Even more about Astrid Lindgren…

Astrid Lindgren left her enormous archive to the Royal Library (Kungliga biblioteket) in Stockholm, and this library contains 125 shelf-meters of manuscripts, letters, press cuttings etc. Most parts of it are letters (from the whole world) and press-cuttings. Unesco has given this archive the status of World-memory (translated directly from Swedish; corresponding to World heritages, which Ingmar Bergman’s and Alfred Nobel’s archives are suggested to be too), by this sanctioned that this archive is important to protect for human beings and the whole world. She and the Danish author H. C. Andersen are the only child book authors which are honoured in this way.

One of her admirers has said about her that she was “simple (or plain), brave, wise, kind, sees when the emperor doesn’t have any cloths – and points this out (talks about it)!”

She was 38 when she made her début as author and 68 when she made her début as political author.

Was she both Pippi and Ronia and Emil etc.? In one and the same person? My wonder…
Ronia the concretisation of the growing child’s rebellion, fear, sorrow, love and also strength. “Watch (Mind or look out for) the Hell’s Gap!”
they said to Ronia, to warn and protect (over-protect?). But then Ronia immediately rushes to it instead.
“How am I supposed to mind for the Hell’s Gap if I am not there?” she wonders.

A woman met Astrid Lindgren and overwhelmed over the situation she said:
“Oh, how wonderful, Astrid, to shake your hand!”
“Shake it again then!”
Astrid Lindgren replied!!

Her first child, Lasse (Lars) she bore in secret before she was twenty, he spent his first three years in a foster home in Copenhagen and one year with his maternal grandparents at Näs in Småland (see earlier blogposts about Lindgren with links to different places etc. connected to her including the farm she grew up on, Näs!).

Her marriage became short. When she was 44 her husband died and she lived the rest of her life as widow, never married again.

Already in February 1951 she participated in a radio program about “the single mother’s situation”. At that point few knew that she talked from own experiences. Her attitude was both then and later that the children should come in the first place, the child was always the most important, not the mother, how difficult her situation even was. She thought it was the children who had to suffer for the moralist’s sake.

At the same time she warned for generalisations and for romanticizing the motherhood. She thought a good foster home could in the specific case be better than a too young and immature mother.

And with an inimitable “lindgrenskian” turn she slightly bantered with how easy it seemed to be to take the guilt feeling away for “the extra-marital fatherhood”!!!

She also said to a friend:
“I can walk out on the street and look people directly in their eyes and then I can’t help thinking: ‘How do you have it, you poor thing?’ One can’t avoid wondering when one knows how people have it: ‘Is it really like this it is thought it shall be? (are those the intentions about life, the world, human beings lives?)’”

She also had her small thoughts when she watched the men in the park (Vasaparken) outside the windows to her apartment at Dalagatan in Stockholm, men who were alcoholics sitting on the benches there. She felt with them too.

In the aftermath of the tax-raid (round up) on Ingmar Bergman 1976 she wrote a letter to one of the responsible about this:
“I think the police shall treat whoever it concerns respectfully [no matter if it was famous person or not, and not treat the famous worse either!! My interpretation).”

She thought one should be careful going out to the press with things before anything was properly investigated, in this case if Bergman deliberately had committed any crimes concerning taxes or not. That people shouldn’t be given out officially only on suspicions.
“It’s like this it is; a judgment in court must have been pronounced first even when it is about the worse and biggest murderer in the whole world!
If he has done something that isn’t right, then of course he shall soot for this when the whole is proven. But don’t pick a human being to pieces as long it’s only about suspicions, a right even Ingmar Bergman should have, as you and me and all which lives in a law-governed society.”

One characteristic thing about her in all she engaged herself in is that global issues are mixed with local. She was a woman with intuition which reacted on “the concrete question at issue”, not an intellectually calculating person which on beforehand estimated in which circumstance her words would have largest or greatest possible effect. She reacted with her heart but also used the head when she was arguing for her cause.

She said to another woman:
“You feel in your stomach what’s right or wrong. Act on your gut feelings, trust them!”
And Astrid Lindgren also thought that it is only the grown up and calculating which start thinking in patterns like
“…on the one hand we shall… to… but on the other we can’t… because…”

A former Swedish politician Bengt Göransson says about her that she was always “common” (i.e., “as we all are”, she never took a position from above) in her appearances, never the great author which spoke to an ignorant public. She spoke from below, before the authority, which she says she had learnt both to obey and respect (??). Her usualness was also her strength he thinks.

Astrid Lindgren spoke about the libraries by informing how great they are for the children, and showed with a grimace that she thought that those who attacked the libraries are mean and stupid, that was enough (no more words than those!!). When she said what he thought she wasn’t the expert who spoke from above but she said what people in general thought. She never started a contribution to a debate with “We intellectuals…”

She also avoided the sunken rocks the populist always risk steering onto when he tries to interpret what people want. It’s simply so that Astrid Lindgren spoke about things she reacted on. She had a strong intuition and felt what was wrong. She reacted spontaneously and rapidly without dedicating herself to tactical considerations. That’s the reason why she so often hit the right thing, and when she captured a general opinion – “what people though” – she didn’t because she had stronger antennas than people in general, antennas which tells what people thinks, but she just said what she herself thought, frankly and directly.

Not only a great author but also a political person, let be with strong traits of the truth telling child in the Emperors New Cloths.

I guess she would have had a lot to react on today…

Photos above taken here today and on the grave yard taken yesterday, on the old church ruin there...

Bosch on the topic children and anger…

Bosch writes about “Anger” in her book “Rediscovering the true self” at page 136:

“Anger is another emotion that children should be able to express. Some things are very difficult to put up with, especially when you are little and powerless, so it is understandable that children feel angry from time to time. There is nothing wrong in expressing anger as long it doesn’t harm others. The child who is allowed to openly show anger at home can be encouraged to avoid doing so in a way that is harmful for others. Inappropriate expression of anger by a child who is allowed to feel anger is and indication of a deeper lying problem that the child needs help to deal with such as feeling threatened, being treated unfairly, being powerless, etc. Parents confronted with their child’s resistance and anger towards them are often surprised. Yet, aren’t anger and resistance very healthy and understandable reactions, when one has to comply day in day out with all kinds of rules and expectations and have so little influence on one’s own life?”

She also writes about ”Honoring all feelings and letting our children express their feelings” at page 135:

“Honoring all feelings our children have, and letting them express these feelings, is another way parents can contribute to their children’s emotional wellbeing. There are no exceptions. When they feel pain, are frightened, confused, etc., it is important to listen to them, let them fully express their feelings, and then, see if a solution can be found together, if the child so desires. Be sure to allow enough time so that the feeling can be fully experienced by the child and not stopped before it has run its natural course. Never try to make children stop crying! It’s the crying that heals.”

But I can imagine that the grown up gets provoked by the child’s feelings in many different ways… And it isn’t about, or shall not be about, technically behave in the right way against and with children… I feel…
-//-
Bosch skriver om “Vrede” i sin bok “Rediscovering the true self” på sidan 136:

”Vrede är en annan känsla som barn bör få möjlighet att uttrycka. En del saker är väldigt svåra att hantera, särskilt när man är liten och maktlös, så det är förståeligt att barn känner sig arga då och då. Det är inget fel att uttrycka vrede så länge det inte skadar andra. Det barn som tillåts att öppet visa vrede hemma kan uppmuntras att undvika att göra det på ett sätt som är skadligt för andra. Olämpligt/ickeändamålsenligt uttryck för vrede hos ett barn som är tillåtet att känna vrede är ett tecken på ett djupare liggande problem som barnet behöver hjälp att hantera, som att känna sig hotat, att bli orättvist behandlat, att vara maktlös osv. Föräldrar som konfronteras med barnets motstånd och vrede mot dem blir ofta förvånade. Dock, är inte vrede och motstånd väldigt hälsosamma och förståeliga reaktioner när man är tvungen att (åt)lyda alla slags regler och förväntningar dag ut och dag in och när man har så litet inflytande över sitt eget liv?”

Hon skriver också om ”Att hedra alla känslor och att låta våra barn uttrycka sina känslor” på sidan 135:

”Att hedra alla känslor våra barn har och att låta dem uttrycka dessa känslor är ett annat sätt föräldrar kan bidra med för sina barns känslomässiga välmående. Det finns inga undantag. När de känner smärta, är rädda, förvirrade osv. är det viktigt att lyssna på dem, låta dem uttrycka sina känslor fullt ut och sen se om det går att hitta en lösning tillsammans, om barnet så önskar. Försäkra dig om att tillåta tillräckligt mycket tid så att känslan kan bli fullt upplevd av barnet och stoppa den inte förrän den har ridit ut sitt naturliga förlopp. Försök aldrig få barn att sluta gråta! Det är gråtandet som helar.”

Jag kan föreställa mig att vuxna kan bli provocerade på en massa olika sätt av ett barns känslor… Och det handlar inte om att tekniskt liksom bete sig rätt mot och med barn… Känns det…

Bosch on the creation of ”safe places”/Bosch om skapandet av ”säkra platser”…

Bosch writes at page 99 and forward in her book "Redisovering the True Self":

“Many therapists also use the strategy of creating a ‘safe place’ when
working with traumatized clients. The therapist helps the client to think up an
imaginary place in which she feels completely safe where she can retreat to
whenever she feels overwhelmed by her feelings. Although this might sound nice
to some readers, why would we need to have an imaginary safe place? We would
only need such a place if we were not truly safe in the present and we were
unable to change our situation. Such thinking implies it is possible that our
feelings cold really hurt us, and that we could actually be overwhelmed by our
feelings. Both these ideas are explicit in the concept of the ‘safe place’. The
‘safe place’ concept prevent us from giving in to our worst childhood feelings
while knowing that there is no actual danger, and therefore it takes away the
opportunity to come out on the other side of the feeling unharmed [and the
possibility to experience that this is actually possible. And possible again and
again till we don’t need it any more, as many times as we maybe need. And the
possibility of experiencing that it for each time gets a little bit easier and
is a little bit less frightening].
Knowing that it is safe to feel all old
feelings, that we won’t be devoured by them, that they will pass by eventually,
and that they are not too much for us to feel, is an important part of the
healing process. It can be painful and unpleasant, but we will come out unharmed
and one step closer to being healed.”

Clients have been scared and thus hindered in their healing during history??? This is awful I think! And this because of the therapists, psychologists and psychiatrists and other helpers own fears for their own truths? Bosch means, and writes, that these fears is actually a defence the child once needed against the truth, defences adults doesn’t need any more, adults can survive those feelings even if it doesn’t feel so. These defences aren’t necessary any longer. The harm that we are so afraid of has already been done and can’t harm us any more. But it doesn’t feel so; it feels as we are in danger here and now… But nevertheless we can survive them… Many clients have been scared instead of helped to overcome this fear, and scared for their own truths… Even more scared instead of less. And have used a lot of energy on controlling these feelings and hold them in check, energy they could have used on much more constructive things!!!!!

She writes at page 98:

“Quite a few therapeutic schools reinforce this fear of feelings we carry
with us. Most therapists do not recognize that the belief, about feelings being
potentially harmful, is actually a defence we needed when we were children.”

No, they don’t even recognise this for themselves?

See also what Freyd has written about healing. That she doesn’t agree with Daniel Goleman (see that blogpost).
-//-
Bosch skriver på sidan 99 och framåt i sin bok "Redisovering the True Self":

”Många terapeuter använder också strategin att skapa ’säkra platser’ när de
arbetar med traumatiserade klienter. Terapeuten hjälper klienten att tänka ut en
inbillad/maginär plats i vilken hon känner sig helt säker och dit hon kan dra
sig tillbaka närhelst hon känner sig överväldigad av sina känslor. Även om detta
kan kännas trevligt för vissa läsare, varför skulle vi behöva en tänkt ’säker
plats’? Vi skulle bara behöva en sådan om vi inte var verkligt säkra i nuet och
var oförmögna att förändra vår situation. Ett sådant här tänkande låter oss
förstå att det är möjligt att våra känslor verkligen kan skada oss och att vi
verkligen skulle kunna bli överväldigade av våra känslor. Båda dessa idéer är
uttryckliga i konceptet ’säker plats. ‘Säkra platsen’ konceptet hindrar oss från
att ge efter för våra värsta barndomskänslor samtidigt som vi vet att det inte
finns någon aktuell fara och därför tar det bort möjligheten att komma ut
oskadad på andra sidan av känslan [att verkligen få uppleva att det faktiskt är
möjligt. Och möjligt igen och igen, så mänga gånger som vi kanske skulle behöva.
Och att få uppleva att det för varje gång blir en aning mindre skrämmande].
Att veta att det är säkert att känna alla gamla känslor, att vi inte kommer
att bli förtärda av dem, att de slutligen kommer att passera och de inte är för
mycket för oss att känna, är en viktig del i helandeprocessen. Det kan vara
smärtsamt och otrevligt, men vi kommer att komma ut oskadade och ett steg
närmare att bli helade.”

Klienter har blivit skrämda och på det viset hindrade i sitt helande under historiens gång??? Detta är fruktansvärt tycker jag! Och detta på grund av terapeuters, psykologers, psykiatrikers och andra hjälpares egna rädslor för deras egna historier?? Bosch menar, och skriver, att dessa rädslor i själva verket är ett försvar som barnet måste ha en gång mot sanningen, försvar som vuxna inte behöver längre, vuxna kan överleva dessa känslor även om det inte känns så. Detta försvar är inte nödvändigt längre. Skadan som vi är rädda för har redan skett. Men det känns inte så, det känns som om faran finns här och nu. Men vi kan överleva dessa starka känslor. Många klienter har blivit skrämda istället för hjälpta att komma över sin rädsla och rädda för sina egna sanningar… Ännu mer rädda istället för mindre. Och har använt en massa energi för att kontrollera dessa känslor och hålla dem i schack, energi som skulle ha kunnat användas på betydligt mer konstruktiva saker!!!

Hon skriver på sidan 98:

“Inte så få terapeutiska skolor förstärker denna rädsla för känslor som vi
bär med oss. De flesta terapeuter erkänner inte att denna tro, att känslor är
potentiellt farliga, faktiskt är ett försvar vi behövde när vi var barn.”

Nej, de erkänner det inte ens för sig själva?

Se också vad Freyd skriver om helande. Att hon inte håller med Daniel Goleman (se det blogginlägget).

Freyd on narrating/Freyd om berättande…

Jennifer Freyd also writes about communication and narration in her book ”Betrayal Trauma – the Logic of Forgetting Childhood abuse” in the chapter ”Creating connections – Injury and Recovery” at pages 170 and forward.
She writes:

“Dana Jack has observed that ‘mind and self come into being through
communication with others. One cannot heal the self in isolation. The healing
role of communication in psychotherapy may partially relate to the recording of
sensory and affective information in shareable ways, just as the original
traumatic amnesia may relate to blockage of such recording. By talking or
writing about the traumatic memories, the client spontaneously creates an
episodic interpretation and integration of previously disjointed sensory and
affective memories (see also Herman1992; Nelson 1993; Pennebaker 190; Squire
1992). /…/ Some people seem to be able to do this sort of narrative
recording without actually speaking to a therapist or a trusted other. For some
it is enough to write the words down, or even to engage in mental dialogue about
the memories, although for most people actual communication is important. The
power of language is not only the external act, but it is also the internal act
– the use of ‘voice’ to reconstruct, to recode, to make new connections [I jump
the discussions about policy round these things; societal change etc.] /…/ [it
is] sometimes essential to focus on healing before looking outward to the world.
At other times it is necessary to change, or at least escape from, a toxic
environment before healing can occur. And sometimes action on both fronts is
required.
There is a long sad history of psychiatry and other mental health
fields silencing women and victims of oppression and abuse. Many ‘healing’
interventions can be understood as designed to cover up the very symptoms that
point toward the oppression and victimization of women, children, and others /…/
in too many cases the professionals endowed with the power of professional
psychiatry or psychology not only implicitly cover up oppression and
victimization but in some cases also exploit and sexually abuse their female
patients [and abuse and violate their clients emotionally, yes, in some cases
commit emotional rape!!??] /…/ the therapists who may acknowledge oppression and
victimization within the therapy room take no role in promoting or encouraging
political reform. I believe that this tendency of even gifted healers to avoid
political activity and to infantilize women victims of interpersonal crimes may
have its rots in the forces that have allowed psychiatry to silence victims of
oppression and violence (see Masson 1988 for an insightful and provocative
critique of psychotherapy). When the goal of therapy is reintegration into
society, the assumption is that it is the individual who must adapt, and the
society that is healthy.”

As it has been (and still is) with the neurasthenics and burn out/exhausted!!! As an individual disease, rather than as the result of an ingrained social disorder, as Freyd also means.
She continues:

“While I agree with many of the concerns raised by critics of therapy, I
believe that some therapy relationships can play an important role in some
survivors’ recovery. Perhaps the crucial factor for recovery is that the abuse
survivor have a relationship (whether with a therapist or someone else) in which
the truth can be told without recrimination, a relationship in which the
survivor can trust that the truth will be heard and believed without the
listener’s subsequently abusing his or her power. According to Jonathan Shay,
‘Healing from trauma depends upon communalization of the trauma – being able
safely to tell the story to someone who is listening and who can be trusted to
retell it truthfully to others in the community’.”

See earlier blogposts about narratives. I would also want to write about how Bosch resonates round the use of “safe places” in therapy and what that can cause and if it is necessary at all, and how she looks on children and their anger.

A sidetrack and short note: Veterinaries seem to be afraid of standing on the animal’s side in animal protecting matters because they are afraid of losing customers according to my brother who works with animal care (he is agronomist)…
-//-
Jennifer Freyd skriver också om kommunikation och berättande i sin bok ”Betrayal Trauma – the Logic of Forgetting Childhood abuse” i kapitlet ”Creating connections – Injury and Recovery” på sidorna 170 och framåt.

Hon skriver:

“Dana Jack har iakttagit att ’själ och själv blir till genom kommunikation med andra. Man kan inte hela självet i isolering. Den helande rollen hos kommunikation i psykoterapi kan delvis sättas i samband med inregistrerande av sensorisk och känslomässig information på ett sätt som kan delas, precis som den ursprungliga traumaamnesin kan relateras till en blockering av sådant inregistrerande. Genom att tala eller skriva om traumatiska minnen, skapar klienten spontant en tillfällig/episodisk tolkning och integration av tidigare osammanhängande sensoriska och känslomässiga minnen (se också Herman 1992, Nelson 1993, Pennebaker 1990, Squire1992). /…/ En del människor verkar kunna göra denna sorts berättande (in)registrerande utan att alls prata med en terapeut eller annan person man har förtroende för. För en del är det tillräckligt att skriva ner orden, eller bara att engagera sig i en mental dialog med minnena, men för de flesta människor är faktisk kommunikation viktig. Makten i språket är inte bara yttre agerande, utan det är också en inre handling – användandet av ’röst’ för att rekonstruera, koda om, skapa nya förbindelser /…/ [det är] ibland väsentligt/oundgängligt att fokusera på helande innan man tittar utåt mot världen. Andra gånger är det nödvändigt att ändra, eller åtminstone fly från/undslippa, en förgiftad omgivning innan helande kan ske. Och ibland krävs agerande på båda fronter.

Det finns en lång och sorglig historia inom psykiatrin och annan mental hälsovård med tystande av kvinnor eller offer för förtryck och övergrepp. Många ’helande’ interventioner/åtgärder kan ses som ämnade att dölja exakt de symtom som pekar mot förtrycket och återoffrandet av kvinnor, barn och andra /…/i alltför många fall så inte bara döljer professionella, förlänade med psykiatrins eller psykologins makt, förtryck och återoffrande underförstått, i vissa fall utnyttjar och sexuellt förgriper de sig på sina kvinnliga patienter /…/ terapeuterna som skulle kunna erkänna förtryck och återoffrande i terapirummet tar inte på sig rollen att befordra/främja eller uppmuntra politiska reformer. Jag tror att denna tendens även hos begåvade helare att undvika politisk aktivitet och att infantilisera kvinnor som är offer för mellanmänskligt våld kan ha sina rötter i krafter(na) som har tillåtit psykiatrin att tysta offer för förtryck och våld (se Masson 1988 för en insiktsfull och provokativ kritik av psykoterapi). När målet är återintegration i samhället, så förutsätts det att det är individen som ska anpassa sig och att samhället är friskt.”

Som det har varit och fortfarande är med neuroastenikerna och de ”utbrända”!!! Som en sjukdom hos individen snarare än som resultatet av en djupt förankrad social sjukdom, som Freyd skriver.

Hon fortsätter:

“Medan jag håller med många av de bekymringar (???) som rests av kritiker till terapi, så tror jag att en del terapirelationer kan spela en viktig roll i vissa överlevares återhämtning. Kanske är den avgörande/kritiska faktorn för återhämtning att överlevaren efter övergrepp har ett förhållande (vare sig det är med en terapeut eller någon annan) i vilken sanningen kan berättas utan att bli motbeskylld, en relation i vilken överlevaren kan lita på att sanningen kommer att bli hörd och trodd utan att lyssnaren senare/efteråt missbrukar sin makt. Enligt Jonathan Shay, ’Helande från trauma hänger på gemensamgörande (???) av traumat – att tryggt kunna berätta historien för någon som lyssnar och som man kan lita på kan återberätta denna sanningsenligt till andra i gemenskapen’.”

Se tidigare blogginlägg om berättelser och berättande.

Two brothers...

I had got a couple of emails from Norwegian friend when I logged in now in the morning and checked my email and published two blogposts. It was about a research here in Swede and as they have actually mentioned in the news recently too about how patients in psychiatric care are treated – with violence.

I came to think on what Kirkengen has written about revictimization in somatic medicine too and about what she calls “medical making of patients”.

I would like to write about two brothers. One was born 1920 and the other 1923. They had an older brother born 1916 and a sister born 1918.

The two brothers died when they were 83 respective 82 years, the first with a metastasis from malign melanoma (which they have shown can be connected to depression, ad probably also a hidden depression, or at least suppressed feelings and emotions from early) in the brain that influenced the speech and coordination of the movements (probably says where I the brain it was located; yes, in the left side, but I can’t say where more specifically, but more in the frontal lobes?), the second in Alzheimer’s disease. And a reader of Miller wrote in a letter and asked about her older sister which fell ill with Alzheimer when she was just above 50… The sister wondered if there could be a connection to abuse in childhood and later on from parents and other family members which used this woman as the family’s black sheep and scapegoat… Reflections from a sister thus that had seen what had happened and had inside information… Miller thought it could be… Things that never had got processed.

When they had lost their conscious awareness they became fairly violent to the ones that should take care of them; they fought, and at least the first of these brothers was extremely strong until he died.

And noone of them wanted to sit down on the toilet or even at the bedside, they just refused as if they were about to sit on something that was very painful or dangerous!? And to put on the pyjama jacket or a t-shirt or shirt was difficult. It looked as it felt like being put in a prison.

I got a picture, of children forced by a mother to sit on the chamber pot. And/or pulled down into a lap of a mother, father or older half-brother… With sexual undertones? A very unpleasant experience for a small child I think, which maybe is immediately suppressed and later controlled until that control no longer is there as in these two old men.

Maybe as very small already?

And a mother forcing a baby-sweater on small babies, impatiently and irritated with no sense for the babies signs or irritated over them. And maybe that the small baby also was in a way stuck in a sheet and blanket… And earlier babies were wrapped in swaddling-cloths… But I don’t think those were, because that wasn’t the custom at all then since long… Can claustrophobia come from such experiences? Can they have been forwarded in other manners or behaviors when swaddling was forbidden? With similar effects in the grown up?

And if that later grown up or old is treated with irritation ad impatience and insensitivity again how is that?? Do hey now try to void what hey experienced early? And maybe they now have the strength to work against it, which the child didn’t have.

How would it be if later caretakers treated this differently? Without force?

These two brothers never showed any such signs when they weren’t consciously aware of things…

The emails cited articles about a investigation that is done o the psychiatry here, where they have shown that patients at psychiatric wards are very often treated with violence from the staff. Even severe violence and force…

I came to think about this and about limit setting patients… What is all that about? Is it exercise of power and more of the same? The staff too often treats the patients in the same manner as the parents treated these patients once when they were small children?? That’s what I wonder. Is this healing or helping? Can this dissolve anything? Does it even make anything better? The things that made the patient sick are done once again to the patient? With maybe the same insensitivity as they once was shown? And what is the caregivers limit setting (posing boundaries) against too one can wonder? Where does this need come from? Is this need today relevant or adequate always? Or how often is it really relevant? But of course they must protect themselves when and if it necessary!!! But are boundaries put just out of need to demonstrate d exercise power?

I have never worked at such a place and have no inside information either, this is only feelings…

I haven’t Kirkengen’s books with me now… But she has written about this phenomenon I think…

And maybe a side-remark, but in the anthology it stood that as late as in the thirties till 1942 they talked physician level about a disease called Caffey’s syndrome, which consisted of broken legs and extravasations of blood under the hard cerebral membrane ‘) in babies!!! Later they discovered that this wasn’t a disease but child abuse and physicians in different countries have learnt to recognize he symptoms and react on them when they meet them.
So such things aren’t more distant in time.

*) blodsutgjutelse under hårda hjärnhinnan!!!

And to be honest, the two brothers above were my dad and uncle… Seen with a daughter’s eyes and experiences of this father – and uncle. And of relatives and their lives (all cousins on dad’s side are older than I and my siblings). What she has seen and sensed, both consciously and unconsciously? And that was probably forwarded in some manner, but maybe not exactly as what they experienced. But probably in other forms… With some of the following problems!? I don’t know which and how yet… But I can imagine… Some of the things…

PS. Photos from my walk today...

Old unmet needs/gamla, ickefyllda behov…

The Dutch therapist Ingeborg Bosch writes in her book ”Rediscovering the True Self- A search for truth and healing. New insights combined with at comprehensive self-healing program” at page 271 about old unmet needs:

“As children we all had needs that were not met by our caregivers.
Usually
these unmet needs are of a no-physical nature (warmth, safety,
respect, trust,
support etc.). There are also unmet needs of a physical
nature (sexual integrity
and bodily safety). It is these unmet needs that
make it necessary for children
to hide the truth about their childhoods from
themselves. The truth being that
their needs are not being met and will not
ever be met.”

Experienced in a totally dependent state. In the powerlessness state as it is to be a small child and a newborn baby dependent on caregivers. The worse the child was treated the more needs in the child of power in her/his adult life…

And this lack of power you can exercise as grown up in different ways… If you aren’t totally paralysed of trauma. Which also can be the case?

The more revenge feelings ad needs for control and power the more you need to exercise this as grow up in different ways… Depending on what opportunities you are given too.

For women the traditional way to do this is via their own children – if they have any. That has been an allowed object for her. Men have had other opportunities, but also exercised it at own children. See what Astrid Lindgren said I her speech about dictators, tyrants etc.

But not only this, but it also causes a lot of problem in the grown ups life, because trying to fill old unmet needs will always cause problems and troubles in relations. Will always distance you, maybe most to the ones that are most important. With whom you won’t have that grown up relation as really grown up to grown up. Maybe that’s an illusion to get the perfect relation?

And it is as Jennifer Freyd writes, that life will always be both wonderful and horrible. But the less unprocessed you have the better you can handle these facts!? The perfect life isn’t a life on roses, but you can handle the life as it is more or less constructively…
I am trying to catch something here…

Denying these truth will always cause problems… If we were able to feel the feelings that would have been adequate then we would have less needs to exercise them in out lives here and now. But this is no easy thing. And that fact would really be a reminder for us all; in how we are treating the up growing species. To prevent all problems we can for them… Because it is so difficult to deal with those things, which we should realize…

A psychologist said to me:

“Each generation has to work on its own”.

That’s the possibility we all have. But I reacted against this statement, tried to point it out, but don’t feel he really took it to him or maybe didn’t even listen or hear what I said!? Because I thought that we should talk much more open about all these things everywhere in society.

But it was like mentioning a taboo-thing!!?? As if it forbidden to blame ones parents and seriously do that and see what comes out of that? If there was nothing to hide what would be the problem? I can’t see where the problem is then? And not least then!

A chid needed warmth, safety, respect, trust etc. on the emotional level, and sexual and physical integrity including bodily safety. If a grown up try to fulfil these needs in adult life it always causes problem, bigger or smaller…

And stands in the way for filling adult needs or even to realize what ones adult needs actually are…

Needs for power and control… But what needs does a grown up actually have in these respects?

I think Jenson is right when she writes at page 173 in the Swedish edition of her book that when we have realized how it actually was we willnot be able to hurt others without feeling their pain too. And: We will not believe that power and richness can give us something really important.

We won’t be able to live with anything but the truth – before ourselves and others. And the best, the better our mental health becomes the more we distance us from exercise of power and violence [wherever it occurs].
-//-
Den holländska terapeuten Ingeborg Bosch skriver i sin bok
”Rediscovering the True Self- A search for truth and healing. New insights combined with at comprehensive self-healing program” på sidan 271 om gamla ickefyllda behov:

“Som barn hade vi alla behov som inte blev fyllda av våra vårdnadsgivare.
Vanligtvis är dessa ofyllda behov av en ickefysisk natur (värme, trygghet,
respekt, tillit, stöd osv.). Det finns också behov av fysisk natur (sexuell
integritet och kroppslig trygghet). Det är dessa ickefyllda behov som gör det
nödvändigt för barn att dölja sanningen om sina barndomar för dem själva.
Sanningen att deras behov inte blev mötta och aldrig kommer att bli mötta.”

”Never violence” – a speech by Astrid Lindgren…

I have started to read the anthology “Ingen liten lort – Astrid Lindgren som opinionsbildare” ISBN 978-91-29-66692-2 Rabén& Sjögren (“No little shit *) – Astrid Lindgren as moulder of public opinion” it would be in English?), about Astrid Lindgren, with contributions from seventeen persons in different ages and with many different works and back grounds most of them living in Sweden. From other child book authors, journalists, a child physician (working at Astrid Lindgren hospital in Stockholm, a child-hospital) a former Soviet ambassador which now is living in Sweden etc.
*) or muck or dirt!?

It is a small cute dog here that wants to go out it looks now when I have sat down to write in the morning!! I wonder if I shall dress and take a walk with him before I write further?? J

Now back from the walk:

The speech Astrid Lindgren held in Frankfurt October 22, 1978 when she received the German bookseller’s peace prize had the title “Never violence” (“Aldrig våld” in Swedish).

The organization which gave it to her asked her not to hold it, just receive the prize, but Lindgren said no and that she wouldn’t come to the prize ceremony at all if she wasn’t allowed to hold just this speech and no other speech, and then they had to change their minds!!!

She starts this speech (which is published in its entity in this anthology) with wonders if we shouldn’t after all those thousand of years ask ourselves if there is a sort of constructional error in the human species since we always resort to violence. And if we are doomed to be ruined for our aggressions sake? Is there no possibility for us to change then, before it is too late? That we could learn to disclaim violence. Try to become another sort of human beings simply. But how and where shall we then start?

She thinks we have to start from the ground, the bottom. With the children.

My comment: And maybe we need many different perspectives on things in our world!!! From different angles, in different ways, from different persons, high and low, intellectual and not the leas intellectual (a former culture minister Bengt Göransson reflects in the anthology upon what made Lindgren such a success in moulding public opinion; and it wasn’t that she talked from above, but from an under perspective, spontaneously, directly etc. Maybe I write more about this too later)… Most the ones which are about our survival on this earth!!??

And she thinks that as they had chosen a child book author for this peace prize they couldn’t expect any political views, or perspectives, or suggestions to international solutions to problems. She wanted to talk about the children, simply. The ones that are going to take over this world. If there is anything left of it. Or what is left of it?

Do we want a society where the violence just keeps on increasing or do we want one where human beings live in peace and fellowship with each others? Is there any hope at all that we are going to create a more peaceful world than we have succeeded to create so far (if we see it from the pessimistic perspective)? And why haven’t we been more successful in spite of all good will? Se asked then, thirty years ago!!

She said that she remembered what a shock it was when she as a very young girl suddenly realized that those who ruled the countries and the world’s destiny were no gods with superior equipment or a divine clear vision. They were just human beings with the same faults and human weaknesses as she had. But the difference was that they had power and could each minute make the most fatal decisions, all after the impulses which ruled them (in that particular moment).

In the worse case a war could be started just because of one person’s desire for power or greediness of revenge or conceitedness or greediness to win or – which seems to be the most usual – blind faith and superstition in violence as the most effective tool in all situations. And at the same time just one good, calm human being can sometimes ward off catastrophes just by being good and calm and by distancing him/her from violence she meant.

She asked why there are so many who want violence and power? Is there an inborn evil wish or desire in some?

No, she believes there isn’t. She means that the decisive factor for if the child is going to turn out to a warm, open, confiding (trustful) human being with ability to community or a frigid, destructive “lonely wolf” is how the child is met when it comes into this world. If the people who meets the child and introduce it into the world can teach it what love it, by meeting it with love and respect or if they refuse to do this, if they refuse to take their responsibility for the child that has been brought into this world and put in their hands. No matter whether this child is going to play an important and decisive role or not. Every child deserves genuine love and respect and care despite this. Yes, no child has asked to come into this world, so I agree with this. But this is difficult, because so many of us are harmed more or less. We have to understand what has formed us (each of us ought to do this work) and at the same time avoid hurting the ones that are growing up (and of course all people).

Even coming statesmen’s or politician’s characters are formed before they have even turned five, this is awful but true she said. My addition: I have had a discussion with a friend about the need for power and control, and I think this plays a role here… I will probably come back to that topic later.

She reflects upon how children have been treated during history. And as she says, it has not all too seldom been about violence of some kind (yes, she said like this!!); physical or psychical, to break the child’s will. She asked: how often haven’t children got their first education in violence by “von denen die man liebt”, i.e., their own parents, and then passed these lectures further from generation to generation. “Spare the rod and you will spoil the child” (or how do one say this in English?) stands in the Old Testament, and many fathers and mothers have believed in this and diligently used the “rod” and called it “love”.

But all those “spoilt lads” (yes, she said so) round the world; the dictators, tyrants, oppressors, tormentors of human beings, which there are so many of in this very minute, if one should investigate what they have in their backgrounds, how their childhoods were. This we ought to inquire she thought. And she thought that behind most of these dictators, tyrants etc. there stand a tyrannical father or other fosterer with a rod or another whip in his hand.

She said in this speech: shouldn’t one get despaired when voices suddenly have been raised (fairly strongly then 1978? As they are today too, a well known child physician here Lars H Gustafsson criticizes the popular nanny-programs that have occurred the last years in TV here too unfortunately, maybe I will write more about this too. Yes, they feel fairly manipulative).

Voices for retrogression to the old authoritarian system, she said – then 1978. Which is what happens at many places in the world just now. Now one want “harder holds/grips” and “more tight reins” and believes that this shall help against all the youths bad habits which too much freedom and too little strictness in the upbringing is to blame they mean and say.

But that’s like trying to drive evil out with Beelzebub and will only in long term lead to more violence. These long-desired “harder holds” would possibly give a superficial effect which the pleaders maybe could interpret as an improvement until they would have to realize that violence breeds violence – as it has always done.

Many parents were probably worried by those signals and wondered what wrong they had done then (not learnt to trust themselves?)? If an antiauthoritarian upbringing is something to be condemned? It is, Lindgren thought, if it is misunderstood. She thinks there must be a mutual respect between children and parents. Children shall though not be left totally alone; left drifting at the mercy of the wind. But I would add that it must always start with the parents respect and love and care and enlightenment.

And then Lindgren told the story about the young mother and her son; Lindgren had met an old woman who told her this story: When she had been a young mother her little son had done something the mother thought she had to punish him for. She asked him to go out and fetch a birch for her so she could o this (or only threaten him with this? As the custom also was? In some homes the birch hang in the kitchen as a reminder). For the first time in his life (he was fairly small?). The little boy went out and was out for a long time. At last he came home crying and said:

“I didn’t find any birch, but here you have a stone you can throw on me”.

Then the mother started to cry too, seeing the whole scene with the boys eyes. The child must have thought:

“My mom in fact wants to hurt me, and then why not use a stone”.

They cried together and the mom put the stone on a shelf in the kitchen and there it lay as an eternal reminder about the promise she gave herself in that very moment:
“Never violence!”

Walk with poles...

Have just returned from a walk with poles and cute and eager dog in the wood. Am baking bread too in the middle of walking and reading, bread with dried fruits and walnuts to the afternoon tea...

Have started to read the anthology about Astrid Lindgren and a blogpost about her will come or even two or more... There were many threads to write around...

Now soon lunch.

PS. Found a letter on Miller's web from a Swedish journalist. He tipped about a magazine "Pockettidningen R" (the site was only in Swedish though). And about the site for the Swedish Journalist's Union.

Ingmar Bergman archives recommended for inclusion in the Memory of the World International Register...

Here information about this; the first in English and two in Swedish: here and here. :-)
It stood that Alfred Nobel's archives are also recommended at the same time. Astrid Lindgren's are already included.

Bergmans arkiv - nytt världsminne! Tack Anja för tipset!! :-)

Addition at 14.10: Am about to pack my car and going north on a trip. Probably stepwise to Norrbotten? Let's see. So blogposts will be fewer and not so long as they have been? But you shall never say no!? Maybe I write nevertheless on the portable computer and as much, and just log in shortly on he net for publishing them on the blog?

I am taking some books with me, for instance an anthology about Astrid Lindgren I got today and that has come recently. So maybe I want to write about her too? :-)

Tips om atiklar...

Ledare igår av Robert Sundberg i DD om högerregeringens utnämningpolitik "Borgarna utnämner borgare" och debattartikel idag i samma ämne "Högeralliansens kritik faller platt till marken".
Sundberg skriver bland annat:

"Under en dräkt av kompetens och oberoende döljs ofta en person med borgerliga sympatier."

Och han skriver att Norge visat att det går att kombinera en omfattande offentlighet i asökningsprocessen med ett stort antal sökande till de tjänster som annonseras ut.
Han skriver vidare:

"En annan orsak till det flitiga bruket av utnämningsmakten till att sätta ut personer från egna politiska lägret kan bero på ett behov av att kunna dumpa politiker snett åt sidan. Alltså lite av en välavlönad och nästan, men inte helt, maktlös avstjälpningsplats för politiker. Det behovet finns nog oavsett ifall det rör de med s-märkt röd partibok eller alliansmärkt orange t-tröja på sig."

Ja, och det var så borgerliga politiker också dumpades redan av Göran Persson?
Greider skriver också på ledarsidan i "Rader från Hagen" att:

"När jag vaknar till slöbläddrar jag i tidningen som ligger på verandabordet. Det är givetvis Dala-Demokraten - men exemplaret är från 7 mars 1945! Nu är kriget snart slut - Köln har fallit. /.../
Längre ner på sidan finns en nyhet, som seriekopplas med dagens politiska verklighet. Den handlar om 'hembiträdesproblemet'. Vad är problemet? Jo, ingen vill längre jobba som hembiträde, trots 'ordnade arbetsförhållanden och relativt hyggliga löner'.
Skadeglad läser jag artikeln: om bara några dagar införs alliansregeringens pigförslag, som innebär att skattebetalarna subventionerar städning av de välbeställdas hem. Men då, för sextio år sedan, visade det sig att unga kvinnor inte ville jobba hemma hos familjer - om de bara fick chansen till något annat och roligare. Hembiträden förknippades - helt korrekt - med en gammal, ofri tid."

//

Tips om popkollo...

Tips från "Allsång på Skansen" om popkollo för flickor!!! Information in English about a music-camp for girls!!
Now I am going to watch the British series "Midsomer Murders".

Overly responsible taking...

Struck me, when when I took a shower and washed my hair (doing things seem to stimulate my thinking!! :-)), about making people feel comfortable...

That nobody shall feel excluded...

Women (generally) tend to take responsibility for the atmosphere, for instance at work places. And stress researchers mean this can be one (of many) explanations why women have been exhausted the last ten years during and after the steal bath in economy.

The pressure has been heavier on those women that tend to take a lot of responsibility in slimmed organizations where more people are tired or exhausted and easier gets outbursts... For those who take responsibility for the atmosphere at the work place too or even too much to carry. Why more women have been on sick list the last 10-15 years... (when we also have had more lousy bosses?).

With this not said that this can't cause problems and irritations for the ones around such a woman/person!!?? But the one that suffers most of this is after all the one that takes more responsibility on her/him than is hers/his!!??

And from where does this stem??? Being forced to take much more responsibility than the ever so clever child ever can take or should take?? And which never was her/his duty at all!!!
Maybe signs of early tragic circumstances???

Fast and spontaneously written as almost always with all what that mean!!

PS. Read something in this style:

"…responsible for looking after others feelings, which one shouldn't have needed to. Still finding oneself doing that, even now, today, an extremely hard habit to break, and does it come of being a loving gentle (???) child, who had to look after everyone else’s needs except ones own?"

Making oneself invisible, no-needy and instilling guilt in all around?? Or, the opposite, refusing to take responsibility for what you should take responsibility for??

Short notes from the magazine MåBra...

Got the magazine “MåBra” (something like “FeelWell” in English) a couple of weeks ago. It has been lying on my balcony after a first skimming through it…

There are short notes among longer articles and chronicles in it.

Here some of the short notes, with a smile… Maybe some are more serious or are worth both a smile and serious reflections??? Or? :-)

Forty-five centimeters is the distance most people feel comfortable with to keep to other people… That’s what a person’s comfortable “room” is. If someone comes closer we have a tendency to take a step back!? Coming closer can be experienced as threatening… Yes, so I think it is… (and by age it can be disturbing if people are coming too close too!!! :-) When siblings children show something just under ones eyes I have to push it away a bit to be able to read and/or see!! If I don't have any contact lenses in my eyes or glasses on. If I don't I need to have the text fairly close! :-)).

And this was probably known to many already!!??

An exercise to get a better memory according to researchers at the University in Manchester: if you look from one side to the other for 30 minutes *) each morning you improve your memory with ten percents!!! Think!! When the eyes are working from the left to the right (without moving the head!?) the brain halves are forced to cooperate more effectively, even later during the day.

*) of course this should be seconds!! Doing this for half an hour sounds a bit... :-) I wonder how I would feel after such an exercise???

“Women on pictures lower men’s ego”. That women feel inadequate (otillräckliga) by seeing pictures on other women in magazines is maybe not so surprising to most people, but did you know (!!??) that men too get bad self esteem by watching pictures of beautiful and attractive women??!! When he sees an attractive and sexy women on a picture he fantasizes about how her dream man looks – and soon realizes that he can’t compete with this man. He can feel complex for his body too and his ego can become lowered… Think!!?? Yes, I can imagine...

Thoughts during a bike tour…

A bike tour dressed only in an armless dress and a t-shirt yesterday evening… It’s sun today too and seems to be a warm summer’s day.

Of some reason I thought about therapy cycling in the summer nature…

Just to change ones behavior, from a dysfunctional to a functional, how genuine is that? Does changed behavior change ones feeling and emotions, and how changed are ones behaviors actually? How radically does a changed behavior change one feelings and emotions, in long term? Maybe they become for those that are least hurt and less traumatized? But those that are more, or a little more...? Does a functional behavior on the surface change ones feelings especially radically? Does a sensitive client feel genuine, not false?

Does unprocessed things reveal themselves in other areas instead? I.e., you react symbolically in other parts of your life instead?? And have the same problems but changed to other objects and parts of the life? What does this cause? What can it cause in a client that want to be genuine and honest? Does this give self respect and self love? Or maybe the opposite? So how healing is this method in fact? Even if it feels liberating at first (because if you have satisfied the therapist with behaving right and thinking and feeling right, you feel satisfied yourself at first at least for being a good patient!?? As you maybe ones was the good girl or boy!? And you haven't drawn the therapists anger and displease over you!!! How many dare to challenge this really?? Or are allowed to really??).

A clever client will do this (maybe do it very intelligently too?) to the therapists satisfaction, to please him/her and get her/his "love", maybe without even being aware of it? Because the client is often very sensitive to very small signs (unconscious even to the therapist maybe, unconsciously manipulating) in the therapist what behaviors and thoughts etc. the therapist likes and approves of??

Maybe exactly as the client once did early in her/his life to get love and to avoid outbursts, being mad totally invisible, being punished in different ways?? And how healing is that? In long term…

I wonder if things won’t be revealed in other areas and circumstances and relations in life??

And many clients most surely also feel relieved and satisfied with changing their behaviors to something the therapist (expert and authority) like and approve of!!?? Used to satisfy? And the ones that haven’t used this strategy as their main don’t seek therapy, not voluntarily???

But sooner or less this clever client will feel that not much has actually changed: he/she still feel this and that, still have similar problems?? Is still unsatisfied with a lot of things??

And what can this result in and cause?

Can tendencies to blame oneself be strengthened instead?? As the small child once did.

“I am a hopeless case? I am worthless, bad, impossible!!!”

Ingeborg Bosch thinks this tendency to blame oneself stems from earliest in life: to blame oneself, which already the very small child does, to survive that hr/his parents didn’t know what she/he needed… It’s easier to blame yourself… For being such a failure, for feeling this and that, for having those needs, feelings, reactions… It’s the child’s fault – and maybe signs the child is sick?? For not being able to take care of her/himself,,,

And this, the first defense (which Bosch calls the Primary defense) we take with us up in adult life, more or less strong or powerful, depending on how little or much we got from the earliest care takers in our lives. Did we get that care and respect and sensitivity from these first care takers, then we have less needs to fulfill them in adult life and can live more fully and with better relations and less problems of different kinds…

And a therapy that strengthens this defense instead of the opposite is bad – or even harmful to say it straight!!??

Addition at 14.37: Got a tip from a friend in Norway about a short note in a paper in Norway where a professor is cited, he says something in the style that it can be a risk to criticize the power/caregiver and the whole apparatus round treatment; you easily get diagnosed as mad or disturbed... But it is necessary to criticize psychiatric treatment, even if people working in this profession can experience this as hostile, the author of this short note thinks... Yes, if you criticize it is a risk you get diagnosed!?

Can the use of diagnoses and statements about others to them be a way to avoid saying: "I feel... You scared me!" or something? Thus to admit what was awoken in you, maybe also admit them to yourself and by exposing this reveal a vulnerability, feelings of power- and helplessness to which fears of being misused or even exploited and abused in this vulnerability are connected?? Contempt for weakness? But can the strength/powerfulness lie in this "weakness" (and this thought is extremely scary to many??)? To dare to expose this weakness? Dare to take that risk?? I don't know... But exposing them to a one that is worth it, came to think about what Kirkengen has written about narrating... See the last blogpost about that.

Feelings you don't want to admit or maybe even be aware of yourself too??

Just some thoughts... And does his understanding have limits too? Maybe it shall have??

Addition June 27: Got another tip from a Swedish friend on the theme therapy. A short cartoon sequence in Swedish, with a client lying on the therapist's coach saying to his therapist something in the style:

"I get such an ache in my foot sometimes..."

The therapist reflects upon this:

"It's because you dislike our therapist sessions, Spix!"

And continues:

"Unconsciously you punishes yourself for this dislike through experiencing the pain in the foot."

A sudden aha-experience in the client, which spontaneously replies, surprised:

"Oh, damn!"

More about narrating/mer om berättande…

Kirkengen also writes in the “Epilogue” at page 395 in her book ”Inscribed Bodies…”:

“However, speaking out about violation can only wield its constructive power in the presence of a crucial precondition: trust. When humans are or feel distrusted when telling about violations, the healing and protecting potential of speaking seems to be unmade, and speaking can become destructive in a double sense; being disbelieved is silencing, and not to be believed shatters ones foundations. More destructive, perhaps than any silence imposed by threat or force during violation, is not to be believed when voicing the violation. When explicit aim of most societies is to create and maintain good conditions for health, a pervasive distrust of narratives about sexual violation as the normative position acts as a pathogenic force, creating and maintaining sickness.”

But when you get the right sort of listener this can mean a lot, maybe the whole, as for Gisela it sounds. It stands at page 387 in “Inscribed bodies...” that:

“I was thirty-two, so this was fairly early. I was sterilized and had lost everything inside. I felt only half human. But the pain remained, until two years ago when I began to tell about the abuse.”

She had been abused by her biological father from when she was nearly three until she was five years old. From the age of seven very frequently abused by a non-relative; a farmer from whom her parents used to rent a cabin for weekends and holidays. On two occasions he also gave three and then two of his adult-fiends access to Gisela too. This abuse terminated when Gisela was fifteen and her parents chose anther place to spend heir weekends on though still ignorant of the farmer’s continuous abuse of their daughter.

Also see former blogpost about "Narratives..."

-//-

Kirkengen skriver också i “Epilogue” på sidan 395 i sin bok ”Inscribed Bodies…”:

”Dock, att tala ut om övergrepp kan bara utöva sin konstruktiva kraft under en avgörande förutsättning: tillit. När människor är eller känner sig misstrodda när de talar om övergrepp, verkar de helande och skyddande potentialerna av tala bli ogjorda och att tala kan bli destruktivt [istället!] i dubbelt avseende; att bli misstrodd är tystande och att inte bli trodd bryter sönder ens grundvalar. Mer destruktivt kanske än någon tystnad pålagd genom hot eller tvång under övergrepp är att inte bli trodd när man ger röst åt övergreppet/kränkningen. När uttrycklig avsikt i de flesta samhällen är att skapa och vidmakthålla bra förhållanden för hälsa kan en genomträngande misstro över berättelsen om sexuella övergrepp och den normerande positionen fungera som en patogen (sjukgörande) kraft, som skapar och vid makthåller sjukdom.”

Men om man får rätt sorts lyssnare kan detta betyda mycket, kanske allt, som för Gisela låter det som. Det står på sidan 387 i ”Inscribed bodies…” att:

”Jag var trettiotvå, så detta var ganska tidigt. Jag var steriliserad och hade förlorat allt inuti. Jag kände mig som en halv människa. Men smärtan var kvar, till för två år sedan när jag började berätta om övergreppen.”

Hon hade blivit förgripen på av sin biologiska pappa från hon var nästan tre år till hon var fem. Från sju års ålder blev hon ofta förgripen på av en som inte var släkting: en bonde som hennes föräldrar hyrde en stuga av över helger och semestrar. Vid två tillfällen lät han också först re så två vuxna vänner också få tillgång till Gisela. Dessa övergrepp slutade när Gisela var femton år och hennes föräldrar valde att tillbringa helger och semestrar på andra ställen, fortfarande ignorerande att bonden hade förgripit sig p deras dotter.

Se också tidigare blogginlägg om "Berättelser..."

Artikeltips och litet andra tips/tips about articles and some other tips...

Här kommer diverse tips om artiklar:
"När psykiatri blir en börda" som norsk vän tipsade mig om. En norsk förlagschef miste sin fru och sitt enda barn i självmord inom loppet av mindre än ett år. Han har skrivit denna artikel själv om sina kontakter med psykiatrin i samband med dessa?

Han fick diagnosen narcissistisk störning av överläkaren på den klinik han uppsökte efter första självmordet, efter att ha haft några terapeutiska samtal med denne, samtal som dock inte redogjordes för i någon journal. Och nekades hjälp senare, vid det andra självmordet med hänvisning till denna diagnos.

Som han skriver; i en sådan här situation (eller i annan kris) söker en del hjälp hos privata behandlare, andra polikliniskt, medan en tredje grupp behöver läggas in på sjukhus, Han tillhörde den sistnämnda gruppen, ehlt enkelt därför att olika människor behöver olia och olika mycket hjälp (vilket heller inte alltid kan förutses innan).

Terapeut som han hade kontakt med utanför den psykiatriska kliniken förordade också inläggning. Men mannen blev alltså nekad sådan och dessutom diagnosticerad av den som hade huvudansvaret.

De vände sig då till ett annat sjukhus i Oslo och där fick mannen den hjälp han behövde.

Mannen ifråga betraktar det han utsattes för som regelrätt terapeutiskt övergrepp. Han menar att överläkaren själv ödelade terapin. Och att han hade definitionsmakten att sjukförklara.

Och den diagnos han satte användes för att neka honom hjälp och behandling. Men på ett annat sjukhus gjordes en helt annan bedömning av både honom och situationen. Där fick han också snabbt hjälp.

Han skriver också att ovanpå självmord i familjen (gäller andra kriser också) kommer så mycket annat i kölvattnet, som nedsatt arbetsförmåga, sviktande hälsa, spänningar i sociala relationer, ödelagd privatekonomi m.m. Allt detta kan bli ganska tungt att bära.

Vidare en ledare av förre chefredaktören för Aftonbladet Gunnar Fredriksson "Moderna fördomar kläs i antika dräkter". Där han skriver om den nya storfilmen från Hollywood "300".

Han skriver bland mycket annat att

"För övrigt var inte de 300 spartanerna ensamma utan fick hjälp av tusentals andra trupper. Och även i Persien fanns en klassisk kultur.

Vad spartanerna faktiskt räddade var inte minst filosoferna och bögarna i Aten och andra städer i söder. Det var under den här perioden som de märkliga filosoferna före Sokrates och Platon framträdde.

Jag kan inte lätt avfärda Hollywoods tolkning av historien som ett likgiltigt fenomen. Jorden runt sprids enligt marknadens lagar denna dynga till masspubliken och det är ju sant att sådant går att sälja. Även i Sverige har vi politiker som förordar marknadsekonomi och ogillar kulturpolitik."

Jenny W. skriver på sin blogg om "I svenska barns svenska liv". Väl värd att läsa apropå de senast avslöjade fallen om barnmisshandel och samhällets handfallenhet inför dessa...

Vidare brev till ledarsidan i DD "Ännu har jag inte börjat titta efter hemtjänsten". Där det bland annat står:

"Idag ska ju vi alla, ja nästan alla, vårdas i det egna hemmet, som blir ditt eget lilla helvete där du ska sitta ensam och ropa och se ut genom fönstret, om inte hemtjänsten kommer snart."

Kommer att tänka på krönika Helle Klein skrev på julafton med temat ensamhet... En ensamhet som kanske är än större idag när vi alla stressar runt och som blir extra påtaglig under julen... Drabbar barn, gamla, människor i kris i alla åldrar, sjuka... Vilket ju blogginlägget "Made sick by Silence/gjord sjuk av tystnad..." ju handlar om; marginaliseringen och stigmatiseringen av olika kategorier av människor... Genom tigande och tystnad och att inte vilja veta eller höra...

Och denna marginalisering tar sig olika uttryck, se t.ex. Arthur Silbers essä "Give Me Your Tired, Give Me Your Poor, But Not Too Many Jews, and Not Too Many Iraqis".

Och slutligen en recension också i DD av pianisten Oscar Petersons bok "A Jazz Odyssey - The Life of Oscar Peterson". "Oscar Peterson skriver om allt".

PS. Jag har försökt översätta blogginläggen "Narratives/berättelser..." och "Made sick by silence/gjord sjuk av tystnad..." till svenska, men jag föreslår att man kollar i den engelska texten om något är oklart eller verkar konstigt... Det är ju inte alltid helt lätt att översätta, när det dessutom är fackböcker det handlar om... Och översättning är ju långt ifrån det jag sysslar med!!! Men jag tycker att detta är så viktiga texter så jag vill i alla fall försöka föra ut dessa texter/böcker så kanske ännu fler får kännedom om dem.

För den som så vill kan man ju försöka låna dessa böcker eller köpa dem och alltså läsa originaltexterna.

Och hittade idag historikern Peter Englunds blogg!!!! Han skriver ett intressant inlägg om Ebbe Carlsson och klättrarens alla drag, enligt Englund...

"Anpassbarheten, opportunismen , hänsynslösheten, fallenheten för manipulation, den gränslösa ambitionen. Samtidigt får man också en känsla för Ebbe Carlsson goda sidor, vilket krävs om man skall begripa hans märkliga karriär: intelligensen, charmen, lekfullheten, energin, humorn."

-//-

Articles in Swedish newspapers and a blog posting...

The first about "When psychiatry becomes a burden", about a Norwegian man which lost his wife and only child in suicide in less than a years time. He needed hospital care. And got it the when the first member ha committed suicide. The had talks he saw as therapy sessions with the chief physician at the clinic he was patient at. But in the records there stood nothing about them,

When the second suicide was committed he once again needed help acutely, supported by the private therapist he then had. But was refused this help at the clinic he had visited the fist time. The chief physician wrote a reply (not immediately though) to the therapist where he diagnosed the man as being narcissist and this was reason to refuse treatment.

They then turned to another hospital in Oslo where the man got help immediately, and where they viewed him and his situation completely different.

This man wrote this article himself and thus went out publicly with what he had been exposed to.

He writes that a crisis of this kind, when family members commit suicide (and in other crisis I would add) there follows things in the wake, reduced ability to work (if you don't flee into work with all what this can mean), failing health, tensions in social relations, ruined private economy etc.

The second article was a leader about the Hollywood film "300". "Modern Prejudices dressed in modern cloths" the writer has called it. He writes about the markets laws spread round the whole world, and even here in Sweden the politicians recommend market-economy (as the solution of everything my addition) and don't like culture policy (no, i agree with him!!! The politicians in the alliance here our present government don't seem to have hardly any interests for culture. How snobbish this even may sound from my part!!! I think of our foreign minister Carl Bildt for instance, very arrogant ad cynical, he doesn't seem to be interested at all and I doubt he knows anything about any of those topics; neither books, music, drama or anything! He is only interested in his career and making money?? Sounds as a poor life to be honest...).

And the last was a review of the pianists Oscar Peterson's new book "A Jazz Odyssey - The Life of Oscar Peterson", the review called "Oscar Peterson writes about everything".

On the theme marginalisation of people see Arthur Silbers essay Give Me Your Tired, Give Me Your Poor, But Not Too Many Jews, and Not Too Many Iraqis".

I have translated the blogposts Narratives..." and "Made sick...", and in he latter it stood about stigmatization and marginalization of people.

And I linked the blog to a Swedish historian in the end of the Swedish part of this blogposting.

Slow Dance...

"SLOW DANCE

Have you ever watched kids On a merry-go-round?

Or listened to the rain Slapping on the ground?
Ever followed a butterfly's erratic flight?

Or gazed at the sun into the fading night?

You better slow down. Don't dance so fast.

Time is short. The music won't last.

Do you run through each day

On the fly?

When you ask How are you?
Do you hear the reply?
When the day is done

Do you lie in your bed

With the next hundred chores
Running through your head?

You'd better slow down
Don't dance so fast.

Time is short.
The music won't last.

Never told your child, We'll do it tomorrow?
And in your haste, not see his sorrow?

Ever lost touch,
Let a good friendship die

Cause you never had time
To call and say,"Hi"

You'd better slow down.
Don't dance so fast.

Time is short.
The music won't last.

You miss half the fun of
getting there.
When you worry and hurry through your day,

It is like an unopened gift....
Thrown away.

Life is not a race.
Do take it slower

Hear the music
Before the song is over."

A poem written by a young girl in New York, with cancer... Got this by email from my youngest sister just now.

Addition: Photo from my bike tour now in the evening. It is fairly dark... For being summer.

In the middle of writing...

In the middle of writing about these heavy topics a break for washing my hair, going to the grocery store... I am going to make lasagna and a hopefully fresh salad to it, home baked bread, to a lunch to a sister her son and "husband" which are coming here for lunch... Hmmm, I am already hungry!! :-)

My brother in law is going to help me with my new computer a little more, to connect it to the wireless network etc.

The second day with lousy weather!! Grey and wet... But I think I won't have to take the car to the store. Can cycle between the houses. It's much more practical with the bike!! With parking it if nothing else, compared to a car!! :-)

Oh, it would be nice with some warmth...

Addition at 17.15: Now I am surfing wireless with my new computer here at home. Nice. But it was really tricky before we managed it!!

I wouldn't have made it on my own. I have Window Vista (not my active choice though) on my new computer and it created a lot of problems when we should install my antivirus protection. But at last we managed it!

Now I need to go out, get some day light after being in the whole day almost. And the weather also makes me quite tired. The dog Eskil also reacts when it is bad weather. Then he don't want to go out even if he hasn't even seen what weather it is. He just senses it!! A comfort really!! :-)

Made sick by silence/gjord sjuk av tystnad...

Kirkengen writes in the chapter "Conclusions and implications" at pages 390 and forward in her book "Inscribed bodies..." (see earlier blog posts about her and her books and what she has written, but these books contains almost 700 pages of text, so there is a lot of material there):

"...biomedicine is ignorant as to how life is inscribed into human lived bodies, and how lived bodies are inscribed in the social politics of silencing.

Violated humans are made sick by the silence and are sacrificed to the silence about overwhelmingly male sexual violence, which societies still resist becoming knowledgeable of and reflect upon. Both psychiatric and somatic medicine take part in the silencing, 'the sickness', the sacrifice and thus, the violence. [this is hard words, but true I think! Even psychiatry contribute to silencing I think, all too often, even fairly often or even very often?]. In outlining the implications of these finding, I shall argue that not only sexual violation or any other violation of personal integrity, has potentially pathogenic impact, but also any structural humiliation of human integrity."

Kirkengen refers to the Hebrew University philosopher Avishai Margalit, and writes for instance, about what he say and mean:

"He finds it more fruitful to construct a negative argument, based on the fact that human beings share the morally relevant characteristic of being 'something which can be humiliated'. This negative argumentation, he states, far surpasses in usefulness all of the positive ones /.../ According to Margalit, human beings no longer have Truth, God, Wisdom, Language, or the Law of Nature or History in common. Paradoxically, however, they do all share the ability to be humiliated.

A decent society is reflected, according to Margalit, in the way its institutions meet the most vulnerable of its members - or its non-members. Any measures which marginalize people stigmatize them. And a stigma is the public sign of deviation from the norm, be it the norm of honor, mores, gender, race, faith or function.

Regarding the concepts of honor, self-respect and self-esteem, Margalit writes: 'A humiliating society is one whose institutions cause people to compromise their integrity,' and, 'a decent society is one whose institutions do not violate the dignity of the people in its orbit.

My study provides evidence that structural humiliation of human dignity occurs within medicine [and in psychiatry and therapy too, because what clients have to come with too often becomes belittled and diminished, and analyzed and intellectualized and put a label or diagnose on, instead of being solved/dissolved. Kirkengen writes more about the power of narrative, and if these narratives are met with distrust, what this can lead to instead. I will write a separate blog post about that. And this occurs both in somatic medicine and psychiatry I think]. Whenever people deviate from the norm of biomedicine they become marginalized /.../ if their symptoms do not respond to presumably appropriate measures; if their health does not improve as fast as expected; and finally, whenever they return with the same presenting problem despite that, according to standard medical practice, it ought to have been solved.

These scenarios all lead to medical marginalization, regardless of their origin. It is known, however, that social stigma and shameful, silenced experiences cause health problems but, at the same time cannot be communicated frankly and explicitly /.../ In other words: socio-culturally originating suffering and bad health are not only misunderstood in medical contexts; they will also most probably be aggravated by being responded to with 'more of the same', so to speak /.../

Consequently there is a path from silenced humiliation in private to legitimized humiliation in public. There is a link between the private experience of being made to feel worthless [originating in childhood] - through domestic abuse [physical, sexual and emotional abuse and violation], subordination, exploitation, neglect or deprivation [in grown ups too, which reeanct what they endured during childhood; if their self-esteem was damaged they won't be able to protect themselves adequately and maybe also behaves self-destructively, if they don't act it out on others in destructive behaviors], and the public doom of being unworthy to receive help - through correct medical and legal objectification."

Also see what the ACE-study has found about adverse childhood experiences and their impact on health (so these experiences doesn't only or even always cause psychic problems, but also what we usually mean are somatic troubles, and in many cases both, even among those we deem as "socially respected"; the ACE-study is performed on middle-class Americans, which can afford health insurances, thus aren't the ones in the absolute bottom of the society!!).

A translation to Swedish will probably follow. And see again "Miller on the Wall of Silence"!!?? The blog post about this...

-//-

Nu kommer översättning av detta blogginlägg:

Kirkengen skriver i kapitlet "Conclusions and implications" på sidorna 390 och framåt i sin bok "Inscribed bodies..." (se tidigare blogginlägg om henne och hennes böcker, som sammanlagt består av nästan 700 sidor text inklusive fotnoter som också är värda att läsa).

”… biomedicin ignorerar hur liv skrivs in i mänskliga levda kroppar och hur levda kroppar är inskrivna av den sociala policyn nedtystande.

Kränkta människor har blivit gjorda sjuka av tystnaden/tigandet och är offrade till tystnaden/tigandet om överväldigande manligt sexuellt våld, vilket samhället fortfarande motstår att bli vetande om [dvs. kort och gott vill man inte veta om det] och reflekterande över. Både psykiatri och somatisk medicin deltar i detta (ned)tystande, ’sjukdomen’, offrandet och sålunda våldet. Genom att skissera innebörderna av dessa fynd, ska jag argumentera inte bara över vad sexuellt våld eller varför vilken annan kränkning av personlig integritet har potentiellt skadande effekter, utan också varför varje strukturellt förödmjukande av mänsklig integritet ar det [Kirkengen skriver om reviktimisering av människor i somatisk medicin och psykiatri, dvs. klienter som blir kränkta igen och på samma sätt som de e gång blev, vilket lett till deras sjuklighet. Bara för att man inte vill veta om de grundläggande och underliggande orsakerna, inte frågar efter dem, inte ’vågar’ (??) fråga efter dem].”

Kirkengen refererar till den hebreiska filosofen Avisha Margalit:

”Han finner det mer fruktbart att konstruera ett negativt argument, baserat på fakta att mänskliga varelser delar den moraliskt relevanta karaktäristiken att vara ’någonting som kan bli förödmjukat’. Denna negativa argumentation menar han vida överträffar/-stiger alla de positiva i användbarhet /…/ Enligt Margalit så har mänskliga varelser inte längre sanning, Gud, visdom, språk eller naturens och historiens lagar gemensamt. Paradoxalt dock, delar de alla förmågan att bli förödmjukade.

Ett anständigt samhälle reflekteras, enligt Margalit, i sättet dess institutioner möter dess mes sårbara av dess medlemmar - eller dess ickemedlemmar.. Alla åtgärder som marginaliserar människor stigmatiserar dem [bland annat genom viss sorts diagnosticerande inom både somatisk medicin och psykiatri, vilket hon också skriver om, t.ex. skriver hon om begreppet ’somatiserare’ ganska omfångsrikt. Och läkare som ’vårdslöst’ pratar om framhärdande/envisa somatiserare, men man hör inget motsvarande om ’framhärdande/envisa negligerare’ (liksom underförstått ’Ah du vet; det är något psykiskt!’ utan att ens någonsin ha frågat patienten om hur den har det eller har haft det) om läkare som vidtar den ena meningslösa åtgärden efter den andra som inte leder till någon som helst förbättring hos klienten]. Och ett stigma är det offentliga tecknet på avvikande från normen gällande heder, ?, kön, ras, tro eller funktion.

Avseende konceptet heder, självrespekt och självförtroende, skriver Margalit: ’Ett fördmjukande samhälle är ett samhälle vars institutioner får människor att kompromissa med sin integritet, ett anständigt samhälle är ett vars institutioner inte kränker värdigheten hos människor som befinner sig i dess omlopp.’"

Min studie förser oss med bevis att strukturell förödmjukelse av mänskligintegritet uppträder i medicin [och i psykiatri och terapi också]. När än människor avviker från normen i biomedicinen blir de marginaliserade /…/ om deras symptom inte svarar mot de åtgärder som antas vara ändamålsenliga; om deras hälsa inte förbättras så snabbt som förväntat; och slutligen, när de än återkommer och presentera samma problem trots detta, enligt standard medicinsk praktik, borde det ha lösts.

Dessa scenarier leder alla till medicinsk marginalisering, oberoende av dess ursprung. Det är dock känt att socialt stigma och skamfyllda, tystade erfarenheter/upplevelser orsakar hälsoproblem men, på samma gång, inte kan kommuniceras frankt och uttryckligen /…/ Med andra ord: lidande som har sociokulturellt ursprung och dålig hälsa är inte bara missförstått i medicinska sammanhang; de kommer också högst troligt att bli förvärrade genom att bli svarade med ’mer av samma’ så att säga /…/

Följaktligen finns det en väg från tysta förödmjukande i det privata till legitimerad förödmjukelse i det offentliga. Det finns en länk mellan den privata upplevelsen att ha fåtts att känna sig värdelös [vars yttersta ursprung finns tidigt troligen] – genom familjevåld [fysiskt, sexuellt, emotionellt], underordnande, utnyttjande, negligering eller deprivation och den offentliga domen att vara inte värd att erhålla hjälp – genom korrekt medicinsk och legal objektivisering.”

Se också vad ACE-studien säger om skadliga barndomserfarenheter och dess inverkan på framtida hälsa. Dvs. dylika erfarenheter leder inte bara till psykisk sjukdom eller problem utan kan leda till somatisk ohälsa. Och i värsta fallen av övergrepp och misshandel till kriminalitet av den värsta sorten (Pincus).

Se också tidigare blogginlägg om tystnadens mur.