Charming

Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
(Proverbs 31:30).

In life, things are not always pleasant. A charming person is one who can sugar coat unpleasantness and smooth things over. "Extremely pleasing"-that's the definition given by Merriam-Webster. Can one be charming without being deceptive? Is there a way to always say the pleasant things with sincerity?

By my observations, there are different types of "charming" individuals. The first one are the entrepreneurs. They are charming with the purpose to gain a business. Entrepreneurs have amazing capabilities to be charming especially to their customers to the point of telling blatant lies. Often, they are so used to operate in this fashion that even in their non-business life, they also operate this way. The second one are those who charm to gain popularity. Politicians are classic examples. These people prize the good opinions of others. They want to be seen as nice, friendly, agreeable and easy going. Finally, there are those who balance charming words and edifying words. These people are usually highly principled and uncompromising but also are genuinely interested in others. You see to be a charming individual one have to show interest in others' well being.

Because of my upbringing, I used to be suspicious of charming people until I encountered one charming person, Lana Packer, a pastor's wife. I was suspicious of her at first. But overtime, I found no evidence of deceit in her charms. You see beside showing genuine interest in others and gentle with her words, Lana never fails to deliver edifying words when opportunity presents itself and she does it in non-judgmental ways. Her tone of voice indicates high expectation in others and belief that people are capable of achieving Christian ideals. I consider myself blessed that our paths crossed briefly. Because of her, I now choose to believe that charming people especially Christians, are sincere until I can prove otherwise.

So, is charm deceptive? Yes, charm is deceptive when principles are allowed to be compromised and and edifying words are withheld.

The Mental Helath Professionals

Every professional should do his/her due diligence so as not to do any disservice to the people they are serving. If you are a financial adviser, you should know your financial products down to the fine prints so that you can explain fully the risk factors of the products to the people who are going to hand over their money to you. If you are a doctor, you should know the latest and proven methods for accurate diagnosis and effective treatment to ensure that your patients' well being is not put in jeopardy. If you are a teacher, you are to do your due diligence to ensure that you are not imparting the wrong value, giving inaccurate information or delivering materials that are too easy and not challenging to your students. If you are a defense lawyer, you are to present the strongest defense possible so that you clients, who might be either innocent or guilty, are given the due process of justice.

The mental health professionals do not escape this scrutiny. The standard code of ethics call for psychologists to not cause harm, and to ensure that clients benefit from our services. One way to ensure these are met is to use only scientifically proven treatment methods. This is the heart of the matter. Acquiring information on scientifically proven methods basically involved reading of journal articles to keep abreast with the latest development. In the clinical setting I was attached to, the psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, and specialist teachers get together once a week to share journal articles pertaining to their fields. However, employing the appropriate and proven treatment method is one thing, maintaining fidelity of treatment during service delivery is another thing. It requires conscientiousness and meticulousness in the part of the professionals. Extensive preparation is needed so that the 50 minutes you are charging your clients are not wasted.

I have been observing the graduate students in my programme. The programme is leading toward certified practice. The students in the programme are supposed to be "The Elect" few. I was told that out of more than 400 qualified applicants to the programme, only 100 were carefully interviewed by fellow psychologists. The interviews were supposed to weed out "unsuitable candidates" whatever that means. And out of the 100, only 20 were selected. To fully prepare oneself to be an effective mental health professional, I found reading the required texts was not enough. Sadly, I observed, the future psychologists I encountered, were not diligently equipping themselves to be good practitioners. If they are not conscientious during training, what level of conscientiousness can you expect after the certificates are in hands?