+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com

  

Required Textbook Readings:

  • Schultz, D.P., & Schultz, S.E. (2012). A History of Modern Psychology, (Ed. 10th).
    • Chapter 12, Gestalt Psychology
    • Chapter 13, Psychoanalysis: The Beginnings
    • Chapter 14, Psychoanalysis: After the Founding

Background Information:

The history of psychology is primarily told and developed from a western worldview and more often than not, the theorists who developed the field of psychology were male and came from privilege as discussed in your textbook. With this being true, the voice of minorities, those with low socioeconomic status (SES, i.e. the poor) and women were left out of the formulation of psychological theories, which has lead at times to the marginalization of these different populations. In light of this, the Reverend Jesse Jackson addresses the American Psychology Association in an attempt to bring to the forefront the deficits in the field of psychology and suggests how the field can become a diverse and inclusive community of academics and therapists.

Before the Initial Post:

  1. Read Jackson (2000) article, What ought psychology to do?

Instructions:

Include in your Discussion Forum the following:

  1. Discuss the purpose of Jackson (2000) address to the APA.
  2. Based on the principle of the "least of these", what did Jackson (2000) claim is the role of psychology in the 21st century?
  3. Describe the points where you disagree or agree with Jackson’s (2000) APA address.
    • Make initial post
    • 250-300 words

What Ought Psychology to Do? Jesse Jackson

The R e v e r e n d J e s s e J a c k s o n a d d r e s s e d the A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n (APA) on A u g u s t 20, 1999, in Boston, MA. The t e x t that f o l l o w s is an a b r i d g e d version o f his r e m a r k s .

I c o m e here t o d a y to r e m i n d y o u that injustice is still with us, albeit in different m a n i f e s t a t i o n s than it was 32 y e a r s ago w h e n Dr. K i n g a d d r e s s e d the A m e r i c a n

P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . Dr. K i n g p r a i s e d this group and noted that p s y c h o l o g i s t s are c h a r g e d with the sol- e m n m i s s i o n o f h e l p i n g p e o p l e live well-adjusted, ful- filling lives, but with a caveat. He c h a l l e n g e d y o u to f o s t e r w h a t he called c r e a t i v e m a l a d j u s t m e n t (King, 1968). B y that he m e a n t p e o p l e should question the p r e c e p t s o f s o c i e t y and reject those that p e r m i t injustice to f o r m and grow. H e v i e w e d the social sciences as instruments o f social c h a n g e – – s a w their m i s s i o n as the e x t i r p a t i o n o f evil. He a p p e a l e d to y o u to o b s e r v e and report, fully and a c c u r a t e l y , the c o m p l e x i t y o f our soci- etal relations. Further, he called for research on h o w structural c h a n g e d e s i g n e d to p r o m o t e a m o r e j u s t soci- ety m i g h t be c r a f t e d and i m p l e m e n t e d . Specifically, he u r g e d r e s e a r c h e r s to i n v e s t i g a t e the s c h i s m b e t w e e n the m o n i e d and the p o o r within the A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n c o m – m u n i t y ; to d o c u m e n t h o w c r i m e s c o m m i t t e d b y the eco- n o m i c b e n e f i c i a r i e s o f s u b s t a n d a r d h o u s i n g in our cities a f f e c t the p e o p l e w h o live in that housing, as well as other parts o f those cities; and to e x a m i n e the self- d e s t r u c t i v e i m p u l s e s that induce our political leaders to m a k e choices that are c o n t r a r y to the best interest o f the public and those that drive y o u n g A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n m e n t o w a r d annihilation.

W e ' v e c o m e a long w a y since the 60s. Legal segre- gation b y race is a thing o f the past. Racial d i s c r i m i n a – tion is no longer s o c i a l l y acceptable. But in s o m e w a y s we h a v e once again b e c o m e c o m f o r t a b l e with a w a y o f thinking about o u r s e l v e s and our society that is d a m a g – ing and can u n d e r m i n e the w o r k that we h a v e done. T o d a y , as b e f o r e , we m u s t fight for priorities. The chal- lenges o f our d a y are to o p p o s e hatred and the v i o l e n c e it spawns, to r e c t i f y injustices that result f r o m the status quo, and to learn to live in the new w o r l d order.

As y o u r president, Dr. R i c h a r d Suinn seeks to d e m – onstrate here in y o u r o p e n i n g c e r e m o n y that y o u r asso- ciation and our larger s o c i e t y are multicultural, m u l t i r a – cial, multilingual, and spiritually diverse. L e a r n i n g to live in a diverse social order requires that we question the p r e v a i l i n g p r e c e p t s o f our society and not seek the c o m f o r t o f isolation within our o w n small group. T o o m a n y o f us h a v e learned to decorate our r o o m , w h e t h e r it is an inspiration r o o m , a religious r o o m , a g e o g r a p h i – cal r o o m , or a c l a s s r o o m . But the h o u s e – – o u r h o u s e – – i s in trouble, and there is no safe haven.

G a p s i m p o s e d b e t w e e n p e o p l e as a m a t t e r o f law h a v e b e e n bridged. N o w there are n e w barriers to equal- ity. W e are s e p a r a t e d not only b y prejudices, but b y m o n e y . The b i g g e s t gap t o d a y is not the race gap. I t ' s the gap b e t w e e n the m o n i e d and the poor, b e t w e e n Wall Street and A p p a l a c h i a . I ' v e spent a lot o f the past y e a r in A p p a l a c h i a , partially to show that p o v e r t y is not j u s t a b o u t racial minorities. M o s t p o o r p e o p l e , as y o u know, are White, y o u n g , and female. M a n y o f the p o o r in the U.S. are children. W e h a v e m a d e the c h o i c e for the p e o p l e w h o d o n ' t h a v e enough m o n e y , including the g o o d p e o p l e o f A p p a l a c h i a , that they should be sicker and defer health care longer than p e o p l e w h o h a v e health insurance. A nation as w e a l t h y as ours, as scientifically k n o w l e d g e a b l e , as e n d o w e d , m u s t not p u s h m o r e chil- dren d e e p e r into p o v e r t y while w e a l t h goes up. W e are a better nation than that.

H e r e are five basic p r e m i s e s for d e m o c r a c y ; t h e y do not fit the p r o f i t – d r i v e n m a r k e t p l a c e .

Equal p r o t e c t i o n under the law Equal o p p o r t u n i t y Equal access Fair share C o n c e r n for p e o p l e w h o h a v e the least o f these.

The health care industry should not b e a n s w e r a b l e first to the m a r k e t and s e c o n d to the g o o d o f society. D e m o c – r a c y m u s t i n f o r m health care access, m u s t i n f o r m e d u c a – tion, m u s t i n f o r m the e n v i r o n m e n t o f care, and m u s t i n f o r m our access to labor and health b e n e f i t s f r o m our j o b s . H e a l t h care policies should not be driven b y the need to m a x i m i z e p r o f i t or b e n e f i t investors. Societies m a k e choices. Let us take stock, on the e v e o f a new century, o f the c h o i c e our society is m a k i n g a b o u t p u b – lic health. W e h a v e m a d e the c h o i c e to a l l o w 45 m i l l i o n p e o p l e in this c o u n t r y to live w i t h o u t health insurance during the greatest growth in wealth in our n a t i o n ' s history.

We p a y a huge cost for not h a v i n g a c o m p r e h e n s i v e u n i v e r s a l health care system. All A m e r i c a n s should h a v e access to the health care they need. E v e r y o n e here is p r o b a b l y i n t i m a t e l y a c q u a i n t e d with the h o r r o r stories o f p r o s p e r i t y – – t h e n i g h t m a r e s – – o f this t i m e o f plenty. I urge y o u to c o m e t o g e t h e r to fight for the right to health care for e v e r y o n e , not j u s t those w h o can a f f o r d to p u r c h a s e it.

T h e r e is strength in diversity. D i v e r s i t y o f e x p e r i – ence and o u t l o o k is a p o w e r f u l tool. D i v e r s i t y can help

C o r r e s p o n d e n c e c o n c e r n i n g t h i s a r t i c l e s h o u l d b e a d d r e s s e d to J e s s e J a c k – s o n a t w w w . r a i n b o w p u s h . o r g , o r to t h e E d i t o r , American Psychologist, 7 5 0 F i r s t Street, N E , W a s h i n g t o n , D C 2 0 0 0 2 – 4 2 4 2 .

328 March 2000 • American Psychologist Copyright 2000 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/00/$5.00

Vol. 55. No. 3,328 330 DOI: 10.1037//0003-066X.55.3.328

JesseJackson

us overcome c o m m o n obstacles that can seem intracta- ble. We must all reject the state o f health care in the U.S., unequal educational opportunity for the haves and for the have nots, and forced choices between bad and worse that we confront every day. Today I challenge your sense o f accomplishment and comfort. You must include eth- nic minorities not only because it is right, but because inclusion makes you better and stronger.

Dr. Suinn chose not only to celebrate diversity, but also to confront the specter o f cancer. An admirable choice, cancer. The number two killer after heart dis- ease. I buried m y brother this morning. He died o f can- cer. Age 55. Late detection. Late admission. Fighting with an HMO. Improper diet. No regular exams. Did not have a chance.

Cancer is one o f the seemingly insurmountable ob- stacles that psychologists help people face. As we think about the treatment o f cancer, we realize that many cancer patients must decide between treatment for themselves and economic security for their families. And this is not right. We do not have to accept these choices. Democratic ideals should be the model underpinning our health care system. Greed is an aggressive cancer o f the soul; it is consuming our national organs. We must choose health care as a right for every man, woman, and child. Everyone should have access to health care if they need it, when they need it, and for as long as they need it.

Yet the core mission for m a n y in the health care business is the building o f wealth. The health care industry is d o m i n a t e d by the drive to build sharehold- er value, to e x c e e d p r o f i t projections, to p a y regular dividends, and to p r o v i d e big salaries for top execu- tives. The health care industry is i n c r e a s i n g l y inhu- mane. Concern for the bottom line is not compatible with the expectation that people who are uninsured or underin-

sured should receive the care they require and deserve. The marketplace is blind. But d e m o c r a c y is nol

blind. It has vision. D e m o c r a c y has vision and values. D e m o c r a c y is one big tent. There are m a n y races, many faces, m a n y places in one big tent. Do we want to continue to build wealth on the backs o f the poor?

I f y o u think o f A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n h i s t o r y as a s y m p h o n y in four m o v e m e n t s , y o u have freeing the slaves, the first m o v e m e n t . The s e c o n d m o v e m e n t is the end o f legal segregation. The third m o v e m e n t is the right for all A m e r i c a n s to vote. A n d the fourth, the one we are in now, is about access. A c c e s s to capital; access to resources; access to i n f o r m a t i o n , to t e c h n o l – ogy, to education; access to o p p o r t u n i t y . All p e o p l e in the U.S. do not have equal access to these things.

T h r o u g h o u t the h i s t o r y o f this great nation, our wealth has been subsidized, and it c o n t i n u e s to be subsidized. Slavery, w o r k w i t h o u t wages, is a subsidy. The p u r c h a s e o f raw materials from other countries (Africa, to name one) at below market prices is a subsi- dy. A f r i c a n s are our creditors, not debtors. N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s have subsidized us all. T h e y are creditors, not debtors. We owe a debt to the w o r k e r s who laid railroad tracks across this c o u n t r y , and to other immi- grants and low-status g r o u p s who w o r k e d for the low- est wages. T h e y s u b s i d i z e d us. These g r o u p s are our creditors, not debtors. African Americans, Native Ameri- cans, A m e r i c a n s o f all ethnic identities w h o labor for u s – – a l l are creditors, not debtors. This shift in our thinking is a matter o f p s y c h o l o g y . A p s y c h o l o g i c a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f our t h o u g h t is n e c e s s a r y if we are to c h a n g e our condition.

Think about this: Most poor people work every day. Most poor people in the U.S. are not Black, not Brown. Most poor people are White, female, young, invisible, and without national leaders. Most poor peo- ple are not on welfare.

They raise other people's children. They work every day. They put food in our children's schools. They work

every day. They clean our offices. They work every day. They work in fast food restaurants. They work every day. They cut grass; they water our flowers. They work

every day. They comb our beaches. They work every day. They pick lettuce. They work every day. They work in hospitals, as orderlies and the like, and

when we are sick, they wash our bodies, cool our fevers, launder our diseased sheets, e m p t y slop jars; no j o b is beneath them. A n d yet, w h e n they get sick, they can- not afford to lie in the bed that they made up every day. I t ' s time for a change.

You should not allow y o u r s e l v e s to be c o m f o r t – able with the status quo. Even as you help people make terrible choices between one evil and another, y o u can reject the limitations imposed by those forced choices. O p p o s e the vertical gap b e t w e e n rich and poor. Op- p o s e u n e q u a l access. A c c e s s to e d u c a t i o n , to o p p o r – tunity, to health care, access to all those things is deter-

March 2000 ° American Psychologist 329

mined by a p e r s o n ' s financial situation. Restricted access, forced choices between bad and worse, and sustaining the status quo perpetuate the uneven distribution o f the goods and services that are necessary to live.

The choices just keep adding up. Look at the injus- tices perpetrated by our criminal justice system. As psy- chologists, y o u are familiar with the concerns o f people who have mental illnesses.' People with long-term, dis- abling mental illness were cheated by deinstitutionaliza- tion. Many have no place to hang their hats. So our streets b e c o m e the place where they go when there is no place else for them. The new technique for caring for mentally ill people is incarceration. Whether they have commit- ted violent crimes or not. Whether or not those crimes were influenced by the illness, they go to jail or prison. The jail industrial c o m p l e x has gobbled up these lost and lonely people without concern for their health. The same market forces that drive health care lead to the incarceration o f people with mental illness. I t ' s a shame and a disgrace.

More bodies for the beds. Bigger profits for the corporate, for-profit jail industrial complex. This is not right. As people who are aware o f the unique challenges o f mental illness, y o u must help me combat this trend. As an army o f hope, y o u must fight tooth and nail against those who would imprison people who have mental illnesses. Or who would execute them. We must be sane. We m u s t be sane. We must fight for sanity and fairness.

To kill an insane man or woman is to be insane or immoral. Our laws create inequity. There are different con- sequences for different offenders, more punitive conse- quences for some than others: 79% o f the rural arrests are White; 64% o f all urban arrests are White. But 48% o f those in jail or prison are Black (Wilson, 1999). What is wrong with this picture?

Or this one? Over half o f the people arrested on a marijuana charge, an offense for which very few Blacks are arrested, get probation. The rest serve less than 4 years in prison. I f you are sentenced for handling cocaine powder, you will learn that the average time in prison is less than 7 years. But if you are arrested for crack, the average time in prison is over 10 years (United States Sentencing Commis- sion, 1999). Does it matter?

These injustices are driving the jail industrial complex. Every city that I have been to has at least two new buildings: A new stadium and a new jail or prison, built by a for-profit corporation. Invariably, the schools are second class to the new, profitable jails.

I ' d like to talk about the violence, the hatred, that is so prominent in our society today. We live in a culture that is permissive toward violence. We live in a context in which we glorify heroes who kill and maim. We are not suffering from racial v i o l e n c e – – i t ' s cultural violence! The horror o f people being intentionally injured or killed because o f their affiliation with a group is with us e v e r y day. Killings within families, violence inside schools, attacks on people who are gay, or who profess a certain religion, or belong to a particular ethnic group are in the news daily. But what I ' d like to bring to y o u r attention

are the explanationg. D o e s n ' t it seem that too frequent- ly, those who kill their partner or their children put the blame on a w e l l – k n o w n criminal w h o m we all f e a r – – a n imaginary Black man? And d o n ' t we all too readily believe in the lie that danger lurks in the Black man?

W h y do we look at individuals to explain violence, rather than at the larger society? Consider this: When a school child fires a gun and people are killed or hurt, listen carefully to the explanations. I f inner city Black or Brown kids fire the shots, the inevitable conclusion is that something is wrong with their mother. She had sex too young; she d i d n ' t go to church. The daddy was a rapper. Three strikes and they are out. But when White children shoot others in Pearl, MS, or Paducah, KY, or Bankhead, GA, or Littleton, CO, we d o n ' t look to their parents to find fault. I t ' s not their mama or their daddy. When it's White-on-White crime, there is something wrong with the system. When are you going to do a study o f White-on-White crime? We must look at the cultural context o f violence!

The fact is we are a God-blessed nation. We are also a free nation, a prosperous nation. We are also the most violent nation on earth. We make the most guns. We make the most bombs, and we drop them. We glamorize vio- lence. We allow the market to determine our health care policy. We punish certain people more severely than oth- ers. We live with inequality o f opportunity to partake of such basic things as health care, information, and educa- tion.

In closing, I want to turn to the fifth o f the democratic premises I listed earlier, concern for the least o f these. We should not compromise our basic American dream. We should fight for what is right. We should leave no one behind. These people, all o f them, are our people. Remem- ber the story o f the lost sheep?

A shepherd called in his sheep in the evening; 99 came but 1 did not. He was worried about it, wanted to go look for it. But some argued that "You can't save every- one," and the 99 sheep said, "What about us? We came when called." As they argued about whether he should go find the lost sheep, the sun went down.

Maybe the one who stayed behind had an auditory problem; maybe it stepped on glass and was bleeding; maybe it was kicked by a bigger sheep, or was lost, or in distress, or had been abused.

You, as good psychologists, as teachers, bring your light to dark places. Help us find all the lost sheep, and leave no one behind.

REFERENCES

King, M. L., Jr. (1968). The role o f the behavioral scientist in the Civil Rights Movement. Journal of Sociallssues, 24(1), 1-12. For the text of the speech, see also http://www.apa.org/monitor/jan99/king.html

United States Sentencing Commission. (1999). 1997 sourcebook o f federal sentencing statistics. Retrieved December 8, 1999, from the World Wide W e b http://www.ussc.gov/annrpt/1997/sbtoc97.htm

Wilson, D. J, (1999, April). Correctional populations in the United States, 1996 (NCJ 170013). Rockville, MD: Bureau o f Criminal Justice Statis- tics. Retrieved December 8, 1999, from the World Wide Web: http:// www.ojp.usdoj .gov/bj s/pub/pdf/cpius965 .pdf

330 March 2000 • American Psychologist