Discussion When help is not help

[torimandy]

A large part of counseling for BPD is to get the person to radically accept their situation and force their place in life as perceived by socio economic factors to be that person role in society regardless of how much they despise their position.

For most going through this a boost of financial help to get them to a place they are better off, like a job that allows them a rental by themselves instead of the stress of multiple roommates. For me it's financial help for surgeries that would probably change my life and make it a tad easier.

Thus, in my opinion, radical acceptance is nothing more than society saying no to the things that could positively effect the life of a person. It's accepting the fact that due to being poor you will never get the things you need and you must sit in the living hell and ignore it cause nobody is ever going to show you the money.

Please, tell me what you think.

 

[Wrennie]

Radical acceptance is basically them saying "your life is shit and you will continue to suffer for things beyond your control, and for some reason you need to accept that, and you still have to contribute to this crummy society despite its repeated refusal to accommodate you".

Whenever I hear it brought up in therapy I die inside... more so than I was already.

 

[Life_and_Death]

if you dont like your situation change it.

this is a generalized answer as i dont know the specifics of your situation so please dont get offended as it does come off as rather blunt.

because of this i hide it so if people get offended its their choice for reading it and not heeding the above warning

Spoiler: blunt/generalized response

in this example you can either get a job or sit there and do nothing. if you do nothing then dont expect anything to change

 

[whywere]

100% agree with you. I have had lots of counseling and it revolves around $$$$. I have 24/7 chronic pain and same deal with me, need the $$$ for medical needs.You and me could be twins! I am sending you all the love, caring and kindness that I have becasue I KNOW what you are talking about.

 

[Wrennie]

Radical acceptance is essentially having "learned helplessness" ingrained in you.

 

[noaccount]

Thus, in my opinion, radical acceptance is nothing more than society saying no to the things that could positively effect the life of a person. It's accepting the fact that due to being poor you will never get the things you need and you must sit in the living hell and ignore it cause nobody is ever going to show you the money.

Please, tell me what you think.

AMEN!

It is the opposite of radic-al, it refuses any attempts towards root-level change, it is disgustingly anti-justice.

lol why does life and death have two accounts?

 

[torimandy]

if you dont like your situation change it.

this is a generalized answer as i dont know the specifics of your situation so please dont get offended as it does come off as rather blunt.

because of this i hide it so if people get offended its their choice for reading it and not heeding the above warning

Spoiler: blunt/generalized response

in this example you can either get a job or sit there and do nothing. if you do nothing then dont expect anything to change

Well @lifeanddeath If I could get a job I would and the surgeries I need may help that happen. In America trans discrimination is absolutely the worse. Transition cost me a a 6 figure career as due to societies perceptions and likelihood to boycott a business just because of my presence it is almost impossible to get a leg up.

 

[Life_and_Death]

lol why does life and death have two accounts?

?

 

[Hyperborean]

?

Didn't know you had two accounts

 

[Life_and_Death]

Didn't know you had two accounts

i dont XD

 

[Hyperborean]

i dont XD

I know lol.

 

[torimandy]

I am sorry I didn't see the underscores between the words. Please stay on topic. My bad.

 

[Miss_Takes]

Sadly, I agree. While therapy has its place it is a relatively cheap alternative to providing the kinds of assistance many people require to stabilise or improve their day to day circumstance so that they are able to engage in therapy to ant helpful degree.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

Trying to force someone to live within the confines of society even if they are incapable of doing so is a lazy "solution."

I've accepted that I am screwed indefinitely most of my life but that's extra motivation for me to kill myself, not motivation to work 60 hour work weeks and pretend like my life is fine. Society should not be surprised when people kill themselves when it doesn't provide any meaningful form of relief other than cliches and empty platitudes.

The meme of the dog saying everything is fine while his house is burning down is an apt comparison. This partial quote should sum it up to some degree:

Perhaps it would be too radical to admit "depression" is an entirely normal reaction to a world in which one exists as a dehumanized, chronically hollowed-out wage slave whose life has been reduced to a series of empty, mindless labor and emptier consumption rituals, comforted only by addictive drugs pushed on them at every turn, and vacuous social ties of similarly hollowed out wageslaves who only know how to monologue and compete; who breathes, eats and shits microplastic, pollution and pesticides, and can't remember the last time they felt somebody actually cared if they lived or died. It'd be far too radical to admit we're living through the slow-motion collapse of the living super organism we call 'civilization' and every case of "depression" is like one little support column showing signs of giving out under the weight of a monstrosity that has become too bloated and labyrinthine for its own good. Then we'd be engaging in reality, giving the "illness" the scope it deserves, and psychology cares not for this.

The reality is, contemporary psychology functions much like a religion or a cult does, in that what one receives from it depends very much on what one puts into it - the power wielded by such organizations are directly correlate to belief of their followers. This is the power of placebo, confirmation bias, and magical thinking. If one considers their reaction to, say, climate change to be "abnormal", they merely have to walk into a therapist's office and their belief will be confirmed - their conscious experience will become a list of "symptoms" of "illness", for which they'll receive "medication". The words, the labels, the pills, they're all momentarily comforting, but none actually deal with the original problem any more than popping an Aspirin cures a raging influenza infection. That's because the entire "mental health industry" is palliative at best - worse yet, it serves at the behest of the state, which benefits massively from an industry that teaches individuals to view their life's problems through a scope that is not only decidedly apolitical but atomized as well.

Take an issue like climate change and this scope fails almost entirely - its sufficiently large-scale enough that the therapist's individualizing lens has no real answer to it. One who is trained in end-of-life therapy may have some more substantial answers that verge into decidedly philosophical territory, but most "by the book" therapists will preach willful ignorance; their role is not to create independent-thinking individuals, community leaders, politically-minded citizens or would-be revolutionaries, because they don't operate in this paradigm; an office vending machine is more communalistic than a therapist's office could ever claim to be.

No, their role is to keep people complicit and complacent in the consume/work false dichotomy lifestyle for they are part of the very same paradigm, this being their work as much as preaching is a priests'. The "mental health" industry is obliged to meet the absurdity of the world it exists in and profits off of, and so existential terror becomes "eco-anxiety", another cutesy label which can be "treated" with the right combination of benzodiazepines and willful ignorance, just as a village witch doctor may have once treated "spiritual possession" with a concoction of ayahuasca and a ceremony. Now this ceremony only takes 45 minutes and $200 a week and a monthly trip to the pharmacy. Who ever said capitalism wasn't efficient?!"

 

[262653]

Radical acceptance is essentially having "learned helplessness" ingrained in you.

Is it ever clear if/when the radical acceptance is justified? How does one distinguish between someone capable but unwilling (through instilled helplessness) to shape and maintain the life worth experiencing, and someone incapable but willing to try (to no avail) to create the life worth experiencing? That if there is even a distinction between capability and willingness.

As far as overall productivity of society is concerned, it makes sense to me to push everyone beyond their limitations, implanting the notion that everyone is capable of living a good life if they work hard enough and that they CAN work hard enough. I'm not so sure whichever is more helpful when it comes to the quality of life of a particular individual, especially if there isn't much information about said individual.

 

[sourpink]

Radical acceptance is basically them saying "your life is shit and you will continue to suffer for things beyond your control, and for some reason you need to accept that, and you still have to contribute to this crummy society despite its repeated refusal to accommodate you".

this is exactly my feelings on radical acceptance and I've voiced this opinion in sessions. they all always try to dance around the reality of living under bigoted misogynistic capitalism as anyone who doesn't meet the terms of what's considered acceptable.
why are we expected to accommodate a society that unabashedly hates us instead of that society changing in necessary and long overdue ways to include valuing lives equally, regardless of productivity, or ability, or identity.. clearly because that society has people it very generously benefits and of course those 'lucky' or 'ambitious ' people will do all they can to preserve their privilege and praise.
.... and when those of us they consider less valuable opt out of participating in their theatrics, because they're pulling all the strings, we get even more harshly beaten while they sit back, entertained and paid to witness and attend to our suffering.

I've been in and out of treatment for about a decade. nothing changes, the method is always steeped in conformity and complacency in oppression and over the years receives less and less funding, despite marketing arguing otherwise.

I've been thinking of checking this thread out. I'm glad I did.
it's refreshing and lovely to see frank conversations being had about all that gets swept under rugs.

 

[torimandy]

Is it ever clear if/when the radical acceptance is justified? How does one distinguish between someone capable but unwilling (through instilled helplessness) to shape and maintain the life worth experiencing, and someone incapable but willing to try (to no avail) to create the life worth experiencing? That if there is even a distinction between capability and willingness.

As far as overall productivity of society is concerned, it makes sense to me to push everyone beyond their limitations, implanting the notion that everyone is capable of living a good life if they work hard enough and that they CAN work hard enough. I'm not so sure whichever is more helpful when it comes to the quality of life of a particular individual, especially if there isn't much information about said individual.

UM, What if society doesn't give you the option of working? Really?

 

[262653]

UM, What if society doesn't give you the option of working? Really?

Wait, are you arguing that someone whom society denies the option of working would be better off radically accepting one's own situation? (Damn. Is it me, or is English language really that ambiguous?) And in any case, I don't know really. I don't see the point in making a choice when I have no idea what either of choices will bring. Might as well toss a coin.

 

[torimandy]

Is it ever clear if/when the radical acceptance is justified? How does one distinguish between someone capable but unwilling (through instilled helplessness) to shape and maintain the life worth experiencing, and someone incapable but willing to try (to no avail) to create the life worth experiencing? That if there is even a distinction between capability and willingness.

As far as overall productivity of society is concerned, it makes sense to me to push everyone beyond their limitations, implanting the notion that everyone is capable of living a good life if they work hard enough and that they CAN work hard enough. I'm not so sure whichever is more helpful when it comes to the quality of life of a particular individual, especially if there isn't much information about said individual.

UM, What if society doesn't give you the option of working? Really?

Wait, are you arguing that someone whom society denies the option of working would be better off radically accepting one's own situation? (Damn. Is it me, or is English language really that ambiguous?) And in any case, I don't know really. I don't see the point in making a choice when I have no idea what either of choices will bring. Might as well toss a coin.

Yes, Radical acceptance is nothing more than getting the person to accept and sit in their shitty situation. That is all it is.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

From a forum members on here:

I used to think that suicide prevention was just another case of good intentions gone too far. That people really did care about those that wanted to die. That they did in fact want what was best for us and simply didn't understand that in some cases, they were doing nothing but prolonging a miserable existence.

And yeah, people are sympathetic, to an extent, to those who are suicidal. Nobody likes seeing someone in so much pain that they would rather die than keep living, but what are they actually willing to do to care for the people in such misery? Not much.

That's why suicide prohibitions and the current paradigm of mental healthcare in general are so convenient for everyone else. Despite claiming to follow the biopsychosocial model of mental health, clinical psychiatry/psychology pretty much leaves the -social part unaddressed and almost unacknowledged. Everyone is perfectly content to pretend that all issues of mental health are a matter of pathology. "Oh it's no problem that you can barely afford to pay your bills. That you've been isolated and ostracized, if not outright abused, for most of your life. There's just a problem with your brain chemistry, here's some pills. Go to some therapy because you clearly need to learn better coping skills."

The nice thing about painting our problems as individual defects or deficiencies, is that the onus is now completely on us to make our lives more livable. If they accepted that people are often driven to suicide by external pressures, that some people actually can't make it on their own, then they would have to make more tangible efforts to support those who are in need. Or they would have to admit that their honest attitude is, "Yeah we'd love for you to be living a satisfying life, but if enabling you to do so requires anything from us, well then fuck off."

Refusing to allow people to freely kill themselves allows the rest of society to feel like they're supporting suicidal people without having to assume any of the burden of those lives. And they know it isn't going to be enough for everyone. That is made abundantly clear by the thousands of people who kill themselves every year despite how difficult they've made it to commit suicide. But when those people inevitably fall through the cracks, everyone will just pat themselves on the back and tell themselves, "We did everything we could to keep them from dying." Yeah, but you did fuck all to give any of us a life worth living.