Like Growlycat said, I happen to believe that incompetent therapists are the source of the damage. My point was that there are some in the industry who do recognize the harm of therapeutic failures. Sure, that's not enough, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

There were some wise words in the interview where i got the quote from. I read less than half of Peck's 2 books mentioned here, but I interpret his view of reparenting and love in therapy as being about finding one's own truth and authentic self, maybe like a spiritual awakening to some, and that appeals to me. He defines love as a verb; a choice, not feelings or romance or affection. He promotes autonomy, not dependency, but thinks people have to first recognize, process, feel, and accept feelings of dependency that come from the authentic self, once layered in reality distorting defenses constructed for protection but impediments to choice and autonomy.

Older theories aren't necessarily less credible than the newer ones. I often find newer theories to be regurgitations of older theories, such as some of Peck's which I think are useful and insightful; some, if not many, hold true today. Delayed gratification and self-discipline were central themes of his work. Some forty years later, a landmark New Zealand study (the Dunedin Study) that followed over 1,000 children from youth to adulthood starting in 1975, found impulse control to be the ONE determining factor of the quality of their future. The children with low self-control had poorer health (including many preventable problems, eg, from smoking), criminal histories, financial problems, etc. They also looked at over 500 pairs of twins to verify this finding.

It's still true today that deeply rooted defense mechanisms, while formerly protective, cause distortions and problems in life. He gives us examples of how people's extreme use of them are 'evil'. His examples resonate with me because they match people who have caused trauma and other hurts in my life. These people (eg, mother) are only dealing with their own pain, as hurt people hurt others. In that case, I don't like the use of the word 'evil', but I think of it more like a powerful psychological force that is used by some to maintain a reality that holds the (false) sense of self together.

One example in one of the 2 books mentioned here talks about a depressed boy he was treating. The parents could not 'see' their role in his development and would rationalize everything as coming from outside of them. For example, This story was absolutely heartbreaking. The parents just kept rationalizing what good parents they were.

I am not a religious person, but I find the concepts to not be rooted in religion despite some of the terms he uses. I think what he means by evil, is that these people truly don't intend to harm anyone; so it's like a 'force'. The parent's actually think they are being good parents. Their own defenses keep them from seeing the truth about how their actions and behaviors and decisions were affecting their children as their minds worked to control their reality, to uphold the image of themselves that they were good, loving parents. Thus, evil being a powerful force beyond a person's control as there is no will involved in using unconscious defenses that one doesn't know exists.

I came across a quote of his that really left a mark on me tonight:

This made me really think about my depression, its impact on my life, and how to get out of this stuck place. Life passes by too quickly to not live it fully. I don't want to look back on my life 20 years from now and think I could have done something even when I was feeling hopeless.

If my concentration cooperates, I think I'll finish reading those 2 books, so thanks for bringing this up. It's just philosophy-different ways of looking at the same thing to find or recognize the truth. I think there's some really good stuff in his writings; wise words. Like the gem of a quote above.