Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by beezel26, Feb 4, 2013.
Suicide and PTSD go hand in hand.
@Summer Dreamer posted some Army suicide states and then several posts later the thread sent semi - off the rails.
Beezel the issue is that veterans are typically exposed to traumatic events than the rest of the general populace. Your thinking is in direct contrast with the point noted in Harps' excellent post, i.e.
In 1980, the American Psychiatric Association added PTSD to the third edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) nosologic classification scheme. Although controversial when first introduced, the PTSD diagnosis has filled an important gap in psychiatric theory and practice. From an historical perspective, the significant change ushered in by the PTSD concept was the stipulation that the etiological agent was outside the individual (i.e., a traumatic event) rather than an inherent individual weakness (i.e., a traumatic neurosis). The key to understanding the scientific basis and clinical expression of PTSD is the conceptof"trauma."
Whether you intend it or not, you are suggesting that there's a weakness in a segment of the population which is incorrect. The segment of the population has had a disproportionate level of exposure to events that trigger PTSD.
So he did. Points to Summer Dreamer on that one. Missed that.
Ender, I don't get that impression so much as it takes a very narrow focus of what can cause PTSD. It seems like it's typically associated with combat, but that really only looks at a very small range of what can be a cause for it. So it's not that his argument is focused on why soldiers are more susceptible, but that it's forgetting that things other than combat can be the cause. Which I'd still say is problematic, as I think the main issue to focus on is treatment, and that would apply to all forms of PTSD as well as being the much broader topic of how mental health is still, in large parts, viewed as weakness in a way that other health issues are not.
When one is enlisted into the armed forces, you're trained to do things that you've been told your whole life are wrong.
At some point, it has to catch up with you, which could be through a variety of triggers. This could include retiring, walking into Walmart one day and realizing probably no other person in the supermarket you're shopping in has ever pulled a trigger and watched as the bullet flies out the other side of someone's head while they're still looking at you. Or been responsible for ordering a drone strike on a village that killed 25 other people as well as the person you were targeting.
I'm amazed the suicide rate isn't higher in the army. Perhaps that's credit to the services available to army and ex-army personnel. But if you're training someone to do something that is considered morally wrong outside of war then you have to expect people to be incredibly messed up by it. War isn't a gentleman's game. It's the most disgusting thing on the planet which brings out the best and the worst in people.
What can be done?
Don't train people to kill others in the first place comes to mind.
But as far as treating PTSD is concerned, art is incredibly therapeutic. Art therapists utilize art to enable veterans to talk about what they've experienced and what it felt like and how they feel about it. Art Therapists working with the British Armed Forces have found casual group art therapy sessions can be incredibly beneficial.
Also I think the extreme worship and glorification of soldiers in the USA is actually incredibly unhelpful for army personnel struggling with PTSD. Suicidal thoughts don't go away with "But you did your bit to serve your country" and "You're a hero!" when you're haunted by the face of some poor ******* you've shot through the head at point blank range every single night. Soldiers are not heros, they're anti-heros. When you have sent the armed forces into somewhere, it's a failure- diplomatic relations have broken down and now there is going to be a long hard slog of bloodshed across the region which will effect everyone. People need to recognize this more.
although it sounds weird but hunting actually works because for most of vets it separates the good shooting from bad shooting. Hunting an animal may sound bad but if they did it before then it makes them associate using a gun with hunting for meat, not for killing and evil. It disassociates them from the sound of gunfire being something ok.
It's not just related to combat in veterans either. If anyone's seen The Invisible War, the majority of the women the filmmakers interviewed also suffer from PTSD stemming from the sexual assault they experienced. And due to what caused the PTSD, the women were finding it nearly impossible to get the help they needed.
That's not true.
An estimated 7.8 percent of Americans will experience PTSD at some point in their lives, with women (10.4%) twice as likely as men (5%) to develop PTSD. About 3.6 percent of U.S. adults aged 18 to 54 (5.2 million people) have PTSD during the course of a given year. This represents a small portion of those who have experienced at least one traumatic event; 60.7% of men and 51.2% of women reported at least one traumatic event. The traumatic events most often associated with PTSD for men are rape, combat exposure, childhood neglect, and childhood physical abuse. The most traumatic events for women are rape, sexual molestation, physical attack, being threatened with a weapon, and childhood physical abuse.
What? When did I disagree with this?
Ender, I meant that when you said beezel's argument seemed to be implying that one segment was weaker than the rest of the population, but I think the problem with that argument more is that it looks at only one cause of PTSD, rather than making implications about any subpopulation. So I'm only disagreeing with your interpretation of the weakness of that approach focused only on soldiers, not the rest of that about PTSD, where I think we're in greater agreement.