Upload
emory-jackson
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Psychology, Justice and Well-Being: From Amelioration to Transformation
Isaac PrilleltenskyDean, School of Education
University of [email protected]
http://www.education.miami.edu/isaac
Three Questions
1. What are the current approaches to well-being and what are their limitations?
2. How can we overcome the limitations of current approaches?
3. What can psychology do?
Question 1: What are the current approaches to well-being?
SubjectiveObjectiveIntegrative
Seligman on Subjective well-being
Contribution: positive affect, positive behaviors, positive cognitions, sense of agency, strengths
Limitations: Minimizes importance of context “If you want to lastingly raise your level of happiness by
changing the external circumstances of your life, you should do the following: Live in wealthy democracy, not in an impoverished
dictatorship Get married Avoid negative events and negative emotion Acquire a rich social network Get religion”
Seligman’s Authentic Happiness (2002, pp. 61)
Seligman on Subjective Well-Being
“As far as happiness and life satisfaction are concerned, however, you needn’t bother to do the following Make more money Stay healthy Get as much education as possible (no effect) Change your race or move to a sunnier climate (no
effect)” Seligman’s Authentic Happiness (2002, pp. 61) Really? If we follow Seligman’s argument to its logical conclusion
we might think that there are a lot of people who are happy but dead!
Colombia: Happy but Dead
Highest rate of murders per capita in the world Highest number of kidnappings in the world
Colombia 5181 in 7 years Mexico 1269 Brazil 515 Venezuela 109 Severe under reporting
Colombians report highest level of satisfaction 8.31 (out of 10) in the world in the 90s
Place Matters
Income Matters for Well-Being
Education Matters
Seligman Engages in Context Minimization Error “Tendency to ignore the impact of enduring
neighborhood and community contexts on human behavior. The error has adverse consequences for understanding psychological processes and efforts at social change” (Shinn and Toohey, 2003, p. 428).
Objective well-being
Contributions: understanding of external and material factors in health, life expectancy, capabilities, and human functioning
Limitations: without understanding of psychological dynamics it cannot explain unhappiness in wealthy environments and life satisfaction in less than optimal objective conditions
Wealth matters for life expectancy (Lynch,
Smith, Kaplan, and House, 2003, Income inequality and mortality. In R. Hofrichster, R. Health and social justice, Jossey Bass, p. 220).
Income is not everything though (Inglehart and Klingemann, 2000, Genes, culture, democracy and happiness; in Diener and Suh, Culture and subjective well-being. MIT Press.
Relative deprivation matters in Sweden Marmot, 2004, The Status Syndrome. London: Times
Relative deprivation matters in UK M. Marmot, 2004, The Status Syndrome. London: Times
Male Life Expectancy by Inequality
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
GINI24.5
GINI31.5
GINI35.5
GINI 45USA W
GINI 45USAAA
Swed/Jap
Australia
Canada
USA White
USA Afri. Amer.
Chinese happiness and democracy: democracy is
not everything (Inglehart and Klingemann, 2000, Genes, culture, democracy and happiness; in
Diener and Suh, Culture and subjective well-being. MIT Press.
Integrative approach
Contributions: Interactionist, ecological approach
Limitations: Insufficient attention to injustice in promotion of well-being at multiple levels
Stokols on Integrative Approach to Well-Being
“The healthfulness of a situation and the well-being of its participants are assumed to be influenced by multiple facets of both the physical environment (e.g., geography, architecture, and technology) and the social environment (e.g., culture, economics, and politics). Moreover, the health status of individuals and groups is influenced not only by environmental factors but also by a variety of personal attributes, including genetic heritage, psychological dispositions, and behavioral patterns.”
Stokols continues…..
“Thus, efforts to promote human well-being should be based on an understanding of the dynamic interplay among diverse environmental and personal factors rather than on analyses that focus exclusively on environmental, biological, or behavioral factors. (Stokols, 2000, p. 27)”
Question 2: How can we overcome the limitations of current approaches? Definition of well-being Well-being is a positive state of affairs in
individuals, relationships, organizations, communities, and the natural environment, brought about by the simultaneous and balanced satisfaction of material and psychological needs; and by the behavioral manifestation of material and psychological justice in these five ecological domains.
Ecological Model of Well-Being
Sites of Well-Being
Individual Relational Organizational Communal Environmental
Objective signs health networks resources social capital
low emissions
SubjectiveSigns
efficacy voice support belonging safety
Values as source and strategy
autonomy caring participation diversity protection of resources
Justice as source and strategy
My due/Our due
Your due/Our due
Its due/Our due
Their due/Our due
Nature’s due/Our due
Ecological Model of Well-Being: Some positive and negative factors
Sites of Well-Being
Individual Relational Organizational Communal Environmental
Objective signs +health- illness
+networks-isolation
+resources- lack of resources
-social capital-lack of trust
+clean air-pollution
Subjectivesigns
+efficacy-lack of control
+voice-repression
+support-isolation
+belonging-rejection
+safety-fear
Values as source and strategy
+autonomy-lack of power
+caring-neglect
+participation-marginality
+diversity-discrimination
+protection of resources-depletion of resources
Justice as source and strategy
My due/Our due
Your due/Our due
Its due/Our due Their due/Our due
Nature’s due/Our due
Social Justice
Cardinal question of justice is whether there are
“any clear principles from which we may work out an ideally just distribution of rights and privileges, burdens and pains, among human beings as such” (Sedgwick, 1922, p. 274).
To each his or her due (Miller)
How Do We Decide What Is Due A Person, Family, Or Group?
Dominant ideologyAbilityEffort
Alternative ideologyAbilityEffortNeedsRightsOpportunitiesPower
The role of context context should determine what criterion or
criteria must be preferred in each case
In social conditions of inequality, we must accord preference to needs over ability
Context of Relative Equality
Under conditions of relative equality, where the gap between classes is not very pronounced, it is possible to favor effort over needs.
Context of Plenty of Opportunities
In a context of plenty of opportunities for everyone, it is possible that ability and effort will be the preferred choice.
Justice Out of Context
Societies aspiring to justice must seek equilibrium among all criteria
When context of inequality calls for need and equality, but culture favors effort, it’s because privileged groups benefit.
As a result, group interests that influence the choice of allocation pattern often disregard the context-specific situation.
Well-Being Justice
Well-Being is enhanced by
Justice is enhanced, and contributes to well-being, by the power, capacity, and opportunity to
Self-determination Experience voice and choice, participate in decision making
Caring and compassion
Experience nurturing relationships free of abuse
Equality and freedom
Benefit from fair and equitable distribution of resources and burdens
Question 3: What can Psychology Do? Proximal caring
Caring Compassion Empathy Therapy
Distal caring Justice Equality Liberation Social action
Balancing amelioration with transformation
AMELIORATION
Treatment Symptoms In the office Charity Individualistic Passive victim Neglects Power
TRANSFORMATION
Prevention Root causes In natural setting Justice Communitarian Agents of change Attends to Power
Changing how we work
From DRAIN Deficit orientation Reactive Alienation Individual change
To SPEC Strengths-based Primary Prevention Empowerment Community change
How can we balance our work in the community?
Collective
Individual
Reactive PreventiveX
Quadrant III
Examples:Crisis work, therapy, medications, symptom containment, case management
Quadrant I
Examples:Community development, affordable housing policy, recreational opportunities, high quality schools and health services
Quadrant II
Examples:Skill building, emotional literacy, fitness programs, personal improvement plans, resistance to peer pressure in drug and alcohol use
Quadrant IV
Examples:Food banks, shelters for homeless people, charities, prison industrial complex
Collective
Proactive
Individualistic
Reactive
Contextual Field in Helping Professions
9/7/1854…Removing the Handle
Getting To The Bottom Of It….
No mass disorder, afflicting humankind, has ever been eliminated, or brought under control, by treating the affected individual
HIV/AIDS, poverty, child abuse, powerlessness are not eliminated one person at a time.
04/20/23 Prilleltensky 39
Too much reaction, not enough preventionInvestments in Reactive vs. Proactive Interventions in Health and Community Services (Nelson et al, 1996; OECD, 2005; de Bekker-Grob et al., 2007)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Reactive Preventive
Investments in Prevention:
Italy 0.6%
USA 3%
Netherlands 4.3%
Canada 8%
04/20/23 Prilleltensky 40
Ratio of Benefits to Costs in National
Exemplary Prevention Models (Lynch, 2007, page 19)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Abeceda CPC Perry 27 Perry 40
How can we balance our work with individuals?
Strengths
Deficits
Detachment EmpowermentX
Quadrant I
Examples:Voice and choice in celebrating and building competencies, recognition of personal and collective resilience
Quadrant II
Examples:Voice and choice in deficit reduction approaches, participation in decisions how to treat affective disorders or physical disorders
Strength
Empowerment
Deficit
Detachment
Affirmation Field in Helping Professions
Quadrant III
Examples:Labeling and diagnosis, “patienthood” and clienthood,” citizens in passive role
Quadrant IV
Examples:Just say no! You can do it! Cheerleading approaches, Make nice approaches
Values that support SPEC in Practice
Domain Values
Questions
PREVENTION Caring and compassion
Does it promote the expression of care, empathy, and concern for the physical and emotional wellbeing of other human being?
EMPOWERMENT Self-determination
Does it promote the ability of individuals to pursue their chosen goals without excessive frustration and in consideration of other people’s needs?
STRENGTH Human diversity
Does it promote respect and appreciation for diverse social identities?
EMPOWERMENT Participation
Does it promote a peaceful, respectful, and equitable process whereby citizens have meaningful input into decisions affecting their lives?
COMMUNITY CHANGE Social justice
Does it promote the fair and equitable allocation of bargaining powers, resources and obligations in society?
Values that support SPEC in Policies and Programs
Values Policies
EMPOWERMENT Self-determination
Devise policies in consultation with community stakeholders
PREVENTION Health
Facilitate access to health care services through universal and outreach programs
STRENGTH Personal growth
Establish policies for teaching employment skills and for accessible recreational and educational opportunities
COMMUNITY CHANGE Social justice
Implement equitable policies and taxation laws that provide adequate resources to the poor
COMMUNITY CHANGE Support for enabling community structures
Promote policies that strengthen high quality basic community services such as education, health and income security
STRENGTH Respect for diversity
Promote inclusive work and social policies that do not discriminate on basis of marital status, gender, ability, sexual orientation, class, culture, or any other source of social power
EMPOWERMENT Collaboration and democratic participation
Promote educational policies that teach importance of civic duties and skills required for meaningful participation in democracy
It’s like Venice…..
Venice’s Lesson
“The psychotherapist, social worker or social reformer, concerned only with his own clients and their grievance against society, perhaps takes a view comparable to the private citizen of Venice who concerns himself only with the safety of his own dwelling and his own ability to get about the city. But if the entire republic is slowly being submerged, individual citizens cannot afford to ignore their collective fate, because, in the end, they all drown together if nothing is done” (Badcock, 1982)