My first preferences in front of the television were perhaps a clue that I would make a career out of research. Psychological trauma. I spent my youth watching the American war comedy-drama M*A*S*H*, which followed a team of doctors and support staff stationed at the 4077th Mobile Army Surgical Hospital in Uijeongbu, South Korea, during the Korean War. . When I was 20, I became a fan of the Chicago-based emergency room drama ER.
In these television series, which reflect the era in which they are set, the term “trauma” refers only to devastating physical injuries. The term has since become a common term to describe the psychology of extreme events as well as physical injuries, but it retains a medical connotation that I think is unhelpful.
My investigation radically reframes psychological trauma. Rather than trying to specify what is “bad” about those who are negatively affected by psychological trauma, I focus on the shared characteristics that put some, and not others, at risk for trauma. These shared attributes, known as social identities, are also very important for trauma recovery.
Life-changing events are common and the most common response to traumatic events is psychological resilience: people bounce back. 90% of people People who experience direct traumatic events such as war, sexual assault, traffic accidents and natural disasters do not have adverse long-term psychological outcomes. For the most part, people manage these events and move on.
But while most people show resilience, traumatic experiences can and often do change them, creating new identities. For example, war and grief can create refugees, orphans, and widows. But trauma can also make existing identities really important.
The continuing case of the UK’s sub-postmasters wrongfully convicted Financial mismanagement is a case in point. Their response, led by the Justice for Subpostmasters’ Alliance, has been based both on their occupational identity as subpostmasters and the greater sense of social connection that results from The injustice they suffered.
Risk and resilience
A growing body of research has highlighted that there are many responses to psychological trauma beyond the negative personal consequences of trauma articulated in health and medicine. Some post-traumatic responses are more positive than negative, some are more social and political. how psychological.
Psychological trauma is a complex personal, social and political phenomenon. Life circumstances are key to both the risk of a traumatic experience and recovery. children and Adults.
I worked as part of a research team Nepal after the major earthquakes in 2015. Our findings showed that people’s social status, linked to the historical caste system, determined the amount of psychological trauma they experienced and also the degree of community belonging they felt after the earthquakes. Together, these attributes explained who showed symptoms of Post traumatic stress.
Clinical models of psychological trauma seek to treat people individually through the use of medications and therapies. This can result in the health benefits of being part of a community or social group being overlooked.
The pandemic has taught us that the ability to work together is crucial for physical and psychological health in difficult times. Similarly, individual resilience often depends on social cohesion during threatening times.
Even after the most difficult and life-threatening experiences, many people report experiencing “post-traumatic growth”, which is often described as a renewed appreciation and interest in life. Our research indicates that identity- and group-based connections are crucial to these more positive outcomes.
People can also show collective post-traumatic growthIn these cases, survivors construct a collective understanding of how traumatic experiences are linked to their identities. This not only allows connections between those affected, as in the case of Subpostmasters of the United Kingdombut it also makes it easier to react against powerful systems that may have caused the problem in the first place and continue to make a bad situation worse.
Resilience is political
The least powerful in any society – the poor, ethnic minorities, women, the disabled, the very young and the elderly – are those who are disproportionately affected by psychological trauma. These groups may struggle to have their voices heard, so coming together to speak as one can enable the effective pursuit of justice and positive social change. Survivors often express this as the “the best medicine”.
Traumatic experiences, instead of resulting in passivity and victimization, can consolidate a Sense of collective self and collective agency – our sense of who we are and what we can achieve. Solidarity among people affected by trauma can strengthen existing solidarity. social connections and prompt collective action with political consequences.
We have seen this process take shape over the #Me too and #Black lives matter This kind of identity-based solidarity is also at the heart of those now seeking to hold those in power to account over the UK Post Office scandal.
But why then is the medical approach still used for psychological trauma? It certainly has a significant health cost in terms of cost of disability worldwide for a small but significant minority of people affected by trauma. This explains some of the reasons we continue to use a medical perspective.
As a viewer of ER and M*A*S*H*, I became invested in and admired the health care professionals and followed their stories week to week. The dramatic focus was rarely on the victims. Being seen as someone who helps is a winning response, but it diverts our attention from prevention and protecting people vulnerable to trauma. That should be our focus.
