Original_To:  BITNET%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:34:00 PDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Don Gallogly <EUP_DG@CWU.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Three Issues on Personality

Rich Adlin writes...

>"Personality":
>
>        Lately, I thought of self-esteem.  It hardly seems that self-esteem
>can be accounted for by genetics.  I'm not aware of any twin studies on
>self-esteem.  Self-esteem, although I'm not well acquainted with the research,
>is highly related to environmental and personl history variables.  Moreover,
>self-esteem is highly related to attachment style; security is related to
>high self-esteem and insecurity to low self-esteem.  Attachment style, and
>self-esteem I presume, are related to different kinds of coping styles
>(eg, support-seeking, problem oriented, avoidant).  It hardly seems that these
>variables, which are so much a part of personality, can be accounted for by
>genetics.

I'll preface these remarks by saying that this is not really my area of major
interest, but I have had (in general) the same core set of classes that I
imagine most of you have.  However, I may be way off base so feel free to kick
me if you think so.

I think the arguement might be legitimately made that self-esteem is not a
personality variable in the same sence as something like temperament or
attachment style.  It is my understanding that self-esteem is widely variable
within individuals and possibly moreso than between.  Personality variables,
as (if I remember correctly) I was taught are fairly fixed within individuals.
Self-esteem on the other hand can rise and fall within a matter of days.
(Right?)


>"Memory":
>
>Nevertheless, the client walked out of my advisor's office
>utterly convinced that he had been abducted, just as when he came in.  I find
>this amazing, but mostly disturbing.  It is difficult to accept that a cure
>can be effected by allowing an individual to continue to support such
>"delusions," and that the truth doesn't "set you free."  All this harks back
>to Freud's seduction hypothesis.  WHen a client reports a memory, should the
>authenticity of it be considered, or is it the therapist's job to assist the
>client in constructing a narrative that helps him or her make sense of it?

This is a very difficult issue that I have not given a lot of thought to before
this morning.  However, I don't believe it is (generally) the place of the
therapist to question the authenticity of the client's memories.  Other than
the fact that you don't have any abduction memories, you have no reason not to
believe the client.  I don't believe a therapist would, generally, question a
client's memories of physical abuse.  And if there is some question of the
authenticity of those memories, I don't believe it would be in the client's
best interest to convince him or her that the abusive memories are delusional.
Convincing a client that his or her thoughts are delusional won't make them go
away.  The object of therapy should be to teach the client to deal effectively
with those memories.

But then there are cases where clients have persecutory fears.  Do therapists
try to convince these people that the fears are delusional?  What about cases
of where the person is hearing voices?  I'm honestly not familiar with standard
practice in these cases, but I'm not sure I'd agree with an arguement that the
client should be convinced the fears/voices don't exist.

Don Gallogly
EUP_DG@CWU.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU