Are 'Sext' Messages Teenage Felony or Folly?

I was talking to an Illinois Congressman at a party after a funeral, of all things, and he asked me what I do when I'm not going to funerals.

"I give workshops to kids and faculty in schools, camps, and community centers, corporations-- on sexual harassment and bullying. It's become very hot now, but I've studied it for years, started it when someone hired me to do some research on rape. So now I'm into awareness and prevention. Less therapy for everyone."

He tells me that very soon Illinois will pass a law that eliminates felony charges for sexting. "It's crazy," he says, "to prosecute kids for doing what everyone else is doing. They don't know any better."

Which of course, is how it is. Most kids just want other kids to like them, and everyone has a phone with a camera, most can record video with sound. Teachers tell me they're afraid to talk freely with students for fear that they'll be caught saying something that might cost them their jobs.

They don't know any better --the congressman's words. We can warn them about permanence of Internet communication, and the danger of having photos with whiskey bottles on Facebook, how that might affect a scholarship or job prospect. But it's not enough, doesn't get to the heart of the matter.

Today's Wall Street Journal, (Nathan Koppel and Ashby Jones) tackles the sexting debate, defines sexting as:

the practice of sending nude or sexually suggestive photos by cell-phone.

So let's get to the heart of it.

Sexting, as a form of distribution of child pornography, is a relatively new phenomenon that is considered a felony in most states. Legislators and professionals who work with children are looking for other ways to approach the problem. The distribution of child pornography is not generally the intention of the message.

Chris Newlin of the National Children's Advocacy Center narrows the polemic to (a) bringing the hammer down, or (b) taking an individualized approach, like consulting with parents to decide what to do.

The matter is complicated when the picture that is circulating is generated to bully the victim. It's not that way, however, when romantic teenage couples share nude photos of themselves with one another, only.

As a form of valentine, sexting is still dangerous, however. When they break up, for they usually do in adolescence, the temptation to share the photos can be irresistible. When pictures are shared by many, then it really is no different than distributing child porn.

Now we're talking jail time, first offense 10 days inside.

Marjorie Esman of the ACLU opines that information about ourselves is not subject to governmental control, that the felony is a violation of the First Amendment. All eighth grade graduates know which one that is.

Jonathon Paton, a sponsor of new legislation that prohibits incarceration, tells us that the law gives prosecutors the

". . . option to put a squeeze on minors, . . . (without) something on their records forever."

That's one goal, obviously. Nobody wants anything like this on a permanent record.

Assemblywoman Pam Lampitt, also according to WSJ, tells it this way. Be logical:

"Look, kids do stupid things, impulsive things, all the time."

And Mary Leary, law professor at the Catholic University of America, who specializes in child exploitation reminds us that:

"The notion that this is simply innocuous behavior. . . ignores the circulation of images for eternity. . ."

No doubt. And the only way to combat all of this is to educate everyone. In this therapist's humble opinion, young people and older people, meaning adults, need to understand the essence of pornography, especially child pornography, why it is damaging, why it can be unalterably abusive. Objectification harms the object, an object that happens to be a person). But it also demeans the individual who consciously or unconsciously objectifies, lowers another person to object status.

They're talking about educating in the schools. It's about time.

Finally we're getting the picture.

Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Why Parents Don't Sleep at Night

Parents don't sleep for a thousand reasons, but one of them is worrying about their children, especially the older ones, the teenagers. They're old enough to go out and have a good time with friends, they drive, they feel on top of the world, omnipotent. They're kids, after all, and don't worry much about safety. So we worry for them.

And there are surely codes, friendship codes, that prohibit, put a damper on intimacy in the family, where it's so, so needed. "Do NOT tell your parents! I told you that in confidence!" is the rule. Parents are the last people to know, sometimes, when a young person is depressed, or angry, certainly when a kid is about to begin sexual relationships.

And when adults do try to warn about catastrophic things like rape, for example, they do it wrong. They don't tell their kids that 90% of all forced sexual relationships are between acquaintances, people who know one another. They blather on about disease, which is good, but not enough.

And they don't talk about jealousy, emotional blackmail, suicide, relationship abuse, the types and the psychological markers.

So where are kids supposed to learn about these things?

The obvious place to teach them is where they congregate, where they're captive audiences. A good dating safety workshop is captivating. There's nothing dry about heart-break or feeling unpopular.

Schools should be the starting place, and parents should keep pecking away, not avoid their kids because they think their children tune them out. If we teach them about relationships, the types of things they might also pick up in couples counseling or family therapy eventually, maybe we can prevent a few disasters, a few bad marriages, even.

It's not just common sense. If it was, relationship therapists (we're mental health professionals, treat the individual casualties) wouldn't be so busy, wouldn't have waiting lists.

Call it crisis prevention to justify it in the budget if you must. But put it on the school calendar, somehow. Then maybe parents will get a better night's sleep.


Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Sexual Harassment and the Company: Mark Hurd

THAT IS not MARK HURD in the photo above, and it is not JODIE FISHER, the employee who accused him of sexual harassment. But you get the idea.

This is the face of sexual harassment. It can look like friendly flirting, but it doesn't feel that way to the one feeling harassed. It feels like an assault, which is why it's a crime.

Front page, Wallstreet Journal-- Hewlett-Packard's Mark Hurd resigns as chief executive officer. An investigation found he had had a personal relationship with a contractor, a woman who received numerous inappropriate payments from the company.

Cathie Lesjak, Chief Financial Officer, will be replacing Mr. Hurd as interim CEO. Technically the investigation did not find a violation of the company’s sexual-harassment policy. But Mr. Hurd's

“. . . profound lack of judgment seriously undermined his credibility. . .damaged his effectiveness in leading HP” in the words of General Counsel Michael Holston.

HP shares plunged 9.3 percent in late trading after the announcement.

It isn't easy proving sexual harassment in a large corporation. The victim has to have been informed of policy, has to have followed the company policy, reported events, documented what happened, everything that happened, where and when, and if not satisfied with the company's internal response, report to the EEOC.

And that's just the beginning. If a complainant, the contractor in this case, pursues sexual harassment and wins, a typical settlement from a large corporation (like Hewlett Packard) hovers at $400,000. But plaintiffs have been awarded much larger settlements.

Among other things, the consequences of sexual harassment include (1) distressed emotional symptoms and the diagnosis of emotional and behavioral disorders, (2) damages to one's future job prospects (as a known trouble-maker), (3) financial hardship during and after exposure of the issue, (4) social isolation, (5) family dysfunction. All because a supervisor, anyone really, working in a company, has made another employee feel threatened or bullied with sexual inuendo or behavior.

We don't know exactly what happened in the situation of Mr. Hurt and the woman who accused him of sexual harassment. It seems he established a close personal, not a sexual relationship. He did meet with her in different cities, however, not generally the type of meetings characteristic of a CEO and a contractor, according to online reports. She alleged sexual harassment, perhaps the truth is somewhere in-between. It doesn't matter. It's settled and a female is running the company.

Most sexual harassment cases involve someone holding corporate power, a supervisor usually, and a more vulnerable employee, someone dependent upon this person for hours, benefits, reviews. There is often an implied threat, something along the lines of:

"If you don't date me, you won't be promoted. If you do date me, you'll be rewarded"

Rewards are generally in the form of raises, promotions, bonuses, or gifts.

Not unusual, unfortunately, this type of coercion.

Sexual harassment prevention workshops in corporations like Hewlett Packard, for many companies, even much smaller organizations, should be sure to be sensitive, yet direct. The traditional training seminar is presented by company counsel, and the psychology behind motives and consequences, light.

A more effective presentation, one that reaches the hearts and emotions of everyone in the organization, has more psychological savvy, communicates a better understanding of the real consequences of an abuse of power-- damages beyond the obvious hit to the corporate pocket book.

Cost-effective on-line training, which is very popular, doesn't have the teeth necessary, either. Webinars technically protect a company-- employees are duly warned, but they are not personal. They don't speak to people. It's a game online, an obligation.

What's needed is a combination of psycho-education and legal expertize-- a workshop that utilizes lawyers and mental health professionals.

Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

What Dating-Defense Means

It's often said that teenagers "suffer" from the rush of hormones that course through them during adolescence. Suffering isn't exactly the right word. Wanting to connect with others is innate-- we're human, after all-- at all ages, social animals.

At birth we need to be held. It's not a need we should lose, particularly.

The suffering is often in relationships, the "joy" beginning with difficult parents or sibs, people who don't feel the need to explain their behavior, who often repeat what happened to them. Not every family is dysfunctional but many are, and you don't need for someone in the family to have an addiction to make home a difficult place to be.

And sometimes it's almost impossible to choose friends who make our lives miserable; who are difficult and manipulative, but attractive for some reason. Like members of the family, they might be coping in their way with depression, or anxiety, their own versions of insecure, and in their struggle, aren't always terribly nice. Emotional bullying isn't a new thing. Where there are kids, there are power struggles.

It is the personality disorders, actually, that tend to confuse kids and adults the most. We don't recognize real pathology readily, don't diagnose others as "borderline" or "hysterical" or "schizoid" for example, but they can be, and it isn't fun being them. And they don't treat us well, not usually. Having a "bad personality" is more than making inappropriate comments. Comments are surely part of it, though.

Unless you've taken a fair amount of psychology (or social work) classes, or live with a mental health professional, a person is likely to be clueless when it comes to such things-- personality disorders, insecurities. Personality development is very complicated.

But a good workshop can take some of the mystery out of the equation. Ask about Teacher's Institute relationship-safety workshops. You can find more information at Education-wise, Relationship-wise Inc, or call 888-761-7610.

Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Anger Issues: Intermittent Explosive Disorder and Carlos Zambrano

We're not diagnosing him with Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED), unless he assaulted someone physically, but this is as good a time as any to differentiate between IED and other impulse control problems. Sometimes a person can have impulse control problems, like Mr. Zambrano apparently has had, and not a full-blown diagnosis.

The damage can be devastating, no matter, and to thousands, disappointing, assuming that person represents a professional baseball team like the Chicago Cubs.

Carlos Zambrano of the Chicago Cubs is taking his anger management classes seriously, as well he should, for cursing out his teammates.

Being a Chicagoan, a town of two major league teams, baseball comes up in therapy every once in awhile, usually during small talk. And when it leads to talk about a certain player behaving like a 4-year old (famous for their tantrums, 4-year olds), when the talk is about anger management, the consensus of opinion tends to be:

What kind of a role model is this? How can an athlete speak this way to his teammates? In public?

The reaction is one of utter dismay and disgust-- not all that different than the dismay and disgust we sometimes feel for parents who get into brawls with other parents at Little League or soccer games. Mr. Zambrano was suspended for over a month after a dugout outburst aimed at teammate Derrek Lee and others.

We don't know why the Cubs pitcher had (has?) an anger management problem, but anger is everywhere in human relationships. It's usually a sign of frustration. We struggle to say it nice, but not everyone can express feelings with words that are meaningful, yet tame (what we call assertiveness), with just the facts, no irritability or blame. Anger, when it is expressed with negative emotion, emotion that signals hatred or disgust, with words that shame another, is a form of violence, even when there's no physical injury.

We call it emotional injury, or verbal abuse when words hit as hard as a fist. A therapist looks deep for personality disorders, Antisocial Personality Disorder or Borderline Personality Disorder-- these types of differential diagnoses, including those listed in "C" below.

When it's the fist that lets loose, then sometimes a diagnosis can be as serious as Paranoid Schizophrenia. But usually what we have is Intermittent Explosive Disorder, 312.34.

Here's what the diagnostic bible, the DSM IV-TR has to say about it. The DSM IV-TR will be the DSM V in the next couple of years. But until it is, this is what we've got:

A. Several discrete episodes of failure to resist aggressive impulses that result in serious assaultive acts or destruction of property.

B. The degree of aggressiveness expressed during the episodes is grossly out of proportion to any precipitating psychosocial stressors.

C. The aggressive episodes ar not better accounted for by another mental disorder (e.g. Antisocial Personality Disorder, a Manic Episode, Conduct Disorder, or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder) and are not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g. a drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical conditin (e.g., head trauma, Alzheimer's disease).

Even kids can be diagnosed with this disorder. When they seem to have it, a good physical/psychological evaluation is a must.

Linda Freedman