PostTraumaticStress

[William Savage]

So for any that don't know PTSD(post traumatic stress syndrom) is expieriancing fear and or anxiety usually from a violent act, long after its over.

Anyhow in my psycollogy book it says that the Vietnam war produced 500,000 PTSD victims. So im wondering: is this a semi-modern phenomina or have there been historical documentations of such effects on warriors? Say from any time before the 1700's.

If I may add my humble oppinion, which I invite everyone to debate, I think its all a conflict between what a boy is taught about violence and what they are taught once they become soldiers. If ones been taught all their lives that violence is wrong, then why wouldn't they have guilt about their acts as a soldier? I think its all a matter of whether one trully believes in the violent act they are committing. Not if the act is good or bad, but whether they have faith in thier motovation.

What im saying is, a soldier who beleives he is only serving his countries political status is more likely to get PTSD than a soldier who believes he is surving his God, even if both of them beleive in obaying their sargent.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

I think your on the wrong track, but in the right ballpark....I think it has nothing really to do with what you are taught but rather what you are exposed to. People in the middle ages were much more aware of death and destruction because it was all around them much more than it is today. In this environment it is easier to cope with death, and then you factor in some of the things you mention.

Modern warfare is also much different than what our ancestors faced. There is a theory that talks about the random nature of death from modern warfare, granted ancient warfare this also existed but on a much more limited scale, in other words here are two ways of approaching the combat:
1- You are a modern fighter, you can train hard and do everything right and due to a lucky shot you can eat it, and your buddies are left wondering what happened. (like let's say your enemy pops out of a window, and fires about 10 unaimed rapid fire shots from the hip and gets you-
2- You are an ancient fighter and your enemy has to close with you and fight face to face, much less chance that your enemy will be able to pull it off if he/she is not as well trained or physically/mentally tougher than you, etc...

Some studies suggest it is the randomness and unpredictability , mixed in with the shock of seeing death when not used to it that causes these stresses- so back then this type of condition probably did not exist as it does today---or to a much lessor extent---ps we are seeing about twice as many cases from Desert Storm, then Vietnam--why?

[TimSheetz]

William,

I highly recommend you read "On Killing" and "On Combat".

Both engage this topic. On COmbat is amazing and looks at the physiological impact of combat stress as well as the emotional content.

The Author, Liutenant Colonel (retired) Grossman, thinks that what radically increased the effects of PTSD is the 24 hour nature of the modern battlefield... as in non-stop combat for days on end because it could be logistically maintained.

In other times, including the American Civil War, there was decompressions time at night, around the camp fire where men could talk about what happened.

When you do hard things, never get time to decompress and therefore carry unnecessary guilt, then arrive home and have peiple spit on you for what you did, it magnifies PTSD.

PEace,

Tim

[William Savage]

Wow. So you really think it is just the lack of exposure that is the big difference. Certainly not all civilizations have been saturated in death until modern times. Would a Medieval Prince or a Roman farmer have been more exposed to death and violence than a modern soldier raised in a Detroit ghetto? And as far as I can tell its more random to have soldiers stand sholder to sholder and fire volleys of bullets from their muskets into other rows of soldiers. Or medieval archers fireing into tightly packet armies from a hilltop.

I don't know which is worse being pinned in a modern foxhole, or being trapped in a moving mass of people, such as a phalanxe.

Im still sticking to my theory that we spent more time teaching our soldiers warrior ethics, philosophy, etiquet, etc. that we'd have less cases of PTSD in our veterans.

[William Savage]

Cool, Thanks Tim.

I had always know that in ancient times the norm was to fight on these schedules, but never in a million years would I have made that connection.
Perhaps that is correct?

[Aaron Pynenberg]

William, yes I really do think that is a big diffrence,that's why I bothered to post it. The medieval person would have seen more death and destruction than someone living in the "ghetto" without a doubt. It is the approach to death which is the key, the way people thought about it, and therefore dealt with it.

Grossman does have a point, and is much more exposed to it than I have been, but his theory does not account for the cases of civilian PTSD that have surfaced. An individual can expirence the same effects from exposure to just one incident. I think combat fatigue certainally play a factor as does the individuals disposition. But marching shoulder to shoulder into muskets is not random bro- you at some level would have to know you are going to get tagged, it is only a matter of time.

Combat ethics and whatnot are fine but the environment you are raised in is the key-if you ask me.

[JeanryChandler]

One thing to consider, when looking at ancient combat, it wasn't always so neat and clean or skill based as you might at first think. Cannon, however primitive, have been around since the 13th century, and primitive firearms and 'grenades' almost as long. Random death was certainly a reality on Renaissance and Medieval battlefields. Even before that you had massed archery, and before that javelins. Massed javelins were a part of warfare going back to the Bronze Age, as were seige engines like giant crossbows and stone throwers. You couldn't be sure when you would be hit and famous figures were always dying from the odd arrow in the eye-slit (Richard Lionheart?). Siege warfare, which also went back to the Bronze Age, was often a 24 hour affair, as were night raids and even guerilla warfare.

There have been attempts through the centuries to formalize warfare and apply rules, which sometimes went through periods where they were actually used for a time... (18th century musket combat being a good example), but total war was going on with all the brutality that term implies, since the time of Homer. Just a couple of examples, the 30 years war killed 1/3 of the population of Germany and depopulated many cities... the Albigensian Crusade killed an even even higher percentage of the citizens of southern France. You can go as far back as the Romans, who routinely massacred entire tribes and towns, as did the Greeks before them.

War is nasty. I personally think long-term PTSD has a lot more to do with the disconnect between the reality soldiers face and what the civilians can grasp at home. If nobody can even imagine what you are saying and couldn't believe your descriptions if they wanted to (as often happened to soldiers returning from WW I say, or Vietnam...) it can be very hard on the troops trying to fit back into society.

Jeanry

[jeremy pace]

I agree, and also you have to look at how our society in particular deals with death and soldiering. I can say from experience that those goarmy.com or marine corps commercials are so much bs. Am i proud to have been a marine? Sure, but did the commercials reflect boot camp (a fingernail on the monster of war to be sure.) at all? Our way is, "Be a hero! Join the military and work to single handedly save america and the free world!" when it should be more like... so you want to join the military? ok, thats fine but first watch platoon, saving private ryan, and thin red line, et cetera.
And you should have to sign a waiver that says, "I have been briefed on the term 'bullet sponge' and fully understand the implications of being one."
Americans are sheltered. I am sure all of these things mentioned have some influence on PTSD, but think that the key to fixing it may be at looking at the past to see why our ancestors didnt have such an issue... or maybe they just walked around in a fog of war all the time and so didnt notice it?
You often hear about the atrocities commited in earlier times but what about things like birth rate, disease, starvation, succumbing to the elements.... Lets face it. We are pansies compared to them. A 10 year old village girl had seen more horror than we probably ever will.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

Good points Jeanry and Jeremy,

I never said war of any time period was clean and nice though. I think we are all maybe having a piece of the whole picture but when all is said, the mind is a complex and random thing.

I think you could take two people from any time period and put them through the same expirence and they will both handle it diffrently.

I am no psychologist, but it probably all depends on the individual.

[s_taillebois]

There were also other random factors in addition to those mentioned (such as longbows, arbalests, onagers and etc). One would be disease, epidemic outbreaks weren't uncommon, and the medical standards of the time could do little. Even during the plague outbreak (which was spread due to warfare ie Jaffa), the fighting often continued.
Another element would have been the difficulty of readjusting from a battle/confrontation context to the behavior expected in a more a genteel situation. Despite the modern mythology, there were clear times in Med/Renn. society when an aristocrat could be censured for acting too martial. That's one of the reasons for the falcon infatuation, it was a symbol to behave socially & without confrontational conduct. And some, were executed for being aggressive within the wrong context...even for a jostle or heated word.
The Renn/Medieval did have their equivalent to PTSD, because they had structures in place to compensate. Such traditions as St. Patrick's purgatory (a cave where such as knight's Tundle and Owen went seeking atonement..isolated in the cave they 'saw' hell and the consequences of wrong behavior, and were often 'brought out' by angels&saints-or at least their conceptions thereof). Another tradition was the abandonment of the sword at a church altar, and the usual isolation thereafter in a monastery. This often wasn't a permanent decision, but when they had done so, usually they were exempt from fighting until they left the cloister. Also, it wasn't uncommon for them to wear a penitent shift, pass through the town square, and then to the Bishop (or liege), seeking forgiveness (often for doing the usual things associated with medieval/renn. warfare). Plus obviously, general things like confessions, pilgrimage and penitance.
In many terms, the acts of overt mysticism associated with renn/medieval warrior cultures, would have been their religious solutions to what we would consider a psychological condition. And although our studies tend to de-emphasize those traditions (don't need them obviously), they did value these mystical compensations. They had to, as they knew they (in some ways) needed them to remain sane.

[JeanryChandler]

Good points all, and Aaron, I wasn't arguing really with anyone in particular just trying to add to the discussion. Thinking about the socities attitude toward death, I was reminded how in rural Russia when a youth was picked to be a soldier and was to be sent off to the front to fight, his village would have a send-off party for him which was basically a funeral.

I think this tradition may still continue in Russia actually...

It kind of reminds me of back in the 80's when the DOD used to tell us for some reason how our battalion had 18 minute life extpectancy in combat. Different units on the Fulda Gap like at Wildflicken used to pride themselves on how they supposedly had a 4 minute or a 2 minute life expectancy if the baloon went up. A wierd morbid kind of bravado.

JR

[MarvinHoffman]

Hello all. I am new to the ARMA. Not yet a member, having just recently stumbled onto the site. But I'm reading through the forums, and enjoying the debate. First I have to say that so far all the postings have been pleasant, and well-mannered! So refreshing, because most forums are too abusive to follow these days.

In reading this thread, I see all the points mentioned, and one thing that came to mind is that if it's true that our young people are more prone to PTSD due to not being "preapared" for such harsh realities, that definitely flies in the face of what many people have charged all of our graphic video and computer games with over the years. And the coyote and roadunner cartoons from my day. Many were touting that this exposure to gore and violence was having a dramatic impact and adding to the increased violence in our young people. I never fully bought into that. But what has been proposed in this thread could show that imaginary "play like" things like the games are, in fact, a stark contrast to the horror of what real death and gore are like.

I do believe that we are sheltered in these modern times. Even in third world countries! I know it's bad, children are starving even as I type this, but it's not as bad as it could be. My children have hardly been exposed to death, let alone the tragedy of a young death.

But I'm certainly not advocating leaving our civilized lifestyle, but I do agree that we need to communicate the realities of life. I doubt that we will ever live in a utopian environment, and the possiblity of armed conflict on any scale will always be present. And having our young people prepared for any eventuality is very important.

I've tried not to rant here, and I hope I didn't allude to anything that would offend anyone. If so, please forgive me.

Thanks
Marvin

[William Savage]

Yes good points everyone. And now a couple of mine.

Our minds may be irrational but they are not random, thats why we have psycollogy.

And i think it is wrong that everyone seems to feel that the world has been uncivilized up until now. Health issues were big causes of death, but that is NO different than the situations in third world countries.

I do think that fanatical beleife in what one is doing is a big part of it. Im in no way trying to rip on the devotion of our ancestors, but today Im not sure how many soldiers can say that "God wanted me to do what I did" or "God forgives me for what I did". I think being able to recieve religious answeres to philosophical, and psycological questions is a big part of why our ancestors were seemingly buffered against PTSD.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

Will, you and i are just going to have to agree to disagree, the science of the mind, is still not a complete science there are many things that are as yet unexplained or that do not conform to the scienticfic method. So yes, we are and can be random in terms of our behavior and actions. Trust me, I see it everyday, people will act in strange ways, even with the same types of upbringing.

As far as religion buffetting these soilders, I ahve to say that you are contradicting yourself no?, If psychology is as scientific as you are saying then those historical fighters should be acting and reacting the same as we are now, even with a belief in God etc...does that make sense?-

Mr Tablois (sp?) sorry, good stuff from you very interesting points as usual- things to think about,

-and to our new guy, no worries man, nobody should be offended by that post-it's a valid point and something that many folks have talked about. I really also do not believe it's the same thing either. You cannot have the same expirences by watching violence in a movie, as I think the mind, no matter how graphic, is still able to disassociate itself to a degree. It's only when you realize you are in mortal danger are these effects internalized full-effect. There are some folks who are in these situations, and do not realize the danger and so then are not effected the same--interesting no?-AP

[TimSheetz]

HI Guys,

I think it important to note that PTSD manifests more on people NOT conditioned to behave otherwise... and this is where I think Aaron's comments link to the de-stressing points I mentioned from the two books that I thought werre worth reading... whether or not you agree they do make you think and consider a lot (they did for me).

Violence affects people differently - and whether they are used to it and more conditioned to respond when that stimuli presents itself matters when we talk about battle and such. Weird things can happen, like crapping you pants, etc... There can be all sorts fo shame associated with it until you find out that it happened to other folks to and that, no, you are not a sicko, but share simiilar experiences with others.

Peace,

Tim