I don't like these distinctions society makes. There are degrees of severity, in a condition we're all prone to. There are co-existing traits that can compound the risks, such as impulsivity. We then say it's only real addiction if the person lacks impulse control. That combination can lead to the most destructive behaviors, but lumping them together as a "disorder" completely misconstrues the nature of the problem. Like, how these two separate issues that on their own are just normal human traits.
At about 39:30, he says that there's this depressing general rule, that we always marry people who are at the same level of trauma that we're at. One thing that bothers me about Maté, is that he too often speaks in absolutes, but that aside.. is there any truth to that? That people tend to pair off more successfully with someone of similar levels of trauma?
I found it interesting, because it makes intuitive sense to me. I've always doubted the notion that depressed people shouldn't be together, for example. It's highly unrealistic. People need to be able to relate to each other. See somewhat eye to eye.
It's important to understand his definition of trauma though. He's referring to the psychological wound. Not the event or experience that created it, but the psychological scarring and damage that remains - something that varies massively depending on how well the damage healed.
A broken leg that's never set can become permanently crippling. While someone else breaks their leg and can say they're just fine, because they got medical attention. One of them healed properly a long time ago, so calling them the same for the original break would make no sense. Trauma, as Maté defines it, means whatever damage currently exists due to those harmful experiences, for whatever reasons.
Trauma then is a product of our lives, the tangle of vicious cycles, compounding factors, abuse, illnesses and accidents, poverty and neglect, in a psychopathic civilization that does everything to keep us down.
No comments:
Post a Comment