Showing posts with label family court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family court. Show all posts

Saturday, January 3, 2009

Kilroy Café #22: "Words Don't Work"

Here is the latest Kilroy philosophy essay, released today. You can print it out on a single page via the pdf file, or you can read the full text below. Also see my other Kilroy Café newsletters.


WORDS DON'T WORK
Sorry, Folks — Education won’t change impulsive behavior.

By GLENN CAMPBELL

Get this into your thick skull: Words don't work.

No form of cognitive education will change an emotionally-driven behavior.

For example: Drug treatment programs don't work. Addicts who go through an addiction treatment program—of any kind—rarely have a better relapse record than those who don't go through it. Even the few programs that can prove, scientifically, that they work better than a placebo have such a low statistical success rate that they are hardly worth their huge cost. Quite simply, drug treatment is a fraud.

I'm not going to offer proof here, but just imagine if what I am saying were true. It would mean that advertizing campaigns, governments programs and court-mandated classes to treat addicts, drunk drivers and other impulsive offenders are a waste of money. It would mean Alcoholics Anonymous is a joke. It would mean Nicoderm, Weight Watchers, Bowflex and virtually every other product or service intended to modify habits and appetites are consumer rip-offs.

Think of the DARE program in public schools (Drug Awareness Resistance Education). The idea is to teach kids the dangers of drug abuse so they won't try it themselves. Parents, teachers, police and politicians love DARE. Social scientists hate it. Statistically, the program is useless in discouraging future drug use (if you compare two schools with and without the program). It may even be worse than useless, giving kids a virtual consumer's guide to drugs for future reference.

Am I saying that when Britney Spears checks into a very expensive rehab program, the treatment itself is completely ineffective in changing her future addictive behavior? Yes, that's exactly what I am saying.

If my claim is correct, it would mean that if your spouse smokes, drinks, overeats or watches too much sports on TV, there is virtually nothing you can do to stop them short of walking out.

Ah, but THAT sometimes works.

Threatening to leave doesn't work, but actually leaving might, provided you really go, close the door and don't turn back. Six months later, after you are long gone, your ex-spouse might realize, "Hmmm, maybe I should change."

There are only two things that can change an emotionally-driven behavior from the outside: (1) You can fundamentally alter the environment in which it takes place, or (2) You can allow the person to experience the full consequences of their actions.

If you remove a kid from a drug-addicted family and place him in one without drugs, his own chances of addiction will be greatly reduced. That's the environmental solution. It often works, but only if it's a radical restructuring that cuts to the core of the problem. Surface changes won't do.

If someone insists on drinking too much, and he suffers because of it, the best thing you can probably do is let him suffer. Those are the consequences. If he experiences them enough he might change or he might not (or he might be killed in the process), but his chances of changing are much greater than with any external program.

The technique you shouldn't bother with is talking the person out of his addiction. It doesn't work, and it's a waste of breath.

Taking away a smoker's cigarettes? Don't fall for it, even if the smoker begs you to. He'll kill you for those cigarettes later. You've also fallen into a trap, because you have substituted your own responsibility for what should be his.

The "will" to quit smoking, lose weight, quit porn or stop playing video games can only come from within. It comes from a combination of repeated consequential pain and the understanding that no one is going to save you but yourself.

Any treatment or education program says the opposite: "We're going to save you." As long as the addict is allowed to believe this—that his addiction is someone else's problem—then he is never going to change.

YOU can change whenever you want—You just have to believe you can.—but no one can impose this belief on you from the outside.

—G .C.


More of my comments on addiction....

©Glenn Campbell, PO Box 30303, Las Vegas, NV 89173. See my other philosophy newsletters at www.KilroyCafe.com.
You can distribute this newsletter on your own blog or website under the conditions given at the main entry for it.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Screenwriting Theory: The Atomic Treatment (Strawberry Fields)

While waking up this morning, I came up with a new screenwriting art form! I call it the “atomic treatment.” It is a whole scene or movie reduced to FOUR LINES.

An atomic treatment is the first thing you should write before attempting a longer treatment or a screenplay. Because it is only four lines, you can experiment with a lot of scenes in a short period of time before investing in heavier writing. Those four lines should be fascinating in themselves or it is not worth writing more.

The four lines of the treatment are labeled like this: SET-UP, CONFLICT, ACTION, TWIST. (Each “line” can actually be composed of several sentences.)

I have even written one to illustrate the concept….

STRAWBERRY FIELDS
SET-UP: A drug addict lies sprawled on a bed in his underwear. He is having a “bad trip,” revealed through a rapid series of disconnected flashbacks and fantasy images. He is walking in “strawberry fields forever” and is obviously disconnected from reality.

CONFLICT: The addict’s girlfriend comes in, realizes he is high and panics. She tells him he’s late for work, and that if he doesn’t get there he’s going to lose his job.

ACTION: The girlfriend and a series of other friends valiantly attempt to get the addict moving. They get him dressed, drive him to work, and usher him down an office hallway, while the addict fades in and out of reality. They encounter a uniformed officer in the hallway who quickly grasps what is happening. However, he doesn’t arrest the addict as expected but instead helps the others get him to his place of employment. They all seem to realize that if he loses his job, they do, too. They get him to a door, prop him up, put a black robe on him and push him through the door.
TWIST: He walks into a courtroom via the service door and becomes a judge! The bailiff says “All Rise!” The lawyers and litigants have all been waiting for him. He takes the bench, all are seated, and he says “Proceed.”

If I had time (which I don’t) I could turn this treatment into a longer one, adding complexity to it, eventually leading to a whole screenplay scene of anywhere from one to ten minutes.

But the advantage of an atomic treatment is that I have written it in a couple of minutes. It is already a whole story that stands on its own. We can discuss it, abandon it or file it away.

This simple concept is a lot more significant than it might seem. For me, it is the whole Rosetta Stone that unlocks screenwriting!

Friday, July 25, 2008

Sound Experiments

I haven't done much with sound editing, but I'd like to. As proof of the concept, here are two "sound experiments" I did for Family Court about two years ago. They demonstrate the capabilities of the Sony Sound Studio software I was using. Each is a little "song" of sorts lasting about a minute.

The first clip plays in the background of this page...


It demonstrates the cutting and pasting of sound clips. Be sure to click on the "backwards" link for the alternate version.

The second clip is a little story playing in the background of this page...


This was concocted entirely in the "studio" using background noises provided with the software.

One of my favorite jobs in the movie biz is "Foley artist" -- the person who provides the various environmental sounds of a movie.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

New Blog for Family Court


I got a little blog-crazy and created a whole new blog for Family Court in Las Vegas. I've been out of the game for a few months now (having mothballed FamilyCourtChronicles.com) and was suffering withdrawal symptoms. The new blog is here:


Just creating the blog and the introduction was exhausting enough. Only time will tell whether I have the energy to keep it up.

UPDATE 7/24/08: I decided to kill the blog before making any significant postings. I would be spreading myself too thin. Family Court will have to get along without me.