How widespread psychological awareness is leading people to mimic the damage expected of them

Tendai Ruben Mbofana

This morning, I found myself captivated by a program on a local private television channel that tackles psychological matters. 

If you value my social justice advocacy and writing, please consider a financial contribution to keep it going. Contact me on WhatsApp: +263 715 667 700 or Email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com

It is a show I genuinely enjoy, primarily because it courageously dives into deeply personal subjects that society usually sweeps under the carpet. 

Today, the discussion centered on issues that affect children, particularly the dynamics commonly referred to as “daddy or mommy issues.”

As much as I appreciate the platform, a specific moment this morning left me deeply unsettled. 

The presenter opened up about her own “daddy issues,” explaining that she grew up loving her father dearly but felt he was never truly available for her. 

This vacuum led her to a relentless pursuit of perfectionism in adulthood, driven by the lingering childhood hope of finally gaining his attention. 

It was a poignant moment, and she nearly broke down on set.

While the scene was undeniably sad, it triggered a troubling question in my mind. 

Are we, as a society, becoming so consumed by our increased awareness and understanding of psychological issues that we are now actually expecting to be affected in a specific way by our past experiences? 

Are we inadvertently training ourselves to behave in a certain manner simply because we went through something that popular psychology labels as traumatic?

There is an unspoken danger in the widespread popularization of psychological concepts. 

While mental health awareness has successfully dismantled long-standing stigmas, it has simultaneously introduced a subtle, insidious form of behavioral conditioning. 

We have entered an era where past pain is no longer just something to heal from; it has become a definitive blueprint for who we are supposed to be.

This phenomenon closely aligns with what the philosopher Ian Hacking termed the “looping effect” in social sciences. 

Unlike objects in the natural world, human beings change their behavior based on how they are classified. 

When an individual internalizes a label—such as being the product of a dysfunctional home or a victim of childhood bullying—they do not just look backward to understand their past. 

They look forward and unconsciously alter their actions to fit the description.

For example, an adult who internalizes the “bullied child” label might enter a new workplace already anticipating exclusion. 

Instead of interacting naturally, they may proactively withdraw from colleagues, misinterpret constructive professional feedback as targeted persecution, or adopt an overtly defensive stance. 

By doing so, they act out the script of the perpetual victim, ultimately creating the very social isolation they expected.

Consequently, we witness a rise in what sociologists call “illness scripting.” 

Society provides ready-made narratives for every conceivable childhood wound. 

If a person experiences relationship difficulties or struggles with low self-esteem in adulthood, the popular script dictates that a specific childhood grievance must be the root cause.

People begin to manifest symptoms not because those symptoms are a natural, inevitable consequence of their unique trauma, but because they expect themselves to act that way. 

They are simply living out the psychological script they have been taught to anticipate.

Consider someone labelled as coming from a “dysfunctional home.” 

They might deliberately derail a stable, healthy romantic relationship by manufacturing conflicts or pushing a partner away, simply because peace and stability feel “wrong” according to the chaotic script they believe they are fated to follow. 

The explanation transforms into a permanent excuse, trapping the individual in a cycle of perpetual victimhood and learned helplessness.

This trap is actively worsened by a modern culture that constantly encourages people to look backward and repeatedly relive their past traumas. 

While this continuous excavation of old wounds is promoted as a necessary path to “healing,” it often achieves the exact opposite. 

In clinical psychology, this repetitive focus on historical negative emotions is recognized as rumination. 

Far from facilitating recovery, continuously dredging up past pain reinforces negative cognitive networks. 

Instead of allowing the psychological wound to close, this constant introspection keeps reopening it, trapping the individual in a state of chronic emotional re-traumatization and preventing natural recovery.

This issue is further compounded by what psychologist Nick Haslam calls “concept creep.” 

Over the past few decades, the boundaries of psychological terms have expanded dramatically. 

Experiences that were once correctly identified as ordinary life challenges, temporary hardships, or routine social friction are now routinely categorized as “trauma” and “abuse.”

When mild or moderate negative experiences are inflated into clinical crises, individuals who would have otherwise naturally developed resilience are instead handed a heavy psychological burden. 

They are taught to view themselves as damaged, and with that diagnosis comes the expectation of subsequent dysfunction.

A particularly dangerous consequence of this widespread awareness is that it has turned ordinary people into amateur clinicians. 

Armed with a superficial understanding of complex psychological terms, people now routinely diagnose friends, family members, or colleagues based on minor behavioral quirks. 

Labeling a difficult boss a “narcissist,” an eccentric friend “bipolar,” or a moody partner “toxic” completely oversimplifies genuine clinical disorders. 

This reckless armchair diagnosing creates profound dangers, as it mischaracterizes normal human variance, destroys interpersonal trust, and misapplies serious medical labels to situations that simply require basic communication or conflict resolution.

We are currently observing the unintended consequences of this hyper-vigilance. 

Recent studies into widespread mental health awareness campaigns have pointed to a “prevalence paradox.” 

By constantly instructing people to scan their internal states for signs of disorder, anxiety, or trauma-induced behavior, we are creating a hyper-aware public that over-interprets normal human emotions. 

Standard moments of sadness, nervousness, or interpersonal conflict are immediately pathologized.

The human mind is incredibly suggestible. 

If we are constantly told that certain childhood experiences inevitably result in adult brokenness, we will find that brokenness within ourselves, even if we have to manufacture it.

The presenter on television this morning displayed immense vulnerability, and her pain was undoubtedly real. 

However, the media’s obsession with framing every adult struggle through the lens of childhood trauma risks turning therapy culture into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Psychology should be utilized as a tool for liberation and self-determination, not as a rigid cage that dictates our future actions. 

There is a profound difference between processing past hardships and allowing those hardships to write the script for the rest of our lives. 

If we do not learn to separate explanation from expectation, we risk raising a generation that parrots dysfunction simply because they were taught it was the only option available to them.

• Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. To directly receive his articles please join his WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08