I recently read the following parable: In the 30s of the 20th century in Japan, an enterprise purchased a machine for its production in the USA. After some time, the equipment manufacturers received a telegram with the following content: The machine is not working. Send an adjuster. The machine manufacturer sent its specialist to Japan and after some time received a new telegram: Your adjuster is too young, send a more experienced one. In response to this, the following telegram was sent: We advise you to use his services, he is the inventor of the machine. I think this is a familiar situation for many, when a younger specialist is automatically perceived as less experienced in comparison with a more, so to speak, older colleague. Of course, the problem is not global in nature and the situation tends to change at the present time, but still I would like to say a few words on this issue, namely, regarding the situation with psychological help and young psychologists in particular. I periodically hear the opinion that a psychologist can be almost an elderly person only, because in order to be useful in solving many issues, such as relationships between people, raising children, family relationships, working with muscle tension, etc., you need to have a lot of life experience. A fairly common question that can be heard: If a psychologist does not yet have his own family, then how can he solve family issues? But, gentlemen, I want to object, look around: how many people with great life experience are around, but which of them helped you? Unfortunately, simply having life experience to become a psychologist is quite problematic, and probably simply impossible. It is not life experience as such that determines how useful a specialist can be to you, but his professional training, which you can have at a relatively young age . Training primarily in the field of practical activities in long-term specialized courses training consultants and therapists. It’s not even theoretical preparation that comes first, although it is, of course, very important, namely preparation for practical activity, which, alas, our higher education does not provide now, and did not provide before (if you have counter examples, I will glad if you share them). And it may well turn out that a younger specialist has better training and, therefore, works better. Experience is, of course, also very important, but it must be created on a solid basis, and if there is none, experience itself may also not be an indicator of qualifications. Of course, it’s great when a specialist has good preparation for practical activities, experience, and constantly expands his knowledge in theory! But if a specialist is young, this also means that he cannot work at a fairly high professional level. Yes, and he still has life experience. And who said that it is worse than the experience of the one who lived longer?