Religious conflict? Samuel Landau, in a ‘Careers’ piece in the April edition, wrote of his challenges in integrating his two hats: that of a community rabbi and that of a clinical psychologist. He finds his rabbi-hat unwelcome in the largely secular professional environment, and his psychologisthat troublesome in the synagogue.
I must disagree with his suggestion that psychology is fundamentally in conflict with religion. Landau goes so far as to claim that his psychological training has resulted in it becoming ‘uncomfortable to preach messages that do not incorporate the complexity of lived experience’, a severe critique of religion. Additionally, he perceives the fixedmoral framework within which he must counsel his congregants as the unique predicament of the religious.
I would suggest that Landau has made a critical oversight in formulating his conclusions. Do not all clinical psychologists encounter clients who have perpetrated or are at risk of perpetrating behaviours that must be condemned? When encountered with a client who is at risk of harming themselves or others, or perpetrating an otherwise illegal behaviour, does any psychologist – irrespective of religious affiliation – have a choice other than to condemn the behaviour? By definition, all psychologists operate within a legally and morally determined framework, and whilst the psychologist operating within a religious setting may have to contend with a more highly specified framework, the essential predicament is universal.
Consequently, it is of universal importance to consider the distinction between condemnation of the behaviour itself and the individual who has perpetrated or is at risk of perpetrating it. Whilst one would expect the clinical psychologists working at Broadmoor to resoundingly condemn the perpetrated atrocities, one would equally expect that they have the utmost sympathy for the mentally ill who have perpetrated them. From a religious standpoint too, there must be room to distinguish between condemnation of a behaviour that stands in breach of religious law and the tolerance born of appreciating the specific circumstances of the individual who is struggling with that law. Indeed, the ‘complexity of lived experience’ dictates that no one can judge others for their behavioural shortcomings, without necessitating compromise in our moral judgement of those behaviours.
In prescribing an array of sometimes challenging behavioural ideals, religion calls for a life of constant striving to ever better one’s character. Self-improvement, for religious and secular alike, is a gradual process that will inevitably be marred by setbacks, and will never result in absolute perfection. Religion acknowledges the gulf between the actual selves of the less-than-perfect beings that we are and asks of its adherents that they do their utmost to strive for their ideal selves. I encourage Landau to use his psychologist-hat to approach the world ‘with a position of curiosity, non-judgement and understanding’ to empirically further his understanding of the human experience, whilst simultaneously using his rabbi-hat to ensure that he remains uncompromising in his moral ideals. Then he will be bestpositioned to assist his congregants in the process of gradually closing that gap.
Thanks for an intriguing monthly read. Moshe Atlas Student at the University of Derby the psychologist july 2017 letters president’s letter
It’s July, often a time of transition between levels of study, training, work experience, and beginning of employment. For some these are planned milestones along a cherished career path, for others, the route is more circuitous. For some pre-tertiary psychology is the start of the journey, for others it’s the undergraduate degree. Some want to push academic frontiers, some are driven by a desire to make things better for people in one of the applied branches of the profession.
How, though, do our graduates fare? The Society has just completed an analysis of the current phase of a longitudinal study that has been running since 2011. Graduates do progress towards their final career destinations in and beyond psychology 3-5 years’ post-graduation. They see significant value in their degree. They are, though, concerned about lack of practical experience and preparation for work, as well as difficulty entering postgraduate training.
We know that experiences in achieving career goals can be mixed. As a result, the Society has been looking at ways we can be more supportive of our aspiring and current graduates. For example, an initial review has suggested an appetite for a level of membership that would provide specific professional support for those in the wider psychological workforce. This could complement the work we already do accrediting training for such roles.
Our presidential task force on modernising psychological careers has workforce planning, training and development high on the agenda, and this is reflected nationally. The House of Lords Select Committee report on the Long–term Sustainability of the NHS and Adult Social Care (April 2017) called for a ten-year rolling view of workforce planning; a flexible workforce that can adapt to new ways of working; training for the future not the present; and upskilling existing staff; noting all this will require culture change, including for professional bodies!
A number of questions are posed too for our Equality, Diversity and Inclusion plan. How representative are our students and graduates of the wider population, and what actions we can take, with other stakeholders, to widen participation? Can we create coherent and streamlined pathways through the various levels of study, work roles, and training, with recognition as people build their careers? What would open up opportunity to draw the abundant supply of psychology graduates into the psychological workforce? We will be consulting with and updating the membership as work progresses.
Contact Nicola Gale at PresidentsOffice@bps.org.uk
