+EARLY ORIGIN OF OUR ONGOING EXPERIENCE OF SHAME AND FORGIVENESS

May 23, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynowLeave a comment

I can in no way see that forgiveness is not about the patterns of rupture and repair. Lack of the ability or willingness to forgive must relate to there being a rupture for which there is no repair.

Every issue involving rupture and repair patterns occur in attachment relationship contexts of our self in relationship to our self, to others and to our world at large. All of our attachment relationships are processed through our right brain’s emotional center. This means that all our ongoing attachment relationship processes are processed through the same neuronal pathways that were built within our brains through our experiences with our early caregivers from birth to one year old.

These experiences built our social emotional brain well before we even had potential for consciousness. They will continue to operate in exactly the way they were formed unless we later can apply conscious thought and effort to change them.

When we choose to apply ‘new and more advanced’ terminology to the basic operations of our brains, minds, nervous systems and bodies, we are taking a step toward the risk of losing touch and sight of what we are actually talking about. It is no different to me than using any word in our language without knowing what the imaginal root of the word is as it came into our language from its beginnings. Words get born. They originate somewhere. They come from somewhere. They have a beginning.

If one pays particular attention to how an infant is attached within its world at about one year old as it moves from the world of its caregiver into the wider world of its own discovery, I suspect that we can tell about the origin of the operation of what we call ‘forgiveness’ as it operates in tandem with the origin of what we call ‘the shame reaction’ that occurs at this time. This ‘shame’ reaction as it is described by Dr. Allan Schore happens when an infant’s nervous system, or more specifically the ‘go’ or sympathetic arm of its autonomic nervous system responds with excitement and outgoing energy as an infant moves into its wider world of discovery.

At the same time, the potential has correspondingly increased for the infant to experience a ‘crash’ or ‘stop’ as the other arm of the automic nervous system, the parasympathetic (I think of this as the pair of breaks) will kick in if the infant returns from its excited explorations to find that its caregiver does not respond back to the infant with the same level of ‘go’ excitement. The infant will experience this clash, or rupture as a depletion of its positive state. This ‘stop’ after ‘go’ is neurologically what we come to call the shame reaction.

There has to be the basis of a safe and secure attachment relationship between an infant and the caregiver it is returning to in order for this rupture to be repaired. These rupture and repair processes are simply further continuations of the development and growth of already existing rupture and repair patterns that have been built through caregiver-infant interactions from birth and correspond to the infant’s right brain emotional center’s development.

If that area of the brain has already suffered from enough malevolent interactions to have been ‘mis-informed’ and thus ‘misformed’ by the time an infant is one year old, all ongoing patterns related to movements within the bigger world as they relate to patterns of ‘coming back together in safety and security’ with the primary caregivers surrounding the infant will also be affected. This go and stop, rupture and repair patterning seems to me to directly connect our more advanced (and thus somewhat more obscure0 words of shame to forgiveness. Even on the most profound and basic physiological level, shame reflects rupture and forgiveness reflects repair.

Because these go and stop patterns are directly related to the right brain’s emotional social center, they are both about emotions in terms of their experience through either regulation or dysregulation. These two patterns are built into the brain from birth, as I’ve mentioned. This means to me that what we call forgiveness directly ties into the right brain’s ability to regulate emotions. Even though we think of forgiveness as being a conscious activity, it still has its roots in the original patterns of our right emotional brain.

Infant brains formed through safe and secure early attachment relationships have the advantage regarding emotional regulation in every possible way over infant brains formed in unsafe and insecure early environmental interactions with early caregivers. The advantages of one and the disadvantages of the other are in the circuitry of the brain itself.

Caregivers need have no negative intent to cause an infant this ‘stop’ shame reaction. It is a natural reaction an infant actually needs to experience on occasion as it learns about safety and danger in the wider world, and about how to negotiate the space of the world with other people and their needs. But the resolution of shame through a repair of the shame reaction is essential if all is going to go well in an infant’s development. Looking at this repair process as a reinstatement of a secure attachment relationship in the world lets us know absolutely that ‘forgiveness’ is the counterpart of ‘shame’ and lies at the basis of our attachment interrelationships.

I remember specifically with my middle child that once she learned to talk well, she needed to talk about things that happened in her life and in her mind long before I would have thought she had the capacity for forming memories from those experiences. It was if she knew somehow that once she had the ability to verbalize about these early experiences that process was also necessary. She had in fact waited for her own developmental abilities to catch up with her needs.

I wonder if it isn’t the same with shame in cases where very eary experiences are harmful and detrimental to an infant. Their phsyiological development might not have developed to the point that they can actually experience the physical process of the stop and go within their nervous system. Yet if those older experiences were damaging enough to a child, I suspect that they can be there waiting for the time that infant’s body is old enough to experience that shame reaction.

I say this because the process of rupture and repair, as it builds the early infant social emotional right limbic brain, has already deeply formed itself into the brain itself well before a child reaches the age of one, the age when the infant can physically move itself around in the larger world. I believe that it is possible that if ruptures have not already been adequately met with repair early on, that even the beginnings of the physical shame and forgiveness patterns will be interfered with.

This is true because expectation, anticipation, hope and hopelessness have already begun the foundational development of the right brain from very early on. For example, when a tiny infant is hungry and someone responds adequately to feed it, that infant’s brain is already building hope into it as it learns within itself that in this safe and secure world it can trust that its needs will be met. These experiences form the basis of the first thought processes as they involve the early formation of mental representations.

If harmful and inadequate experiences are the ones that operate at these crucial early stages, hopelessness, despair and even rage can fill in the cracks where these misshapen mental representations are forming. They will already be firmly in place well before the age of one, and will influence what an infant anticipates and expects upon its return to its caregiver once it enters into the world.

This puts hope — its fulfillment or disappointment — at the pivotal point where shame and forgiveness operate from the start. These inner relationships are physiologically formed into the body and brain of an infant, and will obviously form the foundation for all our hope, shame and forgiveness experiences we have for the rest of our lives.

There is no mystery here. If we want to change the patterns that were built into our brains and bodies from the beginning we have to become conscious of how these patterns are operating within us, even though we will probably never retrieve the actual facts of the experiences we had as infants that built our inner operating systems in the first place. First we have to recognize that these patterns exist, and directly realize that they involve our right emotional brain.

Shame normally happens for an infant when it anticipates a emotional state reaction from an attachment figure that matches the infant’s own state. When that state is not matched the infant experiences this as a rupture that we come to know as shame. It is an interactional experience.

Forgiveness normally happens for an infant when the mismatch between what it anticipated from the caregiver and did not get is repaired. When a caregiver reestablishes rapport with the infant it is acting our forgiveness. The infant actually accepts the forgiveness willingly because an infant’s natural state is to be united with or reunited with its attachment figures.

In looking at both shame and forgiveness in the dictionary, both have origins in the English language before the 12th century. It is rare to find a word in what we would call modern English that came into the language earlier than that. This means to me that both these words refer to states that have been consciously known for a long, long time.

Both words, however, reflect at their basis, at least in modern English, that they relate to conditions of the mind and states of being — as they are rooted in our human physiological body and experience of being alive in that body. They are therefore related to mentalizing abilities and to Theory of Mind. Both of these two operations are interfered with in cases of mental illness like my mother had, and both are also interfered with through early trauma as they become reflected in insecure attachment disorders.

This is because the true issue at stake in both the shame rupture and the forgiveness repair require the context of an attachment relationship in order to operate in the first place. They are both physiologically rooted in our body, brain, nervous system and mind because we are members of a social species and we must form this way. Shame reflects a breech in ongoing attachment and forgiveness repairs and heals this breech.

Early developmental experiences in a malevolent world change how these two corresponding parts of who we are form and operate. If we suffered early abuse and trauma, without having access to adequate secure and safe attachment figures we could always depend on to mediate the damage-forming process as we formed our shame-forgiveness response system, we will experience complications throughout our lives related to these changes.

If we hope to affect healing for ourselves related to shame and forgiveness, I believe we need to understand and accept how and why we got these problems in the first place. To do so we must consider the quality of our attachment relationships from birth so that we can begin to understand how they were already operating in our brains, nervous system and body by the time we were old enough to begin to enter the bigger, wider world on our own at about one year old.

Main Entry:

¹shame

Pronunciation:

\ˈshām\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Middle English, from Old English scamu; akin to Old High German scama shame

Date:

before 12th century

1 a: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety b: the susceptibility to such emotion <have you no shame?>2: a condition of humiliating disgrace or disrepute : ignominy <the shame of being arrested>3 a: something that brings censure or reproach ; also : something to be regretted : pity <it’s a shame you can’t go> b: a cause of feeling shame

rom http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shame

Main Entry:

for·give

Pronunciation:

\fər-ˈgiv, fȯr-\

Function:

verb

Inflected Form(s):

for·gave \-ˈgāv\ ; for·giv·en \-ˈgi-vən\ ; for·giv·ing

Etymology:

Middle English, from Old English forgifan, from for- + gifan to give

Date:

before 12th century

transitive verb1 a: to give up resentment of or claim to requital for <forgive an insult> b: to grant relief from payment of <forgive a debt>2: to cease to feel resentment against (an offender) : pardon <forgive one’s enemies>intransitive verb: to grant forgiveness

synonyms see excuse

— for·giv·able \-ˈgi-və-bəl\ adjective

— for·giv·ably \-blē\ adverb

— for·giv·er noun

from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forgive

+FORGIVENESS AND EARLY BETRAYAL

May 22, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow4 Comments

WARNING – POST MAY TRIGGER TRAUMA MEMORIES FOR THOSE WITH ABUSE HISTORIES

Because of the way dissociation was built into my brain from birth, I can never address a topic that involves an emotional image head on. For those of you who have ever played with building blocks with a toddler, we generally place all the blocks close to the child and begin playing from there. What would happen if we hid all the blocks individually in different places and then told the child to build something out of one particular color, say blue. Or red. The child would have to search in every imaginable place it could think of to find any of the blocks, let alone just those of a single particular color. How well would the game progress for the child?

I have to follow a similar process as I try to know what I might know of forgiveness, or of any other emotional topic. Children are meant to build one safe, secure, logical experience on top of previous ones as they learn about themselves, about the world, and about themselves in the world. When other people talk about ‘recovering’ or ‘rebuilding’ themselves through healing they need to realize that there might be nothing straight forward about the process.

I have an 18 year childhood of bits and pieces of experiences that did not form themselves together in any kind of logical or reasonable way. That is because there was no logic or reason in the environment I was in as my life happened to me. The only organizing principle available to me, other than the one my body could orchestrate on the most basic, physiological level, was my mother. The basis of her organization toward me was her psychosis about me.

I cannot, therefore, travel backward by following an organized, connected, coherent pathway in order to find out anything about myself as I grew and developed into a body and into my life. It becomes an intricate matching game with the pieces in complete disarrangement and mostly lost. My strongest memories are, as I’ve mentioned before, those that my mother included in the abuse litany she recited over and over and over again each time that she beat me throughout these 18 years. One of those very early abuse litany crimes that I had evidently committed happened when I was two years old.

Do I remember this memory because it is mine or because it was placed in my mother’s abuse litany so that over the years the memory was literally pounded into me? I was two years old, my grandmother had just come to visit us and mother sent me to my bedroom because I had done something ‘bad’. After this my mother added it to the litany because it proved to her I was willful, obstinate and disobedient — because I pounded my fists on the wall all the down the hallway to my bedroom.

Whether the memory is mine or mine only because of my mother’s repeated resurrections over the years of this event, I do believe that it happened. I believe at this age of two I was able, still, to feel anger. I have no memory of the feeling of anger in my childhood except as connected to this memory, or pseudo memory. Obviously it was thoroughly communicated to me at this time that my feeling angry was not acceptable or allowed.

As I try to face the topic of forgiveness head on I am automatically lost to myself as I try to know what I might know about it. I cannot track the growth and development of any anger toward my mother past this two year old event, one that I was beaten for many times over in the years that followed. The dissociational patterns within my mind only allow me to try to snatch what might be related events of my life, an act no easier than it would be to try to snatch bits of dandelion fluff out of a strong wind, hoping I can catch them in the order that they were attached to their flower of origin in the first place.

The concept that I could think about individual emotions and my experience of them as actual factors of my being alive was not introduced to me until I entered the seven week in-patient treatment program for alcoholism when I was 30 years old. This is a process that a normal child is exposed to from birth through the mirroring process a mother and other early caregivers surround an infant with. These early mirroring experiences actually show the infant what it is feeling, and begin to form the early foundation of a connection to being an individual self.

If you imagine conditions that prevent this mirroring process from EVER happening for an infant, and then imagine that this non-mirroring state is maintained consistently throughout an entire childhood, you can perhaps realize how difficult it might be for such a person to ever go back and make things right within themselves. Early infant reciprocal interactions form the right emotional limbic brain itself, and they establish all the emotional regulatory patterns that will then exist in that brain for the duration of a lifetime.

This is where the insecure attachment disorders first take their root — in the patterns of neuronal firings that are built into an infant and young child’s growing brain. If a growing individual is exposed only to interactions with adults around them that are completely disorganized and disoriented, that overwhelm the child, that are not one bit reasonable or logical, that are not patterned on ANY information that is actually connected to the inner experience particularly of an infant under one year old, we cannot expect that the resulting operations of such a little one’s brain will ever be either optimal or ‘normal’.

Because of my mother’s mental illness and psychosis it was impossible for her to ever respond to me as being anything other than a distorted projection of evil coming out of her own damaged mind. I have pondered and wondered how it was possible, from these very disturbed beginnings (as they continued unabated for 18 years), that I was able to come out on the other end to be as able to negotiate myself around in the world as I did.

Even for all the resiliency factors that I have identified and described in my earlier posts, I still find myself trying to find the answer to this question. On the one hand, if I remain in the wishful magical thinking state I suspect the magic of some kind of ‘miracle’ that occurred that allowed me to survive as a relatively adequate person. I still know I am faced with a mystery here, but without resorting to magical wishful thinking I also know that I am missing some kind of important factual information in my considerations.

During the nearly 30 years that have passed since I was first told that I had feelings, I have passed many times through a state where I think I was far better off before I had that knowledge. I have come to understand that for some people not ‘being in touch’ with their feelings might be the wisest course a body, brain and mind can ever take.

I say this because I have also come to understand that for those of us with terrible early trauma during our brain formative stages of development, at the same time we experienced these traumas we also experienced the lack of being given adequate abilities and faculties to ever be able to regulate our emotions like ‘normal’ people can. Building an early forming right brain emotional center is about either having emotional regulation abilities built into this center or not. We must understand that emotional regulation occurs through very real physiological, neurological operations that ARE the patterns that were built into our brains in the first place.

I bring this all up as I write today because of those that I asked about their understanding of forgiveness, all of them seem to relate forgiveness in some way to the experience of anger. In fact, one respondent to my question believes that forgiveness itself is a FEELING. Nowhere can I see in people’s response to my question do I see that forgiveness is NOT about feelings. Oh, boy! I am in trouble now! I can either give up and turn away from trying to learn something new about forgiveness, or I can apply a whole lot of willpower, courage and focused effort in an attempt to heal something here — in order to learn something new and different about myself and others in relation to being human in this world.

Because of my childhood I can never assume that I have the same background information about anything that other people who are not early abuse survivors have at their disposal. My building blocks are either missing or so disconnected, dispersed and hidden in unrelated places within me that it takes a whole lot of work to connect them together into a useful construction.

I do know when I think about it that every single time I was beaten my mother was at the same time screaming at me to say I was ‘sorry’. Sorry for what? There was so seldom any rational connection between her beatings and the real world that I did not even know what I had done ‘wrong’ in the first place. Fortunately or unfortunately there was a part of ME that endured these beatings that evidently was extremely stubborn as I held to some version of an inner integrity that I don’t even now understand. I refused her request.

In fact, as my siblings used to point out to me in their pleadings to me on my and their behalf, if I would have cried and if I would have said I was sorry her beatings of me might have been less severe. What was it about ME, as I look back at this today, that prevented me from participating with my mother during these beatings by giving in to her demands? Why did I not shed the requisite tears and beg desperately for her forgiveness?

Those of you who have experience with severe child abuse through beatings will understand me when I say that there were two kinds of beatings. During one kind my mother lost control and entered her violent rage state so quickly that she didn’t even take pause long enough to demand that I pull my pants down. If the origination point of the beating included a ‘slower burn’ that was in fact as cold as ice, the ritualized demand to pull my pants down happened before the physical impact began.

The difference between these two kinds of beatings only had to do with the speed of the actual eruption of her physical blows upon my body. The force of the beatings and the length of them did not vary. Once my mother had entered her insane physical violence against me stage, the beatings themselves could literally go on for a long, long time until she had exhausted not only her rage attack but also her physical stamina. She had a vast reservoir of both.

It is also important that I point out to you that my choice and decision not to beg her forgiveness, not to say I was sorry, and not to cry was never, to my knowledge, a conscious choice. It had to therefore originate from some core of will within myself that I was not able to consciously access in my thoughts — not before the beatings, not during, after or between them. I am left to conclude, therefore, that this ‘battle of wills’ between my mother and my self originated very, very early in my development. In fact, this ability that I had to defy her in taking over ME is what saved me.

Looking backward as I write today I see that I am approaching something that is powerful, forceful, amazing, yet at the same time very delicate. In my attempts to discern what I know about forgiveness I am having to travel back to an age well before two. For those of you who know what anthropomorphizing in relation to animals means, you will understand me better when I say it is not helpful to go back into early childhood and use any adult idea of what was actually happening on the insides of an infant or a very young child.

The reasons should be obvious to us. An infant is very much like a young animal at the beginning in that its brain is very primitive simply because not enough time has gone by yet for the advanced human brain to grow and develop. A fully developed brain would mean that a head would be too big to be born from the mother in the first place. In addition, nature has designed the rest of a brain’s formation to occur in interaction with its environment, not exclusively without those interactions. Experience in the world has to be built into our early brains so that the brain is actually effective in surviving within the same world that built it.

So a very key important point is trying to come clear to me as I write at this moment. Because my mother’s hatred for me was present before I was born as a result of her psychotic break while delivering me that meant she understood I was the devil’s child sent to kill her, there was something within me FROM THE MOMENT OF MY BIRTH, or even before because her break happened while I was still inside of her, that meant the ME that I was and am — KNEW BETTER.

It was therefore never, from that point forward, possible for me to comprehend what she was talking about or beating me for. That is the closest I can describe to what I experienced during the thousands of beatings — this state of non comprehension. My refusal to participate in her psychosis the way she probably wanted me to resulted not from my conscious choice not to, but rather was connected to my innate inner point of logic, reason and the most profound knowing that I’d never left from the time of my birth.

I DID NOT know what she was talking about or really why she hated me or what the beatings and abuse were all about. It was therefore not possible for me to comprehend anything about the abuse. My mother’s actions toward me were outside of my realm of understanding from the first breath I ever took.

How could such a fact actually be possible? Yes, this fills me with awe and makes me feel like I am standing at a point witnessing the mystery and the miracle of a genesis. But as I allow myself to expand my understanding of the possibilities of what still is factual about being human even though science might never be able to explain it, I do include as fact the actual experience I had with my mother as I knew — somehow and most profoundly — from the first breath I ever took — and from the first moment she turned the force and power of her hatred and psychotic mental illness upon me — that she was WRONG.

When we talk about the miracle of healing and of recovery, it is almost mind boggling to me to understand that my personal recovery means that I have to go back to THIS POINT of awareness of knowing I was NOT who and what she said I was, and did NOT do what she said I did and therefore could not possible beg her forgiveness or say I was sorry because I innately KNEW this fact inside of myself.

Nothing she could ever do over a long 18 years could touch me at this core. Nothing she could ever do, and she tried as hard as she possibly could have, could convince ME she was right and I was wrong.

I can sense as I write this today that it is like there was a sacred fire burning at the center of my being that included in its fuel this piece of knowledge. That sacred fire at the center of who I was, and who I am, was somehow absolutely protected from harm. She could not touch it. She could not touch me.

What also happened, however, is that this fire had to remain within its own circle as I grew a body into this world throughout the horror of all the experiences that I had to experience with my mother. Every time that part of Linda tried to move out into the world it was devastatingly attacked and had to retreat back into the safe place that my mother could not get to.

Because I was growing up in a malevolent world without safety and security, I could not integrate this inner self into my own life. The strange part is that even though this hampered me in my development at nearly every turn (my relationship with my 14 month older brother was for my early months of life exempt from her attacks, as was my later relationship with the Alaskan wilderness when I was away from her reach), it also saved me from the betrayal trauma that I believe caused the destruction of my mother’s mind.

My mother, I believe, grew up as any child naturally attempts to grow. The difference between my mother’s experience and my own is that she had, at times, false security offered to her so that she was in fact fooled into believing that her own self could come out into the world and form attachments of some kind to her early caregivers.

I, on the other hand, was never fooled. I actually was betrayed at the time of my birth. The MONSTER was obviously there to greet me at my first breath. My experience was of a consistent hatred while hers was of an inconsistent conditional love mixed with hatred.

My mother had already entered out into the world before she was severely betrayed by the people who had let her believe that they loved her. I knew instantly as soon as I ‘woke into the world’ that something was already terribly wrong. She figured this out too late in her own childhood. And by the time she did, on some deep level, figure out that she was unsafe in the world, it was too late for her to retreat back into that inner place of protective safety that I was forced to never leave from my start.

My mother was old enough to already be at a stage of trying to form a Theory of Mind as she tried to figure out how the rules of life impacted her. She had already experienced conditional love as it coincided with harm to the point that she was ‘tricked’ into believing that she was somehow responsible for actions that meant her attachment figures could not love her because she was wrong, because she was bad.

I believe that her mind became so entangled with this idea that somehow if she could only be good enough those around her would love her (as in that childhood note she found at the time of her mother’s death as I describe in +What I Suspect of My Mother’s Early Childhood), that it ended up becoming the wound around which her psychosis formed that she later projected in its entirety upon me before I was born. In her psychosis some part of her evidently believed that she was so bad and bad enough that the devil would send an unborn child to kill her in labor. I took my first breath being the personification of the entirety of her intolerable internalized evil.

This psychosis actively played itself out throughout my entire childhood. I see an image as I write of the fairy tale ‘poisoned apple’, only this one doesn’t put you to sleep. It kills you in the depths of your being.

My mother was old enough to eat the poisoned apple during her childhood. She trusted enough in those around her that she COULD be betrayed. She was fooled. Because the poisoned apple was presented to me at birth, well before I was actually old enough to eat it, I never was fooled into believing anyone loved me in the first place. I was therefore spared the eating of the poisoned apple. I was spared any further betrayal past my mother’s hatred of me at my first breath.

I could never believe there was anything I could do to change the situation, one way or the other. I was given an immunity as a result that my mother never had. That means that while I consciously completely and totally believed by the time I was 17 that I was evil, that I was not human, that I was the devil’s child — and I DID completely believe this without question — that belief only had to do with what had been told to me and beaten into me from the time of my birth.

I can never underestimate the power of the actual experiences I had that formed this understanding into my brain. But the truth of the matter is that there MUST be more to us than what is built into our brain — and what a long, strange road of suffering I had to take to be able to be one of the people on this earth who can make this statement from the facts of actual experience.

There IS more to us than what our bodies and our brains actually contain. There WAS a Linda, a self of Linda, present when I was born that had a knowledge, even though it was not verbal or conscious, that stood with its own truth and its own corresponding version of reality, against my mother every single step of the way.

Tracking this back to the concept of forgiveness I would say at this moment that when we have a choice to forgive or not to forgive we are being given the ability to exercise an option that lies at some fundamental point of our existence as members of our advanced human species. When I say that I don’t understand it, I mean it. The issue of forgiveness goes back to a time when I was in the act of being born because that is where the betrayals first began for me. But I am lucky this is so because unlike my mother I never had to participate in a fundamental betrayal later on, as she did as a child, that might have broken me as my mother’s broke her.

+ASKING THE QUESTION, “WHAT IS FORGIVENESS?”

May 21, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynowLeave a comment

I just wrote the following in an email and sent it off to my family and friends. I will also post it here, seriously asking any of my readers to please respond if they care to share with me their own answer to this question:

++
If I were a young child and I came to you with this question, how would you answer me?

“What is forgiveness?”

I ask because I realize I absolutely don’t know the answer to the question myself. I can’t, for example, even imagine any situation that could happen where I would even think about forgiving my children. There’s nothing they could do that I can imagine that would even make my needing them enter the picture.

Maybe because I grew up always being in trouble and never being forgiven that I did not grow up with any concept of what forgiveness might be. I just don’t know. So I ask this as a serious question and hope you can give me your perspective. I feel like I’m missing something that seems so important to other people.

+MAGICAL WISHFUL THINKING DOES NOT HEAL ABUSE

May 21, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow2 Comments

If I try to look at myself objectively I would wonder that I refer to my mother as having been mentally ill but I do not consider myself mentally ill. I would ask myself what criteria do I use and apply to myself that is different from the criteria I use in my thinking about my mother?

There seems to be a level of desription regarding the operation of a person’s brain-mind and nervous system that means to outsiders that mental illness is present. With today’s advances in brain imaging techniques I believe that if our culture wanted to, we could actually see in actual brain operating pictures the distinction that I evidently make about mental illnesses within my own mind.

I can visualize my thinking about mental health and mental illness in terms of a growing tree with branches that relate to my descriptive categories. Once a person is set off onto one of the branches related to these categories, they can never ‘jump branches’ by changing the basic origination point that leads into development along one of these branches. What is done or happens to a person before the age of two is the determining factor and cannot be changed.

It is important to realize that there is a fifth branch that I can visualize on this tree. It is actually the one that grows straight up to the sky without deviation or interruption. It relates to people who are optimally designed and who were raised from conception in a ‘good enough’ optimal caregiving environment. These people’s bodies and brains were not forced to change their development in adaptation to malevolency within the world. I only talk about these securely attached individuals in this writing as comparison points for how the rest of us ended up having to develop in one of these other four directions.

In the process of my own writing I have determined that there are four main levels leading to four different branches of this imaginary tree. They result from brain-mind-body changes that lead, in my thinking, off in one of these differing directions. Each of these categories, or types of mental illness that I recognize stem from altered brain development. I can understand that some mental illness occurs strictly through extreme genetic combinations that existed from conception and would have manifested as mental illness no matter how well a person had been cared from during their early lives. I include within this category serious changes that occur prior to birth or at birth through severe traumas to the fetus or infant that can also completely change the way a person develops. Obviously and fortunately I don’t fit this category and did not have to develop along the lines of this branch.

Now I will describe other three categories that do apply to my life personally. I also believe that in the future medical experts, including those working in the mental health fields, will recognize the accuracy of what I understand about these categories. At this point in time I believe that an understanding of which branch we grew into, which one our parents grew into, which ones our siblings grew into, etc. will help us determine what realistic changes for the better we can expect in our lives.

My personal understanding is that for any one of us that grew and developed in some form of a malevolent world during our early years were forced to adapt in some way that has placed us on one of these four ‘deviating’ limbs. We therefore experience some form of very real disability in comparison to the securely attached who grew up without severe harmful influence and who were not forced to adapt to a harmful environment.

The other three branches I am going to describe all entail the presence of some form of insecure attachment disorder. I agree with Dr. Allan Schore that every insecure attachment pattern results in some form of an empathy disorder. The toxic, malevolent, unsafe and insecure experiences we had as we developed created the breach in our ability to form secure attachments in the first place. Changes an individual was forced to make physiologically in our bodies and brains as we adapted in our development is what sends us off into one of these other three branch directions.

If we are of the luckier ones, we ONLY had to develop an insecure attachment. These manifest as what experts call dismissive-avoidant or ambivalent-preoccupied insecure attachment patterns. The FACT is that these patterns are built into the operation of the body, brain, mind and nervous system of the individual who has them.

These people have been forced to develop along an alternative branch of the tree, but do not usually end up with what we, as a society, would term a mental illness. They will, however, experience life differently than a securely attached person will, and are at risk for all kinds of ‘social’ disabilities due to the fact that their early forming social emotional brain development has been effected. They are ‘wired’ for insecure attachments.

It is here in my description of the next two branches of the tree that I deviate from the commonly accepted ideas about mental illness. Early development within an environment of severe trauma so often leads in the direction of the development of some form of ‘mental illness’ that it would be the rare, rare event to find an exception where this does not happen. Current thinking on ‘mental illness’ would therefore demand that we accept what I describe as two separate branches as being only one single large branch. Along this single branch are placed all currently used mental illness diagnostic categories.

As we become very clear regarding the facts, we will know that what creates this branch in the first place is exposure to severe traumas during early development in an environment that does not contain enough available resources to prevent serious adjustments within the infant and young child from having to be made. Once we leave our magical wishful thinking behind about the causes of so-called mental illnesses, we will see that disorganized and disoriented insecure attachment from birth (or before) create the deviation point from which what see as two separate branches originate.

I am forced to use currently accepted thinking and terminology to describe what happens from that origination point on our visualized tree. But I believe that the two branches result from very different and distinct adaptations to trauma and into some version of what we currently consider to be mental illness. While we might magically wish that these two branches are the same, I do not believe that they are.

In my own world of ‘fact’, I know these branches are different from my own experience. My mother was forced to grow along one of these two branches while I was forced to grow along the other one. While personal knowledge is not the stuff science is based on, it can still inform our individual and collective thinking. Larger changes may well come from the bottom-up, grass root, experience based real world knowledge that those of us who have experienced and survived severe abuse from birth have within us. It is from this base that I describe the differences that exist between these last two branches as they originated from adaptations within early malevolent environments.

Do not get me wrong here. Any consideration of mental illness, either as it might currently be accepted as occurring on one single branch, or as might exist in two separate categories on two separate branches, still means that a person’s brain, mind and body has been devastatingly altered during early development. The distinction matters to me because it influences the ability to live with the resulting dis-order and helps our efforts to heal be more effective.

Of all the varying cultural and religious belief structures that exist on our planet, I am going to pick only one to illustrate my point here. In fact, I am only going to pick one sentence from one of these belief structures. I encourage anyone who cannot relate to this one sentence because of its origins to please find a related, similar thought within your own belief structure that will allow you to understand what I am trying to say here.

This one sentence is, I believe, a statement about our species’ condition that can be understood through any spiritual belief system, certainly not only from a Christian point of view. It belongs to the final “Last Seven Words” that Jesus Christ uttered from the cross of crucifixion.

Father forgive them, for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34).

SEE:

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:c93sR4hE5jMJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayings_of_Jesus_on_the_cross+forgive+them+father+for+they+know&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://bibref.hebtools.com/?book=%20Luke&verse=23:34&src=!

I cannot personally find it within myself to argue with these few simple words. Nor can I really understand what they mean. All I know is that situations exist between people on this planet that often come back to this fundamental concept of forgiveness.

I will never argue about religion, nor will I ever defend my own beliefs whatever they might be (and many might say they are eclectic). But I will say that every time the topic of forgiveness arises in relation to my experience of 18 years of nearly constant, terrible insane abuse heaped upon me by my mother, my thoughts always return to the above 10 words. By doing I pass the issue of forgiveness on up the ladder in an understanding that it originates from and in my case belongs to Powers much greater than me.

I introduce the concept of forgiveness here before I describe the two branches of mental illness because believe forgiveness is ultimately about accountability and responsibility. One of the two branches I do hold both accountable and responsible for their actions and the other I do not. I belong to the first branch while I believe my mother belongs to the second.

As I have already mentioned in other posts I am ‘diagnosed’, through the current existing mental health system’s structure, as ‘having’ posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder including severe recurring depression, and dissociative disorder. Within a more enlightened system I would also be described as ‘having’ a severe disoriented-disorganized insecure attachment disorder, if not an adult version of the childhood version of Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD). In the MOST enlightened system I would be considered to have logical physiological changes caused by adaptations that had to be made in order for me to survive in a devastatingly hostile world.

My mother was never formally recognized by anyone as having severe mental illness, so any attempt to ‘diagnose’ her happens in retrospect as a ‘best guess’. She appears obviously to have suffered from a psychotic break, from serious Borderline Personality Disorder, and probably had some Bi-Polar characteristics, as well.

What do I see as the main difference between the two of us, and why would I describe myself as being on one branch of mental illness and place her on an entirely different one? What do I use as the final determining factor for the difference between us?

Returning to the originating point of both of these two branches in their common source of developmental adaptation to a malevolent early environment, and to my description of disorganized-disoriented insecure attachment disorder, I can say that both of us have the same roots to our mental illnesses in the same kind of brain operation: DISSOCIATION.

The distinction I make between the two branches and the mental illnesses that are found on each one, is that in some forms of mental illness such a dissociative break occurred during their development that the survivor has had the ability to connect to their self removed.

Continued survival necessitated that this break occur to prevent the overwhelming nature of their exposure to trauma, as experienced by a self in connection to a mind overcome by that trauma, to continue their lives hopefully without destroying their bodies. As we know, this break is not a guarantee to continued life in a physical body because some still succumb to self destruction.

This fundamental dissociative break between the experience of ongoing life and the self results in brain and body changes that protect life itself at the same time the more advanced and developed abilities to experience consciousness are interfered with. As a consequence these people lack real self reflective abilities, do not appear with what all the rest of us would consider a conscience, and have had the exercise of free will and choice based on self consciousness removed from them. Theirs is a different, and often dangerous, version of reality.

Those of us that do not have the genetic potential to take this detour during our developments that results in a single, profound and fundamental dissociative break in our connection to self — the operation of self and a connection to self being the result a very real (and visible through advanced brain imaging techniques) physiological brain operation — develop along what I see as the other branch.

Both branches, again, involve dissociational patterns as they occur in the brain’s function. Those of us that I would place on this branch I see myself on as different from the one I see my mother as being on, have NOT suffered a fundamental break that prevents us from having access to our self. Having some access to our self is still in the operational loops within our brains (most of the time) while theirs is not ALL of the time.

What do I mean by ‘most of the time’? It is the nature of dissociation when and as it occurs to create some kind of breach between the ongoing experience of being alive in a body and the self. For some, I believe, the dissociative breach happened once and for all and can only be said to be ‘a pattern of one’.

For the rest of us, dissociation can happen thousands and thousands of times throughout our life time, caused by exposure to a million trauma triggers. In between these triggered reactions those of us on this different branch can access some version of a connection to some version of our self while the others cannot.

A very graphic, though not disgustingly bloody, image just popped into my awareness as I finished writing my last sentence. I see those on the one branch where I would place my mother as having a head completely severed from their body. This head hovers closely above the body and follows where it goes but there is no connection between the two. Those of us on the other branch have a head that is partially severed by that is connected through the equivalent of vital main arteries and nerves. Strange image, I know…..

If I go outside to start my car and find the battery is dead, it does me no good at all to forgive my car’s battery for failing me and for making my life more difficult. I think about my own abuse history and my mother in the same kind of factual way I would think about a dead battery. No amount of magical wishful thinking involving denial or forgiveness is going to get my car started. Neither do I see that it applies to my thinking about my mother. If an individual is forced through conditions of early trauma to severe their connection to self they are just as cut off from their power source of consciousness as my car would be from the power of a working battery.

++++++++++

By thinking in terms of this tree, and by identifying how a person ends up on one branch or another, we can begin to separate out what really is the magical wishful thinking process of denial from the more helpful process of learning new facts about how our brains develop. Brains CAN and DO develop in such a way that the more advanced abilities related to having a self and an operational connection to this self are left out of the picture.

It might seem like an odd assessment to make, but I consider that the term and topic of ‘forgiveness’ is often tangled up with magical wishful thinking that is actually a denial of the facts regarding the risks and consequences of severe maltreatment as it affects human development.

I have no desire to protect my mother, excuse or justify her horribly abusive behavior toward me. I equally have no desire to forgive her. I see both my mother and her behavior in the light of fact, not magical wishful thinking that leads to denial. I think we have to be very careful in our thinking about forgiveness because of the risk we take in involving forgiveness with our denial of the very real physiological causes and consequences of severe maltreatment during early brain formation stages.

As long as we keep forgiveness tangled up with our denial of the facts, we will never truly find ways to heal the very real damage done to our perpetrators, to ourselves and being done to others on an ongoing basis. If we continue to apply magical wishful thinking to the real conditions of our existence, we will be at the same time also denying that we have a very REAL problem that has very REAL solutions — a problem caused by factual conditions that we can factually address, heal and resolve.

This is, to me, simply a helpful clarification process. It is a form of inventory taking that can help us identify both our possession of specific resources and our lack of resources.

I aim for realistic rather than wishful thinking. As children, we all moved through a Theory of Mind developmental stage during which we processed, incorporated, and integrated outsiders’ thinking into our own brain-mind. It can feel uncomfortable to have our final thinking structure ‘threatened’ by the introduction of thoughts that do not seem to match the Theory of Mind that we came up with.

Our individual and collective cultural Theory of Mind is always open to learning, growth and change if we are flexible and wise enough to let this happen. This growth requires of all of us that we allow new information to enter our thinking process, and as we do so we change who and how we are in the world. I see this as nothing more than a ‘reality checking’ process that allows us to continue to move past the childhood stage of ‘magical wishful thinking’ in some new way every day of our lives.

I believe that as we do this ‘work’ we can — individually and collectively –push ourselves further and further away from the EVENT HORIZON of trauma and the effects traumas have upon us throughout our adult lives. The literal meaning of an event horizon has to do with what happens near a Black Hole in space.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon

we read: “In general relativity, an event horizon is a boundary in spacetime, most often an area surrounding a black hole, beyond which events cannot affect an outside observer. Light emitted from beyond the horizon can never reach the observer, and anything that passes through the horizon from the observer’s side appears to freeze in place, with its image becoming more redshifted as time proceeds.”

I believe that this image applies to our work related to healing trauma. I believe that degrees of childhood magical wishful thinking that remain within our individual and collective Theory of Mind constructions put us at increasing risk for being sucked into the hole trauma can create in the fabric of a good life filled with well being. The good news is that we can always learn more about what is real in the world, and each time we do learning, we are replacing an immature magical wishful thought with some new fact. Facts are based in the real world as best we can understand it. Continuing to grow our Theory of Mind as it informs our actions is what I think healing is all about.

How do we know what magical wishful thinking is? I see the image of my son when he was three to four years old as he ‘plays’ with my well used tall metal kitchen stool laid down on the floor. His favorite ‘game’ for many moths was to sit on the floor inside it with his legs straight out in front of him between the stool’s supporting cross pieces. His hands were constantly moving around the top round seat piece ‘as if’ it were a space ship’s steering mechanism he had to use to maneuver himself through all of his ‘imaginary’ spaceship adventures.

When adults see young children engaged in this kind of ‘play’ we know that what is happening within the child’s mind is very different than what is happening inside our own as we watch. If we try to tell the child that their world is ‘not real’ they will look at us blankly, walk away and do something else because we have ruined their experience, or simply ignore us and go on with their game. We cannot, at this stage of their development, actually change the way their mind is perceiving their world, though how we interact with them does influence the growth process they are involved in.

The fact that the old metal kitchen stool was not a spaceship meant absolutely nothing to my son. In fact, my true concern eventually had nothing to do with his mental state. I became, as the months went by and his body continued to grow larger, became worried about his body. And I was right to worry. There DID come a day when he wedged himself so tightly into position within the legs and cross pieces of that stool that he couldn’t get out. I couldn’t get him out, either.

He started screaming in panic and terror. It would not have been helpful for me to become involved in my son’s magical thinking world, even if I could have. I needed to be in the real world of fact so I could effect a solution to this very real problem. I left his older sister beside him on the floor while I ran for the apartment manager to help us. It was only through a process of him using a crow bar and force to bend the legs of the stool that we were able to extricate my son from in between the steel pieces. Obviously, that ‘game’ was over.

It had not mattered before that time what I said to my son regarding my concerns. He had to really learn the facts by getting himself so stuck within the stool that he needed serious help to get out that he was forced to finally leave behind his much loved child’s game. Before that time arrived he was not only perfectly capable of retaining his state of magical wishful thinking, but self determined to do so.

How, when, where and to what degree were we able to pass through our own Theory of Mind developmental stages so that we left some part of our magical wishful thinking behind us? How willing are we to continue in our adulthood to exercise our brain’s infinite abilities to learn, grow and change?

Nobody is going to magically appear and sweep us away from the dangers of the event horizon of ongoing effects from trauma, no matter how much we might wish that they would do so. This is something that we all must do together. Learning the actual facts about how trauma changed our bodies and our brain-minds during development in malevolent conditions can lead us to new facts, and is it not the truth what will actually set us free?

As long as we continue to keep magical wishful thinking a part of our Theory of Mind related to the causes and consequences of severe early abuse during developmental stages, we are NOT going to find the very real facts we need in order to prevent this disaster from occurring in the first place, or to find realistic hopes for healing once it has occurred.

+THREE PART ANALYSIS OF MY MOTHER’S STORIES

May 20, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow2 Comments

After much work I present this information in response to this comment a reader made in reference to my mother’s stories:

“Linda, I have read your mother’s childhood stories, particularly the one where you say she has a “break” deep inside her childhood mind. I don’t see it from a readers point of view. Can you explain why you feel this is an important story?”

I know that my own sisters had the same response when they read ,y mother’s stories. Perhaps nobody but me will ever see what I see in them. I don’t know that I can adequately describe what I know about my mother through her childhood writings, but I tried…..

+MY ANALYSIS OF MY MOTHER’S STORIES – PART 1

+MY ANALYSIS OF MY MOTHER’S STORIES – PART 2

+MY ANALYSIS OF MY MOTHER’S STORIES – PART 3

+CATCHING UP ON MY MOTHER

May 19, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow2 Comments

I didn’t finish writing this section until many of you had probably already read yesterday’s post so I am including the link here because it is contains important information to my story. Please be patient with how slow the page might load on your computer. There’s lots of informtion on this blog and wordpress.com loads more slowly as a result.

+What I Suspect of My Mother’s Early Childhood

I also encourage readers who haven’t yet done so to read

My Mother’s Childhood Stories

I’ll write more later today……

Thank you for visiting. Linda

+DISSOCIATION AND MY VERSION OF THIS UTOPIAN WORLD

May 17, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow2 Comments

Every one of us begins life as a unique individual. Through our early interactions with our caregiving environment we “come down into the world” as James Hillman describes in his book “The Soul’s Code.”

http://www.amazon.com/Souls-Code-Search-Character-Calling/dp/0446673714/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242590259&sr=1-1

I believe that if an infant’s caregiving interactions are of a malevolent kind, an individual’s ability to grown down into the world is interfered with. This interference will be reflected in the changes the body and brain are forced to make in adjustment to a malevolent world. Of all the consequences that originate through these adjustments, the one I want to write about today has to do with integration.

A person learns from infancy how to integrate their self within their environment. This all happens through the ‘rupture and repair’ patterns that are established within an infant’s body, nervous system and brain through its interactions with its first caregivers. Because I believe that hope is an innate hard-wired physiological ability available to us from birth, the potential for a lack of hope resulting in hopeless despair and disappointment also exists within us from birth.

If an infant’s early caregiver interactions are adequate and appropriate, hope thus becomes intertwined with this ‘coming down into the world’, or coming to live in a body in this world. If an infant’s experiences result from inadequate and inappropriate early caregiver experiences, hopeless despair and disappointment will grow into an infant’s body as this body grows into the world.

In cases such as mine, when the pattern of early caregiver interactions occurs within the context of severe mental illness, not only will the inadequate and inappropriate nature of the infant’s experiences change the way it grows on all levels, but there will be introduced an additional, complicating factor — the insanity of the mental illness itself.

Mental illness is a manifestation of brain operations that are occurring outside the range of ‘normal’. The ability to use the brain as it has evolved to operate in ‘best case’ scenarios has been removed and has been replaced with alternative operational patterns — most usually in response to its early formational environment of deprivation and malevolence. In these cases REASON no longer operates correctly. Someone whose brain operates like my mother’s did will not have the ability to think reasonably on any level. They therefore live in a world of their own creation, a reality that is entirely processed through a brain that has not formed to operate correctly.

I can only speak for myself about how my reality formed through my interactions with my mother from birth. There was no possibility of my being able to discern reasonable patterns of cause and effect as my brain developed. It is only because of the many resiliency factors that also influenced me in childhood (see previous post on resiliency) that I managed to form a brain that has a reasonable sense of cause and effect built into it. One of the most important resiliency factors that I have to consider is that I evidently did not have the same kind of mental illness genetic combinations available to me to use in order to survive the overwhelming pain of my own childhood that my mother had.

My mother’s irrational control over my developing mind was, however, nearly as pervasive as it was chronic. She shared in common all of the techniques used by the Chinese in the early 50s to control the minds of prisoners — and she did this to me from birth until I left home at 18. As a result I will never be able to fully gain control of my own mind away from her brain and mind forming influence. She made sure that her irrationality became a part of me and she was supremely successful.

But she could never actually control ME, the me that I was from conception, the me that did the interacting with her from the start of my ‘growing down into the world’. Unfortunately that ME was prevented from integrating properly into a body in this world. She filled so much of the space and time that should have been MINE that there was precious little left over during that 18 years for me to have experiences that were not in some way influenced by her and her mental illness.

I write about this today in order to point out a single important aspect of how my early patterns shaped how I am in the world today. Because my mother constantly pointed out to me through her actions and through her words that I was evil, not human, the devil’s child and BAD, I grew up absolutely believing her. Through this process the ME that endured these experiences evidently learned that all of the world outside of my influence must be a perfect place.

That fact made logical, reasonable sense in my growing mind. If Linda was so bad that anyone involved with me had to suffer as from a ‘curse’, then anyone whose life I did not touch must have a perfect life.

I call this today my “Utopian Complex’, and there will evidently never be a logical, rational or reasonable way that I can alter this fundamental belief that I have about myself in relationship to the world outside of my sphere of ‘influence’. As a result, I still fundamentally believe that the world ‘out there’ is a perfect place and if it isn’t, it sure should be. In my logically illogical mind, there is absolutely no excuse for the world not to be perfect outside the range of my own personal influence.

This, to me, is an example of how having a brain formed under the conditions presented by my mentally ill mother’s brain-mind gave me a version of what infant brain development specialists call the infant’s ‘unsolvable paradox’. These researchers know that severely maltreated infants know on a profound level that they have to ‘go on being’ in a world that is so dangerous that possibility is not possible.

This is the consequence of a brain-mind-body that is overwhelmed by traumas outside the possibility of addressing through any known coping ability an infant has. The paradox is formed deeply within the brain-mind simply by the fact that the infant (myself included) DID survive what was impossible to survive.

Because I was told from the moment I was born that I caused nothing but trouble and was the cause of all the troubles in my family, and that their world would be perfect if I wasn’t in it, I simply applied logic in an incremental fashion to include my relationship with the entire world outside of myself. I understand today that my version of building the unsolvable paradox into my being as I grew down into my body and into the world is certainly not the worst that I could have done.

But it only happened THIS way because of the consistent and pervasive psychosis my mother suffered from in relation to me from my first breath. Infant’s crave consistency and I have to say my mother certainly provided me with that! My understanding of cause and effect did not grow to apply to me on an ongoing personal level, but was rather accomplished on the level of the grand scheme of ‘Linda versus the world’.

This world was of course represented by my mother as my brain-mind formed, and because she formed her own brain-mind so completely into my developing one, and because I cannot extricate her from my brain-mind, I am simply left with the understanding that the world has no reason to be less than perfect if I haven’t personally done something to harm it.

I doubt that I can communicate to you that this ‘reality’ is not a ‘maybe’ to me. In the essence of my relationship to being in this world at all, it is fact.

Of course the other side of this double-edged sword, the other part of this paradox that formed itself into me is that it is a bad thing that I am in the world at all, and especially that it is hopeless for Linda to have a good life because Linda is in it. Talk about a no-win predicament! I cannot both live a life and not be in it at the same time! This is, to me, the end result of being so told I was bad and that chance of becoming good was so hopeless and impossible, that I simply excluded myself from my own life.

This may be a difficult thought to follow because it is NOT based on reasonable logic as a ‘normal’ brain would understand it. But I suspect that dissociation within my brain is directly connected to having been forced to live a life for 18 years from birth without ME being allowed to be in it. Each separate experience of my childhood simply happened, but I had no ongoing sense that I was a part of those experiences or any ongoing sense that they happened to me.

It was similar to “If a tree falls in a forest and there’s nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?” And if the answer to that question is “No” once, then it is always so. From the first time I dissociated myself from the ongoing experiences of the traumas that were my childhood I was being forced to live a life without ME in it. If it happens once or happens a million times, the result are the same: A disconnection from a meaningful fluid ongoing experience of being alive in a body in the world.

I know I experience what attachment experts call a disorganized-disoriented insecure attachment disorder. This kind of attachment disorder, I believe, has dissociation so built into it that the person’s ongoing life cannot be separated from it — ever. It results from ongoing experiences from birth that were not based on logical, rational cause and effect processes and through an absence of adequately resolved patterns of rupture and repair.

In my case true hope ‘floated’ so far away from my own personal experience of life that it ‘landed’ at the unreachable interface of where I can imagine the ‘world’ as being separate from myself. Every infant grows into its brain a conception of where its boundaries are, of what lies on its own insides compared to what lies on its outsides. If the early interactions an infant has as it forms these mental boundaries are based on irrationality, the boundaries themselves will not form normally.

In a normal brain, all ongoing experiences are connected together to form a ‘coherent life story’ with the person being the one living the life. I can only artificially construct my own life story from the millions of disconnected pieces that lie alone, separated and isolated, somewhere in my memory. And yet this fact is just one of the small pieces that I believe reflects the kind of damage that results from severe early malevolent abuse.

I will never know if someone’s intervention on my behalf, that could have resulted at least in a different pathway for me through the rest of my childhood, would have left me with less devastating damage. I believe that it would have. Removal would have prevented my mother from being able to consistently build her ‘case’ against me (and into my own brain-mind) over the many, many years she had control over me. I was not given the opportunity to experience myself outside the reach of her terribly distorted mind.

+OUR DISTURBED NATURAL INTERNAL OPIOID (OPIATE) SYSTEM

May 16, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow2 Comments

Could it be this simple, that for all the complexities about being human our lives really boil down to this process: Rupture with repair or rupture without repair, with hope for repair being fulfilled or hope for repair being disappointed?

I believe we are biologically designed even before our birth for the experience of hope. If we believe that a state of calmness related to having all of our needs met is our most normal state, it becomes true that any disruption of this ‘perfect’ state represents a rupture and indicates a need has arisen and a repair must be made.

This entire system is moderated from before our birth by our own endogenous opioid system. Yes, opioid as related to our own natural opiate producing system complete with all the receptors that are designed to receive our natural opioids (endogenous opioid peptides, produced naturally in the body, such as endorphins, enkephalins, dynorphins, and endomorphins).

Endogenous opioids are in the placenta and in mother’s milk. Opioid receptors govern a newborn’s interactions with the world. If its opioid receptors are all filled up the infant is calm and content. If a need arises in its body this need is reflected in the emptying of the infant’s opioid receptors and it is then disturbed and not calm. The infant has experienced a ‘rupture’ in need of ‘repair’, and I believe it is a biological mandate that implicates a physiological response to need in the form of hope for fulfillment.

A mother is physiologically designed to have her opioid receptors filled by bonding to and caring for her newborn. As she responds to her needy infant’s needs, the infant’s opioid receptors are filled back up and the mother’s are affected positively, also.

Hence in my thinking our own feel good opioid system is at the basis of attachment from start to finish. Yet because we are a complex species we often deviate from what is best for us and find all kinds of ways to interfere with our natural abilities to feel good simply through safe and secure attachments patterns with one another as members of a social species.

The more disturbed our natural feel good-feel bad processes were in the beginning, the more our development as infants was reflected in the adjustments our bodies and brains had to make in order to survive in a malevolent rather than a benevolent world. Our hopes of repair after rupture were not met satisfactorily and we are left with an internal opioid system that has been forced to go awry.

I believe that because we are a social species our first line of repair is naturally meant to happen through attachment to one another. This fact is reflected in the processes our early brain development goes through as it forms the right limbic emotional brain in interaction with the experiences an infant has with its early caregivers. All the good natural opioid interactional experiences build a good brain designed for life in a good world where hopes are fulfilled through these caring interactions. Bad opioid interactions build a different brain designed to operate in a world that is not a friendly one. A brain built through inadequate and toxic relational interactions will have a different pattern based on the disappointment of hope rather than on its fulfillment.

These early opioid experiences of fulfillment or un-fulfillment directly feed information not only to the developing brain, but also to the entire body as it also designs and builds its nervous system, its immune system, and the operation of its genetic expression machinery to match the world the infant is forming in. It is on this level that I talk about early attachment experiences and the fostering of either hope based on appropriate and adequate endogenous opioid receptor interactions — forming safe and secure attachments — or about the opposite experiences that form the insecure attachment patterns.

If you search this blog for ’emotional brain’ and for ‘opioid system’ you will access research about these processes. You can also search your own body to find your personal pivot point in relationship to hope and disappointment. Every time we suffer from some version of a rupture in our ongoing state of well being we will automatically have some degree of hope arise in relationship to this disruption. If the opposite of hope is what built our bodies and brains, we will feel the pain of disappointment more often than will someone who was raised in a secure attachment environment.

Our sense of ourselves in our bodies reflect the point on the hopeful – hopeless continuum our self originated from. Our interactional experiences with our early caregivers regarding the natural life processes of rupture and repair told us both how to develop and how the world we were developing into would treat us. It is because all these processes are rooted in our endogenous opioid system that we feel mostly good or mostly bad during our lifespan.

I believe that everything we ever try to do during our lifetimes to make ourselves feel better is a reflection of how our bodies interpreted life in this world from the beginning. If people did not meet our needs, did not repair the natural ruptures caused by our being alive here in the first place, we were forced to survive on our own. We did not develop an optimal right limbic emotional SOCIAL brain geared to a safe and secure world with caring people in it.

To the degree that our natural attachment patterns to and within our species were interfered with, we look outside of the human relationship circle to get our needs met. What we suffer from are degrees of isolation from our species that created and continues to create in us an ‘endogenous opioid hole’ that can never be satisfactorily filled. Recognizing the reality of our degrees of isolation contributes to our ability to become conscious of what we feel, why we feel it, and what better ways we can try to fill our opioid hole.

A lack of secure attachment within our species creates an isolation that we experience as an almost overwhelming sadness. All future adjustments we are forced to make by a disturbed endogenous opioid interaction pattern — including mental illness — is an attempt to survive in spite of our pain.

+BLOG SEARCH OF NEW PAGES ADDED TODAY ON ‘BRAIN DEVELOPMENT’

May 15, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynowLeave a comment

Search Results for ‘brain development’

++NOTES ON RIGHT BRAIN DEVELOPMENT

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

9 Postnotes right brain
10-26-6
COPIED FROM SCHORE chapter 1 affect regulation
“This prefrontal region comes to act in the capacity of an executive control function for the entire right cortex, the hemisphere that modulates affect, nonverbal communication, and unconscious processes. Early object relational experiences are not only registered in the deep unconscious, they influence the development of […]

Read Full Post »

+SIEGEL – ANTICIPATION, TIME AND COHERENCE OF MIND

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

PRENOTES TIME 8
10-14-6
“Furthermore, the elaboration of autonoetic consciousness permits patients to reflect on the past, understand the present, and help actively shape the future. Such mentalizing reflective dialogue is also a fundamental component of secure attachments. Indi- (siegel/tdm/297) viduals with histories of disorganized attachments can thus become freed from the “prison of the present,” in […]

Read Full Post »

+SEIGEL ON SHAME

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

PRENOTES ch44 Child’s Brain
10-13-6
from Siegel’s chapter 8 on Interpersonal Connection
“Allan Schore’s work on affect regulation provides an extensive review of the neurobiology of emotional development. This section highlights some of Schore’s views and integrates them with the framework for emotion regulation proposed in Chapter 7. (siegel/tdm/278)”
“Children need to be able to regulate their bodily and […]

Read Full Post »

+SIEGEL – UNRESOLVED TRAUMA – INFLUENCE SELF-ORGANIZATION THROUGH GENERATIONS

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

PRENOTES ch21 Trauma
10-13-06
TRAUMA AND GRIEF
From below
“Unresolved trauma or loss leaves the individual with a deep sense of incoherence in autonoetic consciousness, which tries to make sense of the past, organize the present, and chart out the future. This lack of resolution can produce lasting effects throughout the lifespan and influence self-organization across the generations. (siegel/tdm/297)”
++++
below […]

Read Full Post »

+SIEGEL ON BRAIN INTEGRATION PROCESSES – SELF ORGANIZATION

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

BRAIN NOTES 8
10-13-6
“The orbitofrontal cortex – the part of the brain just behind the eyes and located at a strategic spot at the top of the emotional limbic system, next to the “higher” associational cortex responsible for various forms of thought and consciousness – plays an important role in affect regulation. (siegel/tdm/280)”
“This area of the […]

Read Full Post »

+SIEGEL – DISORIENTED MIND

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

DISSOCIATION NOTES 6
9-24-6
(named 6 because is being formed in folder for manuscript 6)
“At times, the mind cannot organize itself effectively in response to experiences. Such experiences are traumatizing, in that they overwhelm the mind’s ability to adapt….in the case of disorganized attachment, some interpersonal experiences result in the mind’s becoming unable to form a cohesive […]

Read Full Post »

+SIEGEL – EMOTIONAL REGULATION AND DISORGANIZED ATTACHMENT

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

Chapter 51 Regu con’t
10-12-06
Regulation continued
[Siegel talks a lot in this part about disorganization]
“The capacity to regulate the appraisal and arousal processes of the mind is fundamental to self-organization; therefore, emotion regulation is at the core of the self. The acquisition of self-regulation emerges from dyadic relationships early in life. Attachment studies suggest that the type […]

Read Full Post »

+SIEGEL – DYADIC STATES OF MIND

Posted in Trauma and Its Consequences on May 15, 2009 | Edit | No Comments »

Chapter 49 INTERPERSONAL SYSTEMS AND DYADIC STATES OF MIND

(this is from the last part of Siegel’s chapter on states of mind beginning on page 232)
“The mind of one person, A, organizes itself on the basis of both internal and external constraints. Internal constraints are determined by constitutional features and experience. External constraints include the […]

Read Full Post »

+SEVERE CHILD ABUSE AND SELF ESTEEM

May 15, 2009November 21, 2010 alchemynow2 Comments

On occasion I have heard people say about other people, “They have no self esteem.” I don’t believe this is ever an accurate statement. Everyone has self esteem. If is part of being human. What matters to me is how positive or how negative a person’s self esteem is.

A sense of esteem for the self grows right along with a growing self from birth. Researchers believe that the self of a person is formed by the age of two. It might be hard for us to believe, but by the time a child is that age it already has a strong sense of its own self worth — either positive or negative — built into the brain by every interaction that little person has already had with its early caregivers within its attachment environment.

Because the sense of self esteem, or self worth, is directly formed through attachment relationships, an unsafe and insecure environment will create an unstable connection to the self. Development within a safe and secure world provides a young child with a sense of confident connection to important others in its life and a sense of competence within itself. These conditions are directly connected to either a positive or a negative sense of self esteem and are reflected in the connection each person has to their own inner self in relationship to the world it lives in.

Once the self is formed by the age of two, along with the initial sense of safety, security and positive self esteem, or a sense of un-safety, insecurity and negative self esteem, all other ongoing experiences will be connected to this early formation and will be filtered through it. Only in cases of serious mental illness can a ‘second self’ be formed that will filter and process ongoing experience. In usual cases a growing child will attach future experience to the original self it formed and connects to for the rest of its life.

We can think of the experiences a child has during the time of its life from conception to age two as being like the time it takes to tune a piano that child will play its music on for the rest of its life. We can understand that playing on a well tuned piano will allow that child to create a musically harmonious self prepared to play in an equally harmonious world. On the other hand, a child who has unsafe and insecure attachment experiences will end up with a mistuned piano that cannot make beautiful music no matter how hard that person tries for the rest of its life.

We can, as adults, assess how well tuned our piano was primarily before the age of two in one of two ways. If we already know that there were serious problems in our very early brain development years we have our answer instantaneously. If, however, we have either never thought about ourselves back that far or have no available information at our finger tips that comes from our very early years, we can simply just look back at the patterns of our existence and search for what the overriding emotional tone that our self experiences in the present.

I am certainly not the one to say whether or not ‘bad’ versus ‘good’ people exist in the world. I believe that kind of thinking originated at a time when mythologies and fairy tales were used to explain events that people had no other way of understanding their lives. Today we know very clearly what the impact of very early mother-infant experiences are on the forming brain, nervous system, body and self that originates as a hopefully conscious interaction between a growing individual and their environment. We are not talking about magic. We are talking about cause and effect.

If we look back even at our adult and teen years and detect patterns of disappointments, wrong choices, hurtful relationships, failure to discover our best place in the work world and also detect that our overriding emotional tone is and has been anything other than balanced, competent calm and well being, we will know that we were most likely sent off in a less than safe and secure world in the first place. From the time of our unstable and probably malevolent beginnings we have been trying our hardest to correct our own behavior as if we are somehow to blame for being inadequate for the job of being a happy, well adjusted member of our society.

Our foundational sense of self esteem is not some ephemeral or nebulous construction. It is very real and it actually came from a time of our lives when we had pitifully small powers to control our environments — before we were two years old. I am not talking about some Freudian fantasy of puppet figures from our past related to our own wishful thinking. I am talking about the formation of our brains as our self and our sense of worth, value and place in the world was told to us by the people who took care of us before age two — or didn’t.

Lest we think that we are some kind of exception to a natural rule just because we are of a conscious species, let me assure you we are not. Research has demonstrated, for example, that if a litter of a calm rat mother’s babies are raised with the calm mother they will end up to be calm rat adults. If a litter of a nervous ‘neurotic’ mother rat are allowed to grow up under her care, the resulting adults will also be nervous and ‘neurotic’. No surprise and no magic there.

But here is the surprise though still nothing magical. If you take the calm mother rat’s babies away from her at birth and put them under the care of the nervous ‘neurotic’ mother rat, those same calm mother babies will grow up to be nervous and ‘neurotic’. Take the nervous ‘neurotic’ mother rat’s babies away at birth and give them to the calm mother to raise and those babies will grow up to be calm adults.

So what are we left with about hope of positive changes in our lives if our early beginnings were actually a disaster? Because the human brain is the most complex structure known to exist, we are all at a point of marveling at its potential for change.

Three fascinating links related to the Dali Lama and the science of the brain are listed below

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/labnotes/archive/2009/02/24/mom-dad-dna-and-suicide.aspx

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:RKToUsTHIRMJ:www.dana.org/news/cerebrum/detail.aspx%3Fid%3D7384+dali+lama+nueorscience+neurotic+rats&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://www.mindandlife.org/conf04.html

And take a look at author Alice Miller’s site for prevention of child abuse

http://www.alice-miller.com/index_en.php

More than anything else, I am asking that we consider child abuse backgrounds when facing the difficulties of adult life for anybody who has come from such a past. While it might be difficult for us to consider our own life or the life of others who might be troubled, with respect, dignity and caring compassion, I believe that it will only be under this light of firm but gentle kindness that we can change the patterns that have been ingrained not only in ourselves, but within our cultures around the globe.

We have to take the consequences of infant and child abuse extremely seriously. I cannot, unfortunately, locate a source for the following, but I believe it is true.

I heard that the Dali Lama was asked at one of the neuroscience sessions related to the deprivations caused by abusive childhoods whether or not he believed that an adult with a severely abusive early upbringing had the same ability to advance spiritually in this world as do people who did not have very early extreme abuse histories. It is said that the Dali Lama was quiet in thought for some time before he responded, “No, they do not.”

This means to me that we still do not fully know the adult consequences of early malevolent conditions on all aspects of development. If nobody really yet knows, then we cannot expect ourselves to know the impact that our own early malevolent experiences had on us, either. We will not gain either the knowledge or the changes we seek by being harsh on ourselves or on one another. But in cases where adults are passing on the abuse they experienced to their offspring, we have to be ready to do whatever is necessary to intervene on behalf of their children.

At no point is this a journey for the faint of heart — not for us individually or for us collectively. It is not a journey that can be taken in an atmosphere of ambiguity. We must become clear about what we are facing so that the most helpless and innocent members of our species will not be forced to suffer from what we adults have created to harm them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here are some positive self esteem related books from Gallup Press that I recommend though I have not yet had a chance to read them myself:

In 2004, Gallup Press’ first book, How Full Is Your Bucket?, became an instant #1 New York Times bestseller. This led to the publication of several more strengths books, including StrengthsFinder 2.0 (2007) and Strengths Based Leadership (2009). Fueled by the continued demand for its original strengths-based classic, Gallup Press is releasing two new titles based on How Full Is Your Bucket?.

How Full Is Your Bucket? For Kids (available now)

	Because of the overwhelming response from parents and teachers to How Full Is Your Bucket? — many of whom have asked for a “kids’ version” — Gallup Press has created How Full Is Your Bucket? For Kids. Tom Rath coauthored the book with early childhood development expert Mary Reckmeyer, and they partnered with the brilliant children’s book illustrator Maurie Manning.
This new book brings the basic dipper and bucket metaphor to life through the story of a young boy named Felix. In How Full Is Your Bucket? For Kids, Felix begins to see how every interaction he has with others in a day either fills or empties his bucket. Felix then realizes that everything he says or does to other people fills or empties their buckets as well.

Expanded Anniversary Edition of How Full Is Your Bucket?
(available in mid-June)

This new, expanded hardcover Anniversary Edition of How Full Is Your Bucket? includes updated research and content, with a removable workbook for individual, team, and organizational development.

For more information, or to purchase these new books, visit:

How Full Is Your Bucket? For Kids (available now):

How Full Is Your Bucket? Anniversary Edition (available in mid-June):

	alchemynow on +AN OUTLINE – THE SCOTTI…
	Thorn Prick (@Darlen… on +AN OUTLINE – THE SCOTTI…
	alchemynow on +INDIGO CHILDREN (INDIGO ADULT…
	Kevin Butler Butler on +INDIGO CHILDREN (INDIGO ADULT…
	alchemynow on +NOT LIKING THE FORCED BLOG FO…
	mlhyde on +NOT LIKING THE FORCED BLOG FO…
	alchemynow on +”NEUROTRIBES” = B…
	guidinghope on +”NEUROTRIBES” = B…
	anke pfefferkorn on +NOT A “HOLIDAY SEASON…
	alchemynow on +LEAVING MY BEST BELOVED HUMAN…
	alchemynow on +LEAVING MY BEST BELOVED HUMAN…
	alchemynow on +MY MOTHER’S VAGUS NERVE…
	alchemynow on +SEVEN GENERATIONS FORWARD, SE…
	alchemynow on +SEVEN GENERATIONS FORWARD, SE…
	Clinton vs. Trump or… on +SEVEN GENERATIONS FORWARD, SE…

Stop the Storm

The most important work we can do, individually and globally, is the healing and prevention of traumas so that we don't pass them down to future generations. This blog is a working tool to contribute to this good work.

Tag: child abuse

+EARLY ORIGIN OF OUR ONGOING EXPERIENCE OF SHAME AND FORGIVENESS

+FORGIVENESS AND EARLY BETRAYAL

+ASKING THE QUESTION, “WHAT IS FORGIVENESS?”

+MAGICAL WISHFUL THINKING DOES NOT HEAL ABUSE

+THREE PART ANALYSIS OF MY MOTHER’S STORIES

+CATCHING UP ON MY MOTHER

+DISSOCIATION AND MY VERSION OF THIS UTOPIAN WORLD

+OUR DISTURBED NATURAL INTERNAL OPIOID (OPIATE) SYSTEM

+BLOG SEARCH OF NEW PAGES ADDED TODAY ON ‘BRAIN DEVELOPMENT’

Search Results for ‘brain development’

++NOTES ON RIGHT BRAIN DEVELOPMENT

+SIEGEL – ANTICIPATION, TIME AND COHERENCE OF MIND

+SEIGEL ON SHAME

+SIEGEL – UNRESOLVED TRAUMA – INFLUENCE SELF-ORGANIZATION THROUGH GENERATIONS

+SIEGEL ON BRAIN INTEGRATION PROCESSES – SELF ORGANIZATION

+SIEGEL – DISORIENTED MIND

+SIEGEL – EMOTIONAL REGULATION AND DISORGANIZED ATTACHMENT

+SIEGEL – DYADIC STATES OF MIND

+SEVERE CHILD ABUSE AND SELF ESTEEM

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Search Results for ‘brain development’

Share this:

Share this: