Originally Posted by LadyMacbeth
Overall, I believe that "healthy" is a balance between allowing oneself to need another, as well as having a full and healthy sense of independence in a balanced way. In other words, equally valuing attachment and individuation as core internal needs. So...a "healthy dependence" has a balance of both, an "unhealthy dependence" would involve either focusing on individuality/individuation at the expense of connecting deeply with others (eg being disconnected, nonemotive, unaware of emotions, etc) *or* focusing on attachment/connection at the expense of the self (eg staying in an abusive or controlling relationship out of fear of losing the loved other.)
Of course lots more could be said...
As you lead in with - this is YOUR belief (system). And it's one proposed by the "attachment THEORY".
Mine is simply different.
I have many issues with this thinking for myself. Others obviously are free to choose their own comfort level & direction.
First, but not least, is the understanding that all of this is "scientific THEORY". That should be 'nuff said" for anyone familiar with modern science. Note that I'm one who has had heavy involvement with science from an early age so that's not a "dis" from some blind religious or spiritual perspective. While having certain value when understanding childhood early development, I personally don't feel it can be carried largely unmodified into adults. That devalues our mature cognitive abilities.
Second, and as an example, I'll take a quote I went and clipped from the Wiki entry on Attachment in Adults entry.
(representative statement):"I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me."
This is proffered as "healthy".
As someone who has been on both ends of this, I can state absolutely that I'm NOT (any longer) comfortable with this statement/proposition for one second ! I'm not comfortable putting myself in a position that anyone or anything is solely dependent on me for functioning. Nor will I condone it.
By the same token, I realize I have certain dependencies in my own life that are less than optimal. I try to minimize them whenever possible. However, I'm no master and I'm fully aware that I will probably not ever strive for 100% success in this regard. I remember seeing this expressed once as "our controlled folly". I thought that was accurate and pertinent. Most of us make such decisions frequently - that we're fully aware are not necessarily in our own best interest. We make them anyway and tell ourselves we're willing to suffer the consequences. And we usually do
So I leave this with the full acknowledgment that dependencies DO - and always will - exist. The plants DEPEND on the sun. We DEPEND on the plants. Etc etc And we know what happens when these dependencies fail. We suffer - or cease to exist. So THAT is the CHOICE. For me it's a call to choose wisely and minimally - unless of course I form an attachment to suffering. And yes - some do that.