Prince Harry admits seeking counseling after Diana's death

Started by sara8150, April 16, 2017, 09:47:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sara8150

Prince Harry admits seeking counselling after two years of 'total chaos' as he struggled to come to terms with his mother's death
Prince Harry admits counselling after Diana's death | Daily Mail Online

Double post auto-merged: April 16, 2017, 10:21:18 PM


Prince Harry: I sought counselling after death of mother led to two years of 'total chaos' in my twenties - exclusive Telegraph interview
Prince Harry: I sought counselling after the death of my mother led to two years of 'total chaos' in my twenties - exclusive Telegraph interview

Double post auto-merged: April 16, 2017, 10:26:17 PM


https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.net/pRET1nnVSamUOCgUIRTW_telemon.JPG

Lady Deb

The exclusive Telegraph interview is very personal and heartfelt! It was wonderful of Harry to share his feelings this way and being able to listen to him actually speaking about his own struggles is very encouraging. I think that he is a terrific man. I thought the interviewer was very good too.

royalanthropologist

It is quite hard to grieve when everyone is trying to use you for their own motives. I am glad that Harry found the time, space and professional support to properly grieve for his mum. Feeling like punching someone is no way to go through life.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sara8150

Prince Harry Was 'Very Close to a Complete Breakdown,' Sought Therapy After Mother Diana's Death
Prince Harry Talks Grief, Seeking Therapy After Mother Diana's Death - Us Weekly

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 12:33:14 AM


Prince Harry Reveals He Entered Therapy After 2 Years of 'Total Chaos' in His Late 20s
Prince Harry Entered Therapy in Late 20s After Diana Death

Curryong

This is one of the most extraordinary and profound interviews I've ever heard a member of the BRF give, actually. Harry describes shutting down emotionally pretty well from the age of 12 to 28 until he sought help. He talks about 'flight or fight' feelings at Royal engagements, about chaos in his life in his late twenties, what a help William was to him and how he feels so much better and freed from constraint he feels now, leading to improvements in his public and private life. I think this is terribly moving and I'm glad he did it.

TLLK

Quote"My brother, you know, bless him, he was a huge support to me. He kept saying this is not right, this is not normal"

-Prince Harry

Thank goodness Harry realized that it was time to acknowledge that he needed the help that a mental healthcare professional could provide for him. Also finding a physical outlet with boxing must have been a much needed form of release.

Thank you @sara8150 for sharing all of the links for Harry's interview.

Curryong

Why oh why didn't Charles insist that his sons, especially the 12 year old Harry, receive grief counselling after Diana's death? Harry said in this interview that he closed himself off for years. However, if a young teenager becomes virtually emotionless about the death of a parent and doesn't speak of her, wouldn't the remaining parent think something was up?

Was Charles so wrapped up in his own situation that he was oblivious to his child's issues? It took William, when Harry was in his late twenties, to urge his brother to seek help. I think that's pretty appalling, actually. 

sara8150

Prince Harry sought counselling after hiding Diana death grief
Prince Harry sought counselling after hiding Diana death grief - BBC News

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 04:51:40 AM


Prince Harry reveals counselling over Diana's death after years of 'chaos'
Prince Harry reveals counselling over Diana's death after years of 'chaos'

amabel

Quote from: Curryong on April 17, 2017, 04:04:59 AM
Why oh why didn't Charles insist that his sons, especially the 12 year old Harry, receive grief counselling after Diana's death? Harry said in this interview that he closed himself off for years. However, if a young teenager becomes virtually emotionless about the death of a parent and doesn't speak of her, wouldn't the remaining parent think something was up?

Was Charles so wrapped up in his own situation that he was oblivious to his child's issues? It took William, when Harry was in his late twenties, to urge his brother to seek help. I think that's pretty appalling, actually. 
perhaps because if you "insist" on people having counselling, it is not their choice nad does no good.

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 04:56:12 AM


Quote from: royalanthropologist on April 16, 2017, 11:45:46 PM
It is quite hard to grieve when everyone is trying to use you for their own motives. I am glad that Harry found the time, space and professional support to properly grieve for his mum. Feeling like punching someone is no way to go through life.
who was using him for their own motives???


Curryong

Well, perhaps 'insist' was the wrong word. 'Explore the options' then. Charles seemed to be so caught up in work in those years when Harry was a young teenager. He had Tiggy and Mark Dyer as mentors but there were many times when Harry was in his mid teens and using cannabis and drinking when he was left alone at Highgrove in the holidays. Charles apparently made a remark when Harry was sixteen that he hadn't spent enough time with him.

When Kate Winslet received an award at BP some years ago she spoke to the Queen about trying to balance a film career with her position as a mother which was more important to her than being an actress. The Queen replied 'Yes, motherhood is the most important thing of all'

So is fatherhood.

royalanthropologist

Charles has a very conciliatory parenting style and would not dream of imposing counselling on his children @Curryong. Harry may have shut down for years, but it does not mean that he was not getting support from his father. I know the "Charles is a bad father" meme has been around since the 1980s but to me it all seems like a work of fiction. The man has a very good relationship with his children. There are occasional spats, just like any parents but overall it is a good relationship. Certainly far better than the one Charles had with his dad and mum.

@amabel. Diana's death was lifted from being a private event to a very public event. It was a time overwhelmed with bitter recriminations and the mob mentality. The floral fascists were on the lookout for anyone who seemed not be grieving deeply enough.  Tony Blair and his spin doctors used it to try and muscle out the queen. Republicans were celebrating the end of the monarchy. Situational monarchists were illogically demanding a change of succession that would mean William supplanting his own father in a coup d'etat.

Every Tom, Dick, Harry, Susan and their uncle was giving opinions about how and why the royal family should grieve. Harry's remaining family was being constantly attacked by people for their own selfish motives. Every gesture on Harry and William's part was being analyzed by obsessives to see whether they disliked their father or his family. That horrible man Al Fayed was accusing their grandfather of murdering their own mother. Add that to the fact that royal family does not generally like to give way to this displays of excessive emotions. The first service following their death did not even mention Diana. The royal family was ostriching as per usual. It was one of the strangest deaths and funeral rituals of all time.

Frankly speaking I would be very surprised if those children did not feel frightened by the whole experience. Even what should have been a dignified funeral service was somehow hijacked by Charles Spencer with his hypocritical histrionics. The two kids had to make a split decision whether to clap, cry or stay silent like the royal family. Even that was interpreted as a snub. To this day, any article celebrating Diana or remembering her brings out the trolls with their  copy and paste ad hominen attacks about the royal family. Shutting down emotionally was a defense mechanism.

"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Curryong

Yes, Charles has a better relationship with his sons than he had with his parents. However, that's setting the bar pretty low isn't it?

If Charles was the devoted hands-on parent that is claimed then why did he need the help of mentors Tiggy and Mark Dyer? The boys only had six weeks holiday a year from their boarding school. Yet Charles couldn't spare that from his schedule? If he was so intuitive why didn't Harry in that moving interview speak about his father giving him support as a grieving teenager? All we heard was William's urging him to get help.

You know, of course about the actions of Charles and his staff (notably Bolland)  in leaking sympathetic reports to the media of Charles's immediate response when Harry was found drinking and smoking pot as a teenager, reports that later on were proved to be a self-serving lie

But no, Charles couldnt possibly be wrong in any aspect of his parenting. Just as he was/is the perfect boyfriend, husband, lover, companion, so he is the perfect parent, isn't he? Everything written or spoken to the contrary is lies by Diana fans and the media. No suggestion here that he could very well be a flawed human being in lots of areas of his life.

If he is so perfect a parent I wonder why his latest biographer SBS, who has interviewed hundreds of people around Charles, has strongly hinted that he rarely sees the Cambridges or his grandchildren.

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 05:58:01 AM



Prince Charles ?Sold Out? William and Harry To The Tabloids - The Daily Beast

amabel

Quote from: royalanthropologist on April 17, 2017, 05:20:39 AM
Charles has a very conciliatory parenting style and would not dream of imposing counselling on his children @Curryong. Harry may have shut down for years, but it does not mean that he was not getting support from his father. I know the "Charles is a bad father" meme has been around since the 1980s but to me it all seems like a work of fiction. The man has a very good relationship with his children. There are occasional spats, just like any parents but overall it is a good relationship. Certainly far better than the one Charles had with his dad and mum.

@amabel. Diana's death was lifted from being a private event to a very public event. It was a time overwhelmed with bitter recriminations and the mob mentality. The floral fascists were on the lookout for anyone who seemed not be grieving deeply enough.  Tony Blair and his spin doctors used it to try Every gesture her
I don't remember all this. Yes there was a lot of emoition in the week or so after Diana died...but the boys were kept "safe" up in Balmoral and not encouraged to watch TV or read papers and were given encouragement ot "get out and wlak" and try and take ther minds off the sadness.  Perhaps that wasn't the best thing to do, or perhaps it was.
Harry ad Will went back to school soon and were protected there from too much TV and newspapers.
I would agree that chalres probably did his best for the boys and tired to look after them and make up for the loss of their mother. But that's not easy.  NOTHING relly makes up for the loss of a loved parent or someone close.
I think that as the RF are not "touchy feely" they would not think of counselling as a first resort, but if Harry was being difficult, or seemed very depressed, or a doctor had suggested it, they would have probably insisted he at least TRY it. But I think that with counsellng it probably does not do any good unless the person really wants to do it. 

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 06:13:41 AM


Quote from: Curryong on April 17, 2017, 05:41:28 AM
Yes, Charles has a better relationship with his sons than he had with his parents. However, that's setting the bar pretty low isn't it?

If Charles was the devoted hands-on parent that is claimed then why did he need the help of mentors Tiggy and Mark Dyer? The boys only had six weeks holiday a year from their boarding school. Yet Charles couldn't spare that from his schedule? If he was so intuitive why didn't Harry in that moving interview speak about his father giving him support as a grieving teenager? All we heard was William's urging him to get help.

You know, of course about the actions of Charles and his staff (notably Bolland)  in leaking sympathetic reports to the media of Charles's immediate response when Harry was found drinking and smoking pot as a teenager, reports that later on were proved to be a self-serving lie

But no, Charles couldnt possibly be wrong in any aspect of his parenting. Just as he was/is the perfect boyfriend, husband, lover, companion, so he is the perfect parent, isn't he? Everything written or spoken to the contrary is lies by Diana fans and the media. No suggestion here that he could very well be a flawed human being in lots of areas of his life.

If he is so perfect a parent I wonder why his latest biographer SBS, who has interviewed hundreds of people
who says he's a perfect parent>???  he is problaby not great, but I think he tried.  I think he knew that Tiggy got on well with the boys and they loved her and enjoyed her company, whereas he himself is probably rather awkward with teenagers and there were long years when he and Diana had been at odds, so it took time for the relationship to heal with the boys.  If he was so awful to H after Di's death why is there TV footage when the boys were looking at the flowers, of Harry putting his hand into charles', instinctively and C holding his hand?

Curryong

^ Of course Harry reached out his hand to his sole surviving parent when he was in the midst of the most intense grief of his young life and on public view.

Charles isn't comfortable with very small children, is awkward with teenagers. Crickey, when is he comfortable? And yes Tiggy was a great comfort to the boys, but it's a pity that Charles couldnt have taken six weeks out of his year after Diana died, to concentrate completely and solely on his sons.

And what of Mark Bolland selling Charles's sons and other royals down the river? If it had been me as a parent finding a close member of staff doing that, you wouldn't see him for dust as I personally threw him out, with probably a kick up the behind for good measure.

Yet Charles continued to employ him to give himself and Camilla a makeover. It took the Queen to step in AGAIN before anything was done. That soured relations between William and his father for ages, and to this day there is suspicion between CH and KP.


amabel

Quote from: Curryong on April 17, 2017, 06:54:13 AM
^ Of course Harry reached out his hand to his sole surviving parent when he was in the midst of the most intense grief of his young life and on public view.

Charles isn't comfortable with very small children, is awkward with teenagers. Crickey, when is he comfortable? And yes Tiggy was a great comfort to the boys, but it's a pity that Charles couldnt have taken six weeks out of his year after Diana died, to concentrate completely and solely on his sons.

And
Yet
well I am not comfortable with children and even less so with teenagers..so I quite sympathise...
but I'd say if Chas were such a bad parent as you seem to think Harry would harldy have reached out to hold his hand.
No idea what the story is about Bolland, but I think that Tiggy was someone that Charles believed was a help to his sons and that they would wnat her around when they were at home. whereas Diana threw a fit bout Tiggy and accused her of having an abortion, in front of witnesses, hardly the best behaviour towards a woman that her sons regarded as a big sister

Curryong

If you look at the link I provided at the bottom of my post No. 11(from the Daily Beast) as well as that post, it will tell you about Bolland. There was plenty about that individual  in the media at the time, about his influence over Charles, and what happened with William and Harry, and quite a bit about him in the last two biographies of Charles. What a charmer!

sandy

Quote from: Curryong on April 17, 2017, 05:41:28 AM
Yes, Charles has a better relationship with his sons than he had with his parents. However, that's setting the bar pretty low isn't it?

If Charles was the devoted hands-on parent that is claimed then why did he need the help of mentors Tiggy and Mark Dyer? The boys only had six weeks holiday a year from their boarding school. Yet Charles couldn't spare that from his schedule? If he was so intuitive why didn't Harry in that moving interview speak about his father giving him support as a grieving teenager? All we heard was William's urging him to get help.

You know, of course about the actions of Charles and his staff (notably Bolland)  in leaking sympathetic reports to the media of Charles's immediate response when Harry was found drinking and smoking pot as a teenager, reports that later on were proved to be a self-serving lie

But no, Charles couldnt possibly be wrong in any aspect of his parenting. Just as he was/is the perfect boyfriend, husband, lover, companion, so he is the perfect parent, isn't he? Everything written or spoken to the contrary is lies by Diana fans and the media. No suggestion here that he could very well be a flawed human being in lots of areas of his life.

If he is so perfect a parent I wonder why his latest biographer SBS, who has interviewed hundreds of people around Charles, has strongly hinted that he rarely sees the Cambridges or his grandchildren.

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 05:58:01 AM



Prince Charles ?Sold Out? William and Harry To The Tabloids - The Daily Beast

Dyer was not the best influence on Harry IMO. Harry seemed to get into scrapes even when his "mentor" Dyer was around.

Harry was scapegoated more than WIlliam to show Charles was a "great dad."  The drug episode where Harry was taken to a rehab facility made headlines throughout the world. Rather awful for a young man to experience--the public relations aspect of his "intervention" that is.

William OTOH got protected, cocooned at St. Andrew's and he never had to apologize for his blunders like commandeering a military helicopter to a stag party.

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 11:09:04 AM


Quote from: royalanthropologist on April 17, 2017, 05:20:39 AM
Charles has a very conciliatory parenting style and would not dream of imposing counselling on his children @Curryong. Harry may have shut down for years, but it does not mean that he was not getting support from his father. I know the "Charles is a bad father" meme has been around since the 1980s but to me it all seems like a work of fiction. The man has a very good relationship with his children. There are occasional spats, just like any parents but overall it is a good relationship. Certainly far better than the one Charles had with his dad and mum.

@amabel. Diana's death was lifted from being a private event to a very public event. It was a time overwhelmed with bitter recriminations and the mob mentality. The floral fascists were on the lookout for anyone who seemed not be grieving deeply enough.  Tony Blair and his spin doctors used it to try and muscle out the queen. Republicans were celebrating the end of the monarchy. Situational monarchists were illogically demanding a change of succession that would mean William supplanting his own father in a coup d'etat.

Every Tom, Dick, Harry, Susan and their uncle was giving opinions about how and why the royal family should grieve. Harry's remaining family was being constantly attacked by people for their own selfish motives. Every gesture on Harry and William's part was being analyzed by obsessives to see whether they disliked their father or his family. That horrible man Al Fayed was accusing their grandfather of murdering their own mother. Add that to the fact that royal family does not generally like to give way to this displays of excessive emotions. The first service following their death did not even mention Diana. The royal family was ostriching as per usual. It was one of the strangest deaths and funeral rituals of all time.

Frankly speaking I would be very surprised if those children did not feel frightened by the whole experience. Even what should have been a dignified funeral service was somehow hijacked by Charles Spencer with his hypocritical histrionics. The two kids had to make a split decision whether to clap, cry or stay silent like the royal family. Even that was interpreted as a snub. To this day, any article celebrating Diana or remembering her brings out the trolls with their  copy and paste ad hominen attacks about the royal family. Shutting down emotionally was a defense mechanism.



Floral fascists? My word!

Diana's funeral should have been a public not private event. No matter how negatively some feel about her, she was a public feature, the mother of a future King and popular. She died young and in a tragic way. Yes, indeed it should have been public. Hurrah for the Floral Fascists (are they Baskets of Deplorables?)

Harry and William were  placed into a Camilla campaign less than a year after their mother died. I found that very tacky.

royalanthropologist

Charles has tried to be a good parent and as far as I can see his children get along with him just fine. Had he been stricter, there might have been complaints about harassing the kids. Parenting by opinion polls is not advisable. You just do the best you can with the resources available. Certainly those children have wanted for nothing in terms of being looked after. Some would argue that they have actually been indulged a little bit. Which parent can say that their children never had teenage blues? Does that mean you are a bad parent if your children go through a phase? If Charles focused on his children and showered them with attention; there would still be some who complain about not doing enough work. It is a catch 22 and I think Charles did a good job. Certainly I would not say he was perfect: nobody is ever the perfect parent. But I am not convinced by the "Charles is a bad parent" meme either.

Boland was a disgrace and he clearly overstepped the mark. However, I would also point out that Charles is by no means the first royal to use those children in order to earn some good publicity. Not by a long shot. They were being used as pawns in a much larger political game, some of them even suggesting William supplants his father. It was and is still an outrageous suggestion that would divide the family forever.

I am also perplexed as to why it is Charles' fault if Williams prefers to be with the Middleton. That is his choice. Many families go through the phase where a son marries and spends more time with his in-laws. Charles is not the first and is not the last. I think it is rather unfair to use it yet again as a yardstick to push the "Charles is a bad parent" meme. Indeed there would be eyebrows raised if Charles tried to helicopter the domestic arrangements of his children's families. That is not being a good parent...it is being overly possessive and controlling.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

amabel

well I'veno idea what the "Daily Beast" is and I don't think I could put any credence in what it says. But I agree, Royal that chalres is IMO a middling good parent.  He loved the boys, but he was not IMO comfortable iwht them when they got past the baby stage and then he and Di were on very bad terms so I think he left them to her.  When she died, as far as I can see he DID tryr harder to be there for them, but by then they were teenagers and teenagers are rebellious and horrible and dififcult, for the most part.
I think he was'nt strict enough on Harry, but if he had been he'd be accused of being a horrible dad to a motherless kid.
as fro William, he is problaby happier with the Middletons because they are much more informal than his own family, and he likes that.. Plus Charles is a hard working serious man and William probably finds him hard going since he himself isn't IMO the most dedicated of workers.

amabel

well yes tat's what Spin doctors do.. its a vulgar profession...
As I recall Harry was also seen not only under age drinking but abusing a barman and saying rude things to him.  had I been Charles I would have been fuming and kicked his backside.. for him....


sandy

Quote from: amabel on April 17, 2017, 11:39:17 AM
well I'veno idea what the "Daily Beast" is and I don't think I could put any credence in what it says. But I agree, Royal that chalres is IMO a middling good parent.  He loved the boys, but he was not IMO comfortable iwht them when they got past the baby stage and then he and Di were on very bad terms so I think he left them to her.  When she died, as far as I can see he DID tryr harder to be there for them, but by then they were teenagers and teenagers are rebellious and horrible and dififcult, for the most part.
I think he was'nt strict enough on Harry, but if he had been he'd be accused of being a horrible dad to a motherless kid.
as fro William, he is problaby happier with the Middletons because they are much more informal than his own family, and he likes that.. Plus Charles is a hard working serious man and William probably finds him hard going since he himself isn't IMO the most dedicated of workers.

He was stricter with Harry than WIlliam. Harry had to apologize over and over and atone and his escapades got headlines. William OTOH was no angel and his father apologized on his behalf for an episode where William sped around in his car on someone's estate. His commanding officer took responsibility for WIlliam using a military copter to go to a stag party.

Double post auto-merged: April 17, 2017, 12:15:00 PM


Quote from: royalanthropologist on April 17, 2017, 11:32:16 AM
Charles has tried to be a good parent and as far as I can see his children get along with him just fine. Had he been stricter, there might have been complaints about harassing the kids. Parenting by opinion polls is not advisable. You just do the best you can with the resources available. Certainly those children have wanted for nothing in terms of being looked after. Some would argue that they have actually been indulged a little bit. Which parent can say that their children never had teenage blues? Does that mean you are a bad parent if your children go through a phase? If Charles focused on his children and showered them with attention; there would still be some who complain about not doing enough work. It is a catch 22 and I think Charles did a good job. Certainly I would not say he was perfect: nobody is ever the perfect parent. But I am not convinced by the "Charles is a bad parent" meme either.

Boland was a disgrace and he clearly overstepped the mark. However, I would also point out that Charles is by no means the first royal to use those children in order to earn some good publicity. Not by a long shot. They were being used as pawns in a much larger political game, some of them even suggesting William supplants his father. It was and is still an outrageous suggestion that would divide the family forever.

I am also perplexed as to why it is Charles' fault if Williams prefers to be with the Middleton. That is his choice. Many families go through the phase where a son marries and spends more time with his in-laws. Charles is not the first and is not the last. I think it is rather unfair to use it yet again as a yardstick to push the "Charles is a bad parent" meme. Indeed there would be eyebrows raised if Charles tried to helicopter the domestic arrangements of his children's families. That is not being a good parent...it is being overly possessive and controlling.

well William appears to have adopted his wife's family so much so Charles complains he does not see his grandchildren. I think there is trouble in paradise.

Charles did not have to spoil them to pay attention to them. There are other ways of attention like helping them through their problems or even just being there as a confidante.

There was  and is no way WIlliam would supplant his father. It was wrong on many levels IMO to use his children to promote Camilla.


TLLK

Quote

"Not just for you but everybody else around you as well because you become a problem. I, through a lot of my twenties, was a problem and I didn't know how to deal with it."

On eventually seeking help, the Prince said: "It's all about timing. And for me personally, my brother, you know, bless him, he was a huge support to me. He kept saying this is not right, this is not normal, you need to talk to [someone] about stuff, it's OK.

"The timing wasn't right. You need to feel it in yourself, you need to find the right person to talk to as well."
[/b]

From listening to the podcast and reading the Telegraph article it is clear to me that Harry was not ready to fully participate and benefit from treatment until he was willing to open up. Counseling would have been available to him at school or in a private practice, but until he was prepared to engage in with a mental health care professional it would have not been of much use to him. Everyone grieves on their own timeline however Harry has fortunately addressed the issue with his own grief and can now share about his own experiences to others who might be reluctant to seek treatment.