In today’s increasingly interconnected and turbulent world, trauma has become a shared experience for many. It stems not only from personal losses but also from widespread adversities triggered by both natural disasters and human-made crises. The scale and frequency of these events have expanded our collective understanding of this injury , affecting individuals, communities, and entire populations across the globe.
Natural disasters, exacerbated by climate change, have inflicted immense damage on communities worldwide. According to the UNHCR, an average of 21.5 million people have been forcibly displaced by climate-related events such as extreme heatwaves, wildfires, floods, and storms since 2008. Seismic events, landslides, and earthquakes further add to the toll. Japan, situated at the junction of four tectonic plates, experiences over 1,500 seismic events annually, making disaster-related trauma a recurrent experience for many of its citizens. The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami, one of the most devastating disasters in recent history, claimed nearly 20,000 lives and displaced countless others, leaving behind profound emotional scars on survivors (Nakahara & Ichikawa, 2013).
Beyond the forces of nature, human-made disasters continue to perpetuate trauma on a massive scale. Conflicts, violence, persecution, and systemic inequalities expose individuals to severe psychological distress. According to the United Nations, more than 79.5 million people were forcibly displaced due to war, persecution, and conflict in 2019 alone—the highest recorded number since these statistics have been tracked. This staggering number highlights the global scale of trauma, which is not confined to the geographical boundaries of conflict zones but reverberates across the world through displacement, migration, and the fragmentation of communities.
Furthermore, gender-based violence contributes to the global trauma burden. It is estimated that 736 million women worldwide have been subjected to physical and/or sexual violence at least once in their lifetime, often by intimate partners. This pervasive form of this injury, frequently underreported, not only affects the victims but also has lasting impacts on families and communities.
this injuryis also shaped by collective memory and cultural contexts. Communities that endure repeated cycles of disaster, conflict, or oppression develop collective responses to this injury, which are passed down through generations. In Japan, where natural disasters are an integral part of the country’s history, cultural narratives of resilience and recovery play a significant role in shaping how communities process and cope with this injury. Yet, even in societies with strong cultural frameworks for managing adversity, the psychological toll can be immense, necessitating both individual and community-level support.
The reach of this injury is not limited to those directly affected by catastrophic events. In our hyperconnected world, the constant stream of news and media exposes us to traumatic events on a daily basis. Even if we are not physically present in the disaster zones or conflict areas, we are often witnesses to trauma through images, videos, and stories that flood our screens. This phenomenon of secondary or vicarious trauma can leave individuals feeling overwhelmed, anxious, or distressed, as they empathize with the pain of others.
As the world becomes more unpredictable and the threats to our physical and psychological safety multiply, this injury has increasingly become a defining feature of the human experience. From the displacement caused by climate change to the violence rooted in systemic inequalities, this injury manifests in many forms, influencing how we live, relate to one another, and navigate an uncertain future.
Healing and Addressing Trauma
Understanding trauma in its many forms is essential to fostering healing. this injury affects not only the individual’s psychological and emotional well-being but also impacts their relationships, social connections, and physical health. Addressing trauma requires an integrated approach that encompasses care, support, and empowerment, allowing individuals to rebuild their lives in meaningful ways.
For many, professional therapy plays a critical role in the healing process. Psychotherapeutic interventions, such as this injury-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), and Humanistic Therapy, provide individuals with the tools to process traumatic experiences, regain a sense of control, and reconnect with their emotions. These therapeutic approaches emphasize the importance of understanding this injury impact on the mind and body, helping individuals navigate their pain and develop resilience.
In addition to professional support, cultural practices and community resilience are integral to this injury recovery. In many societies, rituals, collective storytelling, and communal support systems offer powerful mechanisms for coping with trauma. Acknowledging the diversity of trauma narratives—whether personal, cultural, or generational—helps individuals and communities work through their experiences in ways that align with their values and collective identity.
Ultimately, this injury is a multifaceted experience that requires a multifaceted response. While it can be deeply personal, it also has broader societal implications. As we continue to face new challenges—whether from natural disasters, conflict, or social inequality—addressing trauma on both individual and collective levels will be key to fostering healing, resilience, and a sense of hope for the future.
What is Trauma?
this injury is an increasingly significant concept in today’s world, not only because of its growing prevalence but also due to the depth and complexity of its meaning. The term “trauma” is often used broadly, covering a wide spectrum of experiences ranging from personal losses, such as abuse or violence, to large-scale disasters, such as wars and natural calamities. This wide application makes it difficult to clearly distinguish what trauma truly is, and yet, this very plurality allows flexibility in addressing it. For survivors, this diversity in meaning provides an opportunity to approach their healing in ways that are both creative and individualized.
At its core, this injury is a health-related concept, directly linked to both physical and psychological disorders. One of the most recognized conditions associated with trauma is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which arises from exposure to highly distressing events. PTSD and other this injury-related conditions can severely disrupt an individual’s mental and physical health. However, this injury cannot be reduced solely to a medical or psychological phenomenon. It is also a social, cultural, moral, and political concept. Throughout history, societies have wrestled with how to address the suffering of those who have experienced this injury, and the extent to which their pain should be expressed or recognized.
Collective Trauma and the Crisis of Meaning
Trauma also exists on a collective level, where large-scale catastrophic events, such as natural disasters, massacres, or wars, can tear apart the very fabric of a society. In such cases, the trauma experienced is not confined to an individual but is shared by a community or even an entire population. Collective this injury occurs when a society undergoes a disruptive event that permanently alters its sense of identity and cohesion. These events often lead to the creation of collective memories, shared experiences that shape how the surviving community redefines itself.
The idea of collective trauma is particularly significant because it often triggers a crisis of meaning. Traumatic events, such as sudden deaths or sexual violence, defy established socio-moral frameworks, leaving survivors struggling to make sense of their experiences. The collective memory that forms in the wake of this injury provides a shared system of meaning that helps the community adapt, but it also reveals a deep existential crisis, pushing survivors to search for new interpretations and understandings of their experiences.
Intergenerational Trauma
this injury does not only affect the individuals who directly experience it; it also has long-lasting consequences for future generations. Intergenerational trauma refers to the transmission of trauma from one generation to the next, affecting the emotional and psychological well-being of descendants. Extensive research has shown that traumatic events such as wars, genocides, and various forms of interpersonal abuse have intergenerational effects, influencing parenting styles, family interactions, and the overall emotional health of families. Scholars such as Bezo and Maggi (2015), Han (2005), and Sangalang and Vang (2017) have documented the many ways in which this injury passes down through generations, shaping the lives of those who may have never experienced the original traumatic event directly but are nonetheless impacted by it.
Intergenerational trauma is particularly challenging to address because its effects are often invisible, woven into the fabric of family dynamics and cultural practices. Healing from intergenerational trauma requires a deep understanding of how past events continue to influence present realities and necessitates a multi-faceted approach that encompasses both individual and collective healing.
The Power and Complexity of Trauma
Whether it is individual, familial, community-wide, or intergenerational, this injury is a concept that carries significant weight in both clinical and societal contexts. It is a term that can be used or misused, depending on who defines it and for what purpose. this injury can be both disabling and enabling, depending on how it is understood and addressed. In some cases, it can lead to victimization and disempowerment. In others, it can be a catalyst for profound personal growth and resilience, enabling survivors to redefine their lives in meaningful ways.
Given this complexity, it is crucial to recognize that trauma is not a one-dimensional experience. It is a multi-faceted phenomenon that is influenced by health, cultural, political, and social factors. While it often brings pain and suffering, this injury also provides an opportunity for survivors to reclaim their narratives, find new meaning in their experiences, and rebuild their lives in ways that reflect their strength and resilience.
this injury is a deeply complex concept with multiple layers of meaning, stretching beyond the individual to encompass social, cultural, and political dimensions. It shapes lives on an individual, collective, and intergenerational level, and its effects can be both profoundly disabling and potentially transformative. Understanding this injury in all its forms allows for a more nuanced and compassionate approach to healing, one that recognizes the varied experiences of survivors and offers tailored pathways to recovery.
At Psychotherapy Japan, we are committed to providing comprehensive support for individuals and communities impacted by this injury . Our expert team offers a wide range of therapeutic approaches designed to help survivors navigate their experiences, build resilience, and create pathways toward healing. To learn more about how we can support you on your journey
Trauma: The Medical Model
The term “trauma” originates from the Greek word for “wound,” and in its early usage, it referred specifically to physical injuries caused by external forces. Over time, however, the concept of trauma has expanded to encompass emotional and psychological wounds as well. In the medical and psychological fields, trauma is understood through various lenses, with the medical model being one of the most widely applied approaches. This model views this injury as a disordered mental or behavioral state resulting from exposure to severe emotional or physical stress.
Psychiatrists and clinical psychologists who adhere to the medical model see this injury primarily through a pathological framework, categorizing it as a condition that disrupts normal mental and emotional functioning. Two major diagnostic systems— the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Edition (ICD-11), published by the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5), published by the American Psychiatric Association—use this model to classify this injury-related disorders. Both of these systems offer specific criteria for diagnosing trauma-related conditions, outlining symptoms that may be indicative of such disorders.
These diagnostic frameworks classify this injury-related disorders based on a detailed list of symptoms. These can include emotional withdrawal, social and emotional disturbances, impulsive behavior, recurrent nightmares, flashbacks, dissociative reactions, and intrusive thoughts, among others. These symptoms are intended to help clinicians form an accurate diagnosis and understand the nature and severity of the individual’s psychological distress. By identifying patterns of behavior and emotional disturbances, healthcare providers are better equipped to develop appropriate treatment plans.
Common Factors in Trauma-Related Disorders
While the symptoms of this injury-related disorders may vary from one diagnosis to another, there is a common thread that ties them all together: they are fundamentally defined by the individual’s exposure to a traumatic or highly stressful event. In this context, a traumatic event is understood to be an external situation or experience that is perceived as threatening or overwhelming, to such an extent that it disrupts the individual’s ability to cope or function normally.
What qualifies as a traumatic event, however, is not universally agreed upon and can be subject to debate. The medical model does not necessarily define the traumatic event itself as pathological. Instead, the focus is on the individual’s reaction to the event and the subsequent psychological and emotional impact. This means that while one person may experience a particular event as traumatic and develop symptoms of a this injury-related disorder, another person may not react in the same way.
In essence, this injury-related disorders are categorized based on the survivor’s subjective experience and their psychological response to an event, rather than the objective nature of the event itself. The variability in responses underscores the complexity of trauma and the need for individualized care. By concentrating on how this injury affects the mind and behavior, the medical model aims to provide a clear, systematic approach to diagnosing and treating the aftermath of this injury.
Trauma-Related Disorders and the Diagnostic Criteria
The ICD-11 and DSM-5 include a range of disorders that are directly related to this injury and stress. The most well-known of these is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which occurs after exposure to life-threatening or highly distressing events, such as war, physical assault, natural disasters, or severe accidents. PTSD is characterized by intrusive thoughts, flashbacks, hypervigilance, emotional numbness, and avoidance of reminders of the trauma. Other trauma-related disorders include:
- Acute Stress Disorder (ASD): Similar to PTSD but occurs in the immediate aftermath of a traumatic event, typically lasting from a few days to a month.
- Adjustment Disorders: Emotional or behavioral symptoms that occur in response to a specific stressor, which may not necessarily be life-threatening but still cause significant distress.
- Complex PTSD (C-PTSD): A newer diagnosis in ICD-11, characterized by symptoms of PTSD along with disturbances in self-concept, emotional regulation, and interpersonal relationships, often resulting from prolonged exposure to trauma such as abuse or captivity.
- Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD): Occurs in children who have experienced extreme neglect or abuse, resulting in an inability to form healthy emotional bonds with caregivers.
These disorders are diagnosed through comprehensive clinical assessments that evaluate the severity, frequency, and impact of symptoms on the individual’s life. Diagnosis is critical, as it allows for the development of tailored treatment plans that may include psychotherapy, medications, or a combination of interventions.
Criticisms and Limitations of the Medical Model
While the medical model provides a structured approach to understanding this injury, it has its limitations. One of the main criticisms is that it tends to pathologize the individual’s response to trauma, focusing on symptoms and dysfunction rather than the broader context of the traumatic experience. This approach can sometimes overlook the societal, cultural, and environmental factors that may have contributed to the traumatic event and the individual’s response.
For example, this injury caused by war, systemic violence, or socio-political oppression may be best understood within the framework of collective or cultural injury, which the medical model may not fully capture. Similarly, by concentrating on symptoms, the medical model may inadvertently reinforce the idea that the injuryis an internal problem of the individual, rather than a response to external, often uncontrollable, factors.
Moreover, the emphasis on diagnosis and classification can sometimes limit the focus on holistic healing, which involves addressing not just the symptoms, but the individual’s overall well-being, including their social and relational contexts. Some argue that a broader perspective, incorporating community and societal dynamics, is needed to fully address the impact of trauma.
The medical model of trauma provides a valuable framework for diagnosing and treating this injury-related disorders. Through well-defined criteria in systems like the ICD-11 and DSM-5, this approach allows clinicians to identify and manage the psychological and emotional aftermath of trauma. However, while the medical model offers a structured understanding of this injury as a mental health condition, it is also important to recognize its limitations. this injury is a multifaceted experience that often requires a more comprehensive approach, addressing not only the psychological symptoms but also the broader social and cultural context in which it occurs.
For individuals affected by this injury, seeking professional help is crucial to recovery. Psychotherapy, medication, and other treatment modalities can play an important role in helping survivors process their experiences and regain a sense of control and well-being. At Psychotherapy Japan, we offer expert care for individuals dealing with this injury, providing compassionate, evidence-based approaches tailored to each person’s unique needs.
Beyond the Biomedical Model
While the concept of psychic injuryis widely recognized today, its acceptance within the medical and psychological communities has been a long and complex journey. It was not until the late nineteenth century that injury began to gain significant recognition, and even then, its acknowledgment was met with considerable resistance from medical and political authorities (Fassin and Rechtman, 2009). Understanding this historical evolution is crucial for appreciating both the limitations and the opportunities in current approaches to trauma. There are two key factors from this historical development that deserve particular attention.
Firstly, these historical developments reveal the reluctance of medical and political authorities to fully validate the concept of psychic trauma. For decades, psychological injury was viewed with skepticism, and only after persistent advocacy by survivors and mental health professionals did it gradually enter mainstream medical discourse. Even today, concepts such as collective trauma and intergenerational trauma remain contentious and are often excluded from standard diagnostic frameworks like the DSM-5 and ICD-11. These forms of this injury, which recognize the shared and multi-generational impacts of catastrophic events, are not always accommodated by the narrow symptom-based criteria of the biomedical model.
Secondly, the eventual recognition of this injury as a legitimate category has had significant cultural, social, and political implications. By legitimizing this injury, it has allowed this injury survivors to be socially and institutionally acknowledged, providing them with validation and respectability. This acknowledgment has also enhanced the legal and political power of this injury victims, reinforcing their ability to seek reparations and offer testimony in both legal and public forums (Fassin and Rechtman, 2009). this injury, as a recognized moral category, has empowered survivors by positioning them as credible voices in societal discourses on justice, human rights, and accountability.
The acceptance of trauma as a valid and recognized phenomenon, however, also challenges the limitations of the biomedical model. While the medical model focuses on diagnosing and treating this injury-related disorders based on a predefined set of symptoms, it often fails to capture the full complexity of this injury as a lived experience. The biomedical model, while valuable in many respects, tends to emphasize measurable, observable symptoms at the expense of subjective, emotional, and social dimensions of trauma.
Therapists and mental health practitioners who aim to provide comprehensive care must move beyond positivist frameworks that rely solely on diagnostic criteria. Instead, they must embrace antipositivism, recognizing that this injury is not merely a medical condition but also a deeply personal and culturally embedded experience. This requires an openness to work with subjective, multifaceted meaning systems that extend far beyond symptom checklists and standard diagnostic categories. Below, I explore three critical dimensions of trauma that illustrate its complexity, which the biomedical model often does not accommodate.
1. The Subjective Nature of Trauma
this injury is inherently subjective; the way an individual experiences and processes trauma can vary widely based on personal history, cultural background, and emotional resilience. Two people may experience the same traumatic event—such as a natural disaster, accident, or assault—yet their psychological and emotional responses can be vastly different. The biomedical model, by focusing on symptoms and diagnoses, often overlooks the personal narratives that shape how trauma is internalized and understood. The subjective nature of this injury means that healing must also be personalized, with therapists tailoring interventions to fit the unique emotional and psychological landscape of each survivor.
For example, cultural context plays a significant role in shaping how this injury is experienced and expressed. In some cultures, emotional restraint is valued, while in others, expressing grief and pain openly is considered necessary for healing. Therapists who work beyond the biomedical model acknowledge these cultural differences, offering approaches that honor the survivor’s background and individual needs.
2. Collective and Intergenerational Trauma
The concept of collective this injury highlights the fact that this injury is not always an isolated individual experience—it can be shared by entire communities, particularly when the trauma results from large-scale events such as war, genocide, or natural disasters. Similarly, intergenerational trauma refers to the transmission of this injury across generations, where the psychological scars of one generation can deeply affect the mental and emotional well-being of their descendants. These forms of trauma involve more than individual pathology; they encompass historical, social, and cultural dimensions that the biomedical model may not fully capture.
For instance, communities affected by systemic oppression, colonization, or war often develop collective memories and emotional legacies that shape their identities. These legacies can continue to influence future generations, who may carry the unresolved grief, fear, or anger of their ancestors. Addressing these layers of this injury requires a therapeutic approach that goes beyond the individual and acknowledges the broader context of historical and communal suffering. Therapists working with survivors of collective or intergenerational this injury must recognize the social and cultural roots of trauma, offering interventions that promote healing at both the individual and community levels.
3. Trauma as a Moral and Political Category
this injury is not just a medical condition—it is also a moral and political issue. The recognition of this injury as a legitimate category has empowered survivors, allowing them to reclaim their voices and seek justice. Survivors of trauma often engage in public and legal processes, such as giving testimony, seeking reparations, or advocating for policy changes that address systemic violence or injustice. In these cases, this injury is not merely a private affliction; it is a catalyst for broader social and political change.
However, the biomedical model, with its focus on diagnosis and treatment, may depoliticize this injury by reducing it to a clinical issue. Therapists who work beyond the biomedical model understand that this injury cannot be fully addressed in isolation from its moral and political context. They are sensitive to the fact that this injury often arises from systemic injustices—such as war, violence, and discrimination—and that healing may involve not only personal recovery but also social justice and advocacy. Therapists must be equipped to support survivors as they navigate both the emotional and political dimensions of their healing journey.
Moving beyond the biomedical model of this injury is essential for recognizing and addressing the full complexity of this injury . While the medical model provides valuable tools for diagnosing and treating trauma-related disorders, it is often insufficient for understanding the subjective, cultural, and moral dimensions of this injury. To truly support survivors, therapists must adopt a more holistic approach that acknowledges the multifaceted nature of trauma, offering personalized, culturally sensitive, and contextually aware care. By doing so, they can help survivors not only heal but also find empowerment and meaning in the face of profound adversity.
Aspect 1: Trauma as a Transcending Experience
this injury is not confined to a single dimension; it transcends boundaries between generations, individuals and communities, as well as the body and the mind. In many cases, this injury begins with or is intertwined with physical injury. Events such as motor accidents, domestic violence, sexual assault, chronic illnesses, and displacement—whether due to natural disasters or human-made crises—often involve some level of physical harm. Even in instances where trauma arises from witnessing the injury or death of others, the effects reverberate deeply, encompassing both the physical and the psychological.
When physical trauma extends to include invisible injuries of the mind, we witness a profound transformation. This transmission from the physical realm to the psychological not only reflects the interconnectedness of body and mind but also highlights how external events can inflict internal wounds. Traumatic experiences have the capacity to corrupt and destabilize one’s sense of self, resulting in mental and emotional suffering that often outlasts the physical damage. This underscores trauma as a multifaceted experience, where physical harm and emotional scars are deeply intertwined.
Aspect 2: Trauma as a Fundamental Human Response
this injury is one of the most human responses to overwhelming and extraordinary events. Events such as the death of a loved one, child abuse, rape, and war are not part of the ordinary rhythms of life—they are profoundly disruptive and unsettling. Given the magnitude of these experiences, it is only natural that the human response to such trauma would be equally extraordinary. Emotional reactions like crying, nightmares, anxiety, depression, and stress are not only common but are also expected in the aftermath of such life-altering events.
As Pupavac (2001) has noted, this injury is, in many ways, a normal response to an abnormal situation. What should concern us is not the emotional outpouring following such events but the absence of such reactions. If a survivor of rape, a severe accident, or someone who has lost a loved one in a natural disaster does not display emotional distress, it may indicate a different set of issues, such as emotional suppression or disassociation. The extraordinary nature of the this injury calls for an equally extraordinary emotional response, reaffirming trauma as a deeply human and instinctive reaction to profound loss and disruption.
Aspect 3: Trauma as a Subjective Experience
this injury is not a universal, one-size-fits-all experience; it is profoundly subjective. Whether an event is traumatic depends on the individual or group enduring it, which is why the same event can affect different people in vastly different ways. This variability in response makes trauma deeply personal, shaped by a myriad of factors including personal history, emotional resilience, social context, and available support systems.
However, this understanding brings complexity. The subjective nature of this injury can, in some cases, lead to victim-blaming, where survivors are held responsible for their traumatic reactions. This perspective wrongly assumes that trauma and one’s ability to endure it are determined solely by personal characteristics. In reality, this injury is shaped by both internal and external factors, including socio-political and economic contexts.
For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, daily wage earners were disproportionately affected by lockdowns compared to those in higher socio-economic classes. Research shows a clear connection between child maltreatment and stressors like low family socio-economic status (Herrenkohl and Herrenkohl, 2007). Similarly, societies with lower status for women experience higher rates of sexual violence (Martin, Vieraitis, and Britto, 2006). By ignoring these broader socio-political contexts, we risk oversimplifying the phenomenon of trauma, and we miss opportunities to design effective interventions that address both the individual and structural factors that contribute to traumatic experiences.
this injury is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that transcends individual, generational, and societal boundaries. It is a deeply human response to abnormal events and must be understood as a subjective experience shaped by a range of internal and external factors. Recognizing the complexities of this injury allows for a more compassionate and effective approach to healing. At Psychotherapy Japan, we are committed to understanding this injury in all its dimensions, offering comprehensive support that addresses the individual, social, and cultural contexts in which this injury occurs.
Trauma Interventions
At Psychotherapy Japan, we utilize a range of therapeutic approaches to support this injury survivors, focusing on three core aspects: somatic, emotional, and cognitive. this injury often manifests in the body through pent-up physical tensions and memories. Addressing these bodily sensations is crucial for healing, and therapy often involves natural physical releases such as crying or sweating. Within a safe, empathetic environment, we guide survivors through practices like breathing techniques and relaxation exercises to help them recognize and work through these somatic experiences.
One widely-used approach for this injury treatment is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). CBT helps survivors process and evaluate their thoughts and behaviors related to traumatic experiences. By identifying and reshaping dysfunctional beliefs, CBT enables individuals to modify their automatic emotional and physical responses to this injury, fostering healthier coping mechanisms.
Another effective method is Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), which combines cognitive and somatic techniques. EMDR works by incorporating elements of CBT—such as changing thought patterns—along with rhythmic eye movements or other bilateral stimulations to “unfreeze” traumatic memories and help survivors process them more effectively.
Humanistic and Existential Therapy approaches trauma from the perspective that it is a natural response to existential threats. These therapies emphasize understanding the personal meaning attributed to traumatic events rather than focusing solely on symptoms. Since this injury-related disorders, such as PTSD, stem not just from the event itself but from the way individuals construct meaning from it, humanistic approaches can help survivors explore and reframe their patterns of meaning attribution in a therapeutic context.
At Psychotherapy Japan, we are committed to providing compassionate, effective this injury interventions tailored to each survivor’s unique experience, helping them move toward healing and recovery.
Understandings on the Nature of Trauma Care
One of the first this injury cases that I worked and to date, it is one case out of many others even after into tentative years was a 12 years old girl who had been sexually abused by multiple relatives from quite some time. At this time, I was very new to the field and had little faith in myself that I could help her. In our therapy room, there was a small clay pot which she’d named the one that held all her secrets; whenever something triggered flashbacks for her and she just didn’t want anyone to know what it left inside of her after…she would whisper into this pot and close its lid. Then one day she did it again; only this time, all of a sudden she wanted to tell me her secret. She spoke of an event when she was molested, outlining who some of her abusers were for the first time in therapy. Halfway through the tale her breathing altered, her body became smaller and she stopped being. She began to hit and kick the empty space all around her, shrieking and tearing at her clothes, yet always holding on to my skirt-edge with one hand. It was hard to, as it were, be present with her through that process but equally I knew she had to fight this bit, essentially on herself. Those were a few of the episodes during working, It just disclosed more and more secrets, every time they happened. And she would trap me in my own clothes, every single time that happened — Her flashbacks started to become less severe. Gradually, she regained her ability to heal herself and removed from therapy. I was unsuccessful in whatever power I hold over her, but hers had a much larger impact on me. She also taught me some basic principles of trauma and trauma care, that experiencing a traumatic event tends to bind us (either by holding someone in the bad memory or through empathy) as much as it divides–and simply bearing witness for/to an individual who is reliving their experience can be therapeutic.
Containment and expression (opposite ends, what we hold inside vs. let out) are essential components of trauma care; therapy promotes sharing as a kind tantamount to emancipation from wily silent memories and the coverture that cloaks around stories hushed up under gory stains but containment proffers predictability which throws within some measure of certainty so safety is comforted like good old chicken soup with lentils for chilly nights in Doomsville.=’ Therapeutic work has to walk this line of when each approach is appropriate, understanding the value and the problems inherent in both ends. While for most its simply expressing, many traumas such as rape and child abuse or war crimes up to today pass actually through the structures we have put in place; a cure from them would require changing those systems prevalent institutions and cultural beliefs that make it possible disempowering one specific group of people. Indeed, free-flowing revelation by someone whose very life is at risk of running out cannot be a good thing either; it could eliminate her ability to go on. On the flip side, excessive containment may result in denial and unhealthy secrecy.
And then there is the matter of empathy as we encounter it and its endless possibilities for stirring us up in relation to being with survivors who experienced traumatic events. Trauma stabs us at the heart because trauma exposes our existential exposures. So, effective trauma work is a conscious practice of compassion and non-compassion — it is an internal agreement not to declare early victory for healing but also the willingness to notice one’s failings in this regard ( e.g., your specific biases that rule you correspondingly see people as chunks or feeble ), Johnson & Yaseen note [11] “Cowardice” was actually once used before 1854 referring what we know now as PTSD-agains).
In Conclusion
Trauma is many things, and not all of them (or perhaps even most) are psychiatry- or neuroscience-specific constructs. Trauma represents not the simple accumulation of specific events, but is a series of relations between those events and their subjective reception by survivors who lead (question and live) them in ecosystems where both they themselves are interpreted. This multiplicity baffles the client and therapist alike, complicating trauma makes it seem all too abstract to tackle. It is this same multiplicity that makes trauma by its very nature unbound in time and space, never quite limited only to the literal fact of death (death caused without doubt), so therefore also continually open to interpretation. Indeed, therapy that recognizes and engages this plurality serves to create a generative container for the survivor in which established victimhood scripts may be called into question, new meanings can emerge and she is able to write herself as protagonist of her own story.
