I agree nonjwspouse with your comments. The only thing I would add is that it is notoriously complicated to establish prevalence rates of mental illness in so-called "fluid" groups (i.e., in contrast to gender, nationality, ethnicity, etc, which are "immutable"). To the best of my knowledge, there is no prevalence-rate research on any religious group - so, it's a little bit unfair to suggest the Watchtower is trying to keep mental-health problems of its members secret. Besides, if it wanted to, the Watchtower could claim - and adduce willing examples I'm sure - of members who declare their religious faith helped them resolve mental-health issues. I lost count of the number of times witnesses were used at big assemblies to tell their life-saving experiences. You get what I mean? My own educated hunch is that the prevalence of mental health problems among the Witnesses is probably on par with their own secular environments - only, the Witnesses who so suffer may perceive themselves as having fewer acceptable options for addressing those problems. Notice, please, I advance this not as fact but as a hunch.
Young man walks out of Glasgow convention and commits suicide
by jambon1 92 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
steve2
Adamah, good overview of risk and protective factors. Thank you. Strangely enough, if you did a survey, you may find that just as many people claiming the organization helped them by giving them a purpose and meaning in life as those who claim it harmed them. Again, this is not to turn a blind eye to the obvious problems inside the organization, but to show how complicated analyses can be.
-
adamah
Steve2 said-
Adamah, good overview of risk and protective factors. Thank you. Strangely enough, if you did a survey, you may find that just as many people claiming the organization helped them by giving them a purpose and meaning in life as those who claim it harmed them. Again, this is not to turn a blind eye to the obvious problems inside the organization, but to show how complicated analyses can be.
Thanks for your response.
Of course, no JWs are going to be allowed to CONDUCT such a study, and as stated above, members likely would be discouraged from participating for obvious reasons: the TRUTH would likely harm Jehovah's Organization. I suspect it's no coincidence that so many of the risk factors align with JW practices: if it's NOT intentional, they sure have blindly stumbled across that toxic cheese to dole out to the others!
Any kind of a scientifically-valid study would have to be done by an independent group, and complicated and costly to pull off; it seems like it might make a great senior project or doctoral thesis for a student looking for a topic. Such a study wouldn't need to use a survey format (ie polling current members), but could look at deaths by suicide vs stated beliefs (IF that even is on the death certificate, and if someone who kills themselves after shunning has JW listed as their faith: they shouldn't be found on the official roles of members, I'd think).
It's not hard to imagine someone with bipolar disorder being attracted to JWs by seeking some stability in their lives, getting baptized, being discouraged from getting help and diagnosed when they cycle; they act on those impulses (as BPs are known to do), only to get DFed or marked. Their emotional pain response is only going to be amplified vs those not dealing with such issues.
And we all know that JWs shed crocodile tears (if they cry, at all) when shunned/DF/DA members commit suicide: the current members only repeat the tired ol' mantra, "Tsk, tsk, tsk.... Look what happens when you turn your back on Jehovah?"
It's good to remember that shunning developed only AFTER secular authorities disallowed Jews from stoning other members to death: shunning is a non-physical (but potentially lethal) alternative to stoning, since it's the same idea of 'karet': "cutting off" the member from the Jewish community. So if they kill themselves, so much the better.
JW elders are basically given license to kill under the right to practice their religion freely (shunning is a protected activity, under freedom of assocation), since they're in WAY over their heads when dealing with people with complex mental-health issues. Elders are more like directors of the wolf pack, letting human nature do the rest.
If anyone hasn't read it yet, I wrote an article on the shunning topic asking, Would Jesus Shun? Current JW members need to look in the mirror and ask if they're behaving more like Jesus or blindly going with the pack to be a member of the stone-throwing mob.
Adam
-
steve2
Adam, I cannot help but agree with so many of the points you have raised. In my view, though, it is entirely common for religious organizations, near and far, to be protective of their "virtuous" image. So, the Watchtower is in crowded company. I will, however, persist is stating that, whilst the organization's policies impact negatively on untold numbers, those same policies are perceived by untold others in very positive terms. In my years of post-graduate research, I was often surprised by how often seemingly objective and intelligent researchers came to their topics with their minds already made up (i.e., knowing what story they wanted to tell and conveniently finding "evidence" for it). Little wonder the Watchtower finds reports in the most remote places that appear to support Watchtower dogma, whilst ignoring bigger negative reports closer to home. And vice versa: Researchers from other religious organizations who accuse the Watchtower or having or doing or causing things that the critics' own religious organizations also do or whose track record is no better. Working in mental health, I can testify that ecumenical churches and Pentecostal groups are not free from startling mental health problems and suicidal behaviors - so it is rich for them to point the finger at the Watchtower.
Younger people are especially sensitive to messages of shame and condemnation - and what many religious organizations share in common are very strident views on what will happen to sinners. The Watchtower may be more salient on this forum, but it is far from unique. None of this whitewashes the organization - it just places the problem of mental health and suicidality in a much wider setting of which few such groups can claim to be blameless.
-
slimboyfat
A local brother told me an elder told him a young Chinese brother killed himself at the convention. So we can consider that another independent source that confirms the incident.
The brother also remarked to me, "I wonder if the society keeps track of how many commit suicide in the truth, because it seems like a lot."
We have had three in our congregation alone in the last ten years.
-
adamah
On a slightly-related topic, this editorial ran in today's NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/opinion/sunday/banning-a-pseudo-therapy.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
A discredited therapy that purports to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals was repudiated again late last month. This time, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously upheld a California law preventing licensed therapists from counseling minors to change their sexual orientation from gay to straight.
So-called “conversion therapy” or “reparative therapy” began at a time when professionals in medicine and psychology considered homosexuality an illness that was amenable to treatment. That ended in 1973, when homosexuality was removed from the psychiatry profession’s diagnostic manual of mental disorders. Soon all major mental health associations followed suit. A small number of therapists, however, continue to practice and advocate conversion therapy today.
The California law, which was signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in September 2012, says those practicing conversion therapy on a patient under 18 would be engaging in “unprofessional conduct” subject to discipline by state licensing authorities.
The State Legislature relied heavily on professional reviews of the scientific literature, which concluded that the effectiveness of conversion therapy had not been demonstrated and cited anecdotal reports of its harm, including depression, suicidal thoughts or actions, and substance abuse.
The law was quickly challenged in Federal District Court as unconstitutional by practitioners, young patients and their parents, leading to split verdicts and appeals to the federal appeals court, which upheld the ban.
The three judges, appointed by Presidents Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, concluded that the law did not violate the free-speech rights of therapists and minor patients or the fundamental rights of parents, because it did nothing to prevent licensed therapists from discussing the pros and cons of conversion therapy with their patients. The law regulates conduct, not speech, the panel reasoned, and lies well within the power of the state to prohibit practices it considers harmful to minors.
Conversion therapy has had other setbacks in recent months. Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey signed a bill on Aug. 19 banning conversion therapy for minors, making New Jersey the second state to do so. In June, a Christian group that was a leading proponent of conversion therapy disbanded after 37 years, and issued an apology to gays and lesbians for the harm it had caused.
The old idea that homosexuality is an illness that can be “cured” may at last be headed for the trash heap.
The part in bold is referring to Exodus International, a Christian group which recently threw in the towel and admitted that gay conversion therapy didn't work (lotta good dirt on their wikipedia page, which so-called "cured" leaders marrying each other, etc):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_International
The bill in CA allows the State to step in and censure psychologists who continue to offer this treatment in their practices, despite studies showing it to be ineffective and worse, inflicts harm.
Of course, JW elders have no license to engage in ANY kind of psychological counseling, but it's interesting to note that licensees aren't allowed to attempt to "cure" homosexuality (due the higher risk of depression/suicide), while the elders are basically free to attempt to cure it via the power of social ostracism and faith in the Bible.
It's not hard to imagine that even if only on the basis of statistical probabilities, there are an unknown number of JWs who are going to suffer as a result of being born-in to JW's (not their choice), being gay (not their choice), and dealing with depression/BP/etc (not a choice). Hence these individuals are at greater risk of paying for the poor choices made by their parents, and there's NOTHING that anyone can do to help them if they don't find the strength to stand up for themselves: the State grants leeway to religious practices (where believers are a tad resistant to taking their lead from science; their orders come from Heaven).
Adam
-
steve2
I agree Adam. I think that gays and lesbians are more vulnerable to a host of life problems due to social attitudes anyway - but within a strict religious organization, vulnerability increases significantly.
I personally know of young JW males who had been struggling with issues of sexuality who killed themselves. Equally tragically, I also know of young ones who were fellowshipping with pentecostal groups who had been the focus of intense prayer sessions (to rebuke the so-called "spirit" of homosexuality), who later killed themselves.
To me, the shame of what happens among the witnesses is as tragic as that which happens in (some) other religious groups. Add to that, the unknown numbers who make a lifestyle out of self-harm or suicidal behavior as a means of coping which has them in and out of the mental health system. I'd like to believe that the tide is turning - that is, as society becomes more accepting of differences and accords vulnerable groups equal rights, etc), there will be greater social permission to stand up against religious intolerance - wherever it is.
The tragedy of fundamentalist Christianity - to say nothing of other belief systems such as Islam - is that what is says on the one hand (i.e., about being the answer to life's problems and having the truth) but does on the other (i.e., making young people who do not fit into societal "norms" feel even worse about themselves) is a crime hidden by dubious religious "rights".
-
88JM
Here is the recording from the Glasgow convention itself of the couple of talks on Saturday morning that some have mentioned:
09:58 - Reject What Is False - A False Front
http://www.sendspace.com/file/uz2tvf11:10 - Beware of Apostates - Satan
http://www.sendspace.com/file/wz14qs11:24 - Beware of Apostates - Human Apostates
http://www.sendspace.com/file/grqyub -
slimboyfat
Any chance of uploading the baptism talk that directly followed? It was by John Flack I think.
-
cofty
Thanks I'm listening to the "Human Apostate" talk now. It's agonising.