This is my old resume assignment when I was in senior high school
Check this out..
Forgiveness,
Unforgiveness, Health, and Disease
There are some association between
forgiveness and unforgiveness, and health and disease. Firstly, unforgiveness
is defined as stress response fostered into negative emotions through
rumination. However, unforgiveness is obviously different from the immediate
emotional response to a perceived injustice which makes people who experiences
offense cannot be assumed as suffers unforgiveness. On the other hand,
forgiveness is known as the reduction of unforgiveness by reducing negative
emotions while increasing positive response. Those conditions are closely
related to health and disease assumed by some hypotheses that will be explained
on further notions as follow.
(1)
Unforgiveness
is associated with health risks
Health
problems are perceived as the manner similar to chronic stress. In a short term, unforgiveness shows the increase
of negative emotions intensively as well as the psychological responses. When blood
chemistry is getting higher, the case closed to unforgiveness becomes
problematic. Moreover, revealing the psychological area of unforgiveness including
range, frequency, duration, and intensity related to health and disease needs intensive
monitoring so that consequences of severe trauma can be upheld. Besides, the
core of unforgiveness (e.g., anger, hostility, blame, fear, etc.) is well known
as the emotions linked to health risks
for it leads to a sense of mistreatment which is harmful for blood pressure.
Obviously,
some identified behaviors of
unforgiveness are causing disease since one of the results is autonomic nervous
system hyper arousal suffered by a person who gets severe unforgiveness.
Intuitively, unforgiveness leads someone to make a distance with others, affect
relationships, create vulnerable social contact, and loose integrity. Therefore,
it is reasonable that some behaviors of unforgiveness will create social
isolation and endangered health. However, some findings show that not all core
of forgiveness such as anger and hostility caused health problem in the ongoing
recognition since the definition, differentiation, and measurement of
unforgiveness are still blurred. Therefore, people need to be concerned on what
border they use to blame unforgiveness facing the impact of reducing
unforgiveness and promoting forgiveness to make sure that they are not being misled.
(2)
Positive
states that are characteristics of forgiveness have health benefits beyond the
associations with the reduction of unforgiveness
The
core of forgiveness as it brings negative emotions needs to be not only
reduced, but also changed into positive emotions to get a better health. The
reduction of negative emotion can be started through the management of time and
self control by means of having positive
thought that will affect health. Some researchers have had already
conducted to collect the evidences of forgiveness impact. One of them enables
to show tremendous findings that forgiveness will continuously increase Immunoglobulin A and stabilize
the blood pressure and skin conductance.
(3)
Forgiveness
intervention product change in health and disease outcomes when evaluated with
randomized trials
The
research conducted by Waltman was
already evaluated and examined by some further and similar researches toward
patients of heart diseases. The examination held for the coronary artery
disease which is measured by checking myocardial perfusion, heart rate, blood
pressure, and undergoing nuclear heart scan. Waltman examined heart diseases by using pretest, follow-up
checking, and posttest. Unfortunately, after some researches had done, the
setting of accurate indicators to invent the assessment toward the relationship
between unforgiveness and forgiveness, and health and disease still need to be
conducted. Therefore, we do wish that the future intervention will get better.
Each case
needs to be solved. To open the path of further intervention, we need to
provide some solutions and arrange research direction to make it in line with
this area.
1)
Construct
Refinement And Measurement
Beside
the different definitions of forgiveness and unforgiveness existed, the current
assessment and method applied to the researches are also vary. These conditions
lead the confusion toward further invention. In short, better understanding the
nature as well as the extent of negative and positive states is important to
the future of forgiveness research.
2)
Indirect
Models
The
advanced knowledge must be mastered on how the natural history of both
forgiveness and unforgiveness. Therefore, the model of approach which is closely
fitted to the research conducted is interpersonal approach to get into personal
stimulus. In addition, meditational models of various forms should be tested
(e.g., unforgiveness-substance
use-illness or optimism-forgiveness-related positive affect-health outcome).
3)
Long
Term Longitudinal Studies
It
clarifies the typical course of harmful physiological states reacted to unforgiveness. The long-term
health risks associated with dispositional unforgiveness need to be documented.
The potentially bidirectional, if not multidirectional, nature of the
illness-unforgiveness relationship should be explored. The unique health
effects of unforgiveness reduction and forgiveness need to be clarified. The long-term
health impacts of forgiveness interventions should be tracked. The logistical
and financial burdens of such studies are great, but so might be the rewards.
Some
recommendations are provided to avoid overstating claims about nature of the
forgiveness-health association after the providing plausible links that has
been elaborated. First, forgiveness has to be stated as the right path of
unforgiveness reduction because the means of other paths deserve more research
attention. Second, if contraindicated forgiveness occurs, then further
invention will be known as a form of “premature forgiveness”. Third, the
practice of forgiveness research has to be nearly connected to the cultural
bound since the multicultural meaning of forgiveness is now poorly understood.
Last, the use of forgiveness as the reduction of unforgiveness needs a kind of
balancing toward the relationship between patients and doctors to reduce a
tendency of being offended and the implication of grudge harboring in the
process of examining this area.
We need to
emphasize that this chapter focuses on forgiveness and unforgiveness as
proximal to health outcomes. However, given prevailing proximal and causal
perspective of almost all empirical studies, the more distal and indirect
relationships linking forgiveness and health are sorely in need of study. Another
important area of future forgiveness research and application is the
recognition and treatment of unforgiveness. For example, U.S. Institute of
Medicine (2000) estimates that 44,000-98,000 Americans die each year because of
medical errors, and many more are non-fatally injured and disabled. The stress
of unforgiveness in these contexts may exacerbate the already compromised
health in surviving patients, may add additional burdens to family system
already under stress, and may impact the health and professional functioning of
the responsible health care providers.
In a nutshell, current work linking
unforgiveness and forgiveness to short term of both physiological and psychological
variable provides some plausible hypotheses, yet not concludes the accurate
evidences of related link between emotions and health. Even if the invention in
need is not yet conducted, we believe that the more precise construct
definition and measurement, more fine-grained and long-term assessment
schedules, the more advance our understanding toward links related to this area
will be.
