Thursday, 12 March 2009
Dependency for life
In the previous post myalterego talks about what is bad with a no-dependency life?
Jacob Bronowski of book fame, “The ascent of man” refers to humans as social solitaries. I have found this a good descriptive term. Humans like their solitude, independence and individuality. At the same time they are communal beings and have a need to be in relationship and belonging with another person and having a sense of belonging to a group of people. So in this sense they are dependent on that other person and group to be there to fulfil their need for belonging.
If I ever present the idea of the dependency hump inevitably there will be comment by someone that once they get over the hump then they can be independent and thus wont need to depend on anyone. Indeed many psychotherapies promote such an ethos - the healthy state is not a state of dependency but a state of independence. Self reliance is highly regarded in some counselling systems.

Belonging
My response is - dependency for life is a healthy state. Without a doubt self reliance, independence and the like are very good qualities to possess in life. I would encourage people to seek those personality qualities and use them in their daily lives.
Just one problem - they are not enough on their own. We need other people to be psychologically strong ourselves. When we depend on a dependable person/group then we are much more psychologically robust than the person who does not have such dependence in their life. So one needs a person(s) on which to be dependent their entire lives until the day they die.
Let’s take a transactional analysis explanation of this.

Person A has a problem in that they feel sad. However they go and use their own internal resources and use internal nurturing to assist their sadness and after time the Child is soothed and the problem is solved. A clear example of a person being self reliant and independent. A most desirable state to have for anyone I think it is safe to say. Some times however it is not enough and consider person B.

Person B feels sad and uses their own internal NP to assist in soothing the Child. However they also ask another person for help and that person offers their caring and kindness. So the Child is self soothed and soothed by others as well. Person B in the long run is going to be much better off than person A because of their willingness to engage others in their time of need. This person is not being self reliant and independent at this point, which I am suggesting is a healthy state.
However person B has one extra problem. As soon as person B transacts with the other, all sorts of very difficult and thorny psychological issues come rushing to the surface. Issues of trust, reliance, need, importance, closeness, dependence and so forth all come rapidly to the fore. As we know these are major issues of psychological importance that sometimes are not easily dealt with. If you get soothing from others then you have to also deal with these issues.

Trust
For some they are simply too difficult and they choose to rarely seek soothing from others. They will never allow themselves to be in that dependent position and thus they will live an emotionally crippled life.
I suggest that the healthy state is where one allows self to have some kind of life coach, mentor, confidant, therapist for the rest of their days. They allow self at times to be the dependent like party in such a relationship and this is a much more psychologically healthy position than the person who is completely self reliant and independent.
Graffiti
17:03 Permalink | Comments (13) | Email this | Tags: dependency, counselling, caring, relationship



Comments
I wish you'd define the abbreviations like NP.
Interesting - so you think therapy or something is for life?
Posted by: myalterego | Thursday, 12 March 2009
It is amazing to me that for some reason my life is so full of people.
But you're right. After i share something close to my heart with someone, i wonder who else will know in the very near future. I think that perhaps that's a bit silly but for some reason i can't help it. I guess spending, pretty much, my whole life in a church environment is not a healthy place to grow and nurture trust.
I dislike it when people obviously do the whole 'feeling sorry for me' act. Literally makes my skin crawl. Grrrrr!!
But...
I fully understand the need to tell.
There are also things that i don't tell anyone ever. I do tend to be a tenatiously private person. That's just life i guess.
Posted by: roses | Friday, 13 March 2009
Sorry Sara,
NP = Nurturing Parent.
Therapy for life! Sounds almost like a prison sentence.
Most often the mentor/confidant is a spouse, relative or a close friend or maybe even a senior at work.
But I have people who I have counselled intensively for a period of time and then I don't see them for a year or two then they suddenly reappear for 4 or 5 sessions and then disappear again.
In those circumstances I see them using me in the dependerer type of role for them selves. This type of situation can go on for many, many years.
Is that therapy for life?
maybe
Cheers
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 13 March 2009
It sounds Roses like you tell some things and don't tell others.
Is there ambivalence there?
I hear what you say about the church but for some a church can very much fulfill that need for belonging.
I like it when you - Grrrrrr!
Regards
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 13 March 2009
I wrote a comment earlier but it appears it got sucked into the ether.
Fate it seems.
It said that I thought your series of posts this week were very thought provoking.
I wonder if this comment will make it?
Posted by: Kahless | Friday, 13 March 2009
It made it kahless!
Thank you for your kind positive stroke. It is appreciated as indeed are you.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 13 March 2009
Thank-you.
When I read this and the prior post Tony, for some reason I was flipping it around.
With regard to the dependency hump described in your last post.
If a person is at position A,B or C, does that impact how they view other people being dependent upon them?
Dependency is indeed a paradox. You choose a very smart title indeed!
Posted by: Kahless | Friday, 13 March 2009
Kahless I find you have raised a point that kenoath did in his comment on the previous post of dependency and paradox.
One which I had not considered here
Dependency from the point of view of the person being depended on.
I intended to write a short post about this last night, but I was just too fucked, so I will do it later today or early evening perhaps.
Cheers
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 13 March 2009
Tony,
Its not just church life, i guess its the way people in groups work generally.
I do harbour anger feelings toward the way we network in human relations (remembering that i am human and work in networks too).
I've caught myself talking out of turn and have gossiped often - all in the name of seeking advice and such. The reasons all look good don't they - seem to be for all the 'right' reasons. But its saying things that are confidences and hearing things said that i spoke in confidence to someone at sometime.
I'm reading about confidenciality and i don't think a human is capable of it. Maybe one day my thoughts will change but till then - i don't think its possible.
I think that's why the client has to understand that there are times when the therapist must share confidences with say.. a supervisor or a colleague or co-worker in that particular case. I guess that helps but i'm too human to know that people are safe with me. All i can see right now are my weaknesses, all i can see right now is how i can't do it.
Perhaps one can learn. Perhaps.
Ambivalence? Whether i tell you or not is a definate decision made prior to the event. No confusion there my friend.
Happy weekend!
Posted by: roses | Saturday, 14 March 2009
I hope that your workshop on the "Theraputic Relationship" goes well tomorrow.
One day i'm going to be just like you and know this stuff!
One day - you just watch.
Have fun when you can and when you can't... enjoy the challenge!
Posted by: roses | Saturday, 14 March 2009
Why thank you Roses,
I am just preparing a blog post now on one section of what I will be presenting tomorrow.
And I am sure you know lots of stuff already about things which I don't know.
It should be an enjoyable day as we have a full house!!
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Saturday, 14 March 2009
"And I am sure you know lots of stuff already about things which I don't know."
Naa. I don't think so but it was nice of you to say. Actually, nothing is feeling good today so after a good nights sleep maybe the world will be bright and chirpy. Perhaps.
A full house beats a straight I think... or the other way around? Either way, its a great hand to have - well, compared to a pair of twos or less.
It sounds like you crew will have a good day!
Posted by: roses | Saturday, 14 March 2009
Ha ha Roses!
You card metaphor wit sounds chirpy to me already
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Saturday, 14 March 2009
Post a comment