Listening Beneath the Surface: How Educators Can Decode Pathological Behavior

Charles Mathison
3 days ago
4 min read

In special education, some of the most challenging behaviors we encounter are not impulsive acts or defiance—they are stories being retold in real time. A student who throws water on others months after feeling slighted is not being irrational; he is remembering, reliving, and re-enacting something that hurt him deeply. Another student who consistently clashes with school authority is not resisting structure for the sake of rebellion; she is protecting herself from an old experience of control that once felt unsafe. A third may fabricate stories of harassment, not to manipulate, but to rewrite her narrative in a way that gives her agency.

These are not isolated incidents of misbehavior. They are pathologies—patterns of reaction that have taken root from lived trauma. When we approach these behaviors with the goal of “fixing,” we often miss their function. Pathology is not random; it is meaning made visible.

Understanding the Roots of Pathological Behavior

Pathological behaviors emerge from a child’s attempt to cope with overwhelming emotional experiences. What looks like manipulation, defiance, or drama is often a defense—a protective mechanism built to maintain a sense of control in a world that once felt uncontrollable.

Retaliation pathology says, “You hurt me once; I’ll make sure you never forget it.”
Authority pathology says, “Adults control me, and control is dangerous.”
Fantasy or fabrication pathology says, “If I can reshape the story, I can feel safe inside it.”
Projection pathology says, “If I dramatize others’ flaws, I don’t have to face my own pain.”

Each of these patterns is a symptom of something deeper—trauma that was never fully processed. These behaviors are not choices in the conventional sense. They are conditioned responses born out of self-preservation.

Why “Fixing” Doesn’t Work

Educators, particularly those in therapeutic and special settings, are often taught to correct, redirect, and modify behavior. While structure and accountability are essential, “fixing” pathological behavior without addressing its emotional undercurrent leads to temporary compliance, not long-term growth.

To “fix” implies that something is broken. But children with trauma are not broken—they are wounded. Their behaviors, as disruptive as they may be, often make sense within the logic of their lived experience.

Instead of asking, “How do I make this behavior stop?” we must ask, “What is this behavior protecting?” This shift from control to curiosity transforms the teacher’s role from enforcer to interpreter.

Counseling Over Correction

In working with students whose behaviors stem from pathology, my approach is rooted in counseling rather than correction. Counseling, in this context, does not mean formal therapy—it means creating space for dialogue, reflection, and trust.

I listen more than I lecture. I focus less on the immediate behavior and more on the emotional logic behind it. When a student lies, retaliates, or dramatizes, I try to uncover what the act accomplishes for them—what need it fulfills, what fear it shields.

This doesn’t mean the student avoids consequences. Boundaries remain clear and consistent. But the tone shifts from punitive to restorative. Consequences are paired with conversation. The goal is not obedience; it is awareness.

The Educator as Therapeutic Witness

Teachers are not therapists, but they can serve as therapeutic witnesses. A therapeutic witness listens without judgment, holds emotional space, and models regulation even when the student cannot.

When an educator says, “I notice you seem upset when you feel unheard,” rather than “Stop overreacting,” the student experiences a new kind of adult interaction—one that does not escalate or abandon. Over time, this consistency becomes corrective in itself. The adult becomes the stable presence that trauma once denied.

Predictability is the foundation of safety. Many pathological behaviors lose power when the student learns that adults can remain calm, consistent, and caring—even in the face of provocation.

Reframing the Goal: From Compliance to Capacity

Traditional classroom management often seeks compliance: quiet, control, order. But students with deep emotional wounds need something different—capacity. The goal is not for them to simply follow directions, but to build the internal capacity to self-regulate, reflect, and trust.

Educators can foster this capacity through:

Micro-trust building: Following through on every promise, no matter how small.
Emotional labeling: Teaching students to name what they feel before acting on it.
Delayed reflection: Discussing incidents after emotions settle, allowing space for insight.
Safe outlets: Encouraging writing, art, or private conversations as tools for processing.

These approaches cultivate agency. Students begin to recognize their emotions as data rather than threats, and over time, they develop the language to describe what once only erupted through behavior.

The Long Arc of Healing

Progress for students with pathologies is rarely linear. Regression is part of recovery. A student may lie less frequently, retaliate less intensely, or show remorse sooner. Each of these moments, however small, represents growth.

Healing does not always look like the absence of a problem; sometimes it looks like awareness emerging within the problem. When students begin to say, “I got mad because I felt ignored,” instead of acting out, that is the quiet evidence of internal change.

From Control to Compassion

Educators who work with children shaped by trauma must remember that our task is not to “fix” pathology—it is to understand it. When we do, we become part of a healing process that is both educational and human.

Every act of defiance, every fabrication, every delayed retaliation is a signal from a student’s past asking to be heard. Our response—measured, compassionate, and consistent—can help rewrite that story.

In the end, teaching students with pathologies is less about managing behavior and more about restoring dignity. When we stop seeing pathology as defiance and begin seeing it as communication, we teach our students—and ourselves—that understanding is the first step toward healing.

Maynard, B. R., et al. “Effects of Trauma-Informed Approaches in Schools.” School Psychology Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 3, 2019, pp. 275-290. PMC, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8356508/. (PMC)
Sweetman, Norah. “What Is a Trauma Informed Classroom? What Are the Benefits and Challenges Involved?” Frontiers in Education, vol. 7, 2022, article 914448, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2022.914448/full. (Frontiers)
Emerson, A. “The Case for Trauma-Informed Behaviour Policies.” Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2022.2093956. (Taylor & Francis Online)
Clay, Shaleen; Cravens, Jason; Dutton, Catherine. “The Difficulty of Bearing Witness: Experiences of Educators and Therapists with Childhood Trauma.” American Journal of Qualitative Research, vol. 8, no. 1, 2024, pp. 71-88. AJQR, https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/14085. (ajqr.org)