Letters

More coverage needed on couples and smartphones

The article "Smartphone = not-so-smart parenting?" in the February issue of the Monitor addresses an important topic, but I thought the sidebar "Is ‘technoference' hurting your partner?" was unfortunately one-sided. The sidebar casts the issue of technology use (with a focus on smartphone use) impacting the quality of relationships as an issue that negatively impacts women, with men as the "perpetrators." I understand that the study summarized in the sidebar focused on the impact on women, but the Monitor could have clarified that it's an issue that also impacts men, with women as the "perpetrators." I have no idea what the statistics on the issue are in terms of prevalence, but, in fact, in my experience it's more likely to be an issue that negatively affects men, with women as the "perpetrators" (at least in my cohort — I'm 46).

Rob Michel, PhD
Washington, D.C.

Too much homework?

In response to the March article "Is homework a necessary evil?" I think we, psychologists, should be mindful of the impact homework has on many children who are able to learn, but cannot get their homework done. These children get misperceived as unmotivated. They receive constant, negative messages about themselves from family and school. The effects are cumulative, interfering with their education and emotional growth, and positioning them poorly for adult success. There are three specific aspects of homework, which should be understand.

Homework "time," e.g. 10 minutes per night per grade, is not a quantity of time, but an estimate in the teacher's mind. Among other factors, children differ in speed at which they work, and that dictates how long the assignment actually takes. Homework cannot teach "time management," if the homework session is anything but a clock-based unit of time.

Zeros for work not done are mathematically excessive. They affect parents more than students, and direct parents to make unwise decisions.

Home and school are separate organizations. Parents must be in charge of their homes just as teachers must be in charge of their classes. When parents lack the authority to make the final decisions in their home, it interferes with the child's need for stable, authoritative parents.

Until we grasp the psychological impact of these issues, there will always be a significant number of children who are destined to be harmed by homework policy.

Kenneth Goldberg, PhD
Westmont, New Jersey

Sexual orientation therapies

Regarding the September 2015 letter to the editor “Sexual Orientation Therapies,” the authors make a number of assertions that oppose both ethical and legal standards of practice. New legislation largely targets the treatment of applying sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) to minors; the presence of anti-gay bias contributing to harmful parenting decision of sexual minority minors is well-documented, consent issues with minors under social duress are poorly explored in case studies by advocates of SOCE, and the lack of evidence of complaints in this context is not equivalent to evidence of no harm. The APA report Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation is a helpful resource for clinicians seeking guidance in this area.

Similarly, once licensed, all professions yield some rights to speech presented in a professional context that will be considered the informed opinion of a psychologist on a given topic. This limitation on personal speech is covered in most EPPP study materials, and it is disappointing that this is a topic of confusion for at least three licensed psychologists. A political commitment to certain stances on SOCE is not protected speech when engaging professionally with clients, as the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal’s majority opinion recognized.

Subsequent to the Hoffman Report, it is more important now than ever to be mindful of our guiding ethical commitment to non-maleficence, and to be aware that the heavy weight of historical animosity toward sexual minorities, when expressed by licensed psychologists, is a powerful instrument of harm that the field should condemn.

Matthew D. Skinta, PhD , ABPP
Palo Alto University