LET’S TEACH OLD DOGS NEW TRICKS!

WHAT CESAR MILLAN, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC’S TV’s “DOG WHISPERER,” CAN TEACH WORLD LEADERS ABOUT THE PACKS THAT FOLLOW THEM and THOSE THAT THEY FOLLOW!


We never had pets in our FOUR ROOMS, UPSTAIRS (unless you count the one gold fish I had that died 2 weeks after being purchased). My friends didn’t have pets. either. Our families were poor. Our apartments were small. Our parents – all, mostly immigrants – felt proud when they could feed and clothe their children, and no one seemed to entertain the notion of caring for animals as pets.

Fast forward: I married a man who was allergic to cats and most dogs. So, we never had any pets in our home. However, he has always had a passion for nature and animals and when I have time to watch television, I am much more apt to turn to a news station and he’s always seeking programs about nature and animals.

Hence, my lead into this blog!

A few weeks ago when I found my husband watching National Geographic’s channel and got caught up in an episode where Cesar Millan, the DOG WHISPERER, was training a woman how to tame her dog, it was clear that she was seeking his help because she believed that her dog was very anxious, unpredictable and often had temper tantrums that were alarming.

One didn’t have to be a rocket scientist to see at first glance why this man is called the Dr. Phil for dogs!

Millan's on-line site states that: “Cesars’s amazing rehabilitations of aggressive, scared, lazy, compulsive, and jealous dogs captured the national spotlight when the series premiered in 2004" ... and it became evident that “it wasn’t the dogs but the quirky owners who needed Cesar’s help the most.” Also, for those dogs who were abused or abandoned, he founded the Millan Foundation to “support the rescue, rehabilitation, and re-homing ” of such animals.

In the years since, the program has expanded to a full hour and for good reason.  Millan is adept at transforming the most un-useful behaviors with “his calm-assertive guidance.”

That very sentence sums up my immediate connection to the man, his manner and his motivation, because his goals are exactly those of any good psychotherapist.  How he meets his goals and educates both dogs and humans is quite remarkable.

I found myself intrigued with this particular episode. The dog’s loving owner was anxious about taking him out in public for fear that he would act out or even harm someone.  Therefore, she resisted the dog’s socialization.  Her anticipatory anxiety was clearly picked up by her dog and inevitably on the few chance excursions she forced herself to take, he became the label she ascribed to him.  He paralleled her anxiety, became anxious, acting aggressively towards people and other animals.

Seeing this was all too reminiscent of the young parents with whom I work – loving parents – whose anxieties are mirrored in their children, resulting in familial patterns which don’t serve anyone and are difficult to break.

Well, irony of ironies! That’s exactly what Millan does:

He addresses unwanted behaviors as soon as they start and offers practical tips for dealing with common misbehaviors.  He focuses on issues that are exactly those that need to be addressed when doing family therapy.

Behaviors parallel each other.

Whining, yelling, and demanding are equivalent to a dog’s NUISANCE BARKING.

Understanding Aggression and its purpose, and dealing with Separation Anxiety, Hyperactivity and Compulsive Chewing in dogs is no different than understanding similar behaviors in people.

When Millan, as the “DOG WHISPERER,” helps an out of control dog to control himself and
turn himself into a loving and adored friend and protector, he teaches us a great deal not only about dogs but about ourselves.

When he was interviewed by Lesley Stahl in a CBS segment (airdate: October 3, 2010), “he respectfully showed how even presidents can misunderstand the fundamentals of being their dog’s pack leader. The topic hit websites and blogs with fervor. So, we are tackling the subject and giving President Obama, former President Bush, future presidents, and dog owners everywhere, some of Cesar’s best advice."
Cesar’s blog continues:

You need to establish leadership from day one!


Be consistent. Don't send the dog (or in the case of a world leader, your constituents)a mixed message. If you allow the dog to assume the leadership position one day, and not the next, then go back and forth, you are not being the pack leader. No one wants a “wishy-washy” leader!


Humans are the only species that follow unstable pack leaders. Not only do we follow them but even after they’ve proven to be unstable, we still follow them or re-elect them or give them even more power. You would never see an unstable leader in an animal pack!


The selection process for Pack Leaders is very different in animal species than human. Humans tend to choose pack leaders because they are “lovable,” or seem intelligent or charismatic; basically we choose them for their personality – someone we’d like to spend time with socially, rather than for their professional qualifications or ability. Animals select pack leaders because they instinctually know who is strong and who can best lead them. It has nothing to do with personality or physicality. Just watch some animal kingdom shows and you’ll see there are some pretty strange-looking pack leaders out there! But they provide (1) protection and (2) direction!


An animal pack leader is concerned for the pack, not for himself. It’s an unselfish role and an instinctual role. Dog pack leaders don’t go to graduate school to learn how to lead a pack; it’s just in their DNA. In return, the pack completely trusts the pack leader. They instinctually know that the pack leader is there to protect them and guide them.


The leader’s interest of his country is greater than the interests of an individual. Thus, you need to ask yourself what you can contribute to your pack.


Compare this to what I see in many of today’s human pack leaders.  We believe, and now almost accept the fact, that our pack leaders are motivated, in part, by personal interests.  Sometimes the leader's self- interests happen to align well with some members of their pack but not all members.  In America, we say that’s good.  We’ve come to accept this as “normal.”  And because we accept it, we are naturally or instinctually mistrustful of our pack leaders.  So, while dog pack leaders are instinctually driven to protection and direction of the entire pack, human pack leaders are expected to be driven by some self-interest that may align with other self-interests to form a temporary pack or what we call a 'coalition' or 'alliance' or 'joint venture.' But these are temporary packs!


Also, with human packs, mistakes of the past are constantly brought up, reminding people of what happened the last time they elected that party or politician. 'Leaders' want us to remember the bad times and promise a better future! It’s never about the present.  The past never goes away – we remember the hurt, the guilt, the fear – and our pack leaders use this to lead and control the pack.  A fearful pack is a reactionary pack.  And that’s dangerous for any species.  Likewise, our pack leaders use the future in a similar fashion. Only it’s fear of the unknown.  In the animal world, there is only the present.  You live in harmony and with nature NOW and the future takes care of itself.  Make the right choices today and there won’t be mistakes or messes to fix in the future.


America must restore honesty, integrity, and loyalty in our relationships, both here and abroad.  This starts at home.  We need to re-connect with the fundamentals of relationships, and in the process, we can restore the trust and respect from other countries...The power of success is in its simplicity.  It’s just like being a father. The principles I want to leave my kids with are the same principles that I practice in my life every day.  One of my favorite Ghandi quotes – “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” – says it all.”

I do not believe it says it all,  but the statement and the theory says a great deal.

Let’s us hope that our Presidents and our leaders as well as leaders around the world today use simple wisdom and not complex theatrics which are doomed to destroy and not to build healthy packs!

After all, to have any hope, we must believe that it is never too late to learn how to change, to grow and become more adaptable, and Millan offers us that opportunity to learn new tricks.

Check out your local TV station and you’ll be able to watch him on your National Geographic channel.  If you haven’t already done so, please do ... and grow old along with me!

Yours,
Linda
Visit my website at http://www.applemanshapiro.com/ to learn more about my psychotherapy practice, my work as an oral historian, my book FOUR ROOMS, UPSTAIRS: A Psychotherapists Journey Into and Beyond Her Mother's Mental Illness, which can be ordered directly from the website with no fee for mailing ... and , as an advocate for mental health, my availability to speak at various venues.

THE SHORT-SIGHTEDNESS IN CUTTING HEALTH CARE BENEFITS!

It's no secret to anyone that our economy is suffering terribly and budget cuts are inevitable and necessary. Yet, when we slash health care availability for all those suffering from physical and mental illnesses, we lose the right to call ourselves anything but short-sighted and inhumane.

It's especially difficult to understand why even those who are themselves victims of having family members in desperate need of assistance and who have the power to change budgets  do not exert their power to effect such change.  How does Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona,  a long time proponent of mental health services, justify her position in contributing to "dismantling the safety net for the mentally ill" in light of the fact that her son is schizophrenic and was committed to a state hospital over twenty years ago?

As reported by Marc Lacey, Kevin Sack, and A.G. Sulzberger and written by Mr. Lacy in yesterday's  N.Y. Times, those who understand the mental health system best understand the full impact of how the shrinking of services will not only throw fragile lives into total chaos, but will be directly responsible for an increase in the numbers and intensity of the diseases that will surface and effect us all. 

With an increase in homelessness and little or no medication or treatment available to those in need, there will be an increase in self-medication (otherwise known as alcoholism and other drug addictions) – all of which will add to the numbers of senseless crimes affecting not one person, one family, or one community but all of us.

Ironically, Arizona - until last year - was one of the states with the best benefits for mental health treatment until there, too, the services and programs began to shrink.  Not only have there been cuts in counseling, case management, voluntary hospitalization, medications and other mental health services, but Governor Brewer is now - along with governors on both sides of the political aisle - proposing cuts in eligibility for Medicaid, the largest insurer for mental health services.

So, where does that leave us when even a governor seems powerless to help restore a broken health system? After all, she is in the position to influence decisions regarding the allocation of all funding and even she - a mother of  a son who has undoubtedly forced her to experience the darkest side of his disease as well as of that of the entire mental health system - seems unable to influence change.   If not from somone like her, then from where and from whom might we expect help?

Clearly, even the recent horror occurring in Governor Brewer's state of Arizona merely delayed the announcement of her budget cuts.  The killing of eight innocent bystanders, the injuring of thirteen and the placing of Representative Gabrielle Giffords in a fight for her life changed no laws, offered no new protection.

What is perhaps most disturbing is that we now know that Loughner - the man who committed this horrible crime - displayed many red flags (as I wrote about in last week's blog) prior to carrying out his senseless acts of destruction.  Yes, many took note along the way, but no one took action, which may have prevented the tragedy from ever occurring.   He was only able to go on his killing rampage because he wasn't on anyone's radar.  His ability to purchase a gun compounded by the fact that his whereabouts weren't being tracked, left the danger he posed essentially unattended.

As Lacey further reports, the governors in Washington, Kansas, Mississippi, and Iowa (to name but a few) have each eliminated millions from spending for group homes, subsidized medications, case management, halfway houses, and crisis intervention.  He writes that "in Arizona, where the governor delayed announcing her budget to mourn the victims of the Tuscon shooting, Ms. Brewer went on to help close a $1 billion budget hole by seeking federal approval to significantly scale back the state's Medicaid program. To reduce the blow on 5,200 mentally ill people who would lose their health coverage, she proposed spending $10 million to keep vulnerable people on medication."  Yet, who will decide who is the most vulnerable, the most at risk?  And what will be the consequences when considering the potential human toll in every state of our democracy?

Along with many others these days, I believe that our broken economy and broken health system  are prioritized in ways that make it impossible to raise the bar, to protect those who are ill as well as those whom they may target and victimize.

While we all attempt to be hopeful and find reason to believe that health care benefits will improve and change, I'm left doubting whether change is possible given the current climate, the known deficits and the subsequent decisions that protect only the wealthiest of our citizens and leave the great majority out in the cold.

I look forward to the time when our proverbial house is in order and we commit ourselves to saving the lives of those among us who are suffering and, in so doing, reduce the suffering of all.

Yours,
Linda
*Visit my website at http://www.applemanshapiro.com/  to learn more about my private practice, my work as an oral historian and my book, FOUR ROOMS, UPSTAIRS, which can be ordered directly from the site with no charge for mailing.

                         HOW MANY RED FLAGS MUST WE SEE

           TO PREVENT IMMINENT CATASTROPHE?

After Jared Lee Loughner went on a shooting rampage, killing 6 people, injuring others, and leaving Representative Gabrielle Gifford struggling to survive, we have a community and nation in shock yet once again.  Another seemingly senseless and perhaps avoidable tragedy has occurred.

There are political pundits who wish who make this week’s tragic incident in Tucson, Arizona into another reason for stricter gun control laws.  But gun control is not the major problem!  The compelling and tragic picture of our nation’s mental health system continues to fail proper scrutiny.

Loughner’s violent actions should not lead to a debate over gun laws, for as the National Rifle Association points out, “guns don’t kill people, people do.” However, even though I am not in favor of private citizens having guns, when taken literally, they are right.  As one journalist pointed out, "THE REAL SALUTION TO PREVENTING ATTACKS BY INDIVIDUALS IS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DISTURBED INDIVIDUALS."   A gun in a "disturbed" person's hand IS a clear recipe for disaster.
Despite whatever set-backs and losses the current economy has caused, no loss can be greater than that of innocent human lives and the inattention to the care of the mentally ill among us whose behavior over time has displayed many red flags.  Despite the significant advances in treatments available for many mental and physical diseases, there is still a stigma that exists with regard to mental illness.  In many families, there is still shame, and that shame perpetuates inaction and keeping that member of the family out of sight and, therefore, not even eligible to receive help.  Then, there is denial even when what a family sees and hears from one of its members is bizarre and, at worst, potentially dangerous to himself and others.  Beyond that, the major problem that remains is that even when illness is recognized and not denied, and when behavors are seen as being abherent and in need of help, we can't always provide the care, the facilities or the possibility for treatment and healing for all those who are suffering.

Dr. Keith Ablow, a forensic psychiatrist who has run community mental health centers, hospitals, and clinics, states: “I can tell you for sure, without any question, that the mental health care delivery system in this country is shoddy and shattered and without any hope at present of dealing effectively with sick individuals like Jared Lee Loughner, there are slim resources and no strategy whatsoever. That’s the very worrisome story behind this tragedy.”

In Newsweek’s article on “OUR BROKEN MENTAL-HEALTH SYSTEM, one sentence stands out:  “Thousands of anguished parents face a system that thwarts them at every turn.”

With regard to Loughner, we are reminded that there are countless unanswered questions about why he went on his rampage.  However, what is clear is that: “Across America are thousands of parents of older adolescents and young adults who are terrified that their child’s strange behavior, paranoid rants, drinking, drug abuse, conspiracy fantasies, and other red flags of mental illness will lead to violence - possibly against a public figure like Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, possibly against a family member.  That most of these parents have no idea what to do is frightening enough. It’s a national scandal that, even if they succeed in getting their child mental-health care before tragedy strikes" ... it's not in time to set the system in motion so that it will provide the best care needed for as many years as it is needed.   In short, the system presents a myriad of obstacles.

Michael Fitzpatrick, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) is quoted as stating:  “The mental health care system in America is a broken system. The system was already in crisis, and has become even less accessible over the last three years as state budgets for mental health – psychiatric beds [in hospitals], counseling, and other services – have been cut by $2 billion.” NAMI’s Katrina Gay adds, “In many cases you can’t even get an evaluation for two or three months – and that’s assuming you know how to get one in the first place."

Regarding Loughner, the obvious question is whether or not he could have been forcibly locked up before he committed his crimes. Yet, according to forensic psychiatrists, the answer is “not easily.”  But, surely, there were enough red flags leading several people to believe that he was a possible threat to himself and others.

Furthermore, this occurred in Arizona where, ironically, it is easier to commit a mentally ill person. Newsweek reports that the experts they consulted said they were highly skeptical he would have qualified. “Bizarre behavior isn’t enough.” The overall conclusion seemed to be that despite “hindsight bias that leads acquaintances to recall all sorts of warning signs...there’s only a fraction of the behavioral information that will come out...and it’s unlikely that even in Arizona it’s unlikely that courts would have committed him.”

Worse still, given the mental-health care in the country, “it’s unlikely that he would have stayed behind locked doors for long. Typically, hospitals and other facilities stabilize a patient, give him medications, watch him for a couple of days and, if he seems functional and non-delusional, send him on his way.”

In a personal plea, one of the most compelling articles I read during these past few days was submitted to Linkedin.com by Ed Kirby of Nashua, New Hampshire. With a family member suffering from mental illness, Kirby’s sympathetic and intelligent request gets to the heart of the matter better than most, and we feel it in the very title of his article:  LET US COME TOGETHER TO TREAT MENTAL ILLNESS.

Though I recommend reading his entire post, I will leave you with what he (and I) believe to be most important: “When warning signs of brain disorders do not produce the proper responses from medical providers, symptoms can escalate to bizarre acts of desperation such as suicide or even on rare occasions homicide. Emergency rooms and prisons provide temporary lock up at further high cost to society... The question should not be: What police interventions have occurred,” but rather, “What mental health interventions have been made available to him and his family?”

Contrary to modern scientific advances and the progress in understanding the origins of some diseases, attitudes toward the mentally ill still remain fraught with misunderstanding, shame, denial, and a deep-seated unwillingness to get those who happen to be victims of their mental wiring to receive the help they deserve and to become integrated members of society.  Sheepishly, we as a nation, place our priorities elsewhere.

To quote Kirby further: “Those afflicted with brain disorders do not choose to “lose their minds.” Society, families, and individuals - victims on both sides of this equation - can be spared by the existence of, and the unencumbered access to, quality mental health care.

“We must all come together, seek knowledge of the disease, provide funding and support programs so that those in need will receive treatment ...”

I would add that we must all come together to help prevent such heart-breaking tragedies as the one in Tucson and others that have preceded it.

For after all that has been revealed thus far about Loughner, the red flags were there for anyone to see.   Bizarre behavior was exhibited in his classes. Fellow students voiced fear that he would bring a gun to school.  And going on anti-government rants about United States currency was also known about him within his community. Yet, rather than remanding evaluation and treatment, he was simply expelled from his Community College.  Merely recommending help fell short of a remedy, just as not being accepted by the military accomplished nothing positive. 

His behavior, his words – bizarre as they may have been – were not enough for anyone to take the sort of action that would have protected him from himself and others.  Removing him was simply easier.

However, what is easier did not and will not provide a healthier and safer nation.  We must have the ability to identify and offer proper treatment for those among us who are mentally ill.  Such actions will better define who we are as a people, our priorities, what we value, and our pledge to remain a civilized nation.

I don't think we can afford to look at this tragedy without devoting ourselves to a fight for anything but what it is:  THE NEED TO PRIORITIZE THE PROTECTION OF THE MENTALLY ILL SO THAT THEY WILL NOT HARM OR KILL THEMSELVES OR, WORSE YET, HARM OR KILL OTHERS.  AT BEST, THEY WILL BE HELPED TO BECOME HEALTHIER AND MORE INTEGRATED MEMBERS OF SOCIETY, AND WE, AS A PEOPLE, WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE PRIDE IN SUCH AN ACHIEVEMENT.

Do share your thoughts with me on this subject.

Yours,
Linda
*Visit my website at www.applemanshapiro.com to learn more about my psychotherapy practice, my work as an oral historian and my book, FOUR ROOMS, UPSTAIRS, which may be ordered directly from the site with no cost for shipping.

RESILIENCE

Just as contradictory studies about what treatments are best for particular diseases, what foods one should and shouldn’t eat to be healthy or which factors in one’s emotional make-up are hereditary and which are not – such studies seem to appear faster than we’re able to agree or disagree with their findings. So, too, an article in this week’s New York Times offers a new twist to an old supposition regarding the theory of RESILIENCY.  Now, we’re being told that PAST ADVERSITY PROVIDES A MAP that leads to becoming resilient.


I have to admit to having a basic bias and will, therefore,  accept the fact that some of you will disagree with me.


Having suffered in silence throughout my early years (which places me in the category of those who have experienced past adversities), I am not of the opinion that the pain and confusion caused by my mother’s mental illness made me in any way a stronger person, better able to handle adversity than others whose childhoods were not traumatic or, at best, far less dramatic.


I do believe that we come into this world with a core personality and, given the environment in which we then live, the features of our character can be enhanced or impaired.  I cannot go as far, though, as to conclude as this article does by saying that “the number of life blows a person has taken may affect his or her mental toughness more than any other factor ... and that frequency makes a difference.”


According to Roxanne Cohen Silver, a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine, “Each negative event a person faces leads to an attempt to cope, which forces people to learn about their own capabilities, about their own support networks – to learn who their real friends are. That kind of learning, we think, is extremely valuable for subsequent coping ..."


I disagree because it assumes that people are able to cope as best they can when faced with negative experiences varying from the loss of a parent, child or mate to the loss of a job and income, to the diagnosis of a life-threatening illness.  The truth -as I’ve known it to be in my psychotherapy practice as well as in my life - is that people who have had one too many punches often lose their desire or ability to cope at all.  Having been knocked down in the first or second round, they do not have the resources to draw upon that someone who hasn’t even entered the ring.


My belief – cynical as it may sound – is that studies will continue to prove or disprove whatever theory the scientist’s bias going into the study may be.


Just as this article concludes that “mental toughness is something like physical strength ... which cannot develop without exercise,”  I believe that everyone is challenged throughout life in a myriad of ways.  Yet, how we meet each challenge has more to do with the particular circumstance we’re experiencing at the time of each challenge.  In short, if we’re in good physical health, it’s easier to pursue finding work in a bad economy.  If we’ve lost a spouse at a time when we happen to live in an isolated area and do not have the support we once had, the loss will be that much greater to overcome.


In the end, I believe that it is possible for people who are born to adversity to succeed far beyond what their environment would cause us to think likely. Somehow, their internal wiring allows them to do so, while others remain totally disabled.


A good start in life – one that others may even call a “blessed” start can certainly be a contributing factor, but it is not a determining one.  Repeated hardships are not the prerequisites for resiliency just as wealth and fame do not protect one from disease or lives that are unsuccessful.


Often, what is more of a determinant is having a mentor, a teacher, friend, religious leader, therapist or relative – a role model who instills trust, offers hope and shows us another reality that adversity alone can't offer. That gift is as much, if not more of a determining factor as any which the most recent study suggests.


In short, it’s not a workout with adversity as a personal trainer that we need in order to be resilient but fewer challenges that cause us to feel defeated.  And when we are faced with defeat, we will rise to the occasion only if and when we have the support of family and friends, and our will to survive (the very wiring with which we were born and which was enhanced or impaired) allows us to do so as best we can.  


Please do share your thoughts here on this site, if you disagree.


Yours,
Linda

ELIMINATING CHAOS: A NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION!

In her New Year’s Eve blog, BEYOND BLUE, Therese Borchard wrote about the importance of becoming better organized in order to accomplish all that she wishes to accomplish. Wanting to enjoy the PRESENT and not finding herself ruminating about the past nor focusing only on resolutions for the future, her single most important goal now is to develop the ability to organize her days with greater skill.



“Next year,” she wrote, “I am going to try my best to be as organized as I can so that all the stuff around me, reminding me of uncompleted tasks, to-dos, and unresolved issues won't be interrupting my thinking process as I try to tackle the activity in front of me.”


Since so many people are struggling economically and emotionally these days, they often find themselves feeling overwhelmed by everyday tasks and family responsibilities. In doing so, they lose sight of the meaning and pleasure of being in the NOW and have no time to find ways to reduce their levels of stress.


With that in mind, Borchard also makes reference to Russell Bishop’s recently published book, Workarounds That Work: How to Conquer Anything that Stands in Your Way at Work. She states that "it is helpful in categorizing, sorting, and maneuvering your life in such a way that you spend fewer moments overwhelmed” and concludes that "Bishop's compilation of wise and insightful advice is a map to navigate the complex terrain at work and is a manual for frustrating processes of life in general."


As so many of us find ourselves bogged down by the “stuff” of life – from shopping for necessities to taking care of possessions and all the “technological conveniences” of twenty-first century living (all of which tend to break-down at the most inconvenient moments), it's practically impossible to be productive when we are disorganized and feel at a loss for how to put our personal HUMPTY DUMPTY back together again.


The truth is that the clutter in our lives and the inability to figure out ways to be organized can cost us far more than time, energy and productivity. It can impact our health, reflecting directly on our inability to stay focused on projects and people that are most dear to us.


Therese no doubt hit upon something that I feel is necessary for me to do this year, as well. Being more organized WILL allow me to enjoy my days with greater ease and accomplish more in less time as I experience the pleasure of not being surrounded by things that I trip over or haven’t looked at in years but somehow haven’t been able to part with.


Likewise, I’ve never heard any of my patients say they feel good when they come home to rooms that are cluttered and disorganized.  In fact, their sense of self is diminished when laundry is waiting to be done, dirty dishes need to be washed, and papers are strewn about with bills that need to be paid.


Such external disorder merely reminds them of the clutter in their head. General feelings of overwhelming incompetence do not then allow them to proceed creatively or confidently in the important areas of their lives.


Despite the fact that most of us share many of the same resolutions each year – to diet or not to diet, to change jobs or stay bored and frustrated in our present one, to get married or remain single, to stay married or get divorced, to give whatever we can afford to charity or to give, instead, to those whom we know to be in desperate need of help – we often sabotage ourselves and are left unable to satisfy the majority of our resolutions.

The aspects of life that none of us can afford to lose, however, are the love and company of family and friends and the ability to pay our bills without spending more than we have. Remembering too, that our bodies as well as our souls need care, we must eat healthily, sleep well, exercise, go for our yearly physicals, ask for help when we need it, and offer help to others who may need it from us.


All the rest are life’s luxuries – and while luxuries can most certainly be enjoyable, life’s necessities are the fuel with which we are able to keep our engines running, our hearts beating, our lives moving forward with dignity and grace.


Here’s to lives with less chaos, many friendships, much love, good health, and being as productive as we are able to be!

H A P P Y
N E W Y E A R
TO ONE AND ALL !

Yours,
Linda