Psychology, Justice and Well-Being: From Amelioration to Transformation Isaac Prilleltensky Dean, School of Education University of Miami Isaac Prilleltensky Dean, School of Education University of Miami

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? Subjective Objective Integrative

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

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 IndividualRelationalOrganizationalCommunalEnvironmental Objective signs health networks resourcessocial capital low emissions Subjective Signs efficacyvoicesupport belonging safety Values as source and strategy autonomy caring participation diversityprotection 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 IndividualRelationalOrganizationalCommunalEnvironmental Objective signs+health - illness +networks -isolation +resources - lack of resources -social capital -lack of trust +clean air -pollution Subjective signs +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 dueTheir 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 ideology Ability Effort Alternative ideology Ability Effort Needs Rights Opportunities Power

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-determinationExperience 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 Proximal caring Caring Compassion Empathy Therapy Distal caring Justice Equality Liberation Social action Distal caring Justice Equality Liberation Social action

Balancing amelioration with transformation AMELIORATION Treatment Symptoms In the office Charity Individualistic Passive victim Neglects Power 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 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 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 ReactivePreventive X

Quadrant III Examples: Crisis work, therapy, medications, symptom containment, case management 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 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 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 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. 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.

10/16/2015 Prilleltensky39 Too much reaction, not enough prevention Investments in Reactive vs. Proactive Interventions in Health and Community Services (Nelson et al, 1996; OECD, 2005; de Bekker-Grob et al., 2007) Investments in Prevention: Italy 0.6% USA 3% Netherlands 4.3% Canada 8%

10/16/2015 Prilleltensky40 Ratio of Benefits to Costs in National Exemplary Prevention Models (Lynch, 2007, page 19)

How can we balance our work with individuals? Strengths Deficits DetachmentEmpowerment X

Quadrant I Examples: Voice and choice in celebrating and building competencies, recognition of personal and collective resilience 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 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 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 Quadrant IV Examples: Just say no! You can do it! Cheerleading approaches, Make nice approaches

Values that support SPEC in Practice

Values that support SPEC in Policies and Programs

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)