We all imagine that participating in a war has to be a nerve-racking and stressful experience. The constant threat of death to which soldiers are subjected in combat is undoubtedly a psychological trauma that can generate symptoms of stress even years after that experience.
What is striking about the recent study carried out by Norwegian psychologist Andreas Espetvedt Nordstrand and his research team from the Department of Psychology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) is that its results suggest that being exposed to situations that endanger life itself produces fewer symptoms of PTSD for a soldier than experiencing suffering and death in others, without being in danger himself. The study, published in the European Journal of Psychotraumatology , involved 4,053 of the just over 7,000 Norwegian soldiers stationed in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2011.
The causes of trauma can be divided primarily into hazard-based stressors and non-hazard-based stressors. In classic military settings, soldiers can be exposed to danger-based trauma, such as being shot or ambushed. It is an active threat that is linked to anxiety.
For its part, trauma not based on danger is divided into two subgroups: witnessing the suffering or death of others – without being in danger oneself – or moral challenges, that is, seeing or performing an act that violates one’s moral beliefs. “An example of the first case could be a suicide bomber setting off a bomb that wounds or kills children and civilians,” Nordstrand proposes. Then our soldiers come to clean up or secure the area and experience the devastation it has caused. “
Taking actions that violate moral principles, on the other hand, may involve killing an innocent person. “For example, an officer can order that a person be shot because it appears that he is wearing a suicide vest,” explains the Norwegian psychologist. However, later it turns out that he was not a suicide, but only a civilian, who ended up being murdered. “
The study shows that both hazard-based and non-hazard-based stressors lead to an increase in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD can involve being very alert and nervous, sleeping poorly, and reliving events after they have occurred. But non-hazard-based stressors are likely to trigger many more symptoms of psychological distress. “In our study, we found that depression, chronic sleep disorders, and anxiety were much more linked to non-hazard-based stressors than to fears for one’s life,” Nordstrand notes.
A trauma related to shame and guilt
Research results also show that exposure to personal threats often leads to positive personal development. This type of trauma can contribute to an individual’s appreciation of life, closer to family members, and greater faith in their ability to handle difficult situations.
On the other hand, non-danger-based stressors generally lead to negative personal development, where the person values life less, feels more distant from others, and has less faith in themselves. “Many soldiers told stories of how difficult it was for them to overcome the fact of witnessing the suffering of other people, especially children who became victims of war,” explains the Norwegian psychologist, who gives as an example the case of a concrete soldier: “The lived experience that he did not forget and that overwhelmed him was when he went out onto the battlefield after a bomb exploded and discovered a child’s shiny shoe, splattered with blood.”
According to Nordstrand, many people hide their trauma not based on danger and do not discuss it with their family, friends or colleagues. He thinks this relates to the fact that non-danger-based trauma is often related to shame and guilt, and that it may be more difficult to talk about than they feared in an exchange of gunfire.
“We rush to help psychologically when someone has been in a life-threatening situation. I believe that we can do a better job of helping people by recognizing that there is a real risk of mental illness after exposure to non-hazard-based trauma. We should develop protocols so that we can uncover those who are vulnerable and find out how we can best use our resources, ”Nordstrand concludes.
