The Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness, and Healing in a Toxic Culture

In his discussion of child development, Maté references psychologist Jordan Peterson, who says that “an angry child should sit by himself until he calms down” so that he can learn to “behave properly” (133). Though a popular view in our culture, Maté claims such a practice is injurious to the child because it contradicts “her inborn need for unconditional warmth” (133). Rather, it makes love conditional and instrumental, leading to emotional repression and illness in later life. On similar grounds, Maté criticizes modern obstetrical practice, which alludes to the theme of Indigenous Cultures as a Counterpoint to Modernity. In turning childbirth into a medical procedure and ignoring the personal and psychological aspects of it, modern medicine “ignores the genuine and natural needs of mothers and babies” (148). This, says Maté, has highly-damaging consequences both for the relationship of the mother to her child and the child’s future health.

The concept of “needs” plays a key role in Maté’s accounts: The idea of innate needs is central to his discussion of child development, his criticisms of modern culture’s problems, and his prescriptions for addressing these. He identifies four “irreducible needs of the child” (131), including attachment, security, and “the experience of free play” (134), which, he suggests, are undermined by modern culture. Yet, the question arises as to what exactly Maté means by “needs” here and how he identifies them. Maté rejects the idea of strict genetic determinism. Genetics alone, he argues, does not determine what we will become, but only does so in combination with our environment. As he says, adopting an Aristotelian view of human well-being, “[W]e too, have needs the environment must satisfy if we are to flourish” (118).

The conditions for such flourishing are, in turn, rooted in our evolutionary heritage: “[F]or most of our evolutionary past […] human beings lived in small-band hunter-gatherer groups” (120). Within such groups, co-operation and connection with other group members was essential for survival. Thus, argues Maté, we developed strong needs to be accepted by others specifically and by the group in general. Our feelings of happiness were linked to reciprocal social activity, such as sharing, common work, and gift-giving, which confirmed our acceptance in the group. Conversely, feelings of unhappiness and stuntedness became associated with the absence of participation in these activities, and perceptions of greed or selfishness on the part of others.

With this narrative, Maté justifies the meaning and substance of his account of human “needs.” He provides a reason, since these needs are deeply ingrained in our development, for accepting that human beings need “caring, relative harmony” and “interconnectedness” (121) to flourish. On the other hand, this narrative justifies Maté’s contention that contemporary, individualistic, culture “hastens human development along unhealthy lines from conception onward” (122). Yet, it would be wrong to say that with this narrative Maté has dispensed with all potential concerns.

His argument depends, for one thing, upon accepting the assumptions of evolutionary psychology. Namely, his argument rests on the contention that current human needs are best explained by what was necessary for our ancestors to survive in our evolutionary past. A counterresponse could suggest that new human needs have emerged with the seismic shifts of civilization and capitalism that are now necessary for our flourishing. For example, a need for individual freedom and even solitude, may have emerged with these two cultural developments that were not present in our prehistory. As crucially, there is the recurring concern of the practical application of Maté’s critique. Even if modern civilization and then capitalism, as Maté claims, do run counter to human needs and thus our health, there is the question of how this can be changed. Both structures are so deeply ingrained in how we think and feel that substantially altering, let alone replacing, presents a great challenge.