i think that is lovely mouse.

when for so much of our life people seemed to be uncaring in the face of the hurtful things that have happened to us we can come to think that somehow we aren't entitled to feel hurt or upset.

in fact we can start to internalise the notion that we are bad and that we need to be punished. hence... self harm. your therpist has communicated the message to you that they don't think that you do need to be punished for having done those kinds of things. your therapist knows about some of that stuff and doesn't think you are bad and need to be punished.

while i agree with scott that there is indeed a difference between making someone feel better and making someone get better i'm not so keen on the idea that therapists actually have the power to make clients do anything at all.

i'm also not so keen on the implication that therapy should be about behavioural change change change (in this instance i'm figuring that scott is operationalising 'getting better' as 'reduction in self harm'). that might be scott's operational definition of 'getting better' but... is it one that mouse accepts?

if mouse is hoping to increase happiness and to decrease feelings of aloneness and isolation and badness and despair then hasn't her therapist helped with that short term?

i agree that sometimes short term pain is necessary for long term happiness. mouse seems to have her share of pain, however, and seems to be working hard on a lot of stuff that is painful.