A LinkedIn member posted that “Changing ‘why is this happening to me?’ into ‘what is this trying to teach me?’ is a game-changer.” From an Interpersonal Neurobiology (IPNB) perspective, that reframe can actually be harmful because it skips over the most basic needs of the nervous system. When something painful or overwhelming happens, the first priority isn’t to assign meaning, but to restore a sense of safety and regulation. Jumping straight to “what is this teaching me” risks bypassing the body’s natural responses of fear, grief, or anger, which are signals that need acknowledgment and support.
If someone feels pressured to turn every hardship into a lesson, it can create shame when they’re unable to do that. Instead of integration, the nervous system gets stuck in survival mode, carrying the burden alone. Real growth comes not from forcing meaning, but from having the connection, validation, and regulation that allow the body and brain to settle. From there, sometimes meaning emerges naturally, but it can’t be imposed as a shortcut.
I agree that the instruction to figure out “What is this teaching me?” places further burden on the harmed person. It demands she do more work at precisely the moment when she needs to be cared for, when she should rightly be able to expect people, systems, and institutions to work for her. It’s one of those criminal inversions where the wronged is required to erase the incident and take up responsibility by working to renew chastity through some kind of “growth,” while the wrong-doer walks blithely away.