How does your model work with PTSD acquired in a situation where the adverse events was not in anyone’s control? 20 years ago I went to play golf, sat down for lunch and the roof collapsed, killing 2 women and leaving me under the wreckage. I had developed an anxiety/panic disorder 12 months prior (possible susceptibility?) - and yes I developed PTSD. I ask out of curiosity, no criticism implied, I enjoy you videos very, cheers :)
@Deb Downes Thanks for watching the video and for your comment. Sorry to learn about your experience. It’s difficult for me to say what the susceptibility is without understanding your current experiences and without understanding more about the event. This is not the forum for unpacking personal matters. So I need to be generic in my response, which will be low resolution: A helpful tip is that: If one has nightmares, flashbacks or triggers the themes of those may be pointers to the susceptibility. The difficultly with event of randomness such as disasters is that there is no obvious susceptibility to point to except an optimistic trust that the world is safer than it actually is. That works out fine until reality hits and shows one that things are not as safe as they appear. One may lose trust as a result and avoid similar places. But the problem with not trusting anything is that one’s world shrinks. We may sacrifice the world in attempt to feel safe. But we still don’t feel safe. Courageously facing the world in a graduated way is typically how this is accomplished. Easier said than done. How one interprets the meaning of the an adverse event matters also: If one chalks it up to randomness, then that’s different to chalking it up to incompetence of the builder/maintainer/owner. People are more accepting of randomness then they are of negligence. Acceptance helps with moving forwards. One’s experiences, sensitivities and presuppositions really matter when one is making sense of an event. This is why people can experience the same event but come away with or without traumatisation. Al Griskaitis
Thank you for your thoughtful response and, yes this is not the forum :) I do find your model a refreshingly different approach and I look forward to see further videos, cheers Deb :)
I would love to hear this discussion from the Childhood trauma discussion... Great talk though very enlightening! Do you guys have a video from that point? Thanks
Not yet. A critical issue is lack of agency with false perception of agency. But childhood trauma has deep impacts into identity and emotional experiences so it’s very hard to encapsulate in a model like this. But we’re working on it.
@thePSYCHcollective Thank you guys so much for taking time to respond. You guys are doing great work! American here... We love the Aussies... God Bless you guys!
Interesting! Yesterday I had quite bad hand injury when I was chopping wood and I was thinking what schemas might led to the situation and the behaviour. And it seems it was: insufficient self-control, unrelenting standards, approval-seeking and overcompensation of defectiveness, vulnerability to illness/harm, enmeshment, failure.
This video is excellent. I'm wondering perhaps if there is a video in the works for the 'written layered trauma analysis' - i'd be very keen to learn about this. Thank you
That's brilliant. I love this concept and it makes a lot of sense. I can see how finding my susceptibilities actually gets to the root cause. I have cptsd. I can see my vulnerability was I'm sensitive, agreeable and in the past wasn't attuned to my instincts. However it has helped me a lot over the years to learn boundary setting, how to trust my instincts and assertive communication. I'm curious, how do I find out more information about this ? Thank you
We’re coming out with more on this. More videos, an ebook and eventually a course. If you follow us on Facebook you’ll see when things come out. If you download some free recourses from our website we can put you on the mailing list.
@@thePSYCHcollective Thank you for your reply and letting me know, means a lot. That sounds great. I will keep an eye out for those and have a look on your website and download resources. Thanks again ! Have a wonderful weekend.
What if the situation was a vaccine injury - pericarditis - that went untreated (but extensively tested for) for 4 months because of horrible medical care? So, 4 months of feeling like being stabbed in the heart every day, especially late at night, wondering if it was going to lead to death, with no pain relief whatsoever. Then months more of the same but with painkillers and a different cardiologist. And there were pre-existing heart abnormalities including a PFO/hole found during that first 4 months that should have been picked up by a doctor 15 years earlier, but instead of investigating the heart that doctor tried to blame anxiety and send you away with a sample of anti-depressants?
I’m sorry to hear about your injury and the outcomes and the “care”. Inexcusable and all too common. I suffered a similar injury, but not so severely. But your question wasn’t simply a complaint? I think your question is asking was the susceptibility? We can’t figure that out without a lengthy exploration, but I share some ideas (and could be way off) Firstly, the culpability lies in the manufacturers/approval process and propaganda machine and whatever agenda lies under that. Then the competence and quality of care need to be questioned. With regards to “susceptibility”: I can’t say for sure but misplaced trust in the “injury causing intervention” and susceptibility to the “safe and effective” propaganda messaging may have been susceptibilities. Misplaced faith in some institutions as caring about people in general. Trust in government to take care of people. Sounds like you’re eyes are wide open now to just how caring and competent parts of the system are. Have you mitigated your susceptibility? -Would you ever risk doing it again? -Would you trust the system to look after you, let alone compassionately? -do you still swallow what the messaging is telling you.
@@thePSYCHcollective Hi, thanks; I'm sorry you went through a similar injury. Yes, the question was asking about suspectibility. The ideas you've suggested are certainly relevant areas. I wonder about this question: -Would you trust the system to look after you, let alone compassionately? I don't. But who can be trusted instead? If something else health-wise happens, which as a human is inevitable at some point, how can a trusted medical provider be found? -do you still swallow what the messaging is telling you. I've bought out of the pro-vax vs anti-vax thing - I'm "informed consent + do the research first" now. And I used to work for a health-related department, but I can't see myself ever working there again. I'm in another gov department now, and have been questioning recently if what is being done is enough in relation to what the department's aims are, if the awareness campaigns and competitions are enough, if there's enough meaning in the work for me on a personal level, or if it's all just surface level. For now, I've offered to help with a "shared charity goal" idea that has come up in the team and suggested one that makes meaningful change. Maybe it's a way of trying to be there for those in need, because I know what it's like to not have that help and part of me knows the only way that help will be available is if individuals step up?
I agree with you that people need to step up. And one cannot rely on that. Obviously there’s no solution to that. It helps a lot if someone can advocate and complain if needed. Shining light into corrupt systems often leads to placating the complainer lest they lose status. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. But it doesn’t always work and can backfire. There are health services and there are health services. I’ve worked in many any know that the quality can be very different. There are compassionate individuals, but the institutions themselves are often not compassionate and furthermore many systems overwork their staff who quickly develop compassion fatigue. To reduce one’s susceptibility to that, either find a institution which is the least worst. And focus on optimising heath and fitness. And realise that “safe and effective” might be propaganda/gaslighting, so integrating different opinions/views might lead to being better informed. I personally avoid medicines as much as I can. I’ve found dietary and activity patterns that work, but I’m lucky. I’m thankful, but I recognise that the rug can be pulled out from underneath, so I’m keeping my eyes open.
Sorry about the technical answer, but being technical is less emotive and thereby less “triggering”: If the Agent Of Trauma (AOT) is one’s partner, then it’s imperative to mitigate one’s susceptibility to that AOT. Remaining with a partner that is an AOT may be the result of [seemingly] unchangeable circumstances. The self evident problem of remaining in that predicament is that there will be many opportunities for the AOT to exploit unmitigated susceptibility. They might not “intend” to, but it is their nature to and is an irresistible instinct of AOTs. Intentions are BS anyway, what matters is outcomes. It may be wise to work with someone astute to figure out what you can do. If one cannot mitigate one’s susceptibility and one remains in the same predicament then retraumatisation is highly likely, if not inevitable. Leaving is a solution, and it is “low resolution” as one may carry the same susceptibility to the next relationship. If one remains traumatised despite leaving a relationship, it suggests that the underlying root susceptibility is not adequately addressed, so one’s subconscious may keep the body in an alarm state until the susceptibility is determined and the mitigation is enacted and embodied.
How does your model work with PTSD acquired in a situation where the adverse events was not in anyone’s control? 20 years ago I went to play golf, sat down for lunch and the roof collapsed, killing 2 women and leaving me under the wreckage. I had developed an anxiety/panic disorder 12 months prior (possible susceptibility?) - and yes I developed PTSD. I ask out of curiosity, no criticism implied, I enjoy you videos very, cheers :)
@Deb Downes
Thanks for watching the video and for your comment. Sorry to learn about your experience.
It’s difficult for me to say what the susceptibility is without understanding your current experiences and without understanding more about the event. This is not the forum for unpacking personal matters. So I need to be generic in my response, which will be low resolution:
A helpful tip is that: If one has nightmares, flashbacks or triggers the themes of those may be pointers to the susceptibility.
The difficultly with event of randomness such as disasters is that there is no obvious susceptibility to point to except an optimistic trust that the world is safer than it actually is. That works out fine until reality hits and shows one that things are not as safe as they appear. One may lose trust as a result and avoid similar places. But the problem with not trusting anything is that one’s world shrinks. We may sacrifice the world in attempt to feel safe. But we still don’t feel safe. Courageously facing the world in a graduated way is typically how this is accomplished. Easier said than done.
How one interprets the meaning of the an adverse event matters also: If one chalks it up to randomness, then that’s different to chalking it up to incompetence of the builder/maintainer/owner. People are more accepting of randomness then they are of negligence.
Acceptance helps with moving forwards.
One’s experiences, sensitivities and presuppositions really matter when one is making sense of an event. This is why people can experience the same event but come away with or without traumatisation.
Al Griskaitis
Thank you for your thoughtful response and, yes this is not the forum :) I do find your model a refreshingly different approach and I look forward to see further videos, cheers Deb :)
I would love to hear this discussion from the Childhood trauma discussion... Great talk though very enlightening! Do you guys have a video from that point? Thanks
Not yet.
A critical issue is lack of agency with false perception of agency. But childhood trauma has deep impacts into identity and emotional experiences so it’s very hard to encapsulate in a model like this. But we’re working on it.
@thePSYCHcollective Thank you guys so much for taking time to respond. You guys are doing great work! American here... We love the Aussies... God Bless you guys!
My susceptibility is my lack of psycho-education. My solution is to engender ‘Courage’.
Interesting! Yesterday I had quite bad hand injury when I was chopping wood and I was thinking what schemas might led to the situation and the behaviour.
And it seems it was: insufficient self-control, unrelenting standards, approval-seeking and overcompensation of defectiveness, vulnerability to illness/harm, enmeshment, failure.
Clearly never tried to pet a stranger's Chihuahua... jokes ;-)
Being able to relate to this and having light bulb moments throughout. Thank you
This video is excellent. I'm wondering perhaps if there is a video in the works for the 'written layered trauma analysis' - i'd be very keen to learn about this. Thank you
It’s coming! We’re looking at launching a lot more PTSD content later this year.
@@thePSYCHcollective awesome! Looking forward to that.
That's brilliant. I love this concept and it makes a lot of sense. I can see how finding my susceptibilities actually gets to the root cause. I have cptsd. I can see my vulnerability was I'm sensitive, agreeable and in the past wasn't attuned to my instincts. However it has helped me a lot over the years to learn boundary setting, how to trust my instincts and assertive communication. I'm curious, how do I find out more information about this ? Thank you
We’re coming out with more on this. More videos, an ebook and eventually a course. If you follow us on Facebook you’ll see when things come out. If you download some free recourses from our website we can put you on the mailing list.
@@thePSYCHcollective Thank you for your reply and letting me know, means a lot. That sounds great. I will keep an eye out for those and have a look on your website and download resources. Thanks again ! Have a wonderful weekend.
This is very helpful
You're a f***ing genius.
What if the situation was a vaccine injury - pericarditis - that went untreated (but extensively tested for) for 4 months because of horrible medical care? So, 4 months of feeling like being stabbed in the heart every day, especially late at night, wondering if it was going to lead to death, with no pain relief whatsoever. Then months more of the same but with painkillers and a different cardiologist. And there were pre-existing heart abnormalities including a PFO/hole found during that first 4 months that should have been picked up by a doctor 15 years earlier, but instead of investigating the heart that doctor tried to blame anxiety and send you away with a sample of anti-depressants?
I’m sorry to hear about your injury and the outcomes and the “care”. Inexcusable and all too common. I suffered a similar injury, but not so severely.
But your question wasn’t simply a complaint? I think your question is asking was the susceptibility?
We can’t figure that out without a lengthy exploration, but I share some ideas (and could be way off)
Firstly, the culpability lies in the manufacturers/approval process and propaganda machine and whatever agenda lies under that. Then the competence and quality of care need to be questioned.
With regards to “susceptibility”: I can’t say for sure but misplaced trust in the “injury causing intervention” and susceptibility to the “safe and effective” propaganda messaging may have been susceptibilities. Misplaced faith in some institutions as caring about people in general. Trust in government to take care of people.
Sounds like you’re eyes are wide open now to just how caring and competent parts of the system are.
Have you mitigated your susceptibility?
-Would you ever risk doing it again?
-Would you trust the system to look after you, let alone compassionately?
-do you still swallow what the messaging is telling you.
@@thePSYCHcollective Hi, thanks; I'm sorry you went through a similar injury.
Yes, the question was asking about suspectibility.
The ideas you've suggested are certainly relevant areas. I wonder about this question:
-Would you trust the system to look after you, let alone compassionately?
I don't. But who can be trusted instead? If something else health-wise happens, which as a human is inevitable at some point, how can a trusted medical provider be found?
-do you still swallow what the messaging is telling you.
I've bought out of the pro-vax vs anti-vax thing - I'm "informed consent + do the research first" now. And I used to work for a health-related department, but I can't see myself ever working there again. I'm in another gov department now, and have been questioning recently if what is being done is enough in relation to what the department's aims are, if the awareness campaigns and competitions are enough, if there's enough meaning in the work for me on a personal level, or if it's all just surface level. For now, I've offered to help with a "shared charity goal" idea that has come up in the team and suggested one that makes meaningful change. Maybe it's a way of trying to be there for those in need, because I know what it's like to not have that help and part of me knows the only way that help will be available is if individuals step up?
I agree with you that people need to step up. And one cannot rely on that. Obviously there’s no solution to that.
It helps a lot if someone can advocate and complain if needed. Shining light into corrupt systems often leads to placating the complainer lest they lose status. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. But it doesn’t always work and can backfire.
There are health services and there are health services. I’ve worked in many any know that the quality can be very different. There are compassionate individuals, but the institutions themselves are often not compassionate and furthermore many systems overwork their staff who quickly develop compassion fatigue.
To reduce one’s susceptibility to that, either find a institution which is the least worst.
And focus on optimising heath and fitness.
And realise that “safe and effective” might be propaganda/gaslighting, so integrating different opinions/views might lead to being better informed.
I personally avoid medicines as much as I can. I’ve found dietary and activity patterns that work, but I’m lucky. I’m thankful, but I recognise that the rug can be pulled out from underneath, so I’m keeping my eyes open.
What if its your partner that has caused it ?
Sorry about the technical answer, but being technical is less emotive and thereby less “triggering”:
If the Agent Of Trauma (AOT) is one’s partner, then it’s imperative to mitigate one’s susceptibility to that AOT. Remaining with a partner that is an AOT may be the result of [seemingly] unchangeable circumstances. The self evident problem of remaining in that predicament is that there will be many opportunities for the AOT to exploit unmitigated susceptibility. They might not “intend” to, but it is their nature to and is an irresistible instinct of AOTs. Intentions are BS anyway, what matters is outcomes.
It may be wise to work with someone astute to figure out what you can do. If one cannot mitigate one’s susceptibility and one remains in the same predicament then retraumatisation is highly likely, if not inevitable. Leaving is a solution, and it is “low resolution” as one may carry the same susceptibility to the next relationship.
If one remains traumatised despite leaving a relationship, it suggests that the underlying root susceptibility is not adequately addressed, so one’s subconscious may keep the body in an alarm state until the susceptibility is determined and the mitigation is enacted and embodied.