Probably no topic in divorce today is more highly debated than this one. Why does Parental Alienation arouse such passion from the people involved – both the professionals and the families of these children? Because the images it evokes are so tragic. A caring dad kept apart from his daughter or son by a selfish, scheming mother. A predatory father manipulating the legal system to regain unfettered access and control over his victim. These pictures grab our attention and rev up our protective emotions. They make us angry. They are images of terrible injustices that we naturally want to correct.

Join us on May 15th for a luncheon and presentation on this topic.

In the real world, most cases involving the charge of parental alienation can’t be reduced to such melodramatic scenarios. But our fascination with high-conflict situations like this make it easy for interests groups with opposing agendas to get headlines portraying their constituents as victims and their opponents as bad guys. On one side are the “targeted” parents – most often divorced fathers – who fear being shut out of their children’s lives and hearts as their ex-spouse maligns them to their impressionable kids. Lined up on the other side are parents – usually mothers – who are terrified by the idea that an incompetent, neglectful, or (worst case) abusing ex-spouse will gain the necessary time and control in a child’s life to cause serious emotional damage.

Therapists and legal professionals caught in the crossfire between advocates for these groups are understandably confused about what to do when they face a case in which the charge of Parental Alienation is raised: “my ex is poisoning my child’s mind against me; please help me stop her.” Not only does the public controversy seriously muddy the waters (Is parental alienation even a real thing?), but the serious treatment of PA in respected journals can be confusing too. There is no clear consensus among divorce researchers and clinicians.

It helps, we think, to understand the history of the term and of the controversy around it. The Parental Alienation saga, like so much of the current thinking about divorce, begins with the research of Judith Wallerstein and Joan Kelly, who, back in seventies in their first work with children of divorce, made this observation:

“A very important aspect of the response of the youngsters in this age group (ages nine to twelve) was the dramatic change in the relationship between parents and children. These young people were vulnerable to being swept up into the anger of one parent against the other. They were faithful and valuable battle allies in efforts to hurt the other parent. Not infrequently, they turned on the parent they had (previously) loved and been very close to prior to the marital separation.” (1980, 1996)

Wallerstein and Kelly were the first on the scene of the train wreck of the “no-problem divorce” that bubbled happily up from the newly liberated counterculture ethos of the seventies. So their writings provided a treasure trove of clinical observations about the effects of divorce on children. What it didn’t do was offer much insight into underlying processes that caused these kids problems. Their description of the visitation-resisting child provides a good example of their experimental style. Without stating conclusively whyit was happening, Wallerstein and Kelly simply offered up their slightly mystified observation that some children in this age group seemed to be unreasonably mad at one parent, and unreasonably loyal to the other.

This is not to disparage these important researchers’ work. The big contribution from Wallerstein and Kelly was the key observation that, while parents were pretty happy with their new freedom, kids weren’t faring well in these divorces. Partially because of the groundbreaking research of the pair, courts became increasingly interested in the welfare of children.

The Hero or the Villain: Richard Gardner

It’s hard to fully grasp the passion that any discussion of parental alienation arouses without recognizing the central figure in this controversy. His name is Richard Gardner M.D., and, depending upon to whom you listen, he was either a brilliant clinician and theoretician, (Warshak, 2004), well-meaning but misguided, (e.g. Johnston, 2004) or a complete crank (e.g., Meier, 2009). Pretty much everyone agrees on one thing, however: Gardner took Wallerstein and Kelly’s observations about “visitation-rejecting” children to a new level, based upon his passionate belief that residential parents (mostly mothers) were using brainwashing techniques and false allegations of child abuse to prevent non-residents (mostly dads) from gaining access to their children. Gardner’s claims galvanized a whole movement of fathers’ rights activists, and, to his credit, emboldened a whole cohort of previously intimidated and helpless dads to assert themselves as parents in the face of maternal resistance. Not surprisingly, advocates for mothers, and women generally, felt in Gardner’s pronouncements the heavy hand of patriarchal authoritarianism.

But it wasn’t just his ideas about Parental Alienation Syndrome that offended Gardner’s opponents. It was that he vigorously pursued changes in the law, in family court practices and procedures, in official mental health forums like the DSM, and in public opinion about the enforcement of fathers’ rights in divorce. He did this through the many journal articles and a book about Parental Alienation Syndrome, in which he argued that the “programming” of children by one parent to shun the other was the cause of their alienated behavior in a large number of cases where children align against one parent.

The public arguments about PAS have raged hotly over the last decade or so. Gardner’s ideas have penetrated the legal debate and been incorporated into judicial processes and decisions. They have been taken up particularly by “fathers’ rights” groups who argue that divorcing fathers have been victimized in court for years by mothers’ false allegations of child abuse. Feminist groups and family violence specialists have fought back, claiming the Parental Alienation argument is being used by abusive fathers to retain control of (and to continue to abuse) these children.

While passions run high in the debate about Parental Alienation Syndrome, the arguments are largely technical. What constitutes a syndrome? What other factors might be at play when children reject a parent? Is there a sound basis for distinguishing cases where brainwashing occurs from cases where other factors are at play, especially when neglect or child abuse is alleged? Fortunately, for anyone interested in following them, these arguments are well documented in articles by Gardner (2002, 2004) and a series of responses by, among others, Joan Kelly and Janet Johnston ( Johnston, 2004, Kelly & Johnston, 2001).

Gardner’s critics argue convincingly that there may be lots of reasons a child rejects a parent besides brainwashing (e.g., an absent, neglectful or abusive parent). Gardner acknowledges that other factors may cause alienated behavior, but argues that those “differentials” are excluded ruled out in the PAS diagnosis. PAS only applies if the cause is a parent indoctrinating a child. This occurs at an epidemiologically significant rate, Gardner argues, and is significant psychologically and legally as well. Thus, it deserves a diagnostic category all its own.

You can review the serve-and-volley action between Gardner and his critics in the cited articles (it’s vociferous and passionate, at least until the time of Gardner’s death mid-volley, in 2004), but if you are willing to accept these commentators take on the controversy and its outcome, here are the five main things you should remember about Parental Alienation/Parental Alienation Syndrome.

1. The notion of an official DSM category for Parental Alienation Syndrome is DOA. It won’t happen in the new DSM, which takes it off the table for the foreseeable future.

2. In the battle for the hearts and minds of mental health opinion leaders, Richard Gardner and the Parental Alienation Syndrome have lost traction and been largely defeated.

3. Most serious thinkers about this issue, following Joan Kelly and Janet Johnston, agree that Parental alienation [i.e. “the problem of children’s strong negative attitudes and rejecting behavior toward one of their parents after divorce, often accompanied by resistance or refusal to visit,” (Johnston, Walters, & Olesen, 2005)] does indeed exist. Various studies have identified it in 7-15% of children of divorce, and around 20-30% of children in high-conflict divorces.

4. There are many possible causes and combinations of causes for a child to exhibit this behavior, including the vulnerability of a child, neglectful parenting, sexual or physical abuse, non-residential parents losing interest or contact, the effects of the high conflict divorce itself ,etc. The indoctrinating influence on the child of one parent against the other is one of many possible causes.

5. It is difficult and often impossible for outside experts, including therapists, to determine conclusively the etiology of a particular case of this alienated behavior.

This last item – the difficulty of determining exactly why a child is alienated or estranged from a parent – is particularly important for therapists attempting to work with this population. It can be emotionally overpowering to hear from a parent that a child is being abused by their former spouse. Similarly, to be told that a child has been deliberately indoctrinated by one parent to reject the other can arouse the protective hackles of a therapist working with that child. These are gut-wrenching tales that are heard regularly by professionals involved in high-conflict divorces. But, believe them at your own risk. Here are the words of Richard Emery on that topic. Emery is a leading and highly-respected expert on divorce and its effects on children from the University of Virginia.

Mostly my clinical experience tells me how polarized former partners become into “his divorce” and “her divorce,” particularly in high conflict cases (Emery, 1994, 2004). I do not have confidence in my own, or anyone else’s, ability to discern truth in divisive divorces (and I generally believe such attempts are counterproductive), and I would be greatly impressed if some investigator could punch a hole in my skepticism with research demonstrating reliable and valid discriminations between accurate and inaccurate accounts of his and her divorce. To date, no one has done this, including Dr. Richard Gardner. My skepticism remains intact.

Emery is taking on Gardner’s assertion that Parental Alienation Syndrome is at work in a high percentage of cases where children are alienated from a non-residential parent. But the same argument holds for the divorcing parent claiming child abuse. In any case, the therapist who takes a position about the truth of either claim is likely to be undermined by the accused parent, and rendered ineffective in his work with the child. Benjamin Garber ( 2004) calls this outcome therapist alienation, the situation in which the accused parent feels unrepresented in the therapy and works energetically to destroy the therapeutic relationship.

Parental Alienation Syndrome will continue to be a controversial and hotly debated topic among legal and mental health professionals dealing with high conflict divorces. It behooves you to know the state of the art and the state of the discussion around this topic. I’ve attempted to cite the most important and influential journal articles on the topic. Please feel free to contact me if you have trouble locating or accessing them.

Garber, B. D. (2004). Therapist alienation: Foreseeing and forestalling third-party dynamics undermining psychotherapy with children of conflicted caregivers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35(4), 357-363. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.35.4.357
Johnston, J. R. (2004). Rejoinder to Gardner’s “Commentary on Kelly and Johnston’s ‘The Alienated Child: A Reformulation of Parental Alienation Syndrome’.” Family Court Review, 42(4), 622-628. doi:10.1177/1531244504268658
Johnston, J., Walters, M., & Olesen, N. (2005). Is it alienating parenting, role reversal or child abuse? A study of children’s rejection of a parent in child custody disputes. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 5(4), 191-218. doi:10.1300/J135v05n04_02
Kelly, J. B., & Johnston, J. R. (2001). The alienated child: A reformulation of parental alienation syndrome. Family Court Review, 39(3), 249–266. Wiley Online Library. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.174-1617.2001.tb00609.x/abstract
Meier, J. S. (2009). A historical perspective on parental alienation syndrome and parental alienation. Journal of Child Custody, 6(3-4), 232-257. doi:10.1080/15379410903084681
Wallerstein, J. S., & Kelly, J. B. (1996). Surviving the breakup: How children and parents cope with divorce. New York: Basic Books.
Warshak, R. (2004). Dedication to Richard A. Gardner, M.D. The American Journal of Family Therapy,32(2), 77-78. doi:10.1080/01926180490424226

I’d like to thank everyone who has contributed to the newsletter with articles, event postings, ads and announcements.

Those who contribute drive the growth and quality of our chapter and this news site. I hope that you enjoy reading the articles that have been made available here, and I encourage you all to submit content that is of interest to the mental health practitioners in our community.

The goal of this site is to serve as a resource for the mental health professional by listing upcoming events and trainings, and by providing educational and inspirational content to the readers.

We are currently running a special offer on placing events on the calendar. For May and June it’s just $25 to add an event to the calendar.

This offer is for members only, if you have an upcoming event please get in touch.

I welcome your input and feedback and look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks again, and best wishes going into summer!

Alice Geanta
SB CAMFT Newsletter Editor
editor@sbtherapynews.org

I spent my traineeship at CALM and my internship at the Arlington Day Treatment Center and Community Counseling & Education Center, and I feel very grateful for the education I received, in diverse areas, at all three sites. As a relational therapist, I identify with Yalom’s idea of therapist as ‘fellow traveler’. I also greatly admire Virginia Satir’s work: I found the scratchy videotapes of her work with families that we watched at Antioch to be nothing short of transformational. I have worked individually and in groups with DBT and find the combination of the acceptance and the cognitive work to be helpful with many of my clients—it is especially rewarding to work with adult children of alcoholics, and am fascinated by the way in which clients recreate family roles in other groups; with friends, and in office ‘families’, for instance.

I am married and we have one son. When we’re not working, you can find us on the hiking trails or at the beach with our dog, Bear, or at the local high school pools, at swim meets or water polo matches. My volunteer time is spent interviewing high school seniors as part of the scholarship application process, and at the Planned Parenthood book sale. I joined the SB CAMFT Board as secretary in the spring of last year. It has kept me on my toes, but in a fun way—it has been a great way to network and meet my fellow therapists, and I have learned a great deal about the community. I encourage anyone who has the time for it to get involved with the Santa Barbara chapter of CAMFT—it is a great way to stay connected with your colleagues!

Compulsive behaviors begin as a solution to another problem, a way of using pleasure to mask pain. Sadly, over time, the compulsion takes on a life of its own and then becomes the problem. I started my practice specializing in treating eating disorders and soon discovered that many of my clients were alcoholics in recovery or drug abusers. Much later I found out that some were shopaholics but didn’t bother to report that since they didn’t consider it a real compulsion.

My very first client was an alcoholic, drug using, overeater who kept juggling her addictions. We focused on her overeating first, and as we were making progress she married a drug dealer who kept her supplied so she disappeared for a year. On her return she was divorced and became free of drugs. Her goal was to succeed in eliminating overeating binges. However she worked as a waitress in a restaurant where the exhausted staff would go out drinking after work, so she was in a constant state of guilt and shame over her inability to reach sobriety.

Not long after that she relocated to another city and continued to work toward quitting all her addictions. I remember a letter that she sent me letting me know that she was working with an addiction counselor. She wrote that he told her, “I don’t care what you do… just don’t drink!” She added, “So I gained 35 pounds!” Most of us are familiar with the phrase “changing deck chairs on the Titanic.” I am happy to say that this plucky woman did not give up. She eventually reached her goal and even became an addiction counselor herself.

Many of our addicted clients keep going from one feel-good to another. Thankfully, with the great advances in neuroscience we now understand addiction better and can help our clients help themselves more successfully. We now know that craving starts in the pleasure center of the brain. It appears that many people with weight problems often have fewer dopamine receptors in the brain. People with this problem have a harder time coping with stress. Therefore, they instinctively turn to activities and behaviors that stimulate the production of additional dopamine in order to feel better. Eating Carbohydrates stimulates dopamine production. No wonder they crave carbohydrates. That is how a binge is born.

Why can’t overeaters stay on their diets? A diet is deprivation in order to eat again! In addition, hunger caused by low calorie diets, deprivation and feelings of anxiety cause additional stress. The longing for relief from stress, whether physical or emotional, creates craving. The craving is directed toward anything that will raise dopamine or enhance a feeling of pleasure. That is why dieters usually choose cookies over celery and carrots when they feel a craving.

But the relief of craving is temporary because the stressful situation is still waiting. Therefore, the craving returns. That is why overeaters overspend, alcoholics eat sugar, drink coffee, etc. They just change to another “deck chair.”

Another reason the cycle keeps going is that intense or prolonged stress lowers the serotonin in the brain. Serotonin creates a feeling of satiation/satisfaction that ends the craving cycle. Compulsive eaters, drug users, alcoholics, spenders, computer addicts, and gamblers keep reacting to the urges that will raise the dopamine and bring pleasure. The feeling of “gotta have it” doesn’t stop until the serotonin rises enough to offset the dopamine. Unfortunately, the brain does not have an automatic system that automatically raises serotonin so this cycle keeps happening over and over!

The way that I deal with my compulsive clients is through what I call The Four Level Plan. After I describe how the brain works, I explain that every compulsive act is symbolic of Super Stress. Super Stress is different from everyday stress. Super Stress results when they become anxious over a situation or relationship and feel helpless, victimized, frustrated or angry. The clients tell themselves, that it’s awful and there’s nothing I can do about it. The more helpless they feel, the stronger the craving becomes. When the pain of the misery gets too great, they will binge again unless they learn how to deal with the Super Stress.

The Four Level Plan is very easy to follow. The goal is to practice the steps when clients feel a craving coming on. However, they can also examine the binge afterward as well. Instead of beating themselves up for their mistake they can practice the steps after a binge as if they were performing a postmortem in order to learn from their behavior and prevent future binges while also learning how to resolve stressful situations or relationships.

Level One is the Physical Level.
Identify the compulsive urges or binge episode. Rate the intensity of the urge on a scale of 0 to 10 as if it were an emotional earthquake. Don’t rate yourself according to how much you ate, drank or spent, but how strong was the urge to do it. How much did you have to have it, eat it, buy it, drink it, etc? 6? 9? This is a clue that there is unresolved Super Stress.

I once had a client who had many years of sobriety in AA and had conquered her bulimia. One day she came for a session and shared that she was very puzzled by her compulsion to masturbate. She was living with her fiancé and was very happy with their sex life so she couldn’t figure it out. She had a wonderful job, however it was very stressful since her boss was extremely demanding. As we explored this intense urge she realized, “When I climax I experience 16 seconds of bliss.” Her urge to masturbate really had nothing to do with her relationship with her lover or even with sex. It was her way of taking a time out in her overly stressful life since she no longer drank or overate. This was just another example of the ingenuity of the human mind and the ways we find to feel good.

Level Two is the Emotional Level.
For each compulsive act, ask yourself: What in my life is or was a 6 or a 9 in the day or days before I binged? What situation or relationship is involved? Be specific. Are you frantic because your child was smoking pot, a dear one was just diagnosed with cancer, your spouse lost his job, or your dog ran away?
What strong feelings arose from that situation or experience? How powerless do you feel? Common emotions that are difficult to manage are anger, fear, anxiety, guilt, shame, powerlessness or sadness. Write down the situation or relationship that is painful and name your most intense feelings. You may be experiencing more than one. For example, you are angry with your teenager because he has not been doing his homework and also feel scared because he won’t get into college.

One of my clients put herself on a strict diet despite my pleas to find something less punitive. When she came to our session with her food diary I saw that on Mon. and Tues. she stayed on her restrictive eating, but on Wed. she consumed an entire box of macaroni and cheese! When I asked her what had happened on Wed. she replied: “My daughter was expelled from school.”

Level Three is the Level of Thoughts and Beliefs.
What did you tell yourself about that upsetting situation or event that caused you to feel angry, frustrated, helpless or guilty? If a loved one has had a serious accident perhaps you are secretly resenting that you might have to spend precious time taking care of him or, on the other hand, you feel enormous sadness at the possibility of losing someone you love. You might be telling yourself that you can’t live without him. If you had a fight with your spouse and are at an anger rating of 8 you might be telling yourself that if she really loved you she would…. Perhaps you feel like a martyr when you think that no one understands you.
Another compulsive overeating client mainly binged on chocolate covered nuts. I used EFT to help her with her craving for this specific food, and she was delighted that she didn’t crave them for a few weeks. Then one day she arrived puzzled. She explained that she didn’t overeat any nuts, but on Mon. had a huge binge of rice! This is an example of a craving that is so intense that it doesn’t matter what she ate, only that she had to push her intense feelings down any way she could so she wouldn’t face them.
When I asked her what had happened over the weekend she replied, “My husband and I had a big fight. I think that I have to divorce him and haven’t wanted to face it.”

Level Four is the Power Level.
How can you stop making yourself feel like a powerless victim? 
Access your inner resources and you can change your life. What action can you take? 
 It is important to continue to challenge the upsetting fearful or angry thoughts that you discovered at Level Three to determine whether they are true or not. Notice all the ways that you tell yourself that you are powerless over a situation, relationship, behavior or emotions that contributed to the binge you are contemplating or have just indulged in.

Because I specialize in using EFT and other Energy Psychology methods I ask my clients to do acupressure tapping as soon as they realize the source of their Super Stress. Because EFT works so rapidly they are able to transform negative cognitions, release anger, guilt, stress and other negative emotions as well as treat traumatic memories that might be related to their Super Stress.

The Four Level Plan also lends itself to a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy approach as well as to mindfulness methods. Since cravings are about imbalances in brain chemistry and not really about the feel-good substances or behaviors, the more that clients see the relationship, the easier it will be for them to heal what is at the heart of their Super Stress and gain control over addictions and compulsions.

I have gone into greater detail about treating eating disorders and compulsive spending in my books: How to Stop Playing the Weighting Game, Desserts Is Stressed Spelled Backwards, and Born to Spend.

I have been following the press and news releases about Boston’s tragedy for a few weeks now and a current theme I read or hear are the words BOSTON STRONG! I myself understand the meaning behind what has been said about Boston, they are a long established community that stands strong in the face of adversity or even something as common as a Red Sox game. Being a Yankee fan once living on the east coast, I have witnessed their strength first hand.

“The people of Boston are strong like cement. Strong people. They get together when it’s needed,” said Robert Bibias, a city masonry worker, as reported by Ziad Jaber of NBC News.

Today they opened the sidewalk of the bombing site, which was freshly paved over with new cement. The laying down of the new cement takes away the crime scene and symbolizes the restoration normality in the daily lives of the people of Boston. While normality is being regained this does not mean people aren’t still dealing with the pain and suffering that was inflicted but it is a start in the healing process. During this tragedy and the days that have followed, I have found hope and strength from images and stories of how the Boston community came together, worked together, and stood strong to help each other.

As Boston goes through the healing process a question continuously comes to my mind, Is our community Strong like Boston? Could we band together in times of chaos and tragedy to help each other? Is there more we can do as a community to prepare or build our strength? No one wants to go through tragedy to test these questions, but maybe a tragedy does not have to occur for our community to toughen up with resources and ways to help each other. During this next month look around our beautiful beach town of a community and ask yourself, what can I do to make our community stronger, like Boston Strong!

From the desk of a Santa Barbara Therapist to you, here are some resources to help yourself, your kids, and your community:

Resources to help yourself and kids in the wake of the tragedy in Boston:

From the American Psychological Association:

Managing Traumatic Stress – Coping With Terrorism

Coping with Disaster Resources:

Explosions (section on After an Explosion) (FEMA)

Coping with Disaster (FEMA)

Managing traumatic stress: Tips for recovering from disaster and other traumatic events (APA)

Taking care of your emotional health after a disaster (Red Cross)

Recovering Emotionally (Red Cross)

Helping Children Cope with Disaster

Disaster Distress Helpline (24/7 phone and text) (SAMHSA)

Building Your Resilience (APA)

By Jim Piekarski

It is important to help clients learn how to deal with emotions in the context of their interpersonal relationships. Clients are most emotional with those they care about. When things are going well these relationships are the source of love, support and joy. Paradoxically, our clients’ closest relationships are also the ones that trigger anger, guilt, shame and fear. Helping clients learn how to master their emotions will help them transform their relationships, heal themselves, and improve the quality of their life.

Author and psychotherapist, Jim Piekarski, shared insights gained from cognitive behavior therapy, mindfulness, and relational psychotherapy to share tools useful in helping clients navigate a way out of the knottiest relationship difficulties.

Empower your clients with the skills to transform their most difficult relationships into healthy caring ones.

Learning Objectives:

1. Understand the definition of emotional reactivity and how it differs from healthy emotion.

2. Learn the benefits of helping clients focus on the problem of emotional reactivity in therapy because emotional reactivity is so destructive to insight and good communication.

3. Learning the beginning steps to overcome emotional reactivity.

Jim Piekarski is a licensed marriage and family therapist who lives in Southern California. He is the author of Mastering Your Emotions with Your Spouse and Others, Seven Steps for Transforming Emotional Reactivity, which comes from his experience working with couples, families and individuals over the last 30 years. He is the Clinical Director of Phoenix of Santa Barbara, a non-profit agency that treats adults with mental disorders. He also is a clinical supervisor for interns and trainees who are learning to become therapists at the Salvation Army Hospitality House in Santa Barbara. He has served as an adjunct professor at various colleges in the Santa Barbara area.

•••••••••••••••••••••

On Amazon: Mastering Your Emotions with Your Spouse and Others: Seven Steps for Transforming Emotional Reactivity

www.masteringyouremotions.net

As spring is upon us, we at Santa Barbara CAMFT are excited to share what is in store for the upcoming months. Registration is now open for our April luncheon, welcoming James Freeman in the discussion of Collaborative Problem Solving. This talk will explore fresh interventions for clinicians, educators and parents in working with oppositional youth.

Our May luncheon is with our very own Russ Collins and Lauren Collins, J.D. who will focus on the discussion of Parental Alienation and what every therapist should know on this topic.

As far as statewide news, your state CAMFT’s 49th Annual Conference will be held May 16 – 19th in Sacramento. We hope that Santa Barbara will be highly represented at this exciting event. There are other educational opportunities offered by State CAMFT, obtain more information by visiting their website www.camft.org.

I would like to thank our Santa Barbara CAMFT community as I transition from President Elect to President of our chapter. I welcome comments and suggestions regarding Santa Barbara CAMFT and how we, as a board, can make your experience as members more pleasurable.

If you are interested in obtaining more information on how you can become more involved in Santa Barbara CAMFT, please feel free to contact any board member by email.

Warm wishes,
Kandace Overgaag, MFT
president@santabarbaratherapy.com

We have some great reads on the news blog this month which I hope will be stimulating and inspiring in your personal and professional practice. I would also like to take this opportunity to extend a special offer to our members and colleagues, whereby one can advertise an event on our events calendar for half price throughout the months of April, May and June. This would be $25.00 and $40.00/mo., respectively for members and non-members, and would include a link to the event’s page.

Additionally, as a SB CAMFT member benefit, we will also include the event in the May and June e-Newsletter at no cost. The e-Newsletter goes out to SB CAMFT members at the beginning of each month. Please email me at editor@sbtherapynews.org if you are interested in taking advantage of this offer. Thank you all for your continued support and involvement in the community

Danah moved to Santa Barbara in the Fall of 2010 to attend Antioch University where she earned her Master’s Degree in Clinical Psychology and was awarded the prestigious MFT Consortium Stipend in 2011-2012 for her commitment to serving culturally diverse populations and provide mental health services that promote wellness, recovery and resilience in underserved communities.

Danah joined the Board of Directors of Santa Barbara CAMFT in October 2010 where she served diligently as Secretary for two years. Demonstrating an excellence in organizational, interpersonal and planning skills in this role, Danah was encouraged by president elect Debbie McHann and president incumbent Kandace Overgaag, to take on the role of Program Chair.

Danah is presently employing the same skills and creativity as Program Chair and organizes the chapter’s monthly luncheons among other responsibilities. One of Danah’s priorities is to continually enhance monthly CEU presentations and bring fresh insights to 2013 programming.

In the past year and a half, Danah has discovered a passion for running and has completed two half marathons and one full marathon while raising funds for blood cancer research and treatments with the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s Team in Training program. She is currently training for the San Diego Rock N’ Roll Full Marathon in June 2013 and her first triathlon in September 2013.

Danah loves languages, is fluent in American Sign Language and is currently studying Spanish intensively. In town, you can find Danah dining in one of Santa Barbara’s great eateries, at the movie the theater, tasting local wine or volunteering at the county animal shelter’s DAWG program. SB CAMFT is grateful for having Danah on-board and values her professionalism and dedication in serving the community as well as the positive energy that she puts into her work.