PT Clinic

09/07/2025

WHEN EGOS COLLIDE
--------------------------
MG LAZARUS
This is a classic example I can narrate from ego issues presented at therapy sessions.

Picture this: A wife who works from home, sitting comfortably on the couch in the living room, intensely concentrating on the laptop. Her husband is on another sofa, relaxing while watching what’s on the TV screen. As evening draws closer and the living room starts dimming, the husband stirs from his seat, presumably to turn on the lights. The wife says, “Could you turn on the lights, please?” Just as he intended to, the man somewhat hesitates, “Why won’t you do it yourself?” he says instead, but turns on the lights himself.

Sounds familiar?
Let’s examine the ego dynamics now.

1. The Grudging Reply (as in the example above): The husband hesitates, annoyance etching his features, “Why can’t you get up and turn the lights on yourself?” he grumbles. Obviously, he doesn’t want to give the impression that he obeys his wife. When he turns on the lights after saying these words, he passes a message that he is doing a favour rather than complying with his wife’s request. In other words, he momentarily feels important by uttering those grudging words, subtly implying that he doesn’t want to feel obedient to his wife but wants to portray himself as a strong male husband.

2. The Positive Shift: what if the husband responded differently? What if he rose without hesitation and switched on the lights? Surprisingly, he would lose something – something very positive: the illusion of external validation! His self-worth would remain intact irrespective of comparison with others (whether it is his wife or even his children). True self-worth transcends external approval in this alternate reality. It’s an inner assessment of value and capability, independent of others’ opinions.

In the power dynamics within marriage, success lies not in defending ego but in embracing genuine self-worth—one that radiates from within, unswayed by external validation. The husband wouldn’t have to prove anything to his wife or children—every man is a man by himself. And he doesn’t need an excellent job, a noble hobby, an Olympiad, or a big car to prove that he is a ‘man’.

20/05/2025

WHEN ACCOUNTABILITY BECOMES ONE-SIDED
(A section from my next book: Bonds and Blessings)
=================================
In some families, a subtle but damaging pattern emerges where accountability is unfairly concentrated on one individual. Often, this person becomes the emotional focal point of the household, absorbing blame, criticism, and scrutiny, while the rest of the family operates without question or self-examination. Though this may not always be intentional, it gradually shifts the emotional and relational balance within the family. This is more than a conflict—this is a structural issue within the system of accountability.

Take, for example, a family I recently met—two accomplished professionals raising three adult children. Over time, the father became the target of ongoing criticism, particularly from the eldest daughter. His past decisions, parenting style, and even tone of voice were put under a magnifying glass. Naturally, his response was to turn inward. He began questioning himself: Where did I go wrong? Were my intentions misread? Have I failed as a father? He started retreating—not from his family physically, but from his role as the emotional anchor. The energy he once gave to guiding and protecting now redirected inward, focused on self-reflection and self-defense.

And while this was happening, something else took shape quietly but significantly. The other family members—perhaps unconsciously—began bypassing their own responsibilities. The children started booking holidays without informing their parents, arriving home late at night, making independent decisions without regard for family consensus. But no one noticed. Why? Because all the attention was still fixed on the father—what he said, how he reacted, what he should have done differently.

This dynamic closely resembles what psychology refers to as scapegoating—a defense mechanism where a group displaces its collective discomfort or conflict onto one individual. By blaming this person, the group avoids confronting deeper or shared issues. Though the father might not fit the classic “identified patient” model as seen in clinical family therapy, the parallels are clear. The focus on his flaws became a diversion from other underlying problems in the family system. As long as he remained under the spotlight, others were, in a sense, emotionally exempt from their own accountability.

Eric Berne, in his seminal work Games People Play, might describe this scenario as a variation of the psychological “game” called Now I’ve Got You, You Son of a B****. In this game, the “target” is set up to fail or be accused, and the moment they slip—no matter how small the mistake—they are harshly confronted. It’s less about the specific action and more about maintaining a moral high ground or justifying one’s frustrations. In the family context, this can become a cyclical pattern where the person under scrutiny constantly apologizes, adjusts, and self-corrects—yet nothing is ever quite enough to appease the unspoken tension.

This one-sided accountability distorts the relational fabric of the home. It denies others the chance to reflect on their own behavior. It also places an emotional burden on the “target,” who must manage not only their perceived faults but also carry the discomfort that others are unwilling to own. And when the person under pressure is the father figure—traditionally seen as the stabilizer or boundary-setter—the system falters even more. The family is left without a compass, not because the father abandoned his role, but because he was gradually pushed out of it.

True accountability in families is shared. It calls each member to look inward, to examine how their words and actions impact the collective. When it becomes lopsided, the family loses its balance. Healthy families cultivate spaces where reflection is mutual, not weaponized. They resist the temptation to reduce complex issues to one convenient “culprit.” Instead, they seek restoration, not blame—conversation, not confrontation.

29/12/2024

Why crisis intervention is not the answer?
============================

I’m seeing an increase in crisis intervention calls. Families receive this quick fix and feel like, well, all is good, and that they have a path to a peaceful life, so they often don’t seek further therapy.

Here’s one very common situation: a family affair escalates into a major dispute. A friend or relative intervenes — that’s crisis intervention. It acts quickly to cool everybody down and prevent things from escalating at that moment.

But the real issue is that this type of help doesn’t address the underlying problems. It’s like putting a bandage on a deep wound—you may cover it up and stop the bleeding, but you won’t actually heal what caused the cut in the first place.

After the immediate fight is over, families may feel as though all is well. However, if the underlying problems are not addressed, the same issues typically return.

What should be done next? It’s a big deal to see beyond the quick fix. That’s where therapy is super helpful. It helps families understand why they’re arguing, have better conversations, and find less-wild ways to resolve disputes. This will help address the roots of the issues, what family members are doing, their traits, and some coping patterns.

Crisis intervention is great for immediate issues, but it’s only a starting point. To achieve real and lasting peace, you often need continued work—and, at times, even professional help—to resolve family conflicts. Therapy not only allows us to de-escalate the situation but also to learn to understand each other better and fortify our family ties.

03/12/2024

People-pleasing behaviors are difficult to change because they often arise from automatic, unhelpful thoughts, a process known as cognitive chaining. These thoughts can become ingrained, influencing our self-perception, relationships, and even our sense of self-worth.

Let me clarify in simple terms. See the following thoughts:

If I say no, they’ll be disappointed in me.
If I don’t agree, they might take it personally or think I don’t care.
I should go along with this to avoid conflict.
If I assert myself, they’ll think I’m difficult to work with.
It’s better to stay quiet than risk upsetting someone.
It is easier to just go along than to stir up any trouble.

Sounds familiar? Then, you’re likely dealing with thought distortions.

//From my new book 'Break Free to Own Your Space,' Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DNJ4RXPF //

30/09/2024

Book is available in St Oliver's, St. Mary's and Ss. Peter & Paul's parish shops.
Online markets: Amazon, Apple, and Google Books.

06/07/2024

HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND?
=======================
How do you typically respond when someone cuts in line in front of you?
When asked how they typically respond to someone cutting in line, people’s answers can vary widely depending on their personalities, cultural background, and how assertive they feel. Here are a few possible answers people might give in real life to this reflective question:
1. Avoidance: “I usually don't say anything because I want to avoid confrontation. It's not worth the hassle.”
2. Passive Aggression: “I might sigh loudly or make a sarcastic comment loud enough for them to hear, but I won't directly confront them.”
3. Direct and Polite: “I usually tap them on the shoulder and politely let them know there’s a line that they skipped.”
4. Assertive: “I calmly explain that we’ve all been waiting in line and ask them to join at the back.”
5. Aggressive: “I tell them off right there and make sure they know it’s not okay to cut in line.”
6. Indifference: “It doesn’t really bother me. I just let it go because there are more important things to worry about.”
7. Humor: “I might crack a joke about it to lighten the mood, but I’ll make sure the message is clear that they need to go to the back.”
Which one is yours?
(From my book 'Do You Say YES When You Want To Say NO?' Available on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0D5LVYDT8)
MG Lazarus

16/05/2024

Distinguishing Between Assertiveness, Aggressiveness, and Passivity
1. Assertive Communication: You advocate for yourself while considering others' viewpoints. Example: “I understand your point, and here’s another perspective.”
2. Aggressive Communication: You push your agenda irrespective of others' feelings. Example: “This is the only correct way!”
3. Passive Communication: You suppress your own needs and desires. Example: Staying silent even when you disagree.

(From my recently published book on Assertiveness available on Amazon and Google Books)

Do You Say YES When You Want to Say NO?: Learn the art of assertiveness Step by Step

02/05/2024

09/03/2024

Are you an Authoritarian Parent?
======================

They are often characterised by high demands and low responsiveness. They have strict rules and expectations, and their approach is more about obedience and discipline than nurturing. Communication is often one-way (from parent to child), and they may employ punitive measures to enforce rules.

Here are some of the effects of authoritarian parenting:

1. Poor Social Skills: This is because children have fewer opportunities to interact freely with peers and develop social skills through unstructured play. They might also adopt a submissive posture in social settings, as they are used to obeying without questioning authority.

2. Low Self-Esteem: Frequent criticism associated with authoritarian parenting can lead to low self-esteem. They may feel that they are never "good enough" to meet their parents' high expectations.

3. Increased Anxiety and Depression: The pressure to perform and conform to strict rules without room for error can result in higher levels of anxiety and depression. The lack of emotional warmth and support exacerbates these feelings, making it harder for children to cope with stress.

4. Behavioural Problems: While authoritarian parenting might result in outward compliance, it can also lead to internalised anger and resentment. This can manifest as behavioural problems in other settings, like school, where the child might act out as a means of asserting some form of control over their environment.

5. Reduced Independence and Creativity: These parents will discourage open dialogue and critical thinking, which can stifle a child's ability to think independently and creatively. Children might become dependent on external validation and guidance and, thus, will struggle to make decisions or solve problems on their own.

6. Emotional Intelligence: These children might also struggle with empathizing with others. This is due to the limited emotional support and guidance they receive from their parents.

Other consequences may include poor academic performance (some children may show high academic achievements due to strict study time rules, pressure, etc., but still at the cost of all other negative consequences), mental health problems like conduct disorder, lack of empathy, etc.
It's important to note that these consequences can vary widely among individuals, and factors such as temperament, social support systems, and other environmental factors can influence outcomes.

MG Lazarus

07/03/2024

Can a therapist provide counselling to his family or friends?
=======================================

I had this painful experience more than a few times. In fact, I already lost a few friendships due to this psychological dilemma. When I am requested to intervene in family conflicts with my extended family or close friends, I find it hard to say 'no' because they expect that my therapeutic skills must be beneficial to my family and friends in the first place. There's nothing wrong with such expectation, though. However, there is a catch, let me explain.

A two-person relationship under stress might involve a third person to stabilise the relationship or reduce tension, thereby creating a triangle. Here, the therapist must be external to the conflict, helping him/her to limit his/her emotional involvement so as to stay within the professional and ethical boundaries and thus to completely focus on the expressed concerns. However, when I attempt to intervene, though I try my best to stay focused on the issues rather than the persons involved, the affected parties deviate their focus from the issues to my 'suspected bias.' The focus will be on whose side I am rather than what the real problem is. In this way, I become the subject matter rather than their presented concerns. This complete shift in focus will turn the camera lens away from the issues and start focusing on me! Dr. Murray Bowen terms it 'Triangulation.'

So, if a family or friend asks me to get involved in their family affairs, I must alert them to the risk of Triangulation and ask if they still insist on me getting involved. When my integrity is in question, it is better to make onward referrals rather than continue further sessions with this family.

If you want to know what Triangulation theory is, let me summarise it here: Triangulation in therapy refers to involving a third party in relationship issues, potentially creating bias and altering the dynamics. When therapists engage with those they have personal relationships with, their objectivity and professional boundaries can be misinterpreted, making it challenging to provide effective, unbiased support. This can also strain the personal relationship (happened to me!), as the roles of therapist and family member or friend conflict, leading to issues in trust and communication within the therapeutic setting.

MG Lazarus
https://www.proventherapy.com/

06/03/2024

“She needs therapy” – “He needs therapy” – Who needs therapy then?

It is a feature that I frequently witness couples pointing fingers at each other when they attend therapy. Recognizing that this cycle of finger-pointing often leads them to seek help is crucial. Therapy is about healing the relationship, not just 'repairing' one partner. Both individuals are part of the equation, aiming to enhance their marriage and family life. The journey begins by shifting the focus from individual mistakes to a united effort to strengthen their bond. This adjustment in perspective is essential for addressing and resolving the complexities of their relationship dynamics.

MG Lazarus