[Yearning0723]

I was talking to a friend about this the other day, and he's from South Korea, and he says talk therapy there is pretty much unheard of and if you need a therapist, that's a really shameful thing. (He obviously doesn't feel that way himself, but apparently that's how it is there.) But the more interesting thing he said to me was that all kids in Korea get hit, at home, at school, that's really normal, and we're not talking just "spanking" but actual violent, abusive, institutionalized hitting with rulers and sticks and canes.

And obviously in my western worldview, all of those kids will be scarred for life for being hit like that, but I don't know if that's the case, because in that culture it's so normalized that I guess it wouldn't occur to anyone to be scarred for life by that. Even my friend got hit a lot as a kid and even though obviously he disliked it and thinks it was wrong and would never do it to his own kids, he doesn't have any emotional scars from it as far as I can tell (and I know this friend almost as well as I know myself, and vice versa). I wonder if that's actually possible, to be hit (violently) in a way that doesn't completely screw you up and take years to get over. Because for me, I was never hit as bad as he was, but I have so much anxiety stemming from the way my parents treated me.

So, I guess, thoughts? I know this is a super sensitive topic, but I've been thinking about it a lot, and I'm just wondering what y'all think.

[Raging Quiet]

My t comes from a time and country where being hit as a child was the norm which isnt validating. I have friends from China, Thailand and Singapore and they agree with me that counselling is a huge taboo and you respected your family and almost take punishments as part of that. I know my parents hit me and its effected me, many years later.

[feralkittymom]

I think psychology and its interpretations are subject to cultural norms ( and traditionally in the West, those norms have leaned in support of a conservative status quo). In the example you cite, I'm sure there are levels of hitting that would be considered abuse, but where those lines are drawn, and how the issue would be addressed, are dependent upon the culture.

I'm an ex-pat and a professor. Many of my students tell me things they would not reveal to native professors because they recognize that my cultural norms are very different ( and I teach in the area of Cultural Studies, so the subject is a natural prompt). Often they first reveal abuse by their teachers, and especially sports coaches, from jr high. But they rarely recognize their treatment as abusive, even when it clearly crosses sexual boundaries. In fact, they will often talk about those teachers as the ones who were most important in helping them to grow up.

As they become more comfortable, some will confide in me in a way that reveals pain that they don't have a frame of reference for; they have no cultural paradigm that allows for it. And I'm in a culture that does promote therapy, though it's a fairly recent phenomenon. But it's also a culture that stresses conformity, which also influences how therapy is engaged.

[stopdog]

I come from a time (we did not get a tv until I was in grade school) and a place (southern us) when children were hit by everyone. No one focused on how we felt, we were not consulted about life decisions, families were not democracies, and children were the property of parents or other adults. Seriously, we (people my age and in my geographic area) do not all need therapy because of it. I don't consider therapy a need for me, although I choose to go.

I actually do think there can be too much credit given to the idea of therapy or that everyone could benefit from it. It is not a universal panacea and not everyone is traumatized by everything.

[Yearning0723]

Originally Posted by stopdog

I come from a time (we did not get a tv until I was in grade school) and a place (southern us) when children were hit by everyone. No one focused on how we felt, we were not consulted about life decisions, families were not democracies, and children were the property of parents or other adults. Seriously, we (people my age and in my geographic area) do not all need therapy because of it. I don't consider therapy a need for me, although I choose to go.

I actually do think there can be too much credit given to the idea of therapy or that everyone could benefit from it. It is not a universal panacea and not everyone is traumatized by everything.

So what do you think is the difference between people who get hit as kids who are traumatized by it and people who get hit as kids who aren't traumatized by it? It's obviously not the intensity of the hitting, since my friend doesn't seem to be damaged in any way by that but I definitely have lots of emotional baggage from being hit as a kid, even though it was never "as bad".

[pudica]

Yea, it is considered shameful to have to see a therapist or to be taking medication for any mental problems here. If people find out, they will look at you as if you're legitimately crazy and they will be saying things behind your back about how you're "not right" and weird. There's not much awareness about mental illnesses and most people see it as a weakness in character rather than an actual real illness/disorder.

When I was little I was hit with a thin bamboo stick (a switch) as punishment quite often and it was considered normal. Not only that, because I lived with my buddhist aunt and uncle when I was little, another punishment was to be made to kneel in front of the altar for an hour or more. In primary school, the teachers would punish mistakes by hitting on the palm of the hand with a long wooden ruler usually for failing a test, I don't know if they still do this now. This was all in the 90's. What's for sure is that I really hate how they can do this and yet they demand children to respect their elders simply because they are older and if you dare raise your voice you'd be punished even more. I don't feel much respect for the older generation and am very disgusted with their way of thinking and beliefs. I guess the actual hitting did not scar too badly because most of the children were treated the same way even though it's bad so it's not like one child is singled out as the bad one and is made to feel like they are treated far worse than other kids. What did the most damage to me was more the things my father said and how he always made me feel like I can't do anything and he even once said that I'm useless, it's a crippling mentality to ingrain in a child.

[PeeJay]

I think that many cultures have shamanic healers of some sort. Pastoral counseling, psychotherapy, acupuncture, massage therapy, chiropractic intervention, Chinese herbal remedies, all ways to outsource certain needs for physical and emotional caring that are outside of traditional western medical science.

These methods work for many people in many ways.

Also, the concept of emotional scars is cultural. I often think of how mass hysteria, belief in the super natural, and other intangible concepts take hold through the power of suggestion.

I was hit as a child. It never occurred to me to be traumatized by it, and my siblings and cousins often reflect on our beatings with jovial laughter and pride. "Remember that time you threw a rock at that car and Aunt Linda chased you with the wooden spoon?"

Culture matters. Love matters. Context matters. Shared experience matters. Relativity prevails. The whuppin adults cared about us and loved us. I don't need therapy for my beatings.

If you require therapy for childhood trauma, that is not invalidated by the fact that others do not. Similarly, you may not require daily acupuncture for your aches, while someone in another culture might "need" such a thing.

Intriguing thread!

[sunrise]

Originally Posted by Yearning0723

So what do you think is the difference between people who get hit as kids who are traumatized by it and people who get hit as kids who aren't traumatized by it?

There has been a lot of research on why some people experiencing an event develop PTSD and others going through the same event do not, for example people who live through a devastating tsunami, or a plane crash. I think it's a combination of genetic and environmental factors. One thing I remember from the research on adults who went through a potentially traumatizing event was that being married was associated with resilience (not developing PTSD) for men and whereas women who were married were more likely to develop PTSD (than if they weren't married). That was kind of fascinating to me. Like marriage is a liability for women but protective for men. There are a lot of other factors they have identified too.

I think I am somewhat prone to being traumatized. I think some of it for me was early experiences growing up that sensitized me to potentially harmful events. My mom was very volatile and it was very scary to me to have to walk past her in a hallway or small space at home as she might lash out and hit me or I would get trapped where I couldn't escape from her. I would flinch walking past her even when she did not hit me. I think even to this day I am wary about being in small spaces with others and tend to flinch at times when there is no reason. We also had scheduled "spanking time" every Friday night, when my father would turn all of over his knee and give us a spanking for any possible bad things we might have done in the week prior. I do not feel traumatized by this at all, although I definitely feel it was unfair (one could have near perfect behavior and still get spanked). It was more the unexpected nature of my mom's blows accompanied by her rage that made me scared and has had some lasting impact.

[HazelGirl]

I haven't read all the comments yet, but I do need to point out that Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world.

[blur]

While I think that therapy is a good thing I agree with stopdog that it isn't a universal panacea. When I did volunteer work in Southeast Asia one of the first things we were taught in our cross cultural training is that where we were going the people weren't as concerned with the actual work we were doing but rather with building relationships with us. For westerners like Americans we are very individualistic & achievement oriented but in many non-western countries they are more focused on community and relationships. So, in those cultures they have other resources of help that we may not. In some ways the prevalence of therapy shows some of our cultural deficiencies. Both have advantages and disadvantages. We have more freedom to talk about things that in more traditional cultures are not openly discussed but they may have stronger communal bonds that provide natural emotional supports that we don't have as much of.

[Yearning0723]

I agree 100% that therapy isn't a panacea. But in this culture, at least, what do you do when your attachment issues are so big that you can't form healthy relationships with other people because you either cling too much or find it too hard to trust people? I guess maybe in some Eastern cultures that might not be an issue; maybe everyone has someone they securely attach to, or maybe attachment theory doesn't even apply there (although I believe that the strange situation test is a cultural universal).

[stopdog]

I think some other cultures may put emphasis on other things rather than personal feelings or personal happiness or what ever.

I don't have any shaman like associations with my acupuncturist and massage therapist. I avoid medical doctors and western medicine like the plague - I don't consider them healers. I consider them business people who try to sell one model of health care.

[blur]

Originally Posted by Yearning0723

I agree 100% that therapy isn't a panacea. But in this culture, at least, what do you do when your attachment issues are so big that you can't form healthy relationships with other people because you either cling too much or find it too hard to trust people? I guess maybe in some Eastern cultures that might not be an issue; maybe everyone has someone they securely attach to, or maybe attachment theory doesn't even apply there (although I believe that the strange situation test is a cultural universal).

I think therapy is a good option and I can see why specific types of therapy work better for specific diagnoses (sp??). There are lots of other good options too for mental health generally. Therapy & meds did nothing for me personally and I tried both for years. I found help elsewhere.

What stopdog said about people in other cultures having different priorities is interesting. I remember reading after the tsunami in japan (that was a tsunami right? I totally mix up my natural disasters.) that typically Japanese people ask the question "how?" as in "how do I get through this" whereas we westerners tend to ask "why?" as in "why did this happen?"

So, I think you're fine in what you are doing in your situation but we just need to be mindful that what works for us may or may not be the best solution for someone in another culture. They may have other priorities, questions and resources than we do.

Where i live, its totally ok to get therapy. Where i work, we talk about in the office sometimes. Nothing specific, but about having been in therapy-- some of us administrators have been and some of the other staff as been also. Nothing to be embarassed about-- it is seen as an excellent thing to get yourself some help.

Where my family lives (northern USA) it is somethng to be hidden and something to be ashamed of. I dont get that at all... And its too bad that they think that way.

[CantExplain]

Originally Posted by Yearning0723

But the more interesting thing he said to me was that all kids in Korea get hit, at home, at school, that's really normal, and we're not talking just "spanking" but actual violent, abusive, institutionalized hitting with rulers and sticks and canes.

This was true in the West at least until recently. "Raising children without violence" was considered a crazy cult in the 1960s. Even now, you see posts on the internet saying, "I don't want to be governed by a generation that has never been spanked."

[feralkittymom]

Originally Posted by Yearning0723

So what do you think is the difference between people who get hit as kids who are traumatized by it and people who get hit as kids who aren't traumatized by it? It's obviously not the intensity of the hitting, since my friend doesn't seem to be damaged in any way by that but I definitely have lots of emotional baggage from being hit as a kid, even though it was never "as bad".

Denial.

Before everyone jumps, let me explain. If paradigms of response are culturally determined, then denial is largely a function of the internalization of cultural norms. American culture makes denial an increasingly dysfunctional response because more and more it is seen as not supportive of, and a violation of, other valued cultural norms.

The culture I work in shares no such response to denial. Denial is everywhere and is often the most functional response to any number of situations. Other norms are valued more highly, and denial can be in service to those values.

As far as the idea of some cultures putting more value on communal support instead of therapy, that is certainly true, though not in the culture I am in. What appears to an outsider as a benign culture of community is actually a structure in support of conformity. It's not about support, but about control.

A traditional and commonly used punishment for children as young as 4 years old is to be locked out of their home. The child is effectively shunned, his/her inevitable screams ignored. This can go on for hours. A lot of American children faced with the same punishment would take off, explore their environment. These children do not do so. They continue to scream, bang on windows, cry for hours. In a culture that depends upon conformity as an organizing principle, no one can be self-reliant. To be an individual is not a good thing. So to be denied your place with your family, peers, group is psychologically terrifying. The perceived loss of such connection is to not exist or survive. I don't think most of us would view this benignly as a sense of supportive community.

Corporal punishment is not a norm and is seen as abuse. But denial of food is another common punishment. Basically punishments take the form of removal of the privileges of connection, shelter, nourishment, the protection of the group.

This is a culture that places great value on authority figures and institutions, not surprisingly, so therapy has a respected place. But therapy largely concerns itself with helping people conform, rather than the sort of "finding yoursel/honoring the self" mantra that has become a cornerstone of American therapy.

[Yearning0723]

Originally Posted by feralkittymom

Denial.

Before everyone jumps, let me explain. If paradigms of response are culturally determined, then denial is largely a function of the internalization of cultural norms. American culture makes denial an increasingly dysfunctional response because more and more it is seen as not supportive of, and a violation of, other valued cultural norms.

The culture I work in shares no such response to denial. Denial is everywhere and is often the most functional response to any number of situations. Other norms are valued more highly, and denial can be in service to those values.

As far as the idea of some cultures putting more value on communal support instead of therapy, that is certainly true, though not in the culture I am in. What appears to an outsider as a benign culture of community is actually a structure in support of conformity. It's not about support, but about control.

A traditional and commonly used punishment for children as young as 4 years old is to be locked out of their home. The child is effectively shunned, his/her inevitable screams ignored. This can go on for hours. A lot of American children faced with the same punishment would take off, explore their environment. These children do not do so. They continue to scream, bang on windows, cry for hours. In a culture that depends upon conformity as an organizing principle, no one can be self-reliant. To be an individual is not a good thing. So to be denied your place with your family, peers, group is psychologically terrifying. The perceived loss of such connection is to not exist or survive. I don't think most of us would view this benignly as a sense of supportive community.

Corporal punishment is not a norm and is seen as abuse. But denial of food is another common punishment. Basically punishments take the form of removal of the privileges of connection, shelter, nourishment, the protection of the group.

This is a culture that places great value on authority figures and institutions, not surprisingly, so therapy has a respected place. But therapy largely concerns itself with helping people conform, rather than the sort of "finding yoursel/honoring the self" mantra that has become a cornerstone of American therapy.

My mother did this to me once (in -15 degree weather in February when I didn't have my winter gloves or hat) and I was sitting and crying outside the door for an hour or so before realizing that I had other options...but I see your point. So then if denial is the root of it, then trauma stems from not being in denial? Because for me, that incident was traumatic because I can remember the fear I felt and connect with that and realize (sort of) that it wasn't okay. But maybe in the culture you're describing, it's just a cultural norm, so there's the denial of that pain? Is that what you mean, FKM?

[feralkittymom]

Pretty much. I think there is a psychic injury, but since there's no framework for perceiving it as such, and no validation for doing so, the culture supports the denial of any trauma meaning. The trauma comes from the event, but recognition of it as trauma isn't allowed into consciousness.

Understand I'm not saying the event isn't traumatic; part of that is my own cultural judgement, of course. I believe the injury occurs, but the meaning ascribed to it doesn't acknowledge that.

What your mother did by locking you out was horrible. Within our culture, especially in that weather, it's abuse. What's different is that, as you say, after about an hour, you realized you had options. That's because of the cultural norms you'd internalized.

In my example, the kids see/have no options. I witnessed this once in my neighborhood, and my friends and I were really in a quandary because we felt like we needed to do something, call someone, something. This went on from late morning until about 8pm. We relied on the advice of a native colleague who explained what was happening. She didn't approve of it, but understood it in context and addressed the issue in a very--to us--roundabout way involving other neighbors. I think it was effective in stopping the punishment to the extent that we never saw that child locked out again. But we also knew nothing of the family and what else went on, so who really knows?

[Nightlight]

I think there is an enormous amount of cultural variation around healing practices and attitudes towards them, all highly context dependent. What actually helps us depends on our own culture too. Westerners do tend to prioritise individual needs, getting out ahead...and all sorts of things that probably make us more likely to develop, seek out, and accept treatments like therapy that often tend to incorporate those values. When living in a culture that places such a high value on independence and standing out from the crowd, perhaps it's no wonder that we are drawn to treatments like therapy when we’ve been subjected to extremely difficult events and situations that make it impossible to fit in with our society’s expectations. I think it’s hard to step back from our own culture and realise just how differently the world can be perceived and interpreted. I can imagine that it might not seem quite as rational to seek out such an individual focused treatment when collectivist values like community, family, interdependent relationships, and fitting in are prioritised.

I think there is a lot of stigma attached to seeking out long term therapy where I am, a Western society with a publicly funded health system. Even the mental health professionals that I’ve dealt with tend not to support long term therapy—excluding psychotherapists who provide long term treatment themselves. Therapy is largely privately funded here, so insurance companies don’t benefit, and I imagine that sort of thing is one of many factors that play a role in attitudes towards psychotherapy here.

I’m so grateful for the help I’ve received through therapy, but standing back, it’s a bit like biomedicine. It sometimes helps and sometimes harms. It’s not a perfect solution. Unfortunately, even if therapy really did work perfectly to help those suffering from mental illness or emotional distress, some of the people who really need help are going to miss out because there aren’t enough resources to help everyone through individual interventions.

...hope that wasn't too off track!

[Yearning0723]

Originally Posted by feralkittymom

Pretty much. I think there is a psychic injury, but since there's no framework for perceiving it as such, and no validation for doing so, the culture supports the denial of any trauma meaning. The trauma comes from the event, but recognition of it as trauma isn't allowed into consciousness.

Understand I'm not saying the event isn't traumatic; part of that is my own cultural judgement, of course. I believe the injury occurs, but the meaning ascribed to it doesn't acknowledge that.

What your mother did by locking you out was horrible. Within our culture, especially in that weather, it's abuse. What's different is that, as you say, after about an hour, you realized you had options. That's because of the cultural norms you'd internalized.

In my example, the kids see/have no options. I witnessed this once in my neighborhood, and my friends and I were really in a quandary because we felt like we needed to do something, call someone, something. This went on from late morning until about 8pm. We relied on the advice of a native colleague who explained what was happening. She didn't approve of it, but understood it in context and addressed the issue in a very--to us--roundabout way involving other neighbors. I think it was effective in stopping the punishment to the extent that we never saw that child locked out again. But we also knew nothing of the family and what else went on, so who really knows?

I guess maybe the difference is that for me, I was freaked out because it was freezing cold and my hands were red and numb and I was worried I was going to get frostbite because I didn't know when my mother was going to let me back in, or if she would at all, so I figured I needed to do something to protect myself, whereas in the situation you describe, it's not the physical pain (or fear?) from the punishment but instead the isolation of it. I mean, I felt upset that my mother was so angry at me that she didn't even want me in the house, but the way I would experience that isolation is probably different than someone else in a collectivist culture would experience it.

[someone321]

In my homeland many things have changed within last decades... My parents are from the generation which was often physically punished and even my older sister got beaten few times at school with a ruler. I have never got hit but as I was from a small village, some of my schoolmates still got beaten by parents, so I think that many adults in my homeland have been beaten during their childhood but not all of them need a therapy because of that... I would never hit my children but I guess that it was so normal then that children took it as all other punishments (like now no using a computer for some days). Of course only if parents weren't sadistic anyhow... I don't know, I don't know how someone could hit a child but I also do not understand how difficult life was then...
With respect to therapy, in my homeland it is still something really weird and no one would never admit that she/he goes... Probably it will change within next 20 years...
Here, it might be a bit more okay to be in therapy but for sure the level of acceptance is still not the same as in US...

[Lauliza]

This is a great topic. I think everyone has something from their past that traumatized them in some way. It depends on the extent of the trauma, the context, support, etc., available to help a person. It also matters on whether the love expressed outweighed the punishement. A spanking isnt necesarily child abusr, so context is important. If a lot of love is present, enough where there is support and fosters resiliance, then someone may come out of it just fine. In many cultures more value is placed on the group than the individual and it would seem self indulgent to receive therapy. You are essentially depressed because you spend too much time thinking about yourself, and if you spent more time thinking collectively about the others around you you'd be ok. Its a fascinating concept. I think depression and anxiety appear as somatic symptoms rather than emotional ones.

Sometimes, I think there is a point to this line of thinking. think in the US, especially in this generation, everything is patholoigized to some extent. While I've been in treatment if some sort since I was a kid and understand the value of it, it seems like more kids are in treatment now than ever before. I think a lot of people who experienced trauma as children or who felt invalidated are afraid the same will happen to their kids. They don't want them to experience any pain and seek help for everything. This is great in many instances but can also be a problem if kids get more attention for their problems than for the things that are going well in their lives. Coping skills are important and think its important to learn that everyone experiences depression, anxiety, sadness,anger, etc and that is normal. My neice was talking one day about how she hates taking the bus home so we suggested she walk with a couple of her friends. She said "they can't they all have therapy after school". I actually thought that was so funny. How times have changed from just 15 years ago!!

[Yearning0723]

Originally Posted by Lauliza

This is a great topic. I think everyone has something from their past that traumatized tgem in some way. It depends on the extent of the trauma and the supports available to help a person get through it. In many cultures more value is placed on the group than the individual, so it seems self indulgent to receive therapy. You are essentially depressed because you spend too much time thinking about yourself, and if you spent more time thinking collectively about the others around you you'd be ok. Its a fascinating concept. I think depression and anxiety appear as somatic symptoms rather than emotional ones.

Sometimes, I think there is a point to this line of thinking. think in the US, especially in this generation, everything is patholoigized to some extent. While I've been in treatment if some sort since I was a kid and understand the value of it, it seems like more kids are in treatment now than ever before. I think a lot of people who experienced trauma as children or who felt invalidated are afraid the same will happen to their kids. They don't want them to experience any pain and seek help for everything. This is great in many instances but can also be a problem if kids get more attention for their problems than for the things that are going well in their lives. Coping skills are important and think its important to learn that everyone experiences depression, anxiety, sadness,anger, etc and that is normal. My neice was talking one day about how she hates taking the bus home so we suggested she walk with a couple of her friends. She said "they can't they all have therapy after school". I actually thought that was so funny. How times have changed from just 15 years ago!!

I don't think the sole purpose of therapy is necessarily to resolve trauma...for some people it is, but if I had a kid, I would see a therapist at least twice a month just as a precaution, I guess, even if I didn't "need" to, just because it would be important for me to have a professional to discuss parenting trials and tribulations with, and also because of my fear of being like my parents and hurting my kid inadvertently...

I would also probably want my kid to have someone (like a therapist) to talk to, just because I know when I was a kid, if I'd had a therapist or someone like a therapist who was objective, not immersed in my life, but also supportive, it would have been very helpful to me, and when I started seeing a therapist at age eight, I was very grateful for the extra support. A kid can never have too many adults in their lives, and I think it would be important for my kid (not everyone's kids, but my kid) to have an adult to talk to who isn't his or her parent and who can provide the kind of support/expertise/impartiality of a therapist.

My views on this might change as I get older, naturally, and I don't plan on having kids anyway so it's probably a moot point...but I feel like it makes sense for parents who have experienced trauma/maltreatment as children to want to be very careful not to perpetuate the cycle of violence and build a network of support for their children, and I feel like a therapist can be part of that.

Just my two cents, of course. If you have the luxury of affording such things.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by Yearning0723

I don't think the sole purpose of therapy is necessarily to resolve trauma...for some people it is, but if I had a kid, I would see a therapist at least twice a month just as a precaution, I guess, even if I didn't "need" to, just because it would be important for me to have a professional to discuss parenting trials and tribulations with, and also because of my fear of being like my parents and hurting my kid inadvertently...

I would also probably want my kid to have someone (like a therapist) to talk to, just because I know when I was a kid, if I'd had a therapist or someone like a therapist who was objective, not immersed in my life, but also supportive, it would have been very helpful to me, and when I started seeing a therapist at age eight, I was very grateful for the extra support. A kid can never have too many adults in their lives, and I think it would be important for my kid (not everyone's kids, but my kid) to have an adult to talk to who isn't his or her parent and who can provide the kind of support/expertise/impartiality of a therapist.

My views on this might change as I get older, naturally, and I don't plan on having kids anyway so it's probably a moot point...but I feel like it makes sense for parents who have experienced trauma/maltreatment as children to want to be very careful not to perpetuate the cycle of violence and build a network of support for their children, and I feel like a therapist can be part of that.

Just my two cents, of course. If you have the luxury of affording such things.

I suppose if private pay therapy were an option for me I'd think differently. But i need insurance to see a T and for that there needs to be a diagnosis, so I guess I'm looking at it from that perspective. I think family support is hugely important and agree there cant be too many adulta in a childs life. I dont think this necessarily needs to be in the form of a psychologist or therapist, but in some cases it may be what's best. There are lots of parents, myself included, who have benefited greatly from professional guidance when the situation was too complicated for help from friends or family.

Its interesting to note something from the perspective as a parent that I would not have understood when I was younger, and that's that many kids are brought for treatment by their parents, not because its what they want. I'm not saying this isnt warrented. I'm aware that many times it is, and its great that there is so much help available to those who need it.

But it can also be the result of helicopter (or over anxious) parenting too. For a real diagnosis there needs to be a disorder, and many normal childhood begaviors can be considered a disorder if we overanalyze it enough. Kids who are quite well adjusted are sent to therapy and end up sitting in silence for 50 minutes when they could be out doing "kid" things- likely because its their mom or dad who could really use the help. This kind of thing you really only see in the US...

[Yearning0723]

Originally Posted by Lauliza

I suppose if private pay therapy were an option for me I'd think differently. But i need insurance to see a T and for that there needs to be a diagnosis, so I guess I'm looking at it from that perspective. I think family support is hugely important and agree there cant be too many adulta in a childs life. I dont think this necessarily needs to be in the form of a psychologist or therapist, but in some cases it may be what's best. There are lots of parents, myself included, who have benefited greatly from professional guidance when the situation was too complicated for help from friends or family.

Its interesting to note something from the perspective as a parent that I would not have understood when I was younger, and that's that many kids are brought for treatment by their parents, not because its what they want. I'm not saying this isnt warrented. I'm aware that many times it is, and its great that there is so much help available to those who need it.

But it can also be the result of helicopter (or over anxious) parenting too. For a real diagnosis there needs to be a disorder, and many normal childhood begaviors can be considered a disorder if we overanalyze it enough. Kids who are quite well adjusted are sent to therapy and end up sitting in silence for 50 minutes when they could be out doing "kid" things- likely because its their mom or dad who could really use the help. This kind of thing you really only see in the US...

When I saw a therapist as a kid, it wasn't about "treating" anything - I didn't have a diagnosis and was only there because my teacher had recommended that I see someone to talk to about my emotions and stuff I'd been going through as a result of my parents' divorce and my brother being diagnosed with autism. I don't remember all that much about it other than playing games that I thought were stupid that were about expressing your feelings (the point of which I suppose was to teach me emotional regulation), but I remember that it was really nice to have someone to talk to who wasn't in my real life, who I could talk to about my brother's antics without feeling guilty, because in my "real" life, I always wanted to be a super supportive big sister and I never said anything bad about him to anyone.

And if I tried to talk to my parents about that stuff, they just reminded me that he couldn't help his behavior (which I knew) and that I was older and had to be mature and deal with it. So it was really nice to have someone to talk to who wouldn't judge me for being like, "J came into my room yesterday and broke my dollhouse that my grandpa gave me before he died, and when I got upset about it, Daddy just told me it's not his fault; he can't help it; deal with it." And instead of telling me I shouldn't be upset about it, the therapist would let me express my feelings and help me work through them.

Ideally, a kid will have a parent who can provide that sort of response, which I would try to do for my kid, but I think even if my parents had been supportive about stuff like that I might still have not felt comfortable going to them for those sorts of things because ever since I was a little kid I always wanted to project the image of having things under control, even to them. So I would want my kid to have that option, even if it was just seeing a therapist once a month or so. Like your yearly check-up at the doctor's office or the optometrist or the dentist - it's not to fix anything, but just to make sure everything is progressing well.

Of course, this viewpoint is subject to change in the future...but I know how much having someone to talk to (even before I had any clinical diagnosis) helped me when I was a kid, and I guess I was really lucky my parents could afford that. I guess I don't know if it would help my (theoretical, probably non-existent) kid, but it probably wouldn't hurt them.