The primary foci of chapter 26 The Psychological Toll of Exposure to Political Violence included combat-induced stress disorders as well as long-term implications of war captivity. An interesting point the authors Solomon and Ginzburg bring up in the beginning is how the increase in military technology (in the form of more powerful and destructive weapons) has added to the massive stress of war. I recall one of my old humanities professor’s at UTEP talked about how superior military technology has contributed not just to the death toll and destruction on both sides, but also to how we fight wars. And for those who don’t have the technology, the outcomes are far more grim. In this chapter, Solomon and Ginzburg use their research spanning over thirty years and several wars in Israel in order assess some of the long-term effects of war. The reason they used Israeli soldiers is because all men are required to join and serve the military for their entire life. Here in the U.S. joining the military is optional (most of the time) and you’re only bound to a 4-6 year contract. Once you’re contract is up, you are no longer required to be shipped off to war.
Among the combat-induced stress disorders discussed were combat stress reaction (CSR), acute response, and PTSD which is chronic. CSR was described as the point in which a soldier has lost their psychological defenses. They become so overwhelmed that they become powerless to fight. As the authors point out, CSR renders a soldier a danger to both themselves and those around them because they are no longer able to perform military duties. CSR involves psychosomatic, cognitive, affective, and behavioral symptoms. Although the authors provide some prevalence stats, I am unsure as to how they operationalized CSR. Solomon and Ginzburg state that for some individuals, CSR is a precursor to something more serious: PTSD. This is where their research comes into play. With their longitudinal studies on Israeli soldiers from various wars (the First and Second Lebanese Wars, Yom Kipper War) they studied CSR, PTSD, and the relationship between these disorders and the level of exposure to war. Not surprisingly, those who were exposed to war the longest presented higher levels of CSR and then PTSD. One result they did not expect to find was that with treatment, soldiers went from improved lower levels of PTSD to higher levels of PTSD at the 20 year mark. One theory the authors offered to explain this result was that after 20 years, most of the men found themselves at that midlife part of their lives where they are retired. When you reach that midlife point, people have more time to reflect on what they did with their lives. According to the authors, those soldiers now had to reflect on their life experiences fighting in wars. They argued that this high-risk period either reactivated their PTSD or represented a delayed-onset of PTSD.
Solomon and Ginzburg also detail some of the effects of repeated exposure to combat. According to their research, soldiers who had already experienced an episode of CSR and/or PTSD actually helped them cope with subsequent battles only if they had successfully resolved those issues the first time around. However, overall, individuals with repeated exposure to combat do have a weakened resistance to trauma. As the authors state, “…whatever the possible inoculation benefits of successful stress resolution, repeated trauma may eventually break even the hardiest souls” (p.391).
Finally, the authors discuss the long-term implications of being a POW. POW’s find themselves at a much greater physical and psychological danger. The reason being is that it becomes personal. If you’re in war, you kind of already expect getting attacked. You’re in war, obviously you’re going to be a target (one of many). When you’re a POW however, you don’t have the social support of your comrades, you don’t have your privacy, and you are continually tortured and humiliated. In many cases, soldiers are tortured for information. Sadly, in the case of Israeli soldiers, their culture condemns giving up information. You are looked at as a traitor to your country. Therefore, many Israeli POW’s find themselves in a catch-22. The authors called this the “captive’s dilemma.” Not surprisingly, the Israeli soldiers in the authors’ research demonstrated higher rates of PTSD. As far as the trajectory of PTSD, ex-POW’s were 10 times more likely to experience deterioration in their psychological condition compared to controls. The authors conclude the chapter by discussing the importance of helping these individuals. It is clear that experiences such as combat cause severe trauma that often times cannot be ameliorated with treatment.
I found the entire episode very interesting because the subject of PTSD and war are issues that are very close to my heart. My father –in-law is a Vietnam Vet and he most definitely suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and Bipolar disorder. Up until recently, he always slept with a gun. I was always afraid of my husband going over to his dad’s house to check up on him because I thought he might get shot on accident. According to my husband and his siblings, their dad seemed very detached from the family more often than not, ever since they were kids. My father-in-law didn’t go to my husband’s graduation a few years ago, he would go months without calling or even answering their calls. At one point, my sister-in-law Sarah called him and left a message saying, “Dad, I need to talk to you…it’s a very serious emergency!” He never picked up or called back. It wasn’t until recently (about 1-2 years) that he started seeing both a psychiatrist and psychologist. One evening we had dinner at my mother-in-law’s house and he just opened up and told me the most horrendous stories of some of the stuff he lived through and witnessed as a young man. He expressed guilt over the fact that only he and one of his buddies were the only two soldiers in their platoon who survived the war. He talked about how he had to kill people so that he wouldn’t get killed. He also talked about how his entire arm and part of his leg and back were sprayed with shrapnel from an explosive device. One of the things he really talked a lot about were flashback memories and an intense anger he would feel at times. During one incident, he said one of the managers at the post office where he worked did something to piss him off and he described how he all of a sudden felt as though he were back in Vietnam. He became incredibly angry and felt as though he wanted to attack his boss. Somehow, he had enough where with all to walk away from the situation before he anything bad happened but he said he gets these flashbacks frequently. When he told me all these things, he said that he fully recognized that he did suffer from PTSD but had always been reluctant to seek help because a therapist would never understand. He also didn’t want to be categorized as another crazy vet. I told him that although people like myself could never understand where he was coming from (because we’ve never lived through something so horrendous), it would make him feel so much better to let all of those feelings out and talk to someone who was impartial and supportive. I let him know he’s not crazy. I told him that anyone who experiences something that dramatic has to have been affected- it is a completely normal reaction to have if you’re life was constantly in danger and you had to kill people. A short time after, he began to see a psychologist and a psychiatrist. I also found from my husband that I am the only person he has talked to about the war and what he saw. My husband didn’t even know any of the information his dad talked to me about. I like to think that I had something to do with him reaching out for help. At the end of the day however, what’s important is that he is finally receiving the help he so desperately needed and his quality of life has improved tremendously. In fact, he’s actually flying up for my graduation in a couple of weeks! Although my father-in-law is finally receiving help, I know there are thousands of other men (and women) who are in desperate need of the same kind of support. I don’t think that we’ve done enough to help these individuals adjust to life back home and that is very sad. I’m also shocked that little attention has been paid to the long-term psychological tolls of war, as stated by the authors of the chapter. It is painfully clear that far more research needs to be done in this area so that mental health professionals and military professionals are able to assess what forms of treatment would be the most successful. I think we owe it to our vets and their families to do so.
This chapter does tie in with my expert topic to a certain degree. The chapter focuses on soldiers during and after war, however they are not the only ones to suffer from trauma related disorders such as PTSD. War is not fought in some far away land where only soldiers are present. Most, if not all wars are fought among women and children who often times find themselves caught in the cross-fire. Survivors of genocide find themselves, displaced, no food, nothing. In addition to being exposed to these conditions, watching the people around you get slaughtered has to cause severe psychological distress. It is safe to say that such individuals would meet criteria for psychological disorders such as PTSD with flying colors. I think more research needs to be done in this area as well. Being able to treat these individuals could help bring peace to both sides of the conflict.
Chapter 21 discusses the psychological toll of exposure to political violence such as Combat Sress Reactions (CSR) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The text focuses on Israeli regimes, and the life for people in Israel. Along with explaining the two psychological topics, the chapter also discusses long-term implications of war captivity, and the effects from that.
Combat Stress Reactions is when a soldier feels extremely overwhelmed from combat and battlefield anxiety. They feel powerless, vulnerable, and helpless. CSR occurs when someone feels threatened, therefore they are “stripped of their psychological defenses, feels so overwhelmed by the threat that he becomes powerless to fight, and is inundated by feelings of utter helplessness and anxiety.” When a soldier feels this way, they are of danger to themselves and others. I found this to be really interesting because I have always heard of PTSD, and not CSR. I would imagine that something like this is to happen to soldiers, especially if they are always surrounded by war. I have known of soldiers being scared in combat, but I was unaware of the extreme symptoms that CSR is characterized by such as blindness and paralysis. I was really surprised by the differences of the CSR prevalent rates between American soldiers and Israeli soldiers. One out of every 4 casualties (23%) was a psychiatric casualty in the First Lebanon War compared to 1.2% in the Vietnam War.
PTSD is a “constellation of repeated re-experiencing of a traumatic event, reduced involvement with the external world, cognitive-affected hyperarousal, and impaired functioning. In my opinion, PTSD is worse than CSR because of the profound and long-term effects of it and obviously because it is chronic. The study that was done in the text of treated Israeli soldiers was really interesting because of the percentage of casualties that rose 20 years after the study was done! Before reading this I would think that PTSD would be the highest within the first year, which it was at 64%. It eventually declined in the 2nd year, then decreased further after that until 20 years after the experience at war. This is because the soldier did not get treated because perhaps they were unaware of the PTSD, or that they did not want to seek help because at the time, being a soldier was a form of masculinity, causing the soldier to gain self-esteem and social approval. The rise 20 years after the war is because of 2 causes. The first cause is because 20 years after the war would have been in the mid-life, or around there. Men at this time may not be working or be busy as much, therefore they have more time to think about it. Another reason is because it was carried out in the second intifada, which would cause them to “relive” their experiences. I personally do not know anyone experiencing PTSD from combat, but I do know that other people can experience PTSD from divorces, deaths, or break-ups.
Male soldiers in Israel and the overall life experience in Israel are very different from the U.S. After completing 3 years of military service, all able-bodied men are required to serve in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). This means that they are always being exposed to war, military violence, or training for war. Even after they are done serving, they are to return back to a home that is still affected by war. This is obviously different from the U.S. because when our soldiers come home they are greeted with the care from families and friends, and the psychological care that is needed to treat them.
I just got done reading Elaine Scarry’s book “The Body In Pain” a few days ago. The first half of the book is about torture, and essentially the body in pain as the person is being tortured. Interestingly enough, we were assigned this blog that relates to the book and the psychological situations that the captive and captor go through. It is true that the captive and captor do have an unique relationship, even though it may not be the type of relationship that most people are used to. The captor and captive experience a sense of control with each other, even though the person being captured is most certainly not. The captive is not in control of their body or their language, they are only in control of their thoughts or their “self.” After being tortured endlessly both physically and mentally, the captive is most of the time ordered to confess. Confessing is a form of self-betrayal because the “self” is the only that the captive has left so when they do confess, they essentially lose their “self.”
In the text, POW’s were shown to have high levels of PTSD after being released. This is because of many explanations. Some of the explanations are that they experience PTSD because of torture, humiliation, and isolation. Also, another reason is because of being isolated from fellow soldiers, weapons, and from any human compassion or support.
Another topic I found to be both interesting and surprising is that people who were held captive for a long time not only developed PTSD, but developed a unique form that alters their personality. This is referred to complex PTSD, or disorder of extreme stress not otherwise specified. This is when the person held captive for a long period of time experiences long-lasting attachment injuries like avoidance. I think that this would most certainly happen, mainly because the relationship that the captive may have had for a long time was with their captor, so their future relationships would lack trust, love, and compassion.
This chapter doesn’t really relate to my expert topic of elder abuse… unless the person being abused is a war vet and hasn’t really sought help for their PTSD.
This chapter focuses on the psychological after effects of war. I feel like this is important for us to spend time on because of the influx of veterans in our own country suffering from PTSD. The chapter is based on findings from research done in Israel, which seems to be in some sort of conflict at most times. While here in America we seem to have a war for nearly each generation to deal with, in Israel there may be two or three wars that each generation of men could be called to duty for. Along with the increased numbers of wars fought, it seems that serving your country in Israel is not optional. We in America value our right to choose to enlist and many were and are strongly opposed to "the draft" in which men were called to enlist with threat of imprisonment for dodging the draft. With all this conflict going on in Israel there is also more of these after effects of war, such as combat atress reactions (CSR) and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). the chapter delves into the research which looks at occurances of these disorders in veterans and re-occurance rates at various years after serving in war or after multiple wars served.
One of the things which caught my attention was the contrast between soldiers who fought in multiple wars with no signs of psychological disorders afterwards and those who suffered increasing amounts of distress with increasing exposure. I would like to know what makes a person more resiliant to the effects of the stress of battle. I began to wonder if the obligation to serve their country put men who would normally thrive better under non combat situations in a compromising situation by having them in combat. Those who willingly enlist usually have a much better attitude towards what they are signing up for and may have some sort of personality trait that makes them a better soldier. I don't think I would fare well under combat conditions... and I didn't ever consider enlisting because of this. I think it takes a certain something to be able to withstand the amount of mental stress that being in a combat situation demands of a person.
I like the fact that the author ends by acknowledging that there will always be wars and we should strive to do better to understand the psychological aspects of what these wars do to people. I could not agree more. I have seen friends and family come home from our war in Iraq and struggle with being a civillian again. I feel as if there is a huge gap between what our veterans need by the way of mental health care and what they are offered. PTSD is becoming one of those pop culture terms we toss around because it seems everyone knows someone suffering from this condition. I have to assume most of our classmates will have a personal story of how PTSD has affected someone near them in some way, I know I do. I hope that in our societies discussion of PTSD we can make the connection that it is within our power to ensure that the men and women who go out into the battle feild for us get the help they need when they come home.
The only connection I see between my expert topic and this topic would be that some forms of sibling abuse could result in someone suffering from PTSD... but that really applies to any form of violence. anytime the human psyche is pressed beyond its comfort zone and forced to attempt to endure something traumatic we will see tragic results. We often focus on war being the trigger for PTSD but in reality any traumatic event can trigger symptoms in a person. Some more severe forms of sibling abuse such as the use of weapons, rape, or psychological torment could leave lasting wounds. Because sibling abuse often goes unreported there may be many children and adolescents out there suffering from PTSD who will not get help. As the text suggested, this often can lead to dysfunctions in relationships as an adult and a slew of other maladaptive behaviors whic are quite common in those who report being the victims of sibling abuse.
Chapter 21 is very interesting in that it examines two psychological reactions to violence: CSR (combat-stress reaction) and PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). While I have heard of PTSD, I hadn’t heard of CSR and so it was interesting to read about this disorder, which is described as being a psychological break in soldiers during times of war. From the chapter, it would seem that this disorder mainly happens with those soldiers who are wounded. PTSD, of course, is a disorder where the person who experienced the trauma relives it over and over again. The chapter discusses the rates of CSR and PTSD in studies done on Israeli soldiers during both the First Lebanon War and the Yon Kippur War. The authors of this chapter included the soldiers of the Yon Kippur War because in addition to studying rates of CSR and PTSD in “normal” soldiers, they also wanted to know if the rates were different for ex-POWs. The authors found that if a soldier experienced CSR and continued to engage in later wars, there was a much higher chance of them re-developing CSR and also, there was a higher chance of them developing more severe PTSD later. The PTSD was also found to have lasted longer. Soldiers who hadn’t developed CSR but were exposed to more than one war were also found to have more severe and long-lasting PTSD later as well. Finally, ex-POWs had higher and more severe cases of both CSR and PTSD than those who were exposed to violence but not captured by the enemy. Several explanations were offered for all of these findings. Concerning the CSR and later PTSD, it was theorized that after the soldiers’ CSR recovery, there were more prone to psychological distress, thus when violence hit Israel years later, it triggered PTSD in these more-susceptible soldiers. Regarding the ex-POWs, it was theorized that because the enemy made a much more concentrated effort to strip the solider of their mental defenses, it made them much more likely to develop CSR and PTSD. One of the reasons they were more susceptible was because they were no longer part of an army unit; the enemy did their best to make them feel alone and worthless.
I found the chapter interesting because we rarely talk about what violence does to a person that engages in it. While PTSD is something that affects people who don’t engage in violent acts but witness it, it’s a good reminder that war and other acts of violence are traumatizing not just to those who witness but those who engage in it as well. I would like to see a study done on lower forms of violence to see if the people who engage in those forms of violence (gangs, partner abuse, etc) have psychological problems later in life due to the violence they’ve engaged in. One thing that surprised me was that not many ex-POWs had PTSD later in life (23%). While this was higher than those who weren’t captured, it still seemed low to me. I think this is a good thing; it shows that people are able to move on with their life even after horrible things have happened to them. Another thing that I thought it showed was that there is definitely a role for psychologists to play, as most of them sought help after they were released.
This chapter relates very well to terrorism, as it discusses the effects that terrorism can have not just on a population as a whole, but also on our soldiers who are trying to fight it. Terrorism is definitely a politically motivated type of violence, and this chapter did a good job talking about how war is also politically motivated. This chapter, however, doesn’t relate to my topic of sadistic rapists.
This entire chapter was interesting to me, because I've seen in a lot of movies where war veterans have nightmares at night and wake up sweating, but I've never actually read about or seen it happen with my own eyes.
Growing up we experience the fact that we usually grow out of most of our childhood fears and even habits as we grow older. A lot of times we'll automatically assume that it's the same thing for most things in life. But the most surprising thing I read about post-traumatic stress disorders from war is that the study showed that there was a gradual decrease in in PTSD the first 3 years, but when they followed back up with them 20 years later there was a 13 percent jump from year 3 to year 20. Reading this actually makes me feel scared and sorry for them in fear that this could be a psychological issue they may have for the rest of their life and could leave to more harsh consequences. After reading this I would advise anybody I met personally to immediately get counseling no matter how good they feel in the beginning to save them from this unnecessary experience.
I believe PTSD does have a potential to cause harm to the individuals family. Paranoid people are usually the most dangerous to be around, simply because they will more than likely react before they think. Waking them up in the middle of a nightmare about war could cause them to react violently to whoever is trying to wake them. Not sure how many do this, but I have seen in movies some war vets sleep with a gun or knife close by (paranoid), so if someone alarms them in their sleep (pray to God this doesn't happen) they could react with the weapon.
There are no areas in this chapter that relate specifically to my area of expertise, but I have heard stories of guards forcing sexual acts on Middle Eastern prisoners during the the war after 9/11 happened. This is still considered rape even though the guards are forcing to the prisoners to perform sexual acts on each other. They are using power to force unwanted sexual contact on both the giver and receiver in the situations. Which once again, as we have learned earlier in the semester, rape is an action of power and feeling in control the majority of the time. So even if the chapter doesn't specifically relate to my topic, the situation as a whole can have a certain relation to it.
This chapter was very interesting. Chapter 21 talks about the long-term psychological effects of war. A serious negative effect of war is combat stress reaction (CSR). CSR involves feeling overwhelmed, helpless, and anxious and happens during war. CSR can develop in PTSD after war. PTSD is characterized by reoccurring mental images, memories, and dreams and can lead to noticeably less social interaction and a trauma-related avoidance technique. The studies done on the long-term effects of PTSD are interesting because it was reported that symptoms were high about 2 years after war then decreased but 20 years after war were highest. This is proof of the long-term effects of war. This spike may be due to that most of the participants were in midlife 20 years after the war. Midlife is a high-risk period for the reactivation of PTSD. Recurrent exposure to war was also studied. It was found that if you were in war previously, it weakens your resistance to future war violence which causes greater rates of CSR.
The most interesting part of this chapter to me is the information on the effects of war captivity as compared to just being in combat. POWs have many unique factors to deal with. POWs are subject to torture, humiliation, solitary confinement, they may be forced to kill their comrades or even kill themselves. Captors have a controlling and coercive relationship with POWs and the captives are made to feel lonely, scared, and powerless. An added trauma of the effects of being an Israeli POW is the failure to meet the standard of a hero. A surrender to the enemy is considered a betrayal no matter what the circumstances. If POWs made it out alive, they were criticized and condemned thus making them feel like failures. It was found that POWs show a greater prevalence of psychological damage than combat only soldiers. There are different reasons for this. One reason is that the violence against POWs is personal as opposed to the general violence or war. The violence against POWs is specifically done to break them psychologically. They are tortured with the constant “toying” of their lives. Another reason for the greater PTSD among POWs is that they do not have the social support of their comrades. Being in a unit is actually stress-relieving but POWs do not have access to this. A third factor to the PTSD of POWs is that they adapt during their captivity by being highly alert and suspicious. Sometimes it is hard for them to get rid of these habits once they have returned to civilian life which is counterproductive. Lastly, captivity requires coping skills that may have been depleted already from combat. Also, multiple traumas produce more severe psychological responses than a single trauma.
Another interesting part of the chapter was about the effects of captivity on attachment orientation. I found this interesting because we have already talked about attachment and how insecure attachment can affect you and your relationships. Complex PTSD is a form of PTSD that can actually alter one’s personality. It was found that PTSD symptoms positively correlate with anxious and avoidant attachment in ex-POWs. Other personality changes may also correlate with PTSD in ex-POWs which may cause the insecure attachments. It was found that the stress and situational factors of being held in captivity may cause one to not be able to maintain trust with others which can lead to anxious or avoidant attachment.
This chapter could easily be put in the category of outcomes of violence. It very well explains the extreme issues that war veterans can have due to the violence they experienced in combat and/or in captivity. I have not found any information on my expert topic (influence of family violence) that I can relate to this chapter however there may be linkages. Does the preexisting status of a person determine if they will have greater or less psychological issues after war? If so I may be able to relate the two topics
Chapter 21 focuses on exactly what the title says; the psychological toll of exposure to political violence. More specifically, the chapter focuses on the events in Israel. The chapter starts off by pointing out how the men and women actually engaged in combat are the ones that are affected the most when it comes to political violence. Of course, this is no suprise.
The chapter then goes on to talk a little more about Israel and how they have always experienced military and political violence. We even see this in the news stories and papers today. Of course, as many can guess on their own without even reading this chapter, this creates a huge toll on the people that live in Israel and the people who are getting involved in the fighting.
The prolonged exposure to military and political combat can lead to a different array of combat-induced stress disorders. These stress disorders, as we read in the handbook, can either occur on the field during battle, or long after the fighting has stopped.
The first disorder the handbook mentions is combat stress reactions. When a soldier has this disorder, they are overcome with the fear and anxiety that would normally keep them alert and focused. However, the anxiety gets to be so much that they are unable to even function and they become so paralyzed with fear that they are not even able to fight anymore. They literally break down from the events they had witnessed.
The handbook also goes on to mention post-traumatic stress disorder. Most of us have probably heard about this disorder from our other Psychology classes. For those that may not have heard of this, however, post-traumatic stress disorder always crops up after a traumatic event. They could be followed by haunting images in their minds that crop up every now and then. Even something as simple as a sharp sound can affect them. This is probably the most common combat disorder out there.
The book then goes on to talk about how prolonged exposure to political and military violence can affect a person in other ways. They even site Yom Kippur to help illustrate some of the long-term implications of war captivity.
This chapter, although seemingly stating the obvious for the most part, was incredibly interesting. It was interesting to hear a different viewpoint and get more examples when it comes to combat-related disorders. The most interesting thing was that there were disorders that could be induced by combat that actually crop up during combat. You always hear about disorders that are seen after combat and particularly after seeing something especially heinous, but during combat? That was really interesting. What was even more intriguing was learning that it totally shuts the person down. Instead of sending them into a crazy frenzy or causing them to go insane, they simply shut down. Shutting down during battle, to me, would be totally surreal.
Overall, I think this chapter does a great job illustrating terrorism and political violence and explaining what these are in a different light. After looking at these from the points of view of philosophers and economists in the TED talks today in class, it was also nice to take the information and relate it to what the handbook was saying and also gain a Psychological viewpoint. This goes back to what we were saying in class about how the best thing we can do for ourselves to stop this kind of violence is learning everything we can about it and how the minds of these individuals work.
Sadly, this chapter does not relate whatsoever to my chosen expert topic of bullying. Quite frankly, I simply do not think that bullying in schools and terrorism are on quite the same wavelength.
There could be a small case that bullying almost seems like terrorism on an incredibly small scale however seeing as how students are being terrorized by the "elite" in their school. It almost could mirror political violence. Students get these ideas in their head that they need to be thought of as superior and they will stop and nothing to come up on top. They are told that power, honor and respect are the most important things in school and that popularity will get you ALL of that and more.... Because of this, they go and torture their fellow students who they do not feel are on the top and don't conform to their ideas. They terrorize kids that don't wear the same clothes they do or that listen to the same music. This goes back to what we were talking about when everything in terrorism starts with an idea being planted inside their mind.
Again, I am not trying to say that they are completely alike, but maybe the solution to EVERY act of violence is the same: change the ideas being planted in people's minds.
Of course, sadly, this is FAR easier said than done....but now that we know what the problem could be, we can all start becoming part of the solution.
Chapter 21 focuses on the psychological problems resulting from political violence, namely Combat Stress Reactions (CSR) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The focus of the chapter is mainly on men, due to males being the majority in wars. Psychological wounds from war are not as well documented as they should be, but I believe the chapter does a good job discussing the issues. To begin, CSR is basically an overwhelming of battlefield anxiety. There are often feelings of helplessness, powerlessness, and vulnerability involved with CSR, due to being stripped of one’s psychological defenses. Also included in CSR are psychosomatic feelings (such as stuttering and vomiting), cognitive symptoms (such as confusion and impaired decision making), behavioral symptoms (great agitation or apathy and withdrawal), and emotional symptoms (the main two being paralyzing anxiety and deep depression). CSR is only acquired during the time the person is actually enlisted in a war.
PTSD has many similarities to CSR, but it affects more than just soldiers. Victims of rape, severe traffic collisions, and other traumas can also be afflicted with PTSD as well. For soldiers, however, PTSD often is more common to those who already had CSR in a previous war. PTSD is often a reexperiencing of the traumatic event. This leads to impaired functioning and a reduced involvement in the external world. It is often easy to tell when a person is showing symptoms of PTSD, due to their inability to coexist normally with the rest of society (also depending on the severity of one’s PTSD somewhat too). The most common symptom people associate with PTSD is the susceptibility to loud noises (such as Fourth of July fireworks), which makes the person react in startling and unexpected ways that are often indicative to their time in war.
Also included in this chapter was war captivity, which is not really mentioned that often in terms of CSR and PTSD. It has to do with the sense of honor, and the captive soldiers feeling they “failed” in a way. I found it very interesting to think of captivity in this way. The hardships of captivity were much different than the hardships of war, which led to higher levels of PTSD in POWs. The hardships of captivity were often made into a personal matter, as theorized in the book. The humiliation, torture and isolation were directed solely at the captive soldier instead of a large and unparticular mass. In relation to war, however, the threat of combat on one’s life is impersonal and not directed towards any one particular person, which allows the soldiers to “save face.”
What I did find surprising was the fact that not all who undergo symptoms of CSR during the war also developed PTSD. It would seem only natural for those who developed CSR during wartime to also develop PTSD, but that is not the case. Sometimes, it happened that those who were fine during the war later develop symptoms of PTSD. Another surprising factor was those who later in life (around middle to retirement age) developed symptoms of PTSD after being perfectly fine for many years. The one theory the chapter had for this was the reminiscing of old times along with the surplus amount of free time allowed much more rumination over the soldier’s time in combat to flourish.
There was a shocking amount of soldiers who did not realize they had CSR during the war and PTSD after the war, and there was also a large amount who were diagnosed yet did not seek treatment. I wonder if the issue of pride or fears of not being allowed back as a soldier were contributing factors to this. I believe the army should have regulated treatment for those suffering from such symptoms without automatically excusing the soldier from war. This would possibly help those not seeking treatment out of fear and help keep soldiers mentally fit.
Chapter 21 focuses on the psychological toll of being exposed to political violence. Specifically in terms of Israeli soldiers’ experiences during the First Lebanon War and ex-prisoners of war from the Yom Kippur War. The authors examine 30 years worth of information regarding wars in Israel and the immediate and long-term effects of recurrent and prolonged exposure to military violence—Israeli soldiers are exposed to military violence their entire lives because they are more or less in the military until they die.
The chapter continues on talking about combat-induced stress disorders. The first one to be discussed is combat stress reaction (CSR). CSR is also known as shell shock, combat fatigue, or war neurosis. CSR occurs when a soldier feels so overwhelmed by violence going on around him and eventually becomes powerless to fight back, feels helpless, and experiences high levels of anxiety. The authors point out that soldiers experiencing CSR become a danger to themselves and to others and are no longer able to perform the necessary duties of being a soldier. There are a variety of symptoms that accompany CSR including the following: loss of bladder and bowel control; trembling, stuttering, blindness, confusion, impaired attention, impaired memory, alternating states of paralyzing anxiety and deep depression, agitation, etc. Even though the reported prevalence rates of CSR vary considerably, it can be said that CSR is a common consequence of war. The second combat-induced stress disorder discussed is posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). According to the APA, PTSD occurs when “a constellation of repeated reexperiencing of a traumatic event, reduced involvement with the external world, cognitive-affective hyperarousal, and impaired functioning. The text makes a point that PTSD is the most common psychological injury of being exposed to war violence. The text goes on to discuss the authors’ longitudinal studies on Israeli soldiers looking at rates of CSR, PTSD, and the relationship between these two disorders to the exposure level the soldiers experienced during wartime. The authors found that soldiers exposed the longest to war violence showed higher levels of CSR and eventually PTSD. I thought it was quite interesting that the authors found an unexpected rise in rates of PTSD casualties 20 years after a given war. This unexpected finding is explained by noting two possible causes. First, because 20 years after the war would have approximately marked their mid-life point during which these men would not be working as much as before and would have more time to think about their war experiences. Second, due to the measurements being taken during the second intifada, Israeli citizens were exposed to numerous terrorist attacks and violence which could have reactivated the psychological breakdown they experienced after a previous war.
The text continues on to discuss the long-term implications of being held captive during war. POWs are often held in unsanitary and uncomfortable conditions and are typically deprived of basic needs such as food and water. POWs are also subject to being tortured among other forms of brutal force. The authors compared ex-POWs experiences in terms of psychological consequences of war captivity to combat veterans who fought on the same fronts as the ex-POWs but were not captured. The author’s findings revealed that 30 years after their release from captivity, 23% of Israeli POWs met criteria for PTSD compared to 5% of non-POWs. The authors offer four explanations as to why POWs experienced higher rates of PTSD. The text goes on to talk about how having PTSD may affect attachment orientations for the soldiers later on in life. Finally, the authors found higher rates of reported need for help and actual help seeking among ex-POWs.
Chapter 21 was about the psychological effects of war and captivity. It was a very interesting and easy to read chapter. They begin by talking about combat stress reaction (CSR). The authors studied Israeli soldiers because they are pretty much in the military their entire lives. They are constantly subjected to large-scale violence, which makes them a good population to do longitudinal studies on. CSR can be known by different names, such as shell shock, combat fatigue, and war neurosis. This happens when soldiers are so affected by the violence around them that they get overwhelmed, become powerless, feel helpless, have high anxiety, and may even have physical symptoms such as paralysis, blindness, loss of bladder and bowel control, stuttering, confusion, mental problems, etc. These effects are immediate effects that may or may not last longer. The other problem they recorded is post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This is the repeated reexperience of a traumatic event. This may result in reduced involvement with the outside world, cognitive affective hyperarousal, and even impaired functioning. Certain post-war events may trigger them to reexperience the war. Things like the Fourth of July fireworks may make them think they are in the jungle being shot at, and this may result in them reacting as they would then. It can be very damaging and may ruin their lives, never allowing them to interact with others properly or normally.
The authors performed studies where they looked at the occurrence of CSR and PTSD in Israeli soldiers immediately, a short time later, and decades later. They found several things. They found that some men who experience CSR may not develop PTSD later in life. They explain that this may be due to different coping strategies or that the war only affected them while they were in it. They also found that some who did not show CSR during the war showed PTSD later in life. They explained that this may be because the later time frame was around mid-life, thus they might not be working anymore and have more time to reminisce. As for how the two relate, they found that the longer the person experienced war violence, the more likely they were to develop both CSR and PTSD. They also found that while the occurrence of PTSD was lower several years after the war, it grew higher 20 years later. This may be because the second war occurred then and caused them to reexperience the problems they had in the first war.
They also looked at how being a prisoner of war (POW) affects the occurrence of PTSD. They looked at those who were ex-POWs and those who were not POWs to begin with. Since POWs are held in unsanitary conditions and deprived of basic needs, it is clear that there should be some psychological harm. Many times they are also tortured and abused, both physically and psychologically. Many times they would be told that their families were killed or friends or that their government was dismantled and towns destroyed. They looked at both groups 30 years after the event and found a significant number (23%) of POWs had PTSD while only 5% of non-POWs did. They also found that the ex-POWs had different attachment styles than the non-POWs. The ex-POWs had either anxious attachment styles, where they were worried their partners or friends would not be there when they needed them the most, or avoidant attachment styles, where they did not trust others and would avoid interpersonal relationships. We have talked previously about these two attachment styles and how they affect people. One more interesting thing they found, with which they concluded the chapter, was that ex-POWs had a higher rate of reported need for help and help-seeking behavior.
One thing they discussed which I found interesting was that there was a large number of soldiers who either had CSR or PTSD or both and did not seek help. The book explained that they believe this may be because the perceived sense of pride and honor that the soldiers felt if they admitted they had problems and needed help that they would be failing their fellow soldiers. They also felt that they would be dishonored and not as manly. This is a big deal with Israeli soldiers because their culture is one that relies heavily on honor and pride. Luckily, there are some that realize the need for help, although usually it is much later in life when the situation has gotten so much worse. Many of the men who had CSR and PTSD voluntarily reenlisted for following wars because they did not want to seem weak, when in fact it only made the problem worse. It is hard to understand how someone can do that when they are so damaged. One thing that needs to be realized to understand this concept is that their culture is much more reliant on those values that would make them afraid to seek help or to say they can’t fight in another war. I think that it has probably gotten better over time with the changes in cultural thinking and the modernization of ideas. It is also important to realize that other cultures may not have a choice in if they fight, unlike us. Both of these things will help different cultures realize why there may be so much violence within their cultures and why it does not stop. War will never cease, but we may be able to alleviate the effects if we can start understanding why it will never stop and why it is what it is.
This chapter's primary focus is the psychological toll of exposure to political violence. They use Israel as an example of prolonged exposure to political violence of Israeli verterans and discuss studies done on these veterans to determine the long term effects of violence on these veterans.
The first psychological issue discussed is Combat Stress Reaction (CSR). This refers to the reaction of a combatant during battle that is comparable to a psychological breakdown. The individual may begin to feel helpless or vulnerable during battle and also they likely will be overcome with anxiety. Some symptoms of this reaction to combat are stuttering, trembling, vomiting, loss of bladder and bowel control, blindness, paralysis, confusion, impaired memory and attention, and/or agitation. There has been inconsistencies in the reporting of CSR during war, but it is clear that it is a common occurrance during wars.
The second psychological issue that may occur after an individual participates in war is Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. This disorder is characterized by frequent flashbacks or memories, dreams, hyperarousal, and impaired daily functioning. The handbook next discusses chrinic PTSD and stresses the importance of seeking treatment for these serious, and possibly fatal disorders.
The effects of exposure to combat are ultimately extremely devastating to the lives of the indiviudals who are exposed to combat. The authors discuss three perspectives that provide explaination to how war exposure may lead to detrimental effects. The first is the vulnerability perstpective, which contends prolonged exposure to stress is a risk factor because it drains a person of their coping resources. The second is stress inoculation perspective, which states exposure to prolonged stress serves as an immunizer because it helps the person develop different strategies to cope with stress. The third perspective is the stress resolution hypothesis, which suggests the stressful events are not the determining factor; it is how the indiviudal copes with the stress.
The chapter also explains how being a prisoner of war (POW) can lead to PTSD. These situations involve extreme and deliberate physical and mental violence. The authors explain how severe the effects are on an individual due to the severe violence paired with the extreme conditions the POW experienced during combat. It leads the POW feeling horrified and helpless and also they may feel they let their country or group down.
I think the authors do a great job of portraying how serious these disorders are and how great of an effect they can have on the individual. There are not only short-term effects, but effects that can potentially last the rest of the indiviudal's life. It surprised me that many of these war veterans did not seek any type of help after experiencing the symptoms of PTSD. The authors reported that many more POWs seek help than combat survivors. This may be due to the extreme situations the POWs experienced. Many people do not seek help and although the symptoms sometimes do cease, it is highly unlikely without professional assistance.
This chapter was useful to our discussion about political violence because it helps show that not only are we endangering people from another group, but political violence is also unintentionally harming one's own soldiers. I think this chapter also shows the importance that these men get the help they need when they have PTSD. The effects are serious and need to be addressed in order to free the indiviudal of the effects of war.
This chapter was really closely related to my expert topic, so I found it very interesting. Chapter 21 discusses the psychological effects that war can take upon humans when continuously exposed to violence and war, concentrating on how these violent means take effect on Israeli men. This sample of statistics is really interesting to look at, as the Israeli men are pressured to train and be involved in violence and war repeatedly and for most of their lives. While our culture is fairly familiar with stress-related psychological disorders (PTSD being among the most talked about), I was surprised to see the types of psychological break downs that other cultures experience.
The first psychological reaction to violence that was discussed in this chapter is the Combat Stress Reactions (CSR). Some of the examples that were given in the text we really disturbing, and ranged from psychosomatic symptoms (such as loss of bodily functions) to cognitive dysfunction like confusion and disorientation. What really surprised me, however, were the more extreme cases such as paralyzing anxiety and the example of a soldier disposing of his uniform and “running amok” towards the enemy. Even more surprising than the results of these reactions, however, is how common they occur in the Israeli population. The statistics for these occurrences in American soldiers during the Vietnam War were fairly low (1.2% of the wounded), where as the Israeli soldiers experienced a much higher rate of psychological “injury,” in some units reaching up to 70% of their wounded soldiers. These numbers are staggering in comparison, which leads us to the question of, why? Why is there this much of a difference in psychological reaction between two different cultures of humans? While some psychological consequence is expected from war, it seems as though when exposed to violence for more prolonged periods of time the psychological affect takes a greater toll on the soldier when placed in the actual war setting.
In addition to these stress reactions, there are many other psychological issues that maybe appearing at the same time, increasing the effects of the stress reaction. Comorbidities are another topic discussed in the chapter, where they focus on the “Effects of Repeated Exposure to Combat” and “Reactivation of Traumatic Reactions”. In regards to repeated exposed to combat, the findings show that if the soldier had adequate resolution of past psychological breaks, the rates of revisiting that psychological state were lower than in those who never reached a resolution. In addition, those who had never been exposed to war were also at a lower rate than either of the groups who had been in a war setting in the past. These researchers also found that if a soldier has had one psychological break, the likelihood of experiencing a second break in a similar stressful and violent situation increases. They also address the possibility of reactivating a past stressful reaction, something that has been more widely discussed and researched. The researchers discussed the higher probability of developing PTSD when placed in a similar situation as a previous psychological stressor, such as war or a scene of devastation. Those who have had experiences like these were more likely to develop the disorder, with varying levels of severity and frequencies depending on the degree of violence exposure. They conclude that prolonged and repeated exposure to violent situations and war result in higher rates of psychological disorders and reoccurrences in traumatic psychological experiences.
While the chapter is really informative and contains a lot of great statistics, it’s also really sad to realize the psychological stress that these people are exposed to on a regular basis. In a county like Israel war is a constant presence, meaning that its civilians are exposed to these psychological effects on a regular basis. Violence is something that is engrained within their culture; men are expected to fight in war over and over again without question. This is why I was curious as to what effect this has on children for my expert topic. With violence constantly present, it has to be difficult to separate when violence is appropriate or necessary and when it is not. Children have enough difficulty separating these things on their own, without the introduction of constant war and violence in their home (as in many Israeli families). It has been really difficult to find any good information on this topic, so I am glad I at least got to peak into the psychological functioning of the adult men in the culture.
The primary foci of chapter 26 The Psychological Toll of Exposure to Political Violence included combat-induced stress disorders as well as long-term implications of war captivity. An interesting point the authors Solomon and Ginzburg bring up in the beginning is how the increase in military technology (in the form of more powerful and destructive weapons) has added to the massive stress of war. I recall one of my old humanities professor’s at UTEP talked about how superior military technology has contributed not just to the death toll and destruction on both sides, but also to how we fight wars. And for those who don’t have the technology, the outcomes are far more grim. In this chapter, Solomon and Ginzburg use their research spanning over thirty years and several wars in Israel in order assess some of the long-term effects of war. The reason they used Israeli soldiers is because all men are required to join and serve the military for their entire life. Here in the U.S. joining the military is optional (most of the time) and you’re only bound to a 4-6 year contract. Once you’re contract is up, you are no longer required to be shipped off to war.
Among the combat-induced stress disorders discussed were combat stress reaction (CSR), acute response, and PTSD which is chronic. CSR was described as the point in which a soldier has lost their psychological defenses. They become so overwhelmed that they become powerless to fight. As the authors point out, CSR renders a soldier a danger to both themselves and those around them because they are no longer able to perform military duties. CSR involves psychosomatic, cognitive, affective, and behavioral symptoms. Although the authors provide some prevalence stats, I am unsure as to how they operationalized CSR. Solomon and Ginzburg state that for some individuals, CSR is a precursor to something more serious: PTSD. This is where their research comes into play. With their longitudinal studies on Israeli soldiers from various wars (the First and Second Lebanese Wars, Yom Kipper War) they studied CSR, PTSD, and the relationship between these disorders and the level of exposure to war. Not surprisingly, those who were exposed to war the longest presented higher levels of CSR and then PTSD. One result they did not expect to find was that with treatment, soldiers went from improved lower levels of PTSD to higher levels of PTSD at the 20 year mark. One theory the authors offered to explain this result was that after 20 years, most of the men found themselves at that midlife part of their lives where they are retired. When you reach that midlife point, people have more time to reflect on what they did with their lives. According to the authors, those soldiers now had to reflect on their life experiences fighting in wars. They argued that this high-risk period either reactivated their PTSD or represented a delayed-onset of PTSD.
Solomon and Ginzburg also detail some of the effects of repeated exposure to combat. According to their research, soldiers who had already experienced an episode of CSR and/or PTSD actually helped them cope with subsequent battles only if they had successfully resolved those issues the first time around. However, overall, individuals with repeated exposure to combat do have a weakened resistance to trauma. As the authors state, “…whatever the possible inoculation benefits of successful stress resolution, repeated trauma may eventually break even the hardiest souls” (p.391).
Finally, the authors discuss the long-term implications of being a POW. POW’s find themselves at a much greater physical and psychological danger. The reason being is that it becomes personal. If you’re in war, you kind of already expect getting attacked. You’re in war, obviously you’re going to be a target (one of many). When you’re a POW however, you don’t have the social support of your comrades, you don’t have your privacy, and you are continually tortured and humiliated. In many cases, soldiers are tortured for information. Sadly, in the case of Israeli soldiers, their culture condemns giving up information. You are looked at as a traitor to your country. Therefore, many Israeli POW’s find themselves in a catch-22. The authors called this the “captive’s dilemma.” Not surprisingly, the Israeli soldiers in the authors’ research demonstrated higher rates of PTSD. As far as the trajectory of PTSD, ex-POW’s were 10 times more likely to experience deterioration in their psychological condition compared to controls. The authors conclude the chapter by discussing the importance of helping these individuals. It is clear that experiences such as combat cause severe trauma that often times cannot be ameliorated with treatment.
I found the entire episode very interesting because the subject of PTSD and war are issues that are very close to my heart. My father –in-law is a Vietnam Vet and he most definitely suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and Bipolar disorder. Up until recently, he always slept with a gun. I was always afraid of my husband going over to his dad’s house to check up on him because I thought he might get shot on accident. According to my husband and his siblings, their dad seemed very detached from the family more often than not, ever since they were kids. My father-in-law didn’t go to my husband’s graduation a few years ago, he would go months without calling or even answering their calls. At one point, my sister-in-law Sarah called him and left a message saying, “Dad, I need to talk to you…it’s a very serious emergency!” He never picked up or called back. It wasn’t until recently (about 1-2 years) that he started seeing both a psychiatrist and psychologist. One evening we had dinner at my mother-in-law’s house and he just opened up and told me the most horrendous stories of some of the stuff he lived through and witnessed as a young man. He expressed guilt over the fact that only he and one of his buddies were the only two soldiers in their platoon who survived the war. He talked about how he had to kill people so that he wouldn’t get killed. He also talked about how his entire arm and part of his leg and back were sprayed with shrapnel from an explosive device. One of the things he really talked a lot about were flashback memories and an intense anger he would feel at times. During one incident, he said one of the managers at the post office where he worked did something to piss him off and he described how he all of a sudden felt as though he were back in Vietnam. He became incredibly angry and felt as though he wanted to attack his boss. Somehow, he had enough where with all to walk away from the situation before he anything bad happened but he said he gets these flashbacks frequently. When he told me all these things, he said that he fully recognized that he did suffer from PTSD but had always been reluctant to seek help because a therapist would never understand. He also didn’t want to be categorized as another crazy vet. I told him that although people like myself could never understand where he was coming from (because we’ve never lived through something so horrendous), it would make him feel so much better to let all of those feelings out and talk to someone who was impartial and supportive. I let him know he’s not crazy. I told him that anyone who experiences something that dramatic has to have been affected- it is a completely normal reaction to have if you’re life was constantly in danger and you had to kill people. A short time after, he began to see a psychologist and a psychiatrist. I also found from my husband that I am the only person he has talked to about the war and what he saw. My husband didn’t even know any of the information his dad talked to me about. I like to think that I had something to do with him reaching out for help. At the end of the day however, what’s important is that he is finally receiving the help he so desperately needed and his quality of life has improved tremendously. In fact, he’s actually flying up for my graduation in a couple of weeks! Although my father-in-law is finally receiving help, I know there are thousands of other men (and women) who are in desperate need of the same kind of support. I don’t think that we’ve done enough to help these individuals adjust to life back home and that is very sad. I’m also shocked that little attention has been paid to the long-term psychological tolls of war, as stated by the authors of the chapter. It is painfully clear that far more research needs to be done in this area so that mental health professionals and military professionals are able to assess what forms of treatment would be the most successful. I think we owe it to our vets and their families to do so.
This chapter does tie in with my expert topic to a certain degree. The chapter focuses on soldiers during and after war, however they are not the only ones to suffer from trauma related disorders such as PTSD. War is not fought in some far away land where only soldiers are present. Most, if not all wars are fought among women and children who often times find themselves caught in the cross-fire. Survivors of genocide find themselves, displaced, no food, nothing. In addition to being exposed to these conditions, watching the people around you get slaughtered has to cause severe psychological distress. It is safe to say that such individuals would meet criteria for psychological disorders such as PTSD with flying colors. I think more research needs to be done in this area as well. Being able to treat these individuals could help bring peace to both sides of the conflict.
Chapter 21 discusses the psychological toll of exposure to political violence such as Combat Sress Reactions (CSR) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The text focuses on Israeli regimes, and the life for people in Israel. Along with explaining the two psychological topics, the chapter also discusses long-term implications of war captivity, and the effects from that.
Combat Stress Reactions is when a soldier feels extremely overwhelmed from combat and battlefield anxiety. They feel powerless, vulnerable, and helpless. CSR occurs when someone feels threatened, therefore they are “stripped of their psychological defenses, feels so overwhelmed by the threat that he becomes powerless to fight, and is inundated by feelings of utter helplessness and anxiety.” When a soldier feels this way, they are of danger to themselves and others. I found this to be really interesting because I have always heard of PTSD, and not CSR. I would imagine that something like this is to happen to soldiers, especially if they are always surrounded by war. I have known of soldiers being scared in combat, but I was unaware of the extreme symptoms that CSR is characterized by such as blindness and paralysis. I was really surprised by the differences of the CSR prevalent rates between American soldiers and Israeli soldiers. One out of every 4 casualties (23%) was a psychiatric casualty in the First Lebanon War compared to 1.2% in the Vietnam War.
PTSD is a “constellation of repeated re-experiencing of a traumatic event, reduced involvement with the external world, cognitive-affected hyperarousal, and impaired functioning. In my opinion, PTSD is worse than CSR because of the profound and long-term effects of it and obviously because it is chronic. The study that was done in the text of treated Israeli soldiers was really interesting because of the percentage of casualties that rose 20 years after the study was done! Before reading this I would think that PTSD would be the highest within the first year, which it was at 64%. It eventually declined in the 2nd year, then decreased further after that until 20 years after the experience at war. This is because the soldier did not get treated because perhaps they were unaware of the PTSD, or that they did not want to seek help because at the time, being a soldier was a form of masculinity, causing the soldier to gain self-esteem and social approval. The rise 20 years after the war is because of 2 causes. The first cause is because 20 years after the war would have been in the mid-life, or around there. Men at this time may not be working or be busy as much, therefore they have more time to think about it. Another reason is because it was carried out in the second intifada, which would cause them to “relive” their experiences. I personally do not know anyone experiencing PTSD from combat, but I do know that other people can experience PTSD from divorces, deaths, or break-ups.
Male soldiers in Israel and the overall life experience in Israel are very different from the U.S. After completing 3 years of military service, all able-bodied men are required to serve in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). This means that they are always being exposed to war, military violence, or training for war. Even after they are done serving, they are to return back to a home that is still affected by war. This is obviously different from the U.S. because when our soldiers come home they are greeted with the care from families and friends, and the psychological care that is needed to treat them.
I just got done reading Elaine Scarry’s book “The Body In Pain” a few days ago. The first half of the book is about torture, and essentially the body in pain as the person is being tortured. Interestingly enough, we were assigned this blog that relates to the book and the psychological situations that the captive and captor go through. It is true that the captive and captor do have an unique relationship, even though it may not be the type of relationship that most people are used to. The captor and captive experience a sense of control with each other, even though the person being captured is most certainly not. The captive is not in control of their body or their language, they are only in control of their thoughts or their “self.” After being tortured endlessly both physically and mentally, the captive is most of the time ordered to confess. Confessing is a form of self-betrayal because the “self” is the only that the captive has left so when they do confess, they essentially lose their “self.”
In the text, POW’s were shown to have high levels of PTSD after being released. This is because of many explanations. Some of the explanations are that they experience PTSD because of torture, humiliation, and isolation. Also, another reason is because of being isolated from fellow soldiers, weapons, and from any human compassion or support.
Another topic I found to be both interesting and surprising is that people who were held captive for a long time not only developed PTSD, but developed a unique form that alters their personality. This is referred to complex PTSD, or disorder of extreme stress not otherwise specified. This is when the person held captive for a long period of time experiences long-lasting attachment injuries like avoidance. I think that this would most certainly happen, mainly because the relationship that the captive may have had for a long time was with their captor, so their future relationships would lack trust, love, and compassion.
This chapter doesn’t really relate to my expert topic of elder abuse… unless the person being abused is a war vet and hasn’t really sought help for their PTSD.
This chapter focuses on the psychological after effects of war. I feel like this is important for us to spend time on because of the influx of veterans in our own country suffering from PTSD. The chapter is based on findings from research done in Israel, which seems to be in some sort of conflict at most times. While here in America we seem to have a war for nearly each generation to deal with, in Israel there may be two or three wars that each generation of men could be called to duty for. Along with the increased numbers of wars fought, it seems that serving your country in Israel is not optional. We in America value our right to choose to enlist and many were and are strongly opposed to "the draft" in which men were called to enlist with threat of imprisonment for dodging the draft. With all this conflict going on in Israel there is also more of these after effects of war, such as combat atress reactions (CSR) and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). the chapter delves into the research which looks at occurances of these disorders in veterans and re-occurance rates at various years after serving in war or after multiple wars served.
One of the things which caught my attention was the contrast between soldiers who fought in multiple wars with no signs of psychological disorders afterwards and those who suffered increasing amounts of distress with increasing exposure. I would like to know what makes a person more resiliant to the effects of the stress of battle. I began to wonder if the obligation to serve their country put men who would normally thrive better under non combat situations in a compromising situation by having them in combat. Those who willingly enlist usually have a much better attitude towards what they are signing up for and may have some sort of personality trait that makes them a better soldier. I don't think I would fare well under combat conditions... and I didn't ever consider enlisting because of this. I think it takes a certain something to be able to withstand the amount of mental stress that being in a combat situation demands of a person.
I like the fact that the author ends by acknowledging that there will always be wars and we should strive to do better to understand the psychological aspects of what these wars do to people. I could not agree more. I have seen friends and family come home from our war in Iraq and struggle with being a civillian again. I feel as if there is a huge gap between what our veterans need by the way of mental health care and what they are offered. PTSD is becoming one of those pop culture terms we toss around because it seems everyone knows someone suffering from this condition. I have to assume most of our classmates will have a personal story of how PTSD has affected someone near them in some way, I know I do. I hope that in our societies discussion of PTSD we can make the connection that it is within our power to ensure that the men and women who go out into the battle feild for us get the help they need when they come home.
The only connection I see between my expert topic and this topic would be that some forms of sibling abuse could result in someone suffering from PTSD... but that really applies to any form of violence. anytime the human psyche is pressed beyond its comfort zone and forced to attempt to endure something traumatic we will see tragic results. We often focus on war being the trigger for PTSD but in reality any traumatic event can trigger symptoms in a person. Some more severe forms of sibling abuse such as the use of weapons, rape, or psychological torment could leave lasting wounds. Because sibling abuse often goes unreported there may be many children and adolescents out there suffering from PTSD who will not get help. As the text suggested, this often can lead to dysfunctions in relationships as an adult and a slew of other maladaptive behaviors whic are quite common in those who report being the victims of sibling abuse.
Chapter 21 is very interesting in that it examines two psychological reactions to violence: CSR (combat-stress reaction) and PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). While I have heard of PTSD, I hadn’t heard of CSR and so it was interesting to read about this disorder, which is described as being a psychological break in soldiers during times of war. From the chapter, it would seem that this disorder mainly happens with those soldiers who are wounded. PTSD, of course, is a disorder where the person who experienced the trauma relives it over and over again. The chapter discusses the rates of CSR and PTSD in studies done on Israeli soldiers during both the First Lebanon War and the Yon Kippur War. The authors of this chapter included the soldiers of the Yon Kippur War because in addition to studying rates of CSR and PTSD in “normal” soldiers, they also wanted to know if the rates were different for ex-POWs. The authors found that if a soldier experienced CSR and continued to engage in later wars, there was a much higher chance of them re-developing CSR and also, there was a higher chance of them developing more severe PTSD later. The PTSD was also found to have lasted longer. Soldiers who hadn’t developed CSR but were exposed to more than one war were also found to have more severe and long-lasting PTSD later as well. Finally, ex-POWs had higher and more severe cases of both CSR and PTSD than those who were exposed to violence but not captured by the enemy. Several explanations were offered for all of these findings. Concerning the CSR and later PTSD, it was theorized that after the soldiers’ CSR recovery, there were more prone to psychological distress, thus when violence hit Israel years later, it triggered PTSD in these more-susceptible soldiers. Regarding the ex-POWs, it was theorized that because the enemy made a much more concentrated effort to strip the solider of their mental defenses, it made them much more likely to develop CSR and PTSD. One of the reasons they were more susceptible was because they were no longer part of an army unit; the enemy did their best to make them feel alone and worthless.
I found the chapter interesting because we rarely talk about what violence does to a person that engages in it. While PTSD is something that affects people who don’t engage in violent acts but witness it, it’s a good reminder that war and other acts of violence are traumatizing not just to those who witness but those who engage in it as well. I would like to see a study done on lower forms of violence to see if the people who engage in those forms of violence (gangs, partner abuse, etc) have psychological problems later in life due to the violence they’ve engaged in. One thing that surprised me was that not many ex-POWs had PTSD later in life (23%). While this was higher than those who weren’t captured, it still seemed low to me. I think this is a good thing; it shows that people are able to move on with their life even after horrible things have happened to them. Another thing that I thought it showed was that there is definitely a role for psychologists to play, as most of them sought help after they were released.
This chapter relates very well to terrorism, as it discusses the effects that terrorism can have not just on a population as a whole, but also on our soldiers who are trying to fight it. Terrorism is definitely a politically motivated type of violence, and this chapter did a good job talking about how war is also politically motivated. This chapter, however, doesn’t relate to my topic of sadistic rapists.
This entire chapter was interesting to me, because I've seen in a lot of movies where war veterans have nightmares at night and wake up sweating, but I've never actually read about or seen it happen with my own eyes.
Growing up we experience the fact that we usually grow out of most of our childhood fears and even habits as we grow older. A lot of times we'll automatically assume that it's the same thing for most things in life. But the most surprising thing I read about post-traumatic stress disorders from war is that the study showed that there was a gradual decrease in in PTSD the first 3 years, but when they followed back up with them 20 years later there was a 13 percent jump from year 3 to year 20. Reading this actually makes me feel scared and sorry for them in fear that this could be a psychological issue they may have for the rest of their life and could leave to more harsh consequences. After reading this I would advise anybody I met personally to immediately get counseling no matter how good they feel in the beginning to save them from this unnecessary experience.
I believe PTSD does have a potential to cause harm to the individuals family. Paranoid people are usually the most dangerous to be around, simply because they will more than likely react before they think. Waking them up in the middle of a nightmare about war could cause them to react violently to whoever is trying to wake them. Not sure how many do this, but I have seen in movies some war vets sleep with a gun or knife close by (paranoid), so if someone alarms them in their sleep (pray to God this doesn't happen) they could react with the weapon.
There are no areas in this chapter that relate specifically to my area of expertise, but I have heard stories of guards forcing sexual acts on Middle Eastern prisoners during the the war after 9/11 happened. This is still considered rape even though the guards are forcing to the prisoners to perform sexual acts on each other. They are using power to force unwanted sexual contact on both the giver and receiver in the situations. Which once again, as we have learned earlier in the semester, rape is an action of power and feeling in control the majority of the time. So even if the chapter doesn't specifically relate to my topic, the situation as a whole can have a certain relation to it.
This chapter was very interesting. Chapter 21 talks about the long-term psychological effects of war. A serious negative effect of war is combat stress reaction (CSR). CSR involves feeling overwhelmed, helpless, and anxious and happens during war. CSR can develop in PTSD after war. PTSD is characterized by reoccurring mental images, memories, and dreams and can lead to noticeably less social interaction and a trauma-related avoidance technique. The studies done on the long-term effects of PTSD are interesting because it was reported that symptoms were high about 2 years after war then decreased but 20 years after war were highest. This is proof of the long-term effects of war. This spike may be due to that most of the participants were in midlife 20 years after the war. Midlife is a high-risk period for the reactivation of PTSD. Recurrent exposure to war was also studied. It was found that if you were in war previously, it weakens your resistance to future war violence which causes greater rates of CSR.
The most interesting part of this chapter to me is the information on the effects of war captivity as compared to just being in combat. POWs have many unique factors to deal with. POWs are subject to torture, humiliation, solitary confinement, they may be forced to kill their comrades or even kill themselves. Captors have a controlling and coercive relationship with POWs and the captives are made to feel lonely, scared, and powerless. An added trauma of the effects of being an Israeli POW is the failure to meet the standard of a hero. A surrender to the enemy is considered a betrayal no matter what the circumstances. If POWs made it out alive, they were criticized and condemned thus making them feel like failures. It was found that POWs show a greater prevalence of psychological damage than combat only soldiers. There are different reasons for this. One reason is that the violence against POWs is personal as opposed to the general violence or war. The violence against POWs is specifically done to break them psychologically. They are tortured with the constant “toying” of their lives. Another reason for the greater PTSD among POWs is that they do not have the social support of their comrades. Being in a unit is actually stress-relieving but POWs do not have access to this. A third factor to the PTSD of POWs is that they adapt during their captivity by being highly alert and suspicious. Sometimes it is hard for them to get rid of these habits once they have returned to civilian life which is counterproductive. Lastly, captivity requires coping skills that may have been depleted already from combat. Also, multiple traumas produce more severe psychological responses than a single trauma.
Another interesting part of the chapter was about the effects of captivity on attachment orientation. I found this interesting because we have already talked about attachment and how insecure attachment can affect you and your relationships. Complex PTSD is a form of PTSD that can actually alter one’s personality. It was found that PTSD symptoms positively correlate with anxious and avoidant attachment in ex-POWs. Other personality changes may also correlate with PTSD in ex-POWs which may cause the insecure attachments. It was found that the stress and situational factors of being held in captivity may cause one to not be able to maintain trust with others which can lead to anxious or avoidant attachment.
This chapter could easily be put in the category of outcomes of violence. It very well explains the extreme issues that war veterans can have due to the violence they experienced in combat and/or in captivity. I have not found any information on my expert topic (influence of family violence) that I can relate to this chapter however there may be linkages. Does the preexisting status of a person determine if they will have greater or less psychological issues after war? If so I may be able to relate the two topics
Chapter 21 focuses on exactly what the title says; the psychological toll of exposure to political violence. More specifically, the chapter focuses on the events in Israel. The chapter starts off by pointing out how the men and women actually engaged in combat are the ones that are affected the most when it comes to political violence. Of course, this is no suprise.
The chapter then goes on to talk a little more about Israel and how they have always experienced military and political violence. We even see this in the news stories and papers today. Of course, as many can guess on their own without even reading this chapter, this creates a huge toll on the people that live in Israel and the people who are getting involved in the fighting.
The prolonged exposure to military and political combat can lead to a different array of combat-induced stress disorders. These stress disorders, as we read in the handbook, can either occur on the field during battle, or long after the fighting has stopped.
The first disorder the handbook mentions is combat stress reactions. When a soldier has this disorder, they are overcome with the fear and anxiety that would normally keep them alert and focused. However, the anxiety gets to be so much that they are unable to even function and they become so paralyzed with fear that they are not even able to fight anymore. They literally break down from the events they had witnessed.
The handbook also goes on to mention post-traumatic stress disorder. Most of us have probably heard about this disorder from our other Psychology classes. For those that may not have heard of this, however, post-traumatic stress disorder always crops up after a traumatic event. They could be followed by haunting images in their minds that crop up every now and then. Even something as simple as a sharp sound can affect them. This is probably the most common combat disorder out there.
The book then goes on to talk about how prolonged exposure to political and military violence can affect a person in other ways. They even site Yom Kippur to help illustrate some of the long-term implications of war captivity.
This chapter, although seemingly stating the obvious for the most part, was incredibly interesting. It was interesting to hear a different viewpoint and get more examples when it comes to combat-related disorders. The most interesting thing was that there were disorders that could be induced by combat that actually crop up during combat. You always hear about disorders that are seen after combat and particularly after seeing something especially heinous, but during combat? That was really interesting. What was even more intriguing was learning that it totally shuts the person down. Instead of sending them into a crazy frenzy or causing them to go insane, they simply shut down. Shutting down during battle, to me, would be totally surreal.
Overall, I think this chapter does a great job illustrating terrorism and political violence and explaining what these are in a different light. After looking at these from the points of view of philosophers and economists in the TED talks today in class, it was also nice to take the information and relate it to what the handbook was saying and also gain a Psychological viewpoint. This goes back to what we were saying in class about how the best thing we can do for ourselves to stop this kind of violence is learning everything we can about it and how the minds of these individuals work.
Sadly, this chapter does not relate whatsoever to my chosen expert topic of bullying. Quite frankly, I simply do not think that bullying in schools and terrorism are on quite the same wavelength.
There could be a small case that bullying almost seems like terrorism on an incredibly small scale however seeing as how students are being terrorized by the "elite" in their school. It almost could mirror political violence. Students get these ideas in their head that they need to be thought of as superior and they will stop and nothing to come up on top. They are told that power, honor and respect are the most important things in school and that popularity will get you ALL of that and more.... Because of this, they go and torture their fellow students who they do not feel are on the top and don't conform to their ideas. They terrorize kids that don't wear the same clothes they do or that listen to the same music. This goes back to what we were talking about when everything in terrorism starts with an idea being planted inside their mind.
Again, I am not trying to say that they are completely alike, but maybe the solution to EVERY act of violence is the same: change the ideas being planted in people's minds.
Of course, sadly, this is FAR easier said than done....but now that we know what the problem could be, we can all start becoming part of the solution.
Chapter 21 focuses on the psychological problems resulting from political violence, namely Combat Stress Reactions (CSR) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The focus of the chapter is mainly on men, due to males being the majority in wars. Psychological wounds from war are not as well documented as they should be, but I believe the chapter does a good job discussing the issues. To begin, CSR is basically an overwhelming of battlefield anxiety. There are often feelings of helplessness, powerlessness, and vulnerability involved with CSR, due to being stripped of one’s psychological defenses. Also included in CSR are psychosomatic feelings (such as stuttering and vomiting), cognitive symptoms (such as confusion and impaired decision making), behavioral symptoms (great agitation or apathy and withdrawal), and emotional symptoms (the main two being paralyzing anxiety and deep depression). CSR is only acquired during the time the person is actually enlisted in a war.
PTSD has many similarities to CSR, but it affects more than just soldiers. Victims of rape, severe traffic collisions, and other traumas can also be afflicted with PTSD as well. For soldiers, however, PTSD often is more common to those who already had CSR in a previous war. PTSD is often a reexperiencing of the traumatic event. This leads to impaired functioning and a reduced involvement in the external world. It is often easy to tell when a person is showing symptoms of PTSD, due to their inability to coexist normally with the rest of society (also depending on the severity of one’s PTSD somewhat too). The most common symptom people associate with PTSD is the susceptibility to loud noises (such as Fourth of July fireworks), which makes the person react in startling and unexpected ways that are often indicative to their time in war.
Also included in this chapter was war captivity, which is not really mentioned that often in terms of CSR and PTSD. It has to do with the sense of honor, and the captive soldiers feeling they “failed” in a way. I found it very interesting to think of captivity in this way. The hardships of captivity were much different than the hardships of war, which led to higher levels of PTSD in POWs. The hardships of captivity were often made into a personal matter, as theorized in the book. The humiliation, torture and isolation were directed solely at the captive soldier instead of a large and unparticular mass. In relation to war, however, the threat of combat on one’s life is impersonal and not directed towards any one particular person, which allows the soldiers to “save face.”
What I did find surprising was the fact that not all who undergo symptoms of CSR during the war also developed PTSD. It would seem only natural for those who developed CSR during wartime to also develop PTSD, but that is not the case. Sometimes, it happened that those who were fine during the war later develop symptoms of PTSD. Another surprising factor was those who later in life (around middle to retirement age) developed symptoms of PTSD after being perfectly fine for many years. The one theory the chapter had for this was the reminiscing of old times along with the surplus amount of free time allowed much more rumination over the soldier’s time in combat to flourish.
There was a shocking amount of soldiers who did not realize they had CSR during the war and PTSD after the war, and there was also a large amount who were diagnosed yet did not seek treatment. I wonder if the issue of pride or fears of not being allowed back as a soldier were contributing factors to this. I believe the army should have regulated treatment for those suffering from such symptoms without automatically excusing the soldier from war. This would possibly help those not seeking treatment out of fear and help keep soldiers mentally fit.
Chapter 21 focuses on the psychological toll of being exposed to political violence. Specifically in terms of Israeli soldiers’ experiences during the First Lebanon War and ex-prisoners of war from the Yom Kippur War. The authors examine 30 years worth of information regarding wars in Israel and the immediate and long-term effects of recurrent and prolonged exposure to military violence—Israeli soldiers are exposed to military violence their entire lives because they are more or less in the military until they die.
The chapter continues on talking about combat-induced stress disorders. The first one to be discussed is combat stress reaction (CSR). CSR is also known as shell shock, combat fatigue, or war neurosis. CSR occurs when a soldier feels so overwhelmed by violence going on around him and eventually becomes powerless to fight back, feels helpless, and experiences high levels of anxiety. The authors point out that soldiers experiencing CSR become a danger to themselves and to others and are no longer able to perform the necessary duties of being a soldier. There are a variety of symptoms that accompany CSR including the following: loss of bladder and bowel control; trembling, stuttering, blindness, confusion, impaired attention, impaired memory, alternating states of paralyzing anxiety and deep depression, agitation, etc. Even though the reported prevalence rates of CSR vary considerably, it can be said that CSR is a common consequence of war. The second combat-induced stress disorder discussed is posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). According to the APA, PTSD occurs when “a constellation of repeated reexperiencing of a traumatic event, reduced involvement with the external world, cognitive-affective hyperarousal, and impaired functioning. The text makes a point that PTSD is the most common psychological injury of being exposed to war violence. The text goes on to discuss the authors’ longitudinal studies on Israeli soldiers looking at rates of CSR, PTSD, and the relationship between these two disorders to the exposure level the soldiers experienced during wartime. The authors found that soldiers exposed the longest to war violence showed higher levels of CSR and eventually PTSD. I thought it was quite interesting that the authors found an unexpected rise in rates of PTSD casualties 20 years after a given war. This unexpected finding is explained by noting two possible causes. First, because 20 years after the war would have approximately marked their mid-life point during which these men would not be working as much as before and would have more time to think about their war experiences. Second, due to the measurements being taken during the second intifada, Israeli citizens were exposed to numerous terrorist attacks and violence which could have reactivated the psychological breakdown they experienced after a previous war.
The text continues on to discuss the long-term implications of being held captive during war. POWs are often held in unsanitary and uncomfortable conditions and are typically deprived of basic needs such as food and water. POWs are also subject to being tortured among other forms of brutal force. The authors compared ex-POWs experiences in terms of psychological consequences of war captivity to combat veterans who fought on the same fronts as the ex-POWs but were not captured. The author’s findings revealed that 30 years after their release from captivity, 23% of Israeli POWs met criteria for PTSD compared to 5% of non-POWs. The authors offer four explanations as to why POWs experienced higher rates of PTSD. The text goes on to talk about how having PTSD may affect attachment orientations for the soldiers later on in life. Finally, the authors found higher rates of reported need for help and actual help seeking among ex-POWs.
Chapter 21 was about the psychological effects of war and captivity. It was a very interesting and easy to read chapter. They begin by talking about combat stress reaction (CSR). The authors studied Israeli soldiers because they are pretty much in the military their entire lives. They are constantly subjected to large-scale violence, which makes them a good population to do longitudinal studies on. CSR can be known by different names, such as shell shock, combat fatigue, and war neurosis. This happens when soldiers are so affected by the violence around them that they get overwhelmed, become powerless, feel helpless, have high anxiety, and may even have physical symptoms such as paralysis, blindness, loss of bladder and bowel control, stuttering, confusion, mental problems, etc. These effects are immediate effects that may or may not last longer. The other problem they recorded is post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This is the repeated reexperience of a traumatic event. This may result in reduced involvement with the outside world, cognitive affective hyperarousal, and even impaired functioning. Certain post-war events may trigger them to reexperience the war. Things like the Fourth of July fireworks may make them think they are in the jungle being shot at, and this may result in them reacting as they would then. It can be very damaging and may ruin their lives, never allowing them to interact with others properly or normally.
The authors performed studies where they looked at the occurrence of CSR and PTSD in Israeli soldiers immediately, a short time later, and decades later. They found several things. They found that some men who experience CSR may not develop PTSD later in life. They explain that this may be due to different coping strategies or that the war only affected them while they were in it. They also found that some who did not show CSR during the war showed PTSD later in life. They explained that this may be because the later time frame was around mid-life, thus they might not be working anymore and have more time to reminisce. As for how the two relate, they found that the longer the person experienced war violence, the more likely they were to develop both CSR and PTSD. They also found that while the occurrence of PTSD was lower several years after the war, it grew higher 20 years later. This may be because the second war occurred then and caused them to reexperience the problems they had in the first war.
They also looked at how being a prisoner of war (POW) affects the occurrence of PTSD. They looked at those who were ex-POWs and those who were not POWs to begin with. Since POWs are held in unsanitary conditions and deprived of basic needs, it is clear that there should be some psychological harm. Many times they are also tortured and abused, both physically and psychologically. Many times they would be told that their families were killed or friends or that their government was dismantled and towns destroyed. They looked at both groups 30 years after the event and found a significant number (23%) of POWs had PTSD while only 5% of non-POWs did. They also found that the ex-POWs had different attachment styles than the non-POWs. The ex-POWs had either anxious attachment styles, where they were worried their partners or friends would not be there when they needed them the most, or avoidant attachment styles, where they did not trust others and would avoid interpersonal relationships. We have talked previously about these two attachment styles and how they affect people. One more interesting thing they found, with which they concluded the chapter, was that ex-POWs had a higher rate of reported need for help and help-seeking behavior.
One thing they discussed which I found interesting was that there was a large number of soldiers who either had CSR or PTSD or both and did not seek help. The book explained that they believe this may be because the perceived sense of pride and honor that the soldiers felt if they admitted they had problems and needed help that they would be failing their fellow soldiers. They also felt that they would be dishonored and not as manly. This is a big deal with Israeli soldiers because their culture is one that relies heavily on honor and pride. Luckily, there are some that realize the need for help, although usually it is much later in life when the situation has gotten so much worse. Many of the men who had CSR and PTSD voluntarily reenlisted for following wars because they did not want to seem weak, when in fact it only made the problem worse. It is hard to understand how someone can do that when they are so damaged. One thing that needs to be realized to understand this concept is that their culture is much more reliant on those values that would make them afraid to seek help or to say they can’t fight in another war. I think that it has probably gotten better over time with the changes in cultural thinking and the modernization of ideas. It is also important to realize that other cultures may not have a choice in if they fight, unlike us. Both of these things will help different cultures realize why there may be so much violence within their cultures and why it does not stop. War will never cease, but we may be able to alleviate the effects if we can start understanding why it will never stop and why it is what it is.
4/05/11 freebie
This chapter's primary focus is the psychological toll of exposure to political violence. They use Israel as an example of prolonged exposure to political violence of Israeli verterans and discuss studies done on these veterans to determine the long term effects of violence on these veterans.
The first psychological issue discussed is Combat Stress Reaction (CSR). This refers to the reaction of a combatant during battle that is comparable to a psychological breakdown. The individual may begin to feel helpless or vulnerable during battle and also they likely will be overcome with anxiety. Some symptoms of this reaction to combat are stuttering, trembling, vomiting, loss of bladder and bowel control, blindness, paralysis, confusion, impaired memory and attention, and/or agitation. There has been inconsistencies in the reporting of CSR during war, but it is clear that it is a common occurrance during wars.
The second psychological issue that may occur after an individual participates in war is Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. This disorder is characterized by frequent flashbacks or memories, dreams, hyperarousal, and impaired daily functioning. The handbook next discusses chrinic PTSD and stresses the importance of seeking treatment for these serious, and possibly fatal disorders.
The effects of exposure to combat are ultimately extremely devastating to the lives of the indiviudals who are exposed to combat. The authors discuss three perspectives that provide explaination to how war exposure may lead to detrimental effects. The first is the vulnerability perstpective, which contends prolonged exposure to stress is a risk factor because it drains a person of their coping resources. The second is stress inoculation perspective, which states exposure to prolonged stress serves as an immunizer because it helps the person develop different strategies to cope with stress. The third perspective is the stress resolution hypothesis, which suggests the stressful events are not the determining factor; it is how the indiviudal copes with the stress.
The chapter also explains how being a prisoner of war (POW) can lead to PTSD. These situations involve extreme and deliberate physical and mental violence. The authors explain how severe the effects are on an individual due to the severe violence paired with the extreme conditions the POW experienced during combat. It leads the POW feeling horrified and helpless and also they may feel they let their country or group down.
I think the authors do a great job of portraying how serious these disorders are and how great of an effect they can have on the individual. There are not only short-term effects, but effects that can potentially last the rest of the indiviudal's life. It surprised me that many of these war veterans did not seek any type of help after experiencing the symptoms of PTSD. The authors reported that many more POWs seek help than combat survivors. This may be due to the extreme situations the POWs experienced. Many people do not seek help and although the symptoms sometimes do cease, it is highly unlikely without professional assistance.
This chapter was useful to our discussion about political violence because it helps show that not only are we endangering people from another group, but political violence is also unintentionally harming one's own soldiers. I think this chapter also shows the importance that these men get the help they need when they have PTSD. The effects are serious and need to be addressed in order to free the indiviudal of the effects of war.
I'd like to use my freebie from my attendance day.
This chapter was really closely related to my expert topic, so I found it very interesting. Chapter 21 discusses the psychological effects that war can take upon humans when continuously exposed to violence and war, concentrating on how these violent means take effect on Israeli men. This sample of statistics is really interesting to look at, as the Israeli men are pressured to train and be involved in violence and war repeatedly and for most of their lives. While our culture is fairly familiar with stress-related psychological disorders (PTSD being among the most talked about), I was surprised to see the types of psychological break downs that other cultures experience.
The first psychological reaction to violence that was discussed in this chapter is the Combat Stress Reactions (CSR). Some of the examples that were given in the text we really disturbing, and ranged from psychosomatic symptoms (such as loss of bodily functions) to cognitive dysfunction like confusion and disorientation. What really surprised me, however, were the more extreme cases such as paralyzing anxiety and the example of a soldier disposing of his uniform and “running amok” towards the enemy. Even more surprising than the results of these reactions, however, is how common they occur in the Israeli population. The statistics for these occurrences in American soldiers during the Vietnam War were fairly low (1.2% of the wounded), where as the Israeli soldiers experienced a much higher rate of psychological “injury,” in some units reaching up to 70% of their wounded soldiers. These numbers are staggering in comparison, which leads us to the question of, why? Why is there this much of a difference in psychological reaction between two different cultures of humans? While some psychological consequence is expected from war, it seems as though when exposed to violence for more prolonged periods of time the psychological affect takes a greater toll on the soldier when placed in the actual war setting.
In addition to these stress reactions, there are many other psychological issues that maybe appearing at the same time, increasing the effects of the stress reaction. Comorbidities are another topic discussed in the chapter, where they focus on the “Effects of Repeated Exposure to Combat” and “Reactivation of Traumatic Reactions”. In regards to repeated exposed to combat, the findings show that if the soldier had adequate resolution of past psychological breaks, the rates of revisiting that psychological state were lower than in those who never reached a resolution. In addition, those who had never been exposed to war were also at a lower rate than either of the groups who had been in a war setting in the past. These researchers also found that if a soldier has had one psychological break, the likelihood of experiencing a second break in a similar stressful and violent situation increases. They also address the possibility of reactivating a past stressful reaction, something that has been more widely discussed and researched. The researchers discussed the higher probability of developing PTSD when placed in a similar situation as a previous psychological stressor, such as war or a scene of devastation. Those who have had experiences like these were more likely to develop the disorder, with varying levels of severity and frequencies depending on the degree of violence exposure. They conclude that prolonged and repeated exposure to violent situations and war result in higher rates of psychological disorders and reoccurrences in traumatic psychological experiences.
While the chapter is really informative and contains a lot of great statistics, it’s also really sad to realize the psychological stress that these people are exposed to on a regular basis. In a county like Israel war is a constant presence, meaning that its civilians are exposed to these psychological effects on a regular basis. Violence is something that is engrained within their culture; men are expected to fight in war over and over again without question. This is why I was curious as to what effect this has on children for my expert topic. With violence constantly present, it has to be difficult to separate when violence is appropriate or necessary and when it is not. Children have enough difficulty separating these things on their own, without the introduction of constant war and violence in their home (as in many Israeli families). It has been really difficult to find any good information on this topic, so I am glad I at least got to peak into the psychological functioning of the adult men in the culture.