Labeling, illness, and the victim mindset

[21%]

I've been thinking of this issue lately, though maybe not exactly in the normal sense. A few months ago I was at a huge family gathering. My 3-year-old cousin tripped and fell and was about to cry. Her mother immediately went up to her and picked her up, all the while saying in mild baby-talk "It's ok. It doesn't hurt, right? Nooo, it doesn't hurt at all!" The girl seemed a little confused as she thought about it and decided not to cry. A minute later she was happily running around again.

This did not use to happen when I was young. I remember the typical adult response to a kid falling was something like "Are you ok? Show me where it hurts. There, let me kiss it. Better?". I could not help but feel that this response, if used with my 3-year-old cousin, would have produced a different effect. She most likely would have cried as she perceived that the 'pain' was 'real'.

I know this seems a really small matter, but I remember seeing on Dog Whisperer blush how a puppy became hydrophobic after he fell into a pool and the owners 'made a big deal out of it' because they were afraid he was going to drown. Instead, if they had done nothing, the puppy's natural instinct would have kicked in and he would have started swimming.

The human mind is weird in that sometimes "having a name for something" can make it real. Labeling something with a term with a positive or negative connotation can have an effect on how people perceive the matter, e.g. the classic "terrorists" vs "freedom fighters".

Maybe this has an effect on our health as well. I have perceived a few cases where elderly people who are diagnosed with cancer pass away shortly afterwards, sometimes within a few months. One of my friend's grandpa, on the other hand, was never told he had cancer with only a year to live (according to the doctor), and is still alive and well twenty years after.

This is hardly empirical evidence, but I think that maybe when we label something as an illness, it really becomes an illness. It can make people panic and think "OMG, I'm so sick and I'm going to die", and that can have detrimental effects on the treatment.

I think the same goes for mental illness. I'm not saying that mental illness is not real. I believe it is, and people should receive treatment for it. However, I have to say I don't agree how therapists are so easily giving out prescriptions for just about anything. In a way, I think it reinforce the view that they are "sick" to the patients, and might make them start to believe certain things about themselves and perhaps even identify themselves by their conditions.

I attended a course on neuro-linguistic programming once, and the presenter said he got someone to successfully quit smoking by having her identify herself as being 'a non-smoker who sometimes smokes'. I don't believe this works for everything, but I think it has its merits.

I don't have any specific questions or specific points to make. This is still quite vague in my head, but I'm starting to think that this may be the key to solving a lot of what we perceive as 'problems'. If we start thinking about 'problems' as 'exciting and challenging things that we get to do', will they actually cease to be 'problems'?

 

[prplchknz]

I think the same goes for mental illness. I'm not saying that mental illness is not real. I believe it is, and people should receive treatment for it. However, I have to say I don't agree how therapists are so easily giving out prescriptions for just about anything. In a way, I think it reinforce the view that they are "sick" to the patients, and might make them start to believe certain things about themselves and perhaps even identify themselves by their conditions.

clarify this point please cuz i'm not sure where you stand and I don't know if i should be happy or pissed off.

 

[prplchknz]

I think the same goes for mental illness. I'm not saying that mental illness is not real. I believe it is, and people should receive treatment for it. However, I have to say I don't agree how therapists are so easily giving out prescriptions for just about anything. In a way, I think it reinforce the view that they are "sick" to the patients, and might make them start to believe certain things about themselves and perhaps even identify themselves by their conditions.

clarify this point please cuz i'm not sure where you stand and I don't know if i should be happy or pissed off.

 

[Lexicon]

I think positive support can positively influence a situation with regard to physical or mental illness [to what degree, however, is debatable]. There've been plenty of studies around hormones like oxytocin - positive interaction with others [not just from sexual contact, which is what we'd likely 1st link oxytocin to] can raise our levels of oxytocin, which is tied to significant stress reduction & even promotes wound healing. And we've all heard how being under constant stress can actually inhibit our immune systems over time. Many maladies are only treated from one angle, when they likely ought to be looked at from every bio/psycho/social level, to promote an overall more balanced, & healthy path for the individual. But ofc, that's just a bit of idealism talking, here.

I see what you're getting at, I guess. But it sounds oversimplified, in a sense. Certainly though, it's something that needs to be explored more, in the medical community. Unfortunately everyone there is only human, too. Many doctors will just dole out pills. High blood pressure? Here! *writes script, but doesn't suggest the patient make any changes to their diet or activity levels* You're anxious? HERE! HAVE SOME XANAX! - and they don't actually sit down and cognitively take apart the patient's core triggers; the bad programming, etc. People seem to forget that even doctors can grow complacent after awhile. Rinse, repeat. On the same token, these people could die or not be able to function from day to day without certain supplementary medications. External, social factors are only one part of any issue. Heredity, and a variety of physiological elements may also play a significant role. It all really depends on the individual, and the competence of their doctors, I suppose.

 

[garbage]

A few things:


The mother in that example was trivializing and denying the problem. For a toddler (or so), getting a boo-boo or losing a favorite toy is a big deal. Reach out to the damn child.


I think that labeling a phenomenon (mental illness) helps us 'make sense' of it--it provides us with a vocabulary that makes things easier to discuss and to mull about in our own brains.

This can be good and bad. When we can use that vocabulary to construct some sort of logical framework around such a phenomenon, it's easier to develop a mental model that takes it in some direction or another. For example, if there exists a diagnosis, there's now a 'logical' separation between those with the diagnosis and those without, and so those with it might see themselves as screwed up compared to the norm. In a sense, having a vocabulary helps us develop a structure--whether the structure we wind up building is helpful or not.


As one who has quite a few prescriptions, I also struggle with determining which medications I should actually be on and which I ought to be able to go without. Are they a crutch? Do they fix a problem in a good way? Do their ends justify the means?

 

[21%]

clarify this point please cuz i'm not sure where you stand and I don't know if i should be happy or pissed off.

I think right now a lot of doctors are quite 'loose' with giving out prescriptions and will just tell someone with certain kinds of symptoms that they have ADHD or depression without really trying to figure out the problem, because it's just easier for the doctors. I think this is very irresponsible because if someone is just stressed from work and worry a lot and can't sleep for a while, and doctor's diagnosis says they have "anxiety disorder", they might start thinking that they really have anxiety disorder.

With this going on, there's a lot of exploitation. I know you can get prescriptions for just anything if you know the right 'script'. My bf's friends use this strategy to obtain recreational drugs. And, well, maybe the doctors don't care, because it's more business for them. This isn't just for mental ilnesses. I've seen doctors in other fields do this too. When you're paying money then everything is wrong with you and you need so much 'treatment'. When you're on the government health program and are not paying -- well, just go home and drink a lot of water and rest.

So, I guess my point is, mental illnesses are real, but lots of people are just too happy to slap the term on anybody who exhibits any sign of unhappiness. So, this sucks for people who really need help, because suddenly everyone is 'depressed'.

 

[Vasilisa]

I don't believe its right to tell anyone their feelings are wrong. One can help them develop coping strategies, but telling a child that their natural feelings are invalid can lead to all kinds of problems including feeling responsible and personal shame for abuse. This is not an excuse to coddle, but advocating a respectful balance. As far as mental health, it is important to remember that no one's experience of mental illness is exactly the same and that a label cannot contain it. That is why one wonders where self and illness begin, end, and overlap.

I like how Joshua Wolf Shenk stated it:

It is inevitable that we abbreviate and simplify. (It is apparent even in this essay that I see no way around the words "depression" and "melancholy.") But it is one thing to use shorthand while straining against the limits of language. It is quite another to mistake such brevities for the face of suffering. Each year, 17 million Americans and 100 million people worldwide experience clinical depression. What does this mean, exactly? Perhaps they all have deficits of serotonin, feel hopeless, ruminate on suicide. But why? What wrinkles crease their minds? How are they impaired? For how long—two weeks? a month each year? an entire life? And from where does this depression come?

Rather than acknowledge these variations and uncertainties, many react against them, taking comfort in language that raises the fewest questions, provokes the least fear of the unknown. Such is the case with the equation of emotional problems and mechanical failure.​

The intent is not to encourage a victim mentality, but to offer those who are suffering in mental pain a way to not feel like naughty children complaining about something adults know better that isn't real. Its a shame people game the system, but that doesn't make the reality of those suffering any less valid and worth treating.

 

[Viridian]

I don't believe its right to tell anyone their feelings are wrong. One can help them develop coping strategies, but telling a child that their natural feelings are invalid can lead to all kinds of problems including feeling responsible and personal shame for abuse. This is not an excuse to coddle, but advocating a respectful balance. As far as mental health, it is important to remember that no one's experience of mental illness is exactly the same and that a label cannot contain it. That is why one wonders where self and illness begin, end, and overlap.

I like how Joshua Wolf Shenk stated it:

It is inevitable that we abbreviate and simplify. (It is apparent even in this essay that I see no way around the words "depression" and "melancholy.") But it is one thing to use shorthand while straining against the limits of language. It is quite another to mistake such brevities for the face of suffering. Each year, 17 million Americans and 100 million people worldwide experience clinical depression. What does this mean, exactly? Perhaps they all have deficits of serotonin, feel hopeless, ruminate on suicide. But why? What wrinkles crease their minds? How are they impaired? For how long—two weeks? a month each year? an entire life? And from where does this depression come?

Rather than acknowledge these variations and uncertainties, many react against them, taking comfort in language that raises the fewest questions, provokes the least fear of the unknown. Such is the case with the equation of emotional problems and mechanical failure.​

The intent is not to encourage a victim mentality, but to offer those who are suffering in mental pain a way to not feel like naughty children complaining about something adults know better that isn't real. Its a shame people game the system, but that doesn't make the reality of those suffering any less valid and worth treating.

I like this post.

I get what you're saying, but, well, people suffering from clinical depression already have a hard time getting help and reassurance as it is...

Like so:

 

[21%]

Many maladies are only treated from one angle, when they likely ought to be looked at from every bio/psycho/social level, to promote an overall more balanced, & healthy path for the individual.

I totally agree. I think this is something that is totally lacking in modern medicine. Physicians will only treat physical symptoms, and psychiatrists will treat only psychological symptoms, while the two are more linked than we might realize. Most of the time, I think a lot of physical symptoms are even more related than we think, but they are being treated as individual problems. Headache? Here's some pain-killers. Not better? Let's do a brain scan -- walk to that department on the 3rd floor please. Blurry vision too? Go see an optician. It's scary how a lot of the time it's the patients themselves who have to identify what is wrong and choose to go the right doctor.

This is hardly about 'labeling' anymore, but for some reason I still feel it's related. I don't know, maybe there should be someone who is a 'health counselor' who looks at your life and your habits and your psychological state as a whole and help give you advice and refer you to specialists as needed. /dream

The mother in that example was trivializing and denying the problem. For a toddler (or so), getting a boo-boo or losing a favorite toy is a big deal. Reach out to the damn child.

To be honest I still don't know what to think about this. I mean, the fall was not bad and there were no scrapes or cuts, and the mother rushed to the child and was holding her lovingly. I'm quite sure if the child was really hurt or if it was an emotional hurt, the mother would have reacted differently. Maybe this is a modern parenting strategy or something.

I think that labeling a phenomenon (mental illness) helps us 'make sense' of it--it provides us with a vocabulary that makes things easier to discuss and to mull about in our own brains.

This can be good and bad. When we can use that vocabulary to construct some sort of logical framework around such a phenomenon, it's easier to develop a mental model that takes it in some direction or another. For example, if there exists a diagnosis, there's now a 'logical' separation between those with the diagnosis and those without, and so those with it might see themselves as screwed up compared to the norm. In a sense, having a vocabulary helps us develop a structure--whether the structure we wind up building is helpful or not.

This is a very good point. It's how we naturally make sense of the world. Even having words at all is a kind of 'labeling'.

The bolded is exactly what I was trying to get at! It's an issue that's hardly ever addressed. In regard to mental illness especially, maybe everyone is 'screwed up' in some way. Labeling something with a name helps people understand it, but once the problem is spotted as real, maybe it's better to just let go of the labeling altogether and start looking at how we can help you as a person.

As one who has quite a few prescriptions, I also struggle with determining which medications I should actually be on and which I ought to be able to go without. Are they a crutch? Do they fix a problem in a good way? Do their ends justify the means?

That's what I keep wondering too. Personally I don't think medication is the right approach. I think it helps, but there must be better, more natural ways to achieve long-term effects.

I don't believe its right to tell anyone their feelings are wrong. One can help them develop coping strategies, but telling a child that their natural feelings are invalid can lead to all kinds of problems including feeling responsible and personal shame for abuse. This is not an excuse to coddle, but advocating a respectful balance. As far as mental health, it is important to remember that no one's experience of mental illness is exactly the same and that a label cannot contain it. That is why one wonders where self and illness begin, end, and overlap.

I like how Joshua Wolf Shenk stated it:

It is inevitable that we abbreviate and simplify. (It is apparent even in this essay that I see no way around the words "depression" and "melancholy.") But it is one thing to use shorthand while straining against the limits of language. It is quite another to mistake such brevities for the face of suffering. Each year, 17 million Americans and 100 million people worldwide experience clinical depression. What does this mean, exactly? Perhaps they all have deficits of serotonin, feel hopeless, ruminate on suicide. But why? What wrinkles crease their minds? How are they impaired? For how long—two weeks? a month each year? an entire life? And from where does this depression come?

Rather than acknowledge these variations and uncertainties, many react against them, taking comfort in language that raises the fewest questions, provokes the least fear of the unknown. Such is the case with the equation of emotional problems and mechanical failure.​

The intent is not to encourage a victim mentality, but to offer those who are suffering in mental pain a way to not feel like naughty children complaining about something adults know better that isn't real. Its a shame people game the system, but that doesn't make the reality of those suffering any less valid and worth treating.

Very good quote. The question is what can we do then? I think my main gripe about the whole issue revolves around using prescriptions to cure mental illness. Too much emphasis is being put on saying people are ill and feeding them pills so that they can function and become docile (and hopefully productive) members of the society again.

There are other kinds of treatment other than medication and I think these are more important. If someone just lost a job and is about to be evicted from their home, they are going to be more prone to depression. It is not enough just to identify them as depressed and needing treatment. Their living situation needs to be improved as well, and that should be part of the 'treatment'.

I know this is probably not feasible in real life. There is no way to create such a system. It's sad, really.

Amazingly there is so little resource on how others can help people cope with mental illness. Normally it's just "Be there for them and encourage them to get treatment", but very little is said about how exactly to help while keeping a balance in your own life so that you don't get discouraged too. I think people around us have more insight about us than doctors and therefore should be the ones who are best equipped with how to help us.

I guess I don't really have a point

 

[Viridian]

That's what I keep wondering too. Personally I don't think medication is the right approach. I think it helps, but there must be better, more natural ways to achieve long-term effects.


Very good quote. The question is what can we do then? I think my main gripe about the whole issue revolves around using prescriptions to cure mental illness. Too much emphasis is being put on saying people are ill and feeding them pills so that they can function and become docile (and hopefully productive) members of the society again.

There are other kinds of treatment other than medication and I think these are more important. If someone just lost a job and is about to be evicted from their home, they are going to be more prone to depression. It is not enough just to identify them as depressed and needing treatment. Their living situation needs to be improved as well, and that should be part of the 'treatment'.

I know this is probably not feasible in real life. There is no way to create such a system. It's sad, really.

Amazingly there is so little resource on how others can help people cope with mental illness. Normally it's just "Be there for them and encourage them to get treatment", but very little is said about how exactly to help while keeping a balance in your own life so that you don't get discouraged too. I think people around us have more insight about us than doctors and therefore should be the ones who are best equipped with how to help us.

I guess I don't really have a point

Just leaving this here:

Depression can be biological. Willpower alone can't solve everything in those cases. There's a reason it's called an "invisible disease".

 

[garbage]

To be honest I still don't know what to think about this. I mean, the fall was not bad and there were no scrapes or cuts, and the mother rushed to the child and was holding her lovingly. I'm quite sure if the child was really hurt or if it was an emotional hurt, the mother would have reacted differently. Maybe this is a modern parenting strategy or something.

Yeah, I overgeneralized.

Not that the mother's approach wasn't TERRIBLE AND WRONG AND DAMAGING, and not that it didn't work, but the part where the child just seemingly looked all confused as if her pain wasn't justified was what got to me.

There are a few ways to 'learn' that a given pain isn't 'justified.' One is to deny the problem in a pollyanna sort of way, an optimism bordering on naivete. My preferred approach is to to learn through experience that, oh, getting a lil' scrape isn't so bad--and that's a tactic that people use to get over fear and anxiety in general.

This is a very good point. It's how we naturally make sense of the world. Even having words at all is a kind of 'labeling'.

The bolded is exactly what I was trying to get at! It's an issue that's hardly ever addressed. In regard to mental illness especially, maybe everyone is 'screwed up' in some way. Labeling something with a name helps people understand it, but once the problem is spotted as real, maybe it's better to just let go of the labeling altogether and start looking at how we can help you as a person.

I think that terminology has helped me in some ways, but not in others.

Shit's obviously all fucked up when, say, you're burning your candle at both ends for weeks without feeling the least bit tired and feeling as though you don't need sleep, then, blammo, crash. That obviously isn't natural. That's a problem that kinda needs fixed, and labels help.

But to this day, I wind up wondering whether a few days' worth of a glum mood is a depressive episode, or if moments of grandeur are a manic phase. When the experience is so internal and personal, at times the terms actually seem to confuse our understanding of the world and ourselves.

That's what I keep wondering too. Personally I don't think medication is the right approach. I think it helps, but there must be better, more natural ways to achieve long-term effects.

I'd love more natural ways to deal with it all. For the most part, I've been sticking with medications that have been around for decades--that have some history behind them and so their side effects are more well-known. (Those older medications happen to work for me, thank God.)
Though I'm not an expert on the subject, I know some things. To throw a thought out there--one thing that most people don't realize is that, say, typical antidepressants just serve to fix existing emitters and receptors; that typically, they won't do a damn thing for 'normies.'

One natural way to deal with it is psychotherapy, which is universally recommended alongside medication.

I'll also throw in the following--given my experiences, I realize why people might get themselves into situations where they're hooked on illegal or dangerous drugs.

 

[kyuuei]

I'd much rather have half-educated, over named, over prescribed, and quick-to-label doctors and psychs than I would the way things used to be.. when people just rolled their eyes and down-played the importance of illness of all sorts. If you couldn't see it, or understand it, it clearly wasn't there.

Without a name, it might as well not exist. People are not "slow", "off", "crazy".. They're mentally retarded, bipolar, and schizophrenic.. These names are precise determinations. Alzheimer's is NOT a normal part of aging. Not all old people lose their personality and it isn't random that they're forgetting things at an alarming rate. There's a reason that woman is sticking her head in the fridge and having emotional outbursts.. She isn't just some crazy woman that needs to be locked away until she's better. There's a reason that black guy isn't shaving his beard like the rest of the men, he isn't getting special treatment because of his race. Depression is a real, and clinical, condition that can be identified and treated. He isn't some whiny, pathetic dude that *thinks* he has it rough. We're no longer just telling people to man up and shut up about everything, and I find that a good thing.

We're not going to be perfect about everything, by far. That's why we have things like the autism epidemic where suddenly everything under the sun causes the condition, and EVERY child can be said to have ADD and ADHD, which clutters things up and makes it more difficult for those whom really do have those conditions because now people are so desensitized to the issues that they roll their eyes when they hear it. Yes, we have people over prescribing medicines and throwing antibiotics out there like its candy and creating super bugs in the process. We have people who need help with things like obesity and depression getting lots of medicines and not enough emphasis on recreation, exercise, healthy balanced diets, and one-on-one quality therapy and counseling. We're a pop-a-pill generation, and while I feel like that is starting to taper off and it has hit its peak, those remnants will be there. Everyone's a victim now-a-days, you just need to figure out how.

And still, I'd prefer it that way to people getting no treatment at all, insane asylums holding perfectly healthy people, and children being spanked, yelled at, and feeling down on themselves because they cannot figure out how the other kids sit still and pay attention.

 

[prplchknz]

Stigma is a very real thing, so is depression. But people want to act like neither exists, i don't know what this thread is about so i'm just gonna say my piece and be gone.

 

[Kayness]

I can kind of relate to what you're saying. But the examples in my life that I can think of right now are....stuff like...you know...when we were teenagers my dad made such a big deal that we DO NOT get tattooes because he still has this belief that tattooes are for gangsters, bikers and criminals or something. It ironically piqued my interest in it (which I will never get anyway because I don't trust myself to NOT get bored of it a few years later).

anyway yeah my point is that I can relate to that whole thing about making a big deal out of something and it backfires or became a self-fulling prophecy.

 

[Ivy]

To get super-specific about the "how to respond to children's feelings/pain" thing (even though I know it was being used as a metaphor for a larger issue): I don't love either option described in the OP. It wouldn't even occur to me to tell a child that something "didn't hurt." How the hell should I know if it hurts? Only they know that. And I also don't feel the need to hover and make a huge deal out of every little bump and scrape. My response when my children were small depended on the severity of the injury. Usually I didn't react at all, unless the child reacted, and then I would validate that reaction and encourage them to get up and move on. "Ouch! I bet that sucked. Let's play with these Legos."

To address the larger issue, though, I don't think labeling something makes it so, and I don't think the parents' reaction/behavior entirely shapes a child's personality or their illness/wellness profile. They are who they are, they struggle with whatever they're going to struggle with, whether or not the parents recognize it. For example, even though his dad and I share the philosophy of not making a big deal out of things, our son was still diagnosed with autism at the age of 3 and has benefitted greatly from having that "label" and the services that come with it.

 

[Ivy]

To get super-specific about the "how to respond to children's feelings/pain" thing (even though I know it was being used as a metaphor for a larger issue): I don't love either option described in the OP. It wouldn't even occur to me to tell a child that something "didn't hurt." How the hell should I know if it hurts? Only they know that. And I also don't feel the need to hover and make a huge deal out of every little bump and scrape. My response when my children were small depended on the severity of the injury. Usually I didn't react at all, unless the child reacted, and then I would validate that reaction and encourage them to get up and move on. "Ouch! I bet that sucked. Let's play with these Legos."

To address the larger issue, though, I don't think labeling something makes it so, and I don't think the parents' reaction/behavior entirely shapes a child's personality or their illness/wellness profile. They are who they are, they struggle with whatever they're going to struggle with, whether or not the parents recognize it. For example, even though his dad and I share the philosophy of not making a big deal out of things, our son was still diagnosed with autism at the age of 3 and has benefitted greatly from having that "label" and the services that come with it.

 

[prplchknz]

I echo Ivy, on having a label is sometimes a good thing, I was dxed developmental delayed at 18 months and i benefitted greatly from the interventions that were avalaiable to me and than in elementary school i ws dxed with written expressive disorder. I have a hard time getting my thoughts on paper in a coherent manner, so i was allowed to take exams orally because I got the stuff i just couldn't regurigiatate it except orally. and I've been dxed schizoaffective with out the label i'd probably be worse off today than i was a year ago in stead of starting out with a gaf* of 20 and now my average gaf is between 50-60 not the best, but its better. so I don't act like a fucking victim, in fact i'd like to be average.

gaf is global assesment of functioning, or how well you function day to day. http://depts.washington.edu/washinst/Resources/CGAS/GAF Index.htm

 

[21%]

[MENTION=4939]kyuuei[/MENTION] Great post! I agree that we are definitely getting better. I really hope the whole pill-popping thing is a yoyo effect where we go from denial to overdiagnosis, before a better balance can be achieved. Totally agree about desensitization. Every kid has ADHD now, and in this case I think labeling can be really harmful, as illustrated here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

[MENTION=2]Ivy[/MENTION] and [MENTION=360]prplchknz[/MENTION] Thank you for sharing your insight. It's very helpful in my understanding of the bigger picture

[MENTION=12223]Viridian[/MENTION] I hope this thread doesn't come off sounding like I'm denying that these conditions are real, because I'm not

Let me clarify: I know mental illness and all these other conditions are real -- as real as broken bones or diabetes. I'm not suggesting that we should just gloss over them and pretend they don't exist and they will just go away by themselves. In most cases, I agree that "labels" are very useful and actually help people. I'm not in any way trying to trivialize anything of these illnesses or conditions.

To clarify further, maybe I should share what motivated the topic in the first place. I think my boyfriend is suffering from something. I don't know what -- depression? bipolar disorder? anxiety disorder? SAD? I have tried to suggest getting help, but he has always refused, saying that no one knows anything and that no one can help him. I think he thinks he can handle it himself, because he has 'up' periods where he feels great. The problem is, I don't know if he can handle it himself. Right now he is in a postgraduate program where he has no friends or family nearby. He's been isolating himself, and I feel that his condition -- whatever it is -- is getting worse. I've looked up some information online and also tried to locate local therapists for him but I'm not sure if I should try to 'convince' him to seek help at this stage. He is not in the greatest situation in life and he is under a real lot of stress. I'm not physically there to help him out so I'm very, very worried. By giving something a name you give it power, but it may be the only way to deal with it. I don't really know if adding a "condition" to what he has to worry about right now will actually help or do more harm. I didn't want to make it about this specific situation, but just wanted to explore more ideas about the effects of 'labeling' to gain more perspective.

 

[21%]

Not that the mother's approach wasn't TERRIBLE AND WRONG AND DAMAGING, and not that it didn't work, but the part where the child just seemingly looked all confused as if her pain wasn't justified was what got to me.

There are a few ways to 'learn' that a given pain isn't 'justified.' One is to deny the problem in a pollyanna sort of way, an optimism bordering on naivete. My preferred approach is to to learn through experience that, oh, getting a lil' scrape isn't so bad--and that's a tactic that people use to get over fear and anxiety in general.

Yeah, something 'bothered' me about the situation as well, but I didn't know what or why. A lot of people whose parents said "Just get over it" to any problem said it helped them build inner strength. So I don't know where I stand really...

To get super-specific about the "how to respond to children's feelings/pain" thing (even though I know it was being used as a metaphor for a larger issue): I don't love either option described in the OP. It wouldn't even occur to me to tell a child that something "didn't hurt." How the hell should I know if it hurts? Only they know that. And I also don't feel the need to hover and make a huge deal out of every little bump and scrape. My response when my children were small depended on the severity of the injury. Usually I didn't react at all, unless the child reacted, and then I would validate that reaction and encourage them to get up and move on. "Ouch! I bet that sucked. Let's play with these Legos."

Seems like a good response. Thanks! I'll keep this in mind when (and if) I have kids of my own.

The thing is, there are incidents in my childhood that I would have preferred people to 'gloss over' a bit and not make a big deal out of, and these were instances where people were trying to help. It made me feel helpless. Then again, I'm aware of the thin line between "not making a big deal out of something" and "not validating someone's feelings"...

But to this day, I wind up wondering whether a few days' worth of a glum mood is a depressive episode, or if moments of grandeur are a manic phase. When the experience is so internal and personal, at times the terms actually seem to confuse our understanding of the world and ourselves.

This is related to what I'm concerned about with my boyfriend as well. I would hate to have him think that his 'ups' are not really 'ups' but a psychological effect from mood swings and things like that.

[MENTION=15967]Kayness[/MENTION] Yeah, in other things not related to illness, making a big deal out of something can blow the thing way out of proportion. There are things that I don't eat now because people made a big deal out of me not eating them when I was younger. All the arguments about how much I hate something and how I will never eat it somehow reinforces the fact in my mind, and now I'm stuck on not eating it or something...