Go with your gut

Helena Dolny: Shift Happens

Two months ago I wrote about the body compass and the practice of self-scoring between Plus 10 and Minus 10 about how your body feels about various activities on your "to do" list. Then you think about why you scored the way you did.

The idea is that you will begin to recognise your energy levels as indicators of wellbeing and alignment between what you need to do and what taps into your best energy and talents.

"Shackles on? or shackles off?" is the instant-thermometer version of the same tool. It's quick and stunningly effective. Never mind all the wordy arguments going on in your head. Ask yourself: "What is your gut feel?"

I've witnessed executives do this in hiring situations. There's a mass of paper: CVs, psychometric tests, evidence-based interview questionnaires, and then the head of the panel turns to the interviewers and asks: "What's your gut feel about this candidate? Is there a fit?"

If you want to apply this to yourself, then imagine handcuffs -- we don't need real ones to create imprisonment for ourselves. Then check out your gut feel about something you have to do by asking yourself. "Is it 'shackles on? or shackles off?'" Do you feel manacled by the task ahead, or are you looking forward to it?

Sure, it's instant gut feel and not your well-considered thoughts deliberated on for days. But it is emerging that the speed and quality of what the gut can tell you should not be easily dismissed.

Scientific research supports the importance of gut feel. Brain research shows that both our hearts and our stomachs have brain transmitters. Those age-old phrases "I know with my heart …" and "My gut tells me …" are neuron-based and deserve respect. Brainpower, it turns out, is not purely the domain of the cranium after all.

Candice Pert's Molecules of Emotions tells of scientific research on how the chemicals inside us form a dynamic information network, linking mind and body. Jonah Lehrer's, The Decisive Moment -- How the Brain Makes Up Its Mind demonstrates that "our best decisions are a finely tuned blend of both feeling and reason".

I recently failed to apply the "shackles on? or shackles off?" test, with dismal consequences. For about six days, I was chained to a task from which I could not escape without compromising my integrity.

I'd been asked to be an assessor for students doing a masters in coaching. The official time estimate a student assignment is 90 minutes. I did this 18 months ago for the first time, and it took me about four hours an assignment.

Even if I could improve my efficiency, I did not expect to do justice to the assignment in 90 minutes. Some essays take almost an hour just on the first read-through, and I know from speed-reading classes that I read quickly. I looked at my diary and replied that I could do up to eight assignments.

I had good reasons. First, I like reading as an activity. Second, ­students often read the most recently published books and I enjoy being introduced to new texts through their essays. Thirdly, there's the ethos about "giving back". After all, I was also a student once and benefited from the feedback of an assessor.

Seven assignments arrived, which I read to get the overall sense. I prepared the feedback templates. Then I started the rereading, taking notes and typing the feedback into the templates.

My heels dragged. My energy flagged. I overshot my self-imposed deadline. I had to do serious bribery, coaxing myself: "After you've finished marking the next assignment you are allowed to … (eat chocolate, read a magazine, telephone a friend, watch TV)." You would need to design your own mini-reward list to make this work for you.

What was so difficult? I'd failed to remember how onerous it is to package the feedback. It's got to be constructive. It's got to be evidence-based. It's got to be carefully written in proper sentences. And there's the stress of deciding on the rating.

"Shackles on? or shackles off?" If I'd taken the test before sending the email about my availability, maybe I would have hesitated to press the send button. This tool doesn't mean you make polarised black or white decisions. It means that you're taking more notice of yourself and what's good for you.

So next time I'm asked? It's not a simple yes or no. There's the "giving back" criterion that I don't want to discount. I'll offer to do four assignments, not eight.

Read the full article at http://hades.mg.co.za/article/2009-10-13-go-with-your-gut

Storiemakery en deernis

"Miskien is storiemakery, miskien is skrywery, ook 'n manier om in ons tyd, wat allesbehalwe 'n deernisvolle tyd is, deernis te bekom. Want as jy insig het in hoekom mense dinge doen, dan kom die deernis."

- Abraham de Vries aan Murray La Vita in Oop Kaarte, Die Burger, Vrydag 6 November 2009

Lees die artikel by: http://blogs.dieburger.com/Murray24/braam-en-die-heimwee-na-die-hede

Narrative Based Medicine: Potential, Pitfalls, and Practice

International Journal of Narrative Practice Spring 2009 Vol1 ISSN 2041-2207

This new journal is an eclectic publication that draws on different uses of narratives in research, education and practice. As such, it is not confined to any one area or discipline. but welcomes narratives from fields as diverse as the Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, Philosophy and Ethics as well as from professionals in any area. The publication will come out four times a year (Spring, Summer, Autumn and Winter) and the first and second issues will be devoted to presentations and papers from the 2nd. International Narrative practitioner Conference, held at Glyndŵr University in June 2008.

Two articles hold particular interest for me:

Narrative Based Medicine: Potential, Pitfalls, and Practice by Vera Kalitzkus, PhD / Prof. Dr. Peter F. Matthiessen, MD, Chair in Medical Theory and Complementary Medicine, University of Witten/Herdecke, Germany

According to the authors narratives have always been a vital part of medicine. Stories about patients, their recovery from illness, as well as the experience of caring for them have always been shared. With the rise of “modern” medicine, narratives were increasingly neglected in favour of “facts and findings” regarded as more objective and scientific. Yet, in the recent years the medical narrative is changing again – patient narratives and the unfolding story between health care professionals and patients are both gaining momentum.

In due course this led to the formation of Narrative‐based Medicine (NbM). The term was coined deliberately to mark its distinction from Evidence‐based Medicine (EbM), with NbM propagated to counteract the shortcomings of EbM (Greenhalgh 1998; Charon/Whyer 2008). But what does this term actually contain? Is it a specific therapeutic tool, a special form of doctor‐patient communication, a qualitative research tool, or does it just signify a particular attitude towards patients and doctoring? It can be all of the above, but depending on the field of application, a different form of narrative or practical approach is called for.

This article gives a systematic overview of NbM: a short historic background; the various narrative genres; and an analysis of how genres can be effectively applied in theory, research, and practice in the medical field, with a focus on possibilities and limitations of a narrative approach.

In medical practice, three different, although overlapping, areas can be distinguished:

1. Learning about the patient and carers’ perspective for research and training. For this area we will offer a classification of the various narratives.

2. The narrative approach in actual medical practice, through understanding the narrative structure of medical knowledge, and narrative‐oriented, doctor‐patient relations.

3. Narratives as evidence – narratives from social science research and narratives derived from medical practice and patient encounters are a source of knowledge for evidence, beyond the gold standard of randomized controlled trials of evidence‐based medicine.

For the full article go to:

http://thenarrativepractitioner.co.uk/journalsIJNPNarrativeBasedMedicinePotentialPitfallsAndPractice_VKalitzkusProfDrPFMatthiessen.pdf

Telling stories and making sense of cancer by Michael Murray, Keele University Staffordshire England.

According to Murray storytelling is not just the domain of the professional writer. “Rather, we are all natural storytellers – we construct and reconstruct our worlds through the stories we exchange (Murray, 1997, 1999). These stories are not simply spun out of fantasy but engage with the social and material world in which we live. In this paper I want to explore the role of narrative for everyday making sense of cancer.

The advent of serious illness is a crucial turning point in our lives that causes us to reflect upon our materiality and the transitory nature of our lives. According to narrative psychology the person begins to grasp the meaning of a crisis by creating a story about it (e.g. Bruner, 1987). A central belief in Western society is that our lives have a form of linearity and continuity (Becker, 1997). A challenge to our expected organized storyline can lead to disorientation. The experience of illness represents a crisis for the patient and for their families. On initial diagnosis the individual can experience substantial existential dislocation. It is through narratives that sick people can define themselves and clarify their relationship with their bodies and with society. In this paper the author discusses how narrative shapes our understanding of cancer in everyday life.

For the full article go to:

http://thenarrativepractitioner.co.uk/journals/IJNPTellingStoriesAndMakingSenseOfCancer_MMurray.pdf