Reflections on recent and recurrent news regarding the Palestinian genocide and Hamas attack: Part 1- Trauma Stewardship
*I am crossing out the words, “the longstanding Israel-Palestine conflict,” but I’m not erasing it as I believe in being accountable for my mistakes. I’m crossing it out as I’ve learned how inaccurate and harmful I was in using those words. I’ve learned from other therapists like Asma Abu Dahab, that using these words is to imply that there are two equal sides fighting. The truth is very different as the state of Israel has been the oppressor while Palestine/Palestinians have been the oppressed. These two states are not on an even plain field.
I've been reflecting a lot on the Hamas attack, the longstanding Israel-Palestine conflict and the genocide happening against the Palestinians. I feel so angry and sad at the fact that not more was/is being done to proactively protect people and I feel helpless to change it as quickly as needed. In recognizing my and others’ responses, I thought of the whole range of autonomic stress responses that human-beings innately tend towards when facing trauma (e.g. “fight, flight, freeze, fawn” or “fight, flight, submit, collapse, or attach” depending on what your reference is).
*Trauma is defined as any event that exceeds one’s ability to cope, given our internal and external resources at the time.* A succinct definition that comes from a trauma-informed, body-oriented therapy called Somatic Experiencing (SE), defines trauma as, “anything that is too much, too soon, and/or too fast.”
Fight refers to our instinct to fight back when under threat; this can include any response that involves direct action. Flight refers to our instinct to run away from a threat; this could look like trying to ignore what’s happening around us. Freeze refers to our instinct to freeze up/to become immobile because we feel completely helpless to do anything else at the moment (in this response, our nervous systems are highly activated in preparation for switching to our fight or flight response again if/when possible). Fawn or submit refers to our instincts to try and appease whomever/whatever is threatening us. Collapse refers to our instinct to completely shut down so that whatever threats are being imposed upon us are out of our conscious awareness and therefore, hopefully, less hurtful to us. Dissociation is a key feature of this response. Attach refers to our instincts to persistently seek help from others in order to protect ourselves from possibly being alone/abandoned during a crisis (Fisher, J., (2022-2023)).
During these moments of heightened stress, our most critical need is to feel/be safe again.
In the book, “Trauma Stewardship: An Everyday Guide to Caring for Self While Caring for Others” by Laura Van Dernoot Lipsky (2007), the author speaks to this point as she explains the concept of trauma stewardship. “Trauma stewardship” is defined as “a daily practice through which individuals, organizations, and societies tend to the hardship, pain, or trauma experienced by humans, other living beings, or our planet itself (p. 11).” She goes to explain that this includes ways we can live our own lives in ways that can help us sustain the capacity to continue doing the work we do (Lipsky, 2007, p.11)
These descriptions remind me a lot of what is often referred to today as “self-care.” (In a future post, I will be sharing my reflections on “self-care” as it’s been used in recent years).
Self-care then, whether it is in the form of taking a break from the news, taking a walk/engaging in light exercise, or spending time with trusted loved ones, is arguably essential—not just an excess. It helps sustain our capacity to fully participate in the different helping/caregiving roles we play, including crisis response roles.
It can feel selfish or cowardly to even think about, let alone put self-care into practice. After all, it is important to consider the social justice concepts of equity, which prioritizes allocating resources proportionately to what people need (which does not mean allocating the same amount/type of resources). Taking this into account, it’s very understandable why we might think that it’s inappropriate for us to even ask to have time for self-care because other people are in greater need at this time.
So where does that leave us? Is it really a choice between helping ourselves even if it means sacrificing other’s needs OR on the opposite end, helping others even if it means sacrificing our own needs? Is there really no alternative?
In closing here, I’d like to share a short response to this question that will hopefully be helpful:
We do not have to choose between ourselves or others. If we find ourselves doing that, this is likely a sign that we are experiencing a trauma exposure response. When we take care of ourselves with the intention of resuming taking care of others at a later time, this is different than taking care of ourselves to no end/to avoid problems that we actually care about addressing.
Until next time, please be gentle with yourselves,
Gina
Sources:
Fisher, J. (2022-2023), Retrieved from Trauma-informed Stabilization Treatment Training).
Lipsky, L.V.D. (2009). Trauma Stewardship An Everyday Guide to Caring for Self While Caring for Others. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
If you’re curious to learn more about my specialties and what it would be like to work with me, you can check out the links below: