One of the hallmarks of complex PTSD is a perpetual feeling of being under threat, stemming from constantly feeling afraid and vulnerable during childhood. This is true even though the threatening circumstances of our childhood have long since past and, as adults, we are, objectively speaking, under no significant threat. These feelings of being under threat frequently give rise to hypervigilance (i.e. constantly expecting, and being on the lookout for, signs of danger. For example, in social situations, we may find ourselves unable to relax and enjoy such encounters as we are preoccupied with minutely analysing the behaviour of others around us for signs of hostility. Furthermore, we may often believe that we perceive signs of hostility where they do not, in realistic terms, exist due to a cognitive bias compelling us to view others in an unreasonably negative light.
Hypervigilance, a fight/flight response)s makes us feel tense and agitated leading to various unpleasant physical sensations such as hyperventilation, sweating, elevated heart rate etc. However, in this article, I want to focus on a symptom that Pete Walker, author of Complex PTSD: From Surviving To Thriving, referred to as MUSCLE ARMOURING.
Body Armouring essentially refers to body hypervigilance. Because our brain is functioning as if we are in constant danger, it sends signals to the body that it needs to be in a state of preparedness to defend itself or, in other words, to be braced for action.
As a result of this, we are likely to find that we suffer from chronically tensed muscles. Over time, this overstimulation of the muscles can give rise to considerable physical pain as well as conditions such as fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue.
Because of such physical/bodily effects of complex PTSD, one of the world’s leading experts on the condition, Bessel van der Kolk, author of The Body Keeps the Score: Mind, Brain and Body in the Transformation of Trauma, emphasizes the need for those suffering from it to undergo bottom-up therapies as well as top-down therapies, such as somatic experiencing therapy
We have seen in other articles that I have previously published on this site that, if we have suffered severe and long-lasting childhood trauma, and, in particular, were brought up by parents who were emotionally disconnected from us, rejecting, indifferent, absent, abusive (verbally, physically, sexually, psychologically) or neglectful (or, as is frequently the case, a combination of these), we may go on to develop serious psychological conditions in our adult lives such as borderline personality disorder (BPD) or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
In such cases, we are likely to suffer an array of painful symptoms including loneliness, emptiness, self-hatred, despair, thoughts of wanting to be dead or of committing suicide, and excruciating and unremitting mental pain and anguish.
In my own case this mental suffering was so profound that I underwent electro-convulsive therapy(ECT) several times – to no avail, I might add, other than giving me a headache and a feeling of deep confusion for about fifteen minutes after coming out of the anaesthetic (however, it can be effective for some people).
Desperation To Escape Mental Pain
Just as when we are in deep physical pain we are desperate to make it abate, the same is, of course, true of mental pain; indeed, the same brain region is involved in the experiencing of both these types of pain.
Mindfulness Meditation
The most effective form of dealing with psychological, mental and emotional pain that I have found is mindfulness meditation, which is most effective if it is carried out every day (even if you can only afford to spend ten minutes on it per day).
Unprocessed Trauma: Do Your Thoughts Feel ”Out Of Control?’
Childhood trauma, if it is severe enough, has a profoundly adverse effect on how we think and how we process information.
In order to explain why this happens, it is first helpful to recap how the brain is organized. In simple terms, we can split the brain into three parts: the brain stem, the limbic system, and the neocortex. The functions of these three parts of the brain are as follows:
THE BRAIN STEM: The brain stem consists of the midbrain, pons, and medulla oblongata. It is the most primitive part of the brain and controls essential bodily functions such as swallowing, blood pressure, and heart rate.
THE LIMBIC SYSTEM: The limbic system is involved in emotion, motivation, memory, and learning. It also controls the brain’s ‘alarm system’ (i.e., its fight/flight response).
THE NEOCORTEX: The neocortex is involved in the brain’s higher functions, such as reasoning, language, and logic.
Now, regarding the above brain components, let’s compare and contrast how the brain processes information under normal circumstances with how it processes information related to traumatic experiences.
THE NORMAL WAY IN WHICH THE BRAIN PROCESSES INFORMATION:
Under normal circumstances, the brain receives information and processes it via the limbic system to determine its emotional content and then passes it on to the neocortex where it can be logically analyzed and reflected upon in order to produce a rational response.
THE WAY IN WHICH THE BRAIN PROCESSES INFORMATION RELATING TO TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCES:
However, when the brain receives traumatic information because it could potentially mean we are in danger, the brain needs to process it as quickly as possible so that we can respond with the utmost alacrity, thus improving our chances of avoiding harm. In these situations, then, when a lightening-quick response is called for, there is no time for the luxury of allowing the neocortex to leisurely analyze and reflect upon the traumatic/threatening information received until it can determine the appropriate response.
Instead, the brain takes emergency action and processes the traumatic information quickly via the brain stem and the limbic system, bypassing the neocortex and, thus, allowing an instant, reflexive reaction. A simple example of when the brain might process information in such a way would be that of a person out for a walk who sees what s/he (mistakenly) takes to be a snake in the grass (though it is, in fact, just a piece of rope). In such a circumstance, s/he is likely reflexively to flinch and immediately step-away. This happens because the limbic system, working on an emotional level, has detected possible danger (emotional response: FEAR) and activated the ‘fight/flight’ state.
It is only when the neocortex comes back online and the person can logically analyze the situation that s/he realizes that what s/he initially took to be a snake is, in fact, a harmless length of dark, green rope. To reiterate: the reason the neocortex does not take part in the initial assessment as to whether the snake-like object is dangerous or not is that it would take up too much time (after all, if it is a snake it could be poisonous and strike at any second); an immediate response is called for, working on the principle of ‘better safe than sorry.’
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE HAVE TO LIVE IN A STATE OF CONSTANT FEAR AND ANXIETY?
Of course, we can swiftly recover from a minor incident like the one just described above However, if we have existed in a situation (e.g., living with an unpredictably violent, alcoholic father when we were a child) whereby we lived in a perpetual state of fear and anxious uncertainty, the type of information processing just described above (involving mistaking a rope for a snake) becomes increasingly REINFORCED and ENTRENCHED.
Thus, we come perpetually to respond to stimuli via an analysis of information by the emotionally driven limbic system, bypassing the rational analysis that the neocortex would typically supply. This, in short, makes us highly vulnerable to behaving in ways that, objectively speaking, may look deeply IRRATIONAL.
Indeed, eventually, this form of emergency, instant, fear-driven information processing (sometimes referred to as the traumatic neurological response), instead of only operating very occasionally when needed, becomes the brain’s DEFAULT METHOD of information processing and habitual. And, because of this, the brain becomes stuck in a state of constant read alert, leading us to feel constantly on edge and under threat as well as to be continually prone to vastly over-reacting to even the most minor (objectively speaking) of stressors and our whole lives can feel as if they have been subsumed into a kind of living nightmare in which everything seems a threat and potential source of danger – it is as if we have lost control of our thought processes which, in a very real neurological sense, we have.
FRAGMENTARY, UNPROCESSED MEMORIES STORED IN THE SOMATOSENSORY PART OF THE BRAIN LEADING TO UNCONTROLLED THOUGHTS IN THE FORM OF FLASHBACKS, INTRUSIVE MEMORIES AND NIGHTMARES:
Traumatic experiences overwhelm our arousal system, which prevents them from being processed immediately and as a coherent whole. Instead, they are mentally absorbed in a fragmentary way and stored in the somatosensory part of the brain to be processed and made sense of at a later date. Such fragmented memories, therefore, remain unprocessed and unhealed.
It is these unprocessed, unhealed and fragmentary pieces of information stored in the somatosensory part of the brain that gives rise to uncontrolled thoughts which manifest themselves in the form of flashbacks, intrusive memories, obsessive ruminations, and nightmares; such psychological phenomena are likely to be triggered by any stimuli that even vaguely reminds us of our original traumatic experiences (often on an unconscious level) and, whilst deeply unpleasant, represent the brain’s attempt to process our unresolved experiences properly.
Evidence Supporting The Effectiveness Of Mindfulness Meditation
There are now, quite literally, thousands of published research studies that support the effectiveness of mindfulness meditation. It has been shown not only to help relieve symptoms of mental illness but also to greatly benefit those suffering from physical conditions as well as with pain control.
Those who meditate regularly actually beneficially alter the physical structure of their brains. Just as someone who spent years practising the piano would develop a physically denser area of the brain which is involved with the skills of piano playing, those who are experienced in meditation have been found to have undergone beneficial physical changes in the areas of the brain involved in meditation, in particular, the amygdala (which is involved in emotional control/regulation), leading to the development of a generally much calmer disposition and, also, the insula (the part of the brain related to feelings of empathy) leading to not only greater empathy towards others but also towards oneself (this is of especial benefit to those who suffer clinical depression as such individuals are invariably highly self-critical, self-blaming and psychologically self-lacerating).
In this article, due to the theme of this website, I want to concentrate on the benefits of mindfulness meditation which are specifically related to mental health. As this is really an introductory article to the relevant research findings, I will list those mental health conditions which studies have so far shown can be ameliorated by it :
MENTAL CONDITIONS THAT CAN BE HELPED BY MINDFULNESS MEDITATION
1) DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY (e.g. Hick and Chan, 2010)
2) SUBSTANCE ABUSE (e.g. Alterman et al, 2004)
3) STRESS REDUCTION (e.g. Austin, 1997)
4) EMOTIONAL SELF-CONTROL/SELF-REGULATION (e.g. Caldwell et al., 2010)
5) SLEEP DISORDERS (e.g. Ong et al, 2008)
6) RELAPSE OF CLINICAL DEPRESSION PREVENTION (e.g. Beckerman and Corbett, 2010)
7) POSTTRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (e.g. Lang et al., 2012)
8) DISTRESS ASSOCIATED WITH PERSONALITY DISORDERS (e.g. Nyklicek et al, 2012)
10) EATING DISORDERS (e.g. Kristeller and Halleh, 1999)
11) BIPOLAR (e.g. Weber et al, 2010)
12) AGGRESSION (e.g. Borders et al, 2010)
Mindfulness Meditation: An Escape Route Away from Obsessive, Negative Ruminations
Mindfulness helps us to become aware of our CURRENT experience, of things we would normally take for granted. These may include becoming aware of our breathing, of the feeling of our clothes against our skin, the furniture on which we sit, the feel of the temperature in the room etc; anything, in fact, which we are presently experiencing through one of our five senses. It teaches us, as I have said, to accept things as they are rather than to fret about want them to be. We may, too, become aware of our thoughts; again, we are encouraged to accept them non-judgmentally – to simply observe them floating through our minds in a detached manner and not get caught up in them.
Negative Ruminations
This state of mind of existing intensely in the present, accepting it as it is in non-judgmentally, is, at its best (it takes time to master the skill), the polar opposite of obsessive, negative ruminative thinking which can be so painful and destructive.
Below, I summarize the principles which underpin MINDFULNESS :
1) IT IS INTENTIONAL – it helps us to become aware of current reality and the choices which are open to us. This is in direct contrast to rumination (in which we are caught up and trapped in the destructive downward spiral of our automatic negative thoughts).
2) IT IS EXPERIENTIAL – mindfulness trains us to experience the present moment (unlike rumination, which fills us with concerns about the past and the future and causes us to be preoccupied with abstract thoughts detached from present experience).
3) IT IS NON-JUDGMENTAL – mindfulness helps us to accept things as they are right now rather than to get caught up in judgments and frustrations about how we think things should be.
By cultivating MINDFULNESS, it stops us from becoming stuck in a futile cycle of depressive and anxiety creating negative ruminations; instead, it helps us to develop new and wiser ways to relate to our actual experience IN THE PRESENT MOMENT.
However, MINDFULNESS is about more than noticing things around us that we had previously taken for granted and ignored; it also helps us to develop an awareness of THE HABIT OF A PARTICULAR STATE OF MIND WE USED TO FIND OURSELVES IN, WHICH GOT US STUCK AND CAUGHT UP IN RUMINATIONS DESTRUCTIVE TO US AND TO OUR EMOTIONAL LIVES. The skill of mindfulness allows us to DISENGAGE from such destructive, ruminative thinking and shift to an enormously healthier frame of mind which frees us from our self-defeating emotional struggles. Mindfulness allows us to accept the different emotions which drift through our minds non-judgmentally and with self-compassion.
A Week’s Neurofeedback Equivalent To Years Of Zen Meditation
According to Buzsaki, Professor of Neuroscience at Rutgers University, Zen meditation needs to be undertaken for years until the person practising it can slow the frequency of the brain’s alpha waves and to spread the alpha oscillations more forward to the front of the brain; slowing these brain waves have many beneficial effects including :
reducing fear
reducing ‘mind chatter’
increasing feelings of calm
reduce anxiety
reduce feelings of panic
However, Buzaki states that (as alluded to above) while it takes years of Zen meditation to alter alpha wave brain activity optimally, the same results can be obtained after a mere week’s training with neurofeedback.
WHAT IS NEUROFEEDBACK?
Neurofeedback is sometimes also referred to as EEG biofeedback. It is a form of technology that helps the individual to learn how to alter his / her brain waves beneficially, and it works by operant conditioning.
It is based on the idea that dysregulation of the brain forms the basis of many emotional, cognitive and behavioural problems and, as such, this brain dysregulation needs to be corrected. Research has demonstrated that neurofeedback training leads to beneficial alterations in the neural substrates in the targeted area of the brain, alleviating associated pathological behaviour. Such beneficial changes in behaviour have been found to last for months, and it has also been found that such amelioration of behavioural pathology is correlated with structural alterations in the brain’s architecture (in relation to both white and grey neuronal matter).
However, further research is needed to establish more firmly neurofeedback’s potential benefits.
REFERENCES:
Buzsaki, G., Rhythms of the Brain. Published by Oxford University 2006
Sitaram, R., Ros, T., Stoeckel, L. et al. Closed-loop brain training: the science of neurofeedback. Nat Rev Neurosci18, 86–100 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.164
If, as babies and infants, our relationship with our mother (or other primary carers) was impoverished, misattuned and lacking in security and our mother/primary carer was insufficiently attuned to our basic needs and could not be relied upon to comfort us during periods of distress then, as a form of psychological defence, we may develop, according to psychoanalytic theory, a fantasy bond with her (i.e. with our mother or primary carer).
What Is A Fantasy Bond?
A fantasy bond between the child and mother/primary carer is an imagined connection (between the child and mother/primary caretaker) that the child formulates in his/her mind and which serves to compensate for the mental distress caused by the mother’s/primary carer’s inadequate nurturing of him/her (i.e. the child) and failure to provide him/her with sufficient love and care. In short, then, the fantasy bond is an illusion the young child creates in his/her imagination in order to provide him/herself with a sense of comfort and safety Indeed, according to Silverman, this illusion, created in the mind of the very young child, is a very effective defence mechanism against psychological distress due to young child’s powerful imaginative abilities.
Possible Effects On Our Adult Lives
If we were put in the psychological position whereby it was necessary for us to create in our imaginations a fantasy bond with our mother/primary carer as a young child, this can have a seriously damaging impact upon our adult lives in so far as we are liable to create similar fantasy bonds with intimate partners manifested by ‘going through the motions’ of being in love or, to put it another way, ‘playing the role’ of being in love as opposed to feeling genuine, intense, spontaneous love for our partner. Such a relationship, then, based on the fantasy bond, is essentially false, artificial and hollow, devoid of meaningful emotional attachment, deep feeling or passion.
According to Firestone, many adults, as a result of dysfunctional early life relationships with their mother/primary carer, have a fear of intense emotional intimacy with others but, simultaneously, fear being alone. The fantasy bond, therefore, can be seen as a kind of compromise between the two extremes (i.e. intense emotional intimacy and being alone) as it provides some connection with another (thus staving off loneliness) whilst, at the same time, allowing one a degree of emotional detachment.
Possible Signs Of Having A Fantasy Bond With One’s Partner In One’s Adult Life
According to Firestone, signs that we may have developed a ‘fantasy bond’ with our partner include the following behaviours :
reduced eye contact
poor communication
adopting role determined behaviours to bolster the illusion of the fantasy bond
lack of independence and breaching one another’s boundaries
substituting routines, customs and conventional responses for genuine closeness
speaking as one (e,g finishing one another’s sentences; using the pronoun ‘we’ rather than ‘I’).)
emotional aloofness
proneness to anger, manipulation and dominance
routine, cold sex lacking in passion/affection
having a distorted view of the partner’s ‘true self’
playing the role of being in a truly loving relationship
Therapy
Those in an unhappy relationship with their partner may wish to seek couples counselling/relationship therapy.
Firestone, R. W. (1987). Destructive effects of the fantasy bond in couple and family relationships. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 24(2), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0085709
Silverman, L. & Weinberger, J. (1985). Mommy and I Are One: Implications for Psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 40 (12), 1296-1304
Silverman, Frank M. Lachmann, and Robert H. Milich.Richard A. Mackey, The Search for Oneness. By Lloyd H. New York: International Universities Press, 1982. 306 pp. $24.95, Social Work, Volume 29, Issue 4, July-August 1984, Pages 411–412, https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/29.4.411
Complex PTSD can develop in individuals who have experienced protracted and severe interpersonal trauma (parents/primary caregivers) at critical stages in their psychological development whilst growing up. As the name of the condition suggests, both its causes and effects are highly complex and interactive.
Diagnosing the condition is also complex, particularly as (at the time of writing) it remains so far unlisted in DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). However, psychologists and psychiatrists have various tools at their disposal, including self-report inventories (questionnaires). One of the most general of these questionnaires is called, simply enough, The Symptom Checklist (SCL-90) and it includes ninety questions (the clue’s in the abbreviated name) These ninety questions cover eight domains or, as referred to in the title of this article, EIGHT PSYCHONEUROTIC DIMENSIONS (in other words, eight psychological problems causing mental pain that can be present in those unfortunate enough to be suffering from complex PTSD). I list all eight below:
THE EIGHT PSYCHONEUROTIC DIMENSIONS OF COMPLEX PTSD ACCORDING TO THE SCL-90:
AGORAPHOBIA
DEPRESSION
SLEEP DISTURBANCE
ANXIETY
SOMATISIZATION
HOSTILITY
COGNITIVE DEFICITS
INTERPERSONAL SENSITIVITY
TREATMENT:
Various treatments are used to treat complex PTSD and there is no ‘one size fits all. They include:
TIME PERSPECTIVE THERAPY
REFRAMING
DIALECTICAL BEHAVIOUR THERAPY
EYE MOVEMENT DESENSITIZATION AND REPROCESSING THERAPY
COGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL THERAPY
SOMATIC EXPERIENCING THERAPY AND HEALING THE DYSFUNCTIONAL NERVOUS SYSTEM
MINDFULNESS MEDITATION
A WEEK’S NEUROFEEDBACK EQUIVALENT TO A YEAR’S ZEN MEDITATION
COMPASSION FOCUSED THERAPY
NEUROGENIC TREMORS
EMOTIONAL FREEDOM TECHNIQUE
TRAUMA-SENSITIVE YOGA
SCHEMA THERAPY
MENTALIZATION BASED THERAPY
TRANSFERENCE FOCUSED PSYCHOTHERAPY
ACT AND COMMITMENT THERAPY
Leading researchers (e.g. Bessel van der Kolk) recommend a combination of top-down (treatments that address thinking and cognition) and bottom-up (treatments that focus on alleviating stress stored in the body) therapies. Before an individual undergoes treatment in earnest it is important that s/he has established an appropriate degree of stability (e.g. Herman, 1992). It is also of crucial importance that the individual’s feelings in relation to his/her traumatic interpersonal experiences during childhood are sensitively and compassionately validated.
REFERENCES:
Herman, J., Trauma and recovery: the aftermath of violence – from domestic abuse to political terror, New York: BasicBooks, ISBN 9780465087303.
Pearson: Symptom Checklist-90-Revised”. Pearson: Clinical Psychology. Pearson Education, Inc. 2016
Van der Kolk, B., The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Viking, 2014. ISBN 9780670785933.
eBook:
Above eBook now available for instant download from Amazon. Clickherefor more details.
When a child is continually mistreated, s/he will inevitably conclude that s/he must be innately bad. This is because s/he has a need (at an unconscious level) to preserve the illusion that her/his parents are good; this can only be achieved by taking the view that the mistreatment is deserved.
The child develops a fixed pattern of self-blame and a belief that their mistreatment is due to their ‘own faults’. As the parent/s continue to mistreat the child, perhaps taking out their own stresses and frustrations on her/him, the child’s negative self-view becomes continually reinforced. Indeed, the child may become the FAMILY SCAPEGOAT, blamed for all the family’s problems.
The child will often become full of anger, rage and aggression towards the parent/s and may not have developed sufficient articulacy to resolve the conflict verbally. A vicious circle then develops: each time the child rages against the parent/s, the child blames her/himself for the rage and the self-view of being ‘innately bad’ is further deepened.
This negative self-view may be made worse if one of the child’s unconscious coping mechanisms is to take out (technically known as DISPLACEMENT) her/his anger with the parent/s on others who may be less feared but do not deserve it (particularly disturbed children will sometimes take out their rage against their parent/s by tormenting animals; if the parent finds out that the child is doing this, it will be taken as further ‘evidence’ of the child’s ‘badness’, rather than as a major symptom of extreme psychological distress, as, in fact, it should be).
The more the child is badly treated, the more s/he will believe s/he is bringing the treatment on her/himself (at least at an unconscious level), confirming the child’s FALSE self-view of being innately ‘bad’, even ‘evil’ (especially if the parent/s are religious).
What is happening is that the child is identifying with the abusive parent/s, believing, wrongly, that the ‘badness’ in the parent/s actually resides within themselves. This has the effect of actually preserving the relationship and attachment with the parent (the internal thought process might be something like: ‘it is not my parent who is bad, it is me. I am being treated in this way because I deserve it.’ This thought process may well be, as I have said, unconscious).
Eventually, the child will come to completely INTERNALIZE the belief that s/he is ‘bad’ and the false belief will come to fundamentally underpin the child’s self-view, creating a sense of worthlessness and self-loathing.
Often, even when mental health experts intervene and explain to the child it is not her/his fault that they have been ill-treated and that they are, in fact, in no way to blame, the child’s negative self-view can be so profoundly entrenched that it is extremely difficult to erase.
In such cases, a lot of therapeutic work is required in order to reprogram the child’s self-view so that it more accurately reflects reality. Without proper treatment, a deep sense of guilt and shame (which is, in reality, completely unwarranted) may persist over a lifetime with catastrophic results.
Any individual affected in such a way would be extremely well advised to seek psychotherapy and other professional advice as even very deep-rooted negative self-views as a result of childhood trauma (Known as CORE BELIEFS, see immediately below) can be very effectively treated.
CORE BELIEFS:
By the time we are adults, most of us have developed very entrenched, deeply rooted, fundamental beliefs about ourselves. Psychologists refer to these as our CORE BELIEFS. Once established, they can prove very difficult to change without the aid of therapeutic interventions (such as cognitive behavioural therapy, or CBT).
A traumatic childhood, especially one that involved us being rejected and unloved by our parents, will very frequently have a very adverse effect on these CORE BELIEFS. However, precisely how our self-concept is warped and distorted by our problematic childhood experiences will depend upon the unique aspects of those experiences (as well as other factors such as our genetic inheritance, our temperament and the support we received (or failed to receive) from others to help us to cope with our childhood difficulties.
Examples of the kind of false core beliefs our traumatic childhood experiences could have led us to form are as follows :
OTHERS WILL ABANDON ME – this belief may develop if one/both parents abandoned us during our childhoods, for example
I AM NOT WORTH OTHERS CARING ABOUT – this belief may develop if our parent/s focused far more on their own needs than our own, for example
I MUST BE SELF-SACRIFICING – this belief may develop if our parent/s ‘parentified’ us, for example
I MUST SUBJUGATE MYSELF TO OTHERS – this belief may develop if our own views and needs were dismissed as unimportant by our parent/s, for example
I AM A SOCIAL PARIAH, UNFIT TO ASSOCIATE WITH OTHERS – this belief may develop if we grew up feeling our childhood experiences set us apart from our contemporaries or if we were in some way ‘forced to grow up’ too early so that we developed difficulties relating to those of our own age during childhood (perhaps we were so anxious and preoccupied we couldn’t behave in a care-free way join in the ‘fun’).
I AM INTRINSICALLY UNLOVABLE – this belief may have developed if we were unloved, or PERCEIVED OURSELVES TO BE UNLOVED, by our parent/s, for example
I AM VULNERABLE AND IN CONSTANT DANGER – such a belief can develop if we spent a lot of our childhood feeling anxious, under stress, apprehensive or in fear, for example
I MUST ALWAYS KEEP TO THE HIGHEST OF STANDARDS – such a belief may develop if our parents only CONDITIONAL LOVED/ACCEPTED us
I AM SPECIALLY ENTITLED – this belief may develop if we feel (probably on an unconscious level) that society, in general, should compensate us for our childhood suffering or because we are so overwhelmed by our emotional pain that we can’t help but to focus almost exclusively upon our own needs (rather as we would, say if we were on fire).
Unfortunately, such deeply instilled core beliefs are liable to become self-fulfilling prophecies. As already stated, they are resilient to change and this state of affairs is seriously aggravated by the fact that, once such beliefs have become deeply ingrained, our view of the world is so coloured that we misinterpret, or ‘over-interpret’, what is going on around us, specifically :
We selectively attend to, and absorb, information which supports, or, seems to us to support, our negative view of ourselves, while, at the same time, ignoring or discounting anything that contradicts our negative self-view. In so doing, we are likely, often, to grossly overestimate the significance of the information that seems to confirm our negative self-view, or simply completely to misinterpret information (e.g. by thinking/believing: ‘he just yawned because I’m boring’, whereas, in fact, he yawned because he had not slept for twenty-four hours).
Effect On Interpersonal Relationships In Adulthood:
Such self-destructive and dysfunctional beliefs about the self, developed during a psychologically unhealthy and traumatic childhood, have, unsurprisingly, been found significantly to contribute to maladaptive interpersonal styles when we become adults (e.g. Tezel et al., 2015). This can, of course, lead to loneliness, isolation and increase one’s sense of alienation.
Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) can help us to think less negatively about ourselves.
REFERENCE:
TEZEL, F.K. Archives Of Neuropsychiatry (2015) Relationships between Childhood Traumatic Experiences, Early Maladaptive Schemas and Interpersonal Styles
A study conducted by Higley et al., 1991 involving twenty-two rhesus monkeys (all aged 50 months) was set up to investigate if their early life experience affected their alcohol consumption.
The twenty-two monkeys were split into two groups of eleven:
GROUP ONE (also known as the PEER-REARED GROUP):
The eleven monkeys that made up this group had been reared for the first six months of their lives with other monkeys of their own age but without access to adult monkeys (i.e. they had been caused early-life stress due to maternal separation); this had the effect of reducing their exploratory behaviour and increasing their fear-related behaviours
GROUP TWO (also known as the MOTHER-REARED GROUP):
The eleven monkeys in this group were reared for the first six months of their lives by their mothers.
N.B. AFTER THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THEIR LIVES, BOTH GROUPS OF MONKEYS WERE TREATED IDENTICALLY.
THE FIRST PHASE OF THE EXPERIMENT:
For ONE HOUR PER DAY, and for four days per week, all twenty-two monkeys were given free access to alcohol (a 7 per cent ethanol solution).
RESULTS FROM PHASE ONE OF THE EXPERIMENT:
When the two groups of monkeys were compared, it was found that the PEER-REARED monkeys (i.e the maternally deprived monkeys from GROUP ONE), consistently CONSUMED SIGNIFICANTLY MORE ALCOHOL (to levels producing intoxication) than the monkeys from GROUP TWO (i.e. the monkeys who had been raised in a normal way – by their mothers).
THE SECOND PHASE OF THE EXPERIMENT:
In phase two of the experiment, mother-reared monkeys (GROUP TWO) were caused to experience elevated stress levels by being subjected to social-isolation.
RESULTS:
These (GROUP TWO) monkeys, as a result of this increased stress, increased their level of alcohol consumption to a level almost equal to that consumed by the peer-raised (GROUP ONE) monkeys (to levels producing intoxication) during the first part of the experiment.
OTHER FINDINGS FROM THE EXPERIMENT:
Those monkeys who consumed most alcohol also displayed a higher incidence of distress-related behaviours.
Peer-reared (GROUP ONE) monkeys were found to produce more biological indicators of stress(e.g. increased levels of the stress-related hormone cortisol) than the monkeys from GROUP TWO (mother-reared monkeys).
CONCLUSIONS:
In normal living conditions, monkeys reared without a mother or other adults in early life are more likely to suffer stress and to develop fear-related behaviours than monkeys reared by their mothers and this, in turn, increases their (i.e. the maternally deprived monkeys) alcohol consumption to levels significantly higher than the levels consumed by mother-reared monkeys.
Stress caused to monkeys by socially isolating them increases their level of alcohol consumption significantly, even when they have had the early life relative security of having been raised by their mothers and are not, therefore, especially sensitive to the adverse effects of stress.
By extrapolation, the implications pertaining to possible contributing factors to human dependence upon alcohol are clear.
Higley, J.D., Suomi, S.J. & Linnoila, M. CSF monoamine metabolite concentrations vary according to age, rearing, and sex, and are influenced by the stressor of social separation in rhesus monkeys. Psychopharmacology103, 551–556 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02244258
For example, if we grow up in an environment which we perceive to be threatening and are chronically exposed to an atmosphere permeated by fear so that we are chronically and repeatedly frightened by our environment, our brain activity (in response to our feelings of fear) will, whenever we are in this state, instruct our adrenal glands to produce adrenaline (a hormone that helps to prepare us for ‘fight or flight’).to circulate in the bloodstream.
This hormone, circulating around the body, Lipton explains, will then pass information to our biological cells via the cells’ membranes.
This, in turn, may then lead to alterations in how the DNA within the cells expresses itself.
It is important to stress that it is the individual’s PERCEPTION of his/her environment as frightening that is the crucial point here. In other words, if the same person grew up in exactly the same environment but (purely hypothetically) did not perceive it to be frightening, the effect upon his/her adrenal glands and, subsequently, upon his/her biological cells and DNA expression, would not be the same.
To reiterate then, it is the child’s perception of reality that is vital as s/he is growing up; his/her biological responses are directed by this perception and this is what Lipton refers to as the ‘biology of belief.’
In fact, even an embryo appears to be capable of perceiving its environment as dangerous. For example, research has been conducted showing that mothers subjected to chronic stress during pregnancy give birth to children who have a 50% increased risk of cranial malformation.
How does this happen?
Essentially, the pregnant mother suffering from stress produces stress-related hormones which, in turn, communicate a ‘sense of danger’ to the developing embryo. This results in the embryo’s hindbrain developing more than the forebrain.
We can infer from this that the mother’s perception of her environment (i.e. as stressful), via the activity the hormones that she produces in response to that stress, affects the cellular development of her embryo.
Lipton further argues that it is our belief system (which is often unconscious and developed mainly during our childhoods) that primarily affects how we perceive people, situations etc. in later life.
In other words, our belief system deriving from childhood experience affects our perceptions which, in turn, affects which parts of our genomes are expressed;.
To put it more simply still, it would seem that our beliefs affect our biology.
The good news is that, from the above, we can infer that we are not slaves dictated to by our genes, but that, by changing our beliefs, we can alter our own biology and change the behaviour of our cells, thus altering not only our physical health but our mental health (e.g. addictive tendencies) too.
This article is based on ‘Object Relations Theory’ (Fairbairn, 1952). which places crucial importance upon interpersonal relationships, most of all interfamilial relationships, especially between the mother and the child. The theory, in particular, concerns itself with how we develop. in our early lives, inner, mental images of ourselves and others and how these images affect our interpersonal relationships throughout later life. The theory also incorporates the idea that humans are primarily motivated by a powerful desire to form positive relationships with others (breaking away from Freud’s belief that humans are primarily motivated by the instinctual drives of sex and aggression).
Research suggests (e.g.Nigg et al., 1992) that those suffering from BPD are prone to develop ‘malevolent representations’ of others. This article summarizes why this might be in terms of psychoanalytic theory.
First, it is necessary to introduce two terms: ‘Object Cathexis’ and ‘Object Hunger.’
According to the APA Dictionary of Psychology, ‘object cathexis’ is a classical psychoanalytic term that refers to the process of the investment of libido or psychic energy in objects outside the self, such as a person, goal, idea, or activity.’
Object hunger, on the other hand, refers to an intense need of, and dependency upon, others (e.g. family, friends, intimate partners) or, especially in the case of BPD sufferers who experience profound feelings of emptiness, substitutes such as narcotics, tobacco, alcohol, promiscuous sex, overeating, overspending on material goods etc.
In simple terms, if we were brought up in early life by primary cares who made us feel safe and secure we are likely to have developed healthy object cathexis and a general trust in the world and others. However, if our primary carers failed to make us feel sufficiently safe and secure, we are much more likely to have developed a diametrically opposed general view (i.e. that the world and others are unsafe, threatening and not to be trusted). This, in turn, creates in us ‘object hunger.’
Introjection is a psychoanalytic term that means:
‘the unconscious incorporation of attitudes or ideas pf others into one’s personality’. [particularly in relation to the child and his/her parents/primary carers].
Loving and nurturing parents lead us to introject their positive attitudes about others, ourselves and the world in general whereas parents who are abusive or neglectful lead us to introject their negative attitudes about others, ourselves and the world in general which, in turn, creates a proneness in us to see ourselves as unlovable, the world as unsafe and threatening and others as essentially malevolent.
Furthermore, if we are unable to introject positive attitudes from our parents due to their abuse and/or neglect we will be unable to construct a positive, internal, mental representation of them to comfort us in times of stress when they are not physically present. And, because of this, we are likely to have an impaired ability to calm ourselves down and self-soothe when emotionally upset.
Our inability to effectively self-soothe, due to our failure (because of our parents’/primary carers’ abuse and/or neglect) to create for ourselves in early life a ‘soothing introject’ can mean that when feeling fearful and under threat we create instead in our minds a ‘malevolent other’ in order to help us to make sense of the situation and to rationalize it. For example, if a friend unconsciously triggers in us the feelings of rejection we felt in childhood we may demonize and devalue them because we are unable to draw on the emotional resources a ‘soothing introject’ would otherwise have provided. In this sense, the mental creation of the ‘malevolent other’ operates as a defence mechanism based upon the process of transference (‘transference refers to an individual’s displacement or projection of feelings originally directed at parents/primary carers in the individual’s childhood onto others.
Of course, if, due to our childhoods, we have developed this in-built tendency to view others as malevolent, we are likely to encounter serious problems in relation to our interpersonal relationships. To learn more about how these problems may arise, you may wish to take a look at my previously published article about how our adult relationships can be ruined by our childhood experiences.
REFERENCES:
Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1952). Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981.
Nigg, Joel., (1992) Malevolent Object Representations in Borderline Personality Disorder and Major Depression. Journal of abnormal psychology.
Although most people who are diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD) report having experienced childhood trauma, this is not invariably the case (although, of course, just because a person does not report having suffered childhood trauma does not mean s/he didn’t experience it. For example, s/he could be in denial, may have suppressed or repressed memory of the trauma or may have been too young to have stored the trauma in conscious memory).
However, it is also the case that not all of those who suffer childhood trauma go on to develop BPD. This means that there must exist individual differences which make some vulnerable to developing BPD whilst making others resilient.
In order to help cast light upon this, various diathesis-stress models have been proposed and below I summarize three of the most important ones. But, first, let’s define what is meant by a diathesis-stress model:
According to the APA Dictionary Of Psychology, a diathesis-stress model is: ‘a theory that mental and physical disorders develop from a genetic or biological predisposition for that illness (diathesis) combined with stressful conditions that play a precipitating or facilitating role. Also called a diathesis-stress hypothesis, or paradigm or theory’.
THREE IMPORTANT THEORIES ABOUT WHY CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS DEVELOP BPD (ALL BASED UPON THE DIATHESIS STRESS MODEL
The Schema-Focused Therapy Model (Young et al., 2003):
According to this theory, dysfunctional family characteristics such as rejection and deprivation prevent the child from having his/her core emotional needs met which, in turn, leads to frustration.
These frustrations then lead to the child developing ‘maladaptive schema.’ Young defined ‘maladaptive schema’ as:
‘a broad pervasive theme or pattern regarding oneself and one’s relationship with others, developed during childhood and elaborated throughout one’s lifetime, and dysfunctional to a significant degree.’
Information is then processed via the lens of these dysfunctional schemas and it is this distorted informational processing which lies at the heart the BPD sufferer’s maladaptive cognitions, behaviours and emotional reactions, according to Young’s theory.
Core emotional needs include :
the development of autonomy
the development of identity
the development of competency
the development of a sense of secure attachment to others
the freedom to express valid needs and emotions
self-control
realistic limits
spontaneity and play (Young and Klosko, 2005).
An example of a dysfunctional schema that might result from childhood trauma (e.g. rejection and betrayal) is: ‘nobody can ever be trusted.’
Children who are most at risk of being significantly psychologically damaged by the behaviours of the dysfunctional family are those children who are emotionally temperamental due to pre-existing biological/genetic influences, according to this theory.
2. Dialectical Behavior Therapy Model (Linehan, 1993a):
According to Linehan’s theory, children are at risk of going on to develop BPD if they are temperamental, highly sensitive, emotionally vulnerable and predisposed to emotional dysregulation (diathesis) AND ALSO grow up in an environment which is invalidating and dismissive/undermining of the child’s personal experience (stress).
3. Transference Focused Therapy Model (Kernberg, 1984):
According to Kernberg, children who are highly prone to negative emotions, especially aggression (diathesis) and experience certain environmental factors such as emotional frustration (stress) may, as a consequence, develop the dysfunctional defence mechanism known as ‘splitting’ and it is this that underlies the development of BPD. According to the APA Dictionary Of Psychology, ‘splitting’ is defined as:
‘…a primitive defence mechanism used to protect oneself from conflict, in which objects [i.e. person’s] provoking anxiety and ambivalence are dichotomized into extreme representations (part-objects) with either positive or negative qualities, resulting in polarized viewpoints that fluctuate in extremes of seeing the self or others as either all good or all bad.’
THERAPIES RELATED TO THE ABOVE MODELS
You may wish to read my previously published articles about the therapies relating to each of the above models which I list below:
Schema-Focused Therapy
Dialectical Behavior Therapy
Transference Focused Therapy
REFERENCES:
Kernberg, O. F. (1984). Severe personality disorders. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Linehan MM. Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 1993.
Young, J. E. , & Atkinson, T. (2003). The young atkinson mode inventory. New York, NY: Schema Therapy Institute.
Young. J.E.,Janet S. Klosko and Marjorie E. Schema Therapy: A Practitioner’s Guide Weishaar New York: Guilford Press, 2003.
Above eBook now available for immediate download on Amazon. Clickherefor further information.
A study conducted by Stepp et al. (2012) adds further evidence in support of the theory that children of mothers with borderline personality disorder (BPD) are at increased risk of developing their own psychosocial problems (i.e. impaired mental health and difficulties relating to social interaction).
The authors of the study acknowledge that, to some extent, genetics may play a part in this. Although there is not a gene for BPD, children of BPD mothers may be at increased risk of inheriting problematic characteristics such as d difficult temperament, a predisposition towards behaving impulsively and emotional dysregulation((the experiencing of intense emotions which the individual finds extremely difficult to keep under control), Such inherited characteristics may make the child at higher than average risk of developing BPD.
However, the researchers also stress the importance of environmental factors on the child’s psychosocial development, particularly parenting skills or lack thereof. They point to other research showing that BPD mothers are prone to oscillating between the extreme idealization of others and intense devaluation of them (which, as I have said in other posts on this site, is an accurate description of how my mother interacted with me, culminating in her finally throwing me out of the house when I was thirteen years old, then, not being one who could ever be accused of doing things by halves, telling anyone who would listen that I’d ‘chosen’ to go and live with my father as I was a snob and he lived in a bigger house than she did). The authors go on to say that if mothers behave in this way towards their children (i.e. fluctuating between the extreme idealization of them and the intense devaluation of them) this is likely to have a significantly injurious effect upon their (i.e. the children’s) psychosocial development.
Furthermore, it is pointed out by those who ran the study that previous research has also shown that those suffering from BPD often swing between behaving in a very hostile and controlling way towards others and behaving with passivity/coldness towards them. Again, it is observed that, if mothers behave with similar inconsistency towards their children, this too is likely to grossly impair their psychosocial development.
BPD mother’s, too, may be prone to behaviours that frighten the child.
Such mothers may also have a marked tendency to invalidate the child’s emotions (for example, in my own case, when I was very young my mother would behave in a verbally sadistic way towards me, then mock me if I became visibly upset as if I was ‘over-reacting’ or being ‘too sensitive.’
Sadly, the above list examples of dysfunctional behaviour exhibited towards children by PDD mothers is far from exhaustive.
Effects On Child :
Evidence exists to suggest that children of BPD mothers are at increased risk of anxiety, depression, interpersonal difficulties, problems with authority. problems relating to identity, and various other psychological difficulties.
Possible Interventions Which May Help To Reduce The Likelihood Of Intergenerational Transmission Of BPD And BPD-Type Symptoms:
Attachment-based interventions
Psychoeducational interventions
Skills to promote consistency in scheduling and monitoring
Skills to promote consistency in warmth and nurturing
Mindfulness-based parenting skills to facilitate behavioural and emotional consistency
REFERENCE:
Stephanie D. Stepp et al., (2011) Children of Mothers with Borderline Personality Disorder: Identifying Parenting Behaviors as Potential Targets for Intervention. Personal Disord. 2011 Jan; 3(1): 76–91. doi: 10.1037/a0023081PMCID: PMC3268672NIHMSID: NIHMS311263PMID: 22299065
eBook:
Above eBook now available for instant download from Amazon. Click herefor further details.
Many of us who have suffered significant trauma during our childhoods turn to psychotherapy as adults in an attempt to resolve our trauma-related psychological problems. Whilst there are many different kinds of therapy available for this purpose, such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), dialectical behavioural therapy (DBT) and eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR), whichever type of psychotherapy we opt for it is crucial that, if the therapy we choose is to be effective, we have a good relationship with our therapist – a relationship that includes rapport, trust, mutual respect and that evokes a feeling of being safe in the client.
Indeed, one study, undertaken by Stamoulos et al., 2016, identified the relationship between the client and the therapist to be the most important factor contributing to a successful outcome of therapy.
Rapport, Trust And Mutual Respect:
One quality in the therapist that helps to ensure a successful psychotherapeutic outcome is his/her ability to draw on his/her own past life experiences and mental health struggles in order to facilitate his/her ability to relate to, and understand, his/her client; this, in turn, can increase insight into his/her (i.e. the client’s) problems, and help in the development of a healthy rapport and alliance solidly and firmly rooted in trust and mutual respect.
Of course, it is nor necessary for the therapist to have experienced the same life experiences and psychological problems as the client, but understanding mental health problems from both the perspective of the therapist and the client enhances his/her credibility as well as his/her ability to relate to the challenging psychic journey upon which the client has bravely embarked.
To build rapport, some therapists may choose to share their own life experiences (though see below for when this may and may not be appropriate) and mental health difficulties in order to help develop the aforementioned trust with their client and to encourage the client to open up more in relation to what s/he verbally discloses about him/herself.
Furthermore, if the client is made aware that the therapist has had his/her own significant psychological difficulties in life and has gone on to overcome them, this may well inspire the client to continue with the challenge of achieving his/her own recovery and help him/her to feel less alone and isolated within the experience of his/her mental suffering.
Sharing Past Experiences With The Patient. When Is It Appropriate And When Is It Not Appropriate?
It is important that the therapist who chooses to use self-disclosure as a way of helping his/her client to get better has undergone appropriate training in the strategy. This is because it is a difficult skill to master and should be used extremely judiciously as there are times in the therapeutic process when it may be advantageous to self-disclose but also times when it may be disadvantageous. Knowing what to share with the client, when to share it, and the level of detail about past experiences to disclose (or not to disclose) to the client is also vital.
When To Share And When Not To Share:
As already mentioned, if the therapist shares his/her own past difficulties with the client it can encourage him/her (i.e. the client) to recognise that others have suffered mental health issues, too, including those whom one might not suspect have suffered such problems. In this way, if the client can be encouraged to grasp the fact that psychological difficulties are a fairly universal experience (despite whatever distorted images of success in life people may try to project of themselves, and hide behind, in public), it can help him/her to feel less of a pariah and social-outcast.
Generally speaking, though, the therapist should avoid sharing psychological difficulties and problematic life experiences that have occurred in the recent past because s/he is likely still to be too emotionally connected to them and therefore unable to analyse them objectively and rationally. Furthermore, talking about one’s own problems can obviously be therapeutic (a good thing if the client is doing the disclosing) so the therapist must be sure to steer clear of the error of disclosing information which is primarily motivated by self-interest.
It is also generally acknowledged that self-disclosure is less likely to be appropriate at the start of the therapeutic relationship and that it is important that the therapist discerningly restricts what s/he discloses to the client.
When we consider all of the above, it is clear that for many people considering a career as a psychotherapist, one’s own past mental health battles may well prove a substantial advantage, not a hindrance.
REFERENCE:
Stamoulos, Constantina & Trépanier, Lyane & Bourkas, Sophia & Bradley, Stacy & Stelmaszczyk, Kelly & Schwartzman, Deborah & Drapeau, Martin. (2016). Psychologists’ Perceptions of the Importance of Common Factors in Psychotherapy for Successful Treatment Outcomes.. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration. 26. 10.1037/a0040426.
There is increasing evidence to suggest that chronic, severe stress during childhood can lead to changes in the brain’s reward circuitry that leads individuals to prefer short term gains and immediate gratification over postponed, long-term gains and pleasures.
So, for example, rather than save up money to start a business or for an exotic holiday or undertake a diet and fitness regime to improve one’s health and fitness, an individual who has undergone chronic, early-life stress may prefer the kind of instant highs obtainable from alcohol, smoking, junk food, gambling, casual sexual encounters and narcotics.
It is hypothesized that this dysregulation of the appetites may be linked to damage (caused by chronic childhood stress) to the prefrontal cortex which, in turn, reduces its ability effectively to send signals/chemical messages that would otherwise be able to inhibit the nucleus accumbens.
The nucleus accumbens is a region of the brain that drives our sense of desire, or, to put it more simply, makes us want what we want. And, if the prefrontal cortex is unable to keep it under control due to the factors explained above, it can run amok and, potentially, turn us into chain-smoking, alcoholic, drug-addicted, morbidly obese, gamblers and sex-addicts. Clearly, quite apart from other relevant considerations, this would not be good for our physical health (indeed, statistics show that all else being equal, those who have suffered severe and protracted childhood trauma, on average, die significantly earlier than those who have had more fortunate early life experiences).
In other words, if we have suffered significant early life stress we are at increased risk of impulsivity and of seeking and obtaining immediate rewards whilst ignoring the harm and potential losses such behaviour may cause us in the long term
EXPLAINING THE PRIORITIZING OF IMMEDIATE REWARDS OVER GREATER, LONG TERM REWARDS IN EVOLUTIONARY TERMS:
Such impulsive behaviour and prioritizing of short term gains due to the effects of excessive stress and of living in the constant anticipation of danger can be explained in evolutionary terms: If our ancestors were chronically stressed and perpetually feeling under threat because their survival was in danger due to scarce resources and/or because they could at any time be attacked and killed by a predator, it would have been evolutionarily adaptive to consume as many calories as possible when the opportunity presented itself (as there was no way of knowing how long it would be until the next meal became available) and to mate as early and frequently as possible (to maximize the chances of their genes being passed on), as well as to exploit opportunities to achieve other short term ‘wins.’
Indeed, in support of this idea, there exists research (Sweiitzer et al., 2008; Gianaros et al., 2011) to suggest that those from the lowest socioeconomic echelons of society have a greater propensity than those from wealthier backgrounds to opt for immediate rewards and instant gratification at the expense of forfeiting larger, future rewards.
Gianaros, P.J. et al. Parental Education Predicts Corticostriatal Functionality in Adulthood. Cerebral Cortex, Volume 21, Issue 4, April 2011, Pages 896–910.
Sweitzer et al. (2008). Relation of individual differences in impulsivity to nonclinical emotional decision making. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 14: 878-882. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS. 14. 878-82. 10.1017/S1355617708080934.
A study conducted by Santavirta et al., (Uppsala University) and published in the journal of JAMA Psychiatry.sought to answer the question as to whether the adverse effects of childhood trauma could alter a person’s genes and, if so, whether these genetic changes could be passed on to the next generation in a damaging way.
The study involved examing the medical records of 3000 children of Finnish people who, as children, were evacuated during World War 2 to Sweden. Many were under the age of 5 years and were required to learn Swedish; all were placed with Swedish foster families. The medical records of these 3000 children of former evacuees were compared with the medical records of children of parents who were NOT evacuated as children.
FINDINGS FROM THE STUDY:
Children of parents who were evacuated during WW2 were found to have quadruple the risk of developing serious mental health conditions compared to children of the non-evacuated.
Children of mothers who were, as children, evacuated during WW2 were found to be at an elevated risk of being hospitalized for a mental health condition. However, no such elevated risk was found to be associated with children of fathers.
INTERPRETATION OF THESE FINDINGS:
The researchers who conducted the study suggested that it was probable that these findings were due to the childhood trauma experienced by those who had been evacuated as young individuals altering their gene expression (technically known as epigenetic alterations) which were subsequently inherited by their offspring, making them more susceptible to developing problems with their mental health.
However, the researchers also conceded that children of parents who were evacuated during WW2 may also have been at greater risk of developing poor mental health because the childhood trauma experienced by their parents impaired there ability to parent effectively.
Furthermore, more research will be needed in the future to help cast light upon the finding that children of formerly evacuated mothers were at greater risk of being hospitalized with a mental health condition whilst this was not found to be the case in relation to children of formerly evacuated fathers.
EVIDENCE FROM ANIMAL STUDY:
In an animal study (Franklin et al., 2010) investigating if high levels of stress in early life experienced by animals can adversely affect future generations, mice were subjected to chronic and unpredictable stress (by being separated from their mothers) for the first fortnight of their lives). As adults, these ‘traumatized’ mice, as would be expected, were found to have developed depressive symptoms.
However, it was also found that the offspring of the male, ‘traumatized’ mice also developed depressive symptoms, despite the fact that they were raised in a normal manner. The conclusion drawn by the researchers was that the third generation mice must, therefore, have inherited their depressive symptoms via the process of epigenetic transmission.
CONCLUSION:
Such research suggests that the effects of trauma can be passed on to future generations via epigenetic transmission both in animals and humans; however, research in this sphere of study is in the early stages, and more will be needed in the future.
A DEFINITION OF EPIGENETICS:the study of how alterations in how genes express themselves (e.g., as a result of early life trauma) can be inherited by the next generation. However, it should be noted that the underlying DNA structure of these affected genes is not changed (i.e., there is a change in phenotype, not genotype).
Above: It is vital parents validate their children’s feelings in relation to traumatic experiences. (Image licensed by Shuttlestock).
When the child experiences trauma, the response of the parent or primary caregiver is, of course, of vital importance to how the child copes with his/her experience, how resilient s/he is in the face of it and how badly affected s/he is by it.
THE PARENTING CAPACITY CONTINUUM :
According to Thierry, parental response to the child’s traumatic experience lies upon a continuum which he calls the parenting (or environmental) capacity continuum.
At one end of the continuum, representing parental responses to the child’s traumatic experience which are most helpful to the child, the parents’ response is described as WARM, CARING and VERBAL.
At the opposite end of the continuum, representing parental responses to the child’s traumatic experience which are most harmful to him/her, the parents’ behaviour is described as INFLICTING FURTHER PUNISHMENT ON THE CHILD FOR TALKING ABOUT HIS/HER TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCES.
Between these two extremes, parents whose response to the child’s traumatic experiences fall into the middle part of the continuum are described as BULLYING AND NOT FACILITATING PROCESSING.
Let’s look at each of these three descriptions of possible parental responses to their traumatized child’s emotional and psychological needs in a little more detail:
Parents who display warmth and care and are verbal in relation to the child’s traumatic experience:
Such parents are likely to have had a long-term, consistent, loving, nurturing and caring relationship with the child and to have developed a strong and healthy emotional bond with him/her.
Furthermore, parents whose responses lie on this end of the continuum tend to encourage the child to talk about (and, therefore, verbally process) his/her concerns, fears, worries and anxieties.
Unsurprisingly, children who receive such a parental response to their traumatic experiences are, all else being equal, the most likely to develop emotional resilience, mentally process their experiences in a healthy way and recover from the effects of their trauma.
2. Parents who inflict further punishment upon the child for talking about his/her traumatic experience:
At this end of the continuum, the child receives negative consequences from the parent if s/he talks about his/her traumatic experience or about the adverse effect it has had on him/her. Children in this situation may fear their parents and the punishment they will inflict they (i.e. the children) dare defy this imposition of silence. An example would be that of a child who has an alcoholic and abusive father but is never permitted to speak of it.
Again, unsurprisingly, a child who finds him/herself at this end of the continuum will be seriously impaired in his/her ability to process his/her traumatic experiences and, therefore, the adverse effects of these experiences, all else being equal, will be considerably more severe, and of a longer duration, than those a child at the opposite end of the spectrum (see 1, above) suffers.
3. Parents who are bullying and fail to facilitate the child in naturally processing his/her traumatic experience:
In the middle part of the continuum, parents are described by Thierry’s model as being bullying and as not helping the child to process his/her traumatic experiences. Such parents do not have a strong emotional bond with their child and might be dismissive in their attitude towards the feelings the child has in response to his/her traumatic experience. Alternatively, such parents may evenbully their children as a means of inhibiting their desire to express their feelings. Because of these kinds of parental responses, children subjected to them are discouraged from naturally processing (e.g. by talking about it or acting out their feelings through play) what they have been through.
Therefore, children represented by the middle part of the continuum are likely to find their ability to recover from their traumatic experiences significantly impaired, though not to the degree that might occur in the case of children represented by the extreme, negative end (see 2, above) of the continuum.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
If, as babies and infants, our relationship with our mother (or other primary carers) was impoverished, misattuned and lacking in security and our mother/primary carer was insufficiently attuned to our basic needs and could not be relied upon to comfort us during periods of distress then, as a form of psychological defence, we may develop, according to psychoanalytic theory, a fantasy bond with her (i.e. with our mother or 
Complex PTSD can develop in individuals who have experienced protracted and severe interpersonal trauma (parents/primary caregivers) at critical stages in their psychological development whilst growing up. As the name of the condition suggests, both its causes and effects are highly complex and interactive.
When a child is continually mistreated, s/he will inevitably conclude that s/he must be innately bad. This is because s/he has a need (at an unconscious level) to preserve the illusion that her/his parents are good; this can only be achieved by taking the view that the mistreatment is deserved.
Bruce Lipton PhD, author of the book ‘The Biology of Belief’
A study conducted by Stepp et al. (2012) adds further evidence in support of the theory that children of mothers with borderline personality disorder (BPD) are at increased risk of developing their own psychosocial problems (i.e. impaired mental health and difficulties relating to social interaction).
