LDR 711A Week 4 Discussion 1 | Assignment Help | University Of Phoenix
- University of Phoenix / LDR 711A
- 18 Oct 2019
- Price: $8
- Other / Other
LDR 711A Week 4 Discussion 1 | Assignment Help | University Of Phoenix
Week 4 Discussion 1
Discussion Topic
Students need to contribute three substantive posts in this discussion
by the due date indicated. The substantive posts must include a 150+ word
response to the discussion question and a 150+ word response to 2 additional
[separate] students. Late discussion posts do not earn credit. A response to
the discussion activity must be posted on time in order to receive credit for
posts to additional students.
Read Case 11.1: Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness, page
276.
Reply to the four questions at the end of the case, 150+
words.
Ensure you cite and reference your replies appropriately,
per the examples provided in the Week 1 APA Citing and Reference Examples
document.
Reply to 2 additional
students, 150 plus words each.
CASE 11.1
Silence, Stigma, and
Mental Illness
Madeline Halpert and
Eva Rosenfeld had three things in common: They were on the high school
newspaper staff, they both suffered from depression, and until they shared
their experiences with each other, both felt the isolation of the stigma that
comes with suffering from mental illness.
p.278
The two student editors
knew they were far from the only ones in their high school that experienced
these challenges and, in a concerted effort to support others and lessen the
stigma of mental illness, decided to write an in-depth feature on the topic for
their student newspaper. Recent cases of school shootings had brought mental
illness in teens to the forefront, and evidence shows that depression is a
major cause of suicide in young people.
Yet, the strong stigma
that surrounds depression and mental illness often isolates those who suffer
from it. The purpose of Eva and Madeline’s feature was to open the dialogue and
end the stigma. They interviewed a number of teens from schools in the
surrounding area who agreed to use their real names and share their personal
stories about mental illness, including depression, eating disorders, and
homelessness. The student editors even obtained waivers from the subjects’
parents giving them permission to use the stories. However, their stories never
made it to print.
While they were putting
the story together, their school’s principal called them into her office and
told them about a former college football player from the area who struggled
with depression and would be willing to be interviewed. The editors declined,
not wanting to replace the deeply personal articles about their peers with one
from someone removed from the students. The principal then told them she
wouldn’t support printing the stories. She objected to the use of students’
real names, saying she feared potential personal repercussions such as bullying
or further mental health problems that publishing such an article could have on
those students. District officials stood by the principal’s decision to halt
printing of the piece, saying it was the right one to protect the students
featured in the article.
This move surprised the
two student editors because they felt that their school had a very tolerant
atmosphere, which included offering a depression awareness group. “We were
surprised that the administration and the adults who advocated for mental
health awareness were the ones standing in the way of it,” they wrote. “By
telling us that students could not talk openly about their struggles, they
reinforced the very stigma we were trying to eliminate.”
Instead, the two
editors penned an op-ed piece, “Depressed, but Not Ashamed,” which was
published in The New York Times .
The article discussed their dismay with having the articles halted by school
administrators, an act that they believe further stigmatized those with mental
illnesses.
“By interviewing these
teenagers for our newspaper, we tried—and failed—to start small in the fight
against stigma. Unfortunately, we’ve learned this won’t be easy. It seems that
those who are charged with advocating for our well-being aren’t ready yet to
let us have an open and honest dialogue about depression,” they wrote.
The op-ed piece
generated a response—and, interestingly, a dialogue—about the topic.
The two student editors
were subsequently interviewed on the National Public Radio show Weekend Edition (2014). In that
interview, the editors acknowledged that they had experienced mostly positive reactions
to their piece, with more than 200 comments after the initial publishing of
their article. Many of those comments said the article resonated with readers
and gave them the courage to talk to someone about their struggles with mental
illness in a way they hadn’t before.
“And I think, most
importantly, it’s opening a dialogue,” said one of the editors in the
interview. “There were negative comments. There were positive comments. But the
most important thing is that it’s so amazing to see people discussing this and
finally opening up about it.”
Questions
1. How
do you define the problem the editors were trying to address? Was this a technical or an adaptive challenge?
2. What
is your reaction to what the principal did in this situation? How do you think
what she did fits in with providing
direction, protection, orientation, conflict management, and productive norms?
3. Describe
the holding environment in
this case. Was the holding environment sufficient to meet the adaptive
challenges in this situation? How would you improve it?
4. Based
on Figure
11.1 , discuss who were the adaptive leaders in this case. Which of
the leader behaviors ( get on the balcony, identify
adaptive challenges, regulate distress, etc.) did these leaders exhibit?