Right now I am read something called " A Guide to Self Understanding". This is meant to be some sort of "help book" to victims who are having a hard time dealing with the actions that were committed against them. The book itself is great, it has a lot of information to offer people particularly those who are having mental troubles with dealing wit a traumatic experience. It teaches about looking into ones own actions to see what they having been doing differently prior to what they have been or how they were before the incident. It also goes as far as to mention so the biological issues associated with trauma. This technique is one of the many that are offered in the book to assist people and while it is a great option, I find certain things wrong with it. First and foremost, how can you say or be sure that all the biological traumas can be the same for every person who is sealing with any type of situation. To me it is almost the same as saying that if one child jumps off a roof and breaks his leg and another child who falls of his bike and scraps his knee, both should be given a Band-Aid and kiss form mama to make it feel better. It is possible that what I am saying now might be totally contradicting what I said earlier about this being helpful but I honestly feel like if that entire section was omitted then it would be much better. Or may be if the author were to explain in greater detail about the biology of trauma.
What is considered to be the biology of trauma? Where does the limits start? What gets to be put in the category of the "biology of trauma"? How do we decide who has it and who doesn't?
If these sorts of questions could get answered then maybe it would be better.
No comments:
Post a Comment