¶ … psychological trauma, and how does she relate it to repression? What evidence does she supply in support of her claim? Do you agree with her stance on this basic issue?
Slater, in her usual creative style, believes the current methods of dealing with psychological trauma to be ineffective in regards to the identifying a root cause. In fact, Slater believes the act of talking about a traumatic occurrence in an individual's life actually exacerbates the problem. Recollecting past events through constant conversation, Slater believes, does nothing to address the root cause of the problem. Further, by talking incessantly about this traumatic experience, patients may actually become more ill than they otherwise were. This is particularly important when patient are asks to revisit controversial areas in their lives in order to rid themselves of the traumatic event altogether. Slater is very quick to point out that conversation actually, emblazon fear within the brain. This fear is becomes more profound the sooner an individual is forced to articulate the events that occurred in the past. Slater however, claims that repression of the event altogether does more for the client in regards to coping with traumatic events in their lives. Repression allows individuals to simply forget the event ever occurred. They avoid the conversations and the recollection of the traumatic event. Through a study conducted by Karni Ginzburg in conjunction with 116...
Those heart attack victims who constantly processed their experience faired considerably worse than their repressor counterparts. Only 7% of those that repressed the event developed post-traumatic stress disorder. However, 19% of those that constantly processed the event developed post traumatic stress disorder. As such, those who repress their own traumatic events are naturally able to avoid the subsequent disorders that usually occur.
I partially agree with Slater in regards to her argument of repression. Those individuals are who naturally good at repressing their feelings, are better able to cope with stress, I agree. However, I believe those who are repressors are naturally better able to deal with traumatic events as they see them differently altogether. Repressors have different perceptions of stressful events and are therefore better able to cope. As the article indicates, when society sees a large, consuming fire, a repressor only sees a small flame. As such these individuals are simply better "equipped" to handle traumatic events as they simple view the world differently. Those who do not have this capability however, would not perform well repressing their concerns regarding a traumatic event. These individuals eventually release their pent up emotion in unproductive methods. This release occurs in society when a seemingly quiet, non-confrontational, repressor…
