FREEDOM, RESPONSIBILITY AND SPIRITUALITY IN CHILDREN
DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
José Martínez-Romero Gandos
We need to find and to develop our ability to find
MEANING in the most difficult times, especially in extremely stressful
situations. That is the most important skill that we can hone throughout our lives.
Viktor Frankl's book, MAN'S SEARCH FOR MEANING (1963), provides the most
compelling and moving biographical account of the prospect of increasing
humanity's ability to persevere through the unimaginable.
We must remember that, according to a survey conducted
by the Book-of-the-Month Club, and the Library of Congress, Man's Search for
Meaning belongs to a list of "…the ten most influential books in the
United States” (Frankl, 2014; 147). At the time of the author's death in 1997,
the book had sold over 10 million copies and had been translated into 24
languages.
The aim of this article is to draw form Dr. Frankl's
experience in the concentration camps and subsequent adjustment to normal
social life. In this light, it will explore the ability of children and adults
to recover after the pandemic called Covid-19.
What is the meaning of life? Let Dr. Frankl tell us
something about it: "I doubt that a doctor can answer this question in
general terms. Because the meaning of life differs from one man to another,
from one day to another and from one hour to another. What matters, therefore,
is not the meaning of life in general, but rather the specific meaning of a
person's life at any given time." (Frankl 1963; 171)
I propose that, together, we explore the future
possibilities that children may have to overcome the effects or trauma of the
pandemic. It is difficult to comment on this issue since children are our hope
and depend on the decisions of adults and institutions. At the time of the writing
of this article, the high number of deaths and contagion rates worldwide are
alarming. Nevertheless, the statistics indicate that the incidence of Covid-19 in
children is lower than in the general population and that, even though children
may not become as seriously affected by the disease as elderly adults, they can
carry the disease and infect each other and as adults. We could ask ourselves,
what will be their personal and social lives like after the pandemic?
A fleeting memory comes to my mind, something that I
read in “El hombre doliente” (Suffering Human Being; Frankl, 1983), many years
ago. I am at a library, highlighting a few comments about childhood in this
book. The first thing that stands out is a reference to Jaspers with the words "…providence
should be given a chance" (Frankl 1987; p. 145). Hastily, I look for
Jaspers' book "La Filosofía" (1968; p.56, Spanish version) in my
library and there I find written: "The freedom of man opens him up to the
insecurity of his being, while opportunities can open it so that it becomes
what is most appropriate. Man is given to freely manage his existence as if he
were a material. That is why he is the only one with a history, that is, he
lives from tradition instead of just living from his biological inheritance. Man's
existence does not proceed as natural processes. But his freedom cries out for
direction."
This last sentence makes me think that the direction
given by the authorities for children to stay at home at this time may be
understandable. Viktor Frankl adds: "It may be the case that the way of
being of a child cannot be biologically adjusted, but psychological adjustments
are possible, since many defects can be corrected through education" (1987;
p.140). Furthermore, he states that “…If we understand bodily existence as
life, a child's life is the work of his parents. However, if we do not
understand life as merely corporeal existence, but a spiritual way of being (=
essence), thus, not on the biological level, but on the biographical level--the
life of a human being is actually his own vital work” (Frankl, 1987; p. 140).
From these quotation we can infer that children develop their personality and
unfold their existence, according to this "vital work" that is
surrounded and conditioned by the family environment, the school environment,
the social environment and the spiritual environment.
Let us recall that, according to Frankl (2014),
spirituality belongs to human existence, along with freedom and responsibility.
The critical anthropology that governs the psychotherapeutic system of
Logotherapy and Existential Analysis allows to approach a wide spectrum of
clinical psychiatric and psychological descriptions that differentiate it from
current systems, addressing a somatic development (somatogenesis), a psychic
development (psychogenesis) but, above all, a development through the spirit
(noögenesis).
For these considerations, Frankl’s theory and methods are
especially applicable to noöetic problems that require a specific
psychotherapy. This is the case of the problems derived from the incidence of
the Covid-19 pandemic in the general population and in children. Thus, Logotherapy
can be a helpful method of choice in overcoming the effects of the pandemic.
In times of crisis, we can reinforce our value system
that is rooted in the deepest part of our personality. However, that task will not
be easy if humanity denies the human capacity for a dimensional self-understanding
and falls back into the absurdity of consumption, addiction, or the attempt to
overcome depression through commercial daze. The pandemic offers a unique
moment in time to turn the situation into an opportunity, as Jaspers pointed
out. The Greeks called this opportunity “Kairos.” Kairos represents an
undetermined period in which something important happens. Its literal meaning
is "suitable or opportune moment.” In the Judeo-Christian theology, Kairos
is known as "God's time.”
But there is not much time to lose. If we do not do
something about this reality that we have to live in the XXI century, we run
the risk of not making modifications to our individual and social behavior. The
effect will be having lost the unique and un-repeatable possibility that will
disappear forever.
There is a lot of information in the media about the
effect of the coronavirus pandemic. They are not always truthful. They are not
always well intentioned. Effects on the climate, on consumption, on capital, on
mental or physical health seem to foreshadow a not too distant but uncertain
future.
As I write these lines, in the Spain, the country
where I reside, the authorities have introduced strict regulations for more
than a month now. People have been confined to their homes and production has
been limited to what has been called "essential elements for subsistence."
While compliance is good, there is still an overwhelming number of violations
of these rules.
Many adults do not tolerate being at home and look for
loopholes and excuses that would allow them to go outside: walk the dog (but
several times a day), rent a dog for a walk, go to the supermarket several
times a day or simply move with banal excuses or lies. The pandemic presents an
inevitable situation before which, necessarily, we must make a fundamental
decision. This "limit situation" (Jaspers) is described by Frankl as
an experience related to suffering, guilt or death. The path that opens up in
the face of this situation is clear: we must re-evaluate our individual and
collective past, re-examine our sense of ethics and solidarity, determine our
attitude towards our present, and orient ourselves towards self-transcendence
that we usually call “meaningful living.”
Responsibility is a uniquely human phenomenon that can
be manifested in relation to oneself, to others and to God (Marshall, 2017). However,
we are witnessing a different assumption of responsibility by governments, institutions,
or individuals. "I feel locked in a jail," some say to evade the
rule. This is surely the case if they have not "chosen to survive"
(Frankl 1983; p.163) but merely "happen to be a survivor.” If people would
chose to take care of themselves and of others, if they would exercise their
freedom to accept physical distancing to diminish the spread of the infection,
if they truly" loved "the other" with a commitment to care and a
spiritual exchange, they would understand another person’s essence that is singular,
unique and un-repeatable. They would be in a better position to affirm the value
of every life.
In a crisis like the one caused by this pandemic,
unprecedented in our recent history, any measures and restrictions allow us to
learn but also presents us with drawbacks. We should all try to assess the
possible effects, recognize the negatives, and reduce them to mitigate their
impact.
A major prejudice was produced by the misinformation
that children transmit the virus more easily than adults. This claim is false. The
reasons for the ease of transmission were attributed to “…not standing still,
not understanding or obeying all orders of prevention, care and cleanliness,”
or to “not understanding the situation.”
Children are very empathetic and can reason by
following the conversation on the subject with an adult who knows how to
approach them at their own level. However, usually we do not listen to them
well enough to have an insight into their concerns. We do not know about their
complaints in isolation or about their limitation in games and social exchange.
Perhaps many things need to be rethought about children's social contact in
these circumstances. Or, we can follow the exhortation: "Unless you change
and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of
heaven" (Mt. 18; 1-4).
It is always good to remember that children are not a
private property of their parents. They are not objects, that belong to his
family but subjects of law. With their characteristics, they are an important
part of the community. Their special needs are regulated in different countries
and in international law.
Everyone has the same rights, but under current
circumstances not everyone has access to the same benefits. There is not always
a green free zone nearby where safety and hygiene distances can be maintained.
They cannot always access nature in the same way as adults do, and their
freedom is limited according to the climates and seasons. Not everyone has
access to technology, either.
In quarantine, families need to allow children to
express their experiences in different ways: drawings, stories, music, dances,
etc. The school routine is altered. In our environment, teachers send homework
online daily. But not all families have equal possibilities, even in modern
cities. For example, you need to print the exercises that are sent day by day.
What if the printer runs out of ink? There is no possibility to replace the
cartridge. What if the family does not own a printer? In any case, communication,
community, and solidarity are essential.
We must recall Frankl once again, (1987; p, 21; 33)
when he talks about the avenues of attitudinal, experiential, and creative
values. Attitudinal values refer to the capacity to find meaning in suffering,
transforming a personal tragedy into a triumph. Experiential values are
characterized by their “gratuitousness”, that is, it is what we receive from
the world, from nature, from the senses, from contact with others through love,
at no cost. And the creative values, which are essential for the development of
our children during this crisis, embody our ability to give the world through our
own unique ways of responding.
Isolated children at home exhaust the use of toys at
their disposal. --It is time to engage their creativity: Recycle boxes, bags,
objects and "create" new social, personal, or family situations. It
may be the case that communication can be promoted via computerized means.
Without tiring the reader but considering that
personal isolation gives experience, I would like to mention that, two days ago,
my grandson turned seven years old during a thirty-day confinement. Several mothers
organized a greeting from all their classmates, including the teacher, via a
current application. The surprise was supreme, and the enjoyment resembled a
true birthday party. After talking to each one, he showed them the family table
with his birthday cake and some of the ad-hoc home-made decorations to which he
himself had contributed. Phone calls from family and friends and improvised small
gifts bought at the local news stand--the only business allowed to remain open except
the supermarkets and pharmacies—made this day special. His conclusion: "I
did not plan to have such a fun birthday with so many gifts." --Quarantined
and finding meaning, despite everything!
Is there a sense of life for all ages or does each age
have its own meaning? We can recall that the existence of man is conceived on a
continuum, a linear course, without artificial bends. Frankl reminds us: “If
the meaning resides in the world and not primarily in ourselves, man should not
ask about the meaning of existence, but conversely, he should interpret himself
as the being who is questioned, and his own existence as a question mark; It’s
not the individual who must ask, but it’s life that asks questions; the
individual must answer and, consequently, take responsibility for his life ”
(Frankl 1987; p.34).
Meaning is not given to us. We must discover it. It
does not appear in front of our eyes as an automatic conclusion. The process is
gradual, specific and painstakingly projected on the background of the
surrounding reality. How do we learn to follow this path? Our first teacher is
the family, an excellent socializing ground that allows us to search for and
subsequently carry out meaning that is personal, unique and self-transcendent.
The family is the foundational embryonic cell of meaning
and the first school of values. Its health or weakness is closely linked with the
historical context of the communities or societies that the family influences
and is influenced by. It is a peculiar network that grants firmness and unity,
the source of the energy by which life becomes more human. Its education is an
education for freedom and responsibility. It teaches how to distinguish what is
essential from what is not, what makes sense from what does not; between what we
need to be responsible for and what is superfluous.
In opposition to a society that promotes hedonism, overcrowding,
consumerism and superficial well-being, the family stands as the natural and
essential promoter of the internalization of values, reflection on the meaning
of life, respect for authority and responsible exercise of freedom.
In the world around us during this century we have
seen the fundamental principles that distinguish us as a culture in danger.
There is a crisis of values. We observe that the material tries to impose
itself on the spiritual. Philosophical and political positivism impinge on the
natural order. The scientific and technological affects morality. The emphasis
on the possession of goods thwarts the worthy progress of humankind.
Paradoxically, the suffering caused by the worldwide
eruption of Covid-19, the deaths, its consequences in the socio-economic
reality caused by quarantine and the restriction of productive activity, has
illuminated the path that leads us to the door of transcendence. Despite that
the virus is transmitted much faster than any other virus known up to now, its
incidence spreading throughout the planet, full of hardships and obstacles, promotes that inner freedom that
acts as a “battle ram” which breaks the gates of pain or feelings of loss that
surrounds it and activates the ability to overcome and to move forward
"despite everything." Suffering acts as an inner philosopher that
each one possesses and that reveals the value of life, illuminating, making
transparent what seemed so difficult to grasp, opening up regions previously
veiled and truly enriching our existence.
Of course, by "suffering" we mean suffering
that cannot be avoided. We must always attempt to avoid unnecessary suffering.
Only in the face of the suffering that is imposed by the circumstances that we
cannot alter, such as in the case of a disease--that from which we cannot
escape--should we put attitudinal values into action. In Frankl’s words: “Man
is capable of changing the world for the better if possible, and of changing
himself for the better if necessary” (2014; p. 123).
Scientists and healthcare professionals are dedicated
to finding a cure to the viral infection. They seek cures with vaccines,
antibodies and antidotes. Many times, they forget that human beings are multi-faceted
and multi-dimensional beings. They offer to "heal our bodies" by attacking
the virus and propose physical distancing to prevent its spread. They are not
interested in the “cure” of the special dimension that requires tending: the
spirit.
"Cure" is a Latin word that designates
"care and concern." Our main "concern" is to establish
whether people can be "cured" along the bio-psycho-social-spiritual
dimensions.
The reality of all of us, plagued by the fear of
contagion, disease, and death, is the reality that, whatever the prognosis, there
are limits to our freedom that affects our sense of meaning-filled life. Saint
Augustine of Hippo said: “Incerta omnia, sola mors certa” (Everything is uncertain,
only death is certain. I.e., in Ps. 38:19). But despite this certainty, and the
factual universality of human death, there have been many ways in which it has
been understood and explained (i.e., O'Callaghan 2004; Lorizio 1994; Clark,
1993; Anderson, 1986; Carse, 1980; Aries, 1977; Pieper 1970).
A colleague from Peru recently remarked: “The last
problem revealed by the pandemic is that of the imperious Unamunian desire to
live. Or put another way, the imminent fear of dying. Death has come out of its
"letheia" (being hidden), its anonymity, its common places and has
reached the door of our houses. Now it is "aletheia" (no longer
hidden). Death is in the news. It is in the reports. We keep the account, and,
in the abstract illusion of the numbers, we move away from it. Statistics and
mathematics are abstractions. They strip events of their epic significance.
Information disciplines us, keeps us updated and in shape. Hence the chimera
that being informed is being safe” (Giuliano Milla, 2020).
Allow me to quote my answer in reply from an article
that I published under the title of “IPSEIDAD” (Martinez-Romero Gandos, 2020) in
regard to freedom and responsibility at the time of confinement:
“Existentialism highlights the given character (the
irreducibility) of existence, its priority over essence. The Latin origin of
the word "existence" refers to an etymology that expresses something
that "emerges, appears, becomes visible". The list of authors who
have dealt with the being of existence is very long. According to Vicente
Fatone, to exist is to be a being from afar because we are not limited to being
in the here and now since this reality does not exhaust us and projects us in
the search for our realization that always it is on the horizon as
unattainable. In this situation we have to choose at every moment among all our
possibilities, not the pasts that are no longer, but choosing them in a
creative manner that is only in the future. The process of choice is a
liberating process because it allows us to flee from what has already been
determined and created. This is freedom. But this freedom produces anguish. The
person who exists beyond him or herself can only feel threatened, always taking
a risk; and for this reason, we have to take care of ourselves. Thanks to this
care and cure--a caring interest--we are what we were created to be. The cure
is paradoxical; it’s care-ful, but it never gives security. The person, who can
cure, is the insecure, exposed being, the being who constantly runs the risk
being. In that being of possibilities that is human, there is always a
"not yet" that gives us the condition of being unfulfilled. We may
not be sure if we will be ‘finished” even in death. Because death is not
existence.”
Once again, let us be mindful of the account of Dr.
Frankl in “Man’s Search for Meaning: “…I found in a pocket of a newly acquired
coat a single page torn out of a Hebrew prayer book, which contained the main
Jewish prayer, Shema Yisrael. How
should I have interpreted such a “coincidence” other than as a challenge to
live my thoughts instead of merely putting them on paper? A bit later, I
remember, it seemed to me that I would die in the near future. In this critical
situation, however, my concern was different from that of most of my camrades
(sic). Their question was, “We will survive the camp? For, it not, all this
suffering has no meaning”. The question which beset my was, “Has all this
suffering, this dying around us, a meaning? For, if not, then ultimately there
is no meaning to survival; for a life whose meaning depends upon such a
happenstance –whether one escapes death or not – ultimately would not be worth
living at all” (Frankl 1963; 182/183).
Death is not a good topic for the end of this writing.
I prefer to talk about Hope. "What is not possible is optimism by decree.
We cannot order anyone to be optimistic, or to wait against all hope. Indeed,
no one can force hope, nor can the other two attitudes that constitute the
famous triad: faith and love "(Frankl 1983; 64).
We put our whole being at the service of Hope so that
with it, we can attain for our children a future of well-being, happiness and
free of post coronaviral trauma. Amen.
Jose Martinez-Romero Gandos, PhD. was born in Buenos Aires Argentina in 1940. He
completed his doctoral degree in Psychology at the Universidad del Salvador
(Buenos Aires) and at the University of A Corunha (Galicia-Spain). He practiced
psychology for thirty-two years in the Argentine Republic and for the past
eighteen years in Spain. He chairs the Galician Association of Existential
Analysis and Logotherapy where he is active as supervisor and presenter. He
authored several books, book chapters and articles. His latest book is entitled
“Logoterapia Grupal” (Group Logotherapy), Editorial Academica Espanola, 2020
[jmrsentido@gmail.com].
REFERENCES:
Anderson, R. S., (1986) Theology of death and dying. Oxford/New
York: Blackwell.
Ariès, P., (1977) Essais sur
l’histoire de la mort en Occident du Moyen Age à nos jours, Seuil, Paris.
Carse, J. P., (1980) Death and
existence. A conceptual history of human mortality. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Clark, D. (ed.) (1993) The sociology of death. Oxford,
UK: Blackwell.
Frankl, V. E. (2014). Man’s search for meaning.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Frankl, V. E. (2005 [1984]).
Der leidende Mensch. Anthropologische Grundlagen der Psychotherapie, 3rd ed.
Bern: Hans Huber.
Frankl
V. E. (1987) El hombre doliente. Fundamentos antropológicos de la psicoterapia,
Ed. Barcelona, Spain:
Herder.
Frankl, V. E. (1979) The
unheard cry for meaning. Psychotherapy & humanism. New York, NY: Simon and
Schuster/Touchstone Book.
Frankl, V. E. (1969) The will
to meaning. Foundations and applications of Logotherapy. New York, NY: New
American Library,
Frankl, V. E. (1963) Man's search
for meaning, New York, NY: Beacon Press.
Jaspers, K. (1968). La
filosofía. México D.F: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Jaspers, K (1994) Karl Jaspers: basic philosophical writings:
selections / ed., transl., and with intro. by Edith Ehrlich, Leonard H.
Ehrlich, George B. Pepper. New Jersey: Humanities Press International.
Lorizio, G. (ed.), (1994) Morte e sopravvivenza. In
dialogo con X. Tilliette, AVE, Roma.
Marshall, E. (2017). Freedom
of will in relationships. The International Forum for Logotherapy, 40(2),
87-96.
Milla, G. (2020).
Personal communication.
O’Callaghan, P., (2004)
La muerte y la esperanza, Madrid: Palabra.
Pieper, J., (1970) Muerte
e inmortalidad, Barcelona: Herder.
Martinez-Romero Gandos, J.
(2020). Ipseidad. [http://logoterapiagalicia.blogspot.com].
