Mental health and wellness is the state at which one feels, thinks, and behaves. Mental health can be viewed on a continuum, starting with an individual who is mentally well and free of any impairment in his or her daily life, while someone else might have mild concerns and distress, and another might have a severe mental illness.

Everyone has “stuff” that they keep contained in a tightly sealed plastic bag. There are some who occasionally can’t help but let the “stuff” leak, and there are those with the bag wide open.

However, in our society, we still tend to stigmatize those who let their “stuff” leak out instead of helping them, understanding them, or simply not judging them. Just as we all know someone with cancer, we all know someone with a mental health disorder.

Mental health is just as vital as physical health. In reality, the two coexist and should not be treated separately. There are many mental health disorders that exacerbate physical concerns or disorders, and vice versa.

For instance, someone who suffers from chronic migraines might also suffer from an anxiety disorder. Obesity contributes to the severity of symptoms of depression. Poor anger management is associated with high blood pressure. Behind every medical illness, it is possible to find a mental health concern as well.

It is also possible that a boost to mental health can alleviate symptoms of a medical condition. As an example, those who receive art therapy or pet therapy in hospitals are shown to have a speedier recovery than those without, as well as a decrease in severity of symptoms experienced.

A holistic approach for individuals needs to be the standard. Physicians, nurses, dentists, psychiatrists, psychologists, mental health counselors, and other mental health professionals need to collaborate to provide a complete treatment plan. A medical doctor who doles out prescriptions for irritable bowel syndrome also can refer the patient to a therapist for stress management. A dentist whose patient is suffering from extreme anxiety can have a mental health professional onsite or have one to whom to refer the patient. A psychologist can suggest that his patient see a specialist for any symptoms that can be contributing to his or her eating disorder.

As reported by the National Institute of Mental Health, more than 26 percent of the adult U.S. population has a mental health disorder, with over 22 percent of cases being considered “severe.” Mental health disorders include anxiety disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism, eating disorders, mood disorders, personality disorders, and schizophrenia.

Still, only 1 in 3 individuals will seek treatment for his or her disorder. It’s as if only 1 in 3 individuals who suffered from a high fever or a broken bone sought out a doctor.

We tend to view mental health as something that is an illusion, “all in one’s head,” or that certain disorders are overdiagnosed. Has anyone ever exclaimed that “cancer is overdiagnosed”? Yet, I have heard countless times that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is being diagnosed too loosely in children and adolescents.

This month is to advocate for the awareness of mental health; however, it should be a consistent concern. Recent events have brought mental health awareness to the surface. We need to know what that means. This does not mean all catastrophic events are caused by those who are mentally ill and therefore we need better treatments. In fact, statistics show that those who are severely mentally ill are more likely to be victimized than to do harm.

It is easy to blame or stigmatize a certain group when events that cannot be understood occur and we grasp for any bit of reasoning we can. But it is neither accurate nor fair. This is the time that we educate ourselves and become properly informed, and develop compassion and understanding.

References

Brodie, S. J., Biley, F. C., & Shewring, M. (2002). An exploration of the potential risks associated with using pet therapy in healthcare settings. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 11(4), 444-456.

Demyttenaere, K., Bruffaerts, R., Posada-Villa, J., Gasquet, I., Kovess, V., Lepine, J. P., … & Chatterji, S. (2004). Prevalence, severity, and unmet need for treatment of mental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association ,291(21), 2581.

Monti, D. A., Peterson, C., Kunkel, E. J. S., Hauck, W. W., Pequignot, E., Rhodes, L., & Brainard, G. C. (2006). A randomized, controlled trial of mindfulness‐based art therapy (MBAT) for women with cancer. Psycho‐Oncology, 15(5), 363-373.

Neuroaesthetics is the relatively recent study of questions such as “Why do we like the things we like?” and “Why do some people find one thing pleasing while others find it appalling?” It has focused on issues such as creativity, visual and motor processing in visual artists and the varying factors involved in creative domains.

Many of these studies have examined music and the neural activity that occurs when we listen to and evaluate what we hear.

Salimpoor and Zatorre (2013) reviewed a number of research studies examining the effects of music on brain activity; in particular activity that relates to the feeling of pleasure. The evidence was clear: not only does music boost our sense of pleasure but there is also a dopamine activity in anticipation to the music that “touches us.”

But that’s where the tricky part lies: this effect is noteworthy only when it is music that we choose, otherwise it does not apply. When the experimenter chose music he or she found to be emotion-inducing, the participants did not experience the desired feeling or the “chills” effect.

Then, the question remains: Why do people get emotional with some songs but not with others? The answer is not clear.

Cultural background, previously reinforced neural activity, subjective interpretations, exposure to certain sequences of sound and many more variables come into play. The notion of subjectivity in evaluating art is something that still requires a lot of exploration.

However, despite the uncertainty regarding why the pleasurable sensation of music is not an absolute and objective process, there is an important point we ought to highlight. The clear message that we can hold onto is that music arouses rewarding emotions, similar to those involved in addictive behaviors that get reinforced over time.

This information, though intuitive to some degree, may be more helpful when discussing the topic of coping skills for symptoms of depression, “emotional numbness” and recovery from chemical dependency.

One of the goals in developing a treatment plan for depressive disorders and substance abuse is to come up with a set of coping skills that can be easily accessed when feeling “as if nothing brings feelings of joy.” Chemically dependent individuals often report that the feeling of numbness and anhedonia can be quickly escaped by using drugs or other sources of immediate gratification.

Of course, the problem is that along with the sense of pleasure comes other unwanted consequences. This is where the findings from these neuroaesthetic studies come into play: When contemplating ways to respond to a decreased sense of pleasure, knowledge about how music can make us feel good comes in handy. Turning to this risk-free way of experiencing pleasure can be incorporated in treatment methodologies for conditions associated with decreased sense of emotional rewards.

Having said that, we have to be careful not to imply that the strong neurological and physical reaction to substances and other addictive behaviors can be reduced and compared to the effect of listening to a David Bowie or Shakira song. However, knowing that music is a highly rewarding experience is a useful reminder when discussing ways to replace destructive habits, or when developing a set of tools that help manage feelings of depression.

Reference

Salimpoor, V.N.; Zatorre, R.J. (2013). Neural interactions that give rise to musical pleasure. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7, 62-75. doi:10.1037/a0031819

Suggestions abound about the necessity (not mere option) of striving toward certain pinnacles in life, be they health challenges to overcome or professional goals to better implement. The condition of being human in a complex world requires much life-energy spent on going after what’s really important and required of each of us, rather than in chasing distractions.

I like the addition to this philosophy, though, of an element I believe that’s equally required in the mix. It was well stated in a New York Times Career column editorial on Sept. 30, 2012, describing that mere work and dedication are not enough to reach one’s goals.

Real “audacity” must be paired with a balancing measure of “humility.”

Akin to gentle strength — a metaphorical pairing I really latched onto a decade ago (and symbolized for me by a picture of a Sioux woman carrying a heavy burden of wood through snow on her shoulders) — risk and humility go hand in hand. The latter does not temper the trajectory of the extension of the risk-taking — our liabilities do that. Humility simply properly balances the scale, accompanying our grand, significant striving motions that move us forward to what we deserve in our lives, our bodies, our work, our relationships.

You must believe in yourself, your ideas and needs, and go toward what is required and needed for wholeness with a measured sense of humble acknowledgement that our unique assets are indeed worth preserving, declaring, and cultivating.

Attaining something that changes the playing field might seem unreachable to an individual, group or company at any given time. With risk-taking, with the grit of unusual and unique dedication to topics normally resisted, they can be accomplished.

True change is risk paid off as ultimate reward for many — daring to utter the normally not-spoken, pursuing what needs to be addressed that everyone hides their head in the sand about, whether it be mental health or business or cultural issues, and going after the big players who do naught but ill in their work. But it also exposes and celebrates those who create good as individuals and for society.

Things that require over-the-top courage are the very things that will liberate and invigorate an individual as much as the larger whole.

Think in your life where bold steps paid off. Then reflect some more on future risk and reward and link your next steps, with the appropriate measure of humility in the mix — experiential learning, professional advancement, a focus on personal or organizational wellness. Whatever is required, take risks; strive for it. No greater reward will reveal itself than deep personal satisfaction with far-reaching impact.

Some people are really excited by this new technology device. It is one step closer to interacting with a computer inside your brain rather than through our organic input devices (in this case, our eyeballs and voice).

But it begs the question — who is having difficulty using existing devices where wearing your computer on your head is less obtrusive (or obnoxious) than wearing it in your pocket or purse?

Robert Scoble, one technologist, listed three cool things about Google Glass from his personal experience after wearing it for 2 weeks:

1. They are much more social than looking at a cell phone. Why? I don’t need to look away from you to use Google, or get directions, or do other things.

2. The voice works and works with nearly every one and in every situation. It’s the first product that literally everyone could use it with voice. It’s actually quite amazing, even though I know that the magic is that it expects to hear only a small number of things. “OK Glass, Take a Picture” works. “OK Glass, Take a Photo” doesn’t. The Glass is forcing your voice commands to be a certain set of commands and no others will be considered. This makes accuracy crazy high, even if you have an accent.

[3.] I continue to be amazed with the camera. It totally changes photography and video. Why? I can capture moments.

Let’s go through these, shall we?

1. How is pretending to look and pay attention to someone — simply because the screen is in front of you as one eye is looking at them — any different than looking away to check a screen on a handheld device? At least with a handheld device, the other person knows when you are no longer paying attention to them. With Google Glass, you might seem to be looking at me, but you could just as well be buying a pair of shoes on Amazon.com.

From a human interaction perspective, this is maddening. Google Glass is going to once again blur the lines between real social interaction — being “in the moment” with another human being — and just being physically present. Being present is what a lot of people do at their full-time jobs (e.g., people who aren’t doing what they love for a living). You clock in, put together the widgets, then clock out.

When I’m engaged in a social interaction with another human being, I want them to be not just physically there with me — but also emotionally and intellectually engaged with me. If they are only “half there” while checking stock quotes and their Facebook page on Google Glass, honestly, that’s not a quality human interaction any longer (nor one worth my time).

Because we have a mountain of research that demonstrates — without a doubt — that people are generally poor multi-taskers. So while you think you won’t be noticed checking Facebook on Google Glass, guess what — you will be. And it’ll be a huge turn-off.

2. My five year old car has voice commands. I never use them because it takes more brain processing power to speak something than to push a button on the dash.

I think some technologists in our society became enamored of voice commands through science fiction like Star Trek, e.g., “Computer, tell me what’s our current speed.” Wow, that’s great, the computer responds with your current speed, “Warp 5.4.” Looking at an intelligently designed dashboard could’ve gotten you the same information with just a glance — and again, expending zero brain cycles in having to formulate a command — and in Google Glass’s apparent case, the correct command — and then speak it.

My iPhone also has extensive voice commands, and while I use them to compose text sometimes, I’m not really clear on how doing it through thin air (e.g., Google Glass) is somehow “better” than doing it to a handheld device I have to pull out of my pocket first. More convenient? Perhaps,¹ but it’s offset by the lesser convenience of having to wear (and constantly recharge) a somewhat heavy (as far as glasses go) and unconventional pair of glasses.

3. People seem obsessed with “capturing moments” in their lives. Each and every one of us already does this every day — they’re called memories. Memories are wonderfully artistic, colorful and vibrant things. But we actually have to fully experience the event we’re trying to capture in a memory in order to recall it later.

Today, we’re losing that ability to a pale imitation of memory — photographs and videos. A photograph or video can never replay the actual emotional and intellectual experience of being at an event or living in a moment of time in your life.

In the movie, Strange Days, people could experience other people’s recorded experiences through a neural interface — but it was the full experience: emotions, smells, sights, sounds, you name it. Short of that, even a video taken today is equivalent to a Civil War photograph in terms of being as immersive and fully-experienced compared to actual memory.

Now don’t get me wrong — it’s great to capture a moment in photographs or video from time to time in your life. But not every moment. And not to the point where capturing the moment is more important than living in the moment.

Someone wearing Google Glass might claim, “Well, that’s the beauty of Glass — I can capture it without interruption.” Umm, sure ya can. Until you hit that memory limit, or need to try and do a real-time upload of video on a sketchy wifi or 3G connection. Or find your battery is running low (again). Or any of a number of other technological things that can and do happen when you have an always-on connection to unlimited distractions.

Every time a Google Glass wearer starts talking to me, my first thought is always going to be, “Are they really listening to me or updating their Facebook status? Are they really here with me, or are they out there somewhere online?” When I see that person not really following what I’m saying, I’ll have my answer.

Google Glass could be a game changer for some. For instance, I think that for some people who have certain handicaps, it could really help improve their lives.

But for most of the rest of the world, Google Glass is going to be an interrupter — not disrupter — of social interactions.

It is one of those technologies answering a question — much like the Segway — that nobody asked.

For further reading: The one big factor Google Glass is missing

1. Really, is reaching into your pocket that big a deal??

Some writers read a lot more into that statement than was actually there. Science 2.0 — a website that claims it houses “The world’s best scientists, the Internet’s smartest readers” — had this headline, “NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5.” Psychology Today made the claim, “The NIMH Withdraws Support for DSM-5.” (The DSM-5 is the new edition of the reference manual used to treatment mental disorders in the U.S.)

So is any of this true? In a word, no. This is “science” journalism at its worse.

NIMH’s Research Domain Criteria

For the past 18 months, the NIMH has been working on a different categorization system to classify mental disorders, to help further its research efforts (the NIMH is primarily a research-driven organization). It’s called the Research Domain Criteria project:

NIMH has launched the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project to transform diagnosis by incorporating genetics, imaging, cognitive science, and other levels of information to lay the foundation for a new classification system.

The proposed classification system works under these assumptions:

• A diagnostic approach based on the biology as well as the symptoms must not be constrained by the current DSM categories,

• Mental disorders are biological disorders involving brain circuits that implicate specific domains of cognition, emotion, or behavior,
• Each level of analysis needs to be understood across a dimension of function,
• Mapping the cognitive, circuit, and genetic aspects of mental disorders will yield new and better targets for treatment.

In short, the NIMH is trying to find a new categorization system that takes into account more of the biology, genetics, brain circuitry and neurochemistry that we’ve discovered in the past three decades’ worth of research is becoming increasingly relevant to understanding mental disorders.

Does it Replace the DSM-5?

Will this replace the DSM-5? No, because as Dr. Insel notes, “This is a decade-long project that is just beginning.” If the NIMH effort ever replaces the DSM, it will be a long time from now.

Somehow, though, Science 2.0 and Psychology Today believe this letter suggests the NIMH has “withdrawn” support for the DSM-5, or has delivered a “kill shot” (whatever that is!). Are these kinds of characterizations accurate — or indeed, helpful?

We reached out to Bruce Cuthbert, Ph. D., the director of the Division of Adult Translational Research at the National Institute of Mental Health for clarification.

“As with most shifts in science, changes in research priorities require a transition,” said Dr. Cuthbert.

“Because almost all clinical researchers today grew up with the DSM system both clinically and in research, it will take some time to get a “feel” for the relationships between DSM disorders and various kinds of RDoC phenomena (both in terms of the types of symptoms, and in overall severity), learn how to write grant applications with the new criteria, and evolve new review criteria. So, there will be a period of some time while these crosswalks are worked out.

“I also should point out that these comments reflect [only] our translational research portfolios.

“Our Division of Services and Intervention Research mostly supports research conducted in clinical settings that is relevant to current clinical practice and services delivery. Thus, [...] grants in these areas will continue to be predominantly funded with DSM categories for some time.”

That’s a far cry from the entire NIMH withdrawing support for the DSM-5. The NIMH is simply saying (in my opinion), “Look, we’re unhappy with the validity of the DSM and its lack of support for biomedical markers for mental disorders. We’re working on a different schema, especially targeted at researchers. It may have greater relevance someday — that’s our hope and vision.”

Why a New Diagnostic System?

But then again, researchers in mental illness have been promising biomarkers for at least two decades as well — with little notable progress to show for their efforts.¹

Why is a new diagnostic system needed?

“For psychiatric disorders, we cannot effectively use very much of the knowledge we have gained about the brain and behavior over the last 30 years because of our symptom-based diagnostic system. In other words, the categories defined by symptoms simply do not map onto all the knowledge that we have gained about brain circuits, genetics, and behavior,” replied Dr. Cuthbert.

“We know that many different mechanisms are involved in any one DSM disorder (heterogeneity), while any one mechanism (fear, working memory, emotional regulation) is typically involved with many different disorders. [This] heterogeneity frustrates attempts to develop new treatments.”

Indeed, as John Horgan over at Scientific American wrote,

Ironically, some pharmaceutical companies that have enriched themselves by selling psychiatric drugs are now cutting back on further research on mental illness. The “withdrawal” of drug companies from psychiatry, Steven Hyman, a psychiatrist and neuroscientist at Harvard and former NIMH director, wrote last month, “reflects a widely shared view that the underlying science remains immature and that therapeutic development in psychiatry is simply too difficult and too risky.”

Pharmaceutical companies say that, on average, a marketed psychiatric drug is efficacious in approximately half of the patients who take it. Dr. Cuthbert from the NIMH suggests that, “One reason for this low response rate is the artificial grouping of heterogeneous syndromes with different pathophysiological mechanisms into one disorder.”

So the NIMH’s regrouping appears to be as much of an effort to spur new drug development as it is an effort to rethink the classification system of mental disorders. Which is a bit odd, if you think about it, since there is a rich research foundation showing that non-medication treatments — such as psychotherapy — work equally well (if not better) for the treatment of many mental disorders.

If these were pure medical diseases with clear and readily defined biomarkers, that shouldn’t be the case. After all, positive thinking can’t cure cancer.²

“Thus, mental disorders are an area where we must transcend the current symptom-based system if we are to advance,” concludes Dr. Cuthbert. “Among other things, if you have to wait until a full-blown set of symptoms is present before you can define a disorder (and there is no quantifiable data regarding risk states, as there is for, say blood pressure), then prevention is — by definition — impossible.”

This is simply untrue, in my opinion. There is a solid and growing research base already demonstrating that we can detect mental illness through a number of early screening and symptom measures and implement prevention measures. Other studies demonstrate significant correlations with certain characteristics — signs that can also be used to implement effective prevention.

“The research process will necessarily involve complex science to understand how we can relate more neuroscience-based measures to more specific and quantitatively-defined symptoms and clinical outcomes,” says Dr. Cuthbert from the NIMH. “This does not necessarily mean, however, that the diagnostic systems of the future will necessitate such a complex battery. As with biomarkers in other areas of medicine, a subsequent phase will be to find assessments that can be obtained feasibly in clinical settings (although this is unlikely to mean, as is the case now, that all disorders can be diagnosed simply sitting in a clinician’s office).”

Is It All About the Money?

Horgan suggests, perhaps, some ulterior motives for NIMH’s statement:

NIMH director Insel doesn’t mention it, but I bet his DSM decision is related to the big new Brain Initiative, to which Obama has pledged $100 million next year. Insel, I suspect, is hoping to form an alliance with neuroscience, which now seems to have more political clout than psychiatry. But as I pointed out in posts here and here on the Brain Initiative, neuroscience still lacks an overarching paradigm; it resembles genetics before the discovery of the double helix.

I’m not as skeptical as Horgan, but do believe the timing of Dr. Insel’s letter is a little curious — right before the launch of the DSM-5, and right after the public commitment of $100 million to brain research.

What is clear is that the NIMH is not withdrawing support for the use of the DSM-5 anytime soon. It is the reference manual all researchers and clinicians use today to speak the same language of mental illness. Without the same reference frame, research — and treatment — would become impossible.

Further Reading

Scientific American: Psychiatry in Crisis! Mental Health Director Rejects Psychiatric “Bible” and Replaces with… Nothing

Science 2.0′s article: NIMH Delivers A Kill Shot To DSM-5

1. David Kupfer, who chairs the DSM-5 Task Force, told Pharmalot: “The promise of the science of mental disorders is great. In the future, we hope to be able to identify disorders using biological and genetic markers that provide expreciseact diagnoses that can be delivered with complete reliability and validity. Yet this promise, which we have anticipated since the 1970s, remains disappointingly distant. We’ve been telling patients for several decades that we are waiting for biomarkers. We’re still waiting.”
2. Although, to be fair, positive thinking can definitely help in its overall treatment.

Begin to think about some new channels of growth for yourself, as the time of year for sprouts and buds and new green shoots has begun here in the northern hemisphere.

Seedlings and fresh growth are just busting out now, reaching for the sun’s light and warmth. The approach we take to our challenges, to what has been negatively buried or merely incubating, should be the same. Especially in this time of tremendous new growth, it is good to reflect on our own striving for warmth, insight, nourishment and potential to expand.

So what kinds of questions could you ask yourself to help nurture this growth?

Some questions to think on as your fingers work in soil or you tread paths in spring woods:

• Anything keeping you down, not allowing you to grasp for new means of expanding your life professionally, personally, in relationship?
• Just what are you experiencing that is keeping you from peace and wholeness?
• How did you previously move beyond past limitations, and how have past problems been a force for change in your life?

Upon our reflection, while the earth is engaged in upheaval, the past insight we have gained over challenges and transitions will allow for our own enrichment. And some of the best revelations happen when we allow ourselves not to think directly on problems but instead immerse in other activity. New means of understanding ourselves, our lives, and our world surely will sprout as well. In fact, we as humans are called to grasp for more, reaching ever beyond our boundaries.

Explore a different path in the woods. Take one you are not accustomed to and which evokes a little anxiety, for whatever reason. Go to a new coffee shop and challenge yourself to talk to someone you do not know (at an appropriate time).

Take a course, perhaps one of the novel MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) really coming into fruition now. They are free and offered both by the most prestigious universities or more casual ones. You’d have no excuse of inconvenience or cost as these cater truly to the individual spirit clamoring for knowledge.

What you cultivate literally will lift you up and out into an evolving, perhaps entirely new, way of being.
Channels of growth occur after seeds are planted in anticipation. Not all seeds flower. Some become different looking (or tasting) than they were supposed to. Great surprises happen.

Spring is a great time to ready yourself for what is about to flower. We are not meant to stagnate (though so many of us do, continually or periodically). Think of your own growth and just what channels that might take.

What sort of flower might you grow into?

I have seen enough episodes to ask the question, “Why?”

What draws people to watch faithfully every week or watch every series every week? What satisfaction is had by watching women backstab each other, trash-talk each other behind each other’s backs, steal each other’s men, lie and manipulate others for attention, and flaunt their excessive lifestyles?

In short, what is to be gained by watching women treat each other so poorly?

This type of show seems only to feed the drama and stereotypes often associated with female friendships. Somehow it has become “entertaining” to watch women beat each other up mentally, emotionally, and in some cases physically each week in the “entertainment” boxing ring.

In an effort to learn more about the appeal of the “Real Housewives” antics, I started to wonder if those addicted to the show related in any way because of their own real-life friendships. Do the most loyal fans watch to find out why these women behave the way the do, or do they watch because they can resonate with them or find aspects about the “characters” they relate to or even secretly admire in some cases? Loyal fans have their favorites and in most cases fans seem to be drawn to the most outrageous, vindictive, and despicable woman among the group.

Some fans argue they watch the show because it is like a train wreck that they can’t help but watch. However, the difference between a train wreck and the “Real Housewives” is that unlike a train wreck, which is a horrible accident, the “Real Housewives” is a horribly staged event with the sole intent of setting women up to knock each other down.

So for all of you who Real Housewives fans, I challenge you to take this mini-quiz to see how your real-life friendships stack up to the ones on this widely popular show.

1. Do you spend most of your time with your friends gossiping and judging other friends or people in general? Or do you find the time you spend with your friends is often spent listening to them gossip about and judge other people?
2. Do you gossip about your friends behind their backs rather than talk to them directly about something that’s bothering you or about some ongoing conflict? Or do your friends gossip to you about friends they are having issues with versus talking to that person directly?
3. Do you get defensive if a friend tries to communicate to you their feelings or take it as an insult or criticism? Or do you find that when you try to talk to your friends about something they said or did that upset you, they react in ways that make you feel like you did something wrong and even some cases they stop talking to you?
4. Do your loyalties shift depending on which friend you happen to be with at the moment? Or do you find your friends’ loyalties seem to shift depending on who they are around?
5. Do you find you have very little to say to a friend if you aren’t gossiping about another friend or passing judgment on others in general? Or do you find your friend has very little to say to you other than sharing gossip or criticisms of others?

If you have answered “yes” to any of these questions, then it may be time to take a closer look at the quality of your friendships, and even how your friends would rate you as a friend. Are these the type of friendships you want to put your energy into, and is this the type of friend you want to be considered as by others?

If you are guilty of any of these “Real Housewives” types of behaviors, it is pretty safe to assume that the ones you are exhibiting this behavior with are doing the exact same thing with the other “housewives” in your group when you are not around.

As a psychotherapist, I can’t count how many times I have seen individuals and couples struggle with building healthy connections in their relationships.

The most common complaint has been that they feel unfulfilled, devalued or unappreciated in relationships with others. It is my professional experience that when we get caught up in what others can do to make us feel good about ourselves, we are likely to become angry and resentful.

So how do you avoid the resentment trap in your relationship?

Four Tips to Avoid the Resentment Trap

1. Ask yourself: Am I being realistic with my expectations?

Perhaps due to unmet needs, you project your disappointments onto people who are incapable of meeting your standards. No one person can meet all of your needs. If this describes you in relationships, you will ultimately set yourself up for feeling unfulfilled and empty. Friendships, work relationships, family and partners all participate in your life in meaningful ways. But in the end, it is up to you to love yourself the way you deserve to be loved.

One common theme of having unrealistic expectations is getting caught up in the fantasy of what a relationship is supposed to look like — for example, having expectations that your “Prince Charming” will sweep you off your feet and all of your troubles will slip magically away. Now if this isn’t a resentment waiting to happen, I’m not sure what is!

How many women have dreamed of having their lives turn out like the fairy tale endings of Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty? Realistically, how many women have had those fantasies fulfilled to their expectations?

2. Remind yourself: I am a valuable, lovable human being.

No one person can make you feel good all of the time. You can feel loved in another’s presence, but if you choose one person to define how you feel in a relationship, you will be setting yourself up for deep disappointment. If you don’t feel good about yourself, begin by acting as if you do by creating a loving mantra and reciting it each morning in front of the mirror before the day begins. Examples may include “I deserve love,” “I am lovable,” and “I am perfect just the way I am.” Recite a mantra often enough and you will begin to believe it!

3. Surround yourself with healthy people.

By healthy people, I mean people who accept you unconditionally. I am talking about people who don’t shame you or try to prevent you from making your own decisions. These are individuals who will support you with your day-to-day challenges, accept you for your “human-ness” and are okay with you making mistakes. Write a list of people you know who have these qualities and keep in contact with at least one of them on a daily basis. These are also individuals who you can give you a healthy reality check. If you struggle with an issue that keeps you feeling stuck, ask for their perspective.

4. Focus on self-care.

If you deplete yourself to the point of exhaustion, it is far more likely that you will be vulnerable to wanting your needs met by others. You may possibly go to a child-like place and demand that you get your needs met immediately. I see this sort of thing in my work with clients who are struggling in love-addicted or codependent relationships.

So what is the best remedy for healing the vulnerable child within? Replace your expectations with gentle guidance and nurture yourself through a walk, deep breathing, a yoga class, journaling or meditation. Get to know yourself better.

One exercise I recommend is making an inventory of your strengths and weaknesses. Think deeply about your interests and passions. How can you begin focusing more on the things that bring you joy? You deserve loving care — and who better than yourself to give it to you?

How great is that? Here’s a Roman general, top of the pile, a massive celebrity (like the Jay-Z of his day), and there’s this slave reminding him that he’s mortal and not to get too high above himself because he too can die.

Personally, I think we need more of that today — humility and the awareness to realize and accept that we are mortal, destined to die.

Death rarely is a fun topic to bring up, especially when you’re picking up a grande latte at Starbucks first thing in the morning. Not because it’s not an interesting subject, but more because people rarely acknowledge or want to think about their mortality.

So why is talk of death an unusual subject? It’s a shared experience every human on the planet will go through (hands up if you’re about to stop reading this article because it’s too heavy). Richard Dawkins put it most elegantly: “We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die, because they are never going to be born.”

Isn’t that amazing? We are so lucky. We are here and now. We can feel emotions such as love and happiness. We can express joy and laughter. We can feel warmed by the sun, chilled by the wind, cooled by the rain. We can witness so much beauty in the world, gasp at nature’s creativity, do amazing intellectual feats to understand it all. Yet, we’re still unable to stop the inevitable degradation of our bodies and eventual death. Bummer.

The idea of death seems to go against our Western philosophy of being able to choose what we want. We can choose to buy that big 60″ HDTV with the surround sound home-cinema system, but we can’t choose not to die. Who decided that nonsense? No wonder most people will do anything they can to avoid the inevitable (myself included).

Have you ever seen the movie “Logan’s Run”? That film had a profound affect on me when I was younger. In the film, to control population, when people reach 30 years old they’re summoned to the carousel to be ‘renewed’ (killed), and I used to think that was a great idea — until I reached 30 and realized it’s a terrible idea!

So what is our problem with thinking and talking about death? In his Pulitzer-prize winning book Death Denial, Ernest Becker argues that most human action is taken to ignore or avoid the inevitability of death. But this type of thinking is totally irrational because death is inevitable, and this denial will only cause major complications in our lives.

I think many people are realistic enough to hold a healthy preference about their own death, “I’d really prefer not to die, but I also know that it will happen one day.”

However, there are many more people that hold a rigid demand about death, “I absolutely must not die, it is too terrible to comprehend. I can’t stand it.” Due to this unhealthy thinking, people often become overly busy, doing things to distract themselves from thinking about their mortality. Others strive for wealth and power as a way to shield themselves from the inevitable — “maybe if I’m rich, I can buy my way clear of death.”

Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. Just ask Steve Jobs, Joe Weider, or Jerry Buss. It doesn’t matter how much wealth or fame you have, or how busy you are, you can’t beat death.

The other way society avoids thinking about death is with this relentless drive for immortality. You’ve got to look young in society to be acceptable, so take your pills, exercise, stop drinking sugary soda, pray and you might live forever. But hasn’t this irrational goal held humanity back and caused irreparable divisions between people and cultures?

Let’s face it, death is a non-discriminatory experience. Our denial about something that is as natural as birth needs to be accepted and valued. Let’s bring our fear of death to the forefront of our awareness. Death denial will only lead to a life of fear and anxiety, and that’s not healthy.

When it comes to mental illness, people say the darnedest things. As illustrated above, even medical staff can make incredibly insensitive and downright despicable remarks.

Others think teasing is okay.

Fast, a coach who works with partners and families of people with bipolar disorder, has heard stories of people getting teased at work. One client’s son works at the vegetable department of a grocery store. He has obsessive-compulsive disorder and poor social skills. When his symptoms flare up, his coworkers will ask questions like, “Why do the labels have to be so perfect? Why do they have to be in line like that?” They’ve also teased him about being in a psychiatric facility.

But most people — hopefully — know that being an outright jerk to someone about their mental illness isn’t just inappropriate and ignorant. It’s cruel.

Yet there are moments when even neutral words may be misconstrued, because the person is in a vulnerable place, according to F. Diane Barth, LCSW, a psychotherapist and psychoanalyst in private practice in New York City. “The truth is that it can be complicated to find the right comment to make to someone who is struggling with emotional difficulties.”

This is why it’s so important to educate yourself about helpful things to say. In fact, Fast, author of several bestselling books on bipolar disorder, including Loving Someone with Bipolar Disorder, believes that we have to be taught what to say. “It’s not innate at all to help someone who has a mental illness.”

So what makes an insensitive remark? According to clinical psychologist Ryan Howes, Ph.D, “The problems happen when people make statements that imply that mental illness is a sign of emotional weakness, it’s something that can be quickly overcome with some trite homespun advice or they minimize it as a minor issue you can just get over.”

Below are additional examples of problematic statements, along with what makes a good response.

1. “Get busy, and distract yourself.”

“With significant mental illness, [distractions] won’t work, not even temporarily,” Howes said. After a person slogs through various diversions, they’re still left with the same issues. “Ignoring the issue doesn’t make it go away.”

2. “Do you want to get better?”

For mental health blogger Therese Borchard, this was the most hurtful thing anyone has ever said to her. While she knows the person didn’t have ill intentions, it still had a powerful effect. “It implied that I was staying sick on purpose, and that I had no interest in pursuing health, not to mention that I was too lazy or disinterested to do what I needed to do to get better.”

3. “Change your attitude.”

While a change in perspective can be helpful, it doesn’t cure conditions such as ADHD, bipolar disorder, PTSD or schizophrenia, said Howes. And changing one’s attitude isn’t so easy either. “It’s incredibly difficult for a high-functioning person to change their attitude, let alone someone debilitated by an exhausting mental illness.”

4. “Stop focusing on the bad stuff, and just start living.”

According to Barth, “one of the most common mistakes is to tell a person to stop focusing on themselves, or on the bad things, or on the past, and just start living.” Why is this so problematic? It can make a person feel even worse about themselves. “[T]hey figure the fact that they can’t do it is, in their mind, just one more sign of their failure.”

5. “You have everything you need to get better.”

“This is well intentioned, but to me it sounded like an indictment against me for not trying hard enough,” said Borchard, also author of the book Beyond Blue: Surviving Depression & Anxiety and Making the Most of Bad Genes. Plus, this might not even be accurate. Sometimes people don’t have everything they need to improve. “Sometimes you need a little assistance.”

6. “You can snap out of it. Everyone feels this way sometimes.”

Everyone experiences a range of emotions. For instance, everyone feels sad occasionally. But sadness on some days isn’t the same as “a hopeless pit of despair where it’s so dark I’ve forgotten what light looks like,” a description of depression that one client gave to Howes. Feeling anxious isn’t the same as having a panic attack, “a terrifying lightning storm of despair, self-hatred and the absolute certainty of my immediate death,” he said.

7. “Just pray about it.”

Prayer is powerful for many people. Centering yourself and feeling support from a higher power can be very helpful, Howes said. “[B]ut this advice alone can minimize the problem, ignore many proven medical and psychological treatments and can even make someone feel like they’re not being healed, because they lack sufficient faith, which adds insult to injury.”

8. “Why can’t you work?”

It’s no doubt hard to watch someone who’s smart and capable unable to work. But telling a person who’s already struggling that they’re lazy, just making excuses or aren’t trying hard enough can be incredibly hurtful, Fast said.

She’s personally heard the following before: “I don’t see why you have such a tough time with work. Everyone works. You need to just get over it and work.” Even just asking a question like “Why is this so hard for you?” can make a person wonder what’s wrong with them. They might say, “Why can’t I work? They are right and I am a failure!” Fast said. “And they will push themselves too far.”

9. “You have the same illness as my ______.”

Years ago, when Fast’s partner Ivan, who has bipolar disorder, was in the hospital, she didn’t know anything about the illness. She told her friend that Ivan had something called “manic depression.” Fast’s friend responded with: “Oh. I know what that is. My grandfather had it and he shot himself.” A person Fast barely knew told her: “My uncle has that, but we don’t know where he is!”

“I remember every minute of Ivan being ill, and I remember those two comments the most — 18 years ago!”

The Right Responses

While reading this piece, you might be wondering if you should say anything at all. “Silence is, in my experience, the worst response, because it’s generally interpreted in the negative,” Barth said.

According to Howes, these are helpful responses:

• “[S]incerely express your concern: ‘You’re having panic attacks? I’m so sorry to hear that. From what I’ve heard, that can be just awful.’

• Offer your support: ‘Please let me know if you need anything, or if you’d just like to talk.’
• Talk to them the same way you did before, which lets them know your feelings about them or respect for them hasn’t changed; your relationship is stable. They’re the same person, just dealing with an issue that is less visibly obvious than a broken arm or the flu.”

When it comes to mental illness, people make everything from insensitive to totally outrageous comments. When in doubt, Howes suggested offering “compassion, support and stability in your relationship and leav[ing] the advice to the psychological or medical experts… [A]ny advice beyond ‘I hope you’ve found good, caring treatment’ and ‘come talk to me anytime’ can be experienced as intrusive and can even cause more problems.”

For more on this topic, read Borchard’s pieces on what not to say to someone with depression and what to say.  

The focus for most treatment professionals is on a patient’s symptoms and the alleviation of symptoms. Few professionals delve into how a disorder — like bipolar disorder or clinical depression — changes our identity. Everything we know about ourselves.

Everything we thought we knew about ourselves.

That’s why this recent piece in the NYT Magazine by Linda Logan exploring this issue is so interesting and timely.

Our identities as unique individuals with well-worn and familiar roles in life — mother, confidante, partner, employee — are quickly stripped away when a new label takes over: patient. Inpatient. Psychiatric inpatient. In all of society, there is almost no worse label that could be applied.

The illness then takes precedent. Everything about you fades away. It’s all about treating the symptoms, bringing them “under control” — usually through a combination of medication and structured activities in an inpatient setting. It’s an unsettling and uniquely dehumanizing experience. In our society, I suspect only prisoners experience worse.

Linda tells the long and sad story of her grappling with her disorder — bipolar disorder — while a mother to three children and struggling to complete her doctoral studies in geography:

The last time I saw my old self, I was 27 years old and living in Boston. I was doing well in graduate school, had a tight circle of friends and was a prolific creative writer. Married to my high-school sweetheart, I had just had my first child. Back then, my best times were twirling my baby girl under the gloaming sky on a Florida beach and flopping on the bed with my husband — feet propped against the wall — and talking. The future seemed wide open.

Linda writes, “I would try to talk to my doctors about my vanishing self, but they didn’t have much to say on the subject.”

While some medications affected my mood, others — especially mood stabilizers — turned my formerly agile mind into mush, leaving me so stupefied that if my brain could have drooled, it would have. Word retrieval was difficult and slow. It was as if the door to whatever part of the brain that housed creativity had locked. Clarity of thought, memory and concentration had all left me. I was slowly fading away.

Going back again and trying to regain your identity as a unique person with a number of roles in life can be just as hard.

Philip Yanos, an associate professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, in New York, studies the ways that a sense of self is affected by mental illness. [...] Yanos told me that reshaping your identity from “patient” to “person” takes time. For me, going from patient to person wasn’t so arduous. Once I understood I was not vermicelli, part of my personhood was restored. But reconstructing my self took longer.

Mental health professionals across all professions — psychiatry, psychology, social work, etc. — should be more aware that this loss of self identity is a very real component of some people’s mental illness and subsequent treatment. It should be addressed as a regular component of mental health treatment, especially when the loss is acutely felt.

Because across all of healthcare, we are quick to dehumanize patients and focus only on the treatment of symptoms. Maybe it’s a way some professionals seek to keep their patients at arm’s length — not to become too emotionally connected to them. But in doing so, it also sends a (perhaps unintentional) message to the patient — you are only a constellation of symptoms to me. That’s all we’ll focus on, that’s all we’ll treat.

As professionals and clinicians, we can do better. We should do better to not turn someone in emotional pain into a simple diagnosis or label. If we think of Linda as simply “Oh, the bipolar woman in room 213,” we’ve lost our humanity and our focus.

Linda is now 60, and has lived a life full of color and heartbreak. Her story is worth checking out below.

Read the full article: The Problem With How We Treat Bipolar Disorder

When we function in a healthy manner, we don’t just experience joy and happiness, prancing around without a care in the world. We actually still experience a range of emotions, some of which can be very difficult to live with.

It’s absolutely healthy to feel anxiety, depression, anger, jealousy, envy, guilt, hurt or shame. But what makes experiencing these emotions healthy is that we don’t linger in them for longer than is good for us. We don’t demand that they ‘go away.’ We accept the appropriateness of how we feel, and do something about our situation.

Let me give you an example of how a person’s thinking can perpetuate depression.

Imagine that your favorite dog was very sick and you took her to the vet, who tells you she’s in a lot of pain and it’s best to euthanize her. How do you think you might feel? Very sad (most likely), guilty (perhaps), happy (to some degree if you know you can stop her suffering). So, do those emotions seem healthy and appropriate to you? Of course they do, and to experience them is human.

Given the choice, you may not have wanted to face that situation in the first place, but we can’t always pick and choose what happens to us in life. We can only choose how we deal with those situations when they arise.

So how could a person drive themselves into depression after such an event? It’s easy. When a person feels sad about a loss or death, if they start taking far too much responsibility for what happened and judging themselves negatively, then depression will be only a short taxi ride away. The kind of thinking that perpetuates depression will be thoughts such as “I’m such a bad person for killing her,” “I should have done more to make her life happy,” “I should have taken her to the vet sooner and I would have saved her.”

None of those statements is wholly true, yet when you repeat them, you start to believe it and you feel depressed. You’ll even start acting depressed. Instead of going out for a walk, which you used to enjoy, you might stay at home watching TV, because ‘there’s no point in going out without your dog.’ You might even stop socializing with other dog walkers and so you’ll become more isolated, which perpetuates the problem.

So from a healthy sadness about the loss of a loved pet, with unhealthy thinking and behavior, your mood sinks into depression. And once there, it is a lot harder to get out of than when you’re healthily sad.

Anxiety, on the other hand, is depression’s opposite. Rather than dwelling on the past, people with anxiety tend to focus on the possible threat in the future, and employ defensive mechanisms against that perceived threat or problem. Let me give you another example.

Frank gives a presentation at work that doesn’t go down well with his boss. Frank gets shouted at and bawled out for not doing a good enough job. His boss also tells him that he must improve before the next presentation or else! How do you think you might feel? Disappointed (sure). Frustrated (maybe). Concerned (oh yeah).

So how does Frank perpetuate his anxiety? The first thing he does is to fly into the future and use ‘what if’ and ‘if…then’ type thinking. “If I deliver another bad presentation, then my boss will fire me.” “What if I can’t do it the way he wants?” “What if I’m terrible?”

These ‘what if’ thoughts are the precursors to the unhealthy demands that lead to anxiety: “I must know that the presentation will go well.” “I must not screw up the presentation or my boss will fire me.” “I must be perfect.”

The trouble with these irrational demands is that they lead to anxious behaviors: spending hours on the presentation; not sleeping; seeking others’ opinions; asking for reassurance; feeling nauseous beforehand; sweating; feeling ill at ease.

Clearly, Frank is not in a good state to be giving a presentation. He’ll most likely deliver a sub-par presentation. What do you think will happen next time he needs to give a presentation? He’ll feel worse.

To end these destructive cycles, we need to understand that emotions — even the difficult ones — are healthy. Emotions should be used as a guide to let us know that something is off-balance and might need changing. When we demand unreasonable things from ourselves, we’re destined to feel strong, unhealthy emotions.

It’s a thin line between healthy and unhealthy emotions, but by understanding how our thinking perpetuates our emotional disturbance, we can become a healthier version of ourselves.

It could be between yourself and a partner, a parent, a co-worker — even a boss, an adult sibling or an annoying someone you run into every day on your way to work. Likely, it is doing something to temporarily boost yourself or the other person in the mix. Ultimately, however, it is not to anyone’s benefit.

Unspoken bargains, these so-called “arrangements,” are those things that rear their heads in times of challenge, chaos, crisis or just haste. They appear out of nowhere and can be maddening, upon first reflection, demanding us to ask ourselves, “why did I say or do that again to this person?”

They tug at us to examine the contracts we have with others for convenience and to lessen pain. But they are ultimately not self-serving or mutually good -– just codependent traps we put into place to attempt to protect ourselves from perhaps doing the right thing.

A worker discovers an unspoken bargain in play when she realizes she’s allowed her colleague to pull less of the load in order to maintain a friendship with the person everyone in the office likes.

A spouse sees he has one, letting his wife get her way because he’s afraid of upsetting her and bringing out her depression.

Even a parent can look the other way while a child falls into trouble with drugs, just so the parent can pursue self-centered interests uninterrupted by dilemma.

There is nothing pretty about unspoken bargains. Some are certainly more benign; others are profoundly disturbing. But they do demand our attention. They allow us to see who we are, what we present to others, and how we cope in the world.

Next time you find yourself looking at the appearance of some strange contract appearing between yourself and another, don’t look away. Stare at the arrangement keeping genuine relating from happening between you. Face down the unspoken bargain that is presenting itself.

And proactively look ahead of time, as well, for where they may be hiding in your life. Always ask yourself what you are doing in the dance between another person, another entity. If it is forthright, it will not “bargain,” or sacrifice your integrity, that of the other person, or the possibility of real communication between you.

As acclaimed psychologist and author Harriet Lerner so aptly writes in her books The Dance of Anger and The Dance of Intimacy, we must garner the courage to change any detrimental “dance” with another person. And in doing so, we certainly have to look out for counter-moves first. For these habits, odd arrangements and false contracts, these unspoken bargains are challenging to break!. But the steps, the new moves you make for yourself, ultimately will be rewarding.

There’s something strangely comforting in looking at these lists and hoping that our life problems can be boiled down into five simple steps. I read them hoping for the answers, because I too want the secret to life, the universe, and everything.

However, I think the reality is this: As much as some lists offer interesting ideas, the majority mislead people about change. They offer false hope instead of facts. They generally encourage people to think their lives can be simpler if only they do those five secret things that may have worked for another person.

Come on, really? Life is so complex and the reasons why we feel and do what we do also are complex.

Take depression, for example. The reality is nobody really knows why people feel depressed; and nobody really knows what will cure each individual’s depression. When talking about cause and effect, there are so many factors to take into account: cognitive, environmental, social, biological.

What we do have is good empirical evidence that some therapies can help some people overcome depression. But that doesn’t mean everyone will overcome it through therapy. I’ve worked with many people and, for whatever reason, they remain depressed and sometimes become even more depressed. When that happens, the focus of therapy changes to learning to live with being depressed. No list is going to change that.

We know that medication can help. But it doesn’t help everyone. More often than not, medication is guesswork — an art more than a science. What works for one person can make another person sick. I’ve seen some people recover in a matter of weeks, and others poisoned to the point of hospitalization. Where’s the five-point list on that one?

Advances in neuroscience are helping us understand the brain and how it works. Yet, even super-intelligent scientists with the most sophisticated technology don’t fully understand what is causing depression. So, can a five-point list really tell us how to overcome it?

It’s clearly frustrating not knowing the secret to being well. As a therapist and coach, it’s my job to help somebody get well, so it’s easy to hope a list will provide me with the secrets that’ll help me and the person I’m working with.

But many lists just don’t cut it. I was reading a list on procrastination the other week and the first thing on the list was something like ‘just do it.’ I can imagine all the people who procrastinate reading that and thinking, “Wow, that’s amazing. Why didn’t I think of that?”

OK, I’m knocking these lists, so I must know all the answers, right? Nope. I wish I did but unfortunately I don’t (please don’t tell my wife I said that). With that being said, I will now counter everything I’ve just written and offer you my own secret five-point list to life, the universe and everything.

1. You are personally responsible for all that you think, do, and (mostly) feel.
2. Accept reality: Life doesn’t owe you a thing.
3. You are you. Nobody can ever know what it means to be you, so be kind to yourself and others.
4. Life is meaningless, except for the meaning that you give it — so use that power wisely.
5. Nobody has all the answers. We’re all just making stuff up as we go along, hoping for the best.

“You and Dad sit over there”, she commanded. “Now, my brother and I are going to be the father and mother you are the day care center.”

With that, the two of them brought us a couple of dolls, kissed them goodbye and went to the next room.

“What happens next?” I called.

“Oh, you play with the babies and then we go to work for awhile and come back and give you a check.”

“And what are you doing at work?” By now I’m curious about where this is going.

“We talk to people and do stuff and get tired.”

With that, they came back in the room, handed us “checks” made of some coupons I had lying around and took their babies off for bath time and stories.

It was hard for my husband and me not to laugh. They were so serious about it. Ahh. A kids’-eye view of adult life. We go do something mysterious at this thing called work, get tired, and then collect them and real life begins again. That was my first indication that maybe we needed to tell our kids a little bit more about the work that took us away from them all day.

Tomorrow, April 25th, is the 20th anniversary of Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day, a day that encourages parents to do exactly that. Started in 1993 as a “Take Our Daughters to Work Day,” it was originally intended to show girls opportunities that had been closed off to women and to inspire young girls to see themselves as having the potential to reach whatever professional dreams they had. By 2003, it was expanded to include our sons as it was understood that the boys, too, needed to have the experience of seeing what their parents did for work.

Many companies now have incorporated this annual event into the company culture. Employers see involvement in the day as a way to support their workers in balancing work with family life and to invest in the workforce of the future.

One special day a year, parents are invited to bring their children to work to sit at desks, follow their parents around the office or plant or store, and maybe have lunch in the company break room or cafeteria. The kids get to see where their parents spend their day and to meet some of their colleagues. Most important, they get to see up close what their parents’ work involves.

It’s an opportunity for parents and others in the workplace to show kids that education pays off and to talk to them about what it takes for someone to reach their potential and to be successful. Further, it provides a way for parents and adult mentors to talk to children about how work supports the family and how it is an integral part of adult life.

Those of us who work in human services can’t let our kids shadow our day due to very real concerns about confidentiality and privacy for our clients. But we can still celebrate the day by engaging our children in conversation about our work and perhaps by describing in general terms what a typical day looks like. When clients aren’t scheduled, we can still bring our children to the office to see what it looks like, let them sit in our chairs and perhaps meet our support staff. My younger daughter told me recently that it made her feel very grown up the day she came to my office when she was 10 and talked to me seriously about my journey to become a therapist.

Whatever we do for a living, Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day provides a reason to sit down with our kids and demystify our work life.

My children are grown now. They too now go off to work, talk to people and do stuff and get tired. Like their dad and me, they also know the rewards of doing something they are passionate about that supports themselves and their families. I hope when their children are old enough to participate,Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day will continue to be celebrated to help them empower their children also to reach for their professional dreams.