Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective Consciousness

8/9/2019 Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective Consciousness

1/98

Healing Societal Traumas and TransformingCollective Consciousness: A Path to a Culture of

Healing

M.A. Thesis

Submitted by:

Kristin Famula, USA

[email protected]

To the European University Center for Peace Studies

Stadtschlaining/Burg, Austria

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Master of Arts Degree in

Peace and Conflict Studies

Word Count: 21,402

February 2007

Thesis adviser: Dr. H.B. Danesh


2/98

2

Acknowledgements

Many important people have contributed directly and indirectly to this final project.

Very special thanks to my thesis advisor, Dr. Hossain B. Danesh who has spent many

hours talking, meeting, and emailing about various aspects of this paper—always

encouraging me and helping me to find new ways of looking at the ideas.

Thank you also to the European University Center for Peace Studies (EPU) and Dietrich

Fischer who helped me find a unique and wonderful support-group of dedicated peace

workers.

And lastly, deep thanks and love to my parents, Roberta and John Famula, my sister Jamie and my partner, Jason Adams for their continuous support, love and faith in my

path towards peace work. Even while I have questioned my own choices in what will

promise to be a difficult career, they have been a pedestal of never-ending

encouragement.


3/98

3

Abstract

Traumatic events leave long-lasting, detrimental consequences on the individuals

affected. Societal traumas, such as terrorist attacks, war, and natural disasters, which

impact entire populations, similarly inflict enduring pain and suffering. These traumas

have damaging effects that are not recognized by the wounded culture. The negative

results of which are incorporated into the collective consciousness of the culture; making

ideas and actions, based on the traumatic event, seem inherent and natural. Traumatic

events occur cyclically; re-occurring if the effects are never fully healed.

Two methods for healing will be examined in this paper: healing from Posttraumatic

Stress Disorder and lessons learned from numerous Truth and Reconciliation

Commissions with the hopes of finding a new approach to healing entire societies fromthe harmful effects of trauma. Finally, the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation

Commission (GTRC) and Education for Peace (EFP) will be considered as new

frameworks for cultural healing.


4/98

4

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction 5

Chapter 2: Trauma and the Effects of a Traumatic Event 11

1. How We Respond to Trauma—The Need to Heal 16

2. Societal Trauma and Healing 18

Chapter 3: Trauma—Worldview – Collective Consciousness 26

1. Worldview 27

2. Collective Consciousness 293. Consciousness Upheld 304. Memory 32

5. Impact of Trauma on the Collective Consciousness 34

6. Collective Consciousness Transformation through Trauma Healing 39

Chapter 4: Healing from Trauma—Posttraumatic Stress Disorder 41

1. Treatment for PTSD 432. Difficulties with PTSD treatment 44

Chapter 5: Healing from Trauma—Truth and Reconciliation Commissions 47

1. Treatment through TRCs 50

2. Difficulties with TRCs 53

a. Truth 54

b. Justice 55c. Granting Amnesty 56d. Top-Down Approaches 56

e. Time and Resources 57

f. Long-term Healing 57

Chapter 6: A Case Study—The Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission 59

1. Background 59

2. The Observable Impact on the Unhealed Community 613. The GTRC Mandate 62

4. Process for Healing 63

5. Transforming the Collective Consciousness 65

6. Previous Trauma in Greensboro’s History 66

7. Lessons Learned 68


5/98

5

Chapter 7: Culture of Healing 71

1. Culture of Healing as Implemented in Education for Peace (EFP) 76

2. Relevance of EFP’s Culture of Healing to other Communities 78

a. Societal Trauma has a long-lasting impact 79

b. Acknowledging Past Trauma 79

c. Understanding Collective Consciousness and its Impact on Individuals 82i. Building Non-Violent Relations & Reframing Identity 84

Chapter 8: Conclusion 86

Appendix I: Mandate for the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission 89

Appendix II: Prerequisites and components of an effective program of Peace 92Education

References 93


6/98

6

Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective

Consciousness: A Path to a Culture of Healing

Traumatic events are widespread and the effects of these shocking incidents permeate

through the lives of individuals world-wide. Tragedies such as car accidents, natural

disasters, marital or parental aggression, and even rape and murder occur every day in

every part of the world. Responses and reactions to these traumatic events vary from

person to person, but most individuals will, at some point in their lives, be affected by

trauma. While many individuals are able to heal from their experiences, is it possible that

some symptoms still linger? Most psychologists and mental health workers would

answer that question in the affirmative. It is not uncommon for individuals who have

experienced trauma, to change their attitudes or behaviors. In fact, these deeply

disturbing experiences often live with people for the rest of their lives.

In 2005, after Hurricane Katrina swept through the Gulf Coast of the United States,

wiping out most of the homes and businesses in New Orleans, Louisiana, survivors dealt

with many problems in addition to the loss of loved ones and displacement. Examples of

ongoing problems included sleep deprivation, depression, and “re-living” the event. In

particular, the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, triggered many vivid memories and

emotional pain.


7/98

7

Similar to those of the hurricane survivors, most traumatic events leave the impacted

individuals with emotional and psychological pain. After some time, victims of trauma

may feel as if they have moved on from the incident, but sometimes the effects are even

deeper than realized and can result in more severe and long-term, painful consequences.

Dr. Kendall Johnson, a crisis-management consultant for several school districts in

California, has observed many of these trauma side-effects during his work as a marriage

and family therapist. Some of these long-term results include anger at oneself and others,

perpetual pessimism and physical problems associated with the stress of trauma,

including stomach and head aches, weight loss or gain, and even increased likelihood for

illnesses (Johnson, 2006, 66). With the frequency of traumatic events and the severe

impact and lingering effects of trauma so often going unrealized, trauma itself becomes a

larger reason for concern.

While resultant effects are most often observed and researched in individual survivors,

trauma can also be shared across a larger population, affecting not only individuals, but

entire societies. Since the individual impact of traumatic events can be so severe and

long-lasting, it is necessary to also examine the effect on a societal level. Societal or

cultural traumas, such as those inflicted by the subjugation of native peoples, are

common as nations fight for sovereignty, populations work towards equality, or

civilizations strive for power. Societal leaders, often promise that similar traumas will

never happen again, while at the same time stressing the necessity of forgetting or

forgiving these traumas as unfortunate parts of a cultures’ history. Riane Eisler observes

in her historical account of Goddess-Worshiping societies, “[i]t is a widespread


8/98

8

assumption that however bloody things have been since the days of the Sumerians and

Assyrians this was just the unfortunate prerequisite for technological and cultural

advance” (Eisler, 1987, 66). As a consequence of unintentionally defending or

rationalizing the actions of those committing atrocities, the healing process can be

delayed or negated altogether. Social scientist and trauma and healing researcher, Duane

Elgin suggests that some of the traumas following this pattern include, “genocide,

slavery, religious persecution, colonialism, and gender oppression” (Elgin, October 1997,

26). The subsequent effects of particular traumas on societies are ignored or not

understood, but as with individual victims, the resultant symptoms and effects still exist

whether acknowledged or not. Over time, the product of these neglected traumas is an

unhealed society with negative consequences woven into the fabric of the culture.

These unresolved, cultural traumas have a pervasive, long-lasting, negative grasp on the

identity of each culture. Individual views of the world are influenced by each trauma.

This tendency is very similar to that of a child learning a lesson. If she paints on the

walls, and is yelled at by her parents afterwards, chances are, she will think differently

about painting on the walls in the future. While this seems an insignificant example

when compared to the challenges that are created by traumatic events, it helps illustrate

how an event can change the way a person thinks. After a car accident, survivors are

often extremely cautious while driving, and may even become angry or afraid of other

drivers without reason. On a larger scale, imagine what might happen to an individual’s

perception of the world if they are violently attacked and their family members are killed

by a stranger. The person’s view of the world around him will change drastically.


9/98

9

Possibly he will be afraid of total strangers; or he will have thoughts of revenge against

people of the same description as his attacker; either way, he will begin to think

differently and subsequently act differently after the traumatic event. Indeed thoughts,

actions and even ideas about what is inherent and natural behavior is shaped in part by

the process of healing, or not healing, from these traumas. Thus, entire cultures affected

by a common traumatic event develop a similar worldview - a collective consciousness -

which determines how they heal from these traumas, and subsequently how they

approach future conflicts.

Many psychologists and trauma professionals have realized that traumatic events often

generate future traumatic events. This occurs because the collective consciousness of the

traumatized population has transformed to incorporate trauma as natural behavior.

Adults who were abused as children often re-enact the same violence on others (if they

have not been able to heal from the trauma). Similarly, populations impacted by trauma

will often react violently, inflicting similar violence upon others. Medical biophysicist

and psychologist, Peter Levine, who developed a new method for healing from trauma

called “Somatic Experiencing”, agrees that experiencing traumatic events greatly

increases the likelihood for future violence. While violence is only one outcome of

unresolved trauma, it is certainly an important effect to examine (Levine, 1997, 225).

The potential for violent tendencies would not be so much of a worry, if they were not so

increasingly prevalent, but recent studies show the magnitude and severity of violence.

In 2002, the United Nations and World Health Organization released a report on violence

and health world-wide. In the report, they describe violence as “a global public health


10/98


11/98

11

disorders from a trauma, the traumatic event itself will produce deep-rooted, damaging,

results if not fully healed.

Acknowledging and healing from these traumas will open an outlet for creative

alternatives to transforming future challenges nonviolently. There are no easy solutions

for healing from deep traumas, especially those that have occurred decades ago and have

been clouded over by time, but Elgin explains, “it may seem unwise to bring the dark side

of humanity’s past into the light of day, but, unless we do, this unresolved pain will

forever pull at the underside of our consciousness and diminish our future potentials”

(Elgin, October 1997, 27).

This paper will examine different methods of healing in an effort to find a technique for

healing entire societies; for cultural healing. Two current methods for healing trauma

victims will be examined: the positive and negative aspects of methods used for healing

from Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); and the lessons learned from numerous

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs). These two processes, PTSD treatment

and TRCs, were selected because they have been both examined as successful methods

for healing and scrutinized for their possible failures. Both techniques treat trauma

healing as a necessary and unrealized obligation for individuals in the world today. This

paper will also examine the effects of unresolved traumas on the collective consciousness

and worldview. From there, two current cultural healing methods will examined: The

Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission (GTRC), which has prioritized a need

for transforming the collective consciousness in their community; and Education for


12/98

12

Peace (EFP), which has seen much success in developing a Culture of Healing after Civil

War in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Finally, a definition and process will be developed for a

Culture of Healing—and an examination of how a Culture of Healing may replace the

dependence on violence, and replace it with a new outlet for creative, nonviolent

solutions.


13/98

13

Trauma and the Effects of a Traumatic Event

“Trauma” is most commonly defined as any injury both of body or mind caused by

outside means (Judith Herman, as cited in Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 17). Trauma

occurs when “an event creates an unresolved impact on an organism” (Levine, 1997,

129). Trauma, which is prevalent worldwide, includes all individual traumatic events

that affect a person’s normal way of living: childhood abuse, incest, rape, car accidents,

job loss, and family problems; and those traumas that occur on a larger scale such as

genocide, war, and natural disasters. A traumatic event can be caused by many types of

physical or emotional pain; even feared death or a perceived pain can cause such a

reaction. More recently, the definition of trauma has expanded to also include and

acknowledge the recurring reactions to previous trauma that one may have experienced

at an earlier age.

Traumatic events occur every day and practically every person at one point in his or her

life will be subjected to a trauma that will affect him or her in some way. Peter Levine, a

psychologist and researcher notes that, “trauma has become so commonplace that most

people don’t even recognize its presence . . . each of us has had a traumatic experience at

some time in our lives, regardless of whether it left us with an obvious case of post-

traumatic stress” (Levine, 1997, 41).

Many individuals have healthy ways of dealing with their symptoms of trauma; these

tactics sometimes include family support, journal-writing, or other coping techniques.


14/98

14

However, as Levine notes, even if a person is able to cope with their traumatic event in a

healthy way, effects linger for some time. The difficulty is that most of these effects are

not obvious to the traumatized person, and thus psychological symptoms are not

recognized. Additionally, many people do not ever fully heal from trauma. The event

affects them for the rest of their lives whether they realize it consciously or not.

Individuals will have varying reactions to similar traumatic events, and as such, the

effects of such an event will have different outcomes for each person. Trauma can come

in all shapes and sizes and the effects will often change throughout ones life. What may

simply be an uncomfortable occurrence to one, will be traumatic and unremitting for

another, depending on the person’s history, coping abilities and other outside events in

his or her life.

The way a traumatic event affects a person depends as much on how one experiences the

event as the actual trauma itself. Individuals can experience the same incident, but

handle it differently, and therefore heal from it differently. Despite this, in all cases,

trauma has lasting effects that are not always obvious and may linger for long periods of

time. For instance, rape victims often express fear, or the inability to have intimate

relations with others after his or her trauma. It frequently requires years of therapy and

healing to deal with the emotions associated with the trauma, and subsequently, the

reactions that the person has towards other people and relationships.


15/98

15

Human beings are designed for survival. If placed in a situation that is dangerous,

individuals often react instinctively without reflection or evaluation. A traumatic event

immediately triggers a series of reactions in an individual’s body, often called a fight-or-

flight response. This type of response is usually discussed in relation to traumatic events

that cause individuals to exhibit extreme, unexplainable strength. Human beings have

these responses as a defense mechanism against pain from trauma. These instantaneous

reactions are one of the body’s methods for survival. The body prepares a person by

sending a flood of chemicals that hasten the reaction of the body and focus attention to

the crisis. Individuals react immediately in ways that are sometimes extremely surprising

or confusing. These reactions can be categorized into four groups: physical, mental,

emotional and behavioral, and they include responses such as the momentary extreme

strength mentioned above, and quick-thinking (Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 20).

Many physical reactions such as rapid heartbeat, nervousness, and dizziness are simply

these immediate reactions to the trauma. In healthy bodies, these reactions will diminish

fairly quickly. Other common symptoms of trauma linger for longer, but will also

diminish within a short period of time. These can include: depression, anxiety and stress,

anger, sadness, fear, difficulty relating to loved ones, or even immediate reactions as

severe as suicide attempts. Furthermore, although an individual’s immediate responses to

trauma are not usually conscious, they differ broadly from person to person.

Most reactions fall into two “acute stress responses”; individuals either “explode into

extreme emotional action or collapse into psychological shock” (Johnson, 2006, 75).


16/98

16

Both reactions can have dangerous results in addition to the ultimate shock or pain from

the actual traumatic injury. The second of the two responses, a state of stagnant shock, is

common but less obvious, and is often more dangerous to the trauma victim. This state

frequently leaves the person “psychologically wounded without anyone being aware of

it” (Johnson, 2006, 75). This type of response often results in future delayed stress

symptoms, including individuals that thought they were not negatively influenced by the

event. These differing reactions to trauma can be observed in a myriad of normal, every-

day experiences. When a parent dies, one child may cry profusely and be depressed for

weeks; while the other child may seem removed from the heartbreak, but may suddenly

begin having difficulties in school. Similarly, differing responses can be seen in other

traumatic circumstances.

Many of the abovementioned psychological or bodily effects of trauma will fade away

shortly after the event. Other responses to trauma or tragedy are more complicated and

also differ from person to person. Long-term effects include loss of memory (or the

inability to take in more information), long-term depression, and physical ailments such

as a weakened immune system (leading to likely increases in infections to the body or

even increased risks for diseases like cancer) (Bremner, 2005, 268). There are many

more possible long-term effects, which cause damage to the mind, brain and body.

In addition to the more common short and long-term effects, one trauma survivor,

Matthew Sanford notes, “how we carry trauma forward throughout out lives can be the

real injury” (Hart, 48). Some trauma survivors see the world as being completely


17/98

17

different than it was before the event, and consequently the survivors’ perception of his

or her association with the world around them changes. Family and work-related

relationships as well as connections to strangers are often strained or damaged with no

clear understanding why (Hart, 48). Some experts refer to this long-term process as the

“recovery” phase of healing from trauma. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

defines this phase as the “prolonged period of adjustment or return to equilibrium that the

community and individuals must go through”

(http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/disasters/fs_phases_disaster.html). This phase moves

past the basic survival techniques for healing from the trauma, and begins the process of

returning to a normal state of living. For some, especially those that experienced the

traumatic event first-hand, this progression never leads to full healing and many

individuals may develop Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, which will be discussed later.

Traumatic Stress, defined as “leftover reactions (lasting emotional scars) from

overwhelming events” continues long after the actual event; some people may experience

traumatic stress reactions for their entire lives (Johnson, 2006, 70).

The long-term results of trauma can be confusing and frightening, mostly because an

individual does not usually associate the symptoms with the trauma experienced.

Because a traumatic event can have ramifications for the rest of a person’s life, it is

common for individuals to be experiencing problems that are complicating their lives

without any explanation of from where these problems are coming. These difficulties can

include anxiety, panic, disorientation or overwhelming impulses to do things that are

completely out of character such as drinking excessively (Johnson, 2006, 59). Johnson


18/98

18

notes, “Nothing occurs in a vacuum”; the troublesome events that are occurring in one’s

community, in one’s family, and in the world, can affect the way someone handles the

problems in their life, and can release feelings and emotions that are caused by previous

experiences (Johnson, 2006, 59).

Responses to Trauma—The Need to Heal

Much of a person’s reaction to trauma depends predominantly on the way he or she

processes the situation. Although traumatic events will almost always have difficult side-

effects on an individual, outside factors in the person’s background will determine the

overall effects of trauma and will influence the severity and duration of problems. An

individual’s response depends on family experiences, age, relationships, and even

“previous coping strategies” (Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 18). Even things like

religious beliefs and cultural background and perspectives will affect if and how an

individual or group will heal. The “meaning” of a traumatic event will be shaped by an

individual’s history and background (Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 18). Their

understanding of what occurred will depend on their previous experiences.

As previously mentioned, trauma can change the way people think about themselves and

the world around them. Many factors are taken into account when determining how to

help an individual heal from a particular trauma including what a person “sees, hears,

smells, and feels during a traumatic event; how this information travels through the

system of perceptions and is modified by prior memories, emotions, and beliefs; how it is


19/98

19

processed by the nervous system; and how it is ultimately translated into a neurological

response and a new set of memories and cognitions” (Bremner, 2005, 272). The ways in

which societies are taught to deal with trauma is an important part of the ultimate healing

process.

Continuous research has been conducted on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)—a

mental illness that affects many people around the world, but is most commonly

recognized in war veterans. PTSD is the result of massive trauma that is not fully dealt

with at an individual level. The methods for healing from PTSD will be examined later

in this paper, as an example of healing from long-term effects of trauma. What is clear

from research done with trauma survivors, who differed in scope of trauma and in

cultural background, is that the impact inflicted by a traumatic event can leave negative

consequences for decades (Hamber, 2003, 79). Many researchers note, as might seem

obvious, that multiple traumas, or traumatic events that occur for an extended period of

time, will have severe outcomes, especially if the sufferer has not learned how to heal

from them. This occurrence, called Complex Trauma is a “layering of traumatic events”

(Johnson, 2006, 70). Some individual responses to complex trauma are:

• Deep questioning about your character and your adequacy

• Distrust of yourself and your intentions

• Unnecessary skepticism toward the motives of others

• Deep and abiding distrust of the world in which you live (Johnson, 2006, 102).


20/98

20

Many of the above effects of traumatic events are also observed at a collective level from

traumas that affect an entire society.

Societal Trauma and Healing

Traumatic events significantly impact individuals and it is necessary for each person to

heal fully to avoid negative long-term effects from trauma, but trauma does not only

occur at an individual level. Entire populations or cultures can also experience a

collective trauma that will impact them in much the same way as individual traumatic

experiences. One example would be the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon

in the United States on September 11, 2001. This event traumatized much of the U.S.

population in many obvious ways, and also in many undetermined and less apparent

ways. As one observer notes, after September 11, 2001, “our collective trust in the world

and the security of the nation got shattered” (Sanford, 49). As news reports around the

five-year anniversary of this traumatic event report, “9-11” was not just an event; it is an

ongoing process of healing.

Although it is difficult to find scientific research that proves a link between past societal

traumas and problems that exist today, Bremner acknowledges that many different types

of “stressors” whether extreme or not, can “have effects on our minds, brains, and bodies

in ways that we don’t yet fully understand” (Bremner, 2005, 145). He further recognizes

that “scientists are just beginning to understand how extreme stress can have lasting

effects on one’s mind, brain, and physical health” (Bremner, 2005, 144). Many studies


21/98

21

have been conducted, analyzing the long-term psychological effects of natural disasters,

mass violence, war and other traumatic events that affect entire populations. Much of the

research looks at individual psychological responses to the trauma, and methods for how

those individuals healed (or did not heal) from it. Much less research has been done on

the overall effect to entire populations, but many psychologists and counselors have

noted the link between large-scale traumatic events, and a culture’s negative change in

health and identity (Johnson, 2006, 59). As will be seen in the next section, the overall

impact on the identity of a traumatized culture can be much larger than typical

psychological effects on individuals because the pain will linger in the consciousness of

the culture. These trauma symptoms become integrated into the collective worldview of

the traumatized society, changing the identity of the culture. These new opinions and

beliefs are supported and reinforced by the changed identity, making the new behaviors

seem normal and inherent.

In 2005 a report was released by Research Education Disaster Mental Health (REDMH),

an organization co-sponsored by Dartmouth College and the National Center for

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. The senior project director of REDMH and author of this

report, Dr. Fran Norris, examined disaster survivors from 34 countries. Catastrophes

studied included natural disasters, transportation accidents, nuclear and industrial

accidents, and war and peace-time terrorist attacks. The study examined previous

research and compiled the data from outcomes of 132 different disasters. One finding of

the report was that the “severity of exposure [to a particular disaster] also predicted

declines in social relations and increased conflicts with family members” (Norris, 2005,


22/98

22

10). This response is typical in individual trauma survivors; however, when entire

populations are affected by a large-scale trauma, these reactions become a societal

dilemma that is sometimes not an obvious effect.

Since entire populations of people are often affected in similar ways from the same

trauma, collective ideas are developed about the trauma. Memories of the event are

shaped by other individual’s memories; responses to the trauma are shaped by others

responses, or by how other survivors responded; and a collective healing process is

consciously or subconsciously begun. Shared concepts such as these are normal and

ideas and perceptions of the world constantly change. Rarely, however, is full healing

from the trauma collectively achieved. Thus the event leaves the same common side-

effects as individual trauma, and lends to a collective consciousness negatively affected

by the unhealed trauma. It becomes important to recognize the pain and subsequent

collective consequences of societal traumas, and to consciously work towards healing

from them.

The need for cultural healing has been recognized in many places. One example

concerning the United States and Europe, was in an editorial in the Wall Street Journal—

Europe on May 3rd, 2006 by Shelby Steele. It was entitled, “White Guilt and the

Western Past”. The article concluded that the West has yet to come to terms with, and

move on from, it’s “past sins” and that this “white guilt” is now causing even more

problems:


23/98

23

Today, the white west—like Germany after the Nazi defeat—livesin a kind of secular penitence in which the slightest echo of past

sins brings down withering condemnation . . . people stigmatizedwith moral crimes—here racism and imperialism—lack moral

authority and so . . . struggle, above all else, to dissociate

themselves from the past sins they are stigmatized with (Steele,

2006, 13).

Steele’s prognosis, however, diverged here from realizing the entire problem. He

resolved that the United States fear of stigmatization causes a retreat into

“minimalization” and thus never fully deals with the country’s problems (i.e. not using

full military capabilities to defeat the insurgency in the 2003 ongoing Iraq war). Whereas

Steele’s statement that the “white guilt” which “imposes so much minimalism and

restraint that America’s [the United States’] worst problems tend to linger and deepen” is

correct, his conclusion that “moral transformation” has already been made and must

simply be incorporated into the “public life” in the United States is misleading.

The “white guilt” as Steele calls it, has very deep roots that have not been fully faced.

The United States, as is the case for many other countries around the world, has many

traumatic experiences in its history. These cultural traumas are deeply embedded in the

historical construction and fabric of the country, but have not, on a societal level, been

healed. Some of these very significant traumas include the violence against and

subjugation of the original inhabitants of the United States, the Native Americans; the

violence committed in the structures of Slavery; the violence exacted upon the citizens of

Japan; the severe losses in the Vietnam War; or, as mentioned before, the shocking events

on September 11, 2001, all of which have traumatized U.S. citizens in a way that is not

fully acknowledged and from which it has certainly not fully healed.


24/98

24

The United States is not the only country that suffers from these symptoms; many nations

across the globe are dealing with serious outcomes from societal traumas. One somber

realization is that these unhealed traumatic societal events lead directly back into a cycle

of violence. As Levine explains,

When people are traumatized, our internal systems remain aroused. We

become hypervigilant but are unable to locate the source of this pervasive

threat. This situation causes fear and reactivity to escalate, amplifying theneed to identify the source of the threat. The result: we become likely

candidates for re-enactment—in search of an enemy (Levine, 1997, 226).

This need for an adversary is just one of the many dangerous problems. Other common

long-term side-effects of such unhealed traumas are phobias, racism, prejudice, violence,

and a “legacy of fear” (Levine, 1997, 225). Acknowledging and healing from past

traumas will help end the need for violence as well as the other negative effects of

unresolved trauma. Levine says there will be serious consequences if the cycle of

violence is not broken, “lasting peace among warring peoples cannot be accomplished

without first healing the traumas of previous terrorism, violence, and horror on a mass

scale” (Levine, 1997, 222).

Some psychologists even suggest that collective structures are damaged by trauma

(Hamber, 2003, 77). The city of Greensboro, North Carolina was impacted by a protest

and march that resulted in citizen deaths. Greensboro is working towards healing from

this collective trauma in its recent past and notes, “The passage of time alone cannot

bring closure, nor resolve feelings of guilt and lingering trauma” (GTRC, 2006, 17). The


25/98

25

entire culture and identity of a population affected by a traumatic event can be negatively

changed if there is not a conscious effort to heal from it. Psychologist Duane Elgin

proposes, “If we can bear witness to the reservoir of unresolved pain that has

accumulated through history, we will release an enormous store of pent-up creativity and

energy” (Elgin, October 1997, 28).

Interestingly, recent research has been done on individuals with “chronic fear”, a state

where a person is in a constant state of anxiety. Chronic fear is one of the many results of

trauma; a case where the survivor is unable to turn off the responses to danger, keeping

the body in a “constant state of arousal” (Johnson, 2006, 76). This type of trauma

response can lead to many problems such as high blood pressure, stomach ulcers and

impaired memory, while at the same time diminishing an individual’s capacity to respond

safely to traumatic events in the future (Johnson, 2006, 76). Crisis-Management

Consultant, Kendall Johnson, describes the consequences of chronic fear, “When you are

constantly on guard, you easily blow things out of proportion. Relatively minor incidents

can trigger full-blown acute stress responses. These episodes of acute stress reaction can

undermine your life” (Johnson, 2006, 77).

Ironically, after September 11, 2001, citizens in the United States were in a constant state

of fear of future terrorist attacks (partially in part from the immediate anthrax “attack”

following 9-11). The U.S. government helped to supplement the fear by raising terrorist

threat warnings while the media continuously reported the supposed threat, enhancing the

fear of many U.S. citizens. It is, of course, not precisely known whether this “chronic


26/98

26

fear” after the 9-11 attacks resulted in a societal deterioration for future trauma-handling;

however, the similarities to individual traumatic responses is uncanny. Accordingly, it

would seem necessary to incorporate a healthy way of healing from “chronic fear” as part

of a regimen for healing from societal traumas.

This paper is not about the effects of large-scale trauma (i.e. war) on individuals

(although that is part of it), rather, it is about how these traumas affect the collective

identity of the culture that was traumatized. Certainly large-scale trauma affects

individual people, but of equal importance is the change in the collective consciousness

of the traumatized society as a whole, since this new consciousness will ultimately

influence individual reactions to future trauma. It is necessary to heal the entire affected

society and to teach that collective how to heal so that individuals within that culture can

learn to heal in a healthy manner. Equally important is learning to recognize how

societies are affected so that individual’s negative responses will be mitigated. As has

been observed, “much of our normal response to specific crisis is charged with deeper

meaning because of social and global events that are unfolding around us” (Johnson,

2006, 37). It is for this very reason that individuals must learn as a collective how to

heal from the traumas with which they are affected.

Nations have not yet determined a healthy way for dealing with and healing from societal

traumas that occur. This lack of healing in the immediate wake of the attacks on

September 11, 2001 led the United States once again to hostile and aggressive means; the

governments’ solution was to violently attack the aggressors. Not surprisingly, a recent


27/98

27

2006 report1 released by the United States Intelligence Agency, suggests that this

resolution acted as an instigator for even more violence and terrorism. The United

States’ reaction to 9-11, its traumatic event, was not surprising in light of the realization

that trauma such as this is the result of past unhealed traumas, in this case the attackers,

and, as was shown in the Intelligence Report, will spawn future violence and trauma, the

obvious example being the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. response to its

collective trauma, and the subsequent upshot from the violent reactions was significant in

creating a global realization that a violent reaction was probably not the best solution, and

that a more structured healing process may have had more positive results. Regardless of

whether or not fighting a war was the right “solution” after September 11th

2001; it serves

as a painful example of the nature of trauma, which if not healed, reproduces itself in a

cyclical fashion. It is necessary to develop new healing tactics for moving individuals

and nations away from this cycle of trauma and violence and helping societies fully heal

from the pain of these events.

1 Declassified Key Judgments of the National Intelligence Estimate “Trends in Global Terrorism:

Implications for the United States” from April 2006 can be found at:

http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/Declassified_NIE_Key_Judgments.pdf


28/98

28

Trauma—Worldview – Collective Consciousness

The feelings associated with violence, whether a one-time trauma or

continuous violence, often “become the status quo and any lasting change

can only follow a transformation of the various dynamics underlying that

status quo. . . ‘victimhood’ becomes a fundamental aspect of the identity of

affected societies, such as “Catholics in Northern Ireland, Anatolian

Armenenians, European Jews during World War II, Palestinian Arabs

after 1948, Poles and Ukrainians” (Montville as cited in Lerche, 2000, 2).

This section will focus on the idea of collective consciousness, or group awareness. It

will examine how collective consciousness is formed and what the impact of collective

consciousness is on individuals. Finally, it will examine how trauma influences the

collective consciousness. The following two definitions, of “collective” and

“consciousness” are from T.R. Burns, in his Journal article, “The Social Construction of

Consciousness”. T.R. Burns, professor at the Centre for International Environment and

Development Studies, NLU in Norway, has written extensively on socio-cognitive and

consciousness studies. These two definitions will help to develop a preliminary idea of

collective consciousness:

Collective— “a collective is understood as a group or population of individuals (or

collective agents as members) that possesses or develops collective representations of

itself: its values and goals, its structure and modes of operating, its strategies,

developments, strengths and weaknesses, etc” (Burns, 1998, 67).

Consciousness—“ a type of reflective activity: observing, monitoring, judging and re-

orienting and re-organizing self; considering what characterizes the self, what self

perceives, judges, could do, should do (or should not do)” (Burns, 1998, 67).

“Consciousness” is the manifestation of ones worldview. It is shaped by the way an

individual looks at the world around them, and thus influences the way a person acts and


29/98

29

reacts to the world around them. Consciousness is often studied at an individual level,

but individual consciousness is simply a reflection of the collective consciousness of a

particular culture:

all consciousness is basically ‘group consciousness’. An individual’s

awareness, attention, memory, etc. is socially constructed. Without groupinteraction, an individual would never achieve ‘identification’ with anyone

or anything. From this viewpoint, ‘group consciousness’ is the

fundamental matrix from which ‘individual consciousness’ emerges

(Stanley Krippner as cited in Elgin, October 1997, 4).

Since a culture’s collective consciousness is socially constructed, it ensues that societal

trauma would help create the consciousness of the effected society. The normal,

commonly negative, effects of trauma are manifested in the consciousness of the

collective that was traumatized, whether consciously or not. Before it is possible to

understand the impact that trauma has on the collective consciousness of a society, it is

necessary to understand the meaning of consciousness and worldview, and how both are

influenced and transformed.

Worldview

How could a traumatic event possibly have such a long-lasting, insidious effect on entire

societies? Many factors contribute to the makeup of a cultures worldview. One’s

worldview is, simply put, the way an individual or society looks at the world. It is the

pedestal supporting every culture, a “subconscious expression or “framework for all our

life processes—our thoughts, feelings, choices and actions” (Danesh, 64). The

composition of that worldview is complicated and constantly changing—determined by


30/98

30

many different factors such as spiritual, philosophical, and political beliefs, historical

background, and “particular life experiences and environmental characteristics” (Danesh,

2006, 65). All of these pieces construct a common worldview in each particular society;

shaping the way individuals think, believe, understand and react to situations around

them.

Societies are constantly changing their worldviews as part of the normal changes in each

culture. “Culture” is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as:

1 the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievementregarded collectively. 2 a refined understanding or appreciation of this. 3

the customs, institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people,

or group.

The Latin origin of “culture” is cultura, meaning “growing, cultivation” (AskOxford,

2006). Thus, culture is, by definition, a continuous, collective progression. Cultivation

implies a nurturing and fostering of certain ideas, theories, and ideals, literally grown

from stimuli such as language, music, religion, and even architecture. Culture is not a

stagnant phenomenon that is evident from the initial, founding of a nation. Culture is

built, fostered and encouraged. This means that the subsequent worldview of a society is

also constantly changing and being influenced by outside factors.


31/98

31

Collective Consciousness

The possibly dangerous aspects of any culture lie below the superficial identity, existing

at a deep-rooted level where some characteristics of the culture are hidden. Aspects of a

culture’s worldview are institutionalized and become ingrained in each individual’s

identity as normal and accepted: so called “human nature”. These “natural”

characteristics are converted into the culture’s collective consciousness and are reflected

in all that we say and do.

Consciousness has been described as the ability to “know that we know”; “mindfulness”;

and the capacity for awareness of self and others, reflection and reaction (Elgin, October

1997, 4, 12). Consciousness “subsumes all categories of experience, including

perception, cognition, intuition, instinct, will and emotion, at all levels” (Jonas, 1). It is a

phenomenon that is created, cultivated and changed, often completely subconsciously.

This collective identity is “defined and constituted in terms of core symbols, organizing

principles, norms, etc. Some core principles are understood and relied on as ‘natural’, as

if they were not really social products or human constructions” (Burns, 1998, 76).

Consciousness determines what is right and wrong, how one should behave in any given

situation, and what consequences will ensue from respective actions. Collective

consciousness is often institutionalized, encouraging (and enforcing) its seemingly

inherent nature, “the ‘binding’ quality of values and their symbols – truth, beauty and

goodness – comes from the power of collective consciousness” (Wiley, as cited in Burns,

1998, 69). The cyclical quality of collective consciousness, develops a seemingly


32/98

32

obligatory sense of what is intrinsic in a particular culture. Each society develops its own

particular collective consciousness which is also reinforced by other cultures.

“Awareness”, which can be defined as “focusing on or attention to . . . the state or

situation of one’s own group,” while only a small aspect of consciousness, plays a large

role in raising collective consciousness (Burns, 1998, 69). This transformation of

worldview is key to the overall maturation of a society—which is ultimately imperative

for the health and longevity of a culture. As Dr. David Hawkins, a psychiatrist and

expert on consciousness, observes, “consciousness is gullible; it believes everything it

hears. Consciousness is like hardware that will play back any software that’s put into it”

(Hawkins, 2002, 247). Hence consciousness can be changed or even improved. As a

fundamentally reflective action, consciousness can be transformed on a regular basis

through observation, monitoring and judging (Burns, 1998, 68).

Consciousness Upheld

Collective consciousness is not only created and formed through past traumas and

historical events; it is supported and maintained through many different methods.

Religion, food, architecture, language, monuments, and sports all advocate a particular

identity. Governments, the media and individuals consciously and subconsciously

sustain the identity and worldview of a culture through repeated messages and

reinforcement of power.


33/98

33

Ones collective consciousness teaches an individual how to deal with the troubles or

pleasures that he or she may encounter. It creates a basis for right and wrong behavior

and helps implement actions that are seemingly inherent. It also teaches individuals how

to psychologically handle the stress of everyday life. The process that societies embark

upon to handle the stress of a societal trauma is shaped by the collective consciousness of

the traumatized culture. The ensuing process of healing or not healing is a manifestation

of the way the society thinks it is supposed to heal.

Memory

Memory, a very important aspect of consciousness, can be defined as “the process of

storing past experience and using it to understand present events” (Johnson, 2006, 79).

Ones memory helps him or her to comprehend how to react in a certain situation and to

have a clear understanding of how to react in similar circumstances in the future. An

individual’s memory helps her to make good choices. For instance, if a person grabs a

pan out of a hot oven without using something to protect her hand, the pain that she feels

will help her brain remember that situation in the future, so that she is protected from the

heat. Sometimes an individual’s reaction to a situation can be confusing, because the

person is not conscious of the memory that is causing her to act in a certain way. Many

trauma survivors react strangely to seemingly harmless things, without remembering the

event that may have triggered the reaction.


34/98


35/98

35

the victim of a similar crisis, and the subsequent view of this occurrence had been shaped

by the other accident.

Kendall Johnson, an expert on crisis management, explains, that the human brain must

store many pieces of information, some important and some less so. Consequently, the

brain categorizes the intake of information in a way that it can handle. However, in a

traumatic experience, there is an excess of information that is received quickly, and the

human body has to react quickly. An individual’s past memories help him or her to react

in the best perceived way possible. At the same time, the information received does not

always get incorporated into ones memory in a logical way (Johnson, 2006, 81). In a

normal situation, “sights, sounds, and touches are . . . taken in, mixed with thoughts,

feelings, and reflections, and combined into a sensible order” (Johnson, 2006, 81). These

events are incorporated into the map of memories in ones brain; most of which are repeat

occurrences that take their natural place in ones memory. Events during a traumatic

event are incorporated in a different way because they occur too quickly to be

immediately understood. An individual’s future memories may be just snapshots of what

actually happened, or may occur out of sequence.

These traumatic memories often prompt confusing reaction or feelings that cannot be

explained. Sometimes, this is because an individual’s brain has not processed the

disturbing images that it encountered during a traumatic event, causing the person to react

in similar ways to completely unrelated future events. Thus, any sort of reminder will

trigger the same response.


36/98

36

Impact of Trauma on the Collective Consciousness

The impact of trauma on a population, as previously discussed, can have detrimental

results that then become entrenched in the deep culture and collective consciousness.

There is a circular relationship between individual and collective trauma. Thus the

collective identity of traumatized cultures reflects the individual consciousness of

affected individuals. What is deemed accepted and natural behavior is in part, molded by

the effects of trauma. The traumatic event creates, enforces and manipulates the

collective consciousness that determines how a person will heal from these traumas, and

subsequently how he or she will approach future conflicts.

Couple a traumatic national event with a collective memory about the event, and the

consciousness of the society begins to function within the framework of a particular

worldview. Bremner notes that these traumas change “the way we view the world,

ourselves, and our place in the world. The events surrounding a traumatic stress become

strongly engraved in memory, and sometimes certain details seem to become shrouded in

fog.” (Bremner, 2005, 141). Trauma that has never been fully healed, results in

collective conflict-based thoughts, beliefs, and actions that seem inherent to a particular

culture. Roger Walsh say that “the state of the world reflects our state of mind; our

collective crises mirror our collective consciousness” (Walsh, as cited in Elgin, October

1997, 3). Violent behavior is just one of the consequences of an unhealed, traumatized

culture, whose consciousness is deeply impacted by the effects of the trauma, and is


37/98

37

reacting accordingly. The alleged need for violence could be reduced by alleviating the

symptoms of trauma.

Trauma has a ripple effect. The immediate victims, those that are directly affected, bring

their stress responses home to their families. The media constantly reminds the survivors

and their families, and then the communities of the trauma, and so on and so on. It

moves quickly and silently so that generations after the traumatic event, the aftershocks

are still being felt in ways that are not obvious or conscious. At a societal level, a culture

is negatively impacted by a certain traumatic event. One important and often detrimental

influence after a trauma is the pressure put on the family. Psychotherapist Kendall

Johnson notes that after September 11th

2001, his total number of clients rose

considerably, but surprisingly the majority was not individuals affected directly by the

trauma, but families that were experiencing new problems or old problems that could not

be reconciled (Johnson, 2006, 47). He suggests that this “new age of anxiety” puts even

more pressure on the already difficult tasks of living. After 9-11-2001, families simply

could not handle, or did not know how to handle, this added anxiety, and did not

recognize the new problems as reactions to the stress of the trauma.

The effects that a societal trauma has on the global family are similar. In the same way

that families in the United States felt the need for help and advice during the turmoil

following 9-11, the “global family” must find ways for healing from the collective

traumas. Certainly the nearly 3,000 individuals that were killed on September 11th

2001,

had children, husbands and wives, and parents that were immediately impacted by the


38/98

38

death of their loved one. The emergency personnel that arrived on the scene, even those

that were not physically hurt by the trauma, will have long-lasting memories of the

episode; they will bring these memories back to their families. Every citizen in the

United States will remember where they were when they found out about the attack.

They will tell their children and grandchildren the stories. Surely others around the world

will remember the event—and undoubtedly the citizens in Afghanistan and Iraq will

remember the consequences for their own countries. These memories and stories are

forever imbedded in the fabric of the global consciousness.

The collective identity of impacted countries is changed by the traumatic event. But this

changed identity is not stagnant. Collective identity is changed throughout history, and

will continue to be shaped by future events. Consciousness is continuously growing to

include the events that have been built into the collective memory. Consciousness

development can be described as, “our responses to the current global uncertainty, to

threats to the safety of our loved ones, and to changes in our world [that] are colored by

our learned response to threat” (Johnson, 2006, 99). The significant word in that

description is “learned”. Every worldview is the compilation of learned beliefs and

attitudes and “if difficult experiences form toxic beliefs and attitudes”, then, “the result

will be a perpetuation of difficult experiences” (Johnson, 2006, 109). Thus the collective

consciousness that arises from unhealed traumatic events in any culture is generally

reflected in the actions that the traumatized society feels are natural and inherent. It is a

cycle of learning from past experiences and regurgitating the responses that seem

acceptable and normal. Teilhard de Chardin describes this evolution of collective


39/98

39

consciousness, which he calls the “noosphere” as being “inherited by each succeeding

generation of conscious individuals, and to which each generation adds something”

(Chardin, as cited in Elgin, October 1997, 6).

It is vital to the maturation of a society that it is able to transform its collective

consciousness. Many researchers have warned that if humankind does not manage to

advance the collective consciousness, the result will be a never-ending cycle of violence;

a “race between collective awakening and global catastrophe” (Elgin, October 1997, 3).

Many cultures advance the notion of individual learning and improvement, but most

ignore the important role of functioning at a societal level. Duane Elgin notes, “By

focusing primarily on the individual, East and West have neglected the integral role that

the awakening of the collective plays in both personal and cultural evolution” (Elgin,

October 1997, 5). Throughout history societies have gone through a collective process of

maturing and evolving into different levels of consciousness. The process is normal and

natural. No stage in the process of evolution is better than another; each are simply states

through which the human mind naturally progresses; all are essential for providing “more

depth and a broader scope of experience” (Elgin, October 1997, 15). Each stage is a

necessary progression in the overall consciousness; however, each has its limitations and

as a result, the society usually manages to progress to a new level of understanding.

Elgin believes that none of the first three stages of consciousness evolution can allow for

a “form of social organization adequate to provide a framework for the future”, because

the less developed worldviews put an emphasis on violence (Elgin, October 1997, 15).


40/98

40

It becomes dangerous when a culture is unable to evolve in a positive way. There are

different theories about the outcome of a society that is unable to raise its collective

consciousness, but in all scenarios, the consequence is catastrophe. Alternatively, if a

culture is able to mature in a healthy, positive way, the result is unity and nonviolence.

Unity is “the purposeful integration of two or more unique entities in a state of harmony

and cooperation, resulting in the creation of a new, evolving entity, usually of a higher

nature” (Clarke-Habibi and Danesh as cited in Makortoff, 2006). Unity is one of the

prerequisites for a mature collective consciousness. The creation of consciousness is

continuous and can be influenced by many positive and negative factors. It is necessary

to help the collective consciousness of a society evolve in a way that will include the

principle of unity in order to transform the negative consequences of an un-evolved

culture.

Collective Consciousness Transformation through Trauma Healing

Traumatic societal events leave a negative impression on the collective consciousness

and identity of the impacted culture. Since it is important for any society to mature into a

new, constructive stage of collective consciousness, it is necessary for cultural healing to

take place after any traumatic event. If healing does not occur, the responses and results

of the trauma will feed back into the violent cycle, stalling the chances for maturation of

the consciousness. Larry Dossey explains, “[w]e have for so long defined ourselves as

separate personalities that we have fallen into the hypnotic spell of believing that


41/98

41

separation, not unity, is the underlying reality” (Dossey as cited in Elgin, October 1997,

6).

Elgin suggests that as a species, the consciousness of humankind has evolved several

times in the past, so it is not implausible to think that humans are again in the process of a

change. He acknowledges however, that “when our capacity for collective consciousness

first awakens, what will probably emerge will be the deep psychic wounds that have

festered through humanity’s history—the voices that have been unacknowledged and the

pain that has been unexpressed” (Elgin, October 1997, 27, 12). It is necessary for human

beings to learn how to heal from the many collective traumas that are inevitable in each

society. If humankind cannot heal from these traumas, it will be in danger of continuing

in a never-ending cycle of violence. Human beings have the ability to create identities,

memories and worldviews, and must be conscious of the damage that traumatic events

have on the collective consciousness. With newfound knowledge of the negative

consequences of unhealed trauma on societies, a solution can be found. Elgin cautions,

“Humanity’s evolutionary success depends not only on awakening our collective

consciousness but also on promoting its health and healing” (Elgin, October 1997, 4).


42/98

42

Healing from Trauma—Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

There are many different methods for healing from trauma. By understanding unique

approaches for healing from traumatic events, techniques can be gained for healing entire

societies, and for creating a collective consciousness that incorporates healthy processes

for healing. One method that has been well researched and examined at many levels is

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Posttraumatic Stress Disorder has been

researched for many years, but the term PTSD was not coined by the American

Psychiatric Association (APA) until 1980 (Johnson, 2006, 92). The disorder had a long

history of misunderstanding and was diagnosed as many other disorders and problems

before finally qualifying as PTSD. The APA discloses that approximately 10 percent of

the U.S. population has at some point been diagnosed with PTSD, while many others

have exhibited similar symptoms without being diagnosed

(http://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm). Additionally, cases of individuals

diagnosed with PTSD seems to be increasing due possibly in part to new common-

knowledge of the disorder, or to a new wave of individuals inflicted with post 9-11

trauma symptoms (Continuing Medical Education, 2002, 1). Finally acknowledging

PTSD as a disease that affects hundreds of people world-wide helped show the

connection between the suffering and problems that people were having and the event in

their past that was triggering these responses.

PTSD, most commonly associated with war veterans, and known as “Da Costa’s

Syndrome” during the Civil War, is now understood to be a disorder that affects both


43/98

43

men and women whether or not they were involved with war-trauma

(http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html). The effects of trauma

are often similar to those experienced by other trauma victims but are distinguished by

the fact that all of the symptoms are felt by individuals experiencing PTSD. The term

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is used to define the collection of symptoms of trauma.

Symptoms of PTSD are grouped into three categories: avoidance (of friends, family and

colleagues), hyperarousal (a constant fear or belief that “danger is near”) and intrusion (or

intrusive flashbacks) (www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm).

The characteristic that defines these symptoms as PTSD is that all three of these

indicators occur together and interact with each other. Additionally, certain reactions that

are common with PTSD patients and will help distinguish PTSD from other results of

trauma are that:

[T]he traumatic event must be seen as life threatening [to oneself or to

others] and overwhelming; the person must experience the event; the

reexperiencing of the event must cause symptoms of withdrawal or

avoidance; reexperience must also cause overarousal symptoms (Johnson,

2006, 94-96).

In order to be diagnosed with PTSD, these symptoms must continue for at least one

month, however, in all patients with PTSD, these times vary greatly, and for some, the

symptoms will not arise for six months or more, making it very difficult for individuals to

connect their current troubles with the past traumatic event.

For most victims of PTSD, memories of their trauma strike without warning. Many of

the same feelings and emotions experienced during the traumatic event accompany the


44/98

44

“flashbacks” unpredictably—sometimes as extreme as feeling as though the actual

trauma was occurring again. Other symptoms can include nightmares, difficulty

sleeping, and feelings of estrangement which have severe effects on the person’s entire

life (www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html). Some of these symptoms

may seem unconnected to the previous trauma, including, fear, nightmares, feelings of

helplessness, depression, relationship troubles, difficulty relating in social settings,

anxiety and alcoholism or drug abuse. A diagnosis for PTSD helps many individuals

understand that there is a reason for these seemingly strange and uncharacteristic attitudes

and actions.

Treatment for PTSD

Although trauma healing is often a complicated and protracted process, it is possible to

heal the symptoms of trauma. Now that PTSD is more often recognized as a real and

serious disorder, research has been conducted on treatment and healing. Many different

procedures have been developed and have been largely successful at treating PTSD. Five

different practices are identified by the APA: Behavior therapy, psychodynamic

psychotherapy, family therapy, discussion groups, and medication. These treatments

cover a variety of different practices for healing all aspects of the traumatic experience,

from “correcting the painful and intrusive patterns of behavior and thought” to examining

personal values and how the experience of the event changed them. These healing

techniques involve relaxation and re-examining assumptions about the facts of the

trauma. Work is also done with family members and group counseling to help each

person realize that similar reactions during trauma are common and understandable.


45/98

45

Medication, including antidepressants, is also used to help control the negative effects

(www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm).

The objective for PTSD treatment has expanded beyond helping a survivor to forget the

trauma, but rather to “facilitate re-processing and integration of the traumatic memory,

into the larger fabric of the person’s emotional and psychological life” (Continuing

Medical Education, 2002, 1). Another treatment not identified by the APA, but used by

some psychiatrists for anxiety disorders and panic attacks called, “exposure therapy”,

engages survivors in repeated reliving of the traumatic event “under controlled conditions

to help him or her work through the trauma”

(http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html).

In addition to both the common and more unusual methods for treating PTSD, Douglas

Bremner, a psychiatrist and researcher suggests that simply educating a victim of trauma

of the strange but normal ways that an individual’s mind and body react to traumatic

events, and helping him to realize that his reactions are simply part of the process, helps

the ultimate healing progression. Bremner notes that he has “found that education is

what helps trauma survivors and PTSD patients the most. You have to take responsibility

for teaching yourself as much as possible about stress and stress responses. Education

actually helps in the recovery process” (Bremner, 2005, xv).

Difficulties with PTSD Treatment


46/98


47/98

47

Lastly, but potentially most importantly, PTSD treatment does little to help distinguish

the societal effects on healing from trauma. “Healing” as defined by the World Health

Organization (WHO) is “not merely the absence of disease and infirmity but a positive

state of physical, emotional and social well-being” (as cited in Hamber, 2003, 77).

Because of the interconnectedness and complexity of the various effects of a traumatic

event, the healing process is difficult and lengthy. As discussed in the previous section,

the worry with all healing, and particularly with PTSD, is that simply concentrating on

symptoms of trauma is not enough to fully heal. In addition to dealing with the outcome

of trauma, “the origins of violence and its meaning to those involved, as well as the social

and cultural context” must be understood and addressed (Hamber, 2003, 79). Too often,

treatment for individuals affected by trauma focuses on the immediate and obvious

symptoms of the trauma but ignores other issues within the person’s life that may create

difficulties during the healing process. It also ignores the possibly detrimental healing

methods used by the society itself. What is necessary is “deal[ing] with the causes of the

distress and the symptoms…what needs to be ‘healed’ is the multitude of individual,

political, social and cultural responses to a traumatic situation and its aftermath”

(Hamber, 2003, 78). Many times the problems associated with individual trauma

survivors are, in actuality, problems created in the larger society that have not been fully

resolved (Hamber, 2003, 87).

Although the methods for PTSD treatment are continuously being examined and

perfected, ultimately the healing process must begin at a societal level, with the entire

population working towards incorporating methods for positive cultural healing into the


48/98

48

collective consciousness, so that healing is seen as a necessary and normal aspect of

dealing with life’s events.


49/98

49

Healing from Trauma—Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

Many researchers and practitioners have recognized the vital necessity of developing a

method for healing from the adverse effects of traumatic experiences. A great deal of

work has been done in countries around the world to find and cultivate these methods.

This paper has already looked at techniques that are used for healing individuals with

PTSD. This is a fairly widespread and increasingly well-known disorder and

subsequently, treatment for the disorder is progressing continuously. However, as has

been shown, the work that is being done to heal individuals with PTSD is not fully

appropriate for all traumatic situations and individuals.

Another process for healing from traumatic experiences that has undergone much

scrutiny is the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and other less

commonly known Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. The most celebrated TRC

occurred in South Africa immediately following the Apartheid Era. Most people are less

familiar with the fact that between 20 and 402 Truth Commissions in different forms have

been conducted since 1974 (the South African TRC was appointed in 1995, although they

attempted other Truth Commissions in 1992 and ’93) (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 37;

GTRC, 2006, 9). Although the dozens of past commissions varied in many ways, they

held in common a belief that “shared truth was essential for social reconciliation”

(Lerche, 2000, 1). The following is an alphabetical list of Truth Commissions identified

2 Different sources define Truth Commissions differently and thus do not qualify some of the past

commissions as TRCs or Truth Commissions.


50/98

50

since 1974 by Avruch and Vejarano, with additions from the United States Institute for

Peace:

Argentina (1983-1984), Bolivia (1982-1984), Brazil (1986), Chad (1991-

1992), Chile (1990-1991), East Timor (1999-2000), El Salvador (1992-

1993), Ethiopia (1993-2000), Germany (1992-1994), Ghana (2001—

ongoing), Guatemala (1997-1999), Haiti (1995-1996), Honduras (1993),Nepal (1991), Nigeria (1999), Panama (2001), Paraguay (1976), Peru

(2000), Philippines (1986), Rwanda (1993), Serbia and Montenegro

(2001), Sierra Leone (1999-ongoing), South Africa (1992 and 1993; TRC

in 1995), South Korea (2000), Uganda (1974 and 1986-1995), Uruguay

(1985), Zimbabwe (1985) (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 37; USIP,http://www.usip.org/library/truth.html).

Truth-seeking Commissions have also previously been attempted in the United States

after comparable community traumas, examining the events in Rosewood, Florida, in

1923, the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921, and the Wilmington Race Riot in 1898. Similar

efforts have also been made at a national level, investigating Japanese American

imprisonment during World War II and an apology and reparations were given by

President Clinton to the Tuskegee syphilis experiments victims after a period of research

and a final report (GTRC, 2006, 13). Additionally, later in this paper, a large-scale Truth

and Reconciliation Commission in Greensboro, North Carolina, will be examined as a

model for healing following the death and wounding of several protestors.

The premise behind many Truth Commissions is that in order to heal from mass trauma,

it is necessary to come to terms with the actual events as they took place. Generally, past

Truth Commissions have developed after a large trauma has affected a state. A body of

individuals is appointed to research the facts of the designated time period. Truth


51/98

51

Commissions allow perpetrators, victims, families and others to give accounts of the

events that took place. The theory is that shared truth-telling and understanding will help

the affected population understand the trauma that happened in an unbiased and factual

way. The South African TRC, in particular, aimed at helping to “ventilate the evidence,

establish the truth and bring about reconciliation” (Lerche, 2000, 8).

It is commonly thought that the TRC process would stand “to reestablish a baseline of

right and wrong, to humanize the perpetrators and to obtain and disclose previously

hidden information about what happened, who gave orders, [and] where missing persons

ended up” (Minow, 1998, 338). Ultimately, the theory behind Truth Commissions is that

the shared acknowledgement of past wrongs and a common understanding of the way

forward will heal the country better than past methods for simply dealing with the

problem, commonly through a form of retributive justice. Truth Commissions attempt to

allow victims to share their pain, perpetrators to explain their view of the facts and for the

affected population as a whole to collectively heal from the deep impact of trauma.

Earlier, this paper discussed the effects that trauma can have on the consciousness of

individuals and how memories can actually encompass “facts” that did not really occur

during the event. The pieces of the trauma are compiled in the victim’s brain in

sometimes haphazard ways. The same is observably true in entire societies affected by a

common trauma. Thus Truth Commissions can exist as an opportunity to find clarity and

ultimately to help the population heal and move on. Martha Minow, a Harvard Law


52/98

52

professor, explains that Truth Commissions can, “cut through myths, rumors, and false

pictures about the past” (Minow, 1998, 337).

Many TRC mandates also require the commissions to write a report or other written

document that will be used to verify the findings. This is often a crucial aspect of the

groups’ work, since historical evidence of the trauma will then be clarified for future

generations (USIP, http://www.usip.org/library/truth.html).

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, though differing greatly in scale, resources, time-

frame and level of trauma, all seek the same thing: the truth about their shared past,

reconciliation in the community, and an opportunity to move into the future with an

increased level of unity.

Treatment through TRCs

Truth Commissions differ considerably in their approach. They have been established by

international organizations (such as the United Nations), and nongovernmental

organizations, but the majority have been initiated by the national governments in the

countries where the trauma occurred (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 37). Although the

trauma differs in every situation, most commissions have revolved around an issue of

severe human rights abuses.


53/98

53

The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s mandate, following the

period of Apartheid, looked for accounts of the many abuses, identification of

perpetrators, and even reasons why such violence and mistreatment was allowed to

happen. The South African TRC was started by the “Promotion of National Unity and

Reconciliation Act” of 1995, which was approved by former president Nelson Mandela.

It specifically allowed for the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission through

three committees: Committee on Human Rights Violations, Committee on Amnesty, and

a Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation. The act expressly called on the TRC to

accomplish the following:

the investigation and the establishment of as complete a picture as possible

of the nature, causes and extent of gross violations of human rights

committed…the granting of amnesty to persons who make full disclosure

of all the relevant facts relating to acts associated with a political

objective…affording victims an opportunity to relate the violations they

suffered; the taking of measures aimed at the granting of reparation to, andthe rehabilitation restoration of the human and civil dignity of, victims of

violations of human rights . . . the making of recommendations aimed at

the prevention of the commission of gross violations of human rights

(Federation of American Scientists,

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/rsa/act95_034.htm).

Most truth commissions, like the South African TRC, have a specific time period for the

research to be conducted and also stipulate the exact time frame that will be examined.

The commission works to heal the traumatized nation by compiling an accurate account

of the events that took place, and suggesting or enforcing methods to address the abuses

that occurred, thus moving forward and healing from the pain inflicted on all individuals.

It is understood that until there is “public acknowledgement of what has happened”, no

healing process will be able to have long-term positive results (Avruch and Vejerano,


54/98

54

2001, 41). Truth and Reconciliation Commissions are able to help raise the awareness of

such atrocities.

Many methods are used to understand the truth about the past trauma. Two aspects seem

to be shared by most of the previous Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: public

testimony and g

Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective Consciousness

Documents

Transcript of Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective Consciousness