Masthead header

Kay Nahm, AsRFB_Headshots_JPEG_for_Facebook-0004sociate Marriage and Family Therapist, recently joined our team at Relationships For Better! Today, we have the privilege of  getting to know this gifted and skilled therapist even better. Enjoy!

-Megan Lundgren, LMFT, Director of Relationships For Better


Kay received her Master of Science in Marital and Family Therapy at Fuller Theological Seminary.  She currently lives in the San Gabriel Valley, where she has lived for most of her life. 


Kay, why is psychotherapy important to you?

Often, we forget how eye-opening it can be to engage in conversation with another person. Psychotherapy is this special place where it is understood that the conversation itself can be illuminating: informing and determining one’s entire outlook on life. Psychotherapy is a choice to make room for yourself, and in return for others that you love and care for. Asking what we truly want is the start of transforming, lasting change within yourself and your relationships with others.


What kinds of people do you feel are an especially good fit for therapy with you?

I find that whoever walks into my door is someone who is here for a reason. I really enjoy treating motivated individuals who want to understand their emotions and learn new ways to cope.


How would you describe therapy with you?

I am a firm believer that to be yourself is the only way to practice therapy. It is a real, authentic relationship that I share with my clients. We will laugh, we might cry together; we will be real human beings coming together to work toward a common goal. We will experiment with new approaches to old problems, and clients will be challenged at times as well. At the end of the day, clients walk away knowing that I am rooting for them. I often draw from a therapeutic modality called “Restoration Therapy” which helps people work through painful feelings and ground themselves in truth.


There’s an authenticity to your approach. A human-ness. Kay, what’s one thing that you think is important for readers to know before they come to therapy?

I want them to know that they are not supposed to know everything, or have everything together before they come in to therapy. Be open-minded about the process, and remember that massive life change takes time. For therapy to be effective, it requires trust. We will work together for you to thrive!


 Thanks, Kay! To schedule a session with Kay Nahm or to speak with this wonderful therapist, you can call her at (213) 700-0057.


-Megan Lundgren, Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist and Clinical Supervisor






Hello! Welcome to Relationships For Better!

Our therapy practice specializes in helping people work through challenges in their closest relationships. Our mission is to help you THRIVE!

To schedule your session with Megan, Alex, or Kay simply click go here.


We’re looking forward to meeting you!


-Relationships For Better


Megan Lundgren

Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist and Supervisor

Alex Van Fleet

Marriage & Family Therapist Registered Associate

Kay Nahm

Marriage & Family Therapist Registered Associate



Headshots_Vertical_0002By: Megan Lundgren, LMFT

For those who gamble their hard-earned money on the lottery, one big question must be asked:

Is winning the lottery really the key to happiness?

The short answer? No. Here’s why.

A famed 1978 study by Philip Brickman, Dan Coates, and Ronnie Janoff-Bulman at NorthWestern University and the University of Massachusetts indicated that people who win the lottery immediately experience a surge in happiness, yet soon experience a gradual return to their previous happiness homeostasis.  Lottery winners evidently drifted back to the same level of happiness that they experienced before their lottery win because of a phenomenon called the ‘hedonic treadmill’. According to the researchers, “the thrill of winning the lottery will itself wear off” as the winners become accustomed to the pleasures made possible by their new wealth.

Perhaps even more shocking than the finding that happiness isn’t a guarantee when winning the lottery is the study’s second finding: that when measuring the happiness levels of individuals who had experienced a significant trauma in their life (becoming a quadriplegic), happiness levels significantly decreased immediately after the accident, but nearly balanced to their previous pre-accident levels of happiness shortly thereafter. Major life events such as winning the lottery or becoming paralyzed may have relatively little impact on a person’s overall happiness throughout their lifetime.

So, what could possibility be better than winning the lottery?

As it turns out, the answer is community. 

Close relationships are both powerful and consistent in their ability to increase positive feelings. When individuals derive happiness from close relationships (rather than from winning a massive monetary prize), they are more likely to continue to derive happiness from their relationships on an ongoing basis.  In a 2002 study by positive psychology pioneers Edward Diener and Martin Seligman at the University of Illinois, the most salient characteristics shared by the students with the highest levels of happiness were strong ties to family and friends, and commitment to spending time with them.  “Word needs to be spread,” writes Diener, “It is important to work on social skills, close interpersonal ties and social support in order to be happy.”

Why are social relationships so significant to happiness? Communities provide a sense of identity and purpose: belonging to a group may help individuals to understand who they are, and allow them to feel that they are a part of something larger than themselves. As a result of the happiness boost that occurs when social relationships are strong, individuals who develop strong social connections experience fewer physical ailments, fewer mental health diagnoses, and increased resilience from trauma or illness.

Psychologist James H. Fowler analyzed data of 5,000 individuals over a 20 year span, and found that happiness has a contagious effect. In Fowler’s study, individuals who were happy not only impacted the happiness levels of their friends, but also positively impacted the happiness of their friends’ friends. So, if happiness results from social relationships, and social relationships spread feelings of happiness throughout communities, why wouldn’t individuals increase their social involvement to take advantage of this positive happiness cycle?

Unfortunately, mental illness promotes its own cycle of unhappiness. Individuals who are anxious or depressed are more likely to socially isolate themselves, resulting in increased anxiety and depression. Often, individuals with mental illness experience feelings of vulnerability and shame around their symptoms or diagnoses, which further fuels their reluctance to engage in social relationships.

However, what happens when depressed or anxious individuals resist the urge to socially isolate, and instead bravely express their feelings to others? A 2012 study from Stanford by Katharina Kircanski, Matthew D. Lieberman, and Michelle G. Craske indicates that verbally expressing vulnerable feelings may help individuals more quickly feel less anxious or depressed.

Popular author, speaker, and sociological researcher, Brene Brown, explains that vulnerably disclosing sensitive information, such as feelings of anxiety and depression, may result in individuals been more well-liked. “We are actually drawn to people who are real and down-to-earth,” says Brown. “We love authenticity and we know that life is messy and imperfect.” Brown suggests that when a person is honest and vulnerable, it gives others the space and permission to be the same – thus improving social bonding and often increasing feelings of happiness in both the individual and their peers. Rather than burdening others with their true feelings, individuals with mental health challenges may open doors for valued relationships within their community.

For those who spend a few dollars on lottery tickets this month, perhaps consider saving your money for coffee with a friend next time – it may be more powerful than those winning numbers.



Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (n.d.). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 917-927.

Brown, C. (2010). The gifts of imperfection: Let go of who you think you’re supposed to be and embrace who you are. Center City, Minn.: Hazelden.

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. (n.d.). Beyond Money: Toward an Economy of Well-Being. Social Indicators Research Series The Science of Well-Being, 201-265.

Fowler, J., & Christakis, N. (2008). Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: Longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study. Bmj.

Kircanski, K., Lieberman, M., & Craske, M. (2012). Feelings Into Words: Contributions of Language to Exposure Therapy. Psychological Science, 1086-1091.


Headshots_Vertical_0002by Megan Lundgren, LMFT

Trump. Clinton.  The fervor and fright around these presidential hopefuls is rapidly intensifying as the nation approaches November’s presidential elections. Divisive topics are often discouraged in polite dialogue due to the relational conflict they may promote, as noted by the old adage, “Never talk about politics or religion at the dinner table.” However, new research sheds light on the importance of engaging in adaptive relationships with individuals who may diversify perspectives within families or communities.

“Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort,” writes Katherine Philips, dean at Columbia University in Scientific American (How Diversity Makes Us Smarter, 2013). In 2013, Denise Lewin Loyd of the University of Illinois, Cynthia Wang of Oklahoma State University, and Robert B. Lount, Jr., of Ohio State University divided nearly 200 students who identified as Democrats and Republicans into groups that were equally spit between individuals from their own political party and the alternative party. Students were then asked to solve a fictional murder mystery and write a convincing essay communicating their perspective to another group member. Students were told that their partner currently disagreed with their opinion on the murderer, but were tasked to convince their partner to ultimately agree with their perspective. Half of the students in the study were told that their partner shared their political beliefs, and the other half were told that their partner had opposing political beliefs.

The outcome of this landmark study was that Republicans who were informed that a fellow Republican disagreed with them prepared more poorly for the discussion than Republicans who were told that a Democrat disagreed with them. The same pattern was present for Democrats. “When disagreement comes from a socially different person, we are prompted to work harder. Diversity jolts us into cognitive action in ways that homogeneity simply does not,” writes Philips.

The finding that political diversity improves a group’s performance is reminiscent of similar studies regarding racial diversity within groups. In 2006, Margaret Neale from Stanford University and Gregory Northcraft of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign explored the impact of racial diversity on small decision-making groups in which sharing information was a necessity for success. Half of the study’s groups were racially homogenous, and half were racially diverse. Just like the 2013 politically diverse study by Loyd, Wang, and Lount, Neale and Northcraft discovered that the groups with racial diversity significantly outperformed the groups with no racial diversity.

These studies suggest that when individuals believe that they are surrounded by other individuals who have similar beliefs or backgrounds, they inadvertently perceive that the group all holds the same information and perspectives. Ultimately, this assumption hinders group creativity, innovation, and problem-solving abilities.

Does this body of research indicate that political arguments should be promoted at family dinner tables across America? Not necessarily. Many individuals may agree that political disagreements in a group can cause discomfort, a lack of trust, interpersonal conflict, less cohesion, and more concern about disrespect, among other challenges. In addition to relational strain, a series of new research suggests that political disagreements may also simply be ineffective at changing minds. A 2010 study by Brendan Nyhan from the University of Michigan hold a warning for those who may now be eager to debate the latest political scandal, policy, or inflammatory speech. According to Nyhan, a phenomenon called “backfire” causes individuals to adhere to their original beliefs more ardently when presented with contradictory facts (“When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions”, 2013).

These studies suggests that humans are hard-wired to avoid the mental stress of cognitive dissonance, and thus adopt a defense mechanism that confirms previously held beliefs – even when they are disproved. “It’s threatening to us to admit that things we believe are wrong. And all of us, liberals and conservatives have some beliefs that aren’t true, and when we find that out, it’s threatening to our beliefs and ourselves,” reflected Nyhan on National Public Radio’s Talk of the Nation.

How does one proceed if researchers assert that political diversity is essential to the helping groups optimally solve problems, but also indicates that political arguments are likely to leave individuals more deeply ingrained in previously-held belief systems? The research noted in this article convincingly asserts that individuals may be hindered in their intellect when they associate only with those who they perceive as holding similar beliefs. And yet, the benefits of political diversity were not observed in direct discussions about politics, but rather in non-political discussion. In fact, the backfire phenomenon suggests that intellect may be damaged by political debates with opposing individuals. Perhaps one actionable conclusion to consider is building and maintaining close relationships with politically diverse groups of people, while not necessarily fixating on convincing one another to adopt certain political beliefs.

Do we need to start talking about politics at the dinner table? It seems that sharing multi-faceted personal narratives may be more effective than debating political facts.



In Politics, Sometimes The Facts Don’t Matter. (n.d.). Retrieved April 01, 2016, from

Lloyd, D., Wang, C. S., Phillips, K. W., & Lount, R. B. (2012). Social Category Diversity Promotes Pre-Meeting Elaboration: The Role of Relationship Focus. Organizational Science.

Phillips, K. W. (2014, October 1). How Diversity Makes Us Smarter. Scientific American.

When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misconceptions. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from