When Help Is a Form of Control

Help is usually assumed to be benevolent. Offers of support are culturally associated with care, generosity, and goodwill. However, psychological and organisational research suggests that help can sometimes function as a mechanism of control, particularly in contexts marked by power asymmetry (Williams & Dempsey, 2018; Ashforth et al., 2016).

This does not mean that help is insincere. It means that its effects are not always neutral.

Help and asymmetry

Research on power dynamics shows that help is rarely offered between equals. It typically flows from those with greater authority, status, or perceived competence to those with less (Ashforth et al., 2016). This asymmetry matters. Studies indicate that when help is unsolicited, vaguely defined, or difficult to refuse, it can:

• position the recipient as lacking

• create implicit obligation

• limit autonomy

In such cases, help does not simply address need — it redefines the relationship.

When help replaces dialogue

Organisational research suggests that help can sometimes substitute for genuine engagement. Rather than addressing structural or relational issues, assistance is offered at the individual level (Williams & Dempsey, 2018).

Examples include:

• advice given instead of listening

• solutions offered before problems are agreed

• reassurance that closes down further discussion

Studies on sensemaking indicate that such interventions can interrupt meaning-making rather than support it, particularly when they pre-empt the recipient’s own understanding (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014).

The emotional impact of controlling help

Clinical research suggests that help which bypasses consent or mutual understanding can evoke confusion, indebtedness, or diminished agency (Prilleltensky, 2014).

People often report:

• feeling subtly corrected rather than supported

• struggling to decline assistance without appearing ungrateful

• doubting their own competence after “helpful” interventions

Research on epistemic trust indicates that these experiences can undermine confidence in one’s own judgement, especially when help is framed as expertise rather than collaboration (Fonagy & Allison, 2014).

Help as regulation

From a psychological perspective, some forms of help function as regulatory acts. They manage uncertainty, difference, or discomfort by directing the other person’s behaviour or interpretation (Ashforth et al., 2016). Importantly, this does not require conscious intent. Help can be genuinely well-meaning and still constrain autonomy. Research on institutional dynamics shows that such patterns are more likely to affect those who are:

• conscientious

• minoritised

• positioned as learners or dependents

(Williams & Dempsey, 2018; Freyd, 2018).

Differentiating support from control

Psychological research suggests that the distinction between support and control lies less in intention than in process (Kahn, 2017).

Support tends to:

• invite consent

• preserve agency

• allow disagreement

• remain responsive

Control, by contrast, tends to:

• presume need

• close down alternatives

• make refusal costly

Noticing this difference can be clarifying, particularly for individuals who feel unsettled after being “helped.”

A note on refusal

From a clinical perspective, recognising when help is constraining rather than supportive does not require confrontation. It may simply involve reasserting internal authority.

You are allowed to decline assistance that disorients you.

You are allowed to want understanding before solutions.

You are allowed to trust your discomfort.

Research suggests that preserving agency in these moments is central to psychological wellbeing, even when it risks disappointing others (Prilleltensky, 2014; Fonagy et al., 2017).