Trauma in an Intergenerational Perspective - Essay Example

Chronic Problems: Trauma in an Intergenerational Perspective Feelings and emotions are not static. They change alongside with time. That phenomenon has been existent for quite sometime. However, people overlook the nature of some emotional states, which have a deep impact on one’s life. One of these conditions is trauma. Trauma can be considered extreme fear, depression or anxiety over an event that is horrible or unforgettable, which have tremendous effects over the psychological state of a person. Several instances and condition are affected by trauma. In most cases, the personal and the cultural spheres of an individual or a group of people are the ones tampered by this phenomenon. In this paper, there will be an assessment on how trauma affects the personal level by looking at the process of recovery, process of remembering and process of progressing. The same shall be used with the cultural conditions, particularly, with the living conditions of a certain group people having a shared experience of trauma. At the same time, there will be an assessment of the effects of trauma on multiple levels. Memory will always be the basis of trauma. This is undeniable since memories cannot be deleted. They are retained. There have been two possible ways of dealing with it: moving on or dwell in it. There are several ways of dealing with trauma as exemplified by different conditions to be cited here. Mourning is one of the crucial indicators of trauma. The loss of a loved one or someone is often unresolved. Having the problem to recover from this impedes one from recovering and will definitely have a difficult time in addressing future instances that might be of the same nature since establishing relationships are the one at risk (Charles 1999). On a personal level, the need to recover from trauma is not one sided. In the case of mothers who might have a relationship impaired with their infants. The childbirth is not an easy thing for a mother yet the worst thing to find is the resentment of the mother from the trauma of having a child with some problems (Fraiberg, Adelson, Shapiro 1975). The happiness of childbirth shifted into depression due to complications. Double – edged sword as it may seem, the childbirth became a happy and sad moment at the same time. Analytically, this evokes trauma to a certain degree. In this case, the trauma is connected with the act of childbirth. Presumably, the need to recover becomes difficult. If the same experience will happen again, the fear will be a dominant feel since the conditions might be the same once again. This only shows that time is a crucial element that allows the possible occurrence of the same experience, which might be bearable or unbearable depending on the efforts to recover on the part of the individual. Another condition where trauma is present is by the notion of ghosts, especially in scaring children. At the outset, it can be analyzed that the usage of ghosts is a way to regulate the child’s behavior. To a certain extent, the usage of it can be a disciplinary method by using the fear associated with the term. What seems to be crucial with this concept is the use images that can leave a lasting impact; making the trauma dwell in the person (O’Loughlin 2010). The images are representations of fear. This would then lead to certain unease on a person who has experienced the horror about ghosts. As a parallel condition, which cannot be overlooked, the person who has a certain degree of fear and trauma about ghosts will have a difficult time dealing with it at the early stage of his or her life. The reason behind this phenomenon is that the mind of the individual, at a young age, has been conditioned to be responsive to such a fear triggering devise. Every response at the mention of the term ‘ghosts’ would make the person vulnerable to fear. This is such an anxious condition, which will then lead to trauma due to successive occurrence just to instill discipline. The worst case here is that fear, as a trauma device, can be considered as a sanction. What make this fear as traumatic an intergenerational practice is that the need to regulate behavior is always constant. This is always the case whenever an adult has to supervise a child. This cycle will continue once the child assumes adulthood and regulates a child of his or her own. Thus, it can be considered as cultural condition given that it is practiced all throughout. If the fear becomes highly prevalent and is not addressed, then there is a problem. It can be considered that there is a lack engagement or integration across generations to share experiences and learn from it (Charles 1999). In the case of ghost and trauma, there can be no distancing from the experience since the horror of the idea is present. It can be deemed that no recovery mechanism is implemented that allows trauma to linger. Ironically, there is the mechanism of regulation that allows trauma to be passed on to generations. The said phenomenon of ghosts can be considered alien transplant as its theoretical counterpart (Garon 2004). It is undeniable that the concept is foreign due to a certain degree of anomalous representation. The concept is foreign due to its condition being non – existent. The term ghost is a construct to repress the mind and to subjugate. Analytically, the trauma it produces is a foreign intrusion toward consciousness and sane thinking. In comparison with the social conditions that trauma subscribe in to, it appears to be that there is a relatively difficult phenomenon. Most of the time, this is on a cultural perspective and wide-scale in terms of the scope. In this case, horror and fear will still be the basic premise to assume trauma on a collective basis. There is a huge difference between the personal and the social. In the case of the Buffalo Creek, the horror of the incident led to a traumatizing experience for everyone, which triggered depression and demoralization (Erikson 1976). It appears that the process towards recovery from the devastating incident is not an easy task for the community. There is demoralization on the part of the community since the incident has left them in shambles. It appears that recovery will not be easy for everyone (Erikson 1976). Analytically, this trauma can be compensated by engagement since this, presumably, requires minimal effort to be eradicated. On the other side of the spectrum, there is a certain degree of trauma that cannot be dealt with easily due to certain sensitivity to the issue, especially with the Holocaust. Images that recall the bloody history of World War II, especially the persecution of Jews, is still horrible up until now (Kaplan 1995). One thing that cannot be overlooked with this are the images that reminds people of the horrors of the said event. The facilities that are still around serves as memorabilia of the heinous crime against humanity, which are atrocities back then. The Jews, who have survived, cannot let go of such an incident since it is genocide towards their group. For years that have passed, silence has been the battle cry for the succeeding generations of Jews who barely have any idea of the incident unless they are taught in schools (Kaplan 1995). Such conditions actually tries to provide conditions for remembering, which later on will trigger questioning on the part of the new blood of Jews. With such events, it cannot be denied that trauma or even hatred might be developed. If this becomes normalized in the minds of the Jews, then trauma is passed on since the fears about the conditions that surround the Holocaust are explicated. It is inevitable that the story about Holocaust being transmitted creates a totally different impression to people. There are different sensibilities touched by the issue, which cannot be oversimplified in to sheer retelling of the past. The horrors of the past have implications for the future generations. The nightmares of the survivors are passed on to the next (Kaplan 1995). Hysteria becomes a practice and transposition is a phenomenon unavoidable for these victims (Kaplan 1995). At the same time, the excision of language makes the survivors and their children as the witnesses of the experience done via retelling. This would only show that even if the process of engaging can help recovery, then the horror of the memory cannot be overlooked as a simple process since it reinforces again the desperation and frustration of the experience in a time where it is no longer existent. This happened due to the confinement of fear: making the Jews a docile one. This process happens on a group basis. However, there is still a certain degree of complexity that comes with the process given that the amount of pain each member of the group has varies with each other. Even if these people share the same sentiments as an ethnic group, the families that compose the group have their own collective memory as entities. It cannot be denied that the families are also considered groups, though they are exclusive due to certain restrictions. There is a different political implication in families on how they do keep the trauma within the context of family relations? It can be seen from the previous example of the Holocaust that the parents are crucial in keeping the memory intact and transferable. The parent – child dyad is a phenomenon that can explain this process (Krugman 1987). The transmission of cultural memory, in this case, violence, cannot be prevented since it is part of the surviving person: a manifestation of trauma that cannot be simplified. Another condition where the problem of the trauma is transferred or put into play is the use of fantasy, which could arouse empathy towards the incident (Krugman 1987). Thus, the horror of the incident becomes a subtle phenomenon. However, the instances that surround it are retained. Trauma is still present on that level but not as aggravating as the original since there is a mediation of the experience. What is crucial for the retention of trauma, as pointed out earlier, are objects, which are manifestations of the struggle and fear within a person. The object relations and identification with object appears to be daunting since these trigger mental responses that are volatile and uncontrollable (Krugman 1987). There seems to be repetitive cycle if there is always an engagement with object that reminds people or makes them connect with fear or horror: a path of experience or thinking that keeps trauma part of the person’s normalized living. Thus, on a group and on a collective, there appears to be a systematic form of trauma. The Buffalo Creek and the Holocaust exemplify both conditions. For Krugman (1987), trauma is also passed on if the parents, in the case of the events provided, are no longer capable of carrying and engaging the burden alone (Krugman 1987). Thus, the children become assistive mechanisms for continuing the process of recovery. Analytically, the problem will not be much for the adult once the trauma is passed on or shared. The need to engage becomes minimal since the child has become the one to carry the burden of fully engaging the stress of trauma. If these traumatic conditions are not engaged carefully, then the family relations will also affect social relations. This will only make the condition more problematic for people. Impairment is not just present on the personal but extends to the collective level of community. This can lead to disparity and problems in relations that cannot be mediated that fast if there will be no effort exerted by those traumatized people. To compensate the problem, there are still methods that can be done to stop the traumatic experience and relax the consciousness of the victims of those victimized by the experience. The most important step that must be taken comes with the parents who must start engaging the trauma not by silencing themselves but freeing themselves from the grasp of the experience. By then, there will be room for possible personal therapy via self – reflection or even consultation with professional who can help in mediating the trauma slowly. Another thing, the parents should be highly responsible in dealing with their children by not making them suffer from their past experiences. Rather, they need to educate them about the implications and complications of their experiences. If this is done, then there will not be much problem about the kids having to deal with additional pressure that seems to be too unbearable for them. If these are established, then there can be physical and emotional stability (Krugman 1987). This can allow for further development and reconciliation. Progression can be made for recovery and hamper trauma at its grassroots. In the end, it boils down to the question of recovery and of moving on. For most people, overcoming trauma might be an easy thing by focusing on other things. However, this seems to be quite an escapist condition since there is no actual engagement from the experience. Passing the pain to others, even if on the purpose of developing a sense of communality cannot even assure that the trauma is engaged or even rechanneled into a positive perception. A positive outlook can prevent the trauma being passed on from generations to generations. It is inevitable that some experiences are too painful to be let go unpunished. However, forgiveness seems too crucial about the recovery for trauma. For some social trauma, like Holocaust and Buffalo Creek, there is nothing wrong about losing the sense of communality for the sake of personal recovery from trauma. It is unreasonable to go with flow of the majority. To let on the personal level and influence others to do the same thing will only show that people are aware of the past and learn from it: not to dwell in it. It is a daunting performance to do. However, if recovery and the prevention of trauma is the goal, then there is nothing wrong about doing this. It is actually helping each other in the long run. BIBLIOGRAPHY Charles, Marilyn. (1999). The Intergenerational Transmission of Mourning: Personal, Familial and Cultural Factors. Fraiberg, Salma, Edna Andelson and Vivian Shapiro. (1975). Ghosts in the Nursery: A Psychoanalytic Approach to the Problems of Impaired Infant – Mother Relationships. Erikson, Kai. (1976). Loss of Communality at Buffalo Creek. Garon, Josette. (2004). Skeletons in the Closet. Kaplan. (1995). Images of Absences, Voices of Silence. Krugman, Steven. (1987). Trauma in the Family: Perspectives on the Intergenerational Transmission of Violence. O’Loughlin, Michael. (2010). Ghostly Presences in Children’s Lives: Towards a Psychoanalysis of the Social. Read More