My Toy is Broken and So Am I!

Dr. Albert Ellis uses the term ‘upsetness’ to describe a persons’ emotional discomfort when something unwanted has occurred. He says the intensity of the person’s ‘upsetness’ is not caused directly by the event or happening itself. Of course the event has a bearing on the emotional and behavioural outcome but that’s not the whole story.

Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of REBT

A young 7 year old student at my school was out of sorts; crying and quite inconsolable. After a while when he had gathered himself a little, we began to chat about what had happened. His favourite squishy toy had a small puncture and it was oozing its white fluid contents.

He clearly saw this as a significant unwanted occurrence that initially triggered extreme emotional discomfort. Why did he feel as he did? Or more specifically why was his emotional response to the situation so extreme?

Firstly, why is the child’s emotional response considered extreme? We can agree that the child was feeling upset but perhaps that may not best describe the intensity of his upset. A word that comes to mind is ‘distraught’ to describe his emotional state and this would register pretty high up on the emotional thermometer, where upset might rate lower.

The Emotional Thermometer

To feel annoyed or upset is, according to REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy), a healthy negative emotion in that it doesn’t render the person incapable of going about their daily business. The situation would be deemed a minor inconvenience rather the catastrophe it appears to be in this case. Distraught, conversely, is regarded as an unhealthy negative emotion in that the person experiencing it may be disabled for a while; so upset they can’t go about the normal day to day things they would ordinarily be doing.

So why ‘distraught’ and not ‘upset?’ REBT describes a habit of thinking called ‘catastrophising’, where the person believes that what has happened is indeed a catastrophe; the worst thing that can ever happen! This is true for this young child, as at that moment in time he believes that the fact his squishy toy is broken is so awful a happening that he cannot abide the reality (to him) that it has happened.

Dr. Ellis explains when a person has constructed a belief that ‘things must always be as I want them to be’ and that it’s ‘not fair when they don’t and that it’s the worst thing that could ever happen!’ they will find themselves feeling distraught rather than upset when things go awry. Indeed, it may be so bad and awful (awfulising) that it cannot be tolerated (Icantstandititis!). It may be or become a characteristic of that person’s general disposition; something peculiar to him.

Ellis believed we are the architects of our own misery or happiness because we construct the beliefs that underlie our emotional and behavioural dispositions. If it is that this young child is constructing a self-defeating belief like ‘things must always be as I want them to be’ how can this be addressed? What can the educator, carer, counsellor do?

Constructivism

If we accept that our young students’ emotional and behavioural responses to unwanted events is due to his developing (in construction) beliefs about how the world ‘should’ work then we may be able to help him deconstruct and rework those ideas and perspectives to accommodate a more rational world view.

After the young person had gathered himself we talked about the possibility that even though his broken toy constituted a major disruption to his life, could he help himself feel better now and if other ‘bad’ things happen again?

• v  We established that what happened was true (a fact) i.e. his toy was broken.
• v  We agreed that we both thought the toy was broken and that others would also agree with us.
• v  We talked about what he thought about what happened and decided that this was not true for everyone; not a fact, because different people would think differently about it.
• v  We talked about other bad things that can possibly happen e.g. hurting his leg, his dog falling ill etc. and we constructed a list of possible problems. We constructed a catastrophe scale.
• v  We talked about where the broken toy event fits in the scale and we agreed that it registered far below other more serious possible happenings.
• v  We agreed that his broken toy event was not the worst thing that could happen and it wasn’t a catastrophe.

We wrote down old thinking and new thinking as follows:

• v  Old thinking: ‘My toy is broken and it is the worst thing that can ever happen. It shouldn’t have happened and I can’t stand it.’
• v  New thinking: ‘My toy is broken but there are other worse things that can happen. This is not the worst thing can ever happen and I can stand it’ (I accept it has happened).

Old thinking: Distraught. New thinking: Upset

The young person would have to work on himself because his default position is ‘things must be the way I want them to be’ but as time goes by and he works hard to remind himself, the ‘distraught’ emotional events will become rarer as he reconstructs his new, more robust way of thinking and believing! 

When the Shit Hits the Fan - REBT, kids and self regulation

Shit and fans have been part of our vernacular for as long as I can remember. Pear and shaped ditto. These words together help describe colloquially situations that are unwelcome. Pain and arse also come to mind!

What to do when the proverbial hits the wotsit? The amount of the proverbial and size of the fan is significant; how big is the problem? The amount and size is relative to how we may perceive the situation or how we 'estimate' the severity of it! As Marcus Aurelius said: 

“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.” 

Is the problem of catastrophic proportions, pretty big or just a pain? Young children find it useful to learn about the catastrophe scale. This scale helps them see how problems can be arranged in terms of how big/significant they are to the young person. They learn to ask themselves 'is it as bad as..?' If not then this little shift in thinking will have a beneficial payoff i.e. 'this isn't as bad as I initially thought it was and now I feel less angry/sad..'

Learning how to regulate emotional and behavioural responses to situations requires some insight into how thinking is connected to feeling and behaving. Daily teaching of this will help the child develop a habit of stopping, establishing how she feels at a particular moment and then to ask 'what am I thinking/what am I telling myself about this problem? (what is my estimate of what's happening?). The child will become well practised in judging the badness of what is happening according to her own constructed catastrophe scale.

Of course in practising this yourself you are also teaching those around you. Your children are always watching you!

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education - dealing with disappointment healthily

There’s two students in the yard (kids 1 and 2). They’re playing one on one basketball. 

A game of one on one

Another person (3) approaches and asks to join in. He’s told as it’s a one on one game so another player isn’t needed. He waits a while and moves on. Another child comes by (4) and asks the same question and the basketball players say it’s a one on one and another player is not required. This is said respectfully and assertively to the third person. The news is not received well. This student (4) goes into a rage and throws their basketball away which ultimately comes to the notice of the teacher on yard duty. Student 4 is asked to sit out and is talked to for his behaviour.

Something happened in the lives of Kid 3 and Kid 4. They were both declined their request to join in the basketball game with 1 and 2. This is called the activating event, situation A.

So A = they didn’t let me join in.

Person 3 Felt OK about this. It (A) probably rated a 2 on the emotional thermometer. A little upset and disappointed perhaps, still in control. No hard feelings. He moved on after a while. No big deal.

Person 4 felt angry. It (A) rated an 8 on the emotional thermometer. It was a big deal. Catastrophic even. He made some average behavioural choices and was taken to task for it.

Did the situation (A) make the children do and feel as they did? If this was the case surely they would feel and act the same way? But we know person 3 was calm and person 4 was angry so A didn’t make their feelings and behaviours. We will call feelings and behaviours C i.e. the emotional and behavioural Consequence of A.

Person 3 said to another student that they didn’t let him join in. They were playing one on one. Three would be too many and that’s OK. This person accepted the situation calmly.

The emotional thermometer

Person 4 said to another student the kids wouldn’t let him join in. They made him angry. It was their fault!

Why the difference? Kid 3 is OK and kid 4 spat the dummy! What’s going on here?

According to REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) theory kids 3 and 4 have constructed contrasting philosophical perspectives. They have different thinking rules. We will call these thinking rules B for beliefs. What are they?

Kid 3 we would speculate has the following philosophical rule:

I don’t always have to get my. It’s rarely a catastrophe when I don’t. I can handle disappointments.

We would say that is a rational/reasonable/helpful/healthy view.

Kid 4 we would suggest according to REBT theory has the following philosophical rule:

I must always get my way. It’s a catastrophe when I don’t. It’s not fair and I can’t stand it!

We would say that is an irrational/unreasonable/unhelpful/unhealthy view.

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education teaches students that thinking feeling and behaving are interconnected and that people’s experience of a situation emotionally and behaviourally is linked to their beliefs; their thinking rules.

According to REBT Kid 3 has the following perspective on life:

A + B = C where he will account for how he feels and behaves not solely as a consequence of A but my thinking B (me) has a lot to do with it.

According to REBT Kid 4 has the following perspective on life:

A=C When A happens IT (A) makes my feelings and behaviours. It's is not my fault!

One kids way of looking at things is healthy and the others is not so.

The ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance was created by Albert Ellis and is a very useful teaching tool.

REBT and Aspergers

The English lingo is replete with idioms that would pose a problem or two to a student with Aspergers Syndrome. Certain turns of phrase would be as clear as muddy water! She would remain none the wiser if you were to ask her to ‘pull your socks up’ or ‘pull your finger out'or 'take a chair!’ Are you with me? She’d be flat out trying to cop on to the message.  How difficult would it be to get a handle on the meaning of a message if it can only be taken literally.

Consider the expressions ‘to get a handle on something’ and ‘turns of phrase’ mentioned above. Somehow we internalise these expressions, which make particular meanings and we draw them out of our linguistic hat and use them in the right place at the right time in the right context (We hope!). But what of the student who has Aspergers Syndrome?  What assumptions can we make about her capacity to understand these culturally specific idioms?

I was once asked to observe a student in the classroom setting as the teacher had some concerns about the child’s behaviour. I asked the student on one occasion ‘is that your paper under the desk there? To which he replied ‘yes it is’ and continued to carry on doing what he was doing. Implied in my words and tone was ‘there’s paper under your desk. I assume it’s yours and will you pick it up?’ I expected that the student would understand this, as most other students would do in my experience. I remember I found this interesting and repeated what I asked before. The result was exactly the same and then it dawned on me (‘to dawn on someone’ – another one!) that this person might be exhibiting characteristics of Aspergers Syndrome.   He understood the literal meaning of what I had said and responded accordingly but had missed the other more subtle meanings conveyed by tone and body language. How much more trouble would this student have dealing with idiomatic terms such as those mentioned above?

As it turned out he was diagnosed eventually as having Aspergers Syndrome.

What can happen if we assume a student ‘should’ know what was being asked of him? He would be reprimanded possibly labeled a naughty so and so who ‘should’ show more respect to his elders! The student would be wondering what’s going on. ‘You asked me if that was my paper under my desk and I answered you. Why am I in trouble?’ And it would escalate from there as mutual misunderstanding prevailed. 

As Karen Horney once said

‘Try to eliminate the word ‘SHOULD’ from your vocabulary … but try doing so though without replacing ‘SHOULD’ with OUGHT or YOU”D better.”

Karen Horney

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education reminds us that when we operate from a ‘shouldist’ perspective we don’t make helpful judgements and we don’t feel our optimum best.  Our ‘behaviour management’ approach to addressing student behaviour is based on such a perspective. All students are the same and they should all know better. Right?

Not true. Someone once said, ‘treating everyone the same is not equality.’

However we continue to persist with this system of warnings, detention, suspension and exclusion. Why is this approach unhelpful to our Aspergers student? What ‘musts’ ‘oughts’ and ‘shoulds’ underpin this one size fits all approach to behaviour (mis)education?

Rational Emotive Behaviour Educators will:

·  Not assume that all students absolutely should behave as the teacher believes they must.

·  Remain calm as they will not demand that they should get something that they know they won’t get (in the short term).

·  Teach students how their thinking feeling and behaviour are linked together.

·  Negotiate learning goals with students to help them develop their competencies.

·  Regard behaviour education as part of the curriculum and not exclusive of it.

Specific to the Asperger child the Rational Emotive Behaviour Educator will:

·  Understand that she will take things literally so teaching about idiom would help or choosing not to use it is an option in some situations.

·  Be explicit, ‘please pick up that paper under your desk?’ rather than ‘is that your paper under the desk?’

·   Help her challenge inflexible ‘must’ expectations e.g. ‘People must always behave as I believe they must’ or ‘things always must be the way I want them to be’ (social stories, change classroom furniture, change the timetable) by exposing the student to subtle and explained changes.

·  Teach her to put the ‘badness’ of situations in perspective, to decatastrophise so she accepts that when she doesn’t get what she believes she must have, she can handle it.

·  Teach her to prefer rather than demand that others/the world should always give her what she wants.

Foreshore, Whyalla, South Australia

Sams Progress – It Ain’t So Awful Sam!

Sam’s teacher has introduced the Emotional Thermometer to the class and the students know now that irrational thinking is hurtful, its makes strong unhealthy emotions and poor behavioural choices. They know its Brain Bully (BB) trying to trick them. BB is saying: ‘I can’t do this! It’s unfair. I’m dumb.’

Teacher: ‘These are not true! Are they children?’

Children: ‘NO THEY’RE NOT!

Teacher: ‘We won’t let Brain Bully win will we?

Children: ‘NO WE WON’T!’

They also know that Brain Friend tells the truth and makes healthy, manageable negative emotions. BF says, ‘this is hard but I can try.’ ‘I’m not dumb if I make a mistake.’ ‘I’m always OK.’

Teacher: ‘These are true! What do you think children?’

Children: Yes they are. We want BF to win! GET LOST BRAIN BULLY!’

This kind of learning is reinforced across all teaching/learning curriculum areas or if you are a parent the same applies at home at every opportunity. The idea is to reinforce the idea that what you think, how you feel and how you act are all related. When our children understand this they will learn to take responsibility for how they feel and behave (young children pick this up very well)

The next item to introduce to children is the idea that when we think something is ‘bad’ and we tell ourselves that it is the worst thing ever we don’t feel so good. We may feel highly anxious or angry or sad (Check the Emotional Thermometer). We may tell ourselves that ‘its so awful that we can’t stand it!’ This is called ‘Icantstandititis!’ a debilitating condition that can be treated by understanding and using the Catastrophe Scale (CS). The CS is a list of possible/actual concerns which are organised according to how ‘bad’ they are. Children will then be able to see at a glance that an itchy nose is not as bad as the earth being blown to bits!

Teacher: ‘I lost my pencil. This is so awful I cant stand it!’

Children: ‘Watch out Brain Bully will make you mad and sad. Don’t let him win!’

Teacher: ‘But I need my pencil. This is terrible!’

Children: ‘Oh oh! Brain Bully is tricking you. This is not a big problem. It isn’t as bad a sore throat. It is a small problem.’

Teacher: ‘You’re right kids I won’t let BB win. Can you help me?’

Children: ‘BF says this is a pain but not a huge problem. Let BF win and get rid of BB!’

Children respond well to this kind of learning and is a preventative mental health measure, teaching them that unhealthy negative emotions are made by irrational thinking (BB). If they know this they can help themselves to regulate how they feel and behave by themselves. This is what Rational Emotive Behaviour Education is all about.

Sam will learn that when she believes small problems are not so bad after all she will be less inclined to anger and will be a happier little person.

Brain Friend and Brain Bully are characters introduced in my program for young learners ‘Have a Go Spaghettio!’

Problems!

Big ones, little ones,

In between ones too

Problems, problems

Whatever can I do?

I can’t find my hat

Wherever can it be

This is so awful

It’s a catastrophe!

It’s not fair

I'm sick in my tummy

I want my hat

It’s not funny!

My friend is sick

And she is sad

Losing my hat

Isn’t so bad

I can handle this

I can change how I feel

I think ‘this isn’t so awful

It isn’t a big deal’

Big ones, little ones

In between ones too

Problems, problems

I know what I can do!

The Universe Don't Give a Shit!

The universe doesn’t care about you, it’s not for or against you, it just doesn’t give a shit. Albert Ellis

There are many quotes that Albert Ellis left us to ponder and this one’s a cracker! You can imagine him talking to the regular Friday night crowd at the (now fake) Albert Ellis Institute. He would demonstrate his ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance to help volunteer clients gain insight into what was causing their emotional and behavioural disturbances. He would listen carefully to his client protest about how unfair this or that was and that if only life wasn’t so hard he could be happy. He would ‘cherchez le should’ listening intently for the tell-tale signs suggesting that his client believed the world owed him easy passage through life. Dr Ellis would challenge the belief that this or that shouldn’t have happened and that life was so unfair! ‘It happened therefore it should have happened. Yes it was unfortunate but not so awful that you can’t stand it! You can’t change what happened but you can change how you think about what happened.’ Ellis would invite his client to examine the veracity of his errant beliefs and to reconsider them in the light of the evidence and to replace them with healthy preferences. As the workshop ended his client would have something to work with on his onward journey, the audience members would leave well informed and heartily entertained and Dr Ellis would retire to his room and no doubt continue to work on his writing assignments! In my role as school counsellor I work with students who believe that life should be easy and that it isn’t fair when they are required to do something they don’t like. How do I know this? Often they will articulate exactly how they feel. ‘That teacher pisses me off because she wants me to do a science experiment with some kids I don’t like.’ He would be according to Albert Ellis unhappily ‘musturbating’, demanding that he must get what he wants. But mostly their behaviour and accompanying anger tell me what they believe, what their philosophy of life is. According to Ellis’ ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance 'it’ doesn’t make the student angry but it's their expectation that they shouldn’t have to do 'it' that causes them grief! It is the false belief, constructed over time and practiced daily that ‘life should be easy and it is awful when it doesn’t give me what I must have!’ Try and tell a student that he or she is making his/her anger and aggression and not the teacher and she will look at you as if you are nuts. I talk often with colleagues about students who draw most on teacher time and school resources in terms of intervention and support. We agree that most of these students blame someone or something for how they feel and behave. We have found Ellis’ REBT to be a very useful tool to help them learn about the link between thinking feeling and behaving through Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. Students learn about the Catastrophe Scale and how often the belief that a problem is bigger than it is relative to others will cause emotional upset not the event or problem itself and that it is not so awful that it cannot be tolerated. They also learn how extreme negative and unhealthy emotions are driven by irrational musturbatory beliefs. At our school we are applying REBT principles in daily practice through Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. We are systematically challenging the errant view that strength of feelings and behaviours are made by other people and events and we teach that it is the individuals own personal irrational philosophical beliefs that determine largely how they feel and act! For those students who blame their teachers, the weather and others for how they feel and act we are using Ellis’ wise advice, that the world doesn’t give a shit about us and it doesn’t owe us anything so we’d better start taking responsibility for our own actions and emotions.

Giulio wrote this!

Strategies for Breaking Approval Dependence (BAD)

You have Serious Approval Dependence (SAD) and you know how you got it! By dint of your biological inheritance and how you were socialised you have constructed the very debilitating core belief that your worth depends on how others view you or how well you perform in your work, study, sex etc. If you have concocted this warped and destructive belief then you can deconstruct it and replace it with USA, Unconditional Self Acceptance. How do you do this? By self-awareness, vigilance and hard work, that’s how!

1. Know how you are feeling.
2. Understand that your feelings and behaviour are connected to your thinking.
3. Identify your habits of believing.
4. Decide whether or not your thinking is helpful, rational.
5. Challenge your beliefs with vigour.
6. Be forever vigilant.

Activating event (A)

You are a member of a parent group at your child’s school and you are generally happy to sit and listen at meetings. There are times when you have been inclined to say something about an issue of interest to you but you always stop yourself from saying what you want to say. You notice how anxious you feel; your heart races and you begin to sweat a little. You stop yourself from commenting as the opportunity goes by, and you castigate yourself for wimping out. Typical you think.

Is this scenario a repeat of many over the years where opportunity has gone begging and been missed, when the nettle was there to be grasped and you chose to avoid it. Is this a case of Serious Approval Dependence (SAD)? You bet it is and it’s nigh time you had a one on one with your enemy YOU!

How do you feel and act (C)?

Strategy one: Identify how you were feeling around the time you wanted to say something and how strong? (8/10 anxious). Determine whether this is a healthy negative emotion or a helpful one – does it help or hinder you achieving what you want? Answer: Not healthy because you didn’t do what you wanted to do, share your ideas with the group.

What are you thinking (B)?

Strategy two: Identify your self-talk at the time, what were you saying to yourself? Answer: ‘if I make a mistake, what would they think of me? My views are not that important, they seem more knowledgeable than me. It would be awful if I sounded confused or hesitant. I couldn’t stand it if they thought badly of me.’ This is irrational as it is stopping you from doing what you want to do.

Challenge your thinking (D)

Strategy three: Identify a particular statement and challenge it’s veracity (start a diary and record how you thought, felt and acted in various situations). Lets consider the statement:

‘I couldn’t stand it if they thought badly of me.’

Q. If they disagreed with my views would that equate to them damning me as a person?

A. No. A particular viewpoint is not ‘me’. I am more than what I say.

Q. If they disagreed with me would it be ‘so awful that I couldn’t stand it!’

A. No. It would hardly be catastrophic that someone would disagree with me. Breaking my leg could possibly be worse but even that is not catastrophic or so awful that I couldn’t stand it.

Q. Must others always agree with me? Should they see things as I do for me to be worthwhile?

A. Of course not. My worth is not at question here; my ideas and views may be but they are not ‘me’.

Q. Do I need others to agree with me for me to be worthwhile?

A. No. My worth is not given to me and cannot be taken away. I can only be worth – less if I believe I absolutely must have the approval of others to be worthwhile. I am worthwhile because I exist not because someone else thinks I am!

Q. What benefits could I gain by risking the disapproval of others?

A. I will see that the sun will rise again and the birds will continue to twitter in the treetops. Those who care for me and approve of me unconditionally will continue to do so. Even if I stumble and stutter I will not drop dead. I can practice my public speaking skills if I choose to do so. I will accept that sometimes I will stuff up because I am human and that’s what humans do.

Q. What will happen if I continue not to risk the disapproval of others?

A. I will perpetuate the mythological belief that somehow others views of me determine my worth. I will continue to practice Serious Approval Dependence and remain a ‘wall flower’ at the ball, waiting for someone to pick me!

Eleanor Roosevelt said

No one can make you feel inferior without your permission.

Don’t give anyone or anything permission to determine whether you are worthwhile or not. You don’t need it, you exist and that’s that!

Sofia's Story

Sofia was new to the country and was vivacious and good humoured. She was an enthusiastic student, who worked hard at her studies and had a wide circle of friends. She had a ready smile and a caring nature, sensitive to the needs of others, a delight to teach.

On many occasions she would accompany me on yard duty and we would talk about things and inevitably the topic of discussion would turn to friendships and her concern about a particular student who did not seem to like her. This student would generally ignore her and chose not to associate with her in the classroom or in the yard. Sofia would become tearful and I would ask why she felt so sad. She said that she didn’t understand why this student didn’t seem to want to be her friend as ‘everyone else liked me, why doesn’t she?’ On another occasion Sofia said she wasn’t happy because this student wasn’t her friend and she would say ‘she makes me sad.’ As an REBTer (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy counsellor) I used some of the strategies I learned from Dr. Albert Ellis (creator of REBT). According to Ellis Sofia was ‘musturbating,’ that is believing that her fellow student ‘must’ like her and that it was so awful (awfulising) that she couldn’t stand it. To add to her sadness Sofia believed that there must be something wrong with her! There must be something about her that the other student didn’t like and that this was all Sofia’s fault!

And so our discussions began to take on a philosophical note. I asked Sofia how this other person ‘made’ her sad. Sofia said that she ‘should’ be my friend and if she was then she could be happy. So I said, ‘you feel sad because she won’t be your friend and that you can only be happy if she becomes your friend.’ Sofia agreed that this was so and this became the basis of our further talks. We talked about a ‘perfect world’ and what that meant. We agreed that it would be nice if everyone we liked liked us in return and that everything we wanted to achieve we achieved. We talked about perfectionism and how it was unrealistic to expect that everything should go our way all the time. We can work hard to get an A+ and fall short, we can try to make friends with others we like but we may not always meet their approval. This is the way the world works. Sofia agreed and could see the wisdom of what we were talking about. So we returned to what Sofia believed, what her philosophy about herself, others and the world was. Sofia understood that her unrealistic oughting, shoulding and musting were making her sadness (‘she should like me’, ‘I must get her approval’, ‘she is bad because she won’t be my friend’, ‘I am unlikeable, I can’t stand this and it’s awful’). This insight was the turning point for Sofia, as she understood that her desire for a perfect world was an unrealistic expectation. I asked her, ‘must other people you like always like you in return?’ ‘Is it awful when you don’t get an A+ for your assignments even when you tried your best?’ ‘Are others bad if they don’t approve of you or like you?’ ‘Are you an unlikeable no good person because she doesn’t approve of you?’ Sofia answered with a resounding ‘NO!’

So we talked about helpful, rational thinking that would be healthier. I asked Sofia to challenge and change some of the errant beliefs she held to be true.

I said, ‘must you always do well and achieve your goals.’ Sofia said, ‘No. It is better to believe that, ‘I will work hard to achieve my goals. I would like to achieve my goals but I don’t always have to.’ Why is this better?’ I asked. ‘It is not realistic to always get what you want. That is not how the world works!’ she said. She added that she would keep trying anyway.

What about the belief that, ‘people you like must like you in return and always approve of you?’ Sofia said, ‘this is not realistic either. People don’t have to like me. They can make their own choices.’

What about the belief, ‘you are unlikeable; you have nothing to like. You are a nerd.’ Sofia said, ‘this is not true. I have other friends. I have many positive qualities so I can’t be worthless or unlikeable!’

So it transpired that Sofia became more comfortable with herself and the world and she could now accommodate and accept that her fellow student did not want to be her friend, that it was OK, that it was disappointing but not awful and she was still OK. She didn’t need her approval at all!

Dr Ellis would say that Sofia’s errant, irrational ‘musturbatory’ philosophical beliefs have been challenged and modified to become more rational (self and other helpful). Thus Sofia is not unhealthily anxious, angry or depressed (unhealthy negative emotions) because she hasn’t got what she wants (to have her fellow class member as a friend). She now tends to be healthily concerned and disappointed (healthy negative emotions) as she would have preferred (and not demanded) to have the friendship and approval of her classmate.

Sofia continued to make progress but she would need the support of her teachers and mentors to reinforce the insights she has made so that she would move beyond intellectual insight onto emotional insight. We will discuss these ideas and more in my next blog entry about Sofia’s progress.

useful links: www.haveagospaghettio.com.au www.debbiejoffeellis.com http://www.rebtresources.info/