by Marvin Shilmer 46 Replies latest jw friends
So Marvin, who is the author of this letter?
It's not of much use if you can't identify the source. It's no different than the WTBTS's habit of writing articles that reference "an expert," or some unnamed "authority" on whatever subject.
Also, do you have the "submission" that the author references in his letter?
Is that available?
00DAD
I would not be suprised if some dubs are a little off. Especially if you are waking up. Have you ever had that feeling that something is off, but you just can't wrap your mind around what it is? I magine that feeling for decades, plus the constant guilt trips! It's like being Norman Bates living with his Mother! When I learned TTATT, I no longer felt the need for anti-depressants. I realized that I was not crazy, I was held captive in a crazy enviroment.
Who has the highest chance of going nuts, the fish who never asks questions because they are oblivious to their surroundings, or the one who has realized that he is trapped in a bowl and nothing is as it seems. He knows the world is out there, but he is trapped and scared. That sounds like a recipie for the crazies to me... I would think that anyone in a high control group or cult who doesn't fit in would start losing it eventually. Your will either dies, along with your dreams, or you fight back.
Manic depression has a hold of my soul... I know what I want, but I just don't know ...( how to go about gettin' it..)
Many of these surveys provide data which relects a status quo, but the critical question has never been satisfactorily answered . . .
Do fundamentalist cults attract the psychiatrically comprimised . . . or create them?
Thanks Marvin.
Hi Marvin,
Studies on the mental health of sects and fundamentalist groups in general - and JWs in particular - provide rich pickings for all sorts of speculation, mostly damning of religious leadership styles (e.g., authoritarian) as causing mental-health problems.
Unfortunately, practically all such studies either side-step the issues of mental-health definitions, causation and prevalence rates or collapse into simplistic causal statements.
Although I know your article is not about Havor Montague's (aka Jerry Bergman's) "research", it is worth noting that nothing published by Montague/Bergman was worthier of anything other that the label "anecdotal" report.
Diagnostic labels aside (they are a mine field in and of themselves), the issue of causation is often simplistically dealth with, if at all by this man.
The issue of mental health among JWs is a relevant topic, worthy of sound research design. Any researcher would have to acknowledge that, even should a higher incidence of mental health diagnoses be found among JWs, they'd have to address the following:
(I hasten to add this is "just" a competing hypothesis in need of testing but it is no less valid than the still untested hypothesis that the Watchtower causes its members to not only develop mental health diagnoses but at a rate higher than the general population).
I could say more on this. The point is, anyone who disseminates information on mental health and Jehovah's witnesses needs at some level to be aware of these sorts of complicating variables. In my opinion, the chief worth of Montague's/Bergman's reports has little to do with their highly suspect "scientific" rigor - they completely and utterly lack it (although he dresses up his report in the language of science!). Rather, the chief value is as anecdotal report, based on his observations. Not one of his observations warranted claims about prevalence rates of mental-health diagnoses compared to the general population though. To the best of my knowledge, no published research on the mental health of JWs has ever directly addressed the kinds of issues I have raised in this post. Any research worthy of the label "research" needs to be scientifically rigorous and reflect familiarity with basic principles of sociological and psychological research. Warm regards Steve
I believe, based on what I have seen in my wife's congregation, that JW's "childish" tales attract the naive, the misinformed, the uneducated, the forlorn, and the mentally unstable. I actually believe the religion is good for them overall. I wouln't even try to awaken them, especially if they are older. However, the part that turns me into hulk is the indoctrination of the born-in whose potential and critical thinking abilities are quelled from the very first day they step into the KH.
I think the "mental" cases in the JW congregations are of two types: the ones they appeal to and the ones they create, especially the born-ins.
Never a JW: You write so well on the topic. I think you are onto something relevant when you draw a distinction between 1) those who were never raised in the organization but who were "attracted" to it, say in the door-to-door work and 2) those who were "born-in".
An interesting research project, brimming with design difficulties and ethical thorns, would be to do a comparative study of both groups of current "members" in terms of a number of psychological well-being variables and to investigate any meaningful differences between the two groups. Mind you, if we are to believe in the heritability of mental-illnesses across the generations, it gets complicated when, for example, your parents may have been attracted to the organization as adults and you were raised in it. What if either of them had pre-existing mental health diagnoses? What if that is the bigger factor, say, in you developing similar diagnoses but the organization is "blamed" simply because you were raised in it? Meanwhile, the focus is off your parents who displayed a pre-existing vulnerability to mental health problems.
When I was active, I observed that new "converts" often brought with them their old hang-ups - mental and emotional - into the organization, although outwardly they appeared "improved" (nice respectable haircuts, better dressed, cleaner shaved etc).
My guess would be that converts with few family ties in the religion would find it less difficult to ultimately leave, but they might present with a wider array of mental-health problems compared to born-ins. On the other hand, those born-in may find it harder to leave because family are still in. That said, we'd have to keep in mind that these are broad generalizations.
An interesting adjunct to this kind of research - which needs to be acknowledged to ensure the research is fair -are the active JWs who maintain that it is their commitment to the organization that gave their life meaning and direction. I know of many JWs whose "experiences" from the platform, and especially at conventions, convincingly related how much their faith in Jehovah (i.e., the organization) "saved"them from a life of vanity and meaningless pursuits. One of my best JW friends -converted to the organization when he was 19 - swore that the witnesses who first called on him " saved" him from taking a drug overdose. I'd say his experience is just as valid as those who maintain that it was the organization that drove them to want to take a drug overdose in the first place! It shows how complex these sorts of analyses can become.
And that's the reason it pays to approach this kind of fraught topic with healthy caution - and scepticism. There's nothing more powerful than one's own personal experience, whether positive or negative. But personal experiences - and observations - do not constitute properly conducted research studies and really such anecdotal reports shouldn't be promoted as such - or subtly implied to be such.
in the most simplistic terms just think of it like this: if you had a car and your mentality was that the car was riding by the power of jehovah, what would happen over time? everything would start going bad on the car, over time...flat tires, out of alignment, transmission failure, engine failure, broke struts, etc etc. well we know that the car is not running by jehovah, the car is running based on physics and many many components which work together to provide a working vehicle. you take the car to the mechanic and he diagnoses it and fixes it.
jehovah's witnesses pretty much believe that psychology is a pseudoscience. they do not educate themselves on the mechanics of the mind, and the procedures necessary to re-calibrate or fix this mechanism called the human being. granted, psychology does not have all the answers, but it has many of them.
the same way that a jehovah's witness having their menstral cycle would not pray for the blood to stop, they should not pray for the broken mind to stop either. they should take the necessary actions to fix it. granted once again, they do have plenty of their members taking xyz drug for depression anxiety and so on ,which is fine, if that works for them, good. what they do not do, is educate themselves based on the science (not pseudoscience) of psychology and then take actions necessary to rectify whatever behaviorial aberrations may arise. and brother, the behavioral aberrations they are uh many among those folks. they have to be the most passive aggressive people on earth, and does this set a good example? hell no. it creates a society of a bunch of back stabbin bitches. if you are going to stab me, at least do it in the chest with some honor.
steve2 said: When I was active, I observed that new "converts" often brought with them their old hang-ups - mental and emotional - into the organization, although outwardly they appeared "improved" (nice respectable haircuts, better dressed, cleaner shaved etc).
there you go, and what is going to fix that? education in psychology. but no, to them that is pseudoscience. yet they allow them to take the drugs of the pseudoscientists, but they do not allow them to be educated in the same field that is producing these drugs? that should be a new topic right there. maybe i'll make it later if someone else doesn't.
-
“So Marvin, who is the author of this letter?
“It's not of much use if you can't identify the source. It's no different than the WTBTS's habit of writing articles that reference "an expert," or some unnamed "authority" on whatever subject.”
00DAD,
I don’t have permission to reveal the author of the letter you inquire of. I may not need this permission, but nevertheless hesitate to directly identify the source.
On the other hand, my blog elsewhere links to a licensed psychologist who is a JW (and has been a JW since before the time of the letter you inquire of). I have no doubt whatsoever that he knows the author, given their in the exact same line of work. Make of that what you will.
“Also, do you have the "submission" that the author references in his letter?
“Is that available?”
Yes. If you read the article you’ll find a hyperlink to another article titled Elder Involvement — Graphic Presentation. That is the author’s material submission. Here’s a direct link to that information: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2011/09/elder-involvement-graphic-presentation.html
Marvin Shilmer
steve2,
I don’t disagree with a word you’ve said. In particular it bears emphasis that my blog does not promote the use of Bergman’s work on the subject (or his alias Montague) precisely for reasons you mention.
The article at issue is of interest to me because insofar as I can tell it’s completely free of religious bias. That is to say, as far as I can tell the authors made an honest and objective attempt to see what the data says without regard for personal religious preference. To that end results show that various psychiatric diagnoses are more or less prevalent across a spectrum of religious categories. JWs happen to be part of the set cataloged as “Sect” with a disproportionate diagnoses of psychoses.
For diagnoses the study depended on DSM II and patient records. The authors did a very good job explaining means and methods of constructing their seven categories of religious affiliation.
Given your profession, undoubtedly you have access to the original article by MacDonald and Luckett. If you don’t I can supply it for your review. Send a PM with email.
Marvin Shilmer
-
“… but the critical question has never been satisfactorily answered . . . Do fundamentalist cults attract the psychiatrically comprimised . . . or create them?”
sizemik,
That’s the 64-thousand-dollar-question and to the best of my knowledge it’s never been answered conclusively for any religious affiliation, including Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Aside from that question there is this one:
- What if anything does the Watchtower organization do to improve the mental health of whoever ends up among its adherents?
I suspect some tenets of the religion help and others hurt. Some of these are probably overt. But what is the net effect? And, of the overt, why would the organization not jettison the hurtful?
It’s unavoidable that answering the latter question would create speculation. But thought the precise reason would be speculative I can’t comprehend any sincere reason for keeping a tenet that is known to be detrimental to mental health.
Marvin Shilmer
