Fulbright Scholar Dr. Vincent Sezibera

The Center for African Psychology opened at the D.C. Campus last year to educate the campus community and the general public about mental health issues on the African continent and the role that The Chicago School is playing to address those issues.

It took a step toward realizing that goal by hosting a lecture in April from Rwandan trauma expert Dr. Vincent Sezibera, a joint Fulbright Scholar-in-Residence at The Chicago School’s Chicago Campus and Harold Washington College, who delivered the talk, “Psychological Consequences of Genocide: From Trauma to Resilience.”

A senior lecturer in the department of clinical psychology at the National University of Rwanda, he has studied post-traumatic stress disorder and child and adolescent traumatic grief, including among young survivors of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.

“I am particularly interested in how social and economic programs and networks impact resiliency post-trauma,” Dr. Sezibera said. “Thankfully, Rwandans start with a culture and social cognitions that are based in hope and optimism. Yet it is the social and economic support that not only helps the survivors of genocide to sustain hope, but actually develop internal resiliency. And that has implications for trauma survivors across the world.”

The lecture—which Dr. Sezibera also delivered at The Chicago School’s Westwood Campus in June—was an opportunity to get students interested in the international arena, said D.C. Campus President Dr. Orlando Taylor. “It’s easy to focus on things that affect you day to day, but this talk pushed us to broaden our horizons beyond D.C. and the United States.”

It also “opened the doors” to a conversation about joint academic degree or certificate programs between the National University of Rwanda and The Chicago School. “For long-term sustainability, Rwanda has to produce its own work force,” Dr. Taylor said. “It’s not realistic for their students to all come over here, so we talked about the possibility of their students beginning their work through a joint degree program, and their students might come here for a semester or a year.”

In addition to hosting the lecture, the center is about to launch a new partnership with Teach With Africa, a San Francisco-based organization that works to alleviate a teacher shortage in South Africa by sending U.S. teachers to LEAP Science and Maths Schools. LEAP Schools focus on providing academic, social, and emotional support to disadvantaged black youth, and have seen improvements in the number of graduating students who qualify for university.

Chicago School students will provide mental health and psychosocial support services to students through LEAP’s Life Orientation Program, which helps students address family issues, emotional concerns, and other issues that may distract them from school.

Patrick Kennedy accepts his honorary doctoral diploma from D.C. Campus President Orlando Taylor and Trustee Paul Dillon.

Taking center stage at The Chicago School’s 2011 Commencement Ceremony, the Honorable Patrick J. Kennedy encouraged graduates to take active roles in “a new civil rights movement” to ensure mental health care for every American citizen.

Patrick Kennedy

Evoking President Kennedy’s inaugural address 50 years ago, Kennedy challenged graduates to serve not only as psychology practitioners, but as “guardians and advocates for our country’s attitudes toward mental illness,” leading the fight against the stigma that he noted had marginalized many Americans suffering from traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other psychological and neurological disorders. He also stressed the need for incorporating mental health care into an overall approach to health care.

“Just as we can’t have colored water fountains, we can’t have a system that is only for mental health,” he told the 3,000 degree candidates and guests who filled the Civic Opera House on June 10. “We need a (healthcare) system that has mental health as part of it. History is upon us and we must answer the call. ‘Separate but equal’ is unequal.”

TCSPP Graduates

Prior to delivering the commencement address, Kennedy—son of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and a former Congressman from Rhode Island—received an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters degree, which recognized his work in passing the Mental Health Parity Law of 2008. Kennedy is also co-founder of the One Mind for Research Campaign, which has brought together prominent neuroscientists, governmental representatives, advocacy groups, and the pharmaceutical industry to improve funding for brain science research.

More than 500 doctoral, master’s, and education specialist candidates crossed the stage for The Chicago Campus’ 27th annual Commencement, accepting diplomas from President Michele Nealon-Woods, a 2001 graduate herself, and being hooded by members of their respective academic departments.

TCSPP Graduates

The Rev. Dr. Thomas N. Pelton (Psy.D. ’91) was honored by the Alumni Council with the 2011 Distinguished Alumnus Award. Presented by Dr. Susanne Francis-Thornton (Psy.D. ‘03), Council chair, the honor recognizes Dr. Pelton’s work with cancer and AIDS patients in Chicago’s Hispanic neighborhood of West Humboldt Park. (See page 26 for an alumni profile of Dr. Pelton.)

(By Judy Beaupre)

Kids will be kids.

We’ve been saying it for years, sometimes as an explanation for actions that defy adult understanding, occasionally to dismiss or downplay the need for personal accountability, and—perhaps way too often—to convince ourselves that the sometimes-alarming behavior we witness in the young people around us is “normal.”

Take bullying. Once seen as a “rite of passage,” bullying was a label for such innocuous behavior as taping a “call me stupid” sign to the new kid’s back, hiding earthworms in a classmate’s lunchbox, or—as depicted repeatedly in the musical comedy series, Glee—tossing a slushie in someone’s face. Messy, uncomfortable, embarrassing—but not all that damaging in the long run. That has changed, or at least our recognition of the sometimes-dire consequences that can accompany bullying has. Today’s version of peer-to-peer torment has captured media attention as a far more disturbing trend—one that transcends hurt feelings and strawberry-stained clothing, instead being blamed for suicides, catastrophic acts of mass revenge, and long-term mental health consequences for victims, perpetrators, witnesses, and family members.

“Between 15 and 30 percent of students in today’s schools are involved with regularity in bullying—and often with negative consequences,” says Dr. Dan Olweus, a professor of psychology at the University of Bergen in Norway, who has devoted more than 40 years to bullying research and is recognized as an international authority on the subject.

Bullying By the Numbers

“Victims suffer from anxiety, depression, poor self-esteem—they view the rejection by their peer group as too hard to handle.” Others put the prevalence of bullying far higher than Olweus’ estimate. Research published in 2009 in the Journal of Adolescent Health reported that, while only 20 percent of students reported involvement in physical bullying—either as a victim or a bully—more than half were involved in social bullying (defined as social exclusion or spreading rumors) and even more—54 percent—were on the giving or receiving end of verbal bullying. The most recent addition to the bully’s arsenal—cyberbullying—is the fastest growing, accounting for an ever-increasing portion of teen harassment cases. This 21st-century twist on the age-old practice of picking on classmates encompasses the rampant use of the Internet, email, and texting to demean or harass others. Cyberbullying is, in some ways, the most dangerous; it extends the bully’s timeframe for making a peer’s life miserable from school hours to 24/7, and vastly expands the reach of ugly rumors, innuendo, and compromising or humiliating photos.

While bullying has been around for decades—if not centuries—social scientists have only recently gathered enough empirical data to draw conclusions about the phenomenon’s long-term psychological effects. According to researchers, students who have been repeatedly intimidated or persecuted are far more likely to be emotionally distressed and twice as likely as their non-involved peers to experience psychosomatic symptoms such as headaches and abdominal pain. Most alarming of all is the connection that has been suggested between bullying and suicidal ideation.

During the past year alone, news media have been peppered with the stories of children and teens who became victims of what is sometimes referred to as bullycide.

In Massachusetts, a 15-year-old high school girl whose family had recently moved to the United States from Ireland was taunted with cultural slurs—and physically harassed as she walked home from school—until she hanged herself in the stairwell of her home. In Minnesota, two eighth-grade girls fulfilled a suicide pact after repeatedly indicating that they were ostracized and bullied by classmates. And in New Jersey, an 18-year-old Rutgers University student jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge after classmates secretly shot video of him in an intimate encounter with another male student and streamed it online.

While the reasons students are targeted for harassment are many, “being different” leads the list. Few groups are singled out more frequently than students who are—or who are perceived to be—gay. One study produced in 2010 by Iowa State University researchers showed that more than half of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) youth had been cyberbullied in the 30 days preceding the survey. For many, this led to depression and—for 26 percent—thoughts of suicide.

“There’s a saying that we’ve now changed to read, ‘Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can kill,’” Warren Blumenfeld, an assistant professor who co-authored the study, told the ScienceDaily website. “Pre-adolescence through adolescence is a time when peer influences are paramount in a young person’s life. If one is ostracized and attacked, that can have devastating consequences—not only physically, but on their emotional health for the rest of their life.”

Recent research published this year in the Journal of School Health supports Blumenfeld’s contention. According to the study, LGBT young adults who had been victimized during adolescence were more than five times as likely to report having attempted suicide and more than twice as likely to report clinical levels of depression.

“We now have evidence of the lasting personal and social cost of failing to make our schools safe for all students,” said University of Arizona professor Stephen Russell, the study’s lead author. “In our study, we see the effects of school victimization up to a decade later or more.”

Tackling the Problem

Teen angst is nothing new, and has long provided a steady stream of clients for mental health professionals who work with this population—child and adolescent psychologists, clinical counselors, school psychologists, and marital and family therapists.

The growing recognition of bullying’s long-term impact, however, has caused professionals to take a closer look at causes and consequences, and to develop more proactive approaches to curbing the practice’s most egregious forms and teaching victims resilience strategies.

Bystanders and Bullies

Dr. Olweus, the international bullying authority quoted earlier in this story, used his four decades of research to develop the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, which has been implemented in elementary, middle, and junior high schools across the country and claims to have reduced bullying by up to 70 percent in some schools. Its focus is on improving school climate, training teachers and staff to recognize and deal with bullying incidents, and involving parents in conversations about how best to support their children.

Dr. Dan Koonce, associate professor of school psychology at The Chicago School’s Chicago Campus, is a strong believer in using Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS), a systems approach to creating a positive social climate in schools, as a weapon against bullying. Rather than focusing solely on discipline, PBIS incorporates proactive strategies for defining, teaching, and supporting appropriate student behaviors.

It is a two-part approach, he says, involving both a teacher-training component and direct instruction of all students in how to identify bullying and how to respond—as a victim or as a bystander.

“Some teachers are not fully aware of what’s happening—especially when relational aggression is taking place,” Dr. Koonce says. “Texting can be just as dangerous as more outward forms of bullying, and teachers have to know how to identify and address it.”

Unfortunately, addressing the issue on a schoolwide or even communitywide level is often not enough. All 50 states have enacted some form of anti-bullying legislation—many specifically targeting cyberstalking, cyberharassment, and cyberbullying. In March 2011, President and Mrs. Obama hosted a White House Conference on Bullying Prevention, which included leaders from the American Psychological Association, educators, politicians, and mental health professionals.

Participants discussed ways to empower students to come to the aid of classmates who are being victimized, and how to involve family members in teaching their children more respectful ways of interacting with their peers.

Too often, bullying incidents become a matter for the legal system, typically when they lead to violence. Both adults and juveniles have faced charges when their harassment activities resulted in attempted suicide or other injuries, and victims have been known to lash out, taking revenge on those who have tormented them. Sometimes, too, verbal taunting or cyberbullying is just the first step in what eventually becomes more overt acts of violence.

Turning to Violence

In 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, who were widely reported to have been bullied in school, went on a shooting rampage at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., killing 13 including themselves, and injuring 21 others. Seung-Hui Cho was 23 when he opened fire at Virginia Tech, killing 32 before taking his own life, but authorities said that much of his anger could be traced to his high school days, when fellow students had made fun of his shyness and accent.

The 21st Century Bully: Online, Not In Your Face

Dr. James Shaw, assistant professor of forensic psychology at The Chicago School’s Los Angeles Campus, has spent years studying the causes of teen violence. His book, Jack and Jill and Why They Kill: Saving Our Children, Saving Ourselves, shares the stories of 13 adolescents serving time in state youth prisons for murder. His insights were the subject of a keynote address he gave at the first commemoration of the Columbine tragedy. While the juvenile inmates he interviewed did not necessarily point to bullying as a cause for their rage, all articulated feelings of alienation, isolation, and being unloved and unlovable. They expressed disappointment in a person they trusted and with whom they had a connection.

“There is no uniform behavior or set of symptoms for children who turn to violence, although the news media would like to have everyone fit into a formula,” Dr. Shaw said. “The closest I can come is to say all were unhealthy children psychologically and emotionally, and all felt some level of betrayal.” An important thing to recognize, he emphasized, is that “these are kids, not fully formed, and not completely matured psychologically.” He added that the majority did not understand the gravity of what they had done until their court appearance, when they realized the impact their actions had had on family members and the community.

In an effort to counteract teen violence, Dr. Shaw has founded the B.R.A.V.E. (Be Resilient Avoid Violence Everywhere) program, through which he helps children recognize and resist the pressure to engage in any form of violence or bullying as a means of problem-solving. The project has taken off, gaining recognition throughout the criminal justice system, and has been cited by the Philadelphia Regional Office of the FBI as “an example of best community practices.”

Dr. Shaw contends that while parents have responsibility for bringing up children who can readily distinguish right from wrong, schools need to do a better job of addressing aggressive activities. “We need a violence-prevention curriculum that is taught side by side with social studies and English,” he says. “If we can mandate driver’s education, why can’t we require this too? Social driving—social navigation—is as important as anything else we teach in school.”

(By Lindsay Beller)

Sometimes it is easy to deduce what led someone to commit a crime. Take the woman who, traumatized by prior sexual assault, severely reacts to an unwanted advance and finds herself charged with attempted murder. Or the man who was raised in an abusive home and is later arrested for beating his own children. In other cases, the reasons are much less clear. Why does a successful executive, who makes a good paycheck and leads a happy life, risk it all by committing a white-collar crime? How does a person from a lawabiding family grow up to shock his neighbors and loved ones when it is discovered that he is the serial killer who has been terrorizing his community? Did something happen earlier in these people’s lives that we simply don’t know about, or are their brains hardwired for criminal activity?

The causes of criminal behavior have long been up for debate, and today there are still more questions than answers. Are criminals born prone to a life of aggression and anti-social behavior? Are they products of their environment? Is it a combination of both nature and nurture? Research indicates that genetics is responsible for about 50 percent of criminal behavior and that environment accounts for the rest. Many experts argue that inheriting a particular gene doesn’t necessarily predispose someone to a life of crime—but add in an abusive or violent childhood or another negative environmental factor and that risk greatly increases.

What Role Does Environment Play?

Complicating the equation is the notion that while many of those charged with criminal acts share a common set of personality and behavioral traits— such as impulsivity and the need for immediate gratification—the wide range of offenders and offenses makes generalization difficult. Ask Dr. Michael Fogel what causes criminal behavior and his answer is, “It depends.”

“There is no 100 percent certainty that an individual who possesses certain characteristics will engage in a crime. Life gets in the way,” said Dr. Fogel, associate professor of forensic psychology at The Chicago School’s Chicago Campus. “When you understand where the individual came from, what they were exposed to, and the environment in which they grew up, you can understand why they engaged in the behavior that they did.”

Many experts argue that inheriting a particular gene doesn’t necessarily predispose someone to a life of crime—but add in an abusive or violent childhood or another negative environmental factor and that risk greatly increases.

Researchers have long studied the idea that the nurturing an individual does or doesn’t receive influences behavioral development, and found environmental factors such as coercive parenting styles, physical and sexual abuse, neglect, and family conflict are related to antisocial behavior. For example, research has shown that trauma during childhood can lead to aggressive or even criminal behavior. Dr. Kendell Coker, assistant professor of forensic psychology at The Chicago School, has conducted research on the relationship between trauma and delinquent behavior among inner-city minority youth. In one study that explored the association between these two concepts, he found youth who are exposed to more trauma have poorer social problem-solving skills, which in turn is related to higher delinquency.

“Trauma has been shown to have a large impact on youth, and it can also lead to criminal behavior, but not because the kid all of a sudden sees something bad and they go bad,” Dr. Coker said. “It’s because they start to see the world as a hostile place and their source of protection wasn’t there when they needed it, so they feel like they need to protect themselves. A lot of juvenile misconduct happens in social situations. Juveniles are more susceptible to peer pressure and they don’t think about the consequences of their actions.”

In an effort to understand the extent to which both environment and genetics impact antisocial behavior, numerous twin and adoption studies have looked at the traits and personalities of identical and fraternal twins raised in the same and separate environments (identical twins share all of their genes while fraternal twins share 50 percent of them).

Studies also looked at adoptees, and whether they exhibited similar traits to their adopted parents. Results have varied. Some research found evidence that genetics determined antisocial behavior while other studies concluded environmental factors played a stronger role. Still other research has found that an interaction between genes and environment predicts criminal behavior.

British psychologist Francis Galton initiated the first twin studies in the late 19th century. Considered a pioneer of behavioral genetics, Galton’s research led to the exploration of the nature vs. nurture debate. His interest in heredity was inspired by his cousin Charles Darwin’s book about evolution, The Origin of Species, as well as his belief that intelligence and other “human mental abilities and personality traits” were passed down through heredity. His ideas represented the beginnings of the eugenics movement, which aimed to remove “undesirable” people from the gene pool—a movement that gained popularity in the United States in the early 20th century, but ultimately hindered research into the links between biology and criminal behavior.

Are Genetics to Blame?

Spurred in part by racist attitudes toward large waves of immigrants arriving from Asia and Southern and Eastern Europe, eugenics researchers believed if they could control which human genes were passed on, they could eradicate conditions and traits including mental retardation and learning disabilities (or “feeblemindedness,” as it was called), physical disabilities, criminality, epilepsy, and alcoholism, which were considered a drain on public resources. At the time, a limited scientific understanding of heredity was based on research of dominant and recessive genes in plants, and the notion that if animal breeders could select desirable traits for their livestock, the same idea could apply to humans. The Eugenics Record Office was founded to compile genetic information from families, but the data was ambiguous and collected by many individuals who had their own prejudices about what made someone fit to reproduce. While no scientific data confirmed the heritability of most traits, there was widespread support for the movement that led to institutionalization policies and forced sterilization laws. In 1907, Indiana became the first of 30 states to legalize involuntary sterilization. Although the eugenics movement was scientifically discredited after revelations of Nazi experiments on Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and other groups during World War II, the last state law was not repealed until 1981. In that time, estimates of up to 70,000 men and women underwent forced sterilizations and thousands were institutionalized against their will.

Despite the declining credibility of eugenics, researchers continued efforts to link biology and criminality, and some unethical research practices persisted in the 1960s and 1970s. For example, the “Supermale” syndrome posited that men with an XYY chromosome pattern were thought to exhibit aggressive and antisocial behavior. Although subsequent research invalidated this idea, many newborns, juvenile delinquents, and prisoners were screened for the extra chromosome without consent, leading to further stigmatization for a condition that ultimately had no scientific basis.

But since the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003, which identified thousands of new genes, there has been a renewed, yet cautious, interest in the link between biology and criminal behavior, and the research has only recently begun to gain a fragile credibility. Certain genes, like one that regulates the production of the MAOA enzyme, for example, have been linked to aggressive and impulsive behavior. But while about 100 studies have shown a link between genes and crime, many researchers reject the theory of biological determinism—that our genes determine our personalities and who we become—and say that environment plays an important role in whether and how a gene is expressed.

Our Brains and the Law

The brain has become the latest frontier in the quest to understand criminal behavior, particularly of psychopaths and violent offenders. In the growing field of neurocriminology, which is the application of neuroscience to criminology, researchers have documented differences between the criminal brain and the “normal” brain.

Dr. Adrian Raine, a psychologist at University of Pennsylvania, has conducted studies that show a correlation between criminal behavior and the amygdala—“ the guardian angel of behavior” as he described it to an audience at the University of Missouri. The amygdala is located in the prefrontal cortex and is associated with emotion and fear—the idea being the less fear someone has, the less likely he is to have a conscience guide his behavior. In one study, he found an 18 percent volume reduction in the amygdala of psychopaths compared to non-psychopaths.

Dr. Raine was also part of a longitudinal study that examined the fear-conditioning response of 3-year-olds in the island nation of Mauritius. Based on the theory that a dysfunctional amygdala leads to poor fear conditioning and increases the risk of criminal behavior, his team examined children early in life and, 20 years later, gathered information on whether they committed crimes as adults. To measure their level of anticipatory fear, the children wore headphones and listened to a neutral sound followed a few seconds later by a harsh noise. This was repeated several times, so the children knew that the unpleasant sound would always follow the first one. If the child’s “sweat rate” increased while anticipating the second noise, this suggested a normally functioning amygdala. The follow-up study revealed that many of the children who had not shown anticipatory fear during that test had become convicted criminals. Despite his observation that “bad brains lead to bad behavior,” Dr. Raine shares the belief with many other researchers that one’s environment can still impact whether someone becomes a criminal. “It’s not biology versus environment. It’s biology plus environment,” he told The Times of London in a 2010 interview.

At least one psychologist rejects the notions that biology or environment leads to criminal behavior. In his book, Inside the Criminal Mind, Dr. Stanton E. Samenow argued that regardless of their background, criminals think differently than non-criminals—that they make a choice to commit a crime, and should be held fully responsible for their actions.

Blaming one’s environment or even a mental illness paints the offender as a victim, he writes, and research on genetic links to criminality has been inconclusive. Instead criminal patterns such as lying and breaking rules begin during early childhood and culminate into a life of crime. “The person who makes crime a way of life has a radically different way of thinking from the individual who behaves responsibly,” he wrote in the book. “The two mentalities are so different, it’s as though the criminals were a different breed.”

Based on this theory, Dr. Samenow—who collaborated with and built on work started by his mentor, Dr. Samuel Yochelson, in the 1960s—proposed that the only way to rehabilitate a criminal was for him to change the way he thinks, which would lead to better behavior. In their 1977 book The Criminal Personality, the authors identified 52 “thinking errors,” such as poor decision making, failure to consider injury to others, and lack of trust. The notion that criminals demonstrate errors in their thinking has become a critical element in cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), which is considered the most effective treatment to keep offenders from committing further crimes.

What Treatments Work?

Advances in treating offenders have come a long way since 1974 when sociologist Robert Martinson reviewed 231 studies that evaluated the impact of rehabilitation programs and found they had little impact on recidivism. The media seized on the message that “nothing works,” repudiating the criminal justice system’s focus on the rehabilitation of criminals. The findings, splashed on magazine covers and in newspaper articles, contributed to the rise to the “get tough on crime” approach in the United States.

Cognitive behavioral therapy emerged as the treatment with the greatest impact in reducing the recurrence of criminal behavior in juveniles and adults.

But in the decades that followed, even as the criminal justice system became more punitive, cognitive behavioral therapy emerged as the treatment with the greatest impact in reducing the recurrence of criminal behavior in juveniles and adults, and in decreasing the incidence of depression and substance abuse. One 2005 study found that CBT reduced recidivism by an average of 25 percent, with some programs finding reductions of more than 50 percent. Even high-risk offenders were responsive to the treatment.

Changing the Way We Think

CBT—a blend of cognitive theory and its focus on internal thought processes with behavioral theory and its emphasis on external behaviors—teaches offenders to identify distortions in their thinking and understand that altering the way they think will lead to positive changes in behavior. Offenders might be taught coping or problem-solving skills. Dr. Nancy Zarse, associate professor of forensic psychology at The Chicago School, explained how the treatment worked for an inmate she treated during a 16-week cognitive behavioral therapy program. When asked to describe the crime that he had committed—from start to finish—the offender told of a midnight visit from an acquaintance inviting him to help steal $800 tires from a car that had broken down.

“We walked through, from that moment on, how many thinking errors he had and how many rationalizations there were between him leaving that house and getting to the actual car,” she said. “Part of what I wanted to help him see was at how many different points he could have made a different choice and not gone to the crime scene. Because once you’re there, what’s the likelihood that you’re going to turn away?”

When the program concluded, the inmate told her that the exercise was the most valuable part of his treatment. “For him, that’s when he realized, wow, that’s what I’ve been doing,” Dr. Zarse said. “Part of what you want to teach in cognitive behavioral treatment is those earlier decisions, those earlier thinking errors and cognitive distortions, that have a pro-criminal influence as opposed to a pro-social influence.”

Other treatments such as behavioral therapy and psychotherapy show little evidence of being as effective as cognitive behavioral therapy in treating criminals. One study that found that CBT programs were 30 percent more effective than behavioral ones, while a

2007 report from the National Institute of Corrections stated, “Traditional psychotherapy is egocentric; it helps individuals solve their personal problems, feel better about themselves, and fulfill their inner goals and expectations. This egocentric psychotherapy, in and of itself, has failed to have significant impact on changing the thinking, attitudes, and behaviors of offenders.”

As CBT became the widely accepted treatment for offenders, an evolution in risk assessments has resulted in more accurate evaluations and treatment plans. At first professional judgment was used to predict criminal behavior until the 1970s, when psychologists recognized that risk assessments needed to more evidence behind them. They began to consider such factors as the history of criminality, substance abuse, past employment, violent behavior, social networks, and age, which improved accuracy and credibility. Assessments further evolved to consider factors like the offender’s current situation resulting in more targeted interventions. In the last few years, a supervision component has helped ensure that offenders are compliant with their treatment, which reduces their risk of further criminal behavior.

As risk assessments improved, psychologists D.A. Andrews and James Bonta developed the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model of offender rehabilitation. First used in Canada, the model is considered the most effective way to assess and treat criminals, especially higher-risk offenders who traditionally weren’t as likely to receive rehabilitation services as low-risk offenders. The RNR model is based on three principles that guide interventions: the offender’s level of risk, the services that address criminogenic needs, and the types of treatment programs to provide.

Providing interventions that target the offender’s criminogenic needs is considered critical to overall success. As opposed to static risk factors linked to criminal behavior, such as one’s history of violence, criminogenic needs are dynamic risk factors that can be altered to bring about more positive outcomes. For example, if all of an offender’s friends are criminals, a treatment program would encourage him to avoid bad influences. Or if the offender has too much time on his hands—time that typically gets him into trouble—a treatment program might introduce a new activity and support participation.

Although research is producing evidence-based treatments that have a positive impact on recidivism, such advances alone often aren’t enough to magically turn prior offenders into law-abiding citizens. Such programs cost money to implement, and lack of funding is an ever-present impediment. In 2009, there were more than 1.6 million incarcerated in state or federal prisons, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, but the recession has led to budget cuts in rehabilitation programs. Last year, California cut 36 percent in funding for such initiatives, and numerous other states have made or are considering cuts, including Texas, Kansas, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. “Psychological factors play significant roles in criminal behavior, but it takes time to treat them, and oftentimes there aren’t resources to do so,” Dr. Fogel said. “How much rehabilitation can occur when there isn’t money provided for programs?”

While all are common phrases in the world of parenting, they are less so for mothers whose histories of poverty, neglect and abuse have landed them in the charge of the Department of Child and Family Services and resulted in their children’s placement in foster care. Typically, DCFS requires that families remanded to its supervision complete parenting training before being reunited with their children. In Chicago, such parents are often referred to Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT), a program run by The Chicago School Forensic Center.

Stephanie Agost (right) coaches student Kristina Lenz through a PCIT description.

The program’s goal, says project coordinator Stephanie Agost (M.A. ’08), is to alter the negative patterns of interaction between parents and children while enhancing the parent-child relationship and decreasing parenting stress and child behavior problems. Working under the supervision of faculty and staff, students coach parents or caregivers through the process of learning positive communication strategies with their children. They use the acronym PRIDE (praise, reflection, imitation, description, enthusiasm) to teach mothers—and the occasional participating dad—to break the cycle of negative reinforcement and abusive practices that has been passed down, sometimes for generations. Student coaches observe client interactions through a one-way window and communicate with the parents through a bug-in-the-ear technology system.

“PCIT combines behavior therapy principles with traditional child play therapy skills and translates these aspects of intervention into a mode of working with families to bring about healthy, nurturing relationships,” says Dr. Laura Benton (Psy.D. ’98). A Chicago School alumna who returned as a faculty member in the forensic psychology department, Dr. Benton is one of three who train and supervise students in PCIT.

Together, they help parents master the skills that can take a potentially volatile exchange between an ill-tempered child and an exasperated mom or dad and turn it into a carefully orchestrated give-and take that helps the parent remain calm while teaching the child about limits and consequences.

“The strongest advantage that this program has over other parenting programs is that the therapy is conducted with the parent and child in the room together,” Dr. Benton says. “It’s much more powerful when they can witness the changes actually taking place in their relationship with their child.” National data gathered by the U.S. Administration for Children and Families offers evidence of PCIT effectiveness. According to the ACF website, physically abusive parents who participate in PCIT are far less likely to have re-reports of child abuse (19 percent as compared with 49 percent who had not been referred to PCIT).

Pride in Parenting

The Chicago School’s program typically serves between eight and 12 families a year, each through individual appointments. Parents and children show up for weekly sessions, which are held in a cozy, toy-filled room in the Forensic Center. For the kids, it’s a time to have mom’s undivided attention while coloring or reading stories. But it’s also time to learn the rules. Tantrums don’t elicit attention, but good behavior brings praise and hugs. When a parent’s patience starts to run thin, the reassuring voice of a student coach—coming steadily through the unobtrusive earpiece she wears—reminds her not to raise her voice, to turn negative statements into positive, and to tell her children how much she enjoys spending time with them. As kids respond positively, so does mom, demonstrating confidence in her own parenting abilities.

Both Agost and Dr. Benton were trained in PCIT—Agost as a student and Dr. Benton as a new member of the Forensic Psychology faculty—by Dr. Tiffany Masson, who introduced the program to The Chicago School when she joined the faculty in 2006. When launched, it was the only program of its kind in the area, but as empirical evidence became available to validate the program’s efficacy, the use of PCIT has expanded rapidly. It is now taught and practiced at universities and family counseling centers throughout the country, as well as in several countries in Europe and Asia.

Long touted as “man’s best friend,” dogs may be playing an even more important role in the lives of academically at-risk inner-city children in Chicago. Dr. Robert Clark’s research shows that pet canines may be improving literacy skills, school attendance, and behavior for students aged 7 to 9 in under-performing schools throughout the city.

The research, which was co-presented by Dr. Clark, professor of school psychology at the Chicago Campus, and Dr. Corinne Smith, a school psychology adjunct faculty member, at the annual conference of the Midwest Psychological Association. in May, reported on work being undertaken by SitStayRead, a Chicago nonprofit dedicated to improving literacy in academically underserved children.

“Animals have been used in therapeutic situations for years,” Dr. Clark says. “Traditionally they were used with traumatized populations, but SitStayRead introduced them into classrooms as facilitators for academic instruction. What we found is that they definitely have a calming effect: children behave better, their attendance improves, and their reading improves over comparison groups who don’t have the interaction with dogs.”

School psychology has taken the lead in program evaluation for the project, which is a relatively new approach to literacy. As executive secretary of the International School Psychology Association, which has its headquarters office at The Chicago School, Dr. Clark has played an integral role in that research. “Many of the children who live in the inner city don’t have pets of their own; dogs are a novelty for them,” Dr. Clark says. “SitStayRead is a very structured program that requires children to behave and perform in a certain way. Often these kids will do for dogs what they won’t do for us.”

Analyzing “Psycho”

Four decades after Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 thriller “Psycho” began captivating and horrifying audiences, Dr. Jim Iaccino has put a name to the forensic psychology classification that he believes defined Norman Bates, the mother-obsessed serial killer at the center of 109 minutes of suspense and blood-letting.

An associate professor of forensic psychology at the Chicago Campus, Dr. Iaccino has begun presenting his findings, most recently at the American Popular Culture Association Conference in San Antonio, Texas, in April, where he spoke on “Applying a Serial Killer Typology to the Psycho Franchise: Norman Bates as a Visionary Killer on a Mission.”

The title of his presentation offers a clue into his conclusions—that Bates actually falls into two serial killer classifications: the visionary and the mission-oriented killer. “The visionary is someone who typically explodes, leaving a mess—and clues—behind, while the mission-oriented killer takes it upon himself to rid the world of people who possess an undesirable trait—in Norman’s case these were people who remind him of his mother,” Dr. Iaccino says. He explains that the opportunity for dual diagnosis arises when the entire four-film series is viewed, showing Bates as a disorganized, impulsive killer in Hitchcock’s original movie and as a mission-driven murderer who in later “Psycho” films continually targets people with “mother” characteristics.

“Can a person shift from a visionary to a mission killer? I don’t know why not,” he says, adding that he thinks a lot can be learned from viewing and analyzing films. He notes that while little research has been done in the area of analyzing serial killers portrayed on film, it is an area that has recently gained traction with the American Psychological Association through its Division on Media Psychology.

“’Psycho’ remains a classic in horror films—one that offers a very good portrayal of the types of killers out there,” he says.

Presentations

Dr. Claude Barbre, associate professor, Clinical Psychology, Chicago, presented “The Artists Appoints Herself Artist: Otto Rank and Existential–Humanistic Therapies: at the national conference of APA’s Society for Humanistic Psychology in April. He also presented “The Background of Music of Being: On Listening” at the national conference
of the Philosophy of Education Society in St. Louis in March 2011.

Dr. Michael A. Barr, associate professor, Business Psychology, Online, copresented a paper, “Measuring Outcomes of Orthognathic Surgery From a Multidisciplinary Perspective,” at the 68th Annual Meeting of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Dr. Robert Clark, professor, School Psychology, Chicago, gave the keynote address at the Second International Conference on School Psychology in Vietnam, and presented a paper, “International Accreditation Standards for School Psychology,” in Hue, Vietnam.

Dr. Ellis Copeland, dean of academic affairs, Chicago, spoke in April 2011 at Arizona State University’s TEDx ASU West event on Redefining Video Games at the New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences.

Dr. Todd DuBose, associate professor, Clinical Psychology, Chicago, served as a moderator for a panel discussion on Medard Boss and the First Systematic Approach to Existential Psychotherapy at the fourth annual Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference, Division 32, of the American Psychological Association in Chicago. He also presented on “Immeasurable Dasein in a Measuring World” at the International Federation for Daseinsanalysis General Assembly in Athens, Greece, in February 2011.

Dr. Eleazar Cruz Eusebio, assistant professor, School Psychology, Chicago, was invited to present a paper, “Incidental Effects of Students Simulation of Tic Behaviors on Working Memory and Comprehension,” at the International Learning and the Brain Conference May 6 in Chicago.

Dr. Robert Foltz, assistant professor, Clinical Psychology, Chicago, presented on “Adolescent Subjective Experience of Treatment” at the National Conference of the American Association of Children’s Residential Centers in April 2011, in Seattle. He also presented “The Teen’s Perspective of the Residential Treatment Experience” at Reclaiming Youth International, Black Hills Seminar in June 2011.

Dr. Noelle K. Newhouse, associate professor, Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Online, will present on “Development of the Thurstone Mental Alertness (TMATM) Express” at the annual convention of the Association for Psychological Science in Washington, D.C.

Dr. Donald Schultz, associate professor, Marital and Family Therapy, Los Angeles, presented on “Successful Aging: Life Transitions and Finding Fulfillment in Your Later Years” at the Food For Thought Speakers Program, presented as a community service by the Santa Monica Co-Opportunity community organization in March 2011.

Dr. Sandra Siegel, associate professor, and Dr. Linda Robinson, both Counseling, Chicago, presented a paper, “Understanding the History of Chicago’s West Side African American Community: Clinical Implications,” at the Illinois Association of Multicultural Counseling/Division of Illinois Counseling Association.

Dr. Richard Sinacola, associate professor, Clinical Psychology, Los Angeles, presented an “Update on Psychopharmacology: The Latest Medications for Depression, Anxiety and Psychotic Conditions” at the California Association of Marital and Family Therapists 47th Annual Conference in San Francisco in May 2011.

Dr. Orlando Taylor, president, Washington, D.C., presented a paper, “Utilizing the Intersection of Race and Gender to Promote Minority Success in Higher Education: Preparing Critical Faculty for the Future,” at the European Access Network 20th Anniversary Conference for Student Diversity in Higher Education: Conflicting Realities in Amsterdam in June 2011.

Dr. Héctor L. Torres, assistant professor, Counseling, Chicago, has been invited to present a paper, “An Educational Model for the Integration of Culture and Psychology,” at the 38th Congress for Teaching and Research in Psychology in Mexico City. He also co-presented on “Teaching Latino/a Style: Addressing Challenges and Strengths of U.S. Latino/a Graduate Students,” at the 33rd Congress of International Psychology in Medellin, Colombia.

Drs. Hector Adames, Nayeli Chavez, Héctor Torres, and Fahmida Zaman co-presented a paper, “Collectively Building Bridges in the Academy: Culture-Centered Pedagogy,” at the biennial International Conference on The Teaching of Psychology in Vancouver, Canada, in July 2011.

Dr. Debra Warner, associate professor, Forensic Psychology, Los Angeles, and Dr. Loren Hill, manager, Forensic Training Institute in Los Angeles, will present “How Women Expand Personal Comfort Zones of Community/Gang Intervention Training in Los Angeles: Focus Group Findings” at the Institute on Violence Abuse and Trauma (IVAT) Conference in San Diego, September 14, 2011.

Dr. Fahmida Zaman, assistant professor, Clinical Counseling, Chicago, will co-presented two papers at the American Psychological Association in Washington, D.C. in August: “Mastering the Climb: Minority Student Mentorship at the Master’s Level,” and “Lifting As We Climb: Mentoring Diverse Students Across Educational Levels.” He will also present a symposium, “Mentoring Diverse Students Across Educational Levels” at the APA Conference.

Dr. Nancy Zarse, associate professor, Forensic Psychology, Chicago, presented at the FBI’s statewide conference on Campus Safety and School Violence in April 2011. Dr. Zarse addressed Risk Factors and Warning Indicators for Violence. Dr. Zarse also presented her project, “Holding the Classroom Hostage: The Use of a Role Play as an Experiential Teaching Technique,” at the International Scholarship of Teaching and Learning conference in May 2011. Dr. Zarse co-presented on “Extremist Groups in Prisons” at the National Mental Health in Corrections Conference in April 2011.

Publications

Dr. Eleazar Cruz Eusebio recently co-authored “Assessment and Intervention Practices for Children with ADHD and Other Frontal-Striatal Circuit Disorders” in the first edition of Best Practices in School Neuropsychology.

Dr. Elaine Fletcher-Janzen, professor, School Psychology, Chicago, has served as co-editor of the Encyclopedia of Special Education for the past 27 years. She is currently editing and authoring the fourth edition of the work. The Encyclopedia is used in university libraries in over 27 countries.

Dr. Robert Foltz recently published “Principles in Evidence-Based Standards” in the Winter 2011 issue of Reclaiming Children and Youth.

Praise

Dr. Nancy Zarse, associate professor, Forensic Psychology, Chicago received the Distinguished Faculty: Excellence in Public Service award at graduation, in June 2011. For the second consecutive year, Dr. Zarse was also named a Carnegie Scholar by the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, recognizing her ongoing work using role play as a teaching technique through the Hostage Negotiation course she teaches for the Chicago Campus’ Forensic Psychology Department.

Dr. Claude Barbre received the Margaret Morgan Lawrence Award from the Harlem Family Institute in recognition of his contributions to HFI as executive director and his 20 years of clinical services to children and families in Harlem and New York City.

Ralph Barrera was a sergeant in the Los Angeles Police Department when a bullet changed his life.

Fired in the line of duty in accordance with his training and police department regulations, the bullet took the life of an offender—but it also took a toll on Barrera, who embarked on a decade-long battle with post-traumatic stress disorder and eventually confronted the reality that it was time for a career change.

Ralph Barrera (M.A. '10)

As a PTSD patient, he says, he began to think about the role that mental health issues play in law enforcement—issues that affect not only the offender, but victims and police professionals as well. It was this new perspective that led to the next chapter in his life—leaving his 14-year LAPD career, returning home to Florida, earning a master’s degree through The Chicago School’s online Applied Forensic Psychology Services program, and becoming a youth advocate and court liaison.

“Having been diagnosed with severe and persistent mental illness myself, I have a great deal of insight into what my clients are going through,” he says.

“When I advocate for a defendant in Felony Mental Health Court, my goal is to find a balance between the need to keep the community safe and the need to find the appropriate placement of my client back in the community.”

Barrera’s Chicago School degree brought together a growing interest in psychology with his extensive police experience, which included years as an undercover officer and assignments to vice and anti-gang units. In his current job with Archways Mental Health Inc., in Broward County, Fla., he advocates for youth who have committed felonies, makes sure his clients “don’t fall between the cracks” of the legal and mental health systems, and works with Archways’ eight case managers to recommend and follow placements for the youth assigned to him.

“I monitor the case of every defendant, tracking his progress through the system, and alerting the judge when I see a placement isn’t working out as planned,” he says. “I’m not there to take sides, or to work for a conviction or to have the case thrown out of court.

Whether my client is a 23-year-old billionaire arrested for possession or an indigent alcoholic who thinks he lives in the Eiffel Tower, I’m just there to make sure that everything that’s supposed to happen happens.”

He credits The Chicago School’s online degree program with giving him the confidence to reinvent his career in a way that took advantage of his experience and interests, and provided him with the skills to combine the two.

“In some ways, it’s not so different from what I did as a police officer,” he says. “It’s a softer approach to helping people.”

The changing world we live in today requires not only new skills, but a new way of thinking. A struggling economy and increased global competition are just some of the factors accelerating the need for a more innovative, interdisciplinary approach to addressing economic, social, political, and personal challenges. The innovators who will become our future leaders will be able to look at an issue from a variety of perspectives, unencumbered by the narrow constraints of a single discipline or system.

TCSPP President Michele Nealon-Woods

The collective wisdom of The Chicago School faculty, staff, administrators, and alumni reflected in the institution’s new strategic plan recognizes that a more interdisciplinary approach will foster important new competencies in our graduates. So it is only fitting that this issue of INSIGHT focus on the intersection of psychology with another major discipline: the law. We see evidence of the interpenetration of these two disciplines everywhere: in business settings and employee relations, in clinical settings, in global conflicts and trauma, and, of course, in the criminal arena.

Through an exploration of the criminal mind and the factors that lead to criminality, a thought-provoking faculty conversation about recidivism, and an up-close look at our innovative forensic psychology programs, this issue spotlights just a few of the areas in which our faculty and students are changing the game—both gaining and contributing to the critical body of knowledge and expertise at the intersection of psychology and law.

As The Chicago School continues to innovate—through creative extracurricular programs that bring drama and storytelling into the clinical training mix; to international trips that incorporate art, history and modern practice; to interdisciplinary concentrations and degrees—we hope you too will be inspired to explore your career, your community, and the world with a broader lens.

Please keep in touch and bring us back your ideas, your experiences, and learning. As always, your insight informs and improves all of ours.

Dr. Michele Nealon-Woods, president of The Chicago School (left), listens to the discussion with Maj. Gen. William Enyart, adjutant general of the Illinois National Guard, and Dr. Jill Biden, second lady of the United States.

Dr. Jill Biden, second lady of the United States, visited The Chicago School’s Chicago Campus June 16, meeting with representatives of the Illinois National Guard, The Chicago School, and the community to discuss the emotional and psychological impact that military deployment has on armed services personnel and their families.

The event was part of the Joining Forces Initiative, led by First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Biden to mobilize all sectors of society to give service members and their families the opportunities and support they have earned.

Dr. Biden participated in a roundtable dialogue that included high school teachers and community partners involved in educational outreach, church pastors, community college representatives, and private foundations that support veterans’ initiatives. The group discussed services that are available to service members and veterans in Illinois, including the Home Again Project that The Chicago School—in collaboration with the Institute for Therapy Through the Arts and the National Guard—developed to provide support for children whose parents had recently returned from overseas deployment. Through Home Again, graduate psychology students worked with expressive arts therapists, using music, art and drama to help children deal with their anxieties and fears.

The project was developed and overseen by the late Dr. Ted Rubenstein, a Chicago School alumnus and member of the Clinical Psychology faculty.

To his parish in the Hispanic Chicago neighborhood of West Humboldt Park, he is known as Father Tom. But to patients at Saints Mary and Elizabeth Medical Center, where he works with cancer and AIDS patients as coordinator of the Supportive Care Program, he goes by Doctor Tom.

The different monikers underscore the dual roles that the Rev. Dr. Thomas N. Pelton balances as a priest and psychologist.

Rev. Dr. Thomas N. Pelton (Psy.D. '91)

Named the 2011 Distinguished Alumnus of the Year at The Chicago School’s Commencement Ceremony on June 10 for embodying the values of engagement, diversity, and social justice, he reflected that his two divergent professional paths have helped his practice as a “wounded healer.”

“In both professions we practice the healing arts and disciplines, albeit wounded ourselves,” he said. “Mysteriously and powerfully, many of us discover that the healing of others takes place in parallel with our own healing, that our wounds can become a blessing as they inspire our wisdom and compassion for the wounds in others.”

Dr. Pelton’s own path to religion began while growing up in a strong faith-filled family on the Southwest Side of Chicago. He was ordained by the Archdiocese of Chicago in 1966 and has served in 10 parishes around the city, from East Englewood on the South Side to East Rogers Park on the far North Side to his current position at Maternity BVM Parish on the West Side, where he has been for 15 years.

But a desire to increase his options and become more independent—along with conversations with fellow priests and Chicago School alumni Rev. Drs. John Keenan (Psy.D. ’83) and John Lynch (Psy.D. ’82), and the first dean Allan Rosenwald—led him to pursue a Psy.D. in clinical psychology and join the school’s founding class in 1979. “I had a drive for more self-understanding and more understanding of what was going on in the world around me,” he said.

After graduating in 1991, he worked at Loretto Hospital’s Addiction Center and completed his post-doctoral internship at St. Elizabeth Hospital. For the past 17 years he has worked at Saints Mary and Elizabeth Medical Center, where he focuses on palliative care.

“It’s not just end-of-life care though,” he said. “We’re dealing with patients from the onset of diagnosis. That fits well with ministry. Some patients are desirous of a religious component and others are not. In the parish, I’m able to do referrals for psychological services, so my work has broadened both professions.”

With his parish confronting issues like immigration, gang violence, and affordable housing, Dr. Pelton draws on his deep social justice roots to work with nonprofit organizations to help meet the needs of the community—he cofounded the precursor to the Interfaith Leadership Group of Cicero, Berwyn, and Stickney; walked in the Equal Rights March; protested the segregation of the Lewis Towers swimming pool in the 1960s; and has participated in several other demonstrations and rallies through the years.

But Dr. Pelton doesn’t always find it easy to navigate between his two worlds, with patients, colleagues, and parishioners. “If I go into a room (at the hospital) with a drug patient who has HIV, he’ll turn away from me. But if I tell him I’m a priest, it can open him up. It works the other way too. Both have powerful projections.

“Historically, there was a great antipathy between the two professions,” he adds.

“Psychologists thought religion and spirituality were delusional and pathological. And it can be, but in more contemporary times, there are groups in both professions that see an affinity between the two.  However, there are still people in the field who don’t have trust in the other.”

He also encounters many people who believe the two professions fit well together and ultimately values the axiom that “grace builds on nature.”

“To live a fuller psychological life, one needs to deal with the eternal questions and universal energies and relationships,” he said. “To live a fuller spiritual life, one needs to deal with one’s psychological demons and potentialities.”