Workplace Chaplains

[ponderingturtle]

Um,. which part of "clergy are trained in [evidence-based] counselling" do you keep missing?

The part where I believe that. The amount of woo in counseling is truly remarkable and pervasive.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Iindeed, Chaplains can be relieved of their duties, or reassigned, or subject to a number of disciplinary measures.

So what kind of profeshionals do they have overseeing them to make sure that they are using evidence based methods, and not some fashionable woo?

Two cases I am personally familiar with. The chaplain in our destroyer squadron was a detriment to morale. He upset as many people as he helped, and was eventually removed from his position by the DESRON commander. Some of us smart alecs used to parody the opening of his evening prayer, not too far from how he presented his words, as "Dear Lord, we are so miserable . . . "

So he was an ineffective woo. The best get their patients to blame themselves for their failure, as the technique works after all. That is far from the most dammage that I think someone could do in such a position.

More recently, I was a material witness to, and had to write a pair of witness statements regarding, the relief of a chaplain who was not just incompetent, but pretty much a drunk. After numerous complaints, one of them countersigned by myself and some other officers and NCO's, the senior chaplain in the area first counselled him. He collected a number of witness statements, and recommended to the commander that the chaplain in question be sent to the shrink for psychological evaluation. I don't know what happened to the man after he was removed from our base, but I am guessing he went to level III alcohol rehab.

Neither of these has anything to do with the quality of the evidence for their counceling practices. It sounds like saying that Naturopaths are regulated because one got arrested for tax evasion.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Yolu are misreading this to fit your bias. Whether this is intentional or not, I do not know, but I reiterate my suggestion that you step away until your emotions stop clouding your judgment.

The counselor is not a completely unqualified mystic despite your protestations.

You know, ID, your disagreement need not be worded in a willfully ignorant and logically flawed fashion. Yet it is. It surprises me, because I have seen so much better from you elsewhere.

I'd be happy to admit that chaplains are qualified counselors if either the requirements to be one or the training they receive in the military made them so.

ETA: Really, show me how randomly selected theologians given a 12 week crash course qualify as "counselors." I don't see it. There's no assurance that they come to the job with the qualifications, and I don't see that they get the qualifications when they join up.

 

[Garrette]

I'd be happy to admit that chaplains are qualified counselors if either the requirements to be one or the training they receive in the military made them so.

Excellent. Will you also admit that no one here is claiming that whatever training chaplains receive it is not the equivalent of that received by psychologists?

And that since it is impractical to make psychologists universally available to the degree ponderingturtle is implying that someone who is less well trained than a psychologist but better trained than a layman can be an acceptable counselor as a stopgap in a crisis and as a soundingboard for minor issues?

 

[ponderingturtle]

As do medics until the situation demands otherwise.


I suspect they do but do not know with certainty.

I could research it, or if you don't mind waiting a week and a half, I could speak with my unit's chaplain when I go again. (He's the new guy who may or may not know I'm an atheist, so I can't guarantee the same quality response I would have guaranteed with our last chaplain).

It would be interesting to find out.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Excellent. Will you also admit that no one here is claiming that whatever training chaplains receive it is not the equivalent of that received by psychologists?

And that since it is impractical to make psychologists universally available to the degree ponderingturtle is implying that someone who is less well trained than a psychologist but better trained than a layman can be an acceptable counselor as a stopgap in a crisis and as a soundingboard for minor issues?

Hey, I'm well aware that there is a shortage of psychologists and psychiatrists available. I'm well aware that the most practical solution is some sort of less-well trained demi-counselor, but I have two worries.

A: Chaplains do not need degrees in some relevant field to counseling, like psychology. They have qualifications than entitle them to talk to leprechauns. There's no reason to choose to train the chaplain in suicide prevent anymore than there is to train a cook. It's an arbitrary choice dictated more by tradition than by good sense. (That's an opinion, of course.)

B: Considering the fact that chaplains represent one specific lump of nonsense (religion) even ethical chaplains need to struggle with conflicts between what they have been indoctrinated to advise people to do in common situations military personnel have and with the ethical standards of secular psychological practice. An ethical Catholic chaplain wouldn't advise a soldier struggling with issues of divorce that divorce is frowned upon by the Church, but why put both the chaplain and the soldier in that position? Why on Earth would we pick a demonstrably biased mystic to perform a delicate secular function?

 

[ponderingturtle]

I just wanted to stress this -- again -- because it's a point I've been trying to make for some time.

If you want to put an M.D. psychiatrist into every platoon and every watch on every destroyer.....

I never said psychiatrist, I said psychaitric training. But good strawman there.

But I guess you don't concider medics to have medical training either, as they are not doctors?

 

[ponderingturtle]

The counselor is not a completely unqualified mystic despite your protestations.

Neither where the ones behind the Satanic Ritual Abuse findings.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Excellent. Will you also admit that no one here is claiming that whatever training chaplains receive it is not the equivalent of that received by psychologists?

And that since it is impractical to make psychologists universally available to the degree ponderingturtle is implying that someone who is less well trained than a psychologist but better trained than a layman can be an acceptable counselor as a stopgap in a crisis and as a soundingboard for minor issues?

I am not talking about that degree of training, I am talking about makeing sure that they practice effective theraputic techniques, as there is so much mental health woo, that it is astounding. Also this woo, is much harder to segregate from legitimate practitioners, because it is so unregulated.

It is rather like not knowing if your doctor is a MD or a naturopath.

 

[Garrette]

Hey, I'm well aware that there is a shortage of psychologists and psychiatrists available. I'm well aware that the most practical solution is some sort of less-well trained demi-counselor,

Thanks. PT won't say this much. Or maybe I haven't asked in the right way.

but I have two worries.

A: Chaplains do not need degrees in some relevant field to counseling, like psychology.

At what point do we take counseling at any level out of the hands of laymen, then? As I have said previously in this thread, I am/have been a counselor in that I have a fair amount of non-degreed training in crisis counseling and a helluva lot of experience in actually doing it.

In my case, there are no strict protocols such as PT is asking for which limit my actions. There are, however, vaguely worded restrictions which I boil down to these:


1. If someone better qualified is available and acceptable to the person in need, hand over immediately.

2. Make no false promises.

3. Do nothing to establish dependence.

4. Do not have "repeat" counselings.


It's fairly easy to observe when someone is violating one or more of these.


Beyond that, I don't have a degree in psychology yet I counsel my children all the time.

My friends in school had no degree in psychology yet they counseled me when I was going through rough spells as I did for them.

Soldiers have no degree in counseling yet they counsel each other all the time.

Where do you draw the line?

It seems you and PT are assuming that chaplains are setting up a formal practice, complete with patients who come back every week for a strict one hour session, appropriately billed.

They have qualifications than entitle them to talk to leprechauns.

Hyperbole aside, they have theological training in addition to their training in counseling. Just as I have theatrical training and experience in addition to my military training.

There's no reason to choose to train the chaplain in suicide prevent anymore than there is to train a cook.

There's quite a bit more reason. (As an aside, every soldier gets annual suicide prevention training). The cook has duties that tie him to his station. The cook does not have the position or the rank or the cultural history that automatically provide him with more acceptability as a counselor than most other positions do.

It's an arbitrary choice dictated more by tradition than by good sense. (That's an opinion, of course.)

I understand why it would appear that way, and I don't want to imply that the decision to make the chaplain was scientifically arrived at, but it was not an arbitrary choice.

B: Considering the fact that chaplains represent one specific lump of nonsense (religion) even ethical chaplains need to struggle with conflicts between what they have been indoctrinated to advise people to do in common situations military personnel have and with the ethical standards of secular psychological practice. An ethical Catholic chaplain wouldn't advise a soldier struggling with issues of divorce that divorce is frowned upon by the Church, but why put both the chaplain and the soldier in that position? Why on Earth would we pick a demonstrably biased mystic to perform a delicate secular function?

There is a lot of merit in this objection. That's why even chaplains have a commander who can yank their chain.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Garette, if the purpose is to have counselors less well qualified than a psychologist or psychiatrist around, why not choose people with bachelor's degrees in psychology and give them a 12 week crash course in being a chaplain, as opposed to choosing people with a degree in theology?

The answer is, in my estimation, because the priority is for chaplains to fill religious needs. Their counseling training comes in second, and lags well behind. You might as well give a cook the same amount of counseling training as a chaplain gets, because being a mystic is irrelevant to being a counselor.

 

[Garrette]

Neither where the ones behind the Satanic Ritual Abuse findings.

By this reasoning, parents are unqualified to be parents. Many of them abuse their children, you know.

 

[Garrette]

Garette, if the purpose is to have counselors less well qualified than a psychologist or psychiatrist around, why not choose people with bachelor's degrees in psychology and give them a 12 week crash course in being a chaplain, as opposed to choosing people with a degree in theology?

I think you're looking at it backwards.

There was no decision some eons ago to ensure counselors were available in every unit and then a subsequent decision to hire chaplains to do that job.

Chaplains were in place. A recognition of the need for counseling occurred. A concurrent (or slightly subsequent) recognition occurred that chaplains:

a. Are in a position that lends itself more than any other to be the counselor

b. Have training and experience in it already

A final decision to formally add counseling to the job description of chaplains was reached.

The answer is, in my estimation, because the priority is for chaplains to fill religious needs. Their counseling training comes in second, and lags well behind. You might as well give a cook the same amount of counseling training as a chaplain gets, because being a mystic is irrelevant to being a counselor.

Read the above.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Incidentally, my post which followed this one you made was not intended as a response. I was typing it while you typed this one.

Thanks. PT won't say this much. Or maybe I haven't asked in the right way.

I've been trying to be clear, but it's tough.

At what point do we take counseling at any level out of the hands of laymen, then? As I have said previously in this thread, I am/have been a counselor in that I have a fair amount of non-degreed training in crisis counseling and a helluva lot of experience in actually doing it.

In my case, there are no strict protocols such as PT is asking for which limit my actions. There are, however, vaguely worded restrictions which I boil down to these:


1. If someone better qualified is available and acceptable to the person in need, hand over immediately.

2. Make no false promises.

3. Do nothing to establish dependence.

4. Do not have "repeat" counselings.


It's fairly easy to observe when someone is violating one or more of these.


Beyond that, I don't have a degree in psychology yet I counsel my children all the time.

My friends in school had no degree in psychology yet they counseled me when I was going through rough spells as I did for them.

Soldiers have no degree in counseling yet they counsel each other all the time.

Where do you draw the line?

Here's how I might draw the line: Anyone with a Bachelor's degree in psychology, pre-medicine or sociology can become a "military counselor." Now, you might say, "what does pre-med or sociology have to with giving people therapy?" and I might say, "good point, let's exclude them." But, that same objection can be raised (and should be raised) about the academic qualification to become a chaplain who is apparently supposed to counsel people.

I have a friend who earned a degree in psychology and joined the Army. She became a medic because there was no counseling position in the military available for a person with a bachelor's degree in psychology. By what logic is a mystic more qualified to be a counselor than someone educated in psychology? It beggars belief that we would turn away more qualified people in favor of less qualified people.

It seems you and PT are assuming that chaplains are setting up a formal practice, complete with patients who come back every week for a strict one hour session, appropriately billed.

That is not my assumption. My assumption is that people get sent to the chaplain if they are having emotional troubles, with the expectation that the chaplain will be qualified, in some way, to assist them. Even if that is relatively informal, it's a big responsibility to be asked to help a person in that kind of need and I see no evidence that a shaman is more able than any randomly selected person to fill that responsibility.

Hyperbole aside, they have theological training in addition to their training in counseling. Just as I have theatrical training and experience in addition to my military training.

You mean they get a 12 week crash course, which also includes a primer on religious services for religions other than their own, and ethical training, and many other responsibilities beside counseling. Time constraints alone limit how much training they receive on the matter and since a chaplain's function is primarily to provide religious services, they don't get much by any absolute standard.

There's quite a bit more reason. (As an aside, every soldier gets annual suicide prevention training). The cook has duties that tie him to his station. The cook does not have the position or the rank or the cultural history that automatically provide him with more acceptability as a counselor than most other positions do.

Ok, that's fair. Let's compare chaplains to other officers with similar levels of contact with the enlisted personnel. Why not make the radar operator double as a counselor? Or a pilot? Or a tactician? Cultural history is just an appeal to tradition, and tradition is no guide on issues of ethics.

I understand why it would appear that way, and I don't want to imply that the decision to make the chaplain was scientifically arrived at, but it was not an arbitrary choice.

There is a lot of merit in this objection. That's why even chaplains have a commander who can yank their chain.

That's my biggest worry. Expecting religious authorities to advise people in an objective and evenhanded manner consistent with the ethics of secular society reminds me of the old parable about the turtle who gives a scorpion a ride across a river, and of letting the fox guard the hen house. "Look, emotionally vulnerable people who could benefit from Jeezus!"

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I think you're looking at it backwards.

There was no decision some eons ago to ensure counselors were available in every unit and then a subsequent decision to hire chaplains to do that job.

Chaplains were in place. A recognition of the need for counseling occurred. A concurrent (or slightly subsequent) recognition occurred that chaplains:

a. Are in a position that lends itself more than any other to be the counselor

b. Have training and experience in it already

A final decision to formally add counseling to the job description of chaplains was reached.


Read the above.

This is a perfectly plausible theory, but it is not a reason to continue the practice.

 

[Garrette]

This is a perfectly plausible theory, but it is not a reason to continue the practice.

When the alternative is that nobody counsels anybody until we can get the poor sod to a psychologist, it is a reason to continue it.

So far the objection (aside from the one I said had merit) is that less than fully-degreed counselors have caused harm in the past therefore they must not be allowed to do it now. I find that inadequate.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

When the alternative is that nobody counsels anybody until we can get the poor sod to a psychologist, it is a reason to continue it.

Ecuse me, this is a false dichtomy. This is thrid alternative, and by no means the last alternative.

Here's how I might draw the line: Anyone with a Bachelor's degree in psychology, pre-medicine or sociology can become a "military counselor." Now, you might say, "what does pre-med or sociology have to with giving people therapy?" and I might say, "good point, let's exclude them." But, that same objection can be raised (and should be raised) about the academic qualification to become a chaplain who is apparently supposed to counsel people.

Claiming that shamans must double as counselors or no one will get counseling just isn't so.

So far the objection (aside from the one I said had merit) is that less than fully-degreed counselors have caused harm in the past therefore they must not be allowed to do it now. I find that inadequate.

I'd be happy to say that a counselor with more training than a small fraction of a 12 week course mostly devoted to performing religious functions and more qualifications to be a counselor than none would be better than bad counseling, but not as good as a psychologist.

I'd rather get a cavity worked on by a dentist than by a custodian, but we can both agree that a dental hygienist is a better choice than a custodian.

 

[Garrette]

Incidentally, my post which followed this one you made was not intended as a response. I was typing it while you typed this one.

I figured that.

I've been trying to be clear, but it's tough.

You're doing fine. I think at one point I read one of your posts as ponderingturtle's, and that may have led to some confusion.

Here's how I might draw the line: Anyone with a Bachelor's degree in psychology, pre-medicine or sociology can become a "military counselor."

They can. Soldiers counsel each other all the time. Commanders counsel subordinates (I have done so in that capacity, but there are limits inherent to the senior-subordinate relationship).

Now, you might say, "what does pre-med or sociology have to with giving people therapy?" and I might say, "good point, let's exclude them." But, that same objection can be raised (and should be raised) about the academic qualification to become a chaplain who is apparently supposed to counsel people.

And since neither position is perfectly trained, we take the one that is best, and not the one that is perfect.

I have a friend who earned a degree in psychology and joined the Army. She became a medic because there was no counseling position in the military available for a person with a bachelor's degree in psychology. By what logic is a mystic more qualified to be a counselor than someone educated in psychology?

If she is capable at counseling, people will use her. If she wants to take on that duty officially she can speak to her commander and have what is formally called an "Additional Duty" assigned to her.

It beggars belief that we would turn away more qualified people in favor of less qualified people.

We don't. You're still arguing as if the counseling chaplains provide is anything more than (a) one-time crisis counseling or (b) minor emotionally supportive counseling.

If your friend is available when the need for such counseling arises and provides that counseling, no one will tell her not to. They will, however, kick her in the @ss if she sets up an appointment book.

That is not my assumption. My assumption is that people get sent to the chaplain if they are having emotional troubles, with the expectation that the chaplain will be qualified, in some way, to assist them.

And if the trouble is not anticipated to be a long-lasting one requiring more qualified help. And if the chaplain determines in the course of his counseling that more qualified help is necessary, he can refer the person.


[quote-ImaginalDisc]Even if that is relatively informal, it's a big responsibility to be asked to help a person in that kind of need and I see no evidence that a shaman is more able than any randomly selected person to fill that responsibility. [/quote]Have you looked?

Have you seen evidence that a psychologist is more effective than a randomly selected individual?

You mean they get a 12 week crash course, which also includes a primer on religious services for religions other than their own, and ethical training, and many other responsibilities beside counseling. Time constraints alone limit how much training they receive on the matter and since a chaplain's function is primarily to provide religious services, they don't get much by any absolute standard.

They also have their previous theological training which it has been pointed out includes training in counseling. They also get ongoing professional development, some of which is locally generated, other parts of which are residency courses.

Ok, that's fair. Let's compare chaplains to other officers with similar levels of contact with the enlisted personnel. Why not make the radar operator double as a counselor? Or a pilot? Or a tactician?

Exactly the same reasons as not the cook. If I command an aviation brigade and you try to cut into the mandatory rest hours of one of my pilots who represents a significant portion of my firepower I will bodily throw you out of my building.

If you suggest that the enlisted radar operator has the same cultural or professional credibility as the chaplain, I'll laugh you out of my office.

If you think my Ops Officer (closest thing to a tactician we have) is going to give up even one of the precious few hours of sleep I already allow him, then I'll tell you you don't understand the realities of military operations.

Finally, if you don't think someone is more likely to speak about a touchy emotional issue to someone with whom he has a near-absolute promise of confidentiality than they are to anyone else who has no such promise, I'd say you're not thinking.

Cultural history is just an appeal to tradition, and tradition is no guide on issues of ethics.

I made no such appeal, ID.

That's my biggest worry. Expecting religious authorities to advise people in an objective and evenhanded manner consistent with the ethics of secular society reminds me of the old parable about the turtle who gives a scorpion a ride across a river, and of letting the fox guard the hen house. "Look, emotionally vulnerable people who could benefit from Jeezus!"

It is a concern. That's why the military likes to grab 'em young, to get such bad habits out of 'em.

 

[Garrette]

Ecuse me, this is a false dichtomy. This is thrid alternative, and by no means the last alternative.

Not as you have framed your objections. If you're going to count your psychology-degreed friend as the third alternative, then it's simply the old "We've already established what you are; now we're just arguing price" thingie.

Claiming that shamans must double as counselors or no one will get counseling just isn't so.

I've said repeatedly that counseling occurs all the time and have asked for comments about that. Neither you nor ponderingturtle have responded yet.

I'd be happy to say that a counselor with more training than a small fraction of a 12 week course mostly devoted to performing religious functions

Please please please re-read the posts addressing this.

and more qualifications to be a counselor than none would be better than bad counseling, but not as good as a psychologist.

I agree. Ponderingturtle apparently does not.

I'd rather get a cavity worked on by a dentist than by a custodian, but we can both agree that a dental hygienist is a better choice than a custodian.

I agree, but fail to see how it supports your point instead of mine.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Garette, in reading your posts, I can see there's several things we have to clear up, because we're talking past one another.

I posted a list of the requirements to become a chaplain, and a summary of what their training entails, both provided by the U.S. Army. Nothing in their requirements indicates any counseling training. Yes, I'm well aware that some religious orders train their unicorn herders in counseling, but not all do, and there's no indication that the Army cares either way. There's also the worry that this "training" may have more to do with intimidating potential apostates and winning converts than secular counseling practices. I made a reasonable effort to find evidence that chaplains are qualified to counsel people, and found none. If there is evidence to that effect, I'd love to see it.

Counseling. You view counseling as incredibly informal. I view counseling as a formal expectation of the duties of a chaplain, as stated by the U.S. Army.

As an Army Reserve Chaplain, you'll be a preacher, a teacher, a counselor and a citizen-Soldier. You'll be one of the chosen who minister to your neighbors—neighbors who dedicate their time to their country.

http://www.goarmy.com/chaplain/about_army_chaplain.jsp

If their job includes counseling duties, then they should become qualified to do so. I think your definition of "counseling" is too broad in this respect.

It is, according to the sources I've found, expected that a chaplain will counsel as part of their duties.