Most school chaplains are dangerously unqualified

Thomas Anderson says:

10:08am | 04/07/11

Ahh, we’re doing better than most of the world still. Things will never be perfect unless the whole world embraces communism or something.

Bev says:

10:32am | 04/07/11

Thomas Anderson says:10:08am | 04/07/11

Things will never be perfect unless the whole world embraces communism or something.

Good idea then just like Russia we can lock up anybody who doesn’t agree with the PC view. After all if they don’t agree with us they are clearly mad.

Thomas Anderson says:

10:49am | 04/07/11

Not just Russia, you would be better off saying USSR.

In address to your comment, I would just like to say that you seem to be unaware of the difference between “communism” and “a failed attempt at communism by the uneducated and unintelligent working class.”

Bev says:

11:35am | 04/07/11

@Thomas Anderson says:10:49am | 04/07/11

Point taken but it does not change the premise.

Thomas Anderson says:

12:45pm | 04/07/11

Yeah, I know, communism will never work because many, if not most humans will never be satisfied just being equal to people around them.

jf says:

07:24am | 05/07/11

Thomas Anderson says: 12:45pm | 04/07/11

“you seem to be unaware of the difference between “communism” and “a failed attempt at communism by the uneducated and unintelligent working class.”

This could be the ALP mission statement. “I am your intellectual better. Do as I say or you or suffer the consequences”.

“Yeah, I know, communism will never work because many, if not most humans will never be satisfied just being equal to people around them.”

The big mistake Marx made was confusing fair with equal. In seeking to make everyone equal, those that have worked hard, produced and taken risk have the rewards for their inituitive taken away and distributed in the pursuit of equalness. Hardly fair though.

It will never work because it requires absolute adherence and obeyance to the ideology. If one individual wishes to set up a new business and make a profit they will be prosecuted and persecuted. If one person wishes to offer a dissenting opinion the will be prosecuted and persecuted.

By failing to incentivize risk taking it kills productivity and progress.

So yes the USSR was a failed attempt at communism. Perhaps it was because it was attempted by your intellectual and social inferiors (ah the irony); perhaps you could suggest a successful attempt at communism or socialism. North Korea perhaps, or China, or Cuba, or oh Greece, or Vietnam, or Cambodia or most of Eastern Europe or much of war-torn Africa.

The only results that I can see from communism is war, conflict, death, lack of development and profound misery.

Thomas Anderson says:

08:58pm | 05/07/11

jf,

That’s the whole point, communism will never be successful, not because its a bad idea, but because of the human factor. For it to work, everyone has to work hard and be happy about it. There is no successful example of communism, and there probably never will be. You really need like minded, good people for it to work. Marx made no mistake, he dreamed up an idea of the communistic utopia. Horrible, horrible things happened because of it, but I doubt that he could have even foreseen that.

AdamC says:

10:11am | 04/07/11

I agree, Teddy - who would have thought you would choose chaplains on the basis of their religion? How bizarre.

Tedd says:

10:51am | 04/07/11

AdamC,
I was referring to the primary criteria for a supposedly position-of-support in a public school being based on affiliation to a single religion and a single provider in that religion.

Kika says:

12:56pm | 04/07/11

Psychology is too. It does not work for everyone. In fact, it can make things worse for some people.

AdamC says:

01:07pm | 04/07/11

Tedd, pastoral care provided by a chaplain is quite a different form of support to that provided by a professional counsellor or psychologist. They are not mutually exclusive. Many students may prefer to seek the guidance of a spiritual adviser on more quotidian matters, rather than a counsellor.

Plain Jane says:

07:51am | 04/07/11

If you are a kid why would want to be seen going to school psychologist for a problem - labels you sick straight away, and open to ridicule. A chaplain is benign and hopefully overtime has built up a rappor/trust with students even when there is no personal need. All the chaplain needs is government guidelines of when to refer. Simple enough.

acotrel says:

08:44am | 04/07/11

@Plain Jane
‘All the chaplain needs is government guidelines of when to refer. Simple enough.’
I suppose he could always pray for guidance to help him make his decision about when to refer kids for professional help?

TheRealDave says:

08:46am | 04/07/11

What a load of crap Jane. Why would kids discern between a peer going to a Religious based Chaplain over a Professionally Trained Guidance Councillor?

They wouldn’t.

Religious fear mongering again?

Sam says:

09:20am | 04/07/11

I’m a teacher, and kids *do* choose a chaplain. The chaplains at the schools I’ve worked in are (when they’re not having a chat to kids) playing soccer or cricket on the oval, digging over school gardens with kids who would otherwise lack a male role model to teach them about growing veges, serving breakfast in the tuckshop. You ‘bump into’ the chaplain, it’s nothing unusual to be seen talking to him/her. The guidance officer, on the flipside, visits for one day every couple of weeks and you need an appointment to see them. They are often tied up with paperwork concerning diagnosis of problems (Intellectual impairment status for example). The chaplains do such a great job of dealing with *most* of the problems kids bring forward, yes, they drop the ball every now and then, but tragic as it is, I’m guessing a psychologist would also have troubled students they have ‘lost’ along the way. Give us more psychologists - yes please. But please don’t take away our hard-working chaplains and leave us with nothing.

fml says:

09:45am | 04/07/11

Doesnt matter what you call them as long as they are qualified.

Thomas Anderson says:

10:17am | 04/07/11

Rossco, if you are willing to finance a competitive salary for all the counselors - put your money where your mouth is.

Until then, please refrain from saying stupid things.

Rossco says:

12:40pm | 04/07/11

Thomas, point me out where my comments are stupid. I suggested instead of the articles writers insistence that the jobs of the chaplains go to psychologists, they goto qualified youth counsellors instead. So i suggest you grow a brain yourself next time.

Thomas Anderson says:

01:01pm | 04/07/11

Rossco, if you don’t understand what I said, re-read it, think about it, re-read it again. In the end, ask someone else to explain it to you. This time around, I will provide you the kindness.

If you want to have a “qualified counselor” working full time at a given school, you have to pay them money in return for the service they provide. You also have to pay them enough money so they do not go and work somewhere else, where they would get more money. The money that is being allocated to the Chaplain program is insufficient to keep a “qualified counselor” working at each school. Someone has to pay the balance. I suggested it was you, because you suggested the idea.

I hope this explanation was detailed, and simple enough for you to understand.

Dave says:

02:26pm | 04/07/11

Thomas, I think your misinformation “script”  is showing through.  different blog—same comments from the religious right denigrating Psychologists and trained counsellors (not that they are the same thing!)

Chaplains cost how much? Look it up – it’s pretty hard to find though.
But approx $20K p.a for 2 days? so $50K pa then for a full time one?
What does a six to eight year Masters or PhD Psych start on – $56K.

What kind of hours do they work? – with preparation, case notes, follow up work out of hours with parents, teachers and other health services – and compulsory Professional Learning? At least a 12 hr day and more. Lunch breaks? Toilet breaks? “playing with the students” at Lunchtime? doing gardening?
And yes, our Psychs DO run programs, take groups and participate in the life of the school wherever they can – it’s just they are spread so thinly, and they are dealing with the very pointy end of our distressed kids! They’re often not the kids “having fun” with the Chaplain – or if they are, wouldn’t they be better getting some real help?
Our Psychs are approachable – our Psych has kids lined up outside, approaching her in the corridor – sometimes to say hello, but when they need real help, they know where to go – and it’s not the Chaplain.

Even if they do cost “twice as much”, I’d rather have one day of targeted professional support than 2 days of wandering missionary!  and so would most Principals if they were given the choice!

If we just took the $50 million that is allocated to these religious organisations for “administration”, and spend it on School Psychologists we could make a real difference to the mental health of our young people.  Imagine what could be done if the $600 million or so committed to the whole programme could be used to provide proper qualified and evidence-based professional support in our schools.

Daniel says:

02:43pm | 04/07/11

Back in the old days we had guidance counsellors, who were neutral, could be seen by anyone at any time, had pretty much no enemies and were qualified professionals without any requirement of religion in their selection. Why do we need evangelicals in the school yard doing what professionals do best?

Rossco says:

04:10pm | 04/07/11

Thomas, im still seeing loads of bile and rubbish that doesnt make any sense.

You are suggesting there are no ways of working around the issue of pay to Counsellors, even at the same cost of the chaplain program? Please shutup.

Thomas Anderson says:

04:29pm | 04/07/11

Rossco and Dave,

I can see that you two must be very convincing people. Rossco can “get around the pay problem” by convincing people to work for free. Dave can convince psych Masters and Ph.Ds to help kids deal with bullying problems instead of being prominent academics or expensive counselors.

So when are you guys getting started on the recruitment process?

dave says:

05:31pm | 04/07/11

Rossco, I would take a guess and say that Thomas is somehow affiliated with, or works for one of the religious organisations in question.  These people tend to turn up in the comments sections on articles like this and say the same things over and over again—and once they are shown to be wrong, or argued with in a rational manner (providing evidence)—they get more and more irrational and start attacking people personally -  but it’s okay to behave that way because they are doing God’s work—do you see?

Thomas—a Masters degree is now the MINIMUM level of qualification for most psychologists, and it is not unusual these days to have young Psychologists with a Ph.D. working in schools.  Yes, dealing with bullying and other issues, although in a good school this would be well dealt with by teachers and senior staff, and the policies that they would have in place which would be informed by psychological research.

Many of the people our School psychologists deal with are not able to access other services outside the school, for a variety of reasons.

Thomas, the whole point of having psychologist in schools is so that people DON’T have barriers to accessing good counselling. If we had more Psychologists in schools, they would be more accessible, and there would be no need for families to have to go outside the school to access the “expensive counsellors” you seem so averse to—although I would also say this - “you get what you pay for!”

It seems that it’s not just kids that had to deal with bullying problems online—although from Rossco’s responses, I don’t think he needs to see a counsellor.  LOL.

Tedd says:

08:46am | 04/07/11

Yes, there are other “fictional characters” to measure chappies up against, aren’t there, P-Jane?  Trouble is the writings about them are as clear as mud, contradictory, and only suitable for cherry-picking ...

Mick S says:

08:49am | 04/07/11

Sad indeed when someone comments on an article without having read it.
The only “reference” to Father Mulcahy and MASH was from the accompanying photo.
How very sad it is that troubled youth are subjected to the bizarre fantasies of those convinced by the strange fiction involving talking snakes and magic trees.
Real problems need real solutions.

acotrel says:

08:50am | 04/07/11

What ensures that the people who write the ‘government guidelines’ will be sane? Are we going to have a great big book of rules to judge kids sanity?  Will we need a ‘great big new tax on everything’ to pay for it?

Chris L says:

08:53am | 04/07/11

Jane the articles picture is not chosen by the author and I believe that is the only reference to the fictional character you’re complaining about. The article itself is referring to the subtle signs and clues of important mental issues that a trained psychologist might pick up on, but an untrained amateur would likely not.

If they weren’t chaplains and were simply neighbourhood volunteers would you be so defensive? What if they were Buddhist monks offering advice and counselling? Would you still be in favour of the program of unqualified counsellors?

TheRealDave says:

08:54am | 04/07/11

Well, given that Religious Chaplains are dedicated to, based on and 100% devoted to not only a fictional character but an entirely fictional belief system made up from parts of older faiths and designed to help prop up an Empire that disappeared into the pages of history 1600 years ago ....its quite apt when you think about it.

You keep mentioning ‘Guidelines’ Jane, but I ask, which Guidelines do Chaplains follow when they need to decide between what their faith has ordered and what the government has set down?

Easy solution - No ‘Chaplains’ in schools. No conflict of interest, no ‘moral dilemmas’, no ‘religious orders’ put before the law and child welfare. That way your government guidelines can be adhered to 100% ALL THE TIME and in full confidence.

If parents choose a religious upbringing for their kids they can send them to religious schools and or attend religious services OUTSIDE of school.

Dan says:

09:02am | 04/07/11

Well said Plain Jane. I agree.

I’ve lost two close family members to suicide and both had seen psychologists prior to taking their own lives. Maybe if they had found God it would have been different. There are NO EASY ANSWERS.

David Stokes probably just needed to vent against something religious to make himself feel important. It’s seen as an easy target for these “types” of people.
Maybe he should focus on the machine of society.

acotrel says:

09:05am | 04/07/11

@ChrisL Plain Jane is right, sin must be stamped out! The mentally ill are very suspect!  More religion is the answer.

acotrel says:

09:07am | 04/07/11

Hawkeye Pearce was a much better counsellor than Father Mulcahy.  He even used the right drug, made in his own still!

Bev says:

11:04am | 04/07/11

TheRealDave says:08:54am | 04/07/11
That way your government guidelines can be adhered to 100% ALL THE TIME and in full confidence.

Yep it really worked well with pre-school and child minding centres.
The government took a system that was affordable and worked well in the majority of cases. A mix that included community care with costs being offset by volunteer parents putting some time.  The government imposed a system which knocked out volunteer parents (not qualified) and applied so many rules and conditions (which were only going to cost 87cents a day per child) . In reality pre-school and child minding centres are being closed or sold because the real cost is $13 dollars per child per day with even more costs when the second tier rules hits applying even more RULES and government control. Every time government introduces more control and more rules generally written by people who have never actualy seen or worked in a pre-school and child minding centre or a school.  There is more red tape, PC and costs.

Dave says:

02:36pm | 04/07/11

Jane, you and Tim Mander, and Evonne Paddison, and Peter Garrett are all reading from the same script.  There is ample evidence that there is widespread breaching of the chaplaincy “guidelines”, and it’s not hard to find online. 

The guidelines say they should not be counselling, the guidelines suggest they should not be dealing with serious mental health problems, the guidelines say they should not be proselytising,...  but the chaplaincy organisations’ own documentation, and own “research” quite clearly show that these guidelines are not being followed.  The same as it shows that chaplains are not referring on—but then how would they even know when to refer on, when the majority of them have no training.

Plain Jane says:

03:31pm | 04/07/11

So some say chaplains get it wrong,  and psycho counsellors won’t get it wrong. Laugh at that one psycho counsellors never wrong? Yeah just like teachers are never crap. You bet you`ll get the lemon psycho counsellors in schooling setting, just like BER rorts etc

Matthew says:

03:40pm | 04/07/11

Hey TheRealDave, as you (and myself) are a staunch disbeliever in religion, I assume you’re also a believer in science.

Can you please prove with 100% conviction that religion is “100% devoted to a fictional character”?  I strongly disagree with the views of religious people but had an epiphany a few months ago while my friend and I were arguing about the “religious nutters” meanwhile totally offending my other friend.

Logically speaking, God doesn’t exist, it makes no sense but until there’s evidence against it then you can’t rule it out.  Not to mention that all religious people aren’t devoted to their “God” or anything else, they just believe that you should love one another.

Take a second to have a look at all religious people and remember that there’s plenty of atheists that fit into a few of the same categories as religious people:

- Nutters
- Misguided followers
- Rude and arrogant idiots that shoot the other (a)theists down with no real proof purely because “they are right”.
- Accepting of all

I used to fit category 3 as you do but I’m trying to better myself and realise that no matter what you won’t change people so why try?  Just accept them and tell them to shut their traps around you if they don’t want to be flamed.

Dave says:

04:10pm | 04/07/11

Jane,  sorry I was trying to respond to your comment about all that we needed was the “guidelines”.

But you just keep pushing that Barrow— “it’s only isolated incidents” and when that shown to be patently nonsense, we’ll try the other script “well other professions have their dodgy practitioners too”.

Try google, you might find the NSW Coroner’s report, and some of the associated information, you might find the Ombudsman’s report in the NT, you might find the newspaper reports about the Chaplain who was “inappropriate” with a 12 year old boy, as it was reported on the 730 report last week.

If you keep reading, you might get the impression that these incidences are the tip of the iceberg.

Oh, and there was at least one state where there were no BER rorts, because the whole process was regulated—a good word that.

killerbee says:

05:42pm | 04/07/11

Plain Jane
When your guidelines are produced and they recommend giving contraception advice to a young sexually active teenager and the chaplains religious beliefs differ, what happens then?

MarK says:

09:11am | 04/07/11

They are too busy aspiring and climbing the ladders of opportunity and stuff.

Climate change is also a big issue. Thinking of the kids takes up most of the time these days.

acotrel says:

09:26am | 04/07/11

They are probably busy stressing and drinking, from the worry of their mortgages, and their useless jobs?

Dieter Moeckel says:

10:38am | 04/07/11

Unfortunately there are few mums home after school to cope with the little problems a child encounters every day at school.
To pay for the mortgage and the school fees and the swimming lessons ...
Mums work ... and so do dads. That’s what parents do.
Children once went to Sunday School which reinforced the mores, morals and ethos of the community in which they lived, as did extended families - the wayward uncle was always a good example of what goes wrong if you don’t ...
Provided the Chappy does not proselytise they provide an excellent third party opinion. Right is right whatever religion you follow [just in case you want to use Islam. Islam is a Judaic religion just 600 years younger than Christianity]
In the end it is up to the Principal and the staff to decide the precise role of the Chappy and the Principal’s oversight is imperative as it is for all the school’s staff.
The Chappies I’ve met are sincere and dedicated people doing a great job for f… all money, and I’m an atheist.

Dieter Moeckel says:

10:38am | 04/07/11

Unfortunately there are few mums home after school to cope with the little problems a child encounters every day at school.
To pay for the mortgage and the school fees and the swimming lessons ...
Mums work ... and so do dads. That’s what parents do.
Children once went to Sunday School which reinforced the mores, morals and ethos of the community in which they lived, as did extended families - the wayward uncle was always a good example of what goes wrong if you don’t ...
Provided the Chappy does not proselytise they provide an excellent third party opinion. Right is right whatever religion you follow [just in case you want to use Islam. Islam is a Judaic religion just 600 years younger than Christianity]
In the end it is up to the Principal and the staff to decide the precise role of the Chappy and the Principal’s oversight is imperative as it is for all the school’s staff.
The Chappies I’ve met are sincere and dedicated people doing a great job for f… all money, and I’m an atheist.

Dieter Moeckel says:

10:38am | 04/07/11

Unfortunately there are few mums home after school to cope with the little problems a child encounters every day at school.
To pay for the mortgage and the school fees and the swimming lessons ...
Mums work ... and so do dads. That’s what parents do.
Children once went to Sunday School which reinforced the mores, morals and ethos of the community in which they lived, as did extended families - the wayward uncle was always a good example of what goes wrong if you don’t ...
Provided the Chappy does not proselytise they provide an excellent third party opinion. Right is right whatever religion you follow [just in case you want to use Islam. Islam is a Judaic religion just 600 years younger than Christianity]
In the end it is up to the Principal and the staff to decide the precise role of the Chappy and the Principal’s oversight is imperative as it is for all the school’s staff.
The Chappies I’ve met are sincere and dedicated people doing a great job for f… all money, and I’m an atheist.

mike j says:

10:50am | 04/07/11

Obviously, heterosexual parenting has failed, and all kids should be handed over to married homos.

Harquebus says:

01:20pm | 04/07/11

Cocoon as much as they can.

Thomas Anderson says:

10:33am | 04/07/11

“Now that works out at 604,462,909,807,315,000,000,000 direct ancestors for each of us! There isn’t even a name for a number that big!”

There is no name for six hundred and four sextillions? Maybe if you had a Chaplain when you were at school, he could help you out with your crippled mathematical lexicon.

iansand says:

10:43am | 04/07/11

Is that how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?  As far as I know that is the extent of theological calculation.

impossible soul says:

10:58am | 04/07/11

“Now let us consider that for a moment! If there is, on average, a generation every 25 years i.e. 4 per century and we go back just to the time of Christ, then that gives us just 80 generations. Now that works out at 604,462,909,807,315,000,000,000 direct ancestors for each of us! There isn’t even a name for a number that big!”

I suspect you need to check your facts and reasoning again. I don’t know where you get your maths for that incredibly large number. Even the most generous of estimates posit that in the history of the Earth, only some 200 Billion humans have been born.
Secondly, people share a lot of common ancestors, especially the further you go back, so even if the number you quoted was even close to being correct, it wouldn’t work out for ‘each of us’.

When you can be this wrong, it makes me skeptical on how you can be so sure of your position and what other parts might be ill-thought out and unconsidered.

Tedd says:

11:45am | 04/07/11

Yep,
Double your ancestors every generation ...
4 (-5) generations/century ..
Only have to go back 21 gens to get 1 million ancestors - 2^(21)
= 500 yrs

Go back another 500 yrs ~1,00AD
<=> 1,000,000,000,000 (a trillion)

Go another 1,000 years ....

fml says:

12:19pm | 04/07/11

Tedd,

You probably need to factor in the average life expectancy also the death rate and individual factors, such as family members dying at an early age.

Just doubling the number would be a massive exaggeration.

impossible soul says:

12:53pm | 04/07/11

“Yep,
Double your ancestors every generation ...
4 (-5) generations/century ..
Only have to go back 21 gens to get 1 million ancestors - 2^(21)
= 500 yrs

Go back another 500 yrs ~1,00AD
<=> 1,000,000,000,000 (a trillion)

Go another 1,000 years .... “

This is perhaps too simplistic to be anywhere close to accurate. Sure it’s an easy misstep to make. I have 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents and so one. However if you follow that reasoning you get to astronomically high numbers that are just impossible, and that is where this reasoning falls over. You can’t trace back from child -> parent. It has to be parent to child.
Otherwise the earth’s population is actually decreasing. All this talk about overpopulation is fallacious and we shouldn’t worry because 500 years ago, there were a trillion direct ancestors alive just for ol’ Tedd.

If you truly believe this, then I have this great money making idea for you. You sign up 3 people and they sign up 3 people and so on, and after a few generations of sign ups, say 21, you’ll have a trillion people under you, and they can pay you $1, you’ll be a trillionaire…

Tedd says:

01:06pm | 04/07/11

fml,
Those things do not have a bearing on what age a person has a child. 

As far as doubling the number, that’s the reality -
2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents,
16 gt-gt-g/parents, etc, etc.

The number at 21 generations is 1,048,576, and each of those ancestors had 2 parents, right?

Tedd says:

01:15pm | 04/07/11

impossible soul,
I did not say there were 1mill ancestors *alive* @ 500 years,
or 1bill ancestors *alive* @ 1,000 yrs ...

The point is there will be overlap and diversity.  There has to be.

The reality of the numbers of each ancestry for everyone on earth is that we are all inter-related, and why we all have royal ancestors LOL.

Proposing a pyramid scheme on your false interpretation of reality, sneeringly, doesn’t work. Do the math yourself, properly.

Harquebus says:

01:28pm | 04/07/11

“imposing religious nonsense upon childen” are your keywords Jack. I totally agree with you.
For the math, I used 2 to the power of 80. 2 parents, 80 generations.

marley says:

01:28pm | 04/07/11

Yeah, but since every last one of us carries the mitochondrial DNA of a single African woman from a couple of hundred thousand years ago, I’m thinking maybe there’s a flaw in the assumption that we all have billions or zillions of different ancestors -  I suspect an awful lot of our ancestors did not have 8 great grandparents, for example, but maybe only 6 or 5 or 4.

Thomas Anderson says:

01:31pm | 04/07/11

Please consider a shorter life span for previous generations. Also, as mentioned, accidents etc.

impossible soul says:

01:55pm | 04/07/11

Tedd,
this is what I was inferring, that while the math might seem simple and straight forward to work out how many ancestors you have, in reality it won’t hold up, due to common ancestors (marrying relatives etc.)
You’re right we’re all inter-related to some extent or another.

You’ll find occurences of the same unique person occupying multiple paternal or maternal roles as you go back through the generations. The further you go back, the more roles a unique person is likely to occupy. Does this mean you can count the same unique person several hundred times as when they appear in multiple gt-gt-gt-gt-gt-etc-g/parents roles. I’d disagree, if it’s the same unique person, you can’t really double up on the total ancestry count. It’s a little misleading, which is what I was arguing against. 1000 years ago, there just simply weren’t a trillion unique individuals alive.
So, while it might seem like a simple theoretical case of just doubling the number for each generation, in reality, it’s actually much more complicated to work out how many actual unique ancestors you or any one person may have.

To suggest the the former simple solution, obfuscates the reality of situation.
I suggested the pyramid scheme, sneeringly, because it’s a similiar example of a system, that while sounds good in mathematical theory. can’t work in reality with the nature of our population.

impossible soul says:

02:03pm | 04/07/11

” For the math, I used 2 to the power of 80. 2 parents, 80 generations.”

Unfortunately, it’s not that simplistic when dealing with population history. To suggest so is misleading, and also incorrect.

Dave says:

02:40pm | 04/07/11

ha ha—Jack -  I think your mistake was trying to use rational argument against the religious right. As a consequence they have completely hijacked your thread with a bogus discussion not related to the topic.

Thomas Anderson says:

02:49pm | 04/07/11

All that is happening is people are pointing out a few ridiculous claims made by Jack, which hint at the fact that Jack has no idea what he is talking about, thus invalidating his entire comment.

Tedd says:

02:55pm | 04/07/11

impossible soul (01:55pm(

Cheers, I realised - after I quickly fired off - what you were saying.

The ancestral positions/roles exist to the numbers I propose but, as you say, of course many person will fill more than one role - there have not been that many humans on earth at any one point in time - 1,00, 1,400, or 2,000 yrs ago.

The divergence becomes a convergence, eh “cuz” ...

Mahhrat says:

02:59pm | 04/07/11

Uh, clowns with the big numbers, the flaw lay in the fact that your maths presumes that we all have a unique set of ancestors.

My brother and I share the same parentage, so counting both of us as having unique ancestors (2 ^ 80? Really?) is just silly. 

We had the same ancestors.

You lot are numerically challenged.

Someone should give me a job with numbers or something.

Harquebus says:

05:30pm | 04/07/11

@impossible soul. Thanks for that but, when don’t we have two parents?

impossible soul says:

10:04am | 05/07/11

@Harquebus

I agree that a person will always have two parents, however simply applying 2 to the power of n, where n is number of generations you want to go back, is a misrepresentation of the scenario you’re trying to portray. It is viable only on the assumption that a person never shares a common ancestor.
The reality is, this isn’t the case. The further back you go in generations, the more common ancestors we share.

Consider the other extreme scenario, (leaving all moral/ethical/genetic complexities aside) your mother and father, are also brother and sister, and their parents are also brother and sister, and this is the case for each preceeding generation. The number of of ancestors would be a simple multiple of 2. (2x80). (in the case of 80 generations. )

So the number can fall anywhere from my extremely twisted example to the theoretical notion that everyone has unique ancestors for every generation. History has shown unfortunately, that it’s probably closer to my example, and we’re all very inter-related.

Harquebus says:

11:21am | 05/07/11

@impossible soul
“assumption that a person never shares a common ancestor”. Not so.
My siblings and I all have and I think it is 2^(generations-1) ancestors. So should you and everyone else.

impossible soul says:

03:37pm | 05/07/11

@Harquebus
Even your math is wrong for your false assumption.
Your total ancestors = 2^(n+1) - 2 for total ancestors where n is a specific generation up.

If you can’t even grasp the correct math, I guess it’s even more of a stretch to expect you to understand how it changes when applied to human family tree history. Go and do some external reading then come back and read above and it should all make sense to you.

Good derp to you sir!

Harquebus says:

04:18pm | 05/07/11

@impossible soul
Hmmmm. I am a generation but, not an ancestor.
2^(n-1)*2
Take out my parents.
2^(n-2)*4.
Take out my grandparents.
2^(n-3)*8

impossible soul says:

12:50pm | 06/07/11

@Harquebus

Can you elaborate on that?

Harquebus says:

04:23pm | 06/07/11

@impossible soul.
Using binary trees for the number of ancestors.
Excluding myself from the tree because, I can’t be an ancestor to myself, leaves me with two trees. Mother and father. Excluding parents leaves me with four trees starting at grandparents.
Waddya rekon. Sound good?

MarK says:

09:13am | 04/07/11

Yes.

All experiences of chaplains would have been exactly like this. Cudos for bringing to light this shameful and repetitive problem experienced by all.

Tedd says:

09:15am | 04/07/11

Nope, not changed. What happened 20+ yrs ago was what Johhny Howard was thinking when he promoted the program in the dying days of his prime ministership 4-5 yrs ago.

Sam says:

09:33am | 04/07/11

Chaplains aren’t allowed to bring up God unless students ask or invite a conversation. Our Chaplain doesn’t have a cross or any other outward sign that he is Christian apart from the label ‘chaplain’ on his badge. He does, however, offer respite from rowdy children - allowing the rest of the class to get back to learning in the classroom.

Thomas Anderson says:

10:38am | 04/07/11

Teach the children the value of good morals instead of promoting the cult of the ego? How dare they!?

Dan says:

09:15am | 04/07/11

nice to see that you even bothered to use their name, comment writer.

You should do some more research on the net, there’s plenty of examples of Chaplains mishandling issues and dealing with problems WAY beyond their expertise and plenty of examples to show that it could’ve been handled much better (I won’t clutter this comment with links or else I doubt they’d approve the comment). Sure, some may do some psych study, but most don’t, and what’s worse, they’re not checked to see if they do. A lot of the problem is their inability to recognise when a child needs to be referred to an actual professional.

A school-kid going to see a Chaplain for what could be a legitimate yet still undiagnosed mental illness is like me going down the road to my mate Jonno’s place for a medical check-up and deciding that that’s a sound idea because he’s watched all 8 seasons of Scrubs.

Tchom says:

10:05am | 04/07/11

“So again, shove it arsewards…”

Ah, the eloquent riposte of an intellectual. Well done you

Still unimpressed says:

10:21am | 04/07/11

It would be just as easy to find a greater number of “professional” balls-ups.
For every Chaplain you say got it wrong, I can give you 5 who didn’t.

Just say it - either you dont like this government and are opposed to everything they do, or you have a chip about public funding for “Chaplains” in particular
Everything else is empty rhetoric.

Thomas Anderson says:

10:41am | 04/07/11

@ Dan

You are right mate, it is far better for the child to keep it all bottled up inside of them.

Chris L says:

10:59am | 04/07/11

In that case, Unimpressed, you should admit you’re just a bible thumper incapable of admitting that there is any place where your particular religion doesn’t belong.

Unless we’re going to be reasonable and try to bring up rational points for each side rather than resorting to insults and unfounded accusations.

Remaining unimpressed says:

11:34am | 04/07/11

Chris L - I’m an atheist.. my insistence on evidence and logic makes me reject religion in the same way as I reject empty opinioneering that is “supported” by selective examples without proper definition.

Show me numbers arising from endemic failings of a Chaplaincy program, compared with failings that occur within the secular psych system, and show that the failure rates are higher, and as a direct and systemic result of the Chaplaincy program itself (because you want to kill the program, you have to show the program fails) rather than individual examples, I will believe you and argue for its closure.

But there aren’t. So the entire argument is specious, circular and invalid.

Chris L says:

11:44am | 04/07/11

Much better, Unimpressed.

Bev says:

11:59am | 04/07/11

Remaining unimpressed says:11:34am | 04/07/11
This drive to remove chaplins is more ideologically driven than the idea of supporting children.  From many comments here it would seem most chaplins don’t shove religion down childrens throats and show a caring and compassionate approach to what they do.  Most parents are not highly religious in Australia and are ambivalent about school chaplins. Unlike the highly vocal tub thumping atheists.  A piece of paper does not necessarily make you a caring and compassionate person.  We have all met highly educated idiots.

Mythica says:

12:42pm | 04/07/11

Well said Unimpressed, I am so sick of people complaining about the chaplaincy program, with no personal experience to back it up.
All the chaplains I’ve met don’t talk about God, and they are nice young kid friendly people. unlike some of the teachers who I have seen, yell at, belittle, and humiliate little children on a daily basis. I mean for every bad chaplain wouldn’t there have to be five bad teachers?
Oh and I have to say that I loved visits to my school counselor in high school, I don’t think a chaplain (if we had one) would have offered me coffee and cigarettes.

Dave says:

02:48pm | 04/07/11

and there you have it—the reason why this program of putting untrained evangelists in our schools is so well accepted—the use of the term Chaplain—and people like “Unimpressed” think that they are all church ministers—sorry mate that couldn’t be further from the truth.

...and as others have said—there is a pile of evidence of the problems with the chaplaincy program available, and easy to find if you know how to use Google .... and this is where your argument, along with Peter Garrett, Tim Mander and others about these being “isolated incidences” starts to fall down.

as for you denigrating other professionals—it’s par for the course isn’t it?

muddabikes says:

11:06am | 04/07/11

Ah Mick, it seems you may be confused. The “do gooders” that you refer to are not trying to “dismantle a wonderful system” where chaplains serve “God’s purpose” because “perhaps a few chaplains are unable to cope with the pressure of kids”.
We are trying to remove chaplains from schools because we as parents choose not to indoctrinate our children with the fabricated lies of an invented religion. Any religion, not just Christianity. Those that choose to brainwash their children from birth with these absurd claims of heaven and hell are free to do so within the structures set up for that purpose; churches, private schools etc.
Please allow us as parents who send their children to school to be educated, the freedom to raise our children without the influence of religion.

Rhino says:

12:40pm | 04/07/11

“Leave chaplains alone.  They are some of the last remnants of a Christian society which is fast disappearing and they work with the best interests of children at heart. “
Well this atheist cannot wait till the christians get the f*** out of my life and society, i struggle to see any good they do being outweighed by the bad they have done. As far as I have heard with these chaplains they are out to make more little god bots of the kids mate. Go look up the scripture union of queensland, or Access Ministries mission statement. They are dedicated to converting kids to doG, they couldn’t give a shit about the government rules as doG trumps government anyway, but they will happily take the money. Furthermore, to say this is good for the kids you need to prove that believing in an omnipotent cosmic self parenting jewish zombie who died to save you from sin, which he created, is good. BTW, lets ingore the animal sacrifice, genocide and slavery in the bible, that god condoned.

As an aside to this, a friend, a nurse, worked for a certain religious aged care group. Worked very hard for an ordinary wage and a far bit of unpaid overtime (the business in question loved to understaff things). Now he has prostate cancer and guess what, same organisation will not extend him an priveldges for treatment at their expensive, untaxed, private hospitals.

Sorry Mick, to sum up, the money would be better spent on properly trained peronnel helping kids. Not god bots wanting to make more god bots.

Kika says:

01:01pm | 04/07/11

I agree with you Mick. If they were Buddhist monks the do gooders wouldn’t have a problem at all.

Harquebus says:

01:36pm | 04/07/11

Yeah but, Mick, religion is just what I am trying to eliminate. Once destroyed, a lot of problems will just disappear.

Thomas Anderson says:

02:55pm | 04/07/11

Harquebus, out of all the obscure things you have written today, this has got to take the cake.

Religion is one of the few things left in this world that is still pure and good. I feel sorry for you if you think it’s causing any problems, because clearly, you are very misguided.

Rhino says:

05:02pm | 04/07/11

“Religion is one of the few things left in this world that is still pure and good. I feel sorry for you if you think it’s causing any problems, because clearly, you are very misguided.”

Um, are you a poe Thomas Anderson or just so seriously blinded and deluded you miss the whole nature of this article? This has to be one of the most inane comments on the punch today.

If religion is so good and pure, why does it need government funding to get into state schools? Why do so many of us have a problem with the provision of this funding?

Harquebus says:

05:36pm | 04/07/11

@Thomas Anderson. You are too gullible for me to take you seriously. No offense. Brainwashing your children with it, that’s a different story.

Kayte says:

10:37am | 04/07/11

I know.  What happened to real journalism.  It’s very common now for journalists to create an article completely from secondary sources (other peoples articles or opinion pieces) .  It’s not hard to jump in the car,  stop off at a couple of the schools in your area to check it out.  Maybe your prejudices will be challenged, maybe not.  Have you heard of interviews, statistics or case examples?  I’m really interested to know if there is a problem with the school chaplaincy program, but at the moment all I’ve ever heard on the topic is prejudiced generalisations about what the program offers society and schools.  Journalism is a serious game, ideally it assists democracy, we need you little detectives out there with the notepads and microphones - so get to it.

Thomas Anderson says:

11:18am | 04/07/11

Guys, come on… The Punch is a place where current news articles are discussed. The articles at the beginning of the discussions are more of a pre-text aren’t they? So, I guess it’s alright to put unverified or purely opinionated things in there. Chill mayne.

dave says:

04:56pm | 04/07/11

Can’t you guys use Google??

eg:
” Mr David Stokes, psychologist and author of several APS submissions to the Government about the chaplain’s program,”

(As such, everything he says IS based in evidence - much more so than most journalists one would assume! )

Took about 5 seconds to get the following

http://www.psychology.org.au/Content.aspx?ID=3748

http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/APS-submission-chaplaincy-18032011.pdf

http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/APS-Submission-School-Chaplains-July2010.pdf

.. and—“Cranky” - it seems that you are stating that the chaplains are providing a youth mental health service.?  I think that’s the basis of the article, saying that we shouldn’t have people messing with our children’s mental health when they don’t know what they’re doing.

Actually, no one knows what they’re doing—because they’re not regulated, they don’t keep casenotes (I’ve been told that they are actually told not to keep any notes - and that came from a Chaplain) and there is very little oversight, and they are not formally responsible within the school structures.

JM says:

12:55pm | 04/07/11

School counsellors are qualified psychologists who are also experienced classroom teachers. In addition, classroom teachers have educational psychology as part of their training and are familiar with some of the manifestations of learning and behavioural problems which often indicate psychiatric illness. Many teachers also undertake training in welfare and pastoral care roles.They are also very much aware of instances where they need to refer students to professionals.

And yes, teachers must be eligible for APS membership before they can practice as school counsellors, just as your GP must be eligible for membership of professional medical bodies.

I am not aware that there is any onus on chaplains to be similarly qualified.

MarK says:

01:24pm | 04/07/11

Thanks JM but you have not really answered anything I have asked David vis cost and reference for some of his claims, not that I am doubting them but I would like to see things in the proper perspective and have Davis cut to the chase.

I think this is a cash grab and the mechanism is a “think of the kiddies” line mixed in with a good old religion is bad mkay rant. Let me specify that a bit…..christianity is bad. Belting a christian is all fair game these days.

Chris L says:

02:52pm | 04/07/11

Mark, please get over the victim mentality.

We keeping getting headlines such as “ban the burqa”, “protests over proposed mosque/islamic school”, “shocking videos of halal slaughter” and such. Christianity gets a fraction of the bad press islam does and I myself draw little pictures of the Prophet Muhammed on a regular basis.

The fact is that wanting religious influence out of state run schools is not an attack on Christianity. It is simply a push to recognise that the religious stance of children is up to them and their parents, not the state.

Of course this argument targets Christianity, because the state isn’t funding a program for Islamic muftis to work at schools. Can you imagine the outrage if that was ever attempted?

dave says:

03:58pm | 04/07/11

Mark, that stuff is all available online and it has been discussed in the media for some time.  But nice try at undermining - especially by trying to accuse the Psych Society of self-interest—they don’t get any benefit out of putting this point, unlike the right wing evangelical churches who now have control of around $600M of our taxpayers money. 

There is also some data online looking at comparative cost.  The chaplaincy program including what has been spent, and what has been promised for the next two or three years was about $465 million, and Julia Gillard announced another $222 million. The $50 million of that original mount was purely for “administration” (read: lobbying and media saturation - go and have a look at the Scripture union QLD website if you want to get an idea of where all the money’s gone).

Chaplains cost how much? Look it up – it’s pretty hard to find though.
But approx $20K p.a for 2 days? so $50K pa then for a full time one?
What does a six to eight year Masters or PhD Psych start on – $56K.

Of course, Psychologists will do a better job—they are actually trained and registered.  I’m not sure if you realise—but from what you said you’re indicating that you believe the chaplains are doing counselling—I thought they weren’t allowed to do that?

Yes, Mark - School psychologist deal with just about everything—including crisis of faith sexuality, BSS splitting up being dumped, and a lot more serious mental health issues.  That’s the point—how would you know the difference if you don’t have the training and experience?  how would you evaluate a distressed child in front of you and provide them with the best assistance, if you don’t know how?

The point of the article to me, is that the children of our nation deserve the best care, the best intervention, and even more so when we are talking about the 25% or so that will experience mental health problems, and are vulnerable. They’re not adults—they can’t discern the difference, they can evaluate what they might need to do to get help, or whether that help is really good help or not!

If you want to be better informed—maybe go on to the psychological Society’s website like I did and have a look at all the guidelines have related to those issues you mentioned.  and when I say guidelines, though quite lengthy documents based on research evidence.

I hope that’s enough “help” for you—but maybe you should go away and do some reading yourself—Google is a wonderful tool it’s amazing what you can find.

MarK says:

08:23am | 05/07/11

Thanks heaps dave.

Not one link.

It appears to be all about self interest then.

I appreciate you clearing this up.

So what we have is another story from a self interest group spruiking for more taxpayers money. At least they are not overtly christian, makes it fine I guess.

I took one bit of your advice. I went to google and typed in boobs. Thanks for the tip. Wonderful tool. I might search for more stuff later.

PS Re-read this bit you wrote

“they don’t get any benefit out of putting this point, unlike the right wing evangelical churches who now have control of around $600M of our taxpayers money.”

You cannot see the self interest in that?

Dave says:

10:20am | 05/07/11

Hello Mark,—I think you are just trolling for responses, as you haven’t actually provided any cogent arguments for your statements

I am not the author of the article, but if you have a look above your original question—I have provided some links that I found quite easily using Google.  I assume that within those documents there would be references to other source documents.

I don’t know how you infer “self-interest” because somebody on a comments blog doesn’t provide you with some research that you should do yourself?

How about you provide some links to something that proves some of your statements?—Or disproves what the article said.

Mark, you do understand that the money for the chaplaincy program is controlled by, and goes to the evangelical churches who run the show?—$50 million of this is for their administration costs.

The author above is suggesting that services would be better provided by Pychologists in schools - Yes, the logical inference is that we need to spend money on having more of this valuable service in our schools - for the well-being of our young people—I can’t see where the author gains any benefit from this?

MarK says:

10:54am | 04/07/11

So you are against Islamic schools then?

And Catholic?

Luce says:

11:20am | 04/07/11

If they’re privately funded, go for your life. That said, I probably wouldn’t choose to send my child there.

Publicly funded schools, however…

Chris L says:

11:24am | 04/07/11

I suspect Luce was talking about public schools, MarK, as this is where the chaplaincy program comes into use. Public schools are run by the state and the state is not supposed to endorse or impede religion except where the rule of law is involved.

Of course we are all aware the government actually does get involved in religion, specifically judeo-christian. For example female circumcision is illegal (rightly so!) but male circumcision is not.

If we allow the government to continue involving itself in religious matters then there is reasonable potential for our country to start imposing religious interference of a kind you wouldn’t like (such as sharia law and mandatory niqabs, an extreme example but still possible depending on population numbers in the future).

Luce says:

10:40am | 04/07/11

They wouldn’t need to train chaplains to refer children onto psychologists if they were able to access psychologists straight away. Putting a middle man in (i.e. the chaplain) increases the risk of inappropriate or misguided advice, at more financial cost than is needed. What’s the point?

James1 says:

10:47am | 04/07/11

Despite being an atheist, I am actually quite supportive of our school’s chaplain, based on my experience with her so far.  Our daughter has been having some issues since she had a bad accident earlier this year, which has resulted in multiple rounds of surgery and ongoing, painful physiotherapy.  These events have seriously darkened her outlook on things, and my wife and I were unsure of how to deal with this effectively.  The principal called us in one day to talk about these issues, and offered us an arrangement whereby our daughter can talk to the chaplain whenever she is feeling down, coupled with regular sessions with the school counsellor, who is available far less than the chaplain as she has to service three other schools.

Only once has religion been discussed according to the chaplain - and it was instigated by our daughter, who apparently rejected all of the claims made in regard to the existence of god anyway.  As such, I don’t see the perceived evangelism actually having a serious impact on most kids.  In any case, being exposed to religion at a young age is a good thing in many ways - indeed, it was Catholic school that made me the atheist I am today.  I don’t really mind my daughter discussing the Christian god with someone more sympathetic than I - it gels nicely with my teaching her about ancient Greek religion, and our neighbours’ teaching her about their Hinduism.

My point is, given the stretched resources it seems to me that chaplains are a great, and cheap, addition to the school counselling system - that way the kids can get both formal counselling from psychologists and informal discussion of their feelings etc with chaplains.  People who worry overmuch about religious indoctrination do not give children enough credit - they can spot rubbish a mile away, and can even think for themselves, despite what some parents might believe.  You just have to give them the option, expose them to differing points of view, and let them make up their own minds.

Tedd says:

11:48am | 04/07/11

AdamC,
re “you haven’t properly instructed or trained chaplains to make [referrals]”.

... David, nor the APS, are Not in any way responsible for instructing or training chaplains, so your charge is false.

AdamC says:

01:04pm | 04/07/11

Luce, chaplains are not intended to be replacements for psychologists. You (and the author) are making a completely spurious connection between the two. If you want more school psychologists, send a letter to Juliar and ask for some. Blaming chaplaincy is a totally irrational response to a shortage of resources.

James1, I agree. Chaplaincy is part of student wellbeing, but not a substitute for professional counselling. You’d think that would be obvious.

Tedd, I realise the author’s lobby group, trade union or whatever isn’t responsible for training chaplains. My point was, if the author is sincere in his concern about a lack of referrals from chaplains, the obvious solution is to train the chaplains to identify and escalate mental health issues. It’s not rocket science.

Luce says:

01:17pm | 04/07/11

“Chaplaincy is part of student wellbeing, but not a substitute for professional counselling”

That’s the whole point. Many students think they ARE a substitute for counselling and go to them with problems the chaplains aren’t equipped to handle, presenting the risk they won’t be referred on to a professional. Either that, or there aren’t enough actual counselors available, and so the chaplain is the last resort.

The problem is our dear Julia is increasing the funds going to chaplains, when in reality it would be more beneficial to put those same funds towards more counselors. What’s the point in increasing the number of chaplains, and then needing extra funds to train them to refer on to a professional, when we could save time (which can be critical when it comes to a teenager’s mental welfare) AND money and have the counselors available as a first resort for those who need them?

Its not a spurious connection by any means, because Julia has chosen to use public money to increase the number of chaplains instead of increasing the number of counselors. Surely that’s not so difficult to see..?

AdamC says:

01:52pm | 04/07/11

“Many students think they ARE a substitute for counselling ... “

I don’t agree with this, and suspect it is being put out merely to justify making the unreasonable connection between chaplaincy and (psychological) counselling. If the author had any sort of direct evidence that this alleged confusion is widespread, one imagines he would have mentioned it in his article rather than relying on case studies (which seem not even to be directly related to school chaplaincy).

In summary, I simply don’t buy this ‘chaplains or counsellors’ argument. It seems like a transparent attempt by the militant atheism lobby to squeal about governments failing to attack established religion.

James1 says:

02:20pm | 04/07/11

At our school at least, it is made absolutely clear (often by the chaplain herself) that the chaplain is not a substitute for counsellors, to both the parents and the children.  Furthermore, the counsellor and chaplain work very closely together, and the counsellor makes sure that the chaplain is aware of when she is reaching her limit.  So far, at least outside the evangelical atheist-type parents, everyone is satisfied that those boundaries are respected, and the chaplain has never tried to cross them.

Interestingly, an after school dance lesson teacher was told her lessons would no longer be allowed for telling the kids they would burn in hell if they didn’t go to church, but we have had no such problems with the chaplain.

Luce says:

02:32pm | 04/07/11

AdamC, you failed to address the point that children often go to a chaplain because a counselor isn’t available, which happens more often than you seem willing to admit.

The whole point of the argument is the need for counselors is greater than the need for chaplains, yet the government won’t address this because of people like yourself who claim its an attack on organised religion, which derails the debate completely.

The issue being addressed is the mental well being of school kids, not the protection of religion in public schools.

AdamC says:

03:00pm | 04/07/11

Luce, I still don’t understand why you single out school chaplaincy as an unnecessary extravagence instead of all the myriad other things governments spend their money on. Why is it the chaplains’ fault that there aren’t enough counsellors?

That is the reason I regard this article as an attack on religion - because there is no obvious connection between the existence of school chaplains and the shortage of school counsellors. Rather, this seems to simply be an exercise in attacking the value of chaplains on the basis that they are not psychologists. But nobody ever argued they were psychologists!

Bev says:

11:22am | 04/07/11

They would say that wouldn’t they.  When they are busy inventing new disorders and syndromes for actions which fall within the range of human emotions and actions I would say there is quite a deal of self interest involved.  The latest sexual addiction.  So if you have a high sex drive,  have lots of affairs etc you have a syndrome in which one of our most basic drives is labeled psychotic.  How about he/she is a cad who is more interested in the own gratification and is not worried about those they hurt or has enough money to indulge their desires. Happens in lots of situations not just sexual ones.

Luce says:

12:25pm | 04/07/11

Bev, psychosis is a loss of contact with, or an inability to perceive reality. A high sex drive, or sex addiction, is completely unrelated to that.

Religious beliefs, on the other hand, are completely irrational. The only reason they are perceived as normal is because so many people hold these beliefs.. that doesn’t make them any less irrational, however.

Grant says:

12:50pm | 04/07/11

@ Bec

Hmm, I wouldn’t exactly equate sexual addiction with the belief in an invisible creature who they can communicate to through their mind.

If a person went to a mental health care professional and exhibited symptoms of being able to communicate to an invisible being.

I would imagine this could border on delusional schizophrenia, which the American Psychological Association’s DSM-IV describes as involving a profound disruption in cognition and emotion, assigning unusual significance or meaning to normal events and holding fixed false personal beliefs.

Thomas Anderson says:

12:54pm | 04/07/11

Just because you have a bias towards something, it doesn’t mean it’s true and all other view points are “irrational”.

Believing that this world, with all its complexities came about as a result of a number of accidents which approaches infinity, that’s truly irrational.

Bev says:

01:09pm | 04/07/11

Luce says:12:25pm | 04/07/11
Point taken however what is normal?  Some report having sex once a year others report 4 day. Most obviously lie somewhere in the middle.

I see religion in two ways.  For many civilizations state based religion was an arm of government control.  For a secular state that doesn’t happen.  A majority of people have a need for something outside themselves for things which they cannot control or understand.  Call it what you may but it seems to be built in to humans. Every society from modern to primitive has invented some sort of religion. People like to feel somehow it does not all end at death or the dead somehow keep an eye on the living. There are many conversions on death beds to this belief.  It actually takes a strong sense to accept as I do that when I die I really am gone and that my only hereafter is what people know of my works or memories (good/bad) of me. What happens to my body means nothing to me although it may well be important to others. Something many athiests have a hard time accepting in their deepest thoughts despite what they say.

Luce says:

01:45pm | 04/07/11

Bev, I agree with most of that. Religion developed really for two reasons (aside from government control, which is also valid), one being a way to explain what people did not understand, and two as a comfort that when we die, we actually just go to another place.

I don’t see this as built into humans, but I do see it as a natural part of our development as a species. We began as simple creatures, and as our brains developed, we started to look for explanations and reasons behind things, which was the start of spirituality, and of attributing now explainable processes to the gods. Yet, as our collective knowledge of the world around us and philosophical ability increases, it is logical that we would discard religion as a way of explaining our world, as we have concrete explanations that don’t require the hand of the divine.

That just leaves the comfort issue, which is based on emotion and fear, rather than logic and reason. Because of this, it will take longer to fade from society, however I predict sometime in the future, long after we’re gone, it will eventually die out, and people will be developed enough to accept their mortality for what it is, and even if they fear it, still not look for some future form of life to hold on to.

Luce says:

04:34pm | 04/07/11

Thomas Anderson, there’s more scientific evidence for the big bang theory than there is for god.

James1 says:

11:23am | 04/07/11

The important thing here is “in conjunction”.  My understanding of the chaplains is that they are not gatekeepers to professional counselling, nor are they intended as a substitute.  Rather, they are used in conjuction with professional counsellors.  At least, that is my own personal experience.

JM says:

01:01pm | 04/07/11

Difference is, in the Defence Forces, personnel are all adults who have some life experience and can make choices about whom they self-disclose to and what they self-disclose.

This is not the case with kids, some of them as young as 5 or 6. We are not just talking reading volunteers or classroom helpers here.

Dieter Moeckel says:

11:53am | 04/07/11

Psychological studies at QUT - with all respect that always worries me.
Far too many teachers with a couple of units of Psych doing all sorts of “psychological” assessments of children in their car and come out with some dangerous results for the kids.
A clinical Psychologist need a masters and two year ‘intern practice’ before being able to practice.
Self proclaimed counsellors are another worry - Give a Chappy any time. Just the equivalent of a mature older sister/brother or other confidant to get a little shit of liver - if a problem arises I’m sure any Chappy worth their salt will report it to the Principal for further consideration with parents and Psychologists.
This is about common sense problems any mature sensible adult can solve not mentally disturbed children

Lizzie says:

12:48pm | 04/07/11

I think you missed the whole point Chris.  Psychologists don’t get clinical training until the postgradate level, and consequently can’t call themselves psychologists until all their clinical training is done.  I don’t know what kind of studies you did at QUT but unless you did 4yrs of undergraduate plus 2yrs of postgruaduate then you were not qualified for psychological practice.  And believe it or not you really need to know all that theory in order to be able to do the prac.  I guess you missed some lessons…..
As for your overgeneralisations that psychologists are out of touch and not able to apply what they learn.. LOL…ok abit bitter are you? LOL

Thomas Anderson says:

01:12pm | 04/07/11

@ Lizzie

I hope we can take all these psychs with Master’s degrees and employ them at our schools for $10 an hour. Shouldn’t be a problem at all. In fact, why would you have some petty Master’s graduate when there are more qualified people available. Ph.D should be a prerequisite.

Kika says:

01:31pm | 04/07/11

That’s why I stopped studying psychology!! It frustrated me too. I had a bad experience with a psychologist and found that the counselling sessions made me feel worse and more angry than feeling better at all.

Dave says:

03:23pm | 04/07/11

Chris, you “were” a Chaplain, and you did some undergraduate psychology, and you were seeing the children in our schools.  You don’t need to say much more than this.

It is absolutely disingenuous of you to say that a Psychologist is as dangerous as somebody unqualified - why then do they have to be registered, why then do they have to have six years minimum of training?

More concerning is the fact that people do see the Chaplain as a substitute for proper trained professionals. Maybe you should do a Google search on Alex Wildman—have a look at the information available including the coroner’s report.  It seems that he was seeing the Chaplain, so therefore was never referred to the school psychologist. 

And what happens to the children that seek help from the Chaplain (who doesn’t know what to do) in the belief that the Chaplain is able to provide them with help for their issues.  I’m sure they will pray for them nonetheless (just read the Chaplain’s own blogs if you don’t believe me), but do you think those children will be turning to seek support from others in the future?

Chris says:

04:38pm | 04/07/11

Actually I already had a ministry degree and did postgrad studies in psychology while I was a chaplain.  Part of my ministry degree involved Pastoral care studies with a qualified Doctor in psychology and director of lifeline.  I am now involved in Community Development - a “secular” community organisation.  We use trained counsellors here.  Have had psychologists here in the past but most are so out of touch with normal human beings they don’t help many people.  All of the trained counsellors here would agree that Chaplains play an important role in supporting teenagers and we get many referrals from them.  Don’t get me wrong - when I was Chaplain I refered kids to psychologists when it was needed - I had an obligation and responsibility to.  But it was always a gamble as to whether it was going to help or hinder the person and it was hard finding someone appropriate.  Yes - I haven’t yet pursued honours or masters to pursue psychology because the more I work in the mainstream community sector and more I have studied about the area of psychology the more I see problems with it.  Good psychologists are few and far between - and that’s not only my own opinion, the the opinion of those I have worked with in human services for 12 years.

dave says:

05:56pm | 04/07/11

Hey Chris,

You must have been one of the few chaplains in Australia who actually did refer the kids to the psychologist when it was needed.  Their own evaluation showed that this was the thing that chaplains did the least well at.

I am amazed that you did postgraduate psychology, and all you did was theory and statistics ??—postgraduate psychology is where you learn all the practical things to apply the science?  and you said you hadn’t done Honours or Masters?  This is confusing.

I am glad that most of the rest of the population don’t see the “problems with psychology” that you have seen. Far from it -  recent evaluations have shown that psychologists are incredibly effective at treating mental health issues, and that people are actually getting better!

So, even if you and your colleagues have a different opinion (that’s an opinion, remember) it would still serve your clients well to use the evidence-based approach psychologyt, and refer your clients to a psychologist—because the evidence shows that they actually make a difference!

Or better yet, get your organisation to support you to do your psychology degree, become a Psychologist and then you can bring your other learnings and experiences to an evidence-based framework.  You know you want to.

Chris says:

10:43pm | 04/07/11

Sorry for the confusion.  Yes, I did a Grad Dip in Psych so this is undergrad.  Course coordinator said if I want something practical I should do a Masters in Counselling or Social Work.

My point is that the key ingredient is the therapeutic relationship.  From what I have seen, Psychological training brings this in much too late so there are many people going into the profession with too much head knowledge and not enough people skills.  Working with teenagers requires even more unique skills that are not easily learned in a clinical environment.  Teenagers are ruthless and will write off anyone who they think is a tosser, no matter what their training is.

I think if Chaplains provide a therapeutic relationship to young people, and young people respond positively to that it’s got to be a good thing - even more good than a highly educated expert with an inability to form any kind of relationship with a young person.  I had so many kids say to me “I feel more comfortable talking to you than I did to the shrink” - to which I’d encourage them to open up more to professional help - often without success.

I do think Chaplains should know the basics of child development, micro skills, when to refer and some basic mental health first aid - so I’m not saying they should be totally unqualified. 

I kinda think the APA weighing in on the debate is more about protecting the preciousness of the discipline rather than working collaboratively and cooperatively with the wide range of support personel that are out there for teenagers.

There are some other tasks Chaplains do too that are being missed here - tasks other support are not qualified to do.  In my years I taught special modern history classes on different types of religious groups in Australia, conducted funerals, memorial services, gave inspirational talks on Martin Luther King, had involvement in ANZAC ceremonies, did talks on leadership, referred kids to youth groups (only if they were interested in attending one), etc, etc.

Dave says:

04:04pm | 05/07/11

Can you explain to me how that chaplains are providing “therapeutic relationships”—don’t the guidelines say that’s not their role?

You are right in one respect—working with young people does require a fairly specific set of skills, something that our School Psychologists have.

I’m also not sure what you mean by “protecting the preciousness of the discipline” ?—is that the same as “protecting the public from quackery?”

A bit like that chaplains blog I read a few weeks ago, where he and his fellow chaplains had a discussion about praying for his sick 4-year-old child to get better—not once did any of them ever mentioned seeking medical assistance for the boy.

In the meantime, you just keep trotting out your stereotypes, that anybody who might actually know what they’re doing, is a disconnected tosser who can’t relate to kids as well as you.  I wonder how you managed not to pass on this view to the children you came into contact with—especially as you said previously that you were always referring them on for professional help?

As for your list of “tasks that other support staff aren’t qualified to do” - can you show me how these are related to anything to do with mental health of our young people???? - it’s pretty much a list of anything that a certified teacher could do—and as most of our school psychologists around Australia have to be qualified as teachers as well, your argument doesn’t stand.

Chris says:

07:04pm | 05/07/11

I think the argument goes both ways.  Some point out a stereotype in Chaplains professing to connect with teenagers better than others, while others may point out that psychologists profess noone else can improve the mental wellbeing of young people as good as them. 

Yes, some others “could” do some of the other things I mentioned.  But they don’t.  They see it as an “extra” that is not part of their discipline.  However Chaplains, in a whole range of institutions, have always been involved in performing these tasks…..from the military to the police force.  These ceremonial activites, especially surrounding death, are significant events in helping people process grief.  And the reason why the teacher asked me as a guest speaker to her Yr 12 modern history class on religious groups in Australia is because she knew I had first hand knowledge about issues that other professionals couldn’t possible know. 

I think the research is fairly clear that significant adults involved in teenager’s lives create good mental health outcomes.  A relationship that is a more focused caring “pastoral” role with some training can be therapeutic for young people, even though it’s not intense counselling.  While I referred kids onto more specialised experts I felt it was important to still touch base with them at school to ensure they were still seeking support and if not, find other alternatives that would work better for them.

As for the Chaplain you refer to, while he may have had a personal blog about praying for his boy, that fact that he didn’t make a reference to medical care was probably a bit of a no-brainer (I bloody well hope so!).  There was never any talk amongst my fellow Chaplains about not seeking medical or mental health care when it was needed. 

Surely you must admit, even from a psychological viewpoint, the importance of spiritual beliefs for mental health of teenagers?  What about the research Prof Graham Martin has done in the role of spiritual beliefs in preventing self harm/suicide etc?

fml says:

04:25pm | 04/07/11

Counselling.

Thomas Anderson says:

01:20pm | 04/07/11

Cool stuff, in the meantime the children reap the benefits of a curious side effect that is having a person they can talk to about their problems.

Dave says:

03:09pm | 04/07/11

Thomas,—your misinformation “script” is showing again.  Do they actually provided to you in writing ?—I’d like to see a copy.

There is ample and widespread evidence that Chaplains are evangelising and exceeding the boundaries of their role and competence. This is even evident in their own documentation.
The idea that the societal and mental health issues of our young people can be fixed by bringing them closer to jesus, or by “having” a “listening ear,” or a “friend” is fundamentally flawed.

I want my children – and everyone else’s – to have access to properly trained professionals with the skills to address the complexities of these issues. We need $550M spent on School Psychologist – imagine what a difference that would make. Especially as $50m or more of the NSCP money is for “Administration”.

The research tells us that the first point of contact for children with mental health issues is their School Psychologist / School counsellor. There is also ample evidence of the tragedy that can follow when children can’t get access to such a service. The NSW coroner recommended a minimum ratio of one School Psychologist to 500 students in our high schools.

If the government was genuine about youth mental health, they would scrap this program and put the money into training and employing School Psychologists.

James1 says:

03:33pm | 04/07/11

“There is ample and widespread evidence that Chaplains are evangelising and exceeding the boundaries of their role and competence. This is even evident in their own documentation.”

Could you provide some links so that the effort-averse and time-poor amongst us can peruse this evidence?  I would be very interested in looking into this further.

On another matter, everyone has access to counsellors.  Before our school principal stepped in and offered us the use of the school counsellor, we had been looking into external ones.  What you are saying is that everyone should have access to them at schools.

Thomas Anderson says:

04:38pm | 04/07/11

Dave,

Yes, they “do provided to me in writing”.

“I want my children to have access to properly trained professionals with the skills to address the complexities of these issues.”

There’s plenty of professional help available for your kids access. You make an appointment, pay the fee, and access is granted, very simple mechanism. Until then, don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.

dave says:

05:08pm | 04/07/11

Hey James,
Yes, the recommended ratio of School psychologists to students is 1:500.  It is different in different states, but I believe,most are around 1:2000.  In the United States,1:250 is seen as negligent, but the role is slightly different over there.  I know that where one of my colleagues works, (in Australia) the school psychologists see between 15 to 25% of the school population in any one year, but they can’t keep up with demand, and they can’t do that kind of high-quality work that they need to be doing - just because there isn’t enough time.

With regard to documents,I have put some links up elsewhere on this page.  You might also have a look at the Facebook page “stop NSCP”:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_161101063938816#!/home.php?sk=group_161101063938816&ap=1
If you can get past (the minority of ) militant atheists, there are lots of good links to information, media, blogs, articles, and reports.

Dave says:

10:44am | 05/07/11

Hey Thomas,

Sorry about the typo—but I’m confused—did you just admit that your organisation provides you with a written script to go online and make pro-chaplaincy/anti-psychologist comments?? 

You seem to think that the solution here is an external private provider—who are you really—Jeff Kennett?

The services that School psychologists provide are usually to people who can’t afford to “pay the fee” as you seem to think.  And then you have the whole process of referral, the medical model of diagnosing assessing, parental involvement, transporting them to and from the appointment, and children and adolescents being stigmatised as having “something wrong with them”.  These are all huge barriers to our young people getting help. 

Here’s an idea:
Religious guidance and instruction is available for your kids to access—you just make an appointment with the local church, there is usually no fee, and access is granted, a very simple mechanism.  If you’re lucky, you’ll probably speak to somebody who actually does have some formal education and training in this area.

Alternatively, taxpayers should provide hundreds of millions of dollars so that evangelists, usually without any formal education or training in the area come into your supposedely non-religious, government school to access your kids whether you want them to or not ?

James1 says:

11:31am | 05/07/11

Thanks Dave - much appreciated.

Thomas Anderson says:

01:41pm | 04/07/11

Wise words by a wise person

Daniel says:

02:59pm | 04/07/11

must have had a rather odd psychologist - I’ve been seeing one for about 2 years on the GP Mental Health plan, he is a nice, down to earth guy who listens far more than he talks, and gives me practical ideas or strategies to deal with things. He has a very very sound basis in theory for everything he gives me, and it’s all worked so far. I’ve gone in that 2 years from being practically stalled in every area of my life to achieving in most and more importantly feeling more valuable as a person.

On the other hand, the chaplain at the local high school frequently flyers events at a particular evangelical church where the kids are invited to “witness the Holy Spirit at work”, and by this I mean people foaming at the mouth and having epileptic fits up the front. Kids who go and then decide not to go again get kind of rounded on by both the chaplain and the kids who are going in an immoral attempt to pressure them into continuing. The parents have complained several times to the school with no luck, there’s simply no scrutiny in the scheme. It’s sad because the chaplain at the other high school near here seems like a pretty decent bloke and the kids there speak highly of him. But you measure a system not by its strongest points but by its weakest.

Dave says:

03:04pm | 04/07/11

Kika,  I’m sorry you had the experience that you describe—if that was a psychologist that you saw, I would definitely not consider what you describe as ” modern psychology”. If you have an issue with the Psychologists practice, at least you can make a complaint to the registration board.

The “evidence” that psychology works is in the millions of published scientific papers that form the basis of Psychologists professional practice.  Further, psychologists are legally and ethically obliged to use evidence-based practices, enforceable by law through the registration act.  No such regulations for chaplains!

It sounds like you are on your way to dealing with things - I would strongly suggest you find a psychologist who is trained in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT).

With regard to children “forgiving others”  - not sure if forgiveness provides a solution for all the problems they face—in fact for many of the children I have worked with the idea of forgiveness is used by abusers to perpetuate the abuse and further confuse a victim who loves their abuser nonetheless.  Maybe something that can be “forgiven”?  when the child is grown, when they are no longer a victim and can be helped to take control of their lives.

Kika says:

05:01pm | 04/07/11

Dave - I’m fine. I dealt with things not having to cough up the $180.00 for the 60 minutes (ok time’s up - get out of here) of time spent at the counsellor. I really don’t believe in psychology. It really didn’t work for me. I have way too many issues and would like to move on in my life. If I spent another day on the couch talking about how my parents really didn’t give a sht about me I think I really will go mad.

Dave says:

10:29pm | 05/07/11

So Kika, - this was a counsellor, not actually a psychologist? or maybe it was a psychiatrist?

What you are describing is nothing to do with how psychologists work with our young people in schools. I see that you “don’t believe in psychology” - luckily, there is a huge amount of scientific data that makes your “belief” unnecessary for it to work.

I’m glad you are “okay and getting on with your life”—this is exactly what psychologists help people do - I’m sorry if your experience was different to this.

fml says:

04:34pm | 04/07/11

Cant afford counselors anyway, thats why i drink.

Thomas Anderson says:

02:59pm | 04/07/11

Do you really need a uni degree to talk to someone about their problems, say, bullying, or family issues? Perhaps, these young people are the perfect fit for the job, as they still remember going through all these problems themselves not too long ago.

Daniel says:

03:08pm | 04/07/11

I’m a Christian myself, but when I have talked to people in the church about my problems, they seem to think prayer alone will fix them and if I have problems I allegedly don’t have enough faith. (Are they suggesting the people Jesus healed, prior to their meeting him, didn’t have enough faith?) One is treated like they have some contagious disease or something. I’ve always had a much better go with psychologists and counsellors. There are good psychs who happen to be Christians - one I dealt with was an Anglican priest in his spare time! - but the “lay church” is poor at meeting these sorts of needs, and shouldn’t be inflicted on state school students who don’t have that reinforcement at home and discernment training. Discernment training is something I find both Christian and atheist parents (but usually not those somewhere in the middle) do with their kids, learn to understand when something may be true or false based on evidence rather than simply accepting everything as many kids do.

Dave says:

04:27pm | 04/07/11

Not sure what you are referring to here—some of the comments?

The article above does not ever mention that the chaplains are Christian, nor, I believed is that even mention the religious basis for them. Despite the fact that 98% of them are from evangelical Christian organisations - so, hardly “Christian bashing” is it?

quite the opposite.

fml says:

04:39pm | 04/07/11

There is only a limited number of hours in the day, the Muslim and Jew bashing is best left to the following subjects
- burka’s
- Israel - palestinian conflict
- immigration
- integration
- kebabs
- boat people, and
- Sharia law.

Daniel says:

04:55pm | 04/07/11

Are there taxpayer-funded chaplains in Jewish or Islamic schools, or for that matter in private Christian schools? The answer is no. So let’s stick to the relevant question - why should a brand of evangelical Christianity that even many Christians find repulsive be pushed onto public school kids? It shames our entire society, and believe me, there are many, many Christians who see this as more damaging than helpful in the long run.

muddabikes says:

08:17pm | 04/07/11

Praying to a mythical entity…........the ability to be doing nothing and still think you’re helping to fix the problems in society.

dave says:

04:39pm | 04/07/11

That’s a really good question, and a really complex question, with a hugely complex answer I’m sure. The people who might be other help you answer that question would be the Psychologists who are aware of the research in this area! 

There is definitely an increase in mental health issues for our children and youth.  This is a fact.

There have been many many changes to society, for example—mental health problems are not as hidden as they used to be, there is more family breakdown, there is a culture of “self” and consumerism that is disconnecting all of us from each other.  There is a constant brain overload from uncontrolled invasion of technology and media information into all of our lives—even harder to deal with if you’re a child who has never experienced anything else.

One of the issues, is EXACTLY that there ISN’T the access to properly trained and qualified help.  So you have sort of answered your own question…...

This is why so many people are so offended by this huge waste of taxpayers money.

Coop says:

04:58pm | 04/07/11

Apparently they’ve been denied the right to gay marraige

Rhino says:

05:07pm | 04/07/11

Well considering doG <insert brand of doG here> doesn’t exist the forumla would be money input into chaplain scheme divded by 0 or
$500,000,000 / 0 which equals “error” on my calculator.

dave says:

05:45pm | 04/07/11

Hey Null - I like your hypothesis. “Meh”

Only one problem—I think you’re talking about the DSM-IV - which is not actually a “vote” - and it is written by Psychiatrists not Psychologists.

And in response to your last question—yes the School Psychologist would explore questions of faith with the student, being very careful to work within their framework, and within the framework of their family and school. They would be ethically bound to seek input from an appropriate religious/denominational cleric, if there are questions relating to particular faith.

dave says:

11:21am | 05/07/11

Taxpayer,

Most of your arguments are the ones this article is actually decrying—why should Australian children received second-rate services?  The idea that the societal and mental health issues of our young people can be fixed by bringing them closer to jesus, or by “having” a “listening ear,” or a “friend” is fundamentally flawed.

See my previous posts -  six-year trained psychologists start on 56K. 

All the rural schools in some places have a regular psychology service—in many cases this is the only professional service that rural families can easily access.  And in any case, how does the rural and regional argument not apply to chaplains as well? In fact, more so if they are being paid less?

I think if it was just “sensible advice” that was needed—I would much rather have it coming from the teacher at my childs school - who at least has some idea about child and adolescent development!

There is no actual evidence showing that the chaplaincy system provides any real benefit to schools or children—apart from perhaps anecdotal evidence that they “provide an extra pair of hands” to do things around the school, or to take the naughty kids away so they don’t bother everyone. 

Conversely, there is ample and widespread evidence that Chaplains are evangelising and exceeding the boundaries of their role and competence. This is even evident in their own documentation.

Chaplaincy - “feasible”? Well, no.  “affordable”? - $465 million?  plus another $222 million—with $50 million for administration?

Affordable? How much funding was given to students with disabilities in the recent budget? How much funding does the federal government give to wealthy private schools rather than government schools?
how much money did they “save” by cutting the number of sessions with a psychologist for the very small percentage of patients who had serious mental health disorders?

In what way is this scheme “affordable”?

A simple fix, would be to keep the $50 million given to the evangelical organisations for “administration”, and allow schools to use the money to provide professional support services such as psychologists, social workers and youth workers.  Then use part of the $50 million to fund research to show what was actually effective.

A Dose of Reality says:

05:41pm | 05/07/11

LOL, LOL, LOL.

Thank you, Reality Check.

Robbles - (Degree in what?) …Rope, ….Hung!

Chris says:

06:44pm | 06/07/11

Lisa, I think they are experts because their sample size of 50 respondents demonstrates a statistically siginficant amount of the population think they are the gurus