There has been some confusion regarding reassurance seeking and providing in this subreddit.
Reassurance seeking (a person asking for reassurance) is allowed only if it is limited — no repeated seeking of reassurance.
Reassurance providing (a person giving reassurance) is not allowed.
What constitutes reassurance providing?
Before commenting on a reassurance-seeking question, answer to yourself this question: Are you directly answering what the person is asking, and is the answer meant to cause the person to feel better?
If the answer leads towards a "yes", refrain from commenting.
How should I comment on reassurance-seeking questions then?
The issue concerned in reassurance-seeking questions is the emotional obsessive distress that is occurring in the moment, not the question itself.
When you answer those reassurance-seeking questions to quell the person's emotional obsessive distress, it's an act of providing emotional comfort to the person — even if you don't have such explicit intention in mind — rather than an act of providing knowledge.
The person just wants to know they are "fine" in relation to the obsessive question/thought. The answer itself is irrelevant — that's why we don't answer questions of a reassurance-seeking nature directly.
You can comment in any way you want — even providing encouragement and hope — but refrain from addressing the reassurance-seeking question itself.
What if the reassurance-seeking question turns out to be true?
Consider this question: What if the reassurance-seeking question didn't even occur in the first place? What then?
We can go round and round with more "what-ifs", but it circles back to the fact that reality is uncertain, and will always be uncertain. That is why the acceptance of uncertainty is crucial to recovery.
Does that mean the reassurance-seeking question is totally invalid? Because I had a question that was based on reality.
Take note that in the context of OCD, the issue rests with how a person is dealing with the issues, and not so much the issues themselves.
The issues can be entirely valid, but what we are dealing with here — especially with reassurance — is how we respond to such issues.
Separate the reassurance part — the emotional comfort part — from the issues themselves.
All of this is not true. My therapist taught me in the beginning of therapy that these thoughts are not true, and then I got better.
It's important to understand the intent and purpose of each and every information provided.
When a person with OCD is beginning to learn about OCD, they can be taught, for example, that the obsessive thoughts do not reflect on their true character.
The intent and purpose of that example information is cognitive-based — to educate the person — and that helps to, subsequently, be followed up by ERP, which is behavioural-based — hence cognitive-behavioural therapy (of which ERP is a part of).
When a person seeks reassurance, it is mostly solely behavioural: the concern here is to quell the emotional obsessive distress — take that emotional obsessive distress away, and the reassurance-seeking question suddenly becomes largely irrelevant and of less urgency.
This is so un-compassionate. Are we seriously going to let these people suffer?
Providing reassurance doesn't really help the person not suffer either — the way out of that suffering is through the proper therapy and treatment, and providing reassurance to the person only interferes with this process.
Consider as well that if reassurance is provided to the person, where an outcome is guaranteed to the person ("You won't be this! I guarantee you!").
What if the reassurance turns out to be false? What happens then? How much more distressful would the person be (given that they would've trusted the reassurance to keep them safe, only now for their entire world to fall apart)?
Before considering that not providing reassurance is un-compassionate, perhaps it's also wise to consider what providing reassurance can lead to as well.
The reality will always be uncertain, as it is. There is no such solution that guarantees the person won't suffer, but we can at least minimise the suffering by doing what is helpful towards the person (especially in terms of the therapy and treatment) — and that doesn't always necessarily entail making the person feel better in the moment.