Comments on: Returning to an old course on dysfunctional families

By: Mermade

Mermade — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 23:20:53 +0000

I find myself thinking, “What would Bradshaw say about ____” to virtually everything that goes on in my family and relationship now. Jeremy and are so thankful that we had the opportunity to take this course together, as it has greatly influenced how we handle disagreements, how we talk about our past, how we interact within out own families, etc. in a positive way - though I am still a 6 out of 10 at this moment on applying all the lessons, I think.

Anyway, he and I had fun discussing the dysfunctional motifs of this article today: http://www.biblicalwomanhood.com/article12.htm

You gotta check it out. Whew!

By: Hugo

Hugo — Fri, 19 May 2006 11:20:21 +0000

We’re still working out details, Mermade — fall 2007 looks like the time.

By: Mermade

Mermade — Fri, 19 May 2006 01:34:19 +0000

I think I’m going to take this course too! I can already relate to it. And then I’ll hopefully be taking your men and masculinity class. And then the human sexuality block. By the way, when will the human sexuality courses be offered?

By: sophonisba

sophonisba — Thu, 18 May 2006 18:09:23 +0000

Indeed, I believe that the “nuclear family” is no family at all, but only the wreckage of a family…The workings of a large family can be simply incomprehensible to a person from a small one.

Heh. And vice versa, evidently.

By: Older

Older — Thu, 18 May 2006 17:23:11 +0000

I don’t think that idea of family-free “personal autonomy” has much history as a WASP idea. My background is mostly British Isle and I am reasonably described as a “WASP,” but I came from a large family, and I find that I have entirely different expectations of family relationships than people from small families. Indeed, I believe that the “nuclear family” is no family at all, but only the wreckage of a family. I think this different expectation of family and family obligations contributed enormously to the breakup of my second marriage. The workings of a large family can be simply incomprehensible to a person from a small one.

By: Hugo

Hugo — Thu, 18 May 2006 16:57:49 +0000

Vacula, I will likely bring in a friend experienced in cross-cultural psychology to talk about the Bradshaw book, something I did not do in the past.

By: evil_fizz

evil_fizz — Thu, 18 May 2006 16:44:48 +0000

My personal preference for the dysfunctional family story is Bastard Out of Carolina by Dorothy Allison.

By: Vacula

Vacula — Thu, 18 May 2006 16:07:37 +0000

How much time do you spend comparing the difference between the “western” norm and our actual varied traditions? I get the historicity and the literature connections and all that, but I see a big disconnect between your description of your material and your goals for your students. If you want students coming from non-white, non-western traditions to apply a western tradition to their own lives, why not include some things that show how the (white) western tradition has been challenged by other cultures in this area?

If you’re trying to have the students make personal connections but don’t give space for differences between their norms/values and the implied norms/values you’re dealing with, It may not be as applicable as you want it to be. And this doesn’t have to be a racial thing, either - I’m white and a lot of your stated ideas about individualism and the family really don’t jive with my experiences and values.

The intellectual “game” of applying theories to stories in new ways is fun and challenging, but it can also easily produce false insights if you don’t treat the original context carefully enough. Even if these theories do shed a new light on everything that’s problematic in their family, you don’t have the personal context an actual therapist would. I don’t see how you can judge how “insightful” it is for them to apply such a broad and culturally biased theory to their lives without a lot more information than an impressionable student’s personal reflections can give.

I’m sure your class allows for a much more complex conversation than you imply in your post above. But you’ve shown a lot of “blind spots” in using theories that you identify with personally to make large judgements about relationships. Given all the reservations and/or outside criticisms you’ve noted, maybe you need to consult some of your critics for ways to improve the course rather than ending with “But I like it!”

A lot has changed in the way cultures and familys exist since the time of the literature you’re using - your students, with their backgrounds, show this. Why not use a woman writer or an American writer from a non-white culture to deal with some of these issues?

By: djw

djw — Thu, 18 May 2006 15:28:33 +0000

It bugs me sometimes that more people can’t agree to disagree about what the goals of college teaching are. We have no problem respecting diversity of teaching methods, I find, but a great deal more difficulty accepting different goals. Because you incorporate a thereapudic component to your class and I don’t isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. The marketplace of courses available to students should be substantive and procedural.

This sounds like a great course, although if I were you I’d try to get your psychologist friend to come in and give a talk about how pyschologists tend to view things differently than Bradshaw. The science of psychology, like pop pyschology, is part of the western tradition.

By: Yepiz

Yepiz — Thu, 18 May 2006 13:55:32 +0000

I’ve taken several of your courses and hope to take this in the fall. Thanks for the heads up.