February 6th, 2011 
jvremec
Personality Problems – Mental Health
Author: Neil Mastellone
Medical theories of personality are numerous. Some theories take an extremely “materialistic” position and dismiss or refuse to consider any subjective psychological factors that cannot be scientifically measured. Other theories are “humanistic.” They stress the importance of free will, individual growth, self-actualization, and getting one’s needs met. The basic flaw in most humanistic theories is the foundational belief that people are innately “good.” That belief and assumption is actually false and leads to many other false beliefs. Prime examples of fundamental false beliefs are that human being is “innately good” or “innately bad.” Holding either false belief about a human being leads to a multitude of even more mistaken assumptions about our humanity. The truth is that every person from conception to death is actually best described as “pure potential.” A person manifests as “good” or “bad” depending on the kind of choices he or she freely makes. Consistent right choices (loving, nurturing, positive, truthful, constructive, lovingly responsible choices) produce a good person. Whereas, consistent wrong choices (selfish, hurtful, abusive, dishonest, destructive, irresponsible choices) will produce a bad person. One of the popular mistaken medical assumptions is that when a person does not get his or her “needs met,” it will result in dysfunction. That idea places the cause of dysfunction outside of the person and his or her personal wrong choices. Inner stability, inner peace, and general well-being depend on a person acting rightly, not selfishly. Every dysfunction has its roots in selfishness, willfulness, and defiance of what is loving, right, true, and lovingly responsible. Every disorder and every disorder’s symptoms essentially are “selfish reactions.” Freud’s psychoanalytic theory is based on a belief that our personalities develop after birth and progress in four specific “sexual stages.” The unsuccessful completion of any of the assumed four sexual stages means that a child becomes “fixated on that particular erogenous zone” and, as a result, will suffer either over or under indulgence once becoming an adult. The sexual stages that Sigmund Freud thought to be “natural stages,” in fact, were selfish reactions and selfish behavior patterns (mostly subconscious) of sexually abused children growing up in incestuous households with a sexually abusive parent or parents. His theorizing seems to be a projection of Freud’s own feelings and experiences, and the feelings and experiences of most of his disturbed patients, who were also likely to have been incest survivors. He took a giant mental leap and wrongly deduced and asserted that these were “natural experiences” and, therefore, supposedly, the experiences of every person. Freud claimed that infants “naturally had sexual desires” and his theory of personality reflects this absurd idea. Any infant or young child with a sexually abusive parent or parents is apt to be “unnaturally aroused” in emotional and sexual ways because of their inappropriate sexual contacts and sexually abusive experiences. Freud’s infant sexuality theory must have been a very fortunate idea for the selfish, perverted rationalizations of sexually abusive parents and pedophiles everywhere. Other prominent psychiatrists have offered after birth progressive stage theories of personality. Again, these theorists misinterpreted the selfish reactions of children to the selfish and abusive choices of their extremely selfish parents, claiming them to be “natural” responses and natural stages of development. This is somewhat understandable because all of us are choosing to be selfish (to varying degrees), and selfish reactions are generally thought to be “natural,” when in fact they are simply “normal reactions.” Many medical professionals consider an abused child’s negative selfish reactions to extremely selfish, controlling, abusive parental choices as “automatic” or “inevitable” responses. This is a serious twisting of reality by medical professionals and theorizers. In truth, the negative effects and selfish reactions are caused by the abused child’s own selfishly reactive choices, which were choices the abused child did not have to make. The abused child, instead of selfishly reacting, could have chosen to do what he or she knew was right. No one doubts that parents’ wrong choices can negatively influence their child’s behavior and set him or her up for destructive reactions. Nonetheless, it is important to underscore that the essential choice of the child to react to a parent in selfish and destructive ways and the responsibility for that wrong always rests with the child. This is a fact demonstrated by the many children who let many of their parents’ inputs and choices (negative or positive) roll off their backs like water rolls off a duck’s back. These children seem to go about being how they choose to be, no matter how their parents are choosing to be. There are also some children (a rare breed) who endeavor to do what they know is right, regardless of how their parents or others in their environment are choosing to be. Research scientists are confirming that unborn babies are extremely sensitive and psychologically aware (clairvoyant), and start reacting while they are still inside the womb. What psychiatrists describe as “periods of egocentrism” is more likely to be “periods of extreme selfish reaction.” Most toddlers and young children are in extreme selfish reaction to the selfish and controlling choices of their parents. Selfish reaction is what accounts for their frequent crankiness, tantrums, resistance, and disobedience. A problematic toddler probably has been selfishly reacting to his or her parents’ selfish attitudes and choices since he or she was a fetus in the womb. After age four, and during early childhood, a child’s reactions generally tend to decrease gradually. The reason for the decrease is that the child now starts spending time away from home and away from parents. Being at school, gives a child large periods of relief from the pressures of his or her selfish, controlling, demanding, and, often, abusive parents. As we become older, if typical, most of us tend to become increasingly selfish and increasingly reactive. This fact is not always obvious because as we mature, we find more subtle and sophisticated ways of hiding our selfish psychological states and negative thoughts and feelings. As a child enters teenage years, many psychiatrists view a person as just beginning to develop an “abstract view of the world.” They wrongly believe that he or she becomes better able to discern real and imagined situations, develop an increased understanding of causes and effects, and start developing theories of his or her own about the world. The truth is that we are able to do many of these mental activities before teenage years, some of them as early as fetuses inside the womb. When children or teens fail to mature psychologically, it is not the result of “lower intelligence,” nor does it develop from being “stuck” in an alleged and sexual or social stage. More likely, an unhealthy personality and the lack of psychological maturity relates to the selfish reactions of children and teenager’s. Again, the reactions fundamentally relate to the wrong, controlling, hurtful, and abusive choices of their extremely selfish, controlling, unloving parents. “Consistency” is thought to be a major factor that affects a child’s ability to trust others. However, consistency is not the essential criterion for trust. Trust depends on consistent loving, honest, and lovingly responsible interaction. A child’s trust depends on unselfish and nurturing parental interactions that are consistent and caring. When these factors are lacking, distrust and trust issues develop. Trust issues can appear before birth, especially when parents subconsciously mentally and emotionally reject their baby. Some medical views of personality development contend that children do not start asserting their independence until they reach age one or three. An unborn baby gains a sense of being “a separate self” during womb life. As a matter of fact, scientific studies have confirmed that a six-month old fetus is as psychologically developed as a one-year old infant. Another erroneous psychiatric idea is that low self-esteem, shame, and guilt result from a parent’s choices in relation to a child. Low self-esteem, shame, and guilt are psychological conditions that are the direct result of a child’s own willful, defiant, choices to consistently and selfishly defy what he or she knows is right. A selfish parent’s wrong choices can incite a child’s selfish reaction, but it is the child’s own freely made choice to react and act in destructive ways that makes the child fully responsible for his or her actions. Shame is a feeling that stems from a fear that others might find out about a person’s wrong choices and negative experiences, especially, those experiences of a sexual nature involving parents and/or family members. Guilt is a natural effect of a person’s wrong, selfish, unloving, dishonest, irresponsible choices. Guilt does not result from parental criticism or parental control. Guilt is a disturbing sensation that appears to be a natural warning mechanism that alerts us to the fact that we have just made a wrong choicea”a choice against what is loving, true, right, and lovingly responsible. At any age, were a person to remain centered in what he or she knew was loving, right, and true, and resist selfishly reacting to the negative choices of parents or others, that person’s positive choices would not manifest as a personality problem or any other negative psychological defect. [] For more information about Neil’s groundbreaking book “Roots of Dysfunction–Understanding Mental, Emotional, Behavioral, and Sexual Disorders” visit: Link Title
About the Author
Neil directs a 30-year independent research project, assisted by his co-researcher Jean Mastellone, a gifted clairvoyant.
Together, they have amassed a wealth of groundbreaking information about the true causes of negative human behavior and dysfunctional experience.
Neil writes extensively about topics of current interest such as human nature, the subconscious, selfishness, babies and parents, positive parenting, incest, homosexuality, child disorders, teen disorders, adult disorders, substance abuse, violence, abortion, and religion and spirituality.
Many of Neil’s research findings and insights challenge popular medical views and treatments. He and Jean’s work offer new ways of looking at common mental, emotional, behavioral, and sexual disorders.
He has authored several books that are currently available as eBooks and will soon be available in print.
In total, Neil and Jean plan to publish 50 research project related books. []
Posted in 
Tags: 
how can a single parent (mom) develop all rounding personality in the children?
being single parents how can i
1. develop their study habbits.
2. stop them watching t.v. all the time
3. develop good habbits which are easily possible.
4. good healthy eating habbits
5. development in general knowledge.
6. develop sport habbits
7. develop their carrier in education
actually, recently a week ago i became single parents anyhow it is my personal problem. i want my 3 kids age 17,14 and 10 years should be the best kids in the world and i must be the best mom.
my personal problems/incident should not suffer their life and boldly i must face them.
suggest sites, if possible.
and help ?
Structure is the key to raising children. Whether they admit it or not, they crave it.
Create a routine for them. Plan some events that will stimulate the mind. You may have to do separate things with each of them, due to the age difference. For instance the 10 year old may enjoy the zoo or children’s museum. The 14 year old may enjoy the wax museum and volunteering. The 17 year old will want you to back off a bit, because he/she is growing up becoming an adult. He/she may enjoy going to dinner, and a brief visit to the local historical museum or museum of art, or local college campus, for instance.
There are plenty of things for you to do together with them, such as pizza, ice cream, boating, skiing, swimming community sports.
If you plan to travel, you will need to do it quick, before the 17 year old stops ever wanting to go places with you. The 17 year old is ready to spread the wings, but will come back shortly, when he/she realizes how much you mean to them.
As far as health, place fruit instead of junk food snacks out on the table. Have raw veggies cut and washed for them to grab. Do not keep pop in the refrigerator. Keep fruit juices and milk in there.
Notice what they are good at, and try to find career ideas for them. You can get info online or write for info to discuss with them, especially the 17 year old. He/She should already be aware of what he/she wants to do with their life, or at least what interests them the most.
Hobbies are always fun to keep them from just sitting in front of the TV alll of the time. Get each involved in something relating to their age and interest.
The most important thing you can do for them is to let them know that they are not responsible for anything that happened between you and your ex, and try to get along with the ex. remind them everyday of how much you love them, and always notice the good things they accomplish.
can you correct the essay, please?
Whether it is public or private, school plays a more important role than the family in shaping one’s personality. Does the school motivate learners and influence their behaviour or is it simply the place responsible for students’ distress?
To begin with, from the educational point of view, motivation given by teachers and partners activates, guides and sustains personal goals that conduct learners’ behaviour. Bernard Weiner, an American educational psychologist, describes how students are happier and more determined when they perform positive outcomes. Education at schools promotes both personal change and the cultivation of the intellect. A second point to consider is the social one. Pupils spend most of their time socialising and sharing different kinds of experiences that affect the personal unit. Here the benefits can be considerable. School authorities, teachers, auxiliary personnel and schoolmates will usually lend a useful hand to the schoolchildren; give good advice or just be around to offer support. Another argument in favour of educational institutions is the economic point of view, which claims that some of them provide students with scholar-ships and guarantee the continuity of their studies. Furthermore, many schools help students to satisfy their basic necessities, for example alimentation. Some schools supply students with food that they cannot obtain from their families.
On the other hand, learners exposed to many hours at school are often severely affected by stress, up to the point in which educatees are prescribed stress medication. So much of the school day is devoted to competition and preparation for examinations that there is little time left for personality development. Moreover, children have a closer relationship with their parents than with their teachers and partners. It is known that the infants learn habits from their families and that they usually spend about five years of their lives at home before even go to school. Finally, from the economic point of view, some families have the advantage to pay for superior education and provide their children with other activities such us sports.
We believe that education at school exists to generate motivation, well-being and strong will. Without it we would lose a valuable source of socialisation which is used for the benefit of our future society. What would be our education like without schools?
do parents play an important role in the personality and social development of the child?
Working as both a psychologist and a teacher, I can verify that there is only one circumstance in life when a child is GUARANTEED to improve and learn: When all members that are involved in that child’s life (the Parents, Teachers, Counselors, Principals, and the Child themselves) take an active role in their development. Otherwise, it’s always a hit-or-miss as to whether the child will reach any of their potential at all.
What is your opinion?
Ultimately, benefit or harm the wood?
Friday, October 8, 2010
The question plaguing most parents around the world: the wood came from heaven or not?
In the spotlight are constantly new studies and statistics, the key issue of whether a simple slap or a blow to the transmitters of child benefits or harms the development of his personality.
Therefore according to the Australian sociologist, Mr. Mari Strauss, who studied the effect of wood for children over 40 years, a blow with the palm of a child in soft, may cause much more than tears. It can reduce IQ, the famous IQ.
With the sample of 800 children aged between 2 and 4 years, he studied for four years, the influence of wood and concluded that those who ate the wood had five IQ points lower than those who did not receive in this disciplinary process.
In children aged between 5 and 9 years who took part in the same survey found that the wood reduce their IQ by 2.8 points. Mr. Strauss points out that the result of his research is essential for normal development of children around the world.
But the psychologist, Dr.. Judith Kennedy, from Sydney, argues that while a slight blow to the back, sparse and not going to have a traumatic effect on the child, the common wood, certainly has a deleterious effect, even affecting his behavior.
Based on fact, two surveys published in the journal «Child Development», children who ate wood from their parents, exhibited behavioral problems, aggression, and even depression, compared with those children, whose parents were applying other punishment.
On the other hand, according to a survey by the College Calvin, Michigan, a slap to synetisoun parents their children, not only does not hurt, but they do good in their adult lives.
As the Professor of Psychology and Head of Research Ms Marjorie Gkounoe, wood as a form of strict discipline, until the age of 6, makes children look with optimism to the future, help them become better students and also want to go in Higher Education. The researchers looked at 179 adolescents and asked them if and how many parents have used wood as a tool of discipline. From the responses, they concluded that the slap that can be eaten as children, helped teenage life.
This, ultimately one can easily conclude that if the strict tone of voice of a parent, can succeed, then we need to talk about “usable” wood … The limits and rules early on helping children understand when they are wrong and when not
Speaking of IQ points, I lost about 10 just reading this garbage.
Have you sent your child to Parent Participation schools?
). Is it ok that she has missed out on the music classes for tots so far?
So, I have a 15 month old. I just became a stay at home mom and have just joined a couple of neighbourhood playgroups and moms groups. I have seen a lot of interest among the mothers to have their tots join Parent participation schools and other activities. The children are between 12 – 18 months old, and since we didnt have anyone in our circle of friends with children of that age, I was shocked about all this organized play for children this young. So my questions are:
1. Will my child lose out if she doesnt join some sort of class(admittedly most are once a week for the children under 2)
2. My child seems musically inclined(ok, maybe Im exaggerating a bit, but she claps when music comes on and sings along with songs
3. What are the most useful classes for children this age- in terms of their personality development and socializing?
4. What are the different options for children this age- parent participation, montessori (anything else?) and how do they compare?
Obviously I want the best for my child, but I dont want to spend a ton of money on something that we dont gain anything out of(Ive already banked her cord blood thank you!). On the other hand, I dont want her to miss out on a learning experience. So, parenting gurus, please let me know your thoughts. [And unfortunately this is a repost since I didnt hear enough perspectives the last time]
it makes no difference whatsoever if a child is doing a class at an age like that. classes for that age exist primarily to give the parents a chance to get out of the house and see other adults, and to give the kids a chance to meet people and have some social interaction.
some of my kids had fun in a parent-child music class or gymnastics class when they were that age. they would have had just as much fun dancing around the living room. the only reason they were doing the class in the first place is that their older siblings were doing something and it seemed more sensible to enroll them both than to have one child have to sit around and watch. as far as what’s actually being taught, you can just as easily do it at home (or wait a year or two or five). socially you’re just as good heading to the playground or a neighbor’s house or the children’s room at the library.