Psychology, Justice and Well-Being: From Amelioration to Transformation

Isaac PrilleltenskyDean, School of Education

University of Miamiisaac@miami.edu

http://www.education.miami.edu/isaac

Three Questions

1. What are the current approaches to well-being and what are their limitations?

2. How can we overcome the limitations of current approaches?

3. What can psychology do?

Question 1: What are the current approaches to well-being?

SubjectiveObjectiveIntegrative

Seligman on Subjective well-being

Contribution: positive affect, positive behaviors, positive cognitions, sense of agency, strengths

Limitations: Minimizes importance of context “If you want to lastingly raise your level of happiness by

changing the external circumstances of your life, you should do the following: Live in wealthy democracy, not in an impoverished

dictatorship Get married Avoid negative events and negative emotion Acquire a rich social network Get religion”

Seligman’s Authentic Happiness (2002, pp. 61)

Seligman on Subjective Well-Being

“As far as happiness and life satisfaction are concerned, however, you needn’t bother to do the following Make more money Stay healthy Get as much education as possible (no effect) Change your race or move to a sunnier climate (no

effect)” Seligman’s Authentic Happiness (2002, pp. 61) Really? If we follow Seligman’s argument to its logical conclusion

we might think that there are a lot of people who are happy but dead!

Colombia: Happy but Dead

Highest rate of murders per capita in the world Highest number of kidnappings in the world

Colombia 5181 in 7 years Mexico 1269 Brazil 515 Venezuela 109 Severe under reporting

Colombians report highest level of satisfaction 8.31 (out of 10) in the world in the 90s

Place Matters

Income Matters for Well-Being

Education Matters

Seligman Engages in Context Minimization Error “Tendency to ignore the impact of enduring

neighborhood and community contexts on human behavior. The error has adverse consequences for understanding psychological processes and efforts at social change” (Shinn and Toohey, 2003, p. 428).

Objective well-being

Contributions: understanding of external and material factors in health, life expectancy, capabilities, and human functioning

Limitations: without understanding of psychological dynamics it cannot explain unhappiness in wealthy environments and life satisfaction in less than optimal objective conditions

Wealth matters for life expectancy (Lynch,

Smith, Kaplan, and House, 2003, Income inequality and mortality. In R. Hofrichster, R. Health and social justice, Jossey Bass, p. 220).

Income is not everything though (Inglehart and Klingemann, 2000, Genes, culture, democracy and happiness; in Diener and Suh, Culture and subjective well-being. MIT Press.

Relative deprivation matters in Sweden Marmot, 2004, The Status Syndrome. London: Times

Relative deprivation matters in UK M. Marmot, 2004, The Status Syndrome. London: Times

Male Life Expectancy by Inequality

64

66

68

70

72

74

76

78

GINI24.5

GINI31.5

GINI35.5

GINI 45USA W

GINI 45USAAA

Swed/Jap

Australia

Canada

USA White

USA Afri. Amer.

Chinese happiness and democracy: democracy is

not everything (Inglehart and Klingemann, 2000, Genes, culture, democracy and happiness; in

Diener and Suh, Culture and subjective well-being. MIT Press.

Integrative approach

Contributions: Interactionist, ecological approach

Limitations: Insufficient attention to injustice in promotion of well-being at multiple levels

Stokols on Integrative Approach to Well-Being

“The healthfulness of a situation and the well-being of its participants are assumed to be influenced by multiple facets of both the physical environment (e.g., geography, architecture, and technology) and the social environment (e.g., culture, economics, and politics). Moreover, the health status of individuals and groups is influenced not only by environmental factors but also by a variety of personal attributes, including genetic heritage, psychological dispositions, and behavioral patterns.”

Stokols continues…..

“Thus, efforts to promote human well-being should be based on an understanding of the dynamic interplay among diverse environmental and personal factors rather than on analyses that focus exclusively on environmental, biological, or behavioral factors. (Stokols, 2000, p. 27)”

Question 2: How can we overcome the limitations of current approaches? Definition of well-being Well-being is a positive state of affairs in

individuals, relationships, organizations, communities, and the natural environment, brought about by the simultaneous and balanced satisfaction of material and psychological needs; and by the behavioral manifestation of material and psychological justice in these five ecological domains.

Ecological Model of Well-Being

Sites of Well-Being

Individual Relational Organizational Communal Environmental

Objective signs health networks resources social capital

low emissions

SubjectiveSigns

efficacy voice support belonging safety

Values as source and strategy

autonomy caring participation diversity protection of resources

Justice as source and strategy

My due/Our due

Your due/Our due

Its due/Our due

Their due/Our due

Nature’s due/Our due

Ecological Model of Well-Being: Some positive and negative factors

Sites of Well-Being

Individual Relational Organizational Communal Environmental

Objective signs +health- illness

+networks-isolation

+resources- lack of resources

-social capital-lack of trust

+clean air-pollution

Subjectivesigns

+efficacy-lack of control

+voice-repression

+support-isolation

+belonging-rejection

+safety-fear

Values as source and strategy

+autonomy-lack of power

+caring-neglect

+participation-marginality

+diversity-discrimination

+protection of resources-depletion of resources

Justice as source and strategy

My due/Our due

Your due/Our due

Its due/Our due Their due/Our due

Nature’s due/Our due

Social Justice

Cardinal question of justice is whether there are

“any clear principles from which we may work out an ideally just distribution of rights and privileges, burdens and pains, among human beings as such” (Sedgwick, 1922, p. 274).

To each his or her due (Miller)

How Do We Decide What Is Due A Person, Family, Or Group?

Dominant ideologyAbilityEffort

Alternative ideologyAbilityEffortNeedsRightsOpportunitiesPower

The role of context context should determine what criterion or

criteria must be preferred in each case

In social conditions of inequality, we must accord preference to needs over ability

Context of Relative Equality

Under conditions of relative equality, where the gap between classes is not very pronounced, it is possible to favor effort over needs.

Context of Plenty of Opportunities

In a context of plenty of opportunities for everyone, it is possible that ability and effort will be the preferred choice.

Justice Out of Context

Societies aspiring to justice must seek equilibrium among all criteria

When context of inequality calls for need and equality, but culture favors effort, it’s because privileged groups benefit.

As a result, group interests that influence the choice of allocation pattern often disregard the context-specific situation.

Well-Being Justice

Well-Being is enhanced by

Justice is enhanced, and contributes to well-being, by the power, capacity, and opportunity to

Self-determination Experience voice and choice, participate in decision making

Caring and compassion

Experience nurturing relationships free of abuse

Equality and freedom

Benefit from fair and equitable distribution of resources and burdens

Question 3: What can Psychology Do? Proximal caring

Caring Compassion Empathy Therapy

Distal caring Justice Equality Liberation Social action

Balancing amelioration with transformation

AMELIORATION

Treatment Symptoms In the office Charity Individualistic Passive victim Neglects Power

TRANSFORMATION

Prevention Root causes In natural setting Justice Communitarian Agents of change Attends to Power

Changing how we work

From DRAIN Deficit orientation Reactive Alienation Individual change

To SPEC Strengths-based Primary Prevention Empowerment Community change

How can we balance our work in the community?

Collective

Individual

Reactive PreventiveX

Quadrant III

Examples:Crisis work, therapy, medications, symptom containment, case management

Quadrant I

Examples:Community development, affordable housing policy, recreational opportunities, high quality schools and health services

Quadrant II

Examples:Skill building, emotional literacy, fitness programs, personal improvement plans, resistance to peer pressure in drug and alcohol use

Quadrant IV

Examples:Food banks, shelters for homeless people, charities, prison industrial complex

Collective

Proactive

Individualistic

Reactive

Contextual Field in Helping Professions

9/7/1854…Removing the Handle

Getting To The Bottom Of It….

No mass disorder, afflicting humankind, has ever been eliminated, or brought under control, by treating the affected individual

HIV/AIDS, poverty, child abuse, powerlessness are not eliminated one person at a time.

04/20/23 Prilleltensky 39

Too much reaction, not enough preventionInvestments in Reactive vs. Proactive Interventions in Health and Community Services (Nelson et al, 1996; OECD, 2005; de Bekker-Grob et al., 2007)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Reactive Preventive

Investments in Prevention:

Italy 0.6%

USA 3%

Netherlands 4.3%

Canada 8%

04/20/23 Prilleltensky 40

Ratio of Benefits to Costs in National

Exemplary Prevention Models (Lynch, 2007, page 19)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Abeceda CPC Perry 27 Perry 40

How can we balance our work with individuals?

Strengths

Deficits

Detachment EmpowermentX

Quadrant I

Examples:Voice and choice in celebrating and building competencies, recognition of personal and collective resilience

Quadrant II

Examples:Voice and choice in deficit reduction approaches, participation in decisions how to treat affective disorders or physical disorders

Strength

Empowerment

Deficit

Detachment

Affirmation Field in Helping Professions

Quadrant III

Examples:Labeling and diagnosis, “patienthood” and clienthood,” citizens in passive role

Quadrant IV

Examples:Just say no! You can do it! Cheerleading approaches, Make nice approaches

Values that support SPEC in Practice

Domain Values

Questions

PREVENTION Caring and compassion

Does it promote the expression of care, empathy, and concern for the physical and emotional wellbeing of other human being?

EMPOWERMENT Self-determination

Does it promote the ability of individuals to pursue their chosen goals without excessive frustration and in consideration of other people’s needs?

STRENGTH Human diversity

Does it promote respect and appreciation for diverse social identities?

EMPOWERMENT Participation

Does it promote a peaceful, respectful, and equitable process whereby citizens have meaningful input into decisions affecting their lives?

COMMUNITY CHANGE Social justice

Does it promote the fair and equitable allocation of bargaining powers, resources and obligations in society?

Values that support SPEC in Policies and Programs

Values Policies

EMPOWERMENT Self-determination

Devise policies in consultation with community stakeholders

PREVENTION Health

Facilitate access to health care services through universal and outreach programs

STRENGTH Personal growth

Establish policies for teaching employment skills and for accessible recreational and educational opportunities

COMMUNITY CHANGE Social justice

Implement equitable policies and taxation laws that provide adequate resources to the poor

COMMUNITY CHANGE Support for enabling community structures

Promote policies that strengthen high quality basic community services such as education, health and income security

STRENGTH Respect for diversity

Promote inclusive work and social policies that do not discriminate on basis of marital status, gender, ability, sexual orientation, class, culture, or any other source of social power

EMPOWERMENT Collaboration and democratic participation

Promote educational policies that teach importance of civic duties and skills required for meaningful participation in democracy

It’s like Venice…..

Venice’s Lesson

“The psychotherapist, social worker or social reformer, concerned only with his own clients and their grievance against society, perhaps takes a view comparable to the private citizen of Venice who concerns himself only with the safety of his own dwelling and his own ability to get about the city. But if the entire republic is slowly being submerged, individual citizens cannot afford to ignore their collective fate, because, in the end, they all drown together if nothing is done” (Badcock, 1982)