What Dr. Melvin P. Sikes Said

While yesterday’s post on Dr. Melvin P. Sikes was mainly about my personal impressions of him as a teacher, there are a couple of web resources which gives a little more texture about him apart from my imperfect memory and limited experience.

One of them is a formal course outline and evaluations he and another teacher wrote in 1975, which was the year I first encountered him when I was a freshman at Huston-Tillotson College at that time. I know it seems like a tough read, but I was pretty impressed by what teachers said about him in the evaluation part of the document entitled “Report on Teaching in Multi-Cultural/Multi-Ethnic Schools (1974-75).”

The pdf document is 39 pages long, but I suggest focusing on the student teacher evaluations of his course. That starts on page 19. They all praise it, without exception. Many note that he didn’t really just lecture. One of the evaluators called him “supercalifragalisticexpialadoches!” Not sure if that’s spelled just right (it’s on p.33 so you can check it yourselves), but the point is well made—he was viewed as an extraordinarily gifted teacher.

Dr. Sikes’ comments start on pp.35-39 (Attachment D, entitled “Teaching in Multi-Cultural/Multi-Ethnic Schools; EDP F382 -Summer 1975l Professor Melvin Sikes) and I think that’s also worth reading. It’s short and without lofty, academic terminology.

The reading list caught my eye. I looked for Ralph Ellison’s novel “Invisible Man” which had been published in 1952, but it wasn’t on the list. That book has special meaning for me personally, because when I encountered Dr. Sikes in 1975, I was a freshman at one of the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Huston-Tillotson College as it was then known. I was born and raised in Iowa and had never been in the southern United States. I sort of identified with the unnamed protagonist because the first section of the book deals with his experience at a southern black college.

It was a culture shock. I never saw anyone like Bledsoe. In fact, I never personally met the president of H-TC (now Huston-Tillotson University as of 2005), who was Dr. John Q. Taylor King, Sr. at the time. My main connection was Dr. Hector Grant, who recruited me while he was visiting Mason City, Iowa in connection with support from a local church. I still don’t know what happened to Dr. Grant. It’s like he dropped off the face of the earth.

Anway, I wanted to share another item I pulled off the web about Dr. Sikes. It’s a newspaper article about him published in the West Texas Times issue published May 4,1977. It’s in the collection of the Texas Tech University on line, with the link to the main front page story “Judge Orders Officials to Clean Up the Jail,” interestingly enough. It automatically downloads a pdf of the newspaper issue to your computer when you click the link. I’m just going to try to summarize it and pull some quotes.

The title of the story about Dr. Sikes is down the page, “UT’s Dr. Sikes Helps Students Know Themselves and Others.” The story begins with an anecdote about an interaction Dr. Sikes had with a teacher. It involved a black student coming to her with a complaint that a white student had hit him and he used bad language in describing it. The teacher was going to discipline the kid about his bad language, which Dr. Sikes questioned.

Sikes thought the teacher should have first gotten more information about what the student actually experienced in the encounter. The implication was that if she had listened first, she might not have jumped down his throat about his bad language.

The author of the news article writes that, according to Sikes, “I want my students to be more flexible, to understand that people are first people,” the professor likes to say. “I want them to grow out of looking at a color of a skin and making determinations, good, bad, or indifferent.” He goes on to say,

“I don’t even want them to look at blacks and say, ‘these are great people.’ I just want them to look at blacks and say ‘these are people.’

Quotes from Sikes:

“Before you can deal with another in a meaningful kind of way, you have to find some meaning and purpose in your own life—which means defining yourself….”

About teaching:

“Yes, I was lucky, I was taught by my parents, to some degree. But then I had teachers who taught this to me… And much of whatever I am… is the result of teachers and their concern—black teachers, white teachers.”

About our differences:

“If we’re all the same, we can’t make unique contributions because the contributions would be the same.”

The author of the story points out that Dr. Sikes often took student teachers to Huston-Tillotson College to see predominantly black students. The author also writes that Dr. Sikes mentions something about politics which rings a bell.

“He [Dr. Sikes] talks about the politicalization of education, and says that educating has been taken away from the educator and usurped by the politician.”

On teaching the teachers:

Dr. Sikes says: “People don’t realize how important you are and you don’t realize how important you are. You’re molding and shaping human lives, millions of lives, who will become, depending upon how you mold and help shape or help them become.”

“Now the doctor deals with his patient for a short length of time, and the patient dies and he buries his mistake, or he lives and he’s all right. But we can’t bury our mistakes. They walk around and haunt us and other people…sometimes their living is death. But people never realize that it’s teachers—we are the ones who have power.”

And finally, about Mel Sikes himself, one of his students says,

“Sikes is intense, loquacious and supremely personal. He immediately grabs you and talks on a person-to-person wavelength. He tells his students a lot about himself, his struggles as a black and as a radically caring person. He says he would die if it would help all people relate better. And he would.”

There was a lot more to Melvin Sikes than a lemon-yellow leisure suit.

Can We Calm Down?

First of all, I want to make it clear that I am not now nor have I ever been pregnant. Now that I have your attention, I’ll add some context to that weird statement by saying how puzzled I am by all the controversy about whether or not there’s actually a federal recommendation against pregnant women getting the Covid-19 vaccine.

I admit, I actually did think about the movie “Signs” in which the lead character, Graham Hess, says “Everybody in this house needs to calm down and eat some fruit or something.” I think it fits.

I found a lot of news stories claiming that HHS and the CDC don’t recommend that pregnant women get the Covid-19 vaccine. What I actually found on the HHS web site says the opposite—the agency recommends it.

That seems to agree with the paper from the FDA leadership, published in the New England Journal of Medicine by Drs. Prasad and Makary (An Evidence-Based Approach to Covid-19 Vaccination. Authors: Vinay Prasad, M.D., M.P.H., and Martin A. Makary, M.D., M.P.H. Author Info & Affiliations). Published May 20, 2025. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsb2506929.

“Moving forward, the FDA will adopt the following Covid-19 vaccination regulatory framework: On the basis of immunogenicity — proof that a vaccine can generate antibody titers in people — the FDA anticipates that it will be able to make favorable benefit–risk findings for adults over the age of 65 years and for all persons above the age of 6 months with one or more risk factors that put them at high risk for severe Covid-19 outcomes, as described by the CDC (Figure 2).”

Figure 2 is a table which lists many medical conditions that are indications for getting the Covid-19 vaccine. Pregnancy is one of them, based on the idea that it could increase the severity of Covid-19 disease.

On the other hand, when I looked at the health care provider page on the CDC website, the table showing the clinical indications for the Covid-19 vaccine sends a confusing message by showing pregnancy as a condition for which there is currently “No Guidance/Not Applicable.”

Just in case this web page gets updated, I took a screenshot of that part of the table:

screenshot June 12, 2025

But elsewhere on the CDC website are pages which clearly recommend that pregnant women get the Covid-19 vaccine.

I’m not making any political statements here. I’m just an old guy who clearly does have an indication for getting the Covid-19 vaccine and I recently did just that last month.

Do We See Each Other?

I know that what I’m writing here this evening is going to sound foolishly sentimental and maybe even a little spooky, but I was struck by this weird experience I had tonight. It was just a little odd and too fortuitous. I’m not going to talk at any length about the politics of it, just the strangeness.

We have these two books by Ray Bradbury, and when I was a kid, I loved his science fiction stories. I read many of them, but never like the one I read tonight.

The way this started was I was looking for something to do. I thought about watching old reruns of The Red Green Show on YouTube, which always struck me as funny when I watched them long ago. I still do, but couldn’t get into it tonight.

I turned on the TV and flipped through the channels which, as always, were reruns. I was not even interested in the X-Files reruns and I’m a fan.  And I couldn’t stand the thought of seeing any more in-your-face commercials about total body deodorant.

So, I picked up the hefty paperback of a big collection of a hundred of Ray Bradbury’s short stories, entitled oddly enough, “Bradbury Stories.” I just opened up the book with no particular story in mind and it fell open right to one I’d never read before, “I See you Never.”

It’s all of 3 pages long and it’s about a Mexican immigrant named Mr. Ramirez. He’s been brought by the police to the front door of the rooming house where he’s been living on a temporary visa, which has been revoked. He’s just there to say goodbye to his landlady. He’s being deported and has this sad conversation with her on the doorstep. He just keeps telling her in broken English, “I see you never.” The landlady, Mrs. O’Brian (no accident she has an Irish name, of course) just says repeatedly that he’s been a good tenant and that she’s sorry. Then he leaves with the police. She goes back inside and can’t finish her dinner with her family and realizes she’ll never see Mr. Ramirez again.

There’s a much better summary and analysis than mine written by a professional reviewer. This story was published back in 1947 and is set in the historical context of post WWII America.

I hate politics, and I’m not going to say anything specific about how this little story struck me with its irony given what’s going on this country right now. I was just looking for a little science fiction distraction and instead got irony. I didn’t go looking for this and I’ll be brutally frank—I actively avoid political news and I hate like hell to get reminded of it every day. All I did was open a damn book. I wish I had never seen this story.

I guess maybe that’s what I get for my avoidant approach to certain things. How’s that for a Mental Health Awareness month event?

Why Did China Tell President Trump His Tariff Strategy is a Joke?

The title of this post, which is admittedly the lead-in to a lame joke, is inspired partly by the news headlines today and partly by an essay, “Laughter: Better Than a Sharp Stick in Your Eye,” I found on The University of Iowa’s Well-Being at Iowa website. The author, Megan Gogerty, MFA, BA has some pretty sharp opinions about laughter being the best medicine. It’s not always the best.

Anyway, Reuters carried the story “China raises duties on US goods to 125%, calls Trump tariff hikes a ‘joke’,” by Joe Cash and Yukun Zhang, accessed April 11, 2025.

China is pretty upset. So, why did China tell President Trump his tariff strategy is a joke? Because they don’t get it.

Just half-kidding there; actually, I think that might be President Trump’s reply, but I really don’t understand tariffs. That’s probably why I also had trouble with the economist joke below:

Why did the Keynesian psychiatrist get fired? He told his patients to spend their way out of depression.

I found this joke on a YouTube by Jacob Clifford, an economics teacher. I didn’t get the joke, so I repeatedly replayed it because I couldn’t understand the first part. That’s because I didn’t know anything about Keynesian economics. It turns out that it’s based on the belief that proactive actions from the government (like spending) are the only way to control the economy. Get it? Neither do I but it was the only economy joke I could find that included a psychiatrist on a quick internet search.

Here’s twenty economics jokes from Jacob Clifford. They’re pretty lame, but then so is most of the political news.

The Goldwater Rule and The Golden Rule

I read Dr. Moffic’s column today about the challenge in finding a rational solution to the objections many psychiatrists have to diagnosing President Donald Trump with a psychiatric disorder, despite the Goldwater Rule against doing that in any public forum.

Dr. Moffic points out that the high emotions aroused on both sides of the political aisle by the president has resulted in proposed legislation by Minnesota republican lawmakers to create a novel psychiatric diagnosis, Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), which may justify revising the Goldwater Rule, allowing psychiatrists to go public with diagnoses of President Trump.

I suspect that the TDS law was provoked by the conflict between democrats and republicans about the president. In fact, one of the Minnesota lawmakers has basically admitted that the bill was a prank by calling it “…tongue in cheek…” On the other hand, if this is just frustration between politicians, then I would expect that the whole thing might have been dropped a couple of weeks ago.

Yet, the bill still stands, albeit without any movement forward to committee. One of the authors, Senator Glenn Gruenhagen, has posted a comment on Facebook on March 17, 2025 (the day the bill was introduced), indicating that he knows democrats “…will never allow this bill to pass anyway, so take a breath and calm down.”

Can we do that, please? A good start might be to withdraw the bill.

 I also saw a news story posted by The Guardian on March 26, 2025, quoting a New York City Child Psychiatrist, Leon Hoffman, MD, suggesting that the Goldwater Rule is too often broken, and, in response to the TDS gambit, that it might be preferable “…to develop a comparable national rule prohibiting political personnel, both elected and appointed, from creating psychiatric diagnoses as a tool against their political opponents.” Would anyone like to second that emotion?

You can’t just legislate restraint, respect and kindness in public or private discourse. Policies and laws can lay the groundwork for the eventual development of tolerance and maybe even acceptance of others. The Goldwater Rule is too often broken. The Golden Rule is too often broken as well.

The Red Green Show “Twinning” Episode A Model of Cooperation

I just read Dr. H. Steven Moffic’s post on Psychiatric Times, “The Space Station as a Model for Intercultural Cooperation.”  I also read the blog of another psychiatric I consider a colleague and friend, Dr. George Dawson, MD, and it’s sort of in the oppositive vein, being about the recent snafu of some Republican Minnesota legislators deciding to submit a bill to the legislature mansplaining Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) to the Democrats why TDS needs to become a law. It’s going over like a lead space station.

Incidentally, one legislature activity tracking website (Bill Track 50) has an Artificial Intelligence (AI) summary of the bill which says in part, “…the bill appears to be satirical or politically motivated…”

And the Minnesota Senate Minority Leader, Mark T. Johnson, said the bill was “a little bit tongue in cheek,” and possibly unintentionally joked that “Senate Republicans have always supported mental health funding…” while also calling attention to problems that the two political parties have cooperating with each other (story source WCCO News Minnesota, “Minnesota bill to define “Trump derangement syndrome” as mental illness provokes backlash” by Eric Henderson, Caroline Cummings; accessed March 18, 2025). Obviously these two pieces present opposites when it comes to collaboration.

The other issue pertinent to my post today has been the recent tariff and trade war going on between Canada and America, which is all about competition rather than cooperation.

Therefore, I did a web search for any Red Green Show episodes that demonstrated cooperation as a theme. In fact, the usual AI guidance (which I never ask for) pointed out that The Red Green Show didn’t present episodes about cooperation per se, but satirized the topic. For once, I had to agree with AI for the most part.

On the other hand, I did find a Red Green Show episode called “Twinning” that actually seemed to involve collaboration between Canada and Iowa, if you can imagine that nowadays. Back in the year 2000, The Red Green Show sponsored a survey of all 50 states in America, offering an opportunity for persons from an American city to twin with persons from Canada, I think it was Ontario. This meant that Americans would visit Canada and Canadians would visit America. I may not have the exact details right, but the idea of cross-cultural collaboration and getting to know each other was the main idea.

The whole state of Iowa endorsed the twinning offer with The Red Green Show, which of course, represented Canada. At the time, the Iowa Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) network was supporting the Red Green Show.

 I never knew about that when it happened in 2000, probably because I was pretty busy working as a consultation-liaison psychiatrist here in Iowa City, Iowa. Anyway, the “Twinning” episode was one of the funniest I’ve seen. You know, identical twins are not exactly identical in every way.

If You Want Peace and Quiet from Government…

I’ll bet a lot of people are like me and would like more peace and quiet from government. There’s a crisis every day. There’s even some Minnesota Republicans who want to get a bill through the state legislature defining Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) as a new mental illness, applicable only to Democrats. Given the intensely adversarial atmosphere among most politicians, this has made things even more noisy amongst lawmakers.

Because of this highly charged atmosphere which seems to get worse by the hour, I thought it might be instructive to suggest everyone eat some fruit and watch the Red Green Show episode “Good Government.”

Things are much quieter where Red Green lives. Although Jerome, the elected representative of the district, has supposedly been working hard for his constituents for 9 years, it turns out that, in fact, he has been dead for the last 8 years. Things must be pretty quiet in government there because nobody seems to have noticed.

How Red Green and his henchman, I mean co-conspirator, I mean his fellow constituent, address this problem does not involve high drama, although the question of legality does arise—which is hardly a problem provided you ignore the law.

I guess that’s pretty much what happens in real life.

All Jokes Aside, What Do I think About the Book “Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents?”

I just finished reading Isabel Wilkerson’s book, “Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents.” It was a painful read because it talks about racism in America, which is a part of my lived experience. Wilkerson’s compares it to the Nazi persecution of the Jews and the caste organization in India. The chapter on the pillars of caste make sense to me.

When I reached the last section (not at all “final” by any means), which is called “Awakening,” I was not surprised that there were no prescriptions or outlines or action plans for how to eliminate caste in any culture. It turns out that we’re all responsible for becoming aware of how we all are complicit in some way with maintaining caste divisions in society. And the word Wilkerson used for how to begin is “empathy,” or somehow becoming conscious of that tendency and to replace it with understanding.

As Wilkerson emphasizes, empathy isn’t sympathy or pity. Empathy is walking a mile in someone else’s shoes, as the song goes. But she goes a step further and uses the term “radical empathy.” It’s difficult to define concretely. It goes beyond trying to imagine how another person feels, going the extra mile and learning about what the other person’s experience. It’s not about my perspective; it’s about yours. It’s not clear exactly how to make that deep connection. She uses terms like “spirit” which may or may not resonate with a reader searching for a recipe or a cure.

Politics turns up in the book. How could it not? I’m going to just admit that I wanted to make this post humorous somehow, especially after I saw Dr. H. Steven Moffic’s article in Psychiatric Times about whether psychiatrists are to act in the role of “bystanders” or “upstanders” in the present era of political and social turmoil. He specifically mentioned the Goldwater Rule, which is the American Psychiatric Association Ethics Annotation barring psychiatrists from making public statements of a diagnostic opinion about any individual (often a politician) absent a formal examination or authorization to make any statements. The allusion to a specific person is unmistakable.

But, as a retired psychiatrist, I’m aware that my sense of humor could be deployed as a defense mechanism and it would certainly backfire in today’s highly charged political context. I’m not sure whether I’m a bystander or an upstander.

Sena and I had a spirited debate about whether America has a caste system or not. I think it’s self-evident and is nothing new to me. I suspect that calling racism (which certainly exists in the United States) a form of casteism would not be altogether wrong. Wilkerson mentions a psychiatrist, Sushrut Jadhav, who is mentioned in the Acknowledgments section of her book. Jadhav is a survivor of the caste system in India. I found some of insights on caste and racism in web article, “Caste, culture and clinic” which is the text of an interview with him.

His answers to two questions were interesting. On the question of whether there is a difference between the experience of racism and caste humiliation, he said “None on the surface” but added that more research was needed to answer the question adequately. And to the question of whether it’s possible to forget caste, he said you have to truly remember it before you can forget it—and it’s important to consider who might be asking you to forget it.

This reminded me of the speech in the movie “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” said by John Prentice (played by Sidney Poitier) to his father:

“You’ve said what you had to say. You listen to me. You say you don’t want to tell me how to live my life? So, what do you think you’ve been doing? You tell me what rights I’ve got or haven’t got, and what I owe to you for what you’ve done for me. Let me tell you something. I owe you nothing! If you carried that bag a million miles, you did what you were supposed to do because you brought me into this world, and from that day you owed me everything you could ever do for me, like I will owe my son if I ever have another. But you don’t own me! You can’t tell me when or where I’m out of line, or try to get me to live my life according to your rules. You don’t even know what I am, Dad. You don’t know who I am. You don’t know how I feel, what I think. And if I tried to explain it the rest of your life, you will never understand. You are 30 years older than I am. You and your whole lousy generation believes the way it was for you is the way it’s got to be. And not until your whole generation has lain down and died will the deadweight of you be off our backs! You understand? You’ve got to get off my back! Dad. Dad. You’re my father. I’m your son. I love you. I always have and I always will. But you think of yourself as a colored man. I think of myself as a man. Hmm? Now, I’ve got a decision to make, hmm? And I’ve got to make it alone. And I gotta make it in a hurry. So, would you go out there and see after my mother?”

 And there was this dialogue that Sena found on the web, which was similar to that of John Prentice. It was a YouTube fragment of a 60 minutes interview in 2005 between actor Morgan Freeman and Mike Wallace. Wallace asked Freeman what he thought about Black History Month. Freeman’s answer stunned a lot of people because he said he didn’t want Black History Month and said black history is American history. He said the way to get rid of racism was to simply stop talking about it. His replies to questions about racism implied he thought everyone should be color blind. John Prentice’s remarks to his father are in the same vein.

I grew up thinking of myself as a black person. I don’t think there was any part of my world that encouraged me to think I was anything different. I think Wilkerson’s book is saying that society can’t be colorblind, but that people can try to walk a mile in each other’s shoes.