The Illogical, Dangerous, and Disempowering Jargon of the Depression Industry.

Part 1 of 3

20-25 Minute Read

The Illogical, Dangerous, and Disempowering Jargon of the Depression Industry.

Part 1 of 3

20-25 Minute Read

This serves as Part 1 of 3 in the Article Series has prepared on the illogical, dangerous and disempowering jargon of the Depression Industry.

  • This article provides a background of what creates the jargon and lays the foundation for the first portion of why the jargon is illogical (and dangerous and disempowering).
  • Part 2 provides the second portion as to why the jargon is illogical, includes 27 likely causes of depression (and potential sources of joy), outlines some golden opportunities depression can create, and also discusses why the jargon in the depression industry is dangerous.
  • Part 3 shares seven of the main causes of mental and emotional distress and despair (and depression), and also details why the jargon the mental “health” industry uses for depression is disempowering.



[jahr-guh n, -gon]     noun

the language, especially the vocabulary, peculiar to a particular trade, profession, or group

Chances are that we have all seen it and used it before:


“When will the CARM be done?”


“What about the RPT model?”


“Have you looked into their competitive advantages?”


“We need to have a laser focused vision. . . “


“This is how you can 10x your productivity”


. . . if I see this phrase 1x more. . . I . . . may. . . LOSE IT!!!


I can’t wait until this 10x buzz-term goes away!


Setting the Buzz Aside

Setting the (annoying?) trendy buzz-words aside, jargon helps us get by. I bet it is true that within your working environment, there are certain terms, phrases, acronyms, and abbreviations that everyone uses quite often. Maybe even it seems as if your team has created a brand-new language altogether?


Full industries such as business and law have their own jargon. Different trades and subcultures such as sports and movies have their own jargon too.


By shrinking down certain commonly used terms and activities into much shorter statements and sayings jargon, helps us better communicate in many situations.


Some of this jargon is completely harmless. However, some jargon can be dangerous.


Judging by the title of this article, I imagine you’re somewhat interested how science and depression are intertwined into the jargon of the mental “health” industry and what you need to be aware of when they discuss mental “health”?


Why does Jargon Matter?

Some of you may be wondering why jargon is such an important issue. The answer to the question of, “Why does jargon matter?” is simply answered by this profound Fact:


Words do not describe your reality.

They create your reality.


If someone is running around saying, “My life is absolutely terrible!” all the time vs. “I have been getting a little frustrated lately.”, how much will that affect their reality?


Or if someone is saying, “Every single man (or woman) on the planet is a dirty piece of trash. NONE of them can be trusted!” vs. “Some guys (girls) are learning about life and need to be avoided for romantic purposes. If you’re patient you’ll naturally attract plenty of amazing men (women).”, how will that affect their dating life?


I could go on for hours about how the words you choose to use have a huge effect on your quality of life. I elaborate about these effects in “The Sally Story” included in this article.


We do not need to review the whole story now. The cliff notes to that story is the powerful Fact that words do not describe our reality, they create our reality. The Fact also is:


The more often you use disempowering language the less empowered you will feel. The more often you use empowering words, the more empowered and resilient you will feel.


Ultimately, the language you use to describe the mental and/or emotional distress you are feeling creates a certain reality for you. The reality you create can lead you to create an empowering reality (IE: “Your challenge can be conquered!”) or a disempowering reality (IE: “This is how you cope and manage with your challenge”, or “This will not go away.”).

The Sources of the Jargon

There are two dynamics to be aware of that influence and serve as the main sources of the illogical, dangerous, and disempowering jargon of the Depression Industry.


Jargon Source #1: The Mental “Health” Industry:

Mental and emotional distress has been classified as a “health” issue by the powers that be in society.


Part of the logic supporting this viewpoint is the Fact that science has been used to cure a wide variety of other physical health-related “distress”(IE: diseases, organ issues, broken bones, etc.). Thus, the logic is that if you use the same framework that has been proven time and again to work on physical distress, it also should work on mental and/or emotional distress.


In other words, the logic is that if we humans view mental and/or emotional distress as a “health” issue; just like we have found a cure for so many types of physical distress (aka “health issues”), we also will find the cure to these types of distress too.


Jargon Source #2: Science (and Statistics)

This is where science enters the mix. Or, more specifically, the scientific method.


For countless problems (both related to the human body and also problems completely unrelated to humans); the framework of the scientific method is what has consistently proven to be the best approach to follow when attempting to generate the best solution for a problem.


The Mental Health Industry is devoted to solving the problem of mental and/or emotional distress. Seeing as the scientific method has already helped us humans solve an incredibly wide variety of problems; naturally, this industry uses this time-tested and proven framework and method as well.

jargon of depression

As can be by the stars in this diagram, “data” is essential to the scientific method. This is where, ironically, a proven approach that has solved so many other problems actually contributes to creating many of the problems relating to the jargon of the Mental Health Industry.


This is because what is inherent to the analysis and interpretation of data is the “science of statistics”. The jargon of statistics has some serious shortcomings and dangers that need to be avoided when they are used to describe human behavior- especially depression.


Seeing as the Mental “Health” Industry is utilizing the scientific method (and therefore statistics) to attempt to solve the main problems experienced by the clients in their industry; the jargon of the scientific method and statistics is used heavily within the Mental “Health” Industry. Therefore this jargon is prevalent in the Depression Industry too.

HUGE Influence on the Industry

The Dictionary for the Jargon of Depression: the “DSM-V”


While we are on the topic of jargon, it is important to become aware of one document that has a HUGE influence on the entire Mental “Health” Industry (and therefore the Depression Industry too).


This is called the Diagnosis and Statistical Manual of Mental “Disorders” (or “DSM”). After a development process of over 10 years (from 2000 to 2013) the fifth version of the DSM manual was released in May of 2013. This replaced the fourth version (“DSM-IV”), which went into effect in 2000. Today’s DSM is often referenced as the “DSM-V”.


Who all uses this manual?

  1. 90% of the primary sources of payment for Mental Health Services in the U.S.
  2. Malpractice attorneys
  3. Legislators
  4. Education Systems


#1: Insurance Companies and Government Organizations use the DSM

SAMHSA Spending Estimates 2010-2020

Link to Report


As you can see above, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Association (“SAMHSA”- a federal U.S. agency) estimates that during 2014 approximately 90% (+/- $160 billion) of the $179 billion in spending that occurred in the United States for mental “healthcare” services was paid by either a federal or state organization, or a private insurance company.


This amount is expected to grow to $214 billion (90% of $238 billion) by 2020.


All of these organizations use the DSM, as all of them require a diagnostic code based on the manual before they will authorize payments to a provider.


A few hundred billion dollars ought to grab some people’s attention, right?

Side note:

Want a fun piece of jargon that gets some psychiatrists, therapists, and patients a little upset? Read this blogger’s post about “medical necessity”.

#2: Malpractice concerns draws attention to the DSM

Some of the most common reasons for malpractice lawsuits in the Mental Health Industry in the U.S. are from:

1) Making an improper diagnosis

2) Administering improper treatment or prescribing improper medications, or

3) Failing to notice or diagnose a harmful condition.


To determine if any of these three occurred, the DSM will undoubtedly be referenced and relied upon.


#3: Legislators use the DSM

Many laws and regulations require professionals to be educated and trained in diagnosing the different types of mental and/or emotional distress. In fact, for one of the types of licenses professionals can obtain in California, the state’s law requires that individuals be formally trained in the:


“Diagnosis, assessment, prognosis, and treatment of mental disorders, including severe mental disorders, evidence-based practices, psychological testing, psychopharmacology, and promising mental health practices that are evaluated in peer reviewed literature.”


#4: The Education System is very aware of the DSM

The laws legislators have implemented essentially forces the university system’s hand to be very aware of the topic of “diagnosis”. Thus, at some point in the curriculum, students will review the various types of terms, phrases, acronyms, and abbreviations (aka “jargon”) the psychology industry uses to describe different forms of mental and/or emotional distress. In many ways, licensed professionals time in the education system gets them speaking the jargon of the DSM automatically.


The Entire System in the U.S. Uses the DSM

Mental Health Workforce

The four categories in the previous sections cover a wide range of people and organizations. This includes the 400,000+ professionals that use the DSM; plus, all of the legislators, educational department heads, professors, students, attorneys, researchers, and laboratory professionals; plus all of the employees in insurance companies that deal with mental “health” related claims and topics too.


These individuals create the vast majority of the Mental “Healthcare” Industry the United states, and all of them use and/or are influenced by the DSM. It is safe to say that pretty much everyone in the traditional and conventional mental healthcare system uses this manual here in the U.S.


Given how influential this document is on the mental healthcare system, the DSM is an excellent reference for the problematic jargon of the Mental Health Industry. In fact, it is essentially a dictionary where you can find all the illogical, dangerous, and disempowering jargon that the industry uses.

The Specific Jargon that is Problematic

Ultimately, the Fact that a good portion of the powers that be in society view mental and/or emotional distress as a “health” issue (Jargon Source #1) plus the Fact that we humans are attempting to conquer these problems using the framework of the scientific method and statistics (Jargon Source #2) combine to create the problematic jargon of the Mental Health Industry (and the Depression Industry too).


There are two categories of terms and phrases (aka jargon) that the marriage between these two sources create.


Category #1: “Normalcy” Terms

One category has to do with terms related to, “What is normal?” or, “normalcy” for short. This is largely influenced by the scientific community. Any statistician will tell you that the language of statistics is heavily focused on normal distributions of certain data points, sample sets, probabilities, etc.


Category #2: “Health” Terms

The second category of terms has to do with terms related to “health” and “diseases” and “illness”.  These are terms often focused on by the health industry.


To show how prevalent these terms are in the Mental “Health” Industry, please see this review of the DSM-V below:

Normalcy and Health DSM Table

The word “disorder” is used nearly 13,000 times in the DSM (12,807 times, by my count). In fact, throughout the manual, the word “disorder” averages being used +/- 13.5 times per page.


It sure seems as if the mental health professionals like their disorders, doesn’t it?


Those of you whom guessed the word “disorder” as being a main culprit of this problematic jargon were correct.


Much more on why the word disorder is so problematic in the next sections. For now, just remember that there are three pretty important and common “normalcy-related terms” to be aware of. These are:


Disorder. Dysfunction. Abnormal.


The “health” related terms to be aware of will be discussed later in this article series.

Why this Jargon is Illogical, Dangerous, and Disempowering

Again, this jargon is quite prevalent throughout the entire Mental Health Industry. The main concern for this article is the problems it creates within the Depression Industry. To introduce why this jargon is illogical, dangerous, and disempowering; we are going to walk through an exercise called the “Bobby Exercise”.


*My apologies in advance to anyone that goes by this name*.


This exercise may be difficult for some. The exercise involves thinking about some pretty uncomfortable things. It could possibly trigger some very personal responses for some people.


Unfortunately, uncomfortable things are at the heart of mental and/or emotional distress, so they cannot be avoided in this conversation. The Fact that “uncomfortable things” exist will prove exactly why the jargon that is used so commonly by the Depression Industry is so troubling.


Stay strong. It will be worth it.


This will help you see the labels used in the jargon of the mental health industry much differently.

The Bobby Exercise:

Again, I warned you. This may not be the most pleasant experience for everyone.


Please follow the exercise though.


Remember, no matter how personal this may be, this is all only in your mind.


It will be worth it.


Let’s Call Him Bobby

For this exercise, let’s consider a hypothetical person to put through these experiences.


Let’s call him Bobby.


Exercise Part A:

First, I want you to think of a type of abuse that disturbs you the most. The type of abuse that disgusts you and upsets you, and you wish never would happen to any human being. Something that involves mean, ignorant behavior, and completely innocent victims.


Once you got that, take a breath.


This is just your imagination.


It will be over soon.


Exercise Part B:

Now, I want you to think of what would be the most traumatic type of experience someone could go through. Yes, maybe the abuse you thought of in Part A is traumatic in its own right. If so, pick something different and in addition to the thing you picked for Part A.


Maybe pick an event. Something that creates a sense of some sort of extreme loss. Something that makes people question, “How could this happen?” or, “Why does this even happen?”


Got it?


Okay, now you have two things total- an abusive event from Part A and a traumatic event from Part B.


Remember, both of these “uncomfortable” things are only in your mind.



Exercise Part C:

The DSM has a list of “symptoms” (as they like to call it) for each of the “disorders” outlined in the manual.


So you can see firsthand how the jargon becomes troubling, illogical, dangerous, and disempowering for depression, specifically; let’s go through the symptoms of depression.


A good summary of the symptoms of depression as per the DSM-V is available here. The main “symptoms” for what the DSM-V calls “major depressive disorder” are copied below:


1) Depressed mood most of the day, nearly every day, as indicated by either subjective report (e.g., feels sad, empty, hopeless) or observation made by others (e.g., appears tearful)

2) Markedly diminished interest or pleasure in all, or almost all, activities most of the day, nearly every day (as indicated by either subjective account or observation)

3) Significant weight loss when not dieting or weight gain (e.g., a change of more than 5% of body weight in a month), or decrease or increase in appetite nearly every day

4) Insomnia or hypersomnia nearly every day

5) Psychomotor agitation or retardation nearly every day (observable by others, not merely subjective feelings of restlessness or being slowed down)

6) Fatigue or loss of energy nearly every day

7) Feelings of worthlessness or excessive or inappropriate guilt (which may be delusional) nearly every day (not merely self-reproach or guilt about being sick)

8) Diminished ability to think or concentrate, or indecisiveness, nearly every day (either by subjective account or as observed by others)

9) Recurrent thoughts of death (not just fear of dying), recurrent suicidal ideation without a specific plan, or a suicide attempt or a specific plan for committing suicide


The DSM-V then basically says if five or more of those symptoms have been present during the same two-week period, it qualifies as a “Major Depressive Episode” or “MDE”. Later on the manual clarifies that only one (1) MDE qualifies for the diagnosis of “Major Depressive Disorder” or “MDD”.


Yes, only one two-week period counts as a full-on disorder in the eyes of the DSM.


Welcome to the jargon of the Mental Health Industry for depression, specifically.


Side Note:

There are multiple "tests" and " rating scales" traditional mental "health" professionals can use to determine if "depression" exists. As detailed in the beginning of this article, the vast majority of the mental healthcare system relies on the DSM-V in order to process payments. Seeing how much money relies on this manual, the "symptoms" from the DSM-V have been outlined above.


Exercise Part D:

Now, take the symptoms above, and bring up the abusive event you thought of in Part A.


Here is where it will start getting difficult for poor Bobby.


Put Bobby through that hell.


Then ask yourself, “Does it make sense for Bobby to exhibit these “symptoms” based on the experience he went through in Part A?”


In other words, “If Bobby went through the terrible event and abuse from Part A, would it be “normal” for Bobby to exhibit these symptoms at some point in his life?”


Let’s say the event we thought of for Part A was that Bobby was routinely beaten physically by his parents.


If this were the case, and Bobby went through the hell of being routinely beaten by his parents, to complete Part D of this exercise while using depression as our chosen “disorder” from Part C, we would ask:


What do you think the odds are that at some point in his life Bobby may have a ‘depressed mood’ and/or ‘disinterest in certain things’?”. . .


“How likely do you think it is that Bobby would have ‘sleeping issues’ or ‘diet issues’?”. . .


“If Bobby went through this hell, then what are the odds that he would be ‘fatigued’ or feel worthless for just two (2) weeks consecutively during his life?”



Ask yourself this question:


If Bobby was routinely beaten by his parents, don’t you think it would be very, very likely (IE: “normal”) that he would exhibit these behaviors (aka “symptoms”) at some point in his life?



Exercise Part E:

To drive home the point of just how big of a shortcoming it is to use the word “disorder”, now go ahead and put Bobby through the abusive event you thought of in Part A (which is likely traumatic in its own right) AND then add the traumatic event you thought of for Part B.


. . . Poor Bobby. . .


Then ask yourself the same questions:


“If Bobby went through the abusive even in Part A AND went through the traumatic event of Part B, would it make sense for Bobby to experience the “symptoms” of  depression?”


In other words, would his behavior be “normal” if considered in this context?


Exercise Part F:

Let’s make the point even more clear:


Now put Bobby through 3 separate abusive “Part A events” AND 3 separate “traumatic Part B events”.


Would his actions be “normal” relative to the “symptoms” of Part C?


Would he even survive?


Now put poor Bobby through 10 Part A’s and 10 Part B’s . . . .


Would his behavior be considered “normal” if he went through that many hells?




Okay. You’re done.


And poor Bobby is done.


Again, all of this was in your mind. Please remember that.

This Jargon is Illogical

Here is why the jargon typically used to describe depression by the Mental Health Industry (and the Depression Industry) is illogical. A lot of the lack of logic has to do with all of the “normalcy- related terms”, and what is considered “orderly” etc.


What would be Logical?

Let’s get a little technical to provide the first reason why the “normalcy-related terms”. I must say that we will set aside the important question of, “If we want to provide the best solution for the client, is starting with the topic “normalcy” the best place to start to help the client?” for now.  Let’s go ahead and assume someone did indeed want to determine, “What is normal?”


If that is the case, what would be logical to do would be to analyze the behaviors of individuals that went through similar life experiences, and then compare those people to each other instead of comparing them to people who went through a completely different experience than them.


This is clearly indicated by the Bobby exercise. It is simply illogical to compare people with ABC levels of abuse and/or trauma to those with 321 levels of abuse and/or trauma. It is also incredibly unreasonable to compare those with ABC or 321 abuse and/or trauma to those that experienced zero or no trauma.


Making any of these comparisons (IE: ABC vs. 321, or ABC vs. Zero, or 321 vs. Zero) is effectively using data on shapes of bananas to determine the “normal” shape of an apple. Yes, they are both types of fruit, but they are inherently drastically different from the start.


This use bananas to analyze “normal” apples is a form of what statisticians call “selection bias”, and is a fundamental concept that all statisticians attempt to avoid.


Ultimately, the following Fact holds true and needs to be considered in any conversation about what is “normal” and “orderly” behavior:


Someone who grew up under a bridge will have a much different view on life than someone who grew up in the house of a billionaire.

It is not logical, nor fair, nor arguably even moral to compare those that have been through abuse and trauma to those that have not been through any abuse or trauma to determine “normal” and “orderly” behavior.


By not explicitly providing guidance on how to incorporate this Fact into the diagnosing process, the DSM and the entire Mental “Health” Industry creates a lot of illogical (and dangerous, and disempowering) diagnoses. This is especially true for depression.



Ironic Illogic

This is one of the largest shortcomings of the mental "health" industry, (and also the depression industry too). Ironically, the very thing (IE: science and statistics) that influences the jargon and mindset behind calling it a “disorder” and using other normalcy-related terms has been proven in many, many, many studies that certain types of mental and emotional distress are completely normal for us humans to exhibit if we have been exposed to some form of trauma and/or abuse.


In other words, countless scientific research studies have proven that prior experiences of trauma and/or abuse have resulted in much higher odds of experiencing pretty much every single type of mental and emotional distress imaginable.


Below is a list of links to studies and/or detailed articles that describe childhood trauma and/or abuse and how it impacts various types of mental health “disorders”.


Childhood Trauma and/or Abuse and its relation to:


Other Studies:



This is just a few of the thousands (maybe even millions) of studies that are out there. All of these studies use the scientific method and statistics. All of the data and statistics from these studies show that for those that have been exposed to childhood abuse and/or trauma it is quite normal and “orderly” to exhibit some form of mental and/or emotional distress later in life.


However, for some reason (or is it rea$on$?), the mental “health” industry still uses the term “disorder” to describe behavior that has been scientifically proven to be completely normal when viewed in the correct context of what that person went through in their life.


It is ironic that the very thing the mental “health” industry relies upon (IE: science and statistics) seems to be ignored when they pick the words they use to describe the countless facts and figures they have.



A Brief Comment on PTSD

Some may have said, “Well, poor Bobby clearly went through something that will cause Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (“PTSD”).”


Given the severity of the events we thought of in The Bobby Exercise, you are very likely correct. Unfortunately, in situations where multiple abuse and/or trauma has occurred, the DSM does NOT say that the diagnosis of Major Depressive “Disorder” should be avoided in exchange for solely PTSD. The DSM actually recommends the exact opposite. Here is the excerpt about PTSD from the Depression section of the DSM:


Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)

PTSD may include symptoms shared by a depressive episode and may also be comorbid with a depressive episode. PTSD is associated with exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury, and/or sexual violence. It includes intrusive flashbacks, nightmares, psychological and/or physical reactivity to cues of the event, avoidance of cues of the event (both internal and external), negative alterations in mood, and hyperarousal and reactivity (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).


For those of you that are not familiar with it (I wasn’t until I first read it), that morbid word comorbid means being “present simultaneously in a patient”. In other words, the DSM biases towards having two disorders instead of one.


The DSM and the Mental Health Industry sure like their di$order$, don’t they?

What about those that didn’t?

So What About Those that Did Not Experience Abuse and/or Trauma?

Setting aside the Fact that certain incentive$ exist for mental health professionals to say that abuse and/or trauma have occurred, to answer the question of; “What about those that did not experience any abuse and/or trauma?” it must be acknowledged that this question opens up a discussion on the topics of, “What is enough to be considered ‘abuse’?” and, “What is enough to be considered ‘traumatic’?”.


I will say that my personal bias is to use the terms of abuse and trauma as infrequently as possible.


I will also say that you must have to have the courage, humility, and integrity to call a spade a spade.


That is a VERY, very difficult thing for some people to do- especially on the topics of trauma and abuse. This is largely because the question of “What is abuse?” often automatically gets people to think about their parents. And THAT is a loaded topic, to say the least.


The most difficult part for most people to accept is the Fact that abuse (and trauma) can occur even though their parents love them, and love them deeply and dearly.


Abuse and trauma has a lot more to do with skill than it does love- more specifically, parenting skills. Some parents have high levels of emotional intelligence and coping skills, while some parents do not.


My favorite book on the topic of parenting skills is a book by pioneering child psychologist Haim Ginott (wikipedia). This book is titled “Between Parent and Child”. If all of society read and embraced this book and its proven philosophies it would drastically change the entire planet. Feel free to read it when you want to : )


Ultimately, the questions of, “What is abuse?” and, “What is traumatic?” are beyond the scope of this article. However, it is worth briefly highlighting two simple dynamics that help determine what can be considered “abusive” and/or “traumatic”. These are:

  1. A) Intensity (How much?) and
  2. B) Frequency (How often?)


Some events are so egregious and disgusting in intensity that just one-time is traumatic (let’s call these a 7.0+ out of 10.0 for now). Sometimes just ongoing low-level abuse (IE: neglect, criticisms, etc.) over a long period of time (IE: a high “frequency”) can be quite traumatic. In other words, a continued culture and environment with a high frequency events with a level of intensity of 3.0 – 5.0+ can be traumatic (and maybe even abusive).


Just keep these in mind for any research or ponderings you do on “abuse and trauma” and what they are, etc.


In addition to researching what is abuse (physical, mental, sexual, and emotional), here are some other studies worth reviewing as well:


Below are two links to a “fun” topic that gets many people riled up. There is a lot of research out there that shows there are some negative side effects so it is worth getting on your radar:

How to conquer depression

How to Conquer Depression

Free eBook

Receive a free copy of's eBook on How to Conquer Depression by registering below. In this eBook you will find proven methods to generate a Breakthrough in your depression, and practical skills and strategies you can start using today to conquer your depression once and for all.

How to Conquer Depression

How to Conquer Depression

Free eBook
Receive a free copy of's eBook on How to Conquer Depression by registering below. In this eBook you will find proven methods to generate a Breakthrough in your depression, and practical skills and strategies you can start using today to conquer your depression once and for all.


That is the end of Part 1.


Part 2 picks up with some additional information to be aware of as to why it is illogical to use the term “disorder” to describe distress people experience that have not been exposed to trauma or abuse during their childhood. It shares 27 likely causes of depression (and potential sources of joy), and also describes a golden opportunity that is invaluable if you take advantage of it.


It also describes the difference between self-esteem (and self-wroth) vs. self-confidence. These three terms are commonly misunderstood. They also are key to conquering any type of challenge. Understanding these three terms also helps you appreciate why it is so dangerous to use the majority of the jargon that the Depression Industry uses


Part 2 is the part where the dangerous nature of the jargon of the depression industry is discussed. Part 3 discusses why it is disempowering, and also describes why mental “health” industry has “health” in quotations throughout this article series.


I hope you found Part 1 informative and enlightening. Most of all, please remember that:


Someone who grew up under a bridge will have a much different view on life than someone who grew up in the house of a billionaire.

It is not logical, nor fair, nor arguably even moral to compare those that have been through abuse and trauma to those that have not been through any abuse or trauma to determine “normal” and “orderly” behavior.

Take care, and enjoy Part 2.

65 Tall PNG

I know everyone asks for this, but I could use all the help I can get in getting the message out there. If you enjoyed the article,  I would sincerely appreciate if you shared it and/or commented below. Also, if you have not done so yet, liking's Facebook page or Subscribing to the site's YouTube Channel would also go a long way.

Thank you in advance for your support!

Get Going in the Right Direction Again

If you're interested in working together with someone who has been there before and has some alternative perspectives that have proven to be effective, please visit the link below to learn more about working with John. This link will take you to information about working together with him that is posted on his main website- 
  • 4

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

Notify of