Tagged: “Dr. Robert Enright”
Here is my first follow-up question: Isn’t it the case that if a forgiver withholds the forgiving until the other apologizes, then this gets the offender’s attention and therefore, he might examine his conscience sooner and deeper, ask for an apology, and change?
There is no guarantee that the other will change whether you withhold forgiveness or grant it unconditionally prior to his apology.
I would like to have a little debate with you on the issue of forgiving and apology from the offending person. My first question is this: Isn’t it selfish to forgive before the other apologizes? I say this because it seems that the forgiving then is all about the self to feel better rather than about a concern for the well-being of the one who is acting badly.
There can be a number of motives for forgiving prior to the other person’s apology. Yes, one motive might be for the one who forgives to feel better. Here is another motive: to reduce anger so that civil dialogue can start between the two people. Here is another: Someone might forgive so that anger is not displaced on innocent other people. Selfishness need not be a primary or exclusive motive to forgive before the other person apologizes.
Helping Abused Adolescents, Who Are in Corrections, to Forgive
Image by RDNE Stock project, Pexels.com
Drs. Wongeun Ji and Robert Enright this month had a research study published in the Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody, and Child Development. The study highlights the importance of being aware of the traumas suffered by these young people prior to their crimes, arrest, conviction, and imprisonment. It also highlights the effectiveness of a forgiveness program in reversing the negative effects of such trauma.
This study examined the effectiveness of a forgiveness education program for incarcerated female adolescents in South Korea who suffered from attachment disorders, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), and the psychological compromise of anger, anxiety, and depression. A total of 27 female offenders were randomly assigned to a forgiveness treatment or the standard programs offered at this particular institution. Both groups first were screened to be sure that each participant was high on the “adverse childhood experiences.” Each participant also was screened to be sure that she had significant psychological challenges, such as heightened anger and anxiety. In the end, there were 10 participants in the forgiveness experimental group and eight in the control group because some dropped out or did not want to fill out the post-test questionnaires. The forgiveness program lasted for four weeks, with the participants meeting as a group daily for five days each week, except for the final week in which three days were allotted for the program. They met for about 50 minutes for each forgiveness class, which focused on what forgiveness is and is not and the practice of kindness, respect, generosity, and love toward those who act unjustly. The instruction focused on story characters and people (through video reports) who have struggled to forgive. Group discussion followed the presentation of the stories or videos. Participants were encouraged to reflect on their family trauma, but to protect each person’s privacy, the participants were asked not to verbally share those family traumas within the group because this was an educational program, not a psychotherapy program.
When compared to the control group, the participants in the forgiveness treatment group demonstrated more decreases in anxiety and anger and increases in forgiveness and mother attachment. The study also discussed how staff members could serve as substitute attachment figures and promote better attachment outcomes. The results highlight the need for forgiveness programs in corrections because they allow the participants to heal from past traumas that may be contributing to the acting out of their frustrations onto other people.
It is unfortunate that too many correctional facilities do not yet see the strong utility of first giving forgiveness interventions to those imprisoned so that they can reduce anger and anxiety and, therefore, be more open to traditional rehabilitation approaches. After all, the control group had the usual corrections programs and they were not effective. The same kind of ineffective outcome with the usual corrections program occurred in the study with men in a maximum-security correctional context (Yu, L., Gambaro, M., Song, J., Teslik, M., Song, M., Komoski, M.C., Wollner, B., & Enright, R.D. [2021]. Forgiveness therapy in a maximum-security correctional institution: A randomized clinical trial. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy.) In other words, in two research studies to date, the hand-picked approaches by those in authority within the institutions created programs that, by themselves, do not work. In contrast, in each of these two studies, the forgiveness program was successful in enhancing psychological well-being.
The full article describing the above study in South Korea can be read here on the online version of the Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody, and Child Development.
The reference to that work in South Korea is:
Ji, W. & Enright, R.D. (2024). Forgiveness in juvenile corrections: An exploratory study on Korean female youth offenders. Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody, and Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2024.2436967
What if a person is not sure if what happened to him is a true injustice? For example, a co-worker yelled at me. Yet, I have to admit that I was over-bearing in what I was asking regarding a particular work task. I am not sure if maybe I deserved the yelling, in which case perhaps it was not an injustice at all requiring my forgiveness.
It seems that both of you could benefit from forgiving each other, if you choose to do so. You may have been unjust in being “over-bearing.” The other person had many choices with which to respond, and yelling was only one such possible response. The yelling, which could be interpreted as a lack of respect at the moment toward you, can be interpreted as an unjust event. Beyond forgiving each other, you also might consider seeking forgiveness from each other for these interactions.
A friend recently made the claim that people-pleasers are the best forgivers because they want others to praise them for their magnanimous overture of forgiveness. Does this make sense, or is there a flaw in this thinking?
I think, as you say, that there is a flaw in this reasoning because forgiveness is to will the good of the other person. The focus of genuine forgiveness is on the one who acted unjustly and not on the self to get the applause of others.
