There's nothing good about human suffering. At all.

The utilitarian perspective is best as a practitioner's philosophy for any care or health profession. It's the most realistic and pragmatic, but also the safest.

We refer to people who have mental disorders as sufferers. There's a good reason for that. Suffering is never good, or positive, or healthy, or even corrective.

It's just suffering.

There's plenty of suffering to go around, but that's NOT a reason to embrace suffering, because:

1. You can't get an ought from an is

2. The naturalistic fallacy is a fallacy for a reason

Since the objective of the mental health profession is supposed to be to alleviate or even fix (if possible) the internalising and externalising symptoms of patients and clients suffering mental health problems, it DOES necessarily follow that carers and therapists need to have a utilitarian (classical Benthamite and Millian) attitude to human suffering: that it should be minimised or eliminated.

If a person is in a carer or therapy/counselling role and does not have the objective of stopping the suffering of their client/patient, then they should find a different profession.

Think about it this way. Do you really want your psychological help and care - or any part of your life for that matter - to be in the hands of people who don't value your happiness as real, attainable, and healthy?

I don't.

I have met all kinds of religious cult leader - from Buddhist to Christ cult (and many others) - who devalue, minimise, ignore and/or denigrate happiness and the idea of people attaining happiness. These are Voltaire's scoundrels. In many cases they're doing what they do because they were no use in any real profession or application. Their entire 'calling' is deeply pathological and attracts pathological personalities.

Their central doctrine in reality is 'misery loves company'. They have given up on happiness - but in truth most of them (especially the ones with trait APD-psychopathy) just don't care about YOUR happiness.

Trusting such people as counsellors or life guides is certainly a mistake.