Monthly Archives: October 2017

Impression post week 6

--Original published at Site Title

Should Marijuana be legalized or not ? Many people in the United states and around the world love Marijuana and love the effects that it gives you. In fact there are some places in the united states and around the world that it is legal to smoke and buy marijuana like places in Amsterdam, or California where weed is decriminalized and almost legal. People say that in 10 years from now Marijuana will be legal every where. But will it be ? There will always be problems with marijuana no matter what. For example driving high. People do this and participate in this all the time. Is it dangerous ? well it does slow down your reaction time a little bit but yes it is not good too drive under the influence of Marijuana because it is illegal. And it will always be illegal because it is not safe for other drivers on the road. Yes marijuana can help people who actually “need” it, but people are trying to get medical cards all over the place who don’t actually need it for Medical use they just like to get high. I think that it will be a major problem if weed is Legal everywhere because there will be more car accidents and more people will be in danger of others that are under the influence. I think that Marijuana is an amazing plant and i have nothing against it, but if it becomes legal all hell will break loose. I think the idea of having it decriminalized is a good idea because people get in trouble and have to pay huge fines for having buds of an actual plant on them. In my opinion i think that is very ridiculous. I think that weed should stay illegal but decriminalized in more areas around the world and in the United States.


Legalize the Leaf

--Original published at Kyle's Gen Psych Blog

With the rise in popularity of marijuana, both in recreational use & in the medical field, so has the question of whether or not to legalize the controversial plant. Each individual may have a difference in opinions, of which would be built on their own personal experiences.

On that note: My personal opinion is that medicinally, marijuana should be absolutely legal across the united states. Although for recreational use marijuana should at least be somewhat of a restricted substance.

Marijuana has proven to have many positive physical and psychological benefits to those who need it most (i.e. Cancer patients or those with severe anxiety). If assigned by prescription it could at least be somewhat restricted in who uses the substance. Although if is not impossible for someone to pass on or sell their prescription to others, but this should not prevent the legalization of marijuana, because on that logic medicine like Adderall should be banned.

Yet in my opinion, regardless of if the substance is harmful or not, it should have an age limit. Such as alcohol does, i feel that marijuana should have a similar age gate ranging from twenty to twenty four. By legalizing marijuana we can profit from it not only economically but socially. Think back to the prohibition, a rising in crime was directly correlated to keeping a substance from the public. It would not be completely wrong to correlate this back to marijuana. Regardless it is important to note that marijuana is not alcohol, nor is it cigarettes, we cannot handle marijuana the same way we do those substances.

The thing about people is that “If there is a will” they “will find a way”, it is impossible to completely control people. If the public wants something, you can only hinder them, not stop them. Just like with alcohol it can and will be bought for those who cannot buy it themselves, but at least the money spend can be circulated within our economy instead of changing hands between customers and dealers. It is an untapped market with insanely high demand (Have you ever tried to find a dealer? Its not that hard to find one and its easy to make money selling too).  Overall i feel it is in America’s best interest to legalize marijuana.


Week 6-Psychoactive Drugs

--Original published at Site Title

Addiction affects many homes and families as well as the individual involved in the problem. It is hard to decide what is best for a love one and there well being, but all anyone can want is for them to get better. The two methods treating addiction are very different. Abstinence cuts off all ties from the substance, it is a very hard road to take and one that requires immense support.  The harm reduction process may be an easier adjustment for someone then just going cold turkey, as it rules out the negative effects.

I believe it strongly depends on the individual as to which method will work best or be most effective.  I have some stubborn loved ones that I know no convincing would keep them from doing what they wanted.  If alcohol or substance abuse was a problem for them then the harm reduction program would be the best route.  Making sure to rule out the negatives when using drugs would ensure they were safer.  For example having a designated driver, providing clean needles, drug replacement therapy, and so on. However, this method does seem to bring some problems.  The family may still be affected by the individual who for say, when he drinks abuses his wife and children.  In this case an abstinence method would be best.  The addiction to the drug on this method still doesn’t change one may even begin to crave it more, the negative effects are just reduced.

Abstinence seems like for most cases, but not all, the better way to head down.  It completely cuts off the user from the drug and with support of AA meetings and family can be possible. The long term affect of drugs on the brain and the body is very detrimental and unlike the harm reduce program this one will rid an individual of the substance.  It will help ones body and mind recover although one might experience withdraw willpower can help them push forward.  One who has an addiction may have no control over the drug instead it has control over them.  Abstinence may be a way to hold on and grasp ones life again.


Option 2

--Original published at Site Title

The abstinence model and harm reduction model are both effective options for treating addiction. The methods used in these models can overlap. Arguments can be posed regarding the benefits of both models, but the harm reduction model is the better choice. This option is more logical and seems to be built for success.

The harm reduction model focuses on reducing the risk of using addictive substances. While the abstinence model requires addicts to completely stop using the addictive substance, harm reduction utilizes several methods of decreasing substance use. This model replaces harmful substances with less dangerous ones. Needle exchange programs and other such strategies are also part of the harm reduction model. Harm reduction does not enforce immediate sobriety. This is likely easier for addicts to adapt to. While harm reduction can lead into abstinence, which forces addicts to admit that they rely on the substance and are unable to control it, harm reduction methods are less intense and  cause less damage to the self-esteem of addicts. For this reason, I would recommend the harm reduction model to a loved one with an addiction.


Psychoactive Drugs

--Original published at Sarah's Insight

Many states in our country have legalized the use of both recreational and medicinal marijuana, and many more are considering if they should too. While this topic has seen many arguments as to whether or not marijuana should be legal, and in what context it would be legal in, I would like to give my opinion on the matter. I believe that marijuana should be legal in every state for medicinal purposes. Marijuana has been tested and has given positive results that it can aid in the treatment of illnesses like epilepsy, and can decrease nausea, muscle pains, and inflammation. There was a study done on a young boy whose epilepsy caused him to have nearly 100 seizures every day.  This boy was given a dosage of CBD (cannabidiol), which would ensure he wouldn’t get high off of the drug. After a lot of trial and error, the family finally found the right dosage for the boy and got him down to zero to three seizures a day. This is only one of the many ways medical marijuana have helped people of all different walks of life overcome health obstacles.  Click here to read more about this study.

As far as my opinion on recreational use of marijuana, I think that the states should be in charge of whether they want to legalize it or not. I think that sooner or later (sooner rather than later) marijuana will be legalized in all 50 states both legally and recreationally.


First Impression Week 6

--Original published at Kevin Psych Blog

Recreational legalization of marijuana has so many positives that I really struggle to think of cons. As for recreational legalization, it would help so many thing, such as giving less of a market to drug dealers and organized criminals. In doing that we would not only get rid of dangerous people but we would be taking the money they earn, and giving it to our government instead in the way of tax money. Tax money that can be used to fund schools, the construction of roads, strengthening our military, and a plethora of other useful things. Colorado alone made millions, if not over a billion dollars, in 2016 just off of taxing marijuana. Legalizing marijuana would even help our states save money that they would otherwise be putting into the prisons to help hold people convicted of drug related crimes. It also creates jobs, allowing an entire untapped market to be taken advantage of, and open new positions for people to work. Medically, marijuana is a big help in cancer treatment, helping to relieve some of the side effects from chemotherapy like nausea, and the form THC is given to people in those cases doesn’t even give the same high that you would get from smoking for fun. There really just isn’t a good reason to keep marijuana illegal that I can think of. The only arguments that I could even somewhat understand is how it would effect the same corporations who lobby against it, like private prisons. Any other arguments I’ve heard are often very flimsy, like “it’s dangerous” or “addictive”, both of which have been shown to be false time and time again. Alcohol and cigarettes are both far more dangerous and addictive than marijuana. I think that the idea that we still have this fairly harmless drug illegal in most of our states is ridiculous and completely unnecessary and it should, and likely will, be changed soon.


Week 6 First Impression: Psychoactive Drugs

--Original published at Site Title

The legalization of marijuana for both medical and recreational uses seems to be on the brink of being a popular movement. I think it’s the right time to start legalizing it for both means.  Research shows that marijuana has medical benefits. It reduces pain without the addictive qualities of the painkillers that people usually get prescribed, like Percocet. Over the summer, I watched this series of short videos by Vice Sports on Youtube. They interviewed all of these ex-NFL players about their experiences with painkillers while playing and after their career was over. The responses were the same, football had left them with a destroyed body and an addiction to painkillers. A few of them spoke about how they started using marijuana instead of painkillers to deal with their deteriorating bodies and the stories were impressive. Every single one of them said that their lifestyle had improved significantly once they traded the painkillers for marijuana. Kyle Turley was one of those players interviewed. He has been making efforts to legalize the use of marijuana and has also been encouraging other ex-NFL players to use it in place of painkillers. Obviously, not everyone is an NFL player but there are a lot of people in a lot of pain for one reason or another. Instead of giving them addictive painkillers that may only add to their problems, let them use medical marijuana. There is plenty of evidence that it works.

Recreational use of Marijuana should be legal too. It isn’t as harmful as other drugs. Really, it isn’t harmful at all besides making people kind of lazy while they’re high. You don’t see people advocating for the medical use of cocaine or heroin. I feel that the reason marijuana is not legal yet is because of the stigma it carries among some, mainly older, people. That stigma still puts it in the same class as drugs like cocaine and heroin but in reality it is not. Marijuana is not addictive like those drugs and it is safer to use. Marijuana has a lot of positive uses and should be legalized. It’s just a matter of convincing the public of those positive uses.


Week 6 First Impression

--Original published at Em

I chose option two on addiction counseling styles. Addiction counseling is an interesting topic. Before this post I had not thought much on the topic. I was aware of programs such as alcoholics anonymous but unaware of alternatives. I also was aware of the abstinence program. For example in hard drugs this is almost impossible to simply stop or else this wouldn’t be addiction. In the New Hope article address the differences in counseling styles. New hope does explain the steps to have the patient cognitively understand the addiction. It is a disease. Yet I feel the the process is black and white and very cut and dry. If a person is addicted telling them to stop and never be around it or think about it ever is a lifestyle and  neuro-chemical change. They  know where and who to get these substances from. They may be friends or family with people who partake in these activities. The AA model does allow for  relapses.  The harm reduction model gradually encourages addicts to go towards healthier decisions as this process isn’t all at once. When addicts go to prison and then are forced to quit what psychologically changes prisoners to not want to do drugs besides the chemical reason. There is no program  but gradually weening along with counseling would enable them to do that. When the removing addict gets out of prison there needs to be knowledge in place. In contrast if a loved one was addicted I think the AA approach would be more appealing as the emotional response would scare me to knowingly allow them to continue substance abuse even if it was in a weening fashion.

New Hope Recovery Center . “Addiction Counseling: Abstinence Versus Harm Reduction.” New Hope Recovery Center, 24 July 2014,  Accessed 2 Oct. 2017.


Is Divorce Harmful or Helpful?

--Original published at Site Title

Throughout several studies, the children going through the divorce is always the common factor in what effects it can have in dividing a family. Some studies may show that it can damage children and their morals, effecting them all the way up until they are at the point where marriage and children may be questionable due to their family’s past experience with separation. Other studies have found that divorce is better for children in the long run rather than living in a hostile environment with parents who no longer love each other. These children may end up perfectly fine, or may have some challenges to face when they mature. Dr. Jann Gumbiner talks about how many children that grow up in a divorced home struggle when they are older making their own decisions. She states, “Children, even intelligent ones or older ones, often think it is their fault. There is a lot of self blame (Gumbiner 1). This is her main argument to why no divorce could ever end up positively, due to it’s effect on children. She also adds in some well respected emotion because she comes from a divorced family and she has personal struggles of her own. Gumbiner is certain these struggles can be applied to so many children since their parents’ marriages ended. Similarly, Robert Emery talks about how divorce can be stressful on children and cause necessary problems in the future. He states, “Troubled children are particularly likely to develop problems with anger, disobedience, and rule violations” (Emery 1). This leads us to believe that divorce will cause major issues in the personality of the child and their development process, which is a much bigger issue than just the stress it could cause them. On the other hand, some professionals believe that divorce is the better option for some families and their children involved. Brette Sember, a divorce attorney and mediator, explores the idea of how divorce could be beneficial to a child’s life instead of living with dysfunctional parents. She makes a good point saying, “While there is no question that divorce is hard for kids, it is a far cry better than raising your children in a violent, abusive, angry, or deeply resentful marriage” (Sember 1). This takes you down the opposite road, seeing what it would be like if a couple did keep their kids in a family where every day they are exposed to the exact opposite of love. This can surround the child with non-stop hatred while living in a hostile environment, leaving them with a negative childhood experience all around. Supporting this, Novack Law offices has an article published stating, “It can be very upsetting for children to feel that they need to choose between the two feuding parents they love” (Novack 1). It is interesting to see how the lawyers and medical professionals differ in how they word why it can be a positive thing for children to go through divorce. It seems like a common thing to consider the negative emotions during this time, but the positives could very well out weigh the negatives while a divorce is proceeding. Both sides have a great point in whether or not divorce could be positive or negative for children; I believe I agree with the side supporting that divorce is negative only due to personal experience. My parents divorced when I was six, so I didn’t have to go through any major fights growing up, and it was never really a hostile environment; it was just a tough atmosphere growing up in separate households and juggling activities and academics while dealing with split parents. Based on research, I believe there is more negative outcomes rather than positive, especially when it comes to how a child will grow up with split parents. Keeping grades up and maintaining well mental health as a child is stressful enough, and I agree that it would only put more pressure on children attempting to do this with divorced parents.

“3 Reasons a Thoughtful Divorce Can Be Better for Kids Than an Unhappy Marriage.” 3 Reasons Why Divorce Can Be Good for Kids | Novack Law Offices, http://www.novacklawoffices.com/blog/3-reasons-why-divorce-can-be-good-for-kids.

Sember, Brette. “Why a Good Divorce Is Better Than a Bad Marriage for Kids.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 24 Mar. 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brette-sember/why-a-good-divorce-is-better-than-a-bad-marriage-for-kids_b_6925236.html.

Emery, Robert E. “How Divorce Affects Children.” Emery about Children and Divorce, emeryondivorce.com/how_divorce_affects_children.php.

Gumbiner, Jann. “Divorce Hurts Children, Even Grown Ones.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 31 Oct. 2011, http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-teenage-mind/201110/divorce-hurts-children-even-grown-ones.


Spotlight Post 1

--Original published at Caitlin's corner

It is a well known fact that many marriages can end in divorce nowadays, however there is some room for discussion on it’s effects on children. Some can come out of a divorce just fine with the proper help and mediation, but what is best? Some children can come out with adverse experiences and it can show some negative effects later in life. This post will look at four sources, two of each examining both sides of the argument; that some children can come out fine and some can be put through too much.

Divorce is inherently harmful to children articles:

  1. In the Article, “Parental Bickering, Screaming, and Fighting: Etiology of the Most Negative Effects of Divorce on Children from the View of the Children,” from the Journal of Divorce and Remarriage has a strong stance that divorce, especially nasty ones, lead children to having problems later on in life. They wrote, “Parental discord intensified normal reactions and perpetuated negative reactions of various intensities from the children, as well as hindered their adjustment to the crisis.” This shows that when children see parental fighting and frustration, it can lead to them having their own issues with communication and feelings in relationships future on. I think this article is very credible, as it was written from interviews with real children of divorce and written by a credible therapist with a Phd.

source: http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=91b71b3d-82d4-4ae7-a730-58014fc8815e%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=3449943

2. In the article, “The Psychology of Divorce: A Lawyer’s Primer, Part 2: The Effects of Divorce on Children.” written Sandford Portnoy in The American Journal of Family Law. This is a very credible source because it comes from a lawyer’s perspective and keeps many more aspect in mind than the last article. It states, “Aside from psychological problems including high levels of depression, anxiety and low self esteem, children of divorced parents also exhibit, adolescent delinquent behavior, lower academic performance compared to children from intact families, and marital instability.” This shows that they are primed for poor coping skills and behavioral problems. Of course, with the  right therapy and the right counselor, this could not happen, but many people lack resources and knowledge about these problems and how to overcome them.

source: http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=4&sid=91b71b3d-82d4-4ae7-a730-58014fc8815e%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=27773717

Children can come through divorce without serious consequences articles:

  1. In an article written by three researchers and accredited counselors published in the Journal of Divorce and Remarriage they studied the effects of an adjustment to divorce program which included 60 7-9-year-old children who participated with their parents. It stated that, “Based on specific behavioral criteria, pre- and post- testing revealed that children’s adjustment significantly improved after completing Kids’ Turn (the program).” The criteria to determine that conclusion consisted of reports of less conflict between children and parents as well as children’s ability to avoid participating in conflict-laden situations within their post-divorce family system. They also saw more effects in these children, they appeared more emotionally activated at the end of the program than at the beginning. They also had more reconciliation fantasies, greater awareness of distressing feelings regarding the divorce, and more sensitivity to being misunderstood by their parents. The authors concluded their program is effective in creating a greater awareness of children’ s role in the dynamics of the post-divorce family and their coping skills. However, while most of the attitudes, beliefs, and behavior changed in a positive direction, the authors cautioned us saying, “children may need more evaluation and continued support in addressing the strong feelings the program aroused in the participants.” Meaning the program significantly helped, but if there are more problems at large, then they will need more addressing, but overall, a child can come out of a divorce without being inherently damaged.

source: http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=8&sid=91b71b3d-82d4-4ae7-a730-58014fc8815e%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=17037478&db=a9h

2. In the article, “Protecting Children From the Consequences of Divorce: A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Parenting on Children’s Coping Processes” written for the magazine, Child Development they studied the effects between mothers and children post divorce using different coping methods and strategies. They said, “The three-wave prospective mediational analyses revealed that intervention-induced improvements in relationship quality led to increases in coping efficacy at 6 months and increases in coping efficacy and active coping at 6 years.” Their results are discussed in terms of pathways to adaptive coping and implications for the implementation of preventive interventions targeting coping. The researchers looked at the mother-child relationships 6 months and 6 years after the divorce and how their coping has changed or been reinforced. They found that those who had stronger bonds with their mother’s had better coping skills later on. This shows that with the right mediation and intervention, children can walk out of the divorces with good coping and relationship skills.

source: http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=91b71b3d-82d4-4ae7-a730-58014fc8815e%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=57770311

My conclusion from the evidence and articles provided is, children will inherently adapt to their either hostile or supportive environments within the divorce and family structure and then act accordingly. Eventually if these situations remain hostile and they do not get intervention, then the child will take these reactions and bad coping strategies and form them into a habit and thus effect their future situations with coping and relationships. On the other hand, if the child of divorce does get proper counseling and therapy, they can see and use effective and positive coping mechanisms and strategies in their future endeavors. Overall, I think this question is very circumstantial. A lot of factors in a child’s post-divorce coping depends on the intensity of the fighting, bickering, arguing, hostility, and the nature of the divorce. If a child see’s the negativity and inappropriate behaviors coming from their parents and does not get the proper counseling for it, they could have many damaging schema/ideas on love, marriage, relationships, and divorce. Overall, it could set the child up for a not-so-great life. However, if the child and family does get the right counseling and therapy, then the child can use and see good coping mechanisms and the right way to handle our feelings. After reading these studies and cases, I think that if a divorce isn’t handled well, then it can be inherently harmful to children, but it can be handled in a positive and professional manner and help the child in the long-run.