Traumatic Reactions Can Come In All Forms And Vary In Level

Traumatic Reactions Can Come In All Forms And Vary In Level Of Intensi

Traumatic reactions can take various forms and differ significantly in their level of intensity, depending on how an individual experiences the traumatic event. Not everyone responds identically to trauma; reactions are often highly personal and can range from mild distress to severe mental health issues. These reactions, although variable, are genuine and can be profound, necessitating specialized support and sensitivity to facilitate healing. Military personnel, including active-duty soldiers, veterans, and noncombatants stationed in war zones, are all susceptible to a spectrum of traumatic reactions stemming from combat and related experiences.

Understanding the different ways individuals may react to combat-related trauma is crucial for providing effective support. Reactions can include emotional numbness, intrusive thoughts, hypervigilance, flashbacks, avoidance behaviors, and physiological symptoms such as increased heart rate or sleep disturbances. Recognizing these reactions as normal responses within the context of trauma helps reduce stigma and fosters an environment conducive to recovery. By reviewing various media and case studies, one can observe that not all reactions are overt; some individuals may exhibit subtle signs of distress, making sensitivity and awareness essential traits for caregivers and support personnel.

Paper For Above instruction

In this paper, I will examine the traumatic reactions exhibited by a military personnel featured in media and discuss how to normalize such reactions. Specifically, I have selected a veteran, portrayed in a documentary, who demonstrates visible signs of trauma following deployment. One prominent reaction observed is hypervigilance—an intense state of alertness where the individual constantly scans the environment for threats, often leading to difficulty in relaxing or sleeping. This reaction is common among combat veterans due to the unpredictable and dangerous nature of their experiences in war zones.

To support this observation, research by Rubin, Weiss, and Coll (2013) highlights that hyperarousal symptoms—including hypervigilance—are prevalent among veterans suffering from PTSD in post-deployment periods. Their study emphasizes that hypervigilance is a protective mechanism originally developed to survive dangerous environments but often persists long after the threat has subsided, disrupting daily functioning and well-being. While this reaction can seem concerning from an external perspective, normalizing it involves educating the individual and their support system about its role as a typical trauma response.

If I were supporting this veteran, I would approach normalization through psychoeducation, explaining that hypervigilance is a common and understandable response to trauma. I would emphasize that it can gradually diminish with appropriate treatment and support, such as trauma-focused therapy or pharmacological interventions when necessary. Validating the veteran’s experience and assuring them that their reactions are not a sign of weakness but a natural response to extreme stress can be incredibly empowering. Normalization fosters self-compassion, reduces shame, and encourages individuals to seek help without the fear of judgment.

This skill is vital in the healing process because it reduces feelings of isolation and stigma, which are significant barriers to recovery among military personnel and veterans (Dick, 2014). When individuals understand that their reactions are common and understandable, they are more likely to engage in treatment and adopt adaptive coping strategies. Moreover, normalization can strengthen the therapeutic alliance between the veteran and their support providers, enhancing the effectiveness of interventions and promoting resilience. Ultimately, fostering understanding and acceptance of trauma responses plays a crucial role in helping veterans reclaim a sense of safety and stability in their lives.

References

• Dick, G. (2014). Social work practice with veterans. Washington, D.C.: NASW Press.
• Rubin, A., Weiss, E.L., & Coll, J.E. (2013). Handbook of military social work. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
• Karstoft, K., Nielsen, A. S., & Nielsen, T. (2017). Assessment of depression in veterans across missions: A validity study using Rasch measurement models. European Journal Of Psychotraumatology, 8(1), 1346644.
• Godfrey, K. M., Mostoufi, S., Rodgers, C., Backhaus, A., Floto, E., Pittman, J., & Afari, N. (2015). Associations of military sexual trauma, combat exposure, and number of deployments with physical and mental health indicators in Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. Psychological Services, 12(4), 398-405.
• Hoge, C. W., Terhakopian, A., Castro, C. A., Messer, S. C., & Engdahl, B. (2007). Association of posttraumatic stress disorder with somatic symptoms, health care visits, and medication use. JAMA, 298(18), 2271–2279.
• Seal, K. H., Bertenthal, D., Minier, D., Sen, S., & Marmar, C. (2007). Bringing the war back home: Mental health disorders among 103,788 US veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan seen at Department of Veterans Affairs facilities. Public Health Reports, 122(5), 597–602.
• Norris, F. H., & Kaniasty, K. (1996). Traumatic events and psychological distress among Vietnam veterans: A review of the literature. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9(3), 501-519.
• Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.
• Pollock, D. A., & Williams, S. J. (2004). Stronger than war: How veterans are healing themselves. New York University Press.