what about...

in hive-107855 •  2 months ago 

Even more surprises!

Whilst reading up on the subject of trauma, I came across something that had completely escaped me until now, even though it has been ‘in the world’ for over fifty years, namely the highly significant psycho-medical question: What actually is health, and how does it develop or is it maintained?

The established technical term is salutogenesis. In this way, it consciously opposes pathogenesis, the doctrine of the development of diseases. But not as its negation, but as a supplement, as a perspective from the other side.

Salutogenesis - and the healing journeys, that (also) seems to go very well together!

The discoverer of this approach was a (medical) sociologist named Aaron Antonovsky, and he himself was very surprised to come across this topic, namely in a large-scale study on the adaptability of people from different ethnic groups to changing living conditions, analysed using the example of the female menopause. Naturally, the study focussed on women around the age of 50, and one of his respondent groups included survivors of Nazi concentration camps. (This is the very nastiest chapter in German history, but that's not the point here).

Almost a third of these women, who, expectedly, should have been severely traumatised, classified themselves as ‘healthy’, which raised the question for Aaron Antonovsky as to how this could be possible. After about ten years of further research in this direction, he published the summarising book on his topic under the title: ‘Health, stress, and coping’, and after almost another ten years the book ‘Unraveling the mystery of health. How people manage stress and stay well.’

I have not yet read these books, but have only just come across (German and English) Wikipedia articles on salutogenesis and Aaron Antonovsky.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salutogenesis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Antonovsky
please refer also to the German article on Aaron Antonovsky since it is more informative:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Antonovsky

Aaron Antonovsky's generalised question for him was then: ‘How can this person be helped to move toward greater health?’ I think this sheds a pleasant, warm light on the project of the ‘Healing Journeys’.

But I would like to pause here very briefly and point out a seemingly minor detail in the wording: ‘...this person...’ This is not about public health, not about concepts with broad applicability, but despite a generalised model - more on this later - about the inner dynamics of a specific person.

In the ‘Healing Journeys’ project, this gives me new food for thought with regard to the plural of journeys. Perhaps there are not as many different journeys as there are people, but I should reckon with a multitude. And that takes me back to the last section of the (German) Wikipedia article on trauma, because it says in a similar sense

that a stable attachment figure is usually the most important and significant help for a traumatised person.

This assertion or observation may serve the project as a constant reminder to remain very humble.

Finally, I would like to quote the last paragraph from the English Wikipedia article here:

Some people, and many self-help books, use the word trauma broadly, to refer to any unpleasant experience, even if the affected person has a psychologically healthy response to the experience.[100] This imprecise language may promote the medicalization of normal human behaviors (e.g., grief after a death) and make discussions of psychological trauma more complex, but it might also encourage people to respond with compassion to the distress and suffering of others.

Translated with DeepL, re-read by the author

IMAG0421.jpg

photo: ty-ty



Noch mehr Überraschungen!

Bei meiner Lektüre zum Trauma-Thema bin ich auf etwas gestoßen, das mir bisher völlig entgangen war, obwohl es schon seit über fünfzig Jahren „in der Welt“ ist, nämlich auf die psycho-medizinisch hoch bedeutsame Frage: Was ist eigentlich Gesundheit, und wie entsteht sie oder wird sie erhalten?

Das etablierte Fachwort lautet: Salutogenese. Damit stellt sie sich der Pathogenese, der Lehre von der Entstehung von Krankheiten, bewusst entgegen. Aber nicht als deren Negation, sondern als Ergänzung, als Perspektive von der anderen Seite her.

Salutogenese – und die Heilungsreisen, das scheint doch (auch) sehr gut zusammen zu passen!

Entdecker dieser Betrachtungsweise war ein (Medizin-) Soziologe namens Aaron Antonovsky, und er stieß selbst sehr überrascht auf dieses Thema, nämlich bei einer groß angelegten Studie zur Anpassungsfähigkeit von Menschen verschiedener ethnischer Gruppen an veränderte Lebens-Bedingungen, untersucht am Beispiel der weiblichen Menopause. Naturgemäß konzentrierte sich die Studie daher auf Frauen um die 50, und in einer seiner Befragten-Gruppen fanden sich aufgrund dessen Überlebende aus nationalsozialistischen Konzentrationslagern. (Das ist das allerschlimmste Kapitel der deutschen Geschichte, aber darum geht es hier nicht.)

Fast ein Drittel dieser erwartungsgemäß eigentlich schwer traumatisierten Frauen stuften sich selbst als „gesund“ ein, und somit erhob sich für Aaron Antonovsky die Frage, wie das möglich sein kann. Nach etwa zehn Jahren weiterer Forschung in diese Richtung veröffentlichte er das zusammenfassende Buch zu seinem Thema unter dem Titel: „Health, stress, and coping“ (Gesundheit, Stress und Bewältigung; keine deutsche Übersetzung) sowie nach weiteren fast zehn Jahren das Buch „Unraveling the mystery of health. How people manage stress and stay well.“ (deutsche Übersetzung: Salutogenese. Zur Entmystifizierung der Gesundheit).

Ich habe diese Bücher noch nicht gelesen, sondern bin gerade erst auf (deutsche und englische) Wikipedia-Artikel zur Salutogenese und zu Aaron Antonovsky gestoßen.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salutogenese
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Antonovsky

Die verallgemeinerte Frage von Aaron Antonovsky lautete dann für ihn: „How can this person be helped to move toward greater health?“ (Wie kann dieser Person geholfen werden, sich zu einer besseren Gesundheit zu bewegen?) Das wirft ein angenehmes, warmes Licht auf das Projekt der „Healing Journeys“, finde ich.

Aber ich möchte hier ganz kurz innehalten und auf eine scheinbare Kleinigkeit in der Formulierung hinweisen: „...dieser Person…“ Es geht nicht um Public Health, nicht um Konzepte mit breit gestreuter Anwendbarkeit, sondern trotz eines generalisierten Modells – dazu später mehr – um die innere Dynamik eines konkreten Menschen.

Im Projekt der 'Healing Journeys' gibt mir das neu zu denken im Hinblick auf den Plural der Reisen, der Journeys. Vielleicht gibt es nicht so viele verschiedene Reisen, wie es Menschen gibt, aber mit einer Vielzahl sollte ich rechnen. Und das führt mich zurück auf den letzten Abschnitt des (deutschen) Wikipedia-Artikels über Trauma, denn dort heißt es in vergleichbarem Sinne,

dass meist eine stabile Bezugsperson die wichtigste und bedeutendste Hilfe für einen traumatisierten Menschen ist.

Diese Behauptung oder Beobachtung möge dem Projekt als eine ständige Erinnerung daran dienen, sehr bescheiden zu bleiben.

Zum Schluss möchte ich noch den letzten Absatz aus dem englischen Wikipedia-Artikel hier zitieren:

Manche Menschen und viele Selbsthilfebücher verwenden das Wort Trauma im weitesten Sinne, um jede unangenehme Erfahrung zu bezeichnen, auch wenn die betroffene Person psychologisch gesund auf die Erfahrung reagiert Diese ungenaue Sprache kann die Medikalisierung normaler menschlicher Verhaltensweisen (z. B. Trauer nach einem Todesfall) fördern und Diskussionen über psychologische Traumata komplexer machen, aber sie kann auch Menschen dazu ermutigen, mit Mitgefühl auf die Not und das Leiden anderer zu reagieren.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

That's yet another interesting perspective. Specially this one:

that a stable caregiver is usually the most important and significant help for a traumatized person.

I think, I agree

Some people and many self-help books use the word trauma in its broadest sense to mean any unpleasant experience, even if the person affected is responding to the experience in a psychologically healthy way.

I want to make the concept of trauma a bit easier to understand, at least for myself.

Trauma can be any distressing experience that exceeds a person's ability to cope—whether physical or emotional. It's important to remember that everyone’s threshold is different. For example, what seems like a typical childbirth for one person might be traumatic for another. Of course, there may be other factors involved, like the relationship with the child’s father, but even just the physical pain and challenges can make the experience traumatic for someone. And that’s not even counting the impact of hormonal imbalances that can add to the distress.

The definition of trauma is complex and varies for everyone. But when I was thinking about this project, two main ideas came to mind. First, trauma can be when someone violates your personal boundaries—physically, emotionally, or sexually. Second, it can come from situations completely outside your control, like the death of a loved one, where a person feels unable to move on and might need help to heal.

Bambuka's exercises may work for some cases, but not for others. Replicating each trauma is not only really possible, but could be even more damaging—especially when it comes to sexual abuse, particularly by a family member who was supposed to be a protector. Still, I want to explore this idea and see where it leads.

Still, I want to explore this idea and see where it leads.

I did not mean to stop you.

The definition of trauma is complex and varies for everyone.

I disagree. Because the purpose of a definition is the exact opposite. If trauma really varies for everyone, than there is no definition possible at all. If traum is complex, than there is no simple definition possible.

We must not be fixed neither to a definition nor to a word. If someone asks for help, is that the fact and not our defintions and not our amateur (non-expertise) diagnostic skills.

I want to make the concept of trauma a bit easier to understand, at least for myself.

Only for yourself. It is neither our task nor our experience nor our expertise to make a concept "a bit easier".

any distressing experience that exceeds a person's ability to cope

That is the essential theme. We do not need to call it 'trauma'. We only have to listen to a person who says: 'This exceeds my ability to cope with". That's the point to start the conversation, the communication, the listening or reading.

And last not least: "I am an anchor" is just the answer to the question on what is your role. NOT the answer to: "Who am I?" This fundamental question is to be answered on another level. No one will reach this level neither by simplifying definitions nor by wanting to help others nor by being the anchorperson to join helpers with patients.

Loading...
TEAM 7

Congratulations!

THE QUEST TEAM has supported your comment. We support quality posts, good comments anywhere, and any tags

commentbanner.JPG

Curated by : @sduttaskitchen