1

Community Psychology in Israel

Amiram Raviv

Mira Zeira

Keren Sharvit

Tel Aviv University

Chapter in:

S. Reich, M. Riemer, I. Prilleltensky, & M. Montero (Eds.) International

Community Psychology: History and theories. Kluwer.2007

1 2

Abstract

The chapter reviews activities by Israeli psychologists, in which community psychology principles are applied. It is argued that despite the small number of publications using the term “community psychology” and the absence of formal specialization and training in community psychology, many Israeli psychologists have internalized the principles of community psychology and implement them in their work. Specifically, we suggest that the application of community psychology principles, such as early detection, prevention, mental health consultation, crisis intervention, and the use of community resources and strengths, is most apparent in two areas of Israeli psychology: school psychology and crisis intervention in the context of Israel’s complex security situation. In the main sections of the chapter, we review and present examples for community-oriented activities in these areas.

2 3

Community Psychology in Israel

Introduction

When asked to review community psychology activities in Israel, we began by asking whether community psychology (CP) exists in Israel at all. This is a question of central importance since the concept of CP is rarely found in publications by Israeli writers, which might lead to the conclusion that CP barely exists in Israel. However, at the beginning of this chapter we shall argue that despite the small number of publications using the specific term, Israeli psychologists are familiar with the principles of CP and apply them extensively. The principles of community psychology, to which we shall refer throughout the chapter, are based on the principles delineated by Levine & Perkins (1997), and mainly include early identification, prevention, mental health consultation, crisis intervention, and the use of community resources and strengths. We will suggest that the application of CP principles in Israel is most apparent in two areas: school psychology and crisis intervention in the context of the security section. Therefore, in the main sections of the chapter we will review and present examples of community-oriented activities in these areas.

In Israel, there is no official specialization in CP, no specific training program, and the psychologists’ law does not recognize a specialization in CP (unlike Division

27 of the American Psychological Association). Furthermore, a search for the term

“community psychology” in the Szold Institute database of publications by Israeli authors yielded only three publications (Zaki, 1987, 1990, 2000). These publications refer to school psychology in Israel and the change it went through as it moved towards models of prevention and consultation. It may therefore seem that CP is

3 4 almost nonexistent in Israel. However, according to Wingenfeld and Newbrough

(2000), authors of a chapter on CP in an international perspective in the Handbook of

Community Psychology, Israel has a strong affinity to community approaches, beginning in the early days of statehood, and grounded in the socialist and humanist principles upon which the state was founded. Nevertheless, these authors argue that due to the fact that CP has never been formalized in Israel, it only provides a general perspective, and its principles can be found in various areas under different names.

In order to best represent activities conducted in Israel based on CP principles, we carried out a literature search of multiple databases, in both English and Hebrew

(this enables research to be more available to readers who cannot read Hebrew). We began by searching the Szold Institute database for such search words as “therapy and community” (yielding 32 publications), “educational psychology” (73 publications),

“community psychiatry” (40 publications), and “community social work” (24 publications). Next, we searched the Web of Science, Psycinfo, and ERIC databases for the combination “Community and Psychology”, and retrieved 103 additional publications. All publications were then screened for relevance. Our search of the literature supported our view that CP and its conceptual components, which we see as early detection, prevention, mental health consultation, crisis intervention, and the use of community resources and strengths, are most apparent in Israel in the areas of school psychology and interventions related to the security situation, many of which also take place within school settings. The main sections of our chapter will therefore review community-oriented activities in these areas. We also came across some publications, which referred to the application of CP principles in the areas of community mental health and interventions with poor or underprivileged populations in Israel. However, we chose not to elaborate on these activities in the present chapter,

4 5 due to the limited involvement of Israeli psychologists in them and their marginal relevance to CP.

School Psychology

The broadest application of the central aspects of CP can be found in the operation of school psychology services in Israel. School psychologists in Israel are subject to three authorities. The school psychology services are provided by municipal authorities, which are the psychologists’ direct employers. The supervision and professional development of the psychologists are the responsibility of Shefi – the psychology and counseling unit of the Ministry of Education, while issues of licensing and approval of ranks and specializations are handled by the Ministry of

Health (Raviv, Marshak-Pedhatzur, Raviv, & Erhard, 2002).

Shefi was established in the late 1960s, and is currently responsible for approximately 2,100 psychologists. Shefi sees school psychology as located at the intersection between the education system, the parents and the municipal community system, thus enabling the provision of services to children, parents, professional education teams and the municipal system (see cms.education.gov.il/educationCMS/ units/shefi/gapim/psychology). In line with this view, school psychology services in

Israel emphasize community-oriented approaches of early detection, primary and secondary prevention, consultation on mental health issues, and system-oriented approaches. The application of these principles is apparent in the definitions of Shefi's mission and areas of responsibility. Thus, the list of mandatory services provided by

Shefi, as determined by the Ministry of Education General Manager's Notice

(Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, 2003) includes the provision of consultation and follow-up services to educational teams and parents regarding

5 6 treatment of students, in order to ensure students' well-being and mental health through detection and prevention, and crisis intervention at the system and individual levels within educational institutions and in the community. Additional responsibilities listed by Shefi include, among other things, shaping the community's policy of individual treatment in the education system through local School

Psychology Service stations and planning committees in the local municipalities and school psychology counseling for educational institutions and municipal authorities

(see cms.education.gov.il/educationCMS/units/shefi/gapim/psychology). A manager of the education department of the city of Tel Aviv reflects the community-oriented approach of school psychologists well, “Psychologists… operate in two occasionally related spheres: On the one hand they… help individuals in various ways. On the other hand, they represent ‘society’, and through this role they assist the development and improvement of educational and social systems” (Levin, 1993, p. 7).

We shall attempt to present a summary of school psychology activities in

Israel, with an emphasis on the application of the above-mentioned principles of CP.

Early research on the activities of school psychologists in Israel revealed little relationship between these activities and the above-mentioned principles of CP (Raviv et al., 2002). In the early 1980s school psychologists devoted most of their time to individual diagnoses, but expressed dissatisfaction with the amount of time devoted to this task (Ziv, 1980). Within a few years, there was a movement toward greater application of CP principles with a decrease in the amount of time devoted to diagnoses and an increase in time spent on primary and secondary interventions, as well as assistance of students through work with parents and teachers (Raviv, 1984).

Yet this change was slow and in 1984 school psychologists still devoted most of their time to diagnoses and referrals to special education.

6 7

The last two decades of the 20th century brought significant social changes, which influenced schools in general, and school psychologists in particular.

Especially salient among these changes was the change in family structure (higher divorce rate and rising numbers of single-parent families) and the privatization of the psychology, which resulted in a greater number of psychologists who offered individual therapy. At the same time, schools became more autonomous and began searching for more effective methods of teaching. Education for excellence and parental involvement in schools were emphasized more than ever before. The central change made in Israeli school psychology during these years was an orientation towards a community worldview and community work, which included a greater tendency to assist students through work with parents and teachers. This orientation was based on the systems approach to education, which emphasizes understanding the behavior of children in relation to the larger systems (e.g. family, school, community) of which they are part, and the systems in relation to their contexts (Pianta, 1999).

According to the systems approach, children’s behavior is influenced by multiple factors such as their families, communities, social processes, cognitive development, schools, teachers, peers, and poverty. All of these factors must be taken into account if children’s well-being is to be efficiently promoted. The adoption of the systems approach led to a greater emphasis on psychological work with parents, with the child at the center, as a potential way to assist children. Interventions with parents were based on their importance as agents of childcare and change. The view that the child exists in two educational systems – the family and the school, which interact with each other, became prevalent. Thus, it seemed that through the parents there is a possibility to promote the mental health of both typically-developing and exceptional children and reduce difficulties and abnormalities. Therefore, these activities involved

7 8 a powerful preventive influence, both at the school level and at the family level

(Tatur, 1993).

In general, these changes in perspective led to a decrease in the amount of time psychologists devoted to individual diagnoses and an increase in the amount of time dedicated to primary and secondary prevention. In addition, school psychologists gained new clients – the regular students (rather than solely those with special needs).

It is at this point we can observe a growing emphasis on principles of community work, such as prevention, mental health consultation and crisis intervention.

School Psychology as community work.

A relatively new survey of school psychologists (Raviv et al., 2002) reveals a continuing trend toward community work in school psychology. The survey found that psychologists devote about three fifths of their time to system oriented activities, such as consulting with other professionals like principals and teachers, meetings, observations, and administrative work. The other two fifths of the time are devoted to more clinical activities such as therapy with individual children, counseling parents, and diagnoses. Below are descriptions of some of these system oriented activities.

One representative example of community fieldwork by school psychologist is a project of psychological and educational work with groups of preschool parents

(Tatur, 1993). This intervention, which was the first of its kind with Arab parents in

Jaffa, promoted greater involvement of parents in their children's preschools and direct communication with them, which continued even after the group work ended.

The intervention, which started a process of greater parental involvement in decisions regarding their children, led parents of children with special needs to be more receptive to guidance, and helped them with finding a support system. It also helped

8 9 parents feel empowered, all of which reflect principles of empowerment and use of community resources, which are central to CP.

Other examples of work with parents include programs that assist parents in developing skills of effective communication with their children. These include parenting schools operated by an organization with branches throughout the country, which provide group and individual guidance to parents and train non-professionals to assist parents with child-rearing problems (Abramson, 1982). Additional programs specialize in enrichment for children of low socio-economic status. One such program is “the challenge” (Lombard, 1981), which combines guidance at home by semi- professional tutors and group work with mothers and parents.

An example for the application of another central principle of CP, the primary prevention principle, can be found in a study by Klingman (1985). This study found that groups of normal children that were provided with information regarding the treatment they were about to receive and taught techniques for coping with stress, experienced less fear and coped more effectively with the stress caused by the medical procedure.

Another principle of CP is an ecological approach, which involves communication with multiple systems with which the person interacts. This principle is applied in school psychology through consultation with teachers and school staff, with an emphasis on achieving optimal classroom climate (Erhard, 2001; Raviv,

Raviv, & Reisel, 1990, 1993). A good example of this principle’s application can be found in a program implemented in Jerusalem (Benur, 1993), in which teachers were trained to conduct structured simulation activities in the classrooms (6th grade), intended to improve self-esteem and interpersonal relations among children. It was shown that within a short period of time, the program led to improved interpersonal

9 10 relations among the children and with their teachers, decreased need for defensiveness, and increased openness. Furthermore, the program stimulated multi- directional communication in the classroom and improved children's attention in class. Another conclusion was that teachers’ activities could be expanded to include direct and intentional coping with social and emotional problems, so that teachers could operate as agents and mediators of change.

Community approaches to child and adolescent violence. One of the greatest concerns in Israeli society in general, and the education system in particular, is the prevalence of violent behaviors among children and adolescents. Violence has been a central concern of the education system for many years, but in recent years interest in this issue has grown and become more consistent (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005).

Several studies have been conducted in order to assess the extent of youth violence and the factors which may contribute to it (Khoury-Kassabri, Benbenishty, Astor, &

Zeira, 2004; Laufer & Harel, 2003). The studies have found that child and adolescent violence is related to family, school, and community factors. Accordingly, many interventions aimed at coping with violence and reducing it, have taken a community- oriented approach which includes working with parents and other agents in the community. In addition, interventions aimed at improving classroom climate, which also apply CP principles, contribute to violence reduction indirectly (Erhard, 2001).

However, research and publications regarding the effectiveness of these interventions are still unavailable (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005).

Psychological interventions in the context of the security situation

Crisis intervention is considered a prominent aspect of CP. People who are involved in crises become vulnerable to prolonged psychopathology if they are left

10 11 untreated (Caplan, 1964; Lindemann, 1944). This highlights the importance of early detection and intervention, as well as the identification and development of support systems. The history of the state of Israel, as a country involved in a protracted conflict, contributes to the salience of this issue. Milgram (1978) even claimed that

Israel could be thought of as a natural laboratory for the study of stress induced by external factors such as war. In this section we shall attempt to briefly review the research and practice activities of Israeli psychologists in the area of crisis intervention in the context of the security situation, with an emphasis on community aspects. We shall begin by presenting activities conducted within the educational system, mainly by school psychologists, and then present different community and military organizations, which are also involved in crisis interventions in communities.

We will not be able to address all of the abundant and diverse activities conducted in this area. Therefore, we will only present some of the most salient and typical activities in order to illustrate the processes and developments in the field.

Early developments in war-related crisis intervention

It should first be pointed out that until 1974, only very little fieldwork and research on war-related stress were conducted in Israel, mainly due to the shortage of human resources and the fact that most of the state’s efforts in its early years were devoted to the integration of immigrants from various countries and the rehabilitation of holocaust survivors (Milgram, 1978). One of the few studies conducted following the 1967 Six Day War examined children’s reactions to the war and concluded that on first impression, most of them seem to have adapted to the state of war with no unusual difficulties or traumas (De Shalit, 1970).

The positive results of the Six Day War for the Israeli side and the economic prosperity in its aftermath enabled allocation of resources to the rehabilitation of those

11 12 harmed by the war: the physically and mentally wounded, their families, and the families of those who lost their lives: widows, orphans, and bereaved parents.

Although there was some awareness of the fate of psychological casualties of war in these early years, it was not until the Yom Kipur War in 1973 that the severity of the problem was fully recognized. The suddenness of the attack, the initial success of the

Syrian and Egyptian armies, the large numbers of casualties, and the conclusions drawn regarding the future of the middle east, led to the attribution of higher importance to war-related stress and effective coping with it (Milgram, 1978). One of the first studies on this issue (Teichman, Spiegel, & Teichman, 1978) examined crisis intervention conducted by volunteers with the families of soldiers who were missing in action. The intervention was organized by the Israeli psychologists and the guiding principles were mainly of passive intervention, which included listening and showing interest and empathy, without offering advice. The study found that reactions to crisis did not vary with cultural or age differences. The most frequent reaction was a search for information which was interpreted as a manifestation of the need for social affiliation. With regard to the intervention, the findings showed that the volunteers were well accepted by the families and became involved in emotional interactions with them. Both the families and the volunteers were satisfied with the intervention.

However, the authors do not report whether the intervention led to reduces stress and improved coping.

The center of community work in crisis intervention – school psychologists and the education system

Shortly after the Yom Kipur War, the education system and the school psychology services discovered that they lacked a theoretical doctrine, knowledge, and organized procedures for crisis intervention. Initial attempts by school

12 13 psychologists to provide the education system with opportunities to study and practice crisis intervention were met with avoidance and denial (Raviv, 2003). Based on the work of American psychiatrists Caplan (1964) and Lindemann (1944), the

Psychology and Counseling Service at the Ministry of Education (Shefi) created programs for raising teachers’ and parents’ awareness of the importance of early intervention in crises. These interventions were meant to prevent the development of psychopathology in response to crises. Later, primary prevention methods were developed, with the intention of providing the education system with the means to prepare for crises before they occur (Raviv, 2003). As a part of Shefi’s efforts to promote the development of intervention programs, an anthology was published in

1980, which provided professionals with up-to-date information on crisis intervention

(Raviv, Klingman, & Horowitz, 1980). In order to circumvent the resistance to the issue of war among the educational community, the anthology emphasized everyday stress and crisis situations unrelated to the security situation, such as diseases, accidents, and the like (Raviv, 2003).

This anthology already gave much emphasis to the importance of preventive work. Israeli authors, Klingman and Ayalon (1980), wrote about the importance of preparation in advance and of teachers’ involvement. They listed several key characteristics of preventive work in the community, which included teachers' knowledge of various intervention techniques and proficiency with their implementation, as well as a preference for the use of internal school-based resources, rather than external clinical resources.

Unfortunately, the security situation remained unstable after the publication of this initial anthology (Raviv et al., 1980). Therefore, over the years following its publication, further knowledge has been attained, new techniques developed, more

13 14 books written, and additional fieldwork conducted (Raviv, 2003). During this time, intervention programs were developed based on the assumption that it is important to

“vent” feelings related to traumatic events and prepare teachers to deal with such issues in the classroom, with the assistance of mental health professionals. Over time it also became apparent that crisis situations should be addressed from a broad community approach, which would enable coordination between various community services, such as health and welfare, utilization of the available resources of the community, and the creation of an increased sense of security (Klingman, Raviv, &

Stein, 2000).

Klingman (2000) developed a typological model of crisis intervention. This model gives special emphasis to antecedent preparations, which are an integral part of the crisis intervention process. Antecedent preparations take place in calm times, before the occurrence of a crisis, when planning and simulations of crisis situations may be conducted without time pressure. Preparations include training in crisis interventions, setting up crisis intervention networks, and planning emergency procedures. The model also takes a community approach to intervention, which argues that appropriate and efficient organization, along with the use of a systems model, allows for an effective, multi-dimensional, and synchronous preventive intervention. Intervention at the level of the organization or group enables the location of major stress factors, systematic early identification of extreme and unusual responses of individuals and/or groups, and rapid mobilization of support resources and community reservoirs at a time of crisis. Furthermore, the model uses the continuity principle (Omer & Alon, 1994) as a theoretical base. According to this principle, trauma and disaster lead to an acute interruption of the functional continuity in the lives of individuals and communities. Therefore, crisis intervention is geared

14 15 towards maintaining functional, historical, and interpersonal continuities, at the levels of the individual, family, organization, and community. The continuity principle relates to Salmon’s (1919) known principles for the treatment of combat stress reactions – proximity, immediacy, and expectation – and makes them clearly relevant to civilian populations during disasters. Immediacy prevents the interruption of life’s continuity and deepening of the disturbance created by the disaster. Proximity maintains individuals’ connections to the place where they ordinarily live and function and to their interpersonal networks. And expectation preserves the victims’ social roles, and prevents them from assuming the role of “patient”, which may lead to chronic disorders. These principles are also strongly related to the ideas of CP, which refer to the utilization of existing individual and community resources.

Klingman's (1988) model consists of four stages: the anticipatory preparation stage, the impact stage, the short-term adaptation stage, and the long-term adaptation stage (see also Klingman, 1989). Thus, many schools have taken on the responsibility for crisis intervention, and especially preventive intervention. Emergency teams have been formed, emergency plans prepared, and many counselors and psychologists have expanded their skills in this area.

In summary, it may be argued that the importance of proper organization and leadership at a time of crisis has led many communities to establish emergency teams that come into action as soon as a crisis occurs. This development reflects a gradual transition in the definition of the school psychologist’s role. From the traditional role of focusing on “problematic” children, evaluating students for placement purposes, and consultation with the educational system, school psychologists turned to the role of community psychologists, in the broad sense of the term. In times of crisis, their

15 16 guidance is sought by school personnel as well as the political and professional leadership of the community (Klingman et al., 2000).

16 17

Examples of preventive interventions in the context of the security situation

The first example to illustrate the preventive approach to intervention in the context of the security situation is a program that addressed Katyusha missile attacks on Israel’s northern border and Kiryat Shmona in particular, before and after the 1982 war in Lebanon (Ayalon & Lahad, 1990). Since 1979, several projects have been operating in these communities, with the purpose of dealing with the situation by means of primary and secondary prevention. Among other things, these projects include programs for emergency action, such as the formation of emergency teams, bomb shelter entrance drills, and stress inoculation activities in schools during calm times as primary prevention. The assumption underlying these activities is that with adequate preparation and acquisition of coping skills, people would know what to expect and how to act in times of emergency, and as a result, anxiety and panic would be reduced and long-term pathology prevented. Studies by Ayalon and Lahad (1990) on the reactions of children in places being bombed reveal the effectiveness of stress inoculation programs. The studies found a decrease in anxiety and an increase in social cohesiveness and organization following a therapeutic-educational intervention among participants who spent extended periods of time in bomb shelters.

Population-based prevention and intervention programs. Klingman (1992) lists several other ways in which psychologists, mainly school psychologists, have conducted primary prevention interventions targeted at the entire population. These include the writing and distribution of self-help materials, translated into different languages and adapted to different ages (e.g., written materials on coping skills practice) and appearances by psychologists on radio and television (Raviv, 1993).

Another example of community intervention in crisis, which reflects developments in the area, is the crisis readiness program by the Tel-Aviv-Jaffa

17 18 municipality (Spearman, Buchner, & Friedman, 1997). Unlike the clear front-lines and combat along the borders, which characterized Israel’s past wars, the Gulf War and second Intifadah have led to a blurring of the distinction between front-lines and the home front. This blurring required the municipalities to make special preparations for emergencies. We describe the program enacted by the Tel-Aviv-Jaffa municipality in order to illustrate preparation activities. A central feature of this program was the assembly of all relevant units and resources, while coordinating efforts and appropriately allocating tasks. The program operates on two levels: the policy-making level and the field intervention level. Both levels involve professionals from various disciplines. The field intervention units include teams that provide immediate physical and mental assistance at the scene of an attack, a hospital connection unit, a unit of teams that inform the victims’ families, an emergency public information unit, which includes information centers and a telephone hotline for psychological assistance, and more. The program was formed at a time of relative calm, which allowed the professionals involved to receive support, backing, and resources from the city management and enabled the systematic formation of a multi-professional organization. These early preparations proved efficient when the program was activated during several emergencies such as terror attacks and enabled the mobilization of professionals, who were available, motivated, prepared in advance, acquainted with each other, and had the appropriate knowledge and skills to give an integrative response to citizens’ needs. School psychologists have been involved both in the initiation of this program and its operation.

A final example, which demonstrates the use of CP principles such as primary and secondary prevention, crisis intervention and empowerment, is the activity of the

Israel trauma center for victims of terror and war, called Natal. Terror attacks against

18 19 civilians have led to the establishment of Natal as a non-profit organization, with the realization that victims of political terror are distinct from other trauma victim. The purposes of the organization are to provide multi-professional treatment to victims of trauma resulting from politically motivated violence, to provide training and preventive interventions for professionals and endangered populations, and to promote knowledge and awareness with regards to trauma resulting from politically motivated violence in the entire Israeli society. The clinical division of Natal provides various treatment services including several types of psychotherapy while the community division provides preventive services. In addition, Natal operates a social club, which emphasizes activities that facilitate empowerment of victims and interactions among them, and a telephone hotline, which provides assistance to victims (www.natal.org.il).

Other applications of community psychology principles in Israel

We have described the two main areas where community oriented activities by

Israeli psychologists are most frequently observed: school psychology and crisis interventions in the context of the security situation. It should be pointed out that in addition, Israeli psychologists perform community-oriented activities in areas related to community mental health. Examples of such activities include the operation of day centers, counseling and psychiatric outpatient care for children and adults through family and community services, therapeutic clubs, hostels, social clubs, and self-help groups (Elitzur, 1998; Farbstein & Hidesh, 1997). Given the narrow scope of the current chapter and the relatively less dominant involvement of psychologists in such activities, compared to psychiatrists and social workers, we chose not to elaborate on them further.

19 20

Another area where CP principles are applied in Israel is interventions with poor and underprivileged populations, which emphasize principles of empowerment and social change (Aram, 1999; Kaufman & Mensbach, 2002; Pecker, 2000). However,

Israeli psychologists are rarely involved in these activities, and research into their efficiency is scarce. We therefore chose not to include these activities in our review.

A relatively new development in Israel and in the world is the use of the internet for psychological counseling and operation of self-help groups (Barak & Fisher, 2001;

Chen-Gal & Raviv, 2001). The recent growth in internet use has extended the concept of community to include virtual communities. Psychological counseling and self-help through the internet often apply principles of CP such as community support and empowerment. It therefore appears that extended use of the internet as a source of advice and support may be a new frontier for future developments in CP applications, in Israel and the world at large.

Conclusion

In sum, it appears that CP in Israel did not prosper or receive a special standing as much as was expected when Israeli psychology began to develop. Yet like

Moliere’s hero who was not aware that he was speaking prose, when we examine the work of all school psychologists and many other mental health professionals in Israel, it becomes apparent that they have internalized and extensively apply many principles of CP. We can only hope that in the future, more attention will be given to the community approach in the academic socialization process of new professionals and that basic and applied research in the area will expand.

The present chapter's analysis of the application of community-psychology principles in Israel is based on the definition of these principles as developed by

20 21 various scholars, mainly in the United States (see Angelique & Culley, this volume).

These principles were imported to Israel and adapted to the local needs and to the knowledge and skills of local professionals. Yet as mentioned above, CP has never been officially formalized in Israel, and in this sense its standing is more similar to that of CP in Britain (see Burton, Boyle, Harris, & Kagan, this volume).

Unlike the political orientation of CP in the United States, in Israel political involvement as part of the role of school and other psychologists is rare. Some school psychologists are involved in activities related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, but this is usually done on voluntary basis and in a rather sporadic fashion. Due to the political schism that exists in Israel between hawks and doves with regards to the views of the

Arab-Israeli conflict, many psychologists are politically active according to their views, but these activities are usually unrelated to their work as psychologists. More official political involvement of Israeli psychologists has recently been observed in relation to the execution of the "disengagement", which involved the evacuation of

Israeli settlements from the Gaza strip and the north West Bank. Many of the psychological interventions in this context were based on CP principles. Specifically, the early preparation of military personnel for the task of evacuation and the recruiting of professionals to assist the evacuees reflected principles of prevention

(Galili, 2005). In addition, attempts were made to keep communities of evacuees together, in order to maintain community support systems.

It should be noted that the present chapter focused on the activities of psychologists, not those of social workers and psychiatrists, who also frequently apply principles of CP in areas of mental health, psychiatric hospitalization and rehabilitation, and work with arriving immigrants and marginal populations.

21 22

If we go back to the introduction of this chapter, we may consider the state of

CP in Israel, reflected by the literature review, as one of failure. But as optimistic community psychologists (and we believe that CP cannot exist without optimism), we can find the internalization and use of CP principles in almost every intervention by mental health professionals in Israel.

22 23

References

Abramson, Z. (1982). Parent guidance in the Adler institute. Ashiot, 4, 59-72. Aram, E. (1999). The "Dror" program for breaking the chain of deprivation. Society and Welfare, 19, 521-543. Ayalon, O., & Lahad, M. (1990). Living on the border: Inoculation and coping in stressful situations of violence and security risks. Haifa: Nord (in Hebrew). Barak, A., & Fisher, W. A. (2001). Internet-assisted sexuality education: Critical evaluation and suggestions for improvement. School Counseling, 10, 39-58. Benbenishty, R., & Astor, R. A. (2005). School violence in context: Culture, neighborhood, family, school, and gender. New York: Oxford University Press. Benur, I. (1993). A self-enrichment program for the class and for the improvement of interpersonal relations. In S. Levinson (Ed.), Psychology in the schools and in the community (pp. 199-216). Tel Aviv: Hadar publishing house (in Hebrew). Caplan, G. (1964). Principles of preventive psychiatry. New York: Basic Books. Chen-Gal, S., & Raviv, A. (2001). Net psychology: Counseling and therapy in the internet. School Counseling, 10, 59-76. De Shalit, N. (1970). Children in war. In A. Jarus, J. Marcus, J. Oren & C. Rapaport (Eds.), Children and families in Israel: Some mental health perspectives (pp. 151-182). New-York: Gordon & Breach. Elitzur, A. (1998). Institutionalization and de-institutionalization of a regional mental health service as an alternative. Society and Welfare, 18, 13-32. Erhard, R. (2001). Optimal educational climate: A guide for diagnosis and intervention. Israel: Ministry of Education, Psychology and Counseling Unit, Department of Research and Development. Farbstein, M., & Hidesh, G. (1997). Rehabilitation of mental patients in the community: Theory and practice. Tivon: Nord publication (in Hebrew). Galili, L. (2005, August 24). South Command psychologist: "The soldiers are not in a state of crisis". Haaretz. Kaufman, R., & Mensbach, A. (2002). On the context of value decisions in social work: A case study of advanced warning by a community social worker. Society and Welfare, 22, 185-197. Khoury-Kassabri, M., Benbenishty, R., Astor, R. A., & Zeira, A. (2004). The contributions of community, family, and school variables to student victimization. American Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 187-204. Klingman, A. (1985). Mass inoculation in a community: The effect of primary prevention of stress reaction. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 323-332. Klingman, A. (1988). School community in disaster: Planning for intervention. Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 205-215. Klingman, A. (1989). A five level intervention model: Division of professional labor and implication for school counseling. International Journal for the Advancement Counseling, 12, 59-69. Klingman, A. (1992). Stress reaction of Israeli youth during the Gulf War: A quantitative study. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 23, 521- 527. Klingman, A. (2000). Systemic preventive intervention in times of disaster and trauma. In A. Klingman, A. Raviv & B. Stein (Eds.), Children in stress and in

23 24

emergencies: Characteristics and psychological interventions. Jerusalem: Ministry of Education, Psychology and Counseling Service (in Hebrew). Klingman, A., & Ayalon, O. (1980). Preemptive intervention: A model for coping with stressful situations in schools. In A. Raviv, A. Klingman & M. Horowitz (Eds.), Children under stress and in crisis. Tel Aviv: Otsar Hamoreh (in Hebrew). Klingman, A., Raviv, A., & Stein, B. (Eds.). (2000). Children in stress and in emergencies: Characteristics and psychological interventions. Jerusalem: Ministry of Education, Psychology and Counseling Service (in Hebrew). Laufer, A., & Harel, Y. (2003). The role of family, peers, and school perceptions in predicting involvement in youth violence. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 15, 235-244. Levin, Y. (1993). Opening remarks. In S. Levinson (Ed.), Psychology in the schools and in the community. Tel Aviv: Hadar publishing house (in Hebrew). Levine, M., & Perkins, D. V. (1997). Principles of community psychology: Perspectives and applications (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Lindemann, E. (1944). Symptomatology and management of acute grief. American Journal of Psychiatry, 101, 141-148. Lombard, A. (1981). Success begins at home: Educational foundation for preschoolers. Lexinton, MA: Lexinton books. Milgram, N. A. (1978). Psychological stress and adjustment in time of war and peace: The Israeli experience as presented in two conferences. The Israel Annals of Psychiatry Related Disciplines, 16, 327-338. Omer, H., & Alon, N. (1994). The continuity principle: A unified approach to disaster and trauma. American Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 273-287. Pecker, P. (2000). Allocation of funds to social services. Jerusalem: Center for the study of social policy in Israel (in Hebrew). Pianta, R. C. (1999). Enhancing relationships between children and teachers. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Raviv, A. (1984). Psychology in Israel. In R. J. Corsini (Ed.), Wiley Encyclopedia of psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 135-138). New York: Wiley. Raviv, A. (1993). The use of hotline and media interventions in Israel during the Gulf War. In L. A. Leavitt & N. A. Fox (Eds.), The psychological effects of war and violence on children. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Raviv, A. (2003). Between "children under stress and in crisis" and "children in stress and emergencies": Characteristics and psychological interventions. Paper presented at the 'Born into Conflict' international conference, Vienna. Raviv, A., Klingman, A., & Horowitz, M. (Eds.). (1980). Children under stress and in crisis. Tel Aviv: Otsar Hamoreh (in Hebrew). Raviv, A., Marshak-Pedhatzur, S., Raviv, A., & Erhard, R. (2002). The Israeli school psychologist: a professional profile. School Psychology International, 23, 283- 306. Raviv, A., Raviv, A., & Reisel, E. (1990). Teachers and students: two different perspectives?! Measuring social climate in the classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 141-157. Raviv, A., Raviv, A., & Reisel, E. (1993). Environmental approach used for evaluating an individual educational program. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 317-324. Salmon, T. W. (1919). The war neuroses and their lesson. New York State Journal of Medicine, 59, 933-944.

24 25

Spearman, S., Buchner, N., & Friedman, Z. (1997). Multi-professional therapeutic preparation for emergency: The "Open Line" unit at emergency. Tel Aviv: City Guidance Center, Security and Emergency Wing, Tel-Aviv-Jaffa Municipality (in Hebrew). Tatur, M. (1993). Psychological and educational work with a group of Arab parents of kindergarten children in Jaffa. In S. Levinson (Ed.), Psychology in the schools and in the community (pp. 105-113). Tel Aviv: Hadar publishing house (in Hebrew). Teichman, J., Spiegel, Y., & Teichman, M. (1978). Crisis intervention with families of servicemen missing in action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 6, 315-325. Wingenfeld, S., & Newbrough, J. R. (2000). Community psychology in international perspective. In J. Rappaport & S. E. (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 779-810). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Zaki, M. (1987). Toward a community model in school psychology. Paper presented at the 21st scientific congress of the Israeli psychological association, Tel-Aviv. Zaki, M. (1990). Consultation in school psychology: An alternative model in school settings. Tirat Hacarmel: Municipal school psychology service (in Hebrew). Zaki, M. (2000). Child, school, and community: Selected chapters in school and community psychology. Tirat Hacarmel: The psychology station (in Hebrew). Ziv, A. (1980). The school psychologist in work. Israeli Journal of Psychology and Counseling in Education, 12, 25-33.

25