The Four Options for any Problem (Linehan, 1993)

Retrieved and edited 06/12/2021 from “Voice of Experience: Three rules for identifying abnormal child sexual behaviors” by Gregory K. Moffatt, a veteran counsellor with more than 30 years experience. If you are a survivor of sexual trauma at any age, I encourage you not to read this article.

From the perspective of Moffatt’s professional experience, childhood sexual behaviours can be grouped into three categories: 1. normal behaviours, 2. behaviours that are not normal but not unusual, and 3. behaviours that are abnormal or statistically rare. For the purpose of this post, I will be replacing the word “normal” with “natural” and/or “common” moving forward.

Rule No. 1: Natural or common sexual behaviours in children are never forced. The exploration is mutual. While one child likely had the idea first, both children must participate freely. This doesn’t mean that two children might willingly agree to engage in abnormal sexual behaviours, however, therefore read the next to rules for clarification.

Rule No. 2: Natural or common sexual behaviours in children are never painful. Children who behave within cultural and developmental norms will stop what they are doing when they realise they have caused pain.

Rule No. 3: Natural or common sexual behaviour in children is never invasive. Natural childhood curiosity does not include inserting objects or one’s own body parts into the cavities of others — anus, vagina, mouth, etc.

I’m unsure why Moffatt didn’t make this a 4th rule – he did add that most of the time, this type of childhood behaviour occurs between children of similar age. It is highly unusual for a young child to sexually engage with a teen without violating one of the three rules above. That behaviour definitely calls for further investigation. And, certainly, any sexual interaction between an adult and a child is cause for mandated reporting.

Not long ago, words like “triggered,” “gaslighting,” “narcissist,” and “neurodivergent” belonged almost exclusively to therapists’ offices and psychology textbooks. Now they’re everywhere; in workplace training sessions, community organisations, TikTok comment sections, and casual conversation between friends over coffee. That shift has brought some genuinely important changes. But it’s also introduced some problems worth taking seriously.

The real wins

It would be unfair to dismiss this cultural shift outright. There are meaningful gains. More people today can identify manipulation, coercive dynamics, and emotional harm than any previous generation. Mental health conversations have been destigmatised in ways that would have been hard to imagine twenty years ago. People who were historically silenced, particularly those from marginalised communities, finally have language that validates their experiences and gives them permission to leave harmful situations. That’s progress

But then there’s “concept creep” (pathologising the ordinary or “diagnostic inflation”)

Psychologists use the term “concept creep” to describe what happens when a word originally defined by strict clinical boundaries starts expanding to cover increasingly ordinary experiences. And that’s precisely what happened with “trauma.”

Clinically, trauma refers to experiences that overwhelm the nervous system i.e., genuine threats to safety, severe harm, events that exceed a person’s capacity to cope. These days, the same word is regularly applied to being disagreed with, having a relationship end, receiving criticism, or simply feeling uncomfortable. Events like relationship breakdowns, job loss, or failure can be genuinely devastating, and for some people, under some circumstances, they absolutely do meet the clinical threshold for trauma. The distinction isn’t really about the type of event. It’s about the impact on the nervous system and the person’s capacity to integrate the experience.

When everything qualifies as trauma, the word stops doing useful work. Worse, it can actually undermine the resilience people need to navigate a genuinely difficult world.

The nervous system problem

Here’s where it gets important. In actual “clinical” trauma, the brain’s threat-response systems activate intensely. Memory processing is disrupted. The body mobilises for survival in ways that can leave lasting marks.

Discomfort is different. It involves real emotional activation, it’s not pleasant, but cognitive flexibility remains available. The capacity to think, reflect, and choose a response is still intact.

When people learn to label ordinary emotional discomfort as trauma activation, the consequences compound. If discomfort feels equivalent to harm, avoidance becomes a logical response. But avoidance prevents the gradual building of tolerance. And without tolerance, the world gets smaller.

Trauma as identity and social currency

In some online communities, there’s an uncomfortable dynamic worth naming: being “highly traumatised,” “chronically triggered,” or “deeply misunderstood” can confer real social benefits — belonging, validation, moral authority, and attention.

This doesn’t mean the experiences aren’t real. But when distress becomes central to someone’s identity, letting go of that distress can start to feel like losing themselves. Recovery, paradoxically, becomes threatening.

The fragility trap

In certain environments, fragility functions as a kind of protection. If I am highly sensitive, others must accommodate me. Challenge becomes inappropriate. Accountability becomes unsafe. The person is shielded, but the cost is enormous.

Resilience, both psychologically and biologically, develops through graded exposure to stress. We become capable through encountering difficulty, not by avoiding it. Systems that never face adaptive pressure weaken over time. This is simply how human development works.

Why this moment matters

Several things are converging right now. Social media algorithms reward extreme emotional narratives. Identity formation increasingly happens in digital spaces that amplify distress. Institutions have frequently overcorrected towards protective language in ways that, whatever their intentions, can inadvertently signal that discomfort is dangerous. And while there’s been important growth in awareness of systemic injustice, the corresponding emphasis on individual agency has sometimes been lost.

We’ve swung from “suppress your emotions entirely” to “your emotions define reality.” Neither extreme serves people well.

Holding the middle ground

What good support actually looks like isn’t dismissing people’s experiences, it’s deepening them. The distinction that matters is between trauma-informed practice and what might be called trauma-indulgent practice.

Trauma-informed means understanding that harm genuinely impacts nervous systems, avoiding shame, recognising power imbalances, and creating safety. It’s grounded and necessary.

Trauma-indulgent means treating all discomfort as harm, reinforcing avoidance, allowing emotional reasoning to override reality, and quietly removing personal responsibility from the picture. It feels compassionate in the moment but tends to leave people worse off over time.

In practice, holding the middle ground means validating what someone feels while gently asking whether something was truly unsafe or simply hard. It means acknowledging difficulty while also reinforcing capacity. It means introducing a reality that doesn’t get much airtime in online spaces — that we can’t always control how those around us speak or behave, but we can build our own tolerance and capacity to regulate.

The question underneath everything

There’s a deeper ethical question running through all of this: are we reducing suffering in the long run, or just distress in the short term?

Protecting people from discomfort today, if it increases fragility tomorrow, is not a kindness. But exposing people to challenge without adequate safety and support risks re-traumatising those with genuine wounds.

The balance isn’t complicated to describe, even if it’s genuinely difficult to hold: safety, combined with graduated exposure, combined with a genuine sense of agency.

Anyone supporting others through difficulty needs a calm nervous system, a high personal tolerance for distress, and the capacity to sit with being perceived as insensitive when holding a difficult but necessary line. Clear values and genuine boundaries aren’t optional extras — they’re the model.

The world remains economically uncertain, socially polarised, and digitally relentless. People will encounter disagreement, rejection, imperfect institutions, and others who handle things badly. Preparing people for a world where everyone is perfectly considerate is not just unrealistic — it’s a disservice.

Managing moderate to intense anxiety often involves a combination of techniques that address both the mind and body. Here are some effective strategies:

1. Breathing Exercises: Practice slow, deep breathing to calm your nervous system. For example, inhale for a count of four, hold for four, and exhale for four.

2. Progressive Muscle Relaxation: Tense and then relax each muscle group in your body, starting from your toes and working upward.

3. Grounding Techniques: Use the 5-4-3-2-1 method to focus on your senses—identify 5 things you see, 4 you feel, 3 you hear, 2 you smell, and 1 you taste.

4. Mindfulness and Meditation: Engage in mindfulness practices to stay present and reduce anxious thoughts. Apps like Headspace or Calm can be helpful.

5. Physical Activity: Exercise, even a short walk, can release endorphins and reduce anxiety levels.

6. Cognitive Behavioural Techniques: Challenge negative thoughts by questioning their validity and replacing them with more balanced perspectives.

7. Healthy Lifestyle Choices: Maintain a consistent sleep schedule, eat nutritious meals, and limit caffeine and alcohol intake.

8. Journaling: Write down your thoughts and feelings to process them and identify triggers.

9. Social Support: Talk to trusted friends, family, or support groups to share your experiences and gain perspective.

10. Professional Help: If anxiety persists, consider seeking therapy or counselling. Techniques like Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) or medication prescribed by a professional can be highly effective.

When traditional strategies don’t seem effective for managing intense, chronic anxiety, there are additional approaches you can explore:

a. Therapeutic Modalities:

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT): Focuses on accepting anxious thoughts rather than fighting them, while committing to actions aligned with your values.

Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT): Combines mindfulness with skills for emotional regulation and distress tolerance.

Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR): Often used for trauma-related anxiety, it helps reprocess distressing memories.

b. Medication:

Anti-anxiety medications or antidepressants may be prescribed by a psychiatrist. These can help manage symptoms when therapy alone isn’t sufficient.

c. Lifestyle Adjustments:

Explore dietary changes, such as reducing sugar and processed foods, which can impact mood and anxiety levels.

Incorporate consistent physical activity tailored to your preferences.

d. Support Groups:

Joining a group for individuals with anxiety can provide a sense of community and shared understanding.

e. Intensive Programs:

Consider enrolling in an intensive outpatient program (IOP) or residential treatment program for anxiety, which offers structured and comprehensive care.

f. Emerging Treatments:

Research into treatments like ketamine therapy or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) shows promise for treatment-resistant anxiety.

g. Alternative Therapies:

Practices like acupuncture, yoga, or tai chi can promote relaxation and reduce anxiety.

Biofeedback and neurofeedback can help you gain control over physiological responses to stress. They are techniques that help individuals gain control over certain physiological and mental processes. Here’s a breakdown:

i. Biofeedback is a mind-body therapy that uses sensors to monitor physiological functions like heart rate, muscle tension, breathing, or skin temperature. The goal is to provide real-time feedback to help individuals learn how to regulate these functions consciously. For example:

Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback: Helps manage stress by teaching control over heart rate.

Muscle Tension Biofeedback: Useful for conditions like chronic pain or tension headaches.

By practicing biofeedback, people can develop skills to manage stress, anxiety, and other health conditions2.

ii. Neurofeedback, a specialised form of biofeedback, focuses on brain activity. It uses electroencephalography (EEG) to monitor brainwaves and provides feedback to help individuals regulate their brain function. For instance:

It can help with conditions like ADHD, anxiety, depression, and PTSD.

During a session, individuals might watch visual cues or listen to sounds that reflect their brainwave activity, learning to adjust their mental state for better focus or relaxation4.

Both techniques are non-invasive and can be effective tools for improving mental and physical well-being.

IMPORTANT NOTE: It’s necessary to consult with a mental health professional or medical doctor to tailor these options to your specific needs.