Living With: The Fallout Of Trauma (Chapter. 2)

Written by Andi Bazaar | Aug. 13, 2022

“According to research in the early 2000’s, approx 15-36 % of the population that didn’t experience violence directly will still develop PTSD symptoms. The impact of trauma has a wide range even just hearing about the event can shatter our assumptions about our world.”

The shootings will impact the victim’s families and communities forever, some might even develop PTSD as they are certainly at risk especially those who survived and witnessed the events. However, many more are at risk too.

HERE’S A PART TWO ON IDEA OF VIRTUAL TRAUMA.

We as a nation are privy to heinous events either in real time or moments after, sometimes the media coverage is more gruesome and detailed than at others. Regardless, we as a nation are at risk for PTSD even if we were not directly affected.

“According to research in the early 2000’s, approx 15-36 % of the population that didn’t experience violence directly will still develop PTSD symptoms. The impact of trauma has a wide range even just hearing about the event can shatter our assumptions about our world.”

Tragedies like these rip through the basic foundation that we lay our trust upon, they challenge our assumptions + bring them into?

THESE MAY INCLUDE:

• “the world and people are intrinsically good”
• “good people experience good things”
• "the world is safe + just”

Undoubtedly, these assumptions aren’t necessarily true but can be adaptive. For many of us, these very assumptions help us get out of bed in the morning + actually go about our lives + are necessary for meaningful experiences and interpersonal relationships.

The figurative ground we walk on becomes shakier with each shooting, if you notice that after an event you start feeling high irritable + anxious + depressed + like you’ve lost control + anything that’s not your baseline please reach out for help "you’re not alone."

If this article was helpful consider sharing to create crucial awareness around trauma and mass shootings, may these posts be of service.

⬆️ Gun-Control = Mental Health.

This is brief topic on what I perceive to be a problematic, yet common set of views that underlie way our criminal justice system (and larger society) engages people who use drugs and/or struggle with addiction. Not all views held by all people but these tend to travel together.

Many judge harshly the decision to start using substances, despite an evolving understanding of role of genetic risk factors and of common environmental exposures including trauma, mental illness, stress + poverty many continue to view substance use and addxn thru a moral lens.

Many under-appreciate role of prohibition and racist war on drugs in destabilizing people’s lives, marginalizing them from opportunity or safety and exposing them to harms of illicit drug market. We also under-appreciate role of stigma in driving these punitive polices and outcomes.

Many justify incarceration by promoting the *false* notion that suffering or hitting rock bottom is a prospective pathway to behavior change, it is true that many reflect back on their use and identify a rock bottom but hitting rock bottom is not a treatment strategy.

Additionally, addiction is marked by continued use despite negative consequences. Layering on more negative consequences does not meaningfully change behavior, it just layers harm or potential harm on people who are already struggling, thereby making recovery more difficult.

Many under-appreciates complexity or behavior change, many think linear path from addiction ➡️ treatment ➡️ recovery but life is more complex. Ambivalence is common. Struggling or set backs are normal, dichotomous outcomes (abstinent yes/no) limiting but courts love them.

Many under-appreciate complex ways trauma - including violence, neglect or abandonment — influence behavior, including one’s relationship witj courts and healthcare system. Instead of patience and compassion to extinguish challenging behavior, CJ system often layers on more trauma.

There remains clear misconception by many regarding role of pharmacotherapy in treatment of opioid use disorder, too many think OAT simply trading one addiction for another. Little tolerance for medications that alleviate suffering, afford stability and reduce mortality.

CJ system over-utilizes interventions that may not be necessary and that may limit person from working or being closer to family (ie, longterm residential treatment), often with harsh sanctions if treatment discontinued and under-utilizes treatments shown to reduce mortality.

Many under-appreciate how destabilizing incarceration can be to people’s lives, judges like when evidence-based treatment available in jails but I don’t think they fully appreciate how detention threatens the very things that support recovery housing, employment or safety.

IN SUMMARY, PROBLEMS:

1️⃣ Moral frame
2️⃣ Prohibition / War on Drugs (racism)
3️⃣ Stigma & Discrimination
4️⃣ Promoting suffering (rock bottom)
5️⃣ Over-simplifying behavior change
6️⃣ Minimizing trauma (retraumatizing)
7️⃣ Stigmatizing OAT
8️⃣ Minimizing harms of jail
9️⃣ SDOH

A SPECIAL THANKS TO:

• Dr Oliver Schofield (Consulting)
• Dr Seth Gryffen (Consulting)
• Henrie Louis Friedrich (Analyst)
• Clayton Euridicé Schofield (Editor/Journalist)
• José Schenkkan (Photographed)
• Shot at GQ’s Studios by José Schenkkan and Benjamin Schenkkan Joseph
• In appearance: “Yevhn Gertz”