Comment author: play_therapist 29 November 2011 04:03:25PM *  6 points [-]

Re: The why questions- I am both a child therapist and the mother of jimrandomh. I don't remember him ever doing that and the children I work with ( I see about 18 on a regular basis) never do it to me. I think tetsuo55 is right in his observation that children tend to do it when they are being ignored. As an only child of older parents, jimrandomh was virtually never ignored, and, of course, the children I see for individual therapy sessions already have my attention.

Re: "Good parents"- A few observations- The age of puberty has been dropping, the average age of marriage (or settling into committed relationships) has been rising. Not too long ago people got married shortly after they reached puberty.

There were no birth control pills until the 1960's. The early birth control pills were of higher doses and had more side effects. Condoms existed but were not as reliable as they are today. Abortions were not legal in the U.S. until the early 1970's. Aid to Families of Dependent Children, otherwise known as welfare, now modified into Transitional Assistance, didn't exist in most states until the 1960's. In other words, prior to the late 1960's, the chances were good that if you were sexually active, you would get pregnant. If you did, your options were much more limited.

Then came the sexual revolution. There were birth control pills. Abortions became legal. Visitation restrictions in dorms were eliminated. Herpes Simplex 2 was pretty much unknown until the late 1970's, AIDS was first identified in the U.S. in 1981. I had the good fortune to turn 18 in 1970- except for the Vietnam War, it was a great time and I had fun.

Parents today, however, worry about their teens not only getting pregnant, but AIDS, herpes and other venereal diseases that weren't around in my youth. In addition, with younger puberty, the worries come at a younger age, when teens are less able to handle it. (I had a 12 year old girl tell me that she was thinking of having sex with her boyfriend, a Caucasian 4th or 5th generation American girl from a working class community.) I don't think it's just to conform to the societal archetype of Good Parent, there are real things to worry about.

Comment author: play_therapist 30 October 2011 04:44:07PM 3 points [-]

Those great artists who were or are known to be mentally ill or drug users make for interesting news stories and articles. That probably creates the impression that it's more common than it is. Also, the life style of successful artists some times encourages drug use. In some cases the artist might be great despite the use of drugs rather than with the help of drugs.

Jimrandomh makes a good point about not lumping all drugs together. That is, also, true of mental illness. Take bipolar disorder, for example. Van Gogh is thought to have had it. He probably produced large quantities of work during manic phases, but then he took his own life in a depressive phase. Those who suffer from severe depression or anxiety probably are not very productive.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 18 October 2011 01:54:42AM 0 points [-]

I've heard that people need some income on the side to survive if they're on welfare. Not true at all?

Comment author: play_therapist 18 October 2011 02:23:08AM *  6 points [-]

It is true that in many cases people need some income on the side to survive on welfare. It depends. The level of benefits differs by state as does the cost of living. For a family to survive on welfare alone in Massachusetts without subsidized housing is pretty much impossible. With section 8 housing, which doesn't include utilities,it is still tough, if not impossible. If, however, you live in one of the housing projects, heat is included. Your rent is a fraction of the family income, I believe it's 25%. If you're there, get medicaid, food stamps, free breakfast and lunch in school for your children, and extra food from food pantries if needed, I think it is doable. Also, it is permitted, even required in many cases, for parents receiving welfare to work a certain number of hours.

In any case, I'm not saying that a certain amount of cheating of the system isn't justified, even some times necessary. What I am saying is that people who live nearby and are struggling themselves and see abuses are some times disenchanted with the system.

Comment author: play_therapist 18 October 2011 01:24:49AM 4 points [-]

I believe there's probably something to your theory. There are, in addition, a couple of logical explanations for the above mentioned attitudes that haven't been mentioned.

When the minimum wage is raised, it sometimes means less hiring and even layoffs in some places. If a business can only afford to spend a fixed amount on labor and the cost of labor goes up slightly, it may need to cut back on employees. This will effect the unskilled workers, which includes those making slightly more than minimum wage, more than others.

Re:" support for welfare in an area decreases as the percentage of welfare recipients in the area rises." Areas that have large percentages of welfare recipients are areas where nearly all the people are struggling to make ends meet. It makes sense for them to oppose policies that they feel will raise taxes and fees- thus making it harder for them to pay their bills.

The other factor is this- Those who live in areas where there are a large percentage of welfare recipients are more aware of cases where the system is abused than the rest of the population. I'm a bleeding heart liberal and a professional social worker, I believe that welfare and other aid for the poor is very necessary and I deplore most cutbacks- BUT I am aware of how some people routinely cheat the system, and I often hear others who are aware of cases and struggling to make ends meet themselves rant about it. I'm referring to things like extra adults living with families receiving section 8 housing or welfare, who are working, but their income and presence is not reported. Welfare money going to cigarettes, alcohol and drugs is a common complaint. Hidden incomes from under the table work is another common abuse.

In response to comment by Jolly on Fix My Head
Comment author: Alicorn 11 October 2011 04:03:35AM 1 point [-]

My sprue bloodwork included other things, including vitamin D, which I have been taking for a year and a half and still showed a deficiency in. Dunno how that works.

In response to comment by Alicorn on Fix My Head
Comment author: play_therapist 11 October 2011 03:19:21PM 3 points [-]

A few years ago I was tested for Vitamin D deficiency- probably for the first time. I came out at the low end of the normal range- which is probably normal in the Boston area, where I live. We don't get enough sunlight here for much of the year. My doctor prescribed a megadose of 10,000 units a day for 2 or 3 months and then retested. My levels were o.k. then, so she told me to take 1,000 units a day, which I do, in addition to the 400 units in my multivitamin.

My point is, maybe you need a higher dose- in addition to looking into the possibility that your really do have celiac disease, despite the negative test.

Comment author: prase 04 October 2011 06:38:08PM 12 points [-]

It is already pretty clear that the answer is zero for prayer effectivity and spiritual healing. Having a government agency officialy stating that would cause no change in public opinion except slight increase in frequency of "government is suppressing religion" complaints.

Comment author: play_therapist 04 October 2011 08:11:07PM -1 points [-]

Actually, I think that depends on the person and the circumstances. I believe that most people who pray do find it comforting, it gives them hope, it is calming. If they pray with others there is a sense of community and belonging. I believe it has much in common with meditation.

I do believe that getting the government involved would violate the principal of separation of church and state.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 29 September 2011 05:39:51PM 13 points [-]

I emailed Eliezer and said that I did not think that was his final objection, and that he would not care whether it was common or not if he thought it was correct. He agreed. I listed several bullet points, and asked him which he thought were incorrect, and why. He declined to answer.

Comment author: play_therapist 29 September 2011 09:45:38PM 0 points [-]

The fact that you didn't get an answer to that question doesn't conclusively mean that he declined to answer it. Perhaps he over looked the question, got distracted and forgot about it, or wanted to think about it some more. It seems to me that more attempt at a dialogue just between the two of you would be a good idea.

Comment author: jimrandomh 26 September 2011 02:35:12AM 18 points [-]

I forbid myself access to certain classes of video games that I know to be more addictive than I can handle. I also forbid myself from joining any group - clan, team, club, or anything else - which would create a social pressure to play video games.

I encourage everyone to do the same. Avoid video games, for they are devourers of life's potential.

Comment author: play_therapist 26 September 2011 09:47:08PM 1 point [-]

Who are you and what did you do with my son?!!!

Comment author: gwern 22 September 2011 10:05:38PM 5 points [-]

I am not familiar with that history of early Judaism. Can you cite any references I can read about it? (I do admit I have not read the entire old testament, perhaps it's in there?)

Have you read even the early books? The constant warfare and near-genocides engaged in until they built up an empire? Then you have, even much later, all the rebellions which prompted the Romans to raze the Temple and exile most of the Jews.

(An oddity I always found to be an example is that one of the lost books of the bible is titled 'The Book of the Wars of the Lord'.)

Comment author: play_therapist 22 September 2011 10:28:50PM *  0 points [-]

Thanks. Whatever reading I did of the old testament was back when I was a teenager- which was long ago.I don't remember how far I got, not very. I was reading the commentary along with it, and it was tedious. Perhaps I'll get back to it when I get a chance. That's certainly not the spin that was put on the history we were taught in Hebrew school.

In response to comment by play_therapist on Fix My Head
Comment author: Alicorn 18 September 2011 09:01:36PM 1 point [-]

Hey, if the blood test says I don't have celiac, I am not going to follow a miserable complicated diet for weeks just to win a bet.

In response to comment by Alicorn on Fix My Head
Comment author: play_therapist 19 September 2011 02:12:26AM *  1 point [-]

I can understand your reluctance. May I suggest the following? How about if you get the blood test? If it's positive, then you'll know the problem and can fix your head. If it's negative, you really should work with a doctor and see if he can figure out what it is. Ask him to check out some of the other things suggested. If none of them solve your headaches, then you can try the gluten free diet - to be sure.

As far as the bet goes- what conditions are set are between you and Jim, I just think they should be clearly established, to avoid any misunderstandings. I strongly suspect that he's more interested in helping you figure out the cause of your headaches then in winning a bet.

I know people with celiac who follow the gluten free diet. My impression is that it takes some getting used to, but it isn't that miserable or complicated, once you get used to it. Nowadays supermarkets like Whole Foods have gluten free sections where you can buy special mixes, etc. which helps.

View more: Prev | Next