Posted by Dinah on November 23, 2008, at 8:33:41
In reply to Humans must exist along a continuum of attachment, posted by seldomseen on November 23, 2008, at 7:27:31
Actually I totally agree with you. I think that the angle of psychology may sometimes overestimate the power of environment just as the psychopharmacologists underestimate it.
I always figured it was most likely as you said. A basic temperament influenced by the environment.
Perhaps it's because of my life with dogs. I would see parent/child or siblings who were uncannily alike in things you'd never even think might be genetic. And that was true even with sire/puppy, who likely had never met one another. But I also saw how the expression of that temperament could be greatly affected by the environment. So, as the example that struck me most heavily, a mother dog who had a reserved, anxious, not terribly attached temperament and who had grown up in a home with so many dogs that individual attention was unlikely turned out so that she wasn't really able to attach and was quite distrustful, making life in a real home a bit difficult. While her daughter, with the exact same native temperament I'm sure, grew up in a household with just a few other dogs, kids popping in and out, etc. She never grew to be warm and fuzzy precisely. But she grew up to be a relatively well adjusted dog with an attachment to at least one person, and not nearly as anxious or defensive.
I'm not saying the first dog grew up in an abusive environment. She didn't. Any number of dogs could and did grow up just fine. It wasn't a puppymill. It just was a home where the attention was spread a bit further. A more resilient dog, or one with a more outgoing temperament, would have been just fine. Nor was she a horrible dog. On the surface she was more or less the same as any other dog. She just preferred her own company and was a bit suspicious of the motives of others. She never snapped at anyone. It wouldn't have even occurred to her that she could.
It wasn't a bad home. It wasn't a bad temperament. It was merely a bad combination.
She never did get all better and behave like other members of her breed. Yet she, and we, were happy enough together, and perhaps her home with us helped her to be happy.
I'm a bit perplexed as to why this would make you wish to give up therapy though? You clearly have attached to your therapist. Has that attachment been beneficial?
Absolutely there is no requirement or even desirability of going to therapy longer than is beneficial to you. If it doesn't help your functioning, if you think you have gotten all you can from it, etc., then it is time to quit. I think it's a good thing to evaluate this from time to time. Maybe you and your therapist could discuss it?
If I may be a bit bold? I notice that the tone of this post is very detached and clinical, and sounds different from what I am accustomed to hearing from you. Not that you don't regularly impress me greatly with your common sense. But the tone is usually different.
I have noticed in myself (and with great amusement) that I have two ways of getting absolutely furious. The first is by best illustrated by my losing my words altogether. But when I'm angry in the second way, my words get longer and longer, and my writing style more... brilliant (not in the sense of wonderful, but in the sense of a diamond - sharp edged and glittering).
Is it at all possible that your absolute calm and logical sequence of thoughts in this posts is as indicative of anger as it would have been if you had screamed?
I'm not saying it is. I know not everyone is like me. Heck, I always figure I'm the only one so weird as I am. But I thought I'd offer it anyway.
poster:Dinah
thread:864830
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20081120/msgs/864834.html