[hashin]

Agree that depression diagnosis might be wrong. But the therapy is incredibly effective against all the symptoms he has described in details. Therapy is not just for depressed people. I have met different therapists and I was never diagnosed of clinical depression. However, I have faced many of the symptoms that he has described. It makes sense to meet a therapist (if he can afford it) and take their help. Also, in many Indian cities, therapists are generally a way to many social circles, for they act as aggregators. I think it is different in other places, but meeting a therapist (a good one) and taking professional help is the easiest and most preferable route when you hit a rut.

[R0b0t1]

Touting therapy as incredible effective is at least a little dishonest. I know very many people who saw no benefit from it despite great expense.

Think: If you see benefit from therapy are you not more likely to keep going?

[PakG1]

Honestly, a lot of people who see therapists do keep going. A friend put it to me this way: you're paying money for perspective and objectivity, and this is especially true for people in relationships. It also takes time and effort to find a therapist who is a good fit for you. If the therapist is not a good fit for you, then there will be little benefit.

Therapy has helped me anyway.

[R0b0t1]

I know, I'm pointing out that trains of thought similar to "I was unsure of therapy but liked it and kept going" are not going to be universal because maybe there is some underlying thing that makes you more likely to be helped by therapy.

Uncharitably I've seen this framed as something like "therapists only help people with simple problems."

[hamburglar]

> Touting therapy as incredible effective is at least a little dishonest. I know very many people who saw no benefit from it despite great expense.

When someone recommends therapy, just treat it like you would any other recommendation that doesn’t need to trigger a “that doesn’t apply universally!” response. Nobody is forcing anyone to do therapy. Many people find it helpful. Many people don’t. Still quite reasonable for GP to say “therapy helps” with an implied “in my opinion.”

[thelettere]

Except in this instance OP specifically mentioned therapy as advice he was not looking for. So it's odd and paternalistic if not downright rude that the #1 comment advises just that.

[hamburglar]

..among many other things. And they didn’t say they didn’t want therapy as advice, they specifically did ask for advice beyond therapy but that doesn’t mean they are going to be offended by someone saying “but also, if you aren’t in therapy, try it.” And calling this “paternalistic” when someone is saying they hate their life and is asking for advice is completely uncalled for. Your overly-strong anti-therapy stance is noted but it doesn’t really have anything to do with the OP and the commenter you are responding to.

[thelettere]

It is the very definition of paternalistic to tell someone who wants something other than x, x, and "for their own good".

And I am neither anti-therapy nor pro-therapy (only a simpleton would have an unnuanced position on such a complex topic). Next time please refrain from attempting to put words into my mouth, it is disrespectful and adds nothing of value to your comment.

[ekianjo]

> meeting a therapist (a good one) and taking professional help is the easiest and most preferable route when you hit a rut.

"Professional help" is not always positive. If you have internal issues to fix, external help may or may not be the right thing for you. There's absolutely no standard approach for this kind of things.

> a therapist (a good one)

So what they end up with a bad one, was that good advice?