Yellow Flag for Social Emotional Learning – Takeaways from Bad Therapy by Abigail Shrier

SKIP TO: My Key Takeaways from Bad Therapy

SKIP TO: Action Items for Parents

You can buy the book HERE.

Parents with school-age children and anyone else teaching emotional management skills to children directly or in coordination with a counselor.

Yes. This book challenged my initial belief that emotional social learning taught in schools was probably harmless and likely beneficial. One of my primary takeaways from Bad Therapy was that some techniques that are currently in-vogue for parents and teachers to teach emotional skills (i.e., “social emotional learning”) are counterproductive: specifically, encouraging children to focus regularly on their current mental states, closely monitoring children for signs of emotional distress, and making accommodations for children who may be struggling emotionally by lowering their performance benchmarks.

In Shrier’s view, these “therapeutic techniques” are contributing to the youth mental health crisis we are currently seeing play out. She argues that children are typically resilient and benefit from facing challenges, seeing that adults believe they can perform despite emotional turmoil, and learning that they can overcome that turmoil. These benefits are only available if adults permit children to take measured risks. In other words, attempting to teach all children emotional regulation proactively via therapeutic techniques that were developed to address disorders (introspection, discussion, adjusting the environment for the child) is not working, and may in fact be harmful.

Before I read Bad Therapy, I had heard that schools were starting to teach “Emotional Social Learning.” I had some uncertainty from my own upbringing regarding whether schools should be involved in teaching this non-academic subject. (The controversy of my childhood days was sex ed.) But, otherwise, I didn’t have any objections. It seemed like teaching kids to regulate their emotions better could only be a good thing. However, one of the primary takeaways from Bad Therapy is that emotional social learning, as actually taught, does not succeed in teaching good emotional skills.

A key reason emotional social learning fails is that it proceeds from the foundation that teaches children that their emotional states are extremely important. It does this in several ways.

Fixation on Emotional States

First, emotional social learning encourages children to fixate on their emotional states. When I (a millennial) was growing up, we often started our school days by writing down a goal. Today, it is apparently common for teachers to start the day by asking students to share how they are feeling. This sets the tone for the day and encourages children to share sometimes private feelings in a public forum for the edification of the class. Teachers may also ask them to assess their feelings at other times during the school day.

Shrier discusses how happiness is a relatively infrequent human emotion. Therefore, encouraging children to introspect this way sets them up to wonder why they don’t feel happy, and then to wonder what is wrong with them. Focusing on tasks ahead, an “action orientation,” is more likely to result in accomplishments. Focusing on making and achieving goals is more likely to lead children to short and long term satisfaction and happiness.

Shrier’s perspective on how encouraging children to introspect may actually be harmful was one of the surprising takeaways from Bad Therapy. It is surprising because so many parenting books advocate for parents to teach children to consider and parse their emotions. Presumably, the theory is that once they understand what they are feeling, kids can better control their emotions. Shrier suggests that the reverse may be true.

Constant Surveillance

Second, by closely monitoring children and adjusting the environment to their needs, we may be increasing children’s anxiety. Pushing deadlines, bumping up grades, and/or agreeing not to call on a nervous student teaches a child that the adults believe she is unable to perform. Making these environmental adjustments ignores that struggling students may actually benefit from consistent expectations. This includes feeling pressure from adults to perform, receiving encouragement to focus on tasks ahead rather than dwelling on negative emotions, especially in the classroom.

Emotional Validation

Finally, many books encourage a parent to help a child to assess her current emotional state. The parent must then always validate the emotions. But this runs the risk of teaching children that a “deeply imperfect signal” (emotions) is always valid, and that everyone around them should heed to it. We should remind children that feelings do not always reflect an accurate picture of reality – rather, while feelings can be a useful tool, it is important not to take them at face value, because they can be unstable, shifting, and open to manipulation. They should learn to scrutinize their feelings before acting on them or requesting that others do so.

Shrier notes a trend where parents increasingly bring in a therapist to evaluate and talk to a child before that child demonstrates signs of emotional disfunction. For example, she mentions a child who started seeing a therapist to process the death of the family cat and a mom who put a psychologist on retainer for her teen daughters so they could discuss issues they didn’t want to raise with their mom with the therapist.

Treatments powerful enough to heal are powerful enough to harm

Many parents do not realize that therapy has risks. This makes some sense: any treatment that is potent enough to provide a cure is also potent enough to cause harm and make a patient worse off. (See, for example, this article from Psychology Today or this article from the British Psychological Society.) Shrier cites that harmful results may occur in as many as 20% of cases. She notes that therapy can hijack our normal processes for coping, and a therapist may inadvertently cause the patient to view himself or herself as sick and unable to cope independently, to blame other family members and undermine the stability of those relationships, and/or to affirm the cause of a patient’s anxiety and increase stress.

The power dynamics

Further, parents need to recognize the power dynamic between child and therapist. Adults are natural authority figures, and children may not have the perspective to dispute a therapist’s views or interpretations of events where appropriate. A child cannot end therapy if she thinks it is not helpful. This decision is in the hands of parents who are typically not privy to the therapy sessions. Parents place a lot of faith in therapists. They typically do this on the basis that the therapist is a professional. However, the parent typically does not know all that much about therapist other than her credentials. Parents shoudl remember that the therapist is not ultimately responsible for the child.

Opportunity costs

One justification for introducing a therapist preventatively is that a therapist is likely to offer a child better advice than a peer might. However, parents also ought to consider the impact of an ongoing therapeutic relationship on the child’s friendships.

Shrier notes an interesting trend from her conversations with teens about their friends. While teens were keenly aware of their friends’ diagnoses, they often did not know the specifics surrounding their emotional struggles. Why risk intimacy with a friend who may reject you or gossip about you when you can talk to your therapist instead? In other words, an unanticipated side effect of the therapeutic relationship may be that a child passes over opportunities to form deep the lifelong bonds with friends that develop when children share their private adversities and find support in their friends.

In addition, although not highlighted in the book, the child may miss the opportunity to discover her friend’s own struggles, gaining insight into that friend, and taking her own turn to offer emotional support. The result of these missed opportunities may be isolation, fixation on oneself, and more superficial relationships with peers.

In short, another of the takeaways from Bad Therapy is that parents ought to be cautious and vigilant when putting kids in therapy. Parents should consider whether the child’s need for therapy outweighs the risks of an intervention. For children who would benefit from therapy, Shrier notes that in many cases it may be beneficial for parents to receive the therapy. Parents are in a better position to implement treatment with the child on a daily basis than a therapist in a weekly session. In addition, the parents may be inadvertently contributing to a child’s issues.

Another of my takeaways from Bad Therapy was to consider what parenting style one is truly embracing. Shrier discusses studies conducted by Diana Baumrind in the 1960s which classified three styles of parenting: permissive, authoritative, and authoritarian.

Parenting Styles

Permissive parents avoid punishment, involve children in family decisions, make few demands on their children, and are very affirming of the child’s emotions and behavior. These parents tend to view themselves primarily as resources for their children.

Authoritarian parents aim to shape, control and evaluate their children’s behavior using absolute standards and focus on obedience and strict enforcement of rules. Rules are not open to discussion.

Authoritative parents fall between the two extremes: providing structure but also warmth and a willingness to consider the child’s point of view. These parents encourage a give and take, but ultimately take charge where parent and child views conflict.

Baumrind found that this middle-of-the-road, authoritative parenting style tended to produce the happiest kids – successful, independent, self-reliant, and less likely to suffer from anxiety or depression.

Gentle Parenting

Many parenting books today advocate for a therapeutic, gentle-parenting style that Shrier thinks is best classified as permissive parenting. These experts recommend involving children in family decisions. They do not advocate for enforcing clear rules and boundaries. Rather, parents are on equal footing with their children and should see their role as being a resource to the children. They encourage parents to protect their children from emotional harm by naming and validating the child’s emotions and talking about them. Punishments are off the table, as they may simply encourage a child to engage in revenge fantasies.

The books help parents avoid conflict with their children by advocating for involving the child in negotiation with the parent. There is no bright line enforcement of the parents’ rules. Another one of the key takeaways from Bad Therapy is how, as a result of this (permissive) parenting style, these children may not learn to control their behavior. Importantly, they then become anxious because no one is clearly in charge. This leads to much worse long term outcomes for the child.

Many parents eventually reach the stage where they cannot convince their children to ditch an undesirable behavior. They tend to think that something must be wrong with the child to prevent him from complying. This necessitates a psychological evaluation and intervention. They take the misbehaving or otherwise struggling child to a psychologist for a diagnosis. The parents abdicate their authority further and rely on the expert for guidance. They treat the child’s behavior with therapy and a diagnosis, determining accommodations for home and school, and sometimes medications. Meanwhile, the child learns to identify with her diagnosis and believes she is impaired.

Authoritative parents

On the other hand, authoritative parents impose clear boundaries and consequences. This reassures the child that parents are in control and tells the child that he can change his problematic behavior. Shrier makes the point that it is not relevant whether a child engages in revenge fantasies while in time out. What is important is that the child learns that there are rules and that certain behavior is off-limits. For many children, the warm reassurance of a kind-but-firm, boundary-setting authoritative parenting approach may be enough to halt bad behaviors. This means there is no mental health intervention and diagnosis, and no lifetime of therapy and/or medication.

Importance of a solid parent-child relationship

On this note, while not so much one of the takeaways from Bad Therapy, I appreciated the discussion regarding the potential ways in which schools, counselors, and psychologists may unintentionally undermine the parent-child relationship. This is detrimental to the child, who feels less secure in a key relationship which provides strength and security. This may occur via a therapeutic relationship or an informal counseling relationship. It may also occur when schools introduce leading questions that suggest that parents may not be meeting a child’s emotional needs via surveys.

As an example, Shrier points to an elementary school survey in Colorado. The survey asked kids to evaluate following statements:

“My parents notice when I do a good job and let me know; I can tell my parents how I feel about things; I usually eat dinner with  my family; I like to do things with my family; I feel close with my family; I spend time with my family doing things like shopping, playing sports, or working on school projects; Important people in my life often let me down.”

Based on the above takeaways from Bad Therapy, below are three action items.

It may sound great that schools are focusing on children’s emotional health. However, one of my primary takeaways from Bad Therapy was that it is vitally important to ask schools questions regarding how, specifically, they teach emotional skills. Do they encourage children to introspect on their feelings regularly? Would children share their feelings privately or with an entire classroom? Do the schools encourage children to perform in spite of emotional distress or do they routinely step down expectations? What kinds of risks do they encourage the children to take? What is the phone usage policy at the school?

At the start of the school year, consider asking the school what types of state or federal surveys will be provided to the students.

Surveys

Shrier spends some time discussing how the types of questions asked and the manner in which they are asked (numerous questions about suicide, sex, substance abuse, etc.) may have the effect of giving children the impression that certain behaviors are widespread – thereby potentially increasing the likelihood of children engaging in those behaviors. For instance, it is well documented that suicides and self-harm can be contagious among teens. Shrier cites a CDC report that notes that risks of suicide are increased where talk of suicide is excessive or repetitive, where suicide is presented as a means of coping, and details of the methods are provided, and she notes that some of the surveys ask questions that may cross into this territory.

The CDC provides surveys as part of its Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) to be administered to children in schools. Shrier notes that these surveys commonly provide schools with justification to obtain additional funding for psychological services in schools. The survey questions for high school and middle school students can be found on the CDC website for the YRBSS (see link above).

Parent Rights

The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment requires state education agencies, local education agencies, or any recipient of U.S. Department of Education funds to permit parents of minors the right to opt out of surveys addressing the following topics:

1. political affiliations or beliefs of the student or the student’s parent;
2. mental or psychological problems of the student or the student’s family;
3. sex behavior or attitudes;
4. illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, or demeaning behavior;
5. critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships;
6. legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers;
7. religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or student’s parent; or
8. income (other than that required by law to determine eligibility for participation in a program or for receiving financial assistance under such program).

A key point to remember is that although parents can often opt out of these surveys, the method of opting out may vary by state. In some states, consent may be presumed. The website for Parents Defending Education provides some additional information regarding opting out of Social Emotional Learning and relevant surveys. They note that this right may be preserved when schools send parents a scant 24-hour notice, which may be buried in an email addressing a number of other topics. Therefore, the point here is to ask the school preemptively regarding any surveys that will be administered if you are concerned.

Shrier notes that a child’s responses in the classroom when asked about his or her feelings during “emotional social learning” sessions may be memorialized in a teacher’s notes. Because schools are increasingly using software to track student records, one teacher’s notes may trail the child for years as she rises through the school system. For instance, Panorama is a popular provider of this software. Panorama’s New York website states that it “offers a comprehensive, actionable view of every student in one system” including social-emotional learning (SEL), where schools can “Enhance SEL with assessments, check-ins, and interventions.” Parents have the right to obtain copies of these records and request corrections (but not require corrections) under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act until the child turns 18 or attends school beyond high school.

I had many practical takeaways from Bad Therapy, and it opened the door to my curiosity regarding how schools are in practice teaching emotional social learning. However, the book relies heavily on anecdotes, which makes it difficult to determine how cherry-picked the examples are, how widespread the problems are, and what the typical situation for a child is likely to be. The book clearly comes into the conversation with an argument to make. Therefore, there is not a lot of nuance. For instance, although the book has numerous citations, there is no in-depth discussion of the studies it cites or evaluation of conflicting studies. To be fair, that would make this a very different book, so I don’t think this is necessarily a flaw.

There was a brief discussion regarding the downsides of teaching an empathy-based moral framework over a rules-based moral framework. The concern is that one can only feel empathy for a handful of individuals at a time. Further, empathy is highly manipulable, enabling unfairness and even cruelty for members of the out-group. The book references Paul Bloom’s book, Against Empathy, as a source for this concern – I am putting it on my reading list.

Another book that Shrier mentions is Hunt, Gather, Parent: What Ancient Cultures Can Teach Us About the Lost Art of Raising Happy, Helpful Little Humans, by Michaeleen Doucleff. The author gave up on gentle parenting and decided to study how other cultures raise their children. She found that imposing boundaries and granting children permission to take risks in resulted in happier parents and more independent, well-adjusted children. Another one for the reading list.

Shrier mentions the parenting books How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk & Raising Your Spirited Child as examples of books that advocate a therapeutic approach. She tags The Whole-Brain Child as a book that suggests parent are morons (see my notes on this book, HERE).

Shrier discusses the book Good Reasons for Bad Feelings, by Randy Nesse. The book provides evolutionary explanations for anxiety and depression. It takes the position that these emotional states are not necessarily bad – they evolved over time to serve some useful purpose.

---

Disclaimer: This post is part of a series of practical takeaways on books that influence how I parent. The below reflects my interpretations and takeaways from Bad Therapy: Why the Kids Aren’t Growing Up by Abigail Shrier. My interpretations may not reflect the author’s views. If you are interested in reading more in-depth on the topics addressed below, I encourage you to buy the book!

Please also note that this blog contains affiliate links. So, if you purchase a book through one of the Amazon links, I may earn a small commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting this project!