Family Trauma Case #6

The last trauma assessment case is of Jon, my maternal uncle. John is now 51. At age 46, he lost his wife to uterine sarcoma. Before her demise, they had only one child. John appeared traumatized by the loss exaggeratedly. Even though he was not diagnosed with complicated grief, Jon was abnormally depressed for seven months and had lost a significant portion of his weight. His trauma was unique he stayed too long in the denial phase before the demise. His wife was taken for palliative care because of an advanced stage of the disease but Jon was not willing to admit the diagnosis. The demise was inevitable and the complications were expected. Outcomes of the Trauma Jon indulged in alcohol use following the death of his wife. Before the death, Jon was a social drinker who would use less than two beer bottles on an occasion. As aforementioned, alcohol use is an outcome of trauma from various causes. Jon’s case is also maladaptive but would be greatly associated with his trauma from the loss. To justify his trauma, Jon’s response to the loss suggested a direct response to trauma experienced by a close family member. Sometimes, the trauma may not be directly experienced by the victim but witnessing the suffering and outcomes of the trauma justifies the occurrence.

Coping Strategy and Counselling

Initially, Jon showed self-controlling as a coping strategy. Stanisławski (2019) interprets self-controlling as the regulation of one’s feelings and actions. His coping can also be seen as confrontive coping. Confrontive coping involves aggressive attempts to alter the traumatic situation (Stanisławski, 2019). His drinking escalated quickly and aggressively. The end goal was to make his emotional complications go away. His family offered necessary support before realizing that Jon was not holding up well anymore. He received cognitive-based counseling that yielded positive outcomes in her thoughts and emotions. His drinking gradually improved and he no longer takes alcohol.

Conclusion

The assessment of my family, both nuclear and extended family, has shown varying degrees of trauma and related outcomes. The degrees of coping are also varied and complicated. Most assessed trauma situations involved the adults who experienced trauma directly or indirectly. The trauma in children seemed to have taken an indolent course but the outcomes were out of proportion. Matt and Ryan are children who suffered health injury and school bullying respectively. Riley, 32, suffered physical trauma, Bob, 83, is a veteran, and Jon 51 suffered trauma related to bereavement and grief response. The etiologies were different but the need for intervention was seen in all cases. Special incidences of trauma were also noted in this assessment. The role of the family in providing social and emotional stability has been appreciated. In Ryan’s case, the problem was detected by the teacher. The role of the family was not evident in providing support for him. School bullying can yield severe traumatic incidence but the victim may try to conceal the emotionally traumatic responses to themselves. Ryan’s response would also be considered social phobia at first. Missing the school would have suggested other reasons. Further research is needed to scientifically delineate social anxiety or phobias and child coping strategies or traumatic responses to school bullying. Understanding the reasons for traumatic responses would promote early intervention and improved coping with these situations

References