Isabella Parker
Clinical Hypnotherapist
Location: Ninderry - Yandina, in the Sunshine Coast hinterland, Queensland
|
Background:
I began my private practice as a Clinical Hypnotherapist & Psychologist in 2000. My relevant background is
working as a Research Psychologist in depression research at the Black Dog Institute (Sydney).
Practice Location:
Currently, I have a private practice as a Clinical Hypnotherapist, in Ninderry-Yandina, the hinterland of
the Sunshine Coast, in South-East Queensland (Australia).
My Philosophy and Clinical Approach
My philosophy is the importance of not just helping clients to achieve their therapeutic goals in therapy, but to also help
them to achieve self-empowerment. This generally involves claiming (or reclaiming) the power taken away from them
as children or that they have relinquished to other people or problematic stuff or situations during their life.
During my years in practice as a Clinical Hypnotherapist and Psychologist, regardless of what a client’s ‘presenting
problem’ is, for most of them, we needed to address ‘childhood stuff’. Hence, my expertise has developed in the area of resolving this ‘childhood stuff’.
It is common knowledge that there is often a link between childhood experiences and later psychological or emotional issues that impact on a person’s wellbeing, their capacity to fulfil their potential or entails dysfunctional coping or getting into unhappy relationships or other patterns of self sabotaging thinking and behaviour. Generally, most people have some awareness of this link, but often, they don’t – or they dismiss childhood stuff as no longer relevant to their adult life. However, it is very relevant! Childhood is where we develop our sense of self and subconscious motivations plus a whole lot of other stuff which, for better or worse, has a lifelong impact in our subconscious mind.
There is no point in just addressing the current problem in a ‘band aid fix’ - we also need to eliminate (or at least
reduce) the risk of relapse of the problem. This means addressing the origins and fix the effects of whatever went on in childhood that has been underpinning the current problem. It is the vulnerability (or predisposition) that is the real problem, so I believe that it is essential to resolve that in order to achieve any real healing. Fortunately, due to the plasticity of the brain, whatever has been subconsciously learned in childhood is amenable to change.
For a more comprehensive explanation on how childhood events affect who you are as an adult, check out my model of emotional development: http://www.selfesteemparenting.com.au.
Information on this website is relevant for anyone interested in SELF HELP or just curious to understand how Self Worth,
emotional reactions, attitudes, behaviours and relationship choices are shaped in childhood. As the name suggests, this is also a website for PARENTING information.
Regards
Isabella
Book on building foundation for Self Esteem now available
Finally, after ten years of developing and fine tuning a model of child emotional development, I have just published a book: “Self Worth BEFORE Self Esteem”, ‘What every parent must know about building the foundations of Self Esteem’. The book is available on http://www.amazon.com as an ebook and in paperback.
In addition, embedded within the book there is a guide for readers interested in ‘self-help’.
To help parents understand how the subliminal messages in what they say and do or don’t say and don’t do actually affect their children, readers are invited to apply the model to their own childhood and reflect on their own experiences and how the subliminal messages they received from their parents have influenced ‘who they are’.
This model is a non-conventional approach and may be regarded as a bit controversial since it does not support current social ideology or feminist dogma.
The CARRP-ALIAS model in this website and book is a guide for parents wanting to build healthy emotional foundations in their children and also a useful guide for adults into 'self help'.
So, what is the relevance for adults?
If children have ‘faulty’ emotional foundations laid down in childhood, or they are ‘emotionally damaged’, when they grow into adults, these turn into ‘unresolved emotional issues’, commonly known as ‘stuff’. But, the good news is that because of the plasticity of the brain, emotional foundations in the subconscious mind can be ‘rebuilt’ and damage ‘repaired’, using hypnotherapeutic techniques and the ‘stuff’ gets resolved.
How can ‘unresolved stuff’ affect your life as an adult?
Example #1: Do you keep making the same mistakes in relationships? Do you keep getting into crappy relationships and believe or hope that ‘this time’ it will ‘be different’? But it never is! Why?
An analogy: You can watch a DVD of ‘The Titanic’ a hundred times, and no matter how much you might wish that it could have a happy ending, Jack is going to drown EVERY time, because it is a recording and the ending is ‘fixed’ and cannot ever change. Likewise, when we ‘replay’ the ‘personal drama/horror’ relationship movie programmed in our subconscious mind, we expect or hope that ‘this time, things will be better’ or ‘this time, we will get it right’. Don’t we wish! But, like ‘The Titanic’, when we press the ‘replay’ button for that personal relationship movie we play in our subconscious mind, the outcome is ‘fixed’ and as much as we wish, it is always going to turn out the same way – crappy, dysfunctional, stressful unhappy and eventually you can just end up getting depressed. We may replace the ‘romantic lead’ and expect this will give us a different outcome, but the ‘casting criteria’ for that role remains the same, so although for each ‘replay’, the person filling this role has a different face, it is still the same character, merely in a different guise - and the role we play is still the same character.
The solution is to delete that old dysfunctional movie in your subconscious mind and program in a new one you know will have a better outcome – one that has a changed criteria for your character and consequently a changed criteria for the role of ‘romantic lead’ playing opposite you,.
PS: You will need tech support to delete that old movie and program in a new one! That is what I do! Tech support for your subconscious mind!
Additional recommended reading:
“In Being there: Why Prioritizing Motherhood in the First three Years Matters”, by Erica Komistar, emphasises the importance of mothers and how essential they are to a whole range of developmental aspects, for the mother to be physically and emotionally available to her child during the first 1,000 days of the child's life.
Review: This is a very honest book with a much-needed message about the real needs of children that goes counter to the feminist agenda which devalues motherhood because having to take care of children gets in the way of more rewarding and enjoyable activities such as careers. Erica bravely argues that mothers need to prioritise their children over their work. I say 'bravely', because in this era of women's 'social rights' being the highest priority, children's 'innate rights' to have their emotional needs met by mothers has been deliberately ignored by 'gender equality' feminists who want to be more like men, and any child development professional who has dared to question the wisdom of subjecting children under three years of age to substantial periods of 'maternal deprivation' in non-maternal care (particularly long day care) is quickly shouted down by feminists and the child care industry who argue they provide 'quality' care and have 'caring' carers. The mere fact that child care operators offer this argument illustrates their lack of understanding of the emotional needs of young children, particularly infants, and the indisputable fact that there is no satisfactory substitute for maternal care.
PS: Fathers are essential from the beginning, too, but during infancy, it is the maternal input during this time that is essential for emotional development - Dad is more important to the child later!
.
Topics in the Media
13/11/2017
How to change gross male attitudes and behaviour
A study of 200,000 15-year-olds from mixed sex schools around the world has found that boys do better when there are more girls in the class than boys, suggesting that girl’s higher levels of concentration and motivation provide a positive influence on boys (CM, 11/11/2017). This is hardly newsworthy or surprising, but it does go against feminist ideology and illustrates the power women have to improve male attitudes and behaviour when they ‘set standards’ rather than try to be the ‘same as’ men by adopting gross male standards of behaviour.
This has been further highlighted by several authors of relationship books who have stated that men can only get away with treating women badly in relationships because women allow them to. One male author even gives the advice to women, “Men respect standards – get some”! This is no surprise to anyone living prior to the erosion of moral values by imposition of libertarian values (ie, rights, freedom, ‘me first’, non-responsibility, instant gratification in pursuit of the ‘next dopamine hit’, while ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘honesty’ have degenerated to be just an excuse to be offensive) during the 1960s followed by second wave feminism, where gender equality was translated into women trying to be the ‘same as’ men. Prior to this, in the era of moral values (ie, responsibility, delayed gratification, obligations to society, consideration for others, respect for self, others and property), women were the ‘moral guardians’ of society. Mothers raised their daughters to have self respect and their sons to ‘not hit girls’ and to respect women. These boys, in turn, raised their sons to respect women.
However, second wave feminism was hijacked by man-haters with no interest in marriage or kids, but a desire to cast off any traditional and innate roles of women, to be ‘like men’. While libertarians abandoned values of respect and consideration for others (after all, treating others with respect and consideration would violate personal freedoms and rights), it was second wave feminists who abolished respect for women because they regarded men treating women with courtesy as ‘degrading’ to women.
Libertarians introduced the value of non-responsibility and abrogating personal responsibilities to the nanny state. Feminists extended that to abrogating maternal responsibility by devaluing motherhood and promoting outsourcing of child care for infants and toddlers.
Instead of being taught about respect (for self and for others), girls are taught to behave the same as boys and boys are taught to treat girls the same as they treat other boys. Girls are taught that being selfish, loud and aggressive is being a ‘strong woman’ and being sexually promiscuous is being ‘liberated’. When women seek validation to boost their poor sense of Self Worth by getting inebriated with the intention of ‘hooking up’ with a stranger for casual sex, then cry ‘victim’ when it turns out badly, we have complaints that men don’t respect women. Well, women don’t respect themselves, and don’t take responsibility for their safety, so how can they expect to be treated with respect by men exploiting their stupidity?
If women want to be treated with respect by men, then girls need to be taught to have self respect and women take back the responsibility for moral guardianship in society, instead of copying men and then blaming them for the demise of respect.
Since libertarian values were embraced and women abandoned the role as moral guardians, society has descended into what has been commonly referred to as a ‘moral abyss’ and youth without parental guidance as ‘lacking a moral compass’. While women think it is ‘liberating’ and ‘gender equality’ to behave like men, they are validating gross male conduct and negative male attitudes and behaviour towards women. While women continue to do this, men will never be motivated to improve their social behaviour or attitudes and behaviour towards women. Solution: Advice by the author to women, “Men respect standards – get some”!
12/11/2017
First 1,000 days of a child’s life
Erica Komisar’s new book regarding the premise of the importance of mothers and how essential it is to a whole range of developmental aspects for the mother to be physically and emotionally available to her child during the first 1,000 days of a child’s life, is causing quite a stir. This is probably because, “In Being there: Why Prioritizing Motherhood in the First three Years Matters”, does not support the feminist agenda but instead, argues that mothers need to prioritise their children over their work, thereby challenging the feminist mission to devalue motherhood.
The fact is that second wave feminism was hijacked by the loudest voices who were man-hating women with no interest in marriage and kids (eg Germaine Greer), but purely in elevating the status of women. In order to achieve this, children’s INNATE rights to have their emotional needs met had to be subjugated and to justify this, feminists devalued motherhood with mantras such as: ‘there is nothing special about mothering’, ‘anyone can raise a child’, and even as recent as a couple of years ago, 'attachment theory is out of date’. Such a comment on ‘attachment’ is pure ignorance or deliberate intent to mislead women. Bowlby’s ‘Attachment’ is not merely a theory, (or an ideology as is feminism) but is based on empirical data. Feminist views on child raising ignore child developmental psychology and mantras are sprouted to support feminist ideology. Child emotional developmental needs are a non-issue in feminism and promotion of ‘quality’ child care is simply intended to serve the goal of ‘liberating’ women from the unrewarding chore of childcare, urging them to spend their time in more rewarding and enjoyable activities – as if motherhood is some patriarchal conspiracy to keep women subjugated.
The fact is that second wave feminists deliberately misled women and modern feminism has inherited this ideology without question. Perhaps Erica’s book is causing some mothers to question the dictates of feminism and is validating their own mixed feelings as working mothers.
Life choices have a cost that is born by someone and in the case of feminism and women trying to live up to the false promise that ‘women can have it all’, women probably feel that they are ‘doing it all’, getting stressed in the juggling act, but the collateral damage and long term emotional cost are born by children.
When high profile career women claim they are being a role model for their young daughters, they are either being delusional or simply trying to justify their choices. As a Clinical Hypnotherapist whose main work has become addressing adult clients’ childhood stuff, I can assure you that what goes through the mind of a young child is not admiration for their mother being a career woman, but emotional deprivation, subconscious feelings of being unimportant to Mum (which contribute to poor Self Worth which is the foundation for Self Esteem) and even anger which has to be repressed and is either internalised or externalised (which results in some degree of long term emotional/mental health issues, resentment and/or aggressive behaviour problems). Treating adult clients has given me an understanding of what the emotional developmental needs are and the long term consequences of these needs being unmet or violated by parents (even unintentionally), plus the awareness that any feelings of not being valued by their parents are concealed behind what I refer to as the mask that says “I’m ok”, because subconsciously, they feel that to express them could result in alienation of the parent.
My prediction is that the social time bomb for this century is ‘outsourcing early childcare to non-maternal care’ whether that is the ‘nanny state’ institutionalised child care, paid nannies or family members, because for healthy emotional development, there is no substitute for a mother.
For advice on what the developmental emotional needs for kids are, and how this has a long term impact on adults, check out the mickey mouse version on: https://selfesteemparenting.com.au or for the adult version in paperback, “Self Worth BEFORE Self Esteem: What Every Parent MUST Know about Building the Foundations of Self-Esteem”, Isabella McKenzie Parker, available on Amazon.
22/9/2017
Prescription drugs not the best for depression!
Based on the ‘medical model’ of depression, medication is the ‘fist line’ treatment. However, medication is not the most effective treatment for non-endogenous depression which accounts for 90% of depression cases, since antidepressants merely provide symptom relief as an ‘emotional analgesic’. This means that the real cause is not treated and leaves the patient vulnerable to a recurrence of depression at later stressful times in life.
Another reason to not rely on medication is the recent findings of studies that revealed antidepressants increase risk of death due to their blood thinning property which leaves patients more vulnerable to haemorrhaging and internal bleeding (CM, 15/9/2019).
As a proposed alternative, perhaps acknowledging the limited efficacy and problems of antidepressants, but of equally dubious benefit, is a report that within three years, the psychedelic drug in magic mushrooms may be available on prescription to treat depression (CM, 16/9/2017). Never mind that patients are reported to ‘likely experience hallucinations and other temporary shifts in consciousness.’ What are these ‘shifts’? Tripping? Delusions? What then? A prescription for adjunctive antipsychotic medication to treat the hallucinations and ‘shifts’?
The pharmaceutical approach to treatment reflects the lack of real understanding of non-endogenous depression by medical science. This is further highlighted by the experimental trials with a psychedelic drug, which sounds like a desperate attempt by pharmaceutical companies to cling to relevance in the market as more people become disillusioned with conventional medicine and seek natural alternatives.
The true causal factors of non-endogenous depression are psychological-situational in nature so these cases respond more effectively to psychological strategies to help the patient deal with current life circumstances and create necessary changes. To be even more effective and reduce risk of recurrence, the underlying vulnerabilities or ‘risk factors’ which originate in ‘childhood stuff’ can be resolved and the patient ‘take back their power’ with hypnotherapy. All with no side effects!
7/2/2017
Self-image of being a 'dummy' - can be 'fixed'
The high cost of child care has been reported as forcing low income parents to send their children to school before they are emotionally and mentally old enough to cope with the demands of formal education. The ‘powers that be’ have dismissed any concerns that this might be damaging in any way.
While these younger children can catch up academically as their brains mature neurologically, psychological scars do remain. As a Clinical Hypnotherapist, most of the treatment for my adult clients is resolving childhood ‘stuff’ which underlies current emotional issues and ‘mental health’ problems. Among these is the occasional adult who was sent to school prior to their fifth birthday. During that first year, they struggled academically, were put into remedial classes and formed a negative self-belief that they were a ‘dummy’, resulting in long term lack of wellbeing and a poor sense of Self Worth. Some were hindered by their negative self-image from attempting higher studies or challenging careers. Others went on to achieve academically at university and were successful in their careers, but the poor Self Worth and self-image as a ‘dummy’ stuck with them. This prevented them from being able to acknowledge or enjoy their achievements, believing they were a ‘fraud’ who did not deserve their success, consequently living in some degree of anxiety that they would be ‘found out’ .
It is odd that in a society that places such emphasis on the importance of mental health, wellbeing and self esteem, and government is concerned at the high cost to services when these are lacking, that the implementation of action that can compromise this in the long term can be regarded so dismissively by the ‘powers that be’ as of no import. Perhaps the real reason for this response is that our government, in its wisdom is aiming to improve poor OECD academic ratings for Australia by commencing formal education at an earlier age. It could not justify doing this if acknowledging the long term psychological harm – and the long term potential financial cost of ‘mental health’.
3/9/2016
Biased sex education for 4-year olds
I recently read a sample family scenario such as is being used in LGTGB-biased sex education for young children which takes ‘gender equality’ and Freud’s ‘penis envy’ by man-hating feminists to the extreme. The family consisted of a biologically-male father, a female mother transitioning to male, and a young daughter. The mother was explaining to the girl how ‘God got it wrong’ so she was now correcting this mistake. If this is the kind of message young children are receiving at home from LGTGB parents and in pre-school, no wonder they feel their gender is a ‘mistake’ and experience ‘gender dysphoria’.
This leads to an important point which is the attitude of a parent can influence how a child feels about their gender, so as a Clinical Hypnotherapist and former psychologist treating adult clients for childhood ‘stuff’ , I would urge not pushing kids to question and choose their gender at this time.
A common scenario throughout history is fathers wanting a son to carry on the family name or business or to share their sporting interests, and being disappointed when a baby girl arrives. Most fathers adjust and adore their daughters. However, there will generally be a family member who thinks it is hilarious to remind the daughter, generally at family gatherings, how disappointed her father was that ‘she was not a boy’. Daughters need their fathers’ approval and the relationship between father and daughter teaches her how to value her gender, so if she receives messages (explicit or implicit) that he wanted a boy instead of the girl he got, she will feel rejected by him. Perhaps he spends more time with his sons. The daughter will try to gain his approval by becoming the son she believes he wants, by rejecting all things feminine and adopt a masculine persona by dressing like a boy and engaging in masculine activities. She will generally ‘grow out’ of this behaviour when puberty kicks in and embrace her femininity but the belief that her father does not value her because she is a girl will remain and have a life-long impact on her sense of Self Worth.
Whilst not denying that there are some young children who have genuine reason to ‘feel different’, pushing a message that they are in the ‘wrong body’ to young children at a vulnerable age can only result in a lot more confused heterosexual kids experiencing ‘gender dysphoria’. If they are channelled into a program of ‘gender transitioning’ they will become really screwed up as adolescents and adults.
30/8/2016
‘Fussy eaters’ and psychopathology
Here we go again! Behaviour problems being pathologised by professionals instead of parents using common sense. Parents, worried about young kids who are fussy eaters, are seeking professional help.
The ‘condition’ is being pathologised and parents are being warned to take the condition seriously, with the warning that fussy eaters are prone to anxiety and other mental health problems. Bunkum! What next? Anxiolytic or antidepressant medication for fussy eaters to treat the underlying psychopathology or as a preventative of future psychopathology? The American Psychiatric Association continues to pathologise normal conditions (eg, grief) and ‘learned’ behaviour that is the result of ineffective parenting, as psychiatric disorders, to justify the relevance of psychiatry. ‘Fussy eater’ will probably be listed in the next version of DSM.
Mothers become anxious and worry needlessly that fussy eaters will suffer ill-effects if they do not eat so pander to them by tempting them with tasty snacks. Hence, there begins a life of inconvenience for the mother, cooking special meals for one member of the family who will not eat what everyone else is eating, thereby also reinforcing poor eating habits. Kids will not starve if they miss a couple of meals, and in time, they will learn to eat ‘what is put in front of them’ when they are hungry enough. When parents pander to kids, they are relinquishing their parental authority and that is a lesson in ‘power’ that kids learn young and learn quickly – unduly influencing family decisions, getting whatever they want and emotional manipulation of parents.
Memo to worried mothers of a ‘fussy eater’: If your child is happy, content, active, progressing developmentally and not obviously unhealthy, but the doctor tells you that your child is in the ‘lowest percentiles’ or their weight has ‘dropped a percentile’, just ignore their concern. ‘Dropping a percentile’ does not mean your child is losing weight or is unhealthy, but simply means that your child is not gaining weight as fast as other kids. ‘Percentiles’ are meaningless when ‘normative data’ are skewed by the prevalence of kids with obesity beginning in infancy, so by comparison, a fussy eater or a child of small build will ‘appear to go backwards’ in their growth.
Some ‘sciences’ are prone to confuse ‘cause and consequence’ to justify their relevance, but as a therapist, I know that quite often, so called ‘psychiatric disorders’ in children and adults are merely dysfunctional ‘learning’ from situations in the early childhood environment. Kids learn (subconsciously) from parents’ behaviour and emotional reactions, so rather than ‘fussy eating’ being an indicator of future psychopathology, what is more likely happening is kids are ‘learning’ psychopathology from ‘anxious’ parents making a ‘big deal’ out of not eating and making mealtimes stressful for themselves and the child.
11/6/2016
Societal dangers of ‘repressed anger’ are ignored or unrecognised.
A student of Palm Beach-Currumbin High School has been hospitalised with brain injuries when he fell and hit his head on concrete after blacking out in a ‘choke hold’ placed on him by another student (Courier Mail, 11/6/2016). What concerns me even more than the ‘choke hold’ applied by a student and the consequences for the victim, is the reaction by authorities and professionals as reported in the media. This ‘choke hold’ is labelled as ‘tap out’, ‘knock out’ or ‘black out’ and is being dismissed as a ‘game’, a ‘craze’, a ‘fad’, a ‘stupid prank gone wrong’ or ‘risk taking’ behaviour that adolescents engage in.
First point: ‘Risk taking’ behaviour is stupid thoughtless actions taken by an individual that puts their own life at risk, such as jumping off a second-storey roof or driving into flood water or holding on to a hand grenade after pulling the pin. Hence, the joke about idiots responsible for their own death being eligible for the “Darwin Award for Service to Humanity”, by removing themselves from the gene pool. Dangerous or aggressive behaviour that puts the life of someone else at risk does not qualify as ‘risk taking’ behaviour.
Point two: Ask any woman who has been a victim of domestic violence if being put in a ‘choke hold’ until ‘blacking out’ is a game! When a man engaging in domestic violence puts a ‘choke hold’ on his wife, does this qualify as ‘risk taking’ behaviour? Risky for whom? Not for him, the perpetrator, that’s for sure! It is risky only for the victim of the ‘choke hold’ whom he intends to harm. This element of ‘intention to cause harm’ seems to be overlooked in dismissing this ‘choke hold’ as a ‘game’ and its PC reinterpretation as legitimate ‘risk taking’.
And that brings me to point three: It is not merely naïve to dismiss the seriousness of these so-called games but inexcusable ‘head in the sand’ stupidity. There are constantly expressed concerns about the increasing violence in society, particularly where alcohol is involved, and violence inflicted on women by their partners in relationships. Yet, here we have ‘intentional violence’ being ‘excused’ as a ‘game’.
As a Clinical Hypnotherapist, I have been surprised by the frequency of ‘repressed anger’ I have treated in clients. Considering the extent of violence in society, I should not be surprised. Unfortunately, this ‘repressed anger’ responsible for societal violence goes unrecognised so is not addressed, but simply blamed on alcohol. However, alcohol does not cause violence, but simply ‘short circuits’ the control switch for ‘social inhibition’, revealing the true character that lies hidden behind the public mask that people wear. Hence, when drinkers become mean, nasty, loud, foul-mouthed, abusive, belligerent, aggressive or violent, they are expressing their true character. They are ‘externalising’ their existing ‘repressed anger’ and an existing desire for aggression.
Rather than dismiss ‘games’ of violence against others that are intended to harm, as some sort of harmless ‘risk taking’ fun (that is also legitimised by violence in media entertainment), there needs to be the recognition that the perpetrators or initiators are adolescents ‘externalising’ their ‘repressed anger’ under the legitimising guise of a ‘game’, and their psychological issues need to be addressed sooner, rather than later in prison.
5/6/2016
Education policy is being shaped by misguided social engineers aiming for ideological victories but lacking any understanding of cognitive development, hence the poor academic standards in Queensland schools. The latest hare-brained scheme in an attempt to redress this embarrassing situation is to start kids in formal education younger, at four years of age. However, social engineers have no understanding of child emotional development and the lifelong cost to them of this policy. Wise parents with legitimate concerns about their children’s welfare are holding them back for another year. This is not an example of ‘helicopter parenting’ but simply a matter of parents making a realistic assessment of their child’s level of maturity. Their concerns are valid, yet these parents are being criticised as basing them on their own negative experiences and just the ‘perception’ that their own children ‘might’ struggle. They are being assured by so called ‘education experts’ that even though there may be a ‘small advantage’ in the child being older at start of school, (implying an admission that the younger children do struggle), by Year 3, ‘all are on an even keel‘ (CM, 3/6/2016).
While it is true that the younger children catch up academically as their brains mature, and they can go on to successfully complete university degrees and engage in reasonably successful careers, the emotional damage has a long term negative impact that hinders optimal wellbeing and achievement. The brains of some four-year-old ‘early developers’ may be neurologically mature enough to meet the academic demands of the early school years, but most will not.
As a Clinical Hypnotherapist and former registered psychologist treating adult clients, I can claim to be an ‘expert’ on the long term consequences of childhood experiences. I have treated adults who were sent to school ‘too young’ as four-year-olds. Their school experiences were similar, with recollections of ‘struggling’ or ‘floundering’, the stigma of being in the ‘remedial class’, seeing themselves as the ‘dummy’ of the class, feeling ‘not as smart’ as everyone else and on the odd occasion when they did well in a school test after some coaching by their mother, instead of being praised by the teacher, were subjected to an accusation of not being able to achieve on their own so ‘must have cheated’. Psychologically, what they had in common as adults was a poor sense of Self Worth and Self Esteem, self-doubts and poor self-confidence, unable to acknowledge or appreciate their successes but instead, feeling like a ‘fraud’, unable to believe they had actually ‘earned’ their success through their own ability. Generally, they were discouraged by their negative self-beliefs from pursuing their dreams and ambitions, hindered from achieving their full potential, defeated by their self-belief as a ‘dummy’ who lacked the brains to achieve. Those who were driven to achieve by a need to prove that they were ‘not dummies’, were not able to shake off their negative self-beliefs in spite of their successes.
On second thought, given the admission by social engineers that school programmes are being based on leftie-neo-Marxism, perhaps they are not ignorant of child psychological development after all. Their true motive in starting children in school so young is to exploit this vulnerable developmental period of the brain being receptive to any influential input, hence are ideal for ideological brainwashing.
15/5/2016
In the Sunday Mail section on Parenting (15/5/2016), there is an article on disciplining kids with ‘kindness’, drawing a distinction between disciplining by teaching, instructing and guiding versus punishment which is hurting someone because you do not like what they are doing.
All the advice given is fine, except that nowhere was there mention of the need to set rules of ‘expected behaviour’ and importantly, the essential role of parents in upholding those rules and teaching kids accountability for behaviour.
The main problem in kids’ behaviour posing social problems in today’s society is parents who do not set any rules for behaviour and if they do, they fail to uphold them because it is ‘too hard’ and they are afraid that if they say ‘no’, their kids will hate them, so relinquish parental authority to kids to do as they please.
The fact is that kids do not hate parents who say ‘no’, but instead, they despise parents who are a weak pushover and resent these parents for not regarding them as worth the effort of stepping up to the plate and taking on the authoritative role of parenting, making the tough decisions and providing them with the protection of leadership and guidance they need in order to feel safe and loved.
10/10/14 Babies too close
Germaine Greer has come in for some flak for criticising the Duchess of Cambridge for having another baby ‘too soon’. However, there is sound basis for this criticism. When Princess Mary’s second pregnancy was announced, she came in for public criticism by child development professionals in Denmark because having babies closer together than two years is violating the first infants ‘attachment’ needs.
This argument that it is a woman’s right to determine her own life is one of the problems with feminism because when women’s rights are considered to be paramount, it means subjugating the innate rights of young children. For information on 'attachment' and other developmental emotional needs of children, check out: http://www.selfesteemparenting.com.au
9/9/14 Ectogenesis – alternative to surrogate births
Fifty years ago, the term ‘ectogenesis’ was coined to describe the ability to raise a foetus outside the human body in an
artificial womb - an ‘aquarium filled with amniotic fluid’. The foetus would be bathed in a saline solution infused with nutrients,
and specific hormones added at appropriate stages of development, all computer-controlled – much like hydroponically grown marihuana.
More recently, bioethicists have supported this as a solution for homosexual couples and single men to not have to deal
with the legal hassles and emotional dramas associated with surrogate mothers. The technology already exists and human trials are being held up only by legal and ethical issues. A prediction has been made that the technology will be readily available within twenty years and that by 2074, only thirty percent of births would be ‘human births’.
Hydroponically grown babies does have implications for ‘attachment’ which would normally begin while the infant is still in the
mother’s womb. (Refer discussion on surrogacy 5/9/2014).
Science and technology have developed artificial body parts and organs that function efficiently as mechanical and electronic devices which have saved lives. Hence, male scientists may regard a woman’s womb as just another body part with a mechanical function, merely a biological receptacle providing a biochemical environment of liquid nutrients and hormones. ‘Science’ may believe that it can replicate these functions and regulate them more efficiently than can a human womb. However, the essential component that makes the foetus human cannot be replicated by science – the essential emotional environment of a woman’s womb cannot be replicated, no matter how sophisticated technology becomes. Hence, I suspect that a foetus that develops in the soulless and emotionless environment of an aquarium would be so emotionally deprived that it would lack the capacity to develop attachment with anyone after it is born - ever.
As for the attachment implication if a woman chooses surrogacy or ‘ectogenesis’ for convenience (so as not to interfere with her career or lose her figure) - it seems to me that she lacks commitment to motherhood so attachment is already doomed. As is the long term emotional wellbeing of her child.
Implications for attachment to a surrogate mother certainly would not be an issue for what I refer to as hydroponically grown babies – attachment would be a lifelong non-issue for them. As would be emotional wellbeing – or rather, the lack of.
5/9/14 Surrogacy, ‘attachment’ and emotional security:
Surrogacy has been in the news lately, including a discussion on “Insight”, SBS ONE. Much is being made of the issue of commercialisation and exploitation of surrogates versus altruistic surrogacy. A significant aspect is the emotional cost to those involved. Surrogacy is a blessing for women having reproduction difficulties, but the ‘mother’ can feel excluded and may even feel some jealousy and resentment towards the surrogate, particularly if it is a family member. The surrogate may feel an emotional wrench giving up a baby with whom she has bonded during pregnancy and what is overlooked is the emotional impact on the infant who has begun to develop ‘attachment’ in the womb. Adoptees commonly feel the need to track down and reconnect with their birth mothers. Will this be a future issue for children of surrogate births? And of course, ‘attachment’ does begin in the womb. If it didn’t, then why do fathers talk to the mother’s abdomen and why would mothers send loving thoughts to their developing baby? On the “Insight” discussion, an altruistic surrogate stated that she deliberately tried to not bond with the baby during the pregnancy. This is an understandable attempt to protect herself from the emotional wrench of giving up the baby. But, what are the implications here if that becomes recommended standard practice for surrogates? What impact does this have on the infant, being denied this emotional bonding? ‘Attachment’ has a lifelong impact on emotional security and wellbeing. So, is emotional deprivation in the womb going to have an adverse impact on the child’s capacity
for ‘attachment’ and future emotional security? 'Attachment' is discussed on the parenting website: http://www.selfesteemparenting.com.au
I began my private practice as a Clinical Hypnotherapist & Psychologist in 2000. My relevant background is
working as a Research Psychologist in depression research at the Black Dog Institute (Sydney).
Practice Location:
Currently, I have a private practice as a Clinical Hypnotherapist, in Ninderry-Yandina, the hinterland of
the Sunshine Coast, in South-East Queensland (Australia).
My Philosophy and Clinical Approach
My philosophy is the importance of not just helping clients to achieve their therapeutic goals in therapy, but to also help
them to achieve self-empowerment. This generally involves claiming (or reclaiming) the power taken away from them
as children or that they have relinquished to other people or problematic stuff or situations during their life.
During my years in practice as a Clinical Hypnotherapist and Psychologist, regardless of what a client’s ‘presenting
problem’ is, for most of them, we needed to address ‘childhood stuff’. Hence, my expertise has developed in the area of resolving this ‘childhood stuff’.
It is common knowledge that there is often a link between childhood experiences and later psychological or emotional issues that impact on a person’s wellbeing, their capacity to fulfil their potential or entails dysfunctional coping or getting into unhappy relationships or other patterns of self sabotaging thinking and behaviour. Generally, most people have some awareness of this link, but often, they don’t – or they dismiss childhood stuff as no longer relevant to their adult life. However, it is very relevant! Childhood is where we develop our sense of self and subconscious motivations plus a whole lot of other stuff which, for better or worse, has a lifelong impact in our subconscious mind.
There is no point in just addressing the current problem in a ‘band aid fix’ - we also need to eliminate (or at least
reduce) the risk of relapse of the problem. This means addressing the origins and fix the effects of whatever went on in childhood that has been underpinning the current problem. It is the vulnerability (or predisposition) that is the real problem, so I believe that it is essential to resolve that in order to achieve any real healing. Fortunately, due to the plasticity of the brain, whatever has been subconsciously learned in childhood is amenable to change.
For a more comprehensive explanation on how childhood events affect who you are as an adult, check out my model of emotional development: http://www.selfesteemparenting.com.au.
Information on this website is relevant for anyone interested in SELF HELP or just curious to understand how Self Worth,
emotional reactions, attitudes, behaviours and relationship choices are shaped in childhood. As the name suggests, this is also a website for PARENTING information.
Regards
Isabella
Book on building foundation for Self Esteem now available
Finally, after ten years of developing and fine tuning a model of child emotional development, I have just published a book: “Self Worth BEFORE Self Esteem”, ‘What every parent must know about building the foundations of Self Esteem’. The book is available on http://www.amazon.com as an ebook and in paperback.
In addition, embedded within the book there is a guide for readers interested in ‘self-help’.
To help parents understand how the subliminal messages in what they say and do or don’t say and don’t do actually affect their children, readers are invited to apply the model to their own childhood and reflect on their own experiences and how the subliminal messages they received from their parents have influenced ‘who they are’.
This model is a non-conventional approach and may be regarded as a bit controversial since it does not support current social ideology or feminist dogma.
The CARRP-ALIAS model in this website and book is a guide for parents wanting to build healthy emotional foundations in their children and also a useful guide for adults into 'self help'.
So, what is the relevance for adults?
If children have ‘faulty’ emotional foundations laid down in childhood, or they are ‘emotionally damaged’, when they grow into adults, these turn into ‘unresolved emotional issues’, commonly known as ‘stuff’. But, the good news is that because of the plasticity of the brain, emotional foundations in the subconscious mind can be ‘rebuilt’ and damage ‘repaired’, using hypnotherapeutic techniques and the ‘stuff’ gets resolved.
How can ‘unresolved stuff’ affect your life as an adult?
Example #1: Do you keep making the same mistakes in relationships? Do you keep getting into crappy relationships and believe or hope that ‘this time’ it will ‘be different’? But it never is! Why?
An analogy: You can watch a DVD of ‘The Titanic’ a hundred times, and no matter how much you might wish that it could have a happy ending, Jack is going to drown EVERY time, because it is a recording and the ending is ‘fixed’ and cannot ever change. Likewise, when we ‘replay’ the ‘personal drama/horror’ relationship movie programmed in our subconscious mind, we expect or hope that ‘this time, things will be better’ or ‘this time, we will get it right’. Don’t we wish! But, like ‘The Titanic’, when we press the ‘replay’ button for that personal relationship movie we play in our subconscious mind, the outcome is ‘fixed’ and as much as we wish, it is always going to turn out the same way – crappy, dysfunctional, stressful unhappy and eventually you can just end up getting depressed. We may replace the ‘romantic lead’ and expect this will give us a different outcome, but the ‘casting criteria’ for that role remains the same, so although for each ‘replay’, the person filling this role has a different face, it is still the same character, merely in a different guise - and the role we play is still the same character.
The solution is to delete that old dysfunctional movie in your subconscious mind and program in a new one you know will have a better outcome – one that has a changed criteria for your character and consequently a changed criteria for the role of ‘romantic lead’ playing opposite you,.
PS: You will need tech support to delete that old movie and program in a new one! That is what I do! Tech support for your subconscious mind!
Additional recommended reading:
“In Being there: Why Prioritizing Motherhood in the First three Years Matters”, by Erica Komistar, emphasises the importance of mothers and how essential they are to a whole range of developmental aspects, for the mother to be physically and emotionally available to her child during the first 1,000 days of the child's life.
Review: This is a very honest book with a much-needed message about the real needs of children that goes counter to the feminist agenda which devalues motherhood because having to take care of children gets in the way of more rewarding and enjoyable activities such as careers. Erica bravely argues that mothers need to prioritise their children over their work. I say 'bravely', because in this era of women's 'social rights' being the highest priority, children's 'innate rights' to have their emotional needs met by mothers has been deliberately ignored by 'gender equality' feminists who want to be more like men, and any child development professional who has dared to question the wisdom of subjecting children under three years of age to substantial periods of 'maternal deprivation' in non-maternal care (particularly long day care) is quickly shouted down by feminists and the child care industry who argue they provide 'quality' care and have 'caring' carers. The mere fact that child care operators offer this argument illustrates their lack of understanding of the emotional needs of young children, particularly infants, and the indisputable fact that there is no satisfactory substitute for maternal care.
PS: Fathers are essential from the beginning, too, but during infancy, it is the maternal input during this time that is essential for emotional development - Dad is more important to the child later!
.
Topics in the Media
13/11/2017
How to change gross male attitudes and behaviour
A study of 200,000 15-year-olds from mixed sex schools around the world has found that boys do better when there are more girls in the class than boys, suggesting that girl’s higher levels of concentration and motivation provide a positive influence on boys (CM, 11/11/2017). This is hardly newsworthy or surprising, but it does go against feminist ideology and illustrates the power women have to improve male attitudes and behaviour when they ‘set standards’ rather than try to be the ‘same as’ men by adopting gross male standards of behaviour.
This has been further highlighted by several authors of relationship books who have stated that men can only get away with treating women badly in relationships because women allow them to. One male author even gives the advice to women, “Men respect standards – get some”! This is no surprise to anyone living prior to the erosion of moral values by imposition of libertarian values (ie, rights, freedom, ‘me first’, non-responsibility, instant gratification in pursuit of the ‘next dopamine hit’, while ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘honesty’ have degenerated to be just an excuse to be offensive) during the 1960s followed by second wave feminism, where gender equality was translated into women trying to be the ‘same as’ men. Prior to this, in the era of moral values (ie, responsibility, delayed gratification, obligations to society, consideration for others, respect for self, others and property), women were the ‘moral guardians’ of society. Mothers raised their daughters to have self respect and their sons to ‘not hit girls’ and to respect women. These boys, in turn, raised their sons to respect women.
However, second wave feminism was hijacked by man-haters with no interest in marriage or kids, but a desire to cast off any traditional and innate roles of women, to be ‘like men’. While libertarians abandoned values of respect and consideration for others (after all, treating others with respect and consideration would violate personal freedoms and rights), it was second wave feminists who abolished respect for women because they regarded men treating women with courtesy as ‘degrading’ to women.
Libertarians introduced the value of non-responsibility and abrogating personal responsibilities to the nanny state. Feminists extended that to abrogating maternal responsibility by devaluing motherhood and promoting outsourcing of child care for infants and toddlers.
Instead of being taught about respect (for self and for others), girls are taught to behave the same as boys and boys are taught to treat girls the same as they treat other boys. Girls are taught that being selfish, loud and aggressive is being a ‘strong woman’ and being sexually promiscuous is being ‘liberated’. When women seek validation to boost their poor sense of Self Worth by getting inebriated with the intention of ‘hooking up’ with a stranger for casual sex, then cry ‘victim’ when it turns out badly, we have complaints that men don’t respect women. Well, women don’t respect themselves, and don’t take responsibility for their safety, so how can they expect to be treated with respect by men exploiting their stupidity?
If women want to be treated with respect by men, then girls need to be taught to have self respect and women take back the responsibility for moral guardianship in society, instead of copying men and then blaming them for the demise of respect.
Since libertarian values were embraced and women abandoned the role as moral guardians, society has descended into what has been commonly referred to as a ‘moral abyss’ and youth without parental guidance as ‘lacking a moral compass’. While women think it is ‘liberating’ and ‘gender equality’ to behave like men, they are validating gross male conduct and negative male attitudes and behaviour towards women. While women continue to do this, men will never be motivated to improve their social behaviour or attitudes and behaviour towards women. Solution: Advice by the author to women, “Men respect standards – get some”!
12/11/2017
First 1,000 days of a child’s life
Erica Komisar’s new book regarding the premise of the importance of mothers and how essential it is to a whole range of developmental aspects for the mother to be physically and emotionally available to her child during the first 1,000 days of a child’s life, is causing quite a stir. This is probably because, “In Being there: Why Prioritizing Motherhood in the First three Years Matters”, does not support the feminist agenda but instead, argues that mothers need to prioritise their children over their work, thereby challenging the feminist mission to devalue motherhood.
The fact is that second wave feminism was hijacked by the loudest voices who were man-hating women with no interest in marriage and kids (eg Germaine Greer), but purely in elevating the status of women. In order to achieve this, children’s INNATE rights to have their emotional needs met had to be subjugated and to justify this, feminists devalued motherhood with mantras such as: ‘there is nothing special about mothering’, ‘anyone can raise a child’, and even as recent as a couple of years ago, 'attachment theory is out of date’. Such a comment on ‘attachment’ is pure ignorance or deliberate intent to mislead women. Bowlby’s ‘Attachment’ is not merely a theory, (or an ideology as is feminism) but is based on empirical data. Feminist views on child raising ignore child developmental psychology and mantras are sprouted to support feminist ideology. Child emotional developmental needs are a non-issue in feminism and promotion of ‘quality’ child care is simply intended to serve the goal of ‘liberating’ women from the unrewarding chore of childcare, urging them to spend their time in more rewarding and enjoyable activities – as if motherhood is some patriarchal conspiracy to keep women subjugated.
The fact is that second wave feminists deliberately misled women and modern feminism has inherited this ideology without question. Perhaps Erica’s book is causing some mothers to question the dictates of feminism and is validating their own mixed feelings as working mothers.
Life choices have a cost that is born by someone and in the case of feminism and women trying to live up to the false promise that ‘women can have it all’, women probably feel that they are ‘doing it all’, getting stressed in the juggling act, but the collateral damage and long term emotional cost are born by children.
When high profile career women claim they are being a role model for their young daughters, they are either being delusional or simply trying to justify their choices. As a Clinical Hypnotherapist whose main work has become addressing adult clients’ childhood stuff, I can assure you that what goes through the mind of a young child is not admiration for their mother being a career woman, but emotional deprivation, subconscious feelings of being unimportant to Mum (which contribute to poor Self Worth which is the foundation for Self Esteem) and even anger which has to be repressed and is either internalised or externalised (which results in some degree of long term emotional/mental health issues, resentment and/or aggressive behaviour problems). Treating adult clients has given me an understanding of what the emotional developmental needs are and the long term consequences of these needs being unmet or violated by parents (even unintentionally), plus the awareness that any feelings of not being valued by their parents are concealed behind what I refer to as the mask that says “I’m ok”, because subconsciously, they feel that to express them could result in alienation of the parent.
My prediction is that the social time bomb for this century is ‘outsourcing early childcare to non-maternal care’ whether that is the ‘nanny state’ institutionalised child care, paid nannies or family members, because for healthy emotional development, there is no substitute for a mother.
For advice on what the developmental emotional needs for kids are, and how this has a long term impact on adults, check out the mickey mouse version on: https://selfesteemparenting.com.au or for the adult version in paperback, “Self Worth BEFORE Self Esteem: What Every Parent MUST Know about Building the Foundations of Self-Esteem”, Isabella McKenzie Parker, available on Amazon.
22/9/2017
Prescription drugs not the best for depression!
Based on the ‘medical model’ of depression, medication is the ‘fist line’ treatment. However, medication is not the most effective treatment for non-endogenous depression which accounts for 90% of depression cases, since antidepressants merely provide symptom relief as an ‘emotional analgesic’. This means that the real cause is not treated and leaves the patient vulnerable to a recurrence of depression at later stressful times in life.
Another reason to not rely on medication is the recent findings of studies that revealed antidepressants increase risk of death due to their blood thinning property which leaves patients more vulnerable to haemorrhaging and internal bleeding (CM, 15/9/2019).
As a proposed alternative, perhaps acknowledging the limited efficacy and problems of antidepressants, but of equally dubious benefit, is a report that within three years, the psychedelic drug in magic mushrooms may be available on prescription to treat depression (CM, 16/9/2017). Never mind that patients are reported to ‘likely experience hallucinations and other temporary shifts in consciousness.’ What are these ‘shifts’? Tripping? Delusions? What then? A prescription for adjunctive antipsychotic medication to treat the hallucinations and ‘shifts’?
The pharmaceutical approach to treatment reflects the lack of real understanding of non-endogenous depression by medical science. This is further highlighted by the experimental trials with a psychedelic drug, which sounds like a desperate attempt by pharmaceutical companies to cling to relevance in the market as more people become disillusioned with conventional medicine and seek natural alternatives.
The true causal factors of non-endogenous depression are psychological-situational in nature so these cases respond more effectively to psychological strategies to help the patient deal with current life circumstances and create necessary changes. To be even more effective and reduce risk of recurrence, the underlying vulnerabilities or ‘risk factors’ which originate in ‘childhood stuff’ can be resolved and the patient ‘take back their power’ with hypnotherapy. All with no side effects!
7/2/2017
Self-image of being a 'dummy' - can be 'fixed'
The high cost of child care has been reported as forcing low income parents to send their children to school before they are emotionally and mentally old enough to cope with the demands of formal education. The ‘powers that be’ have dismissed any concerns that this might be damaging in any way.
While these younger children can catch up academically as their brains mature neurologically, psychological scars do remain. As a Clinical Hypnotherapist, most of the treatment for my adult clients is resolving childhood ‘stuff’ which underlies current emotional issues and ‘mental health’ problems. Among these is the occasional adult who was sent to school prior to their fifth birthday. During that first year, they struggled academically, were put into remedial classes and formed a negative self-belief that they were a ‘dummy’, resulting in long term lack of wellbeing and a poor sense of Self Worth. Some were hindered by their negative self-image from attempting higher studies or challenging careers. Others went on to achieve academically at university and were successful in their careers, but the poor Self Worth and self-image as a ‘dummy’ stuck with them. This prevented them from being able to acknowledge or enjoy their achievements, believing they were a ‘fraud’ who did not deserve their success, consequently living in some degree of anxiety that they would be ‘found out’ .
It is odd that in a society that places such emphasis on the importance of mental health, wellbeing and self esteem, and government is concerned at the high cost to services when these are lacking, that the implementation of action that can compromise this in the long term can be regarded so dismissively by the ‘powers that be’ as of no import. Perhaps the real reason for this response is that our government, in its wisdom is aiming to improve poor OECD academic ratings for Australia by commencing formal education at an earlier age. It could not justify doing this if acknowledging the long term psychological harm – and the long term potential financial cost of ‘mental health’.
3/9/2016
Biased sex education for 4-year olds
I recently read a sample family scenario such as is being used in LGTGB-biased sex education for young children which takes ‘gender equality’ and Freud’s ‘penis envy’ by man-hating feminists to the extreme. The family consisted of a biologically-male father, a female mother transitioning to male, and a young daughter. The mother was explaining to the girl how ‘God got it wrong’ so she was now correcting this mistake. If this is the kind of message young children are receiving at home from LGTGB parents and in pre-school, no wonder they feel their gender is a ‘mistake’ and experience ‘gender dysphoria’.
This leads to an important point which is the attitude of a parent can influence how a child feels about their gender, so as a Clinical Hypnotherapist and former psychologist treating adult clients for childhood ‘stuff’ , I would urge not pushing kids to question and choose their gender at this time.
A common scenario throughout history is fathers wanting a son to carry on the family name or business or to share their sporting interests, and being disappointed when a baby girl arrives. Most fathers adjust and adore their daughters. However, there will generally be a family member who thinks it is hilarious to remind the daughter, generally at family gatherings, how disappointed her father was that ‘she was not a boy’. Daughters need their fathers’ approval and the relationship between father and daughter teaches her how to value her gender, so if she receives messages (explicit or implicit) that he wanted a boy instead of the girl he got, she will feel rejected by him. Perhaps he spends more time with his sons. The daughter will try to gain his approval by becoming the son she believes he wants, by rejecting all things feminine and adopt a masculine persona by dressing like a boy and engaging in masculine activities. She will generally ‘grow out’ of this behaviour when puberty kicks in and embrace her femininity but the belief that her father does not value her because she is a girl will remain and have a life-long impact on her sense of Self Worth.
Whilst not denying that there are some young children who have genuine reason to ‘feel different’, pushing a message that they are in the ‘wrong body’ to young children at a vulnerable age can only result in a lot more confused heterosexual kids experiencing ‘gender dysphoria’. If they are channelled into a program of ‘gender transitioning’ they will become really screwed up as adolescents and adults.
30/8/2016
‘Fussy eaters’ and psychopathology
Here we go again! Behaviour problems being pathologised by professionals instead of parents using common sense. Parents, worried about young kids who are fussy eaters, are seeking professional help.
The ‘condition’ is being pathologised and parents are being warned to take the condition seriously, with the warning that fussy eaters are prone to anxiety and other mental health problems. Bunkum! What next? Anxiolytic or antidepressant medication for fussy eaters to treat the underlying psychopathology or as a preventative of future psychopathology? The American Psychiatric Association continues to pathologise normal conditions (eg, grief) and ‘learned’ behaviour that is the result of ineffective parenting, as psychiatric disorders, to justify the relevance of psychiatry. ‘Fussy eater’ will probably be listed in the next version of DSM.
Mothers become anxious and worry needlessly that fussy eaters will suffer ill-effects if they do not eat so pander to them by tempting them with tasty snacks. Hence, there begins a life of inconvenience for the mother, cooking special meals for one member of the family who will not eat what everyone else is eating, thereby also reinforcing poor eating habits. Kids will not starve if they miss a couple of meals, and in time, they will learn to eat ‘what is put in front of them’ when they are hungry enough. When parents pander to kids, they are relinquishing their parental authority and that is a lesson in ‘power’ that kids learn young and learn quickly – unduly influencing family decisions, getting whatever they want and emotional manipulation of parents.
Memo to worried mothers of a ‘fussy eater’: If your child is happy, content, active, progressing developmentally and not obviously unhealthy, but the doctor tells you that your child is in the ‘lowest percentiles’ or their weight has ‘dropped a percentile’, just ignore their concern. ‘Dropping a percentile’ does not mean your child is losing weight or is unhealthy, but simply means that your child is not gaining weight as fast as other kids. ‘Percentiles’ are meaningless when ‘normative data’ are skewed by the prevalence of kids with obesity beginning in infancy, so by comparison, a fussy eater or a child of small build will ‘appear to go backwards’ in their growth.
Some ‘sciences’ are prone to confuse ‘cause and consequence’ to justify their relevance, but as a therapist, I know that quite often, so called ‘psychiatric disorders’ in children and adults are merely dysfunctional ‘learning’ from situations in the early childhood environment. Kids learn (subconsciously) from parents’ behaviour and emotional reactions, so rather than ‘fussy eating’ being an indicator of future psychopathology, what is more likely happening is kids are ‘learning’ psychopathology from ‘anxious’ parents making a ‘big deal’ out of not eating and making mealtimes stressful for themselves and the child.
11/6/2016
Societal dangers of ‘repressed anger’ are ignored or unrecognised.
A student of Palm Beach-Currumbin High School has been hospitalised with brain injuries when he fell and hit his head on concrete after blacking out in a ‘choke hold’ placed on him by another student (Courier Mail, 11/6/2016). What concerns me even more than the ‘choke hold’ applied by a student and the consequences for the victim, is the reaction by authorities and professionals as reported in the media. This ‘choke hold’ is labelled as ‘tap out’, ‘knock out’ or ‘black out’ and is being dismissed as a ‘game’, a ‘craze’, a ‘fad’, a ‘stupid prank gone wrong’ or ‘risk taking’ behaviour that adolescents engage in.
First point: ‘Risk taking’ behaviour is stupid thoughtless actions taken by an individual that puts their own life at risk, such as jumping off a second-storey roof or driving into flood water or holding on to a hand grenade after pulling the pin. Hence, the joke about idiots responsible for their own death being eligible for the “Darwin Award for Service to Humanity”, by removing themselves from the gene pool. Dangerous or aggressive behaviour that puts the life of someone else at risk does not qualify as ‘risk taking’ behaviour.
Point two: Ask any woman who has been a victim of domestic violence if being put in a ‘choke hold’ until ‘blacking out’ is a game! When a man engaging in domestic violence puts a ‘choke hold’ on his wife, does this qualify as ‘risk taking’ behaviour? Risky for whom? Not for him, the perpetrator, that’s for sure! It is risky only for the victim of the ‘choke hold’ whom he intends to harm. This element of ‘intention to cause harm’ seems to be overlooked in dismissing this ‘choke hold’ as a ‘game’ and its PC reinterpretation as legitimate ‘risk taking’.
And that brings me to point three: It is not merely naïve to dismiss the seriousness of these so-called games but inexcusable ‘head in the sand’ stupidity. There are constantly expressed concerns about the increasing violence in society, particularly where alcohol is involved, and violence inflicted on women by their partners in relationships. Yet, here we have ‘intentional violence’ being ‘excused’ as a ‘game’.
As a Clinical Hypnotherapist, I have been surprised by the frequency of ‘repressed anger’ I have treated in clients. Considering the extent of violence in society, I should not be surprised. Unfortunately, this ‘repressed anger’ responsible for societal violence goes unrecognised so is not addressed, but simply blamed on alcohol. However, alcohol does not cause violence, but simply ‘short circuits’ the control switch for ‘social inhibition’, revealing the true character that lies hidden behind the public mask that people wear. Hence, when drinkers become mean, nasty, loud, foul-mouthed, abusive, belligerent, aggressive or violent, they are expressing their true character. They are ‘externalising’ their existing ‘repressed anger’ and an existing desire for aggression.
Rather than dismiss ‘games’ of violence against others that are intended to harm, as some sort of harmless ‘risk taking’ fun (that is also legitimised by violence in media entertainment), there needs to be the recognition that the perpetrators or initiators are adolescents ‘externalising’ their ‘repressed anger’ under the legitimising guise of a ‘game’, and their psychological issues need to be addressed sooner, rather than later in prison.
5/6/2016
Education policy is being shaped by misguided social engineers aiming for ideological victories but lacking any understanding of cognitive development, hence the poor academic standards in Queensland schools. The latest hare-brained scheme in an attempt to redress this embarrassing situation is to start kids in formal education younger, at four years of age. However, social engineers have no understanding of child emotional development and the lifelong cost to them of this policy. Wise parents with legitimate concerns about their children’s welfare are holding them back for another year. This is not an example of ‘helicopter parenting’ but simply a matter of parents making a realistic assessment of their child’s level of maturity. Their concerns are valid, yet these parents are being criticised as basing them on their own negative experiences and just the ‘perception’ that their own children ‘might’ struggle. They are being assured by so called ‘education experts’ that even though there may be a ‘small advantage’ in the child being older at start of school, (implying an admission that the younger children do struggle), by Year 3, ‘all are on an even keel‘ (CM, 3/6/2016).
While it is true that the younger children catch up academically as their brains mature, and they can go on to successfully complete university degrees and engage in reasonably successful careers, the emotional damage has a long term negative impact that hinders optimal wellbeing and achievement. The brains of some four-year-old ‘early developers’ may be neurologically mature enough to meet the academic demands of the early school years, but most will not.
As a Clinical Hypnotherapist and former registered psychologist treating adult clients, I can claim to be an ‘expert’ on the long term consequences of childhood experiences. I have treated adults who were sent to school ‘too young’ as four-year-olds. Their school experiences were similar, with recollections of ‘struggling’ or ‘floundering’, the stigma of being in the ‘remedial class’, seeing themselves as the ‘dummy’ of the class, feeling ‘not as smart’ as everyone else and on the odd occasion when they did well in a school test after some coaching by their mother, instead of being praised by the teacher, were subjected to an accusation of not being able to achieve on their own so ‘must have cheated’. Psychologically, what they had in common as adults was a poor sense of Self Worth and Self Esteem, self-doubts and poor self-confidence, unable to acknowledge or appreciate their successes but instead, feeling like a ‘fraud’, unable to believe they had actually ‘earned’ their success through their own ability. Generally, they were discouraged by their negative self-beliefs from pursuing their dreams and ambitions, hindered from achieving their full potential, defeated by their self-belief as a ‘dummy’ who lacked the brains to achieve. Those who were driven to achieve by a need to prove that they were ‘not dummies’, were not able to shake off their negative self-beliefs in spite of their successes.
On second thought, given the admission by social engineers that school programmes are being based on leftie-neo-Marxism, perhaps they are not ignorant of child psychological development after all. Their true motive in starting children in school so young is to exploit this vulnerable developmental period of the brain being receptive to any influential input, hence are ideal for ideological brainwashing.
15/5/2016
In the Sunday Mail section on Parenting (15/5/2016), there is an article on disciplining kids with ‘kindness’, drawing a distinction between disciplining by teaching, instructing and guiding versus punishment which is hurting someone because you do not like what they are doing.
All the advice given is fine, except that nowhere was there mention of the need to set rules of ‘expected behaviour’ and importantly, the essential role of parents in upholding those rules and teaching kids accountability for behaviour.
The main problem in kids’ behaviour posing social problems in today’s society is parents who do not set any rules for behaviour and if they do, they fail to uphold them because it is ‘too hard’ and they are afraid that if they say ‘no’, their kids will hate them, so relinquish parental authority to kids to do as they please.
The fact is that kids do not hate parents who say ‘no’, but instead, they despise parents who are a weak pushover and resent these parents for not regarding them as worth the effort of stepping up to the plate and taking on the authoritative role of parenting, making the tough decisions and providing them with the protection of leadership and guidance they need in order to feel safe and loved.
10/10/14 Babies too close
Germaine Greer has come in for some flak for criticising the Duchess of Cambridge for having another baby ‘too soon’. However, there is sound basis for this criticism. When Princess Mary’s second pregnancy was announced, she came in for public criticism by child development professionals in Denmark because having babies closer together than two years is violating the first infants ‘attachment’ needs.
This argument that it is a woman’s right to determine her own life is one of the problems with feminism because when women’s rights are considered to be paramount, it means subjugating the innate rights of young children. For information on 'attachment' and other developmental emotional needs of children, check out: http://www.selfesteemparenting.com.au
9/9/14 Ectogenesis – alternative to surrogate births
Fifty years ago, the term ‘ectogenesis’ was coined to describe the ability to raise a foetus outside the human body in an
artificial womb - an ‘aquarium filled with amniotic fluid’. The foetus would be bathed in a saline solution infused with nutrients,
and specific hormones added at appropriate stages of development, all computer-controlled – much like hydroponically grown marihuana.
More recently, bioethicists have supported this as a solution for homosexual couples and single men to not have to deal
with the legal hassles and emotional dramas associated with surrogate mothers. The technology already exists and human trials are being held up only by legal and ethical issues. A prediction has been made that the technology will be readily available within twenty years and that by 2074, only thirty percent of births would be ‘human births’.
Hydroponically grown babies does have implications for ‘attachment’ which would normally begin while the infant is still in the
mother’s womb. (Refer discussion on surrogacy 5/9/2014).
Science and technology have developed artificial body parts and organs that function efficiently as mechanical and electronic devices which have saved lives. Hence, male scientists may regard a woman’s womb as just another body part with a mechanical function, merely a biological receptacle providing a biochemical environment of liquid nutrients and hormones. ‘Science’ may believe that it can replicate these functions and regulate them more efficiently than can a human womb. However, the essential component that makes the foetus human cannot be replicated by science – the essential emotional environment of a woman’s womb cannot be replicated, no matter how sophisticated technology becomes. Hence, I suspect that a foetus that develops in the soulless and emotionless environment of an aquarium would be so emotionally deprived that it would lack the capacity to develop attachment with anyone after it is born - ever.
As for the attachment implication if a woman chooses surrogacy or ‘ectogenesis’ for convenience (so as not to interfere with her career or lose her figure) - it seems to me that she lacks commitment to motherhood so attachment is already doomed. As is the long term emotional wellbeing of her child.
Implications for attachment to a surrogate mother certainly would not be an issue for what I refer to as hydroponically grown babies – attachment would be a lifelong non-issue for them. As would be emotional wellbeing – or rather, the lack of.
5/9/14 Surrogacy, ‘attachment’ and emotional security:
Surrogacy has been in the news lately, including a discussion on “Insight”, SBS ONE. Much is being made of the issue of commercialisation and exploitation of surrogates versus altruistic surrogacy. A significant aspect is the emotional cost to those involved. Surrogacy is a blessing for women having reproduction difficulties, but the ‘mother’ can feel excluded and may even feel some jealousy and resentment towards the surrogate, particularly if it is a family member. The surrogate may feel an emotional wrench giving up a baby with whom she has bonded during pregnancy and what is overlooked is the emotional impact on the infant who has begun to develop ‘attachment’ in the womb. Adoptees commonly feel the need to track down and reconnect with their birth mothers. Will this be a future issue for children of surrogate births? And of course, ‘attachment’ does begin in the womb. If it didn’t, then why do fathers talk to the mother’s abdomen and why would mothers send loving thoughts to their developing baby? On the “Insight” discussion, an altruistic surrogate stated that she deliberately tried to not bond with the baby during the pregnancy. This is an understandable attempt to protect herself from the emotional wrench of giving up the baby. But, what are the implications here if that becomes recommended standard practice for surrogates? What impact does this have on the infant, being denied this emotional bonding? ‘Attachment’ has a lifelong impact on emotional security and wellbeing. So, is emotional deprivation in the womb going to have an adverse impact on the child’s capacity
for ‘attachment’ and future emotional security? 'Attachment' is discussed on the parenting website: http://www.selfesteemparenting.com.au