Reliving my childhood... Two Glorious Nights with the Braves

Flashback to the 1990s. Growing up, I watched the Braves all the time. I have the 1995 newspapers from the playoffs, I cried in 1996 when the Yankees beat the Braves in 6 games, and my mom took me on a tour of Turner Field for my 12th birthday. Every year, the Braves made the playoffs, my teachers would show the games on TV at school, and I would always write letters to my favorite players (like Ron Gant, Fred McGriff, and Tom Glavine). In short, the Braves represent something nostalgic and formative for me.

Flash to 2010. I haven't seen the Braves play live since 2008. I keep up with the team through box scores and headlines, but this is a far cry from watching them nightly at the dinner table. This year, however, the Braves made the playoffs for the first time in five years. They clinched the Wild Card in the last game of the regular season,  and serendipitously they faced off with the San Francisco Giants. The Braves were in the playoffs, and I was acting like a 10-year old... Suddenly, it was feeling more like the 1990s.

Seizing the opportunity, Tracy and I committed to go to both games in San Francisco. Luckily, Tracy's dad was able to help out with some great seats for the first game, and our friends, Dave and Adena, got us a deal on a couple seats for the second game. And the games did not disappoint! I saw an amazing performance by Giants' pitcher, Tim Lincecum; Bobby Cox's last ever ejection; a comeback Braves win in extra innings; and two beautiful nights at AT&T ballpark. I also got my fair share of heckling from Giants fans and two amazing dates with Tracy! A few pictures for the annals.  

Game 1: Lowe vs. Lincecum, a one-run thriller

Me, Tracy, Adena, and Dave at Game 2

Two Lone Braves Fans at Game 2; An unforgettable comeback capped with a Braves Homerun hit into the Bay

Since, the Braves lost to the Giants in four games. It matters not. Reliving my childhood for two days was priceless. Go 2011 Braves!

Stigma Matters

Mental health is gaining traction within insurance policies, and public opinion is slowly moving. However, certain sectors of society are continually plagued by the damning stigma of mental health. Specifically, the social norms of many male-dominated arenas have hindered the ability of some to seek care, preventative or reactive. I have written about the difficulties that our soldiers and veterans are confronted with mental health issues (July 10 Post).  And the same could be said for professional athletes.

It appears that, Kenny McKinley, an NFL player, recently committed suicide after battling depressive symptoms.  In a subsequent article, there is evidence that Kenny had shared his suicidal ideation before taking his life. "'He had made statements while playing dominoes shortly after the surgery that he should just kill himself,' an unnamed investigator reported, via the AP. 'No one believed he was serious,'" the article stated.

The knee-jerk reaction to incidences of mental health problems in these populations is that resources should be made available to players.  The reality is, however, that resources are available. In fact, as a recent article indicates (Despite Resources, Players Reluctant to Seek Help), there are services offered to help players cope with various issues (e.g., financial, family). Within their player development program, free counseling sessions and trained staff people are made available on a regular basis.  Further, "The NFL Players Association hands out cards with the number of a helpline. There are life skills classes, both mandatory and voluntary, taught on a regular basis."

So why aren't players getting help?
No one can be certain why Kenny did not seek help or if it would have prevented his suicide. Yet, it is likely that the stigma of mental illness prevents players like Kenny from utilizing psychological services. As participant of society, it is important to understand how we act, react, and participate in mental health prevention and remediation; these actions dictate the connotations and stereotypes of mental health, which may influence how welcome others feel in seeking help. This is especially true in masculine jobs. 

Therapizing, Researching, and Covering Long Distances

[Disclaimer: I'm missing family, so I thought I'd blog to catch some of them up on my semester so far.]

As it turns out, when the semester begins, life gets crazy busy...

My weekdays have been filled with an internship as a therapist at a non-public school for students with emotional-behavioral difficulties. The challenges facing my clients are profound, transgenerational, and incredibly obdurate.  My role is designed to be a therapist, but by necessity, I am adopting roles as teacher consultant, case manager, and (fill in the blank to whatever is needed at the moment).  I'm making some strong professional relationships, and I am being challenged emotionally, professionally, and philosophically.  With great challenge is coming great reward (I hope!).  In my short time, I have quickly re-realized what an amazing dice-roll I received from God/cosmos (stability, support systems, privilege, etc.).

My weeknights have been filled with research on three different projects. First, I am continuing my own research on person-environment fit and student motivation. I am submitting my first solo piece for publication in the upcoming months! Second, I am working with a local charter school to conceptualize and measure gains in their first years.  Tomorrow, I am presenting our findings to the teachers.  My final project deals with high-schoolers' college knowledge (and I'm finding really interesting trends across SES and racial/ethnic groups!).

My weekends are consumed by endurance races. And by races, I mean finishing the distance in how ever long it takes me.  This month, I ran my first two ultra-marathons (both 50kms), the latter being much faster and more enjoyable.  Lou and Daniel provided some much-needed nutritional and preparation counsel, which benefited me greatly on the second go-around. Tracy has been supportive of these self-indulgent Saturdays. Tracy and I cycled to the summit of Mt. Tam two weekends ago, and this weekend, we are heading to Lake Tahoe for a Century.  Although I have loved my trail runs, I am anxious to get into the saddle. 

Never a dull moment.

A look at how we give care in the last moments

After a 5-month hiatus, I've returned, spurred by the threat of being booted from the blog's byline and the looming presence of another semester...

I want to share two articles on end-of-life care. If you have some time, read Atul Gwande's article in the New Yorker. (I really, highly, strongly recommend this article -- essential reading)

Next, read a shorter article on the same topic in the New York Times.

Gawande's article presents the end-of-life debate with perfect juxtaposition of fact, reason, and emotion. I found myself releasing my breath in long, deep sighs, as if to comfort myself with the control.

What happens when we are faced with a situation when tubes and pills and caustic solutions running into our veins and breathing machines and new organs leave us in more pain, more depressed, and alive not one day longer? On the day of our diagnosis, or even our birth, did we imagine ending our struggle like this?

"Spending one’s final days in an I.C.U. because of terminal illness is for most people a kind of failure. You lie on a ventilator, your every organ shutting down, your mind teetering on delirium and permanently beyond realizing that you will never leave this borrowed, fluorescent place. The end comes with no chance for you to have said goodbye or 'It’s O.K.' or 'I’m sorry' or 'I love you.' "

A cultural phenomenon has led us to a place where we believe if we acknowledge death we acknowledge defeat.

I recently read a spiritual book that implored its readers to remind themselves of their mortality each day, then ask, "How do I live, knowing I will die?" By acknowledging death (for some this is more imminent than others) we free ourselves from trying to escape it and allow ourselves to focus on living.

This same concept can be applied to how we view, expect, and provide medical care in the last years, months, and hours of our lives.

Symbolism--That which makes us human

This summer, I taught Sociology. One lesson was that of Herbert Mead and Symbolic Interactionism. His theory of microsociology focuses on the meaning we ascribe to our individual interactions. Without going further into his theory, Mead relies on the tenets of Evolutionism, which states that language and self-consciousness are what sets human apart from animals.

Today, there was an NPR piece titled, What Makes Us Mentally Modern. Without mentioning Mead, it is an excellent exemplar of the importance of symbolism in our daily lives. Rather than researching when we become bipedal, the piece asks, when did we development symbolic thought? "Museums are full of bones under glass — fossils that can tell us when we became physically modern. But how do you find a fossil of a symbolic thought?"

Sociologist or not, it is worth a listen.

For-Profit Post-Secondary Schooling

In the education world, there is much debate on relatively recent influx of for-profit post-secondary institutions in American education. Everyone has seen ads for Phoenix University, and you probably know someone is who currently enrolled. In fact, Phoenix, the behemoth of the for-profit sector, currently enrolls more students than all of the Universities of California (e.g., Berkeley, Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, etc.) and the Ivy League schools combined (as cited in the Frontline piece below)! Thus, like it or not, for-profits are becoming pivotal players in our society.

Do these institutions fill a void in post-secondary education that 4-year schools and community colleges cannot cover?  That is, are they providing a much-needed service in our knowledge-based economy and our nation's endeavor of democratic uplift?

Or do these companies prey on people who are ill-equipped to succeed in college and leave them with seemingly insurmountable debt? Does their undying obligation of profit compromise the social benefit they provide? Specifically, do they exploit Pell Grants (tax-payer funded loans for students) for profit?

In my search for answers, I have come across three recent media pieces on this issue (For now, they will have to suffice until the peer-reviewed literature catches up). I think all three are illuminating and stoke the debate.

Frontline
College, Inc.

NPR: All Things Conidered

For-Profit Colleges Encouraged Fraud, Used Deceptive Marketing, GAO Reports

New York Times:
For-Profit Colleges Mislead Students, Report Finds

Through reading, hearing, and watching these pieces, the opponents' skepticism is well-outlined. For now, I tend to agree. To be fair though, we are still collecting facts. To be determined...

Solving the Textbook Problem

As I see it, there are three problems with textbooks: (1) content, (2) publishing, and (3) medium. That is, publishing companies have a heavy hand in deciding what content students learn, which is somewhat problematic in a democracy (but expected within a capitalistic society). In addition, as information grows and increases exponentially, it is becoming more difficult to maintain the relevancy of content. Second, a select number of publishers in California and Texas dominate the publishing industry, which is predominantly financed by K-12 school districts and college students. Finally, the idea of lugging a five-pound tome to and from school only to read 40 pages seems antiquated.

Given these problems, do we have solutions? Excitedly, we (seemingly) do. Through open-sourcing and e-readers, adapting solutions seems to be within reach. In a recent NYT piece, ($200 Text Book vs. Free. You do the Math) the plausibility of these options are addressed. The article's author, Ashlee Vance writes, "Over the last few years, groups nationwide have adopted the open-source mantra of the software world and started financing open-source books. Experts — often retired teachers or groups of teachers — write these books and allow anyone to distribute them in digital, printed or audio formats. Schools can rearrange the contents of the books to suit their needs and requirements."

Will this be the panacea? Doubtful. Is it an improvement from the current state of textbooks? Likely. The article is a worthy read, and I hope this issue gains more cultural and political momentum.