Laurence Westreich - addicts' relatives

In the latest edition of Wise Counsel podcast Dr. David van Nuys speaks with Laurence Westreich who is a psychiatrist specialized in the treatment of addicts. The subject of the discussion is mainly the practical advice Dr. Westreich has for the relatives of addicts. How to detect addiction, how to find the right treatment and how to get the addicted relative to take up and continue the treatment.

The podcast is short and to the point. It makes for great listening, but if you are particularly interested in the topic, you may want to keep a pen and pad in short reach for taking notes for Dr. Westreich shoots the practical advice fast and it is numerous. In broad terms he encourages anyone who is involved in the treatment of addictions to be optimistic and persevering. He also seems to advocate a multi-faceted aproach, supporting psycho-therapy as well as group-therapy, twelve step programs and medication. On the subject of medication, Dr. Van Nuys asks a question I think is inspired by an earlier podcast of his in the Shrinkrapradio series where he interviewed Dr. Sinclair, who has developed a medication for addiction. Dr. Westreich admits there are good medicines, but would rather not leave out the psycho-therapy and agrees with Dr. Van Nuys that with medicine there is always the danger of making the addict move from the addiction in one substance to another.

On the subject of addiction in a broader sense, addictions that are not to a substance, but rather to things like gambling, gaming, TV or the internet, Dr. Westreich is a bit hesitant to regard these addictions as the same, but admits that there are found similarities. His experience though is mostly with substance addiction.

החלטת מזוז בעניין משה הקצב

הריצות המטורפות לבג"צ, המאבק למי יש יותר כסף להשיג עו"ד יותר חזק, הציפיה שמישהו בעמדה חזקה כמו נשיא בית משפט עליון (רצוי עם שרביט וזקן ארוך לבן) או יועץ משפטי לממשלה (חכם ורצוי גם שרירי) יגאל אותנו מכל התלאות, יצור עולם צודק ויצבע אותו בצבעים טובים יותר מעידים כאלף אלפי עדים כי עייפנו ואנחנו זועקים לעזרה. נמאס לנו מהתחושה של חברה עם הרבה ערכים שנרמסים ברגל גסה, שהדת בה קיבלה מונופול על המוסר ושהרוב בה לא לוקח אחריות על חייו, על חינוך ילדיו, על זהותו הלא דתית, תחושה של קורבן שמוכה כלכלית, מלחמתית ועוד ועוד! ולכן, מגיע לו לפחות שבבית פנימה רחוק מכל העוולות והצרות יהיה מישהו אחר שיעשה סדר, שיעניש את האשמים ושאנחנו נוכל להמשיך בתפקידים שלנו, בריצה אחרי כסף וטרדות היום יום. אבל מה לעשות והמציאות בה בחרנו כאנשים שאינם מאמינים בהתערבות של כוחות עליונים בחיינו משמעה גם בחירה של לקחת את חיינו במו ידנו ולעשות את העבודה בעצמנו.

למערכת המשפטית מגבלות בהיותה בבסיסה מערכת טכנית כשעו"ד 'טובים' הם אלה שמגלים את הפרצות שעדיין לא נסתמו או שמנצחים במרוץ על כמות או העדר ראיות. אפשר להתווכח עם הסגנון של מזוז אבל ברמה המשפטית, ומכאן גם העניין המוגבל שלי בה, התשובה תפול תמיד על עניין טכני, כמות ראיות, איזון אנטרסים בסבירות ומידתיות כזו או אחרת. הכח האדיר והמוגזם והציפיות שיש לנו מהמערכת הזו מקשה עליה לעשות את העבודה לשמה נועדה ולא משחרר אותנו מאחריות על חיינו. הטענה שאם העניין לא יסתיים בבית משפט עם גזר דין וגינוי חמור משמעה שהעוול החברתי לא יתוקן – מעוותת, מביאה לייאוש ורפיון ידיים ולתפיסת החברה האזרחית כגוש חלש וקורבני הזקוק רחמנא ליצלן למנהיגות חזקה והחלטית שתעשה עבורו את המלאכה. במקום לומר שאבד לנו האמון במערכת המשפטית אני מציעה לומר שהאופציה המשפטית צריכה לחזור למידותיה הנכונות כאופציה אחת מתוך אופציות חשובות אחרות. יש מקום לדרוש מנבחרי הציבור, פוליטיקאים שיחזרו לעשות המלאכה המקורית שלשמה הם נבחרו - וינהיגו, מאנשי חינוך מכל הזרמים והפלגים שיזמו דיון ולימוד ויפיצו ויטמיעו ערכים, מהוגי דעות שונות ומעמיקות שישמיעו קולם בעת הזו ויתרמו להובלה רוחנית, ערכית ופלורליסטית, מאנשי תקשורת שיהיו מקצועיים ואמינים ומאיתנו בתור אזרחים, הורים, חברים ובני אדם בחברה שאכפת להם לקיים בכל יום את דברי הילל הזקן ש'מה ששנוא עליך לא תעשה לחברך'.

Thomas Dekker

Met de billen tegen elkaar is een uitdrukking van Mart Smeets waar ik niet graag gebruik van maak, maar nu wel steeds aan moet denken. Wat is er nog over van de Tour de France, behalve met de billen tegen elkaar hopen dat we op zaterdag normaal van start gaan. Dat het gewoon over wielrennen zal gaan en niet over doping. Ik heb er een hard hoofd in.

Het nodigt uit om met een andere blik naar de tour te gaan kijken. Om niet teveel de klassementen te gaan volgen - zeker niet het algemeen klassement - maar om de leuke, frisse dingen op te zoeken. Zo ga ik een nieuwe renner volgen: Thomas Dekker. Een aanstormend talent dat zijn eerste tour gaat rijden. Kijken hoe hij zich houdt.

De kans is aanwezig dat we na een paar dagen uitgekeken zijn, zo gaan die dingen, maar er zijn ook redenen om iets moois te verwachten. Op een blog vond ik een analyse van kanshebbers voor het jongerenklassement en daar werd Dekker als favoriet aangewezen:

[...]
Thomas Dekker
The biggest talent in cycling has been living up to his promise this year with a string of impressive rides. He's able to win TT's against top competition and can hold his own on the climbs so it's hard to find any real weakness in Dekkers arsenal. He still has to prove that he can handle a GT though and the question is how much freedom he will have if Menchov stays competitive in the GC. Being the new golden boy of dutch cycling it is hard to see Rabo holding him back. Maybe he has spent a little too much energy already and that could cost him later in the Tour.
[...]
And the winner is........Thomas Dekker. My guess is that Menchov will disappoint/get screwed and Dekker will be Rabobanks main priority. Lövkvist should benefit from a lot of TT kilometers but unless a minor miracle occurs, his climbing will be his undoing. Contador would be the obvious winner but he has burned a lot of matches this year and he will waste the last of his energy pulling Levi up the mountains. He sure looks like the rider in this group who will be the first to win the Tour de France though.

Agricultural revolution first - History 5 podcast

Diligently I continue through the course of History 5, the podcast of UC Berkeley about European history from the renaissance to the present, about which I have written several times previously. On Thomas Laqueur's series and on Margaret Anderson's fourth lecture and her reply to my thoughts. By now, I have reached the Industrial Revolution.

It is commonly known that the Industrial Revolution started in England and it is also commonly known that the revolution was possible because of new technologies that allowed for mass production. The question is why it began in England in the nineteenth century and not in another place or time. The Chinese had the same technology - Anderson tells us the Chinese had steel bridges, long before the English had them. And France had the same, if not better technology, yet the French took much longer to industrialize. We need therefore a broader answer and I am excited as to how clear the history 5 podcast brings the point home.

If I have to recount this in my own words, I'd do it thus - and this is after one run of the lecture... What is needed for mass production is both a labor force to deliver and a market to buy. A sizeable labor force in England became available because of an agricultural revolution that preceded the industrial. By improving the organization and methods of agriculture, a much smaller force was needed to supply food for the population, thus freeing a large amount of workers for the factories. In addition, England was already a market economy, meaning, that it already had a division of labor going on and had the average Englishman, not produce for his own needs, but rather go out to the market to buy his needs and sell his specialty goods or services. In addition, the strata of English society were permeable and continuous, allowing for a climb on the social ladder to every individual. Consequently, the English already were consumers and therefore, a demand for the mass production on industrial society was also in place.

That was unique for England. In other places, less workforce could be freed from agriculture and less consumerism was in place, so that the market was less capable of growing demand.

Intermediate mindfulness

On the zencast podcast you are instructed in various ways to mindfulness. Gil Fronsdal has no started an intermediate level course into mindfulness generally. This is in an attempt to widen the strengths of the introductory course. What is good about the course, what is good about the repetitiveness of having courses and what needs to be extended. Fronsdal also reveals he is inclined to feel a bit embarrassed if he repeats himself. However, when it is in the framework of a course, and a repeated course, for that matter, he feels less hampered.

As a podcast, this series takes off on a slow start. In the first issue there is a long sitting (meditation) in the middle and that provides for a long silence on the pod. The second issue starts off with questions. Though the recording qualitey has dramatically increased and the questions are entirely audible, still, these silences and questions make the podcast listener rather detached from the course. It takes therefore considerable effort and intent, not to say mindfulness of the podcast, in order to make this course work through the recordings rather than by being present.

Parashat Balak

Jewish tradition has mapped the Torah onto the year and sectioned it into weekly portions, so that in a year's time, the Torah will be read entirely. The portions are named and sequential, so that they are recognizable and read and referred to in the same week, across the board. Last weeks section, called a parasha, or parsha, was Parashat Balak.

Parashat Balak recounts the story of King Balak of the Moabites, who sends for Bileam (Balaam, Bil'am) to curse the Israelites. When Bileam sets out to do so, he rides a donkey that is stopped three times by an angel. Three times he hits the ass and only by the third time understands he is to bless the Israelites in stead.

There are two podcasts I listened to in order to get a teaching on the parsha, KMTT and Rav Dovid's. As usual the teachings are very different, but what was interesting is that I took from them an almost similar bottom-line, though this line was arrived at in a totally different manner. Rabbi Yonatan Snowbell, in KMTT, points out that throughout Sefer Bamidbar (Numbers, Numeri) the Jews are miserably failing by whatever prescript they are met and nevertheless, Bileam is stopped from cursing them. The lesson is, according to Snowbell, that a Jew can always mend his ways and is encouraged to do so. He may be punished, severely at times, but will never be cursed. In other words, one assumes some innate moral quality in the Jew.

Also according to Rabbi Dovid Bendory, drives to this moral quality, but in a much more mystical fashion. In his view Bileam represents the immorality of the non-Jews. Bileam, being this mighty man who can bless or curse and allows his corruption by Balak of the Moabites, once he is sufficiently lured to do so. The Jews on the other hand, also have a mighty prophet on their side, Moshe, but do not lure him into corruption, hence show their innate moral quality. In spite of, adding the words of Snowbell, miserably failing most of the time in acting according to that morality.

So what I see, is that in very different ways, the Jews are encouraged by these interpretations to lead their life morally, that is according to Torah. I feel always a bit uneasy with this exclusion towards Jews and Torah. I am the eavesdropper who is not properly Jewish and therefore is not addressed, maybe even the haughty one who is on the part of Balak and Bileam. But then again the encouragement to lead a moral life is laudable in any case, applicable to everybody. For a non-Jew to hear this, only means that he has an ultimate excuse to stray as he is not Jewish and the appeal is not directed toward him. But at the same time, since he understand and sees the quality, is invited to follow nonetheless and may choose to do so. Hence, in the end, the morality is for everybody. I would add: if it is not for everybody, it is for none.