Naming a child after a family member or a famous person can be a particularly hazardous task. If a chid is named after uncle Harry, that is all good and well, except that uncle Harry was a boozer and a womaniser. The child is being given that label to wear for its life time.
One deals with the anger problem by not talking about it, which may seem a little odd.
If this is happening the therapist again must be open to the idea that mother or father secretly delight in the angry self destructive acts of the teenager. This allows the mother or father to avoid the expression of their own self destructiveness.
The child refuses to go to school or demonstrates repeated illnesses in an attempt to avoid school.
There has been found to be four common motivators for a mother to tell a child not to separate from her. This shows how the injunction comes from the mother’s own needy Child ego state wants and desires.
It is said that the 3 year old is assentive whilst the 4 year old is assertive. People with assertion problems maybe fixated at this stage.
If one has the opportunity it is pertinent to ask the parents about the good child in the family. The one who is not making any noise can be the one in most pain.
Of course this has significant implications for therapists in countries like Australia. We have long been indoctrinated by the theories of Margaret Mahler and John Bowlby who both adopt a very individualistic approach in their theories. It would seem wise to be much more understanding of the communal family structures.
First, this is better for the parents (which in turn is better for the children) because there is usually more support readily available. Second, from an attachment theory point of view it is better if children are raised in a polymatric family rather than a monomatric family.
The therapeutic response is clear. Get the family secret exposed and this can change family dynamics, quite profoundly at times.