Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

allanschore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 203 posts

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#121

Post by zaphar »

graemep wrote: post #114
sleno wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you summarize some practical takeaways from all these books? To be honest I've become a bit skeptical of how much this sort of stuff helps. From what I see, our society has become much more well-versed in all this psychology-therapy-trauma material in the last 20 years, yet despite this we're taking more anti-depressants and seeing more therapy than ever. Mentally and spiritually we seem to be doing worse than…

> Somehow, humans managed to get by for thousands of years without any of this stuff. In very different societies. Our societies have gradually become less and less like what we evolved to fit into: small groups, time out doors, lots of face to face contact with people you are close to etc. Some past societies were pretty miserable for many people. I am pretty sure slaves had lots of trauma and other psychological pr…

Religious Faith and Belief are choices. They have to be because they are fundamentally about unprovable things. So in one sense they are absolutely practical. However if you don't want to choose a religion then it may not be practical for you. It is in no way the case though that Faith is something that just happens to you. It's a personal choice.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#122

Post by wing-_-nuts »

dimal wrote: post #8
softwaredoug wrote: post #2

One book that really resonated with me was "The Deepest Well" about the epidemic of childhood trauma and its deep and measurable impact on health outcomes for adults. I learned that resolving childhood trauma would help on the order of curing cancer in terms of health outcomes in our society https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33413909-the-deepest-wel...

I had the same experience reading that book. It’s amazing that even though these effects are well documented, they aren’t really taught in medical school. I’ve never come across a doctor who knew anything about it. It’s really incredible and disheartening. Even when people advocate for “trauma-informed care”, they’re just talking about avoiding retraumatization. They never talk about the health consequences of trauma…

>They never talk about the health consequences of trauma.

Yeah, reading the deepest well, then reading all my increased chances for...just about every disease imaginable was grim. There isn't really a 'cure' or real treatment for it either.

I just realized, if I was at a much greater risk for health problems, I'd need to counterbalance that with lifestyle changes. I got treatment for an autoimmune condition. I started using exercise over alcohol to deal with stress. I improved my diet. I'm trying to get more sleep but that one I still struggle with.

I've purposefully made changes to lower the amounts of stress in my life. This is everything from choosing an employer with good WLB, to leaving extra time for myself to get places, to saying the 'serenity prayer' and focusing on things in my control. I cannot control everything that happens to me. I can control my reaction to it, or at least attempt to.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#123

Post by infecto »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #106
infecto wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have links yourself for those claims?

You could see the bibliography of the book itself. You could google a bit and see the guy is a leader in this field, and a pioneer of this research. Answering a request for sources of your assertion with a request for theirs isn't done in good faith.

I made no such assertion? I was following the thread and I think its a fair request. It was an easy google search to see that he was fired for bullying and creating a hostile workplace a few years back...not sure where that landed. And I saw a number of articles relating to pseudoscience that he recommends in the book. It was a simple ask for their simple ask.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#124

Post by pjlegato »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #108
igorramazanov wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure "woundology" may indeed make things worse. There's another book which I haven't read yet about the dangers of therapy and underestimating the people's intuition and resilience - "Bad Therapy, Why the kid's aren't growing up", but the podcast with the author seemed reasonable. It gives lots of evidences on what you've just said. Just simply living a life, focusing on goals and targets, making mistakes and learnin…

>"Bad Therapy, Why the kid's aren't growing up", but the podcast with the author seemed reasonable. I had this book in my read queue, until I saw a podcast where she basically outted herself as an anti-vax covid denier. She may well have a point but after that I could only see her as an unhinged contrarian.

Are you advocating for comprehensive moral purity tests -- if a person holds a particular view that you disapprove of, they ought to be canceled in general and everything they've ever said or done banned, no matter whether their other work is good on its own merits?

It seems there are very, very few people in the history of the world whose work would survive. Perhaps none.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#125

Post by lanstin »

throwaway22032 wrote: post #73
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #19

In the microplastics thread, so many were ready to assign blame for so many pervasive ills to the prevalence of microplastics. Meanwhile we have known about the devastating effect of interpersonal trauma in childhood and just shrug or worse, say “well that’s how my parents did it and I’m fine.” Foundationally there is no problem more urgent than eliminating interpersonal alienation at every possible interaction and e…

I think you're being a bit unfair with "I'm fine". Rumination is a real thing and for a lot of people they don't find it useful, or in fact actively harmful, to draw attention to the fact repeatedly.

And the goal of therapy and other treatments is to in fact be fine. Also a common result of child sexual abuse is to feel uniquely specially damaged in a way no one could understand. Cut off from humanity, while in fact the experience is one some percentage of people share and while it's bad it's not something that renders your life hopelessly bad. Letting go of that feeling of specialness is hard but very beneficial. In some families the abuser is the only person to be warm or kind to the victim. Their only experience of comforting touch, which is needed, becomes a weirdly special secret.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#126

Post by gosub100 »

reflexco wrote: post #83
MrDresden wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to deny your experience with it, however looking up the author and the book I notice that it has drawn some serious criticisms for inaccuracies and lack of empirical data backing up claims.

> lack of empirical data backing up claims Doesn't that describe almost all books on psychology? Psychology studies tend to be so hilariously unscientific that I'd rather get the coherent opinions and gut feelings of an experienced practicing expert, rather than half-arsed studies.

You could level some pretty damning claims against hard science as well due to the ongoing reproducibility crises in academia (LK99, the "faster than light" accidents that have been reported,the "EM Drive"), or the enormous amount of money (and people's brains) sunk into string theory. Somehow those are/were considered science even though there is no evidence.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#127

Post by wing-_-nuts »

pjlegato wrote: post #124
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Bad Therapy, Why the kid's aren't growing up", but the podcast with the author seemed reasonable. I had this book in my read queue, until I saw a podcast where she basically outted herself as an anti-vax covid denier. She may well have a point but after that I could only see her as an unhinged contrarian.

Are you advocating for comprehensive moral purity tests -- if a person holds a particular view that you disapprove of, they ought to be canceled in general and everything they've ever said or done banned, no matter whether their other work is good on its own merits? It seems there are very, very few people in the history of the world whose work would survive. Perhaps none.

I am a layman, not a psychologist with sufficient education to prove or disprove her claims. When I judge someone's credibility, I take into account whether they've spread misinformation in the past. In this case, she has. Or at least she holds those beliefs and believes them strongly enough to speak openly about it on a public podcast.

Yes. I judge people on that. We all have the freedom of speech. We do not have freedom from the judgement of others.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#128

Post by pm »

sleno wrote: post #87
igorramazanov wrote: post #36

Attachment Theory is an interesting subject on the matter. A few useful books which helped me with both understanding and healing (there're still problems, but it gets better): 1. Love Sense, Sue Johnson. 2. The Power of Attachment, Diane Pooler Heller. 3. Understanding Disorganized Attachment: Theory and Practice for Working with Children and Adults, David, Shemmings and Yvonne Shemmings. 4. The Body Keeps the Score…

Could you summarize some practical takeaways from all these books? To be honest I've become a bit skeptical of how much this sort of stuff helps. From what I see, our society has become much more well-versed in all this psychology-therapy-trauma material in the last 20 years, yet despite this we're taking more anti-depressants and seeing more therapy than ever. Mentally and spiritually we seem to be doing worse than…

You might think it's getting by, but you've got no idea of how much damage this attitude unwittingly propagates the trauma on succeeding generations.

I've seen this firsthand in my own family, a family beset with undiagnosed ADHD and trauma from a violent patriarch, who was no doubt subject to the same abuse, lying about his age to join armies on BOTH sides of the conflict in WW2 to escape and eventually emigrate.

As for the difference in psychological resilience: it's more much more likely those who have been traumatised are seeking understanding, rather than healthy then traumatised by their curiosity. Conversely, it's been shown religious people are, as a whole, more psychologically resilient, largely due to community and the accompanying support system it provides. However, there is also a strong element of suppression within those communities, which directly contributes to the very trauma of which I speak.

If there is no communication, the abused, very often, become the abusers. And so the wheel turns.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#129

Post by pjlegato »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #127
pjlegato wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you advocating for comprehensive moral purity tests -- if a person holds a particular view that you disapprove of, they ought to be canceled in general and everything they've ever said or done banned, no matter whether their other work is good on its own merits? It seems there are very, very few people in the history of the world whose work would survive. Perhaps none.

I am a layman, not a psychologist with sufficient education to prove or disprove her claims. When I judge someone's credibility, I take into account whether they've spread misinformation in the past. In this case, she has. Or at least she holds those beliefs and believes them strongly enough to speak openly about it on a public podcast. Yes. I judge people on that. We all have the freedom of speech. We do not have fr…

That doesn't address the argument at all. You claimed that although her views on one topic seem reasonable, you believe they should be canceled, no longer promoted in society, buried.... because you strongly disapprove of her views on an unrelated topic.

Are you prepared to extend this practice universally? Are you aware that practically nobody can survive this sort of puritanical Maoist cancel culture? Look at what happened in China or Cambodia for recent examples of how that goes.

Re: The Effects of Early Relational Trauma (2001) [pdf]

#130

Post by dimal »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #122
dimal wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same experience reading that book. It’s amazing that even though these effects are well documented, they aren’t really taught in medical school. I’ve never come across a doctor who knew anything about it. It’s really incredible and disheartening. Even when people advocate for “trauma-informed care”, they’re just talking about avoiding retraumatization. They never talk about the health consequences of trauma…

>They never talk about the health consequences of trauma. Yeah, reading the deepest well, then reading all my increased chances for...just about every disease imaginable was grim. There isn't really a 'cure' or real treatment for it either. I just realized, if I was at a much greater risk for health problems, I'd need to counterbalance that with lifestyle changes. I got treatment for an autoimmune condition. I starte…

I've done a lot on my own too. I'm hoping it'll help, but my health has been pretty bad the past few yers. It feels like I've gotten on top of it, though, and I've been improving, but it's a struggle. It's especially frustrating because I pay $1000/month for "health care" (I really use that term loosely) and doctors can't help at all. I've had to figure out everything on my own. What am I paying for?
Post reply on HN