noise centers (airports, busy freeways) corresponded with decreases in the IQ of children, Dr. Merzenich began to suspect that early brain development could be overloaded and derailed by bombardment with “white noise” (noises that is disorganized and covers many frequencies). In laboratory experiments, Merzenich exposed baby rats to pulses of white noise. He found that the brain development of the rats was “devastated” by the exposure. The rats developed symptoms that paralleled human autistic spectrum disorders—including a high rate of seizure activity, which could be triggered just by exposure to normal human speech. (Progressive Degradation and Subsequent Refinement of Acoustic Representations in the Adult Auditory Cortex)

In a society where white noise intrudes upon much of our lives, in the form of car engines, vacuum cleaners, air conditioners, electronics and a host of other devices, noise appears to be a credible accomplice in the autism problem.

However, it is likely not the only part of the problem. Recent studies of fraternal and identical twins with autism indicate that autism is impacted by environmental conditions more than by genetics.  (California Autism Twin Study).   These environmental conditions can include conditions in the womb. Something that happens to the mother during pregnancy may have a significant impact on the development of autism in the baby.

Another study, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry in November 2011 shows that antidepressant use (specifically, SSRI antidepressants) by the mother during pregnancy more than doubles the risk of autism. If the antidepressant use occurs during the first trimester of pregnancy, the risk of autism increases nearly four-fold.  (Antidepressant Use During Pregnancy) The depression itself is not the culprit. The research shows that depression and other mental health problems that are not treated with SSRIs produce no increase in autism risk.
This research dovetails very nicely with Dr. Merzenech’s research. He theorizes that excessively sensory bombardment through noise overwhelms the developing brain. This bombardment would be exaggerated even more by the presence of SSRIs, which increase the neurotransmitter dopamine and would thus be likely to “amplify” the effects of sensory bombardment.
Perhaps the most interesting development in autism research is Dr. Merzenich’s efforts to reverse the brain damage in his rat subjects. He attempted this by using sound training sequences that exposed the autistic rats to single clear tones, one at a time, slowly, in a way that allowed their brains to begin to differentiate normally. This work produced dramatic improvement in the rats.  (Progressive Degradation and Subsequent Refinement of Acoustic Representations in the Adult Auditory Cortex)
Such an intervention draws attention to Dr. Merzenich’s “Fast ForWord” software, which was developed for helping children with auditory processing disorders. Similar to the intervention he used to help the rats, but broader in its applications, it is being explored as a potentially potent resource for helping autistic children. (Study on Improved Language Skills for Children with Developmental Delays)

It is interesting to note that a similar intervention was developed over thirty years ago by a French scientist, Dr. Guy Berard. His program, “Auditory Integration Training” was widely publicized in the early 90s through the book “The Sound of a Miracle” by Anabel Stehli in which she described her daughter’s dramatic recovery from autism using Berard’s technique. Berard’s techniques have since been the subject of 28 research studies, 22 of which found the technique to be helpful. (AIT research) Berard’s techniques have failed to gain the support of the medical community, perhaps in part because of the lack of a scientific, physiological evidence for the neurological mechanisms showing why they worked. Merzenich has now supplied that.

In addition, the neurofeedback community has done considerable work in studying and treating autism as a brain dysregulation disorder.   Their research is another confirmation of Merzenich’s theoretical approach.   A pilot study using neurofeedback for improving the function of autistic children showed very positive results.

Join us on Wednesday, March 4 for more information and details on new insights into autism.

The information on Michael Merzenich’s research is taken from the bestselling book,  The Brain that Changes Itself:  Stories of Personal Triumph from the Frontiers of Brain Science, by Norman Doidge.

The Christian feature film "Courageous" underscores the essential role of fathers

Boys need fathers to teach them how to be men. Girls need fathers to affirm their transition into womanhood, and to teach them trust and attachment with a male figure. Both genders need fathers to teach them independence, discipline, self-reliance, abstinence from addictive behaviors, and unselfishness.

Yet the role of fathers in the home has often been underestimated and undervalued. In fact, a great deal of the original research on attachment in parenting only focused on the mother’s role. This created a more simplified research model, but it also created a paradigm and a language in attachment theory that initially excluded the father’s role.

In more recent years the importance of fathers has become a subject of discussion and discovery–and the role of fathers has been demonstrated to be very important–so important that in the ACE studies, the absence of the biological father in the home is a formal category of childhood trauma.

As a graduate student doing research I did a study comparing the rate of one-on-one time that young people in different groups spent with their fathers. I compared a group of high-functioning young high school students with strong moral values to a group of young people incarcerated in the youth corrections system. The high-functioning young people were getting 1 to 5 hours a week of one on one time with their fathers. The delinquent juveniles (when they had been living at home) had one-on-one time with their fathers somewhere between once a month and never.

Other research studies show similar correlations:
In conjunction with the release of the recent move “Courageous“, by the

A father begins his efforts to reenter his son's life in the movie "Courageous"

inimitable Christian film group Sherwood Pictures, focuses attention on the need for engaged, committed and present fathers.   The movie quotes a number of the following statistics on fatherhood:

“Fatherless homes produce:

• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
• 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
• 80% of rapists come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Report on the State of High Schools .)
• 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes  (Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children.)
• 85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)”

If these numbers are translated into probabilities, we find that “youth who grow up without a father are:

• 5 times more likely to commit suicide
• 32 times more likely to run away
• 20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
• Boys are 14 times more likely to commit rape
• 9 times more likely to drop out of high school
• 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances
• 9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution
• 20 times more likely to end up in prison”

(All Pro Dads, © 2010 Family First)

The National Fatherhood Initiative website has a great deal of information about the impact of a father in all sorts of areas of a child’s life, from vocabulary development to risk of obesity.   An interesting and very significant area is risk for child abuse.  The presence of two parents in the home significantly reduces the likelyhood that a  child will fall victim to abuse.  ”Children in single parent homes have:

• a 77% greater risk of being physically abused
• an 87% greater risk of being harmed by physical neglect
• a 165% greater risk of experiencing notable physical neglect
• a 74% greater risk of suffering from emotional neglect
• an 80% greater risk of suffering serious injury as a result of abuse
• overall, a 120% greater risk of being endangered by some type of child abuse.”

Cohabiting fathers do not provide the same level of benefits and protection to children that married fathers do, probably because of the lower level of committment. (http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/ fatherhood/chapterthree.cfm)

One in four Americans have been victimized by sexual abuse. Girls are more often victimized (one in three females in America have been sexually abused), but the rates for males are only slightly lower, with one in five boys being victimized.
Some survivors of sexual abuse seem to recover and live healthy, normal lives. Others show pervasive symptoms of severe trauma, struggling throughout their lives with anxiety, depression, low self-worth, addictive behaviors, difficulty having normal relationships, nightmares, promiscuity, anger, flashbacks, and a vast array of medical problems.
In recent years trauma researchers have carefully studied the factors that create high levels of lasting trauma for a sexual abuse survivor. This research has overturned many previously-held beliefs about sexual abuse.
In her book “Just Before Dawn,” Jan Hindman lists the trauma factors that have been shown to create lasting problems. These risk factors affect the victim primarily by creating the emotions of shame or fear. Prominent among these risk factors are the behaviors of the family, friends and community. A very potent trauma risk is created if family and friends blame the victim, don’t believe the victim, or fail to take any action. An additional powerful trauma factor is created if the victim is required to continue to interact socially with the perpetrator and is pressured to “be nice” to him.
Sexual predators characteristically blame their victim, with words like “I can’t help it because you act so seductively,” or “I wouldn’t do this if I didn’t know you wanted it.” Perpetrators are also often manipulative and charismatic, and are often able to mobilize relatives and community members into taking their side. All of these perpetrator messages tend to intensify the shame created by sexual abuse. The victim begins to think he or she was the person who did wrong, not the perpetrator.  This shame adds to the huge weight of feeling dirty, unclean or inadequate–feelings that are a pervasive burden for abuse survivors.
This false assumption of shame and blame for the abuse is also intensified if the victim is told “you just have to forgive him right now.” Although forgiveness is the essential final step to complete recovery from sexual abuse, it is the final step, not the starting place. Trauma specialists continue to warn that forgiveness in the absence of deep emotional healing is just a shallow academic exercise. To achieve complete forgiveness, the survivor of abuse much be supported through the process of resolving and repairing all the deep-brain neural networks created by the abuse experience. Then forgiveness can be offered. To attempt to reverse this sequence and require forgiveness first tends to just create more shame in the victim.
One quarter of the people in our lives are probably abuse survivors. Learn more about how to support them in their healing, and how to avoid common mistakes that intensify their trauma.

This program will broadcast live on the Healing Talk Segment of Prime Time Health, Wednesday March 7 at 5 pm.  Listen on KHQN 1480 AM in Utah County, or watch the live video simulcast on http://healingtalkradio.utahvalleylive.com.  Listen to replays daily for a week on syndicated internet stations wcww.com, plantarystreams.com, and SHOUTcast.com