• We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
  • Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.

So,why Would Therapists Recommend Brene Brown For Trauma Sufferers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Where do you come up with this? Just wondering if this is a fact or theory.

Fact. Children are vulnerable to the passing of toxic shame because of their reliance on their parents. In fact,this dependency is necessary to the internalization of shame:Shame can only be passed in significant relationships. For a child to believe the shaming criticisms and teachings they must come from someone the child trusts and needs.



My mother is a narcissist. There was no love or trust in my environment. Again,being the scapegoat has its perks. I had one excellent grandmother. And many role models along the way. Think of the movie..The help." You is kind. You is smart. You is important. :)
 
Last edited:
Oh geez, both of the ban-ees are back here again? I'm confused, are you two gonna play nice now or is it a continuation of before? I somehow missed the other thread.... but this one seems to scream "eff you mods, we'll start again, neener neener neener!" (By the way, I'm not ACTUALLY saying that to the mods, rather this is my impression of what is going on.)

Carry on....
 
Really not sure what the point of a new thread is, if you think the other one was a train wreck,
Since I got banned from it, I thought it would be more fruitful to start a thread in relation to the conclusion we all started to reach (4 pages later) that it was weird that some therapists were suggesting this...which I am allowed to do. And yeah, it turned into a trainwreck, from my perspective.

If you have an objection with this thread though, you are free to not participate. I thought it was a bit more productive to work out ways people can approach their therapists when these kinds of unhelpful suggestions are made, rather than just bitch about Brene Brown..[DOUBLEPOST=1399462698,1399462478][/DOUBLEPOST]
???? Who was banned???
Moi and survivor2thriver.[DOUBLEPOST=1399462797][/DOUBLEPOST]
Oh geez, both of the ban-ees are back here again?

I don't think practising my freedom to start a fresh thread is saying anything other than "I accept the situation...BUT, I know I am free to start a fresh thread about something I am genuinely interested to understand...which I am."

I respect anthony's decision. The Vulnerability thread got out of hand. I'm not mad at him...I thought it was funny actually. It's my first time being banned from here since I joined. Bit of a milestone really. :D

I have survivor2thriver on ignore, so you can all interact with her and there will be no more conflict between us.

I think it's a productive thread...or it could be. Some people agree with me, as they are giving suggestions.
 
Last edited:
My therapist likes Brene Brown, but the only reason he brought her up was because we were tackling my struggles with vulnerability and shame (Brown's PhD work, I believe). I personally don't see the big whoop with her, but he likes her, so I've found some nuggets of wisdom in what she says regardless :tup:

Thanks, I appreciate your input here, and it makes sense that the therapist might want you to hear what brene has to say, if it might improve the therapist/client relationship...not everyone else in the persons life. Do I have that part right, or did I misunderstand you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let's not forget a very important question that's mentioned in the title of this thread.

What's the therapist's perspective? What's their motivation? Assuming that the therapist is trained and experienced with PTSD, why would they think that Brene Brown's research might be helpful?

Yes, thanks Valentino. Despite someone thinking I am doing this just to be a bitch to anthony or not getting why I would want to start it, I actually am genuinely interested in why therapists would suggest Brene Brown to trauma survivors, when they should know that her work is probably not realistic for someone at that stage of recovery and healing to work with?

Or are we to assume that the therapist is ill-willed? Incompetent? Malicious?

Well, a member I just responded to said that their therapist suggested it perhaps as a way for their relationship to grow and improve, or at least that is how I interpreted their words(?)...so that may also be one reason. It can take years for clients to feel safe enough to open up to therapists...and lets face it, that's a long time to be waiting and hearing the person use sophisticated mechanisms to avoid talking about what is really going on for them...not to mention all the money they are spending to not get anywhere.

What about if the survivor has lost touch with what their core needs are? Is the therapist supposed to be a mind reader too?

I feel like this question relates to the thought I had above. It can take so much time and money to get to the core issues. Perhaps the therapist is just trying to give the process a quick start? If they are trying to save the client money then isn't that a sign of a GOOD therapist, not a suspect one? It would indicate that they at least care enough about them (and not the money) to not be ripping them off for sessions that aren't really getting anywhere.

Should the therapist let the survivor totally lead the healing process, when their inner world is fractured, and parts of their personal identity has been replaced by an instinctive survival driven coping mechanism??

I think part of any good therapists role is to act as a catalyst for healing. The person has their own innate healer within them, but sometimes they need gentle nudges in the right direction for things to really get moving.

What if the therapist has codependency issues too? Or also has a bit of a narcissist/borderline/rescuer complex? In this case they're also driven by their own motivations and can be quite blind or deaf to the survivors needs??

THIS is a very real possibility, and every person going into therapy needs to be aware that therapists also have their own issues, and they can project and gaslight just like any other human can. People need to be aware of the power dynamics that go on in a therapist/client relationship, and watch for imbalances...because they happen all the time.

But a trauma survivor often has a history of being in bad relationships, so how can they even trust their decision making process to even allow a potentially slightly less blind therapist help guide and lead the way at least temporarily?

This is the hard part. I don't know the answer to it?

Thanks for the awesome questions Valentino. :)
 
Last edited:
I thought this was an interesting read with well thought out criticisms of Brene Brown's research. I have also noticed that the current mental health model of isolated expert/client therapy is often severely lacking in social and community context.
I liked quite a bit about the talks, at first. It all felt so affirming and familiar, you know? I mean, who doesn’t grapple with being vulnerable – in personal relationships, in the body, in the world? Who doesn’t struggle with shame? Who doesn’t struggle with connection? Very few people.
But something was missing. A lot was missing, actually. In fact, so much was missing that what Brown had to say ultimately didn’t have much staying power for me.
What was missing was both utterly vast and stunningly simple: social context. Nearly everything that Brown talked about – our fear of vulnerability, our lack of connection, our sense of shame – was with reference to individual psychology, with absolutely no acknowledgment that different people occupy different contexts that bear on all of these questions.
...
But let’s face it: Disconnection is not going to be solved just by overcoming shame. People from any marginalized group can do all the personal work on themselves they want, but that work is not going to magically get them off the margins and connected into the larger society. If you’re on the margins, it’s not your attitude that’s got you disconnected. It’s stigma and systemic exclusion. I can be the most psychologically healthy, spiritually evolved, kick-ass disabled person on the planet, and that is not going to solve the social, sensory, and architectural barriers that enforce my disconnection from the able-bodied world every single day.
...
In psychotherapy, I have experienced this omission of social context as deeply shaming, deeply disconnecting, and deeply alienating. It has put all of the responsibility for changing my attitude, my outlook, and my internal narrative on my shoulders without ever addressing the outside forces that make that change so difficult. Do I bear responsibility for how I walk through the world? Absolutely. No question. But that’s not all there is, and the idea that it’s all up to me dooms the whole project of “feeling good about myself” to failure.
...
Do I think that people in the field of social work, like Ms. Brown, or anyone with therapeutic training means to be shaming or disempowering? No. I don’t. In fact, I think most are quite well-intentioned and want to help people, and I think that their work has its place. It has certainly helped me in other respects. But without social context, their work becomes deeply problematic, and many of the issues that arise are reflected in Brene Brown’s videos.

---- by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg "Shame and Disconnection: The Missing Voices of Oppression in Brene Brown's 'The Power of Vulnerability'"
full article here: http://thebodyisnotanapology.tumblr...shame-and-disconnection-the-missing-voices-of
I think that the social and community aspect of mental health is a HUGE aspect that limits healing and often also increases suffering of the people who end up getting externally isolated or banished due to difficulties fitting in.

But, I think that shame is actually a big contributor in a social aspect, it's shame abuse by society. We live in a growing culture of silence and secrecy. This likely motivates a knee-jerk 'attack the messenger' towards anyone sharing bad news that bring out unpleasant emotions. And there is also a pervasive movement to defend a 'just world theory' illusion which ends up driving 'blame the victim' knee-jerk reactions.
A conspiracy of silence, or culture of silence, describes the behavior of a group of people of some size, as large as an entire national group or profession or as small as a group of colleagues, that by unspoken consensus does not mention, discuss, or acknowledge a given subject. The practice may be motivated by positive interest in group solidarity or by such negative impulses as fear of political repercussion or social ostracism.
--- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_silence
The just-world hypothesis or just-world fallacy is the cognitive bias (or assumption) that a person's actions always bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, so that all noble actions are eventually rewarded and all evil actions are eventually punished. In other words, the just-world hypothesis is the tendency to attribute consequences to—or expect consequences as the result of—a universal force that restores moral balance.
...
The hypothesis popularly appears in the English language in various figures of speech that imply guaranteed negative reprisal, such as: "You got what was coming to you", "What goes around comes around", and "You reap what you sow".
--- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
With trauma survivors all of this contributes to a secondary wounding effect that often hurts more than the original abuse, to be shamed, dismissed, and silenced by other family members, friends, and society when trying to share our stories or seek support.
A rape victim is especially stigmatized in cultures with strong customs and taboos regarding sex and sexuality. For example, society may view a rape victim (especially one who was previously a virgin) as "damaged". Victims in these cultures may suffer isolation, be disowned by friends and family, be prohibited from marrying, be divorced if already married, or even killed.
...
Secondary victimization is the re-traumatization of the sexual assault, abuse, or rape victim through the responses of individuals and institutions. Types of secondary victimization include victim blaming and inappropriate post-assault behavior or language by medical personnel or other organizations with which the victim has contact.
--- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming
 
Last edited:
Well, yes, all humans, and especially those dealing with traumatic histories, are technically vulnerable.

Yes,being vulnerable is the human condition. Everyone is vulnerable. Finding a balance is key. Trauma survivors will have a different balance than non traumatized individuals. Why? Necessity. We have the gift and curse of knowing and having deep understanding of humanity. It's not shame based.
 
I liked quite a bit about the talks, at first. It all felt so affirming and familiar, you know? I mean, who doesn’t grapple with being vulnerable – in personal relationships, in the body, in the world? Who doesn’t struggle with shame? Who doesn’t struggle with connection? Very few people.
But something was missing. A lot was missing, actually. In fact, so much was missing that what Brown had to say ultimately didn’t have much staying power for me.
What was missing was both utterly vast and stunningly simple: social context. Nearly everything that Brown talked about – our fear of vulnerability, our lack of connection, our sense of shame – was with reference to individual psychology, with absolutely no acknowledgment that different people occupy different contexts that bear on all of these questions.
...
But let’s face it: Disconnection is not going to be solved just by overcoming shame. People from any marginalized group can do all the personal work on themselves they want, but that work is not going to magically get them off the margins and connected into the larger society. If you’re on the margins, it’s not your attitude that’s got you disconnected. It’s stigma and systemic exclusion. I can be the most psychologically healthy, spiritually evolved, kick-ass disabled person on the planet, and that is not going to solve the social, sensory, and architectural barriers that enforce my disconnection from the able-bodied world every single day.
...
In psychotherapy, I have experienced this omission of social context as deeply shaming, deeply disconnecting, and deeply alienating. It has put all of the responsibility for changing my attitude, my outlook, and my internal narrative on my shoulders without ever addressing the outside forces that make that change so difficult. Do I bear responsibility for how I walk through the world? Absolutely. No question. But that’s not all there is, and the idea that it’s all up to me dooms the whole project of “feeling good about myself” to failure.
...
Do I think that people in the field of social work, like Ms. Brown, or anyone with therapeutic training means to be shaming or disempowering? No. I don’t. In fact, I think most are quite well-intentioned and want to help people, and I think that their work has its place. It has certainly helped me in other respects. But without social context, their work becomes deeply problematic, and many of the issues that arise are reflected in Brene Brown’s videos.


Amen! :joyful:
 
Thanks, I appreciate your input here, and it makes sense that the therapist might want you to hear what brene has to say, if it might improve the therapist/client relationship...not everyone else in the persons life. Do I have that part right, or did I misunderstand you?

You're very welcome, it's an interesting thread!

It's kinda half-and-half. I have trouble opening up to him about certain topics in therapy, and the shame surrounding the topics also prevent me from discussing these issues (and others that make me uncomfortable) with my loved ones and any one else who cares and could potentially help me cope.

I wasn't associating/connecting my lack of being vulnerable with feeling shame. My T was mainly trying to help me see that through Brown's TED Talks, which we discussed together. I also read a little of one of her books and shared it with my T as well.

It was a little helpful, but I still didn't quite "get" what her points were. I don't really follow her style very well. My T explained it better, in my opinion. I think Brown is relevant, but she isn't necessarily for everybody. Like, she's a proud Texan, holds pretty heteronormative views, is a mother in her (40's?), and has pretty rigid gender expectations (to me). I'm from a major city, a lesbian struggling with breaking a lot of heteronormative thinking/beliefs/expectations, etc., in my 20's, and I never did "fit" my gender role.

I feel like Brown puts a lot of culture and personal beliefs in her work, and I just, largely, can't relate. Basically, I feel that she tries to relate to lots of women, in particular, by subscribing to various notions that are assumed to be common. But, for me, I just wind-up being excluded or only partially "represented." Again, not sayin she's not smart or passionate or good or anything like that. She just doesn't work for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Valentino

I just read your post after posting mine. Thank you for finding the excerpt that so brilliantly supported my point! I could not for the LIFE of me figure out what was missing from Brown's assertions, and yes! there it is! Social context! Inclusivity! Recognition of humanity's biases, prejudices, and intangible institutionalized barriers!!

Your comments, and this thread in general, have really helped me feel more validated. I don't feel like I'm stupid or missing some amazing gem that my T and others who really enjoy Brown have uncovered.

*whew!* Still normal :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Donation drives

2026 Donation Goal

Goal
$1,800.00
Earned
$910.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  50.6%

Trending content

Featured content

Back
Top Bottom