PTSD used to be shell shocked?

[Alfred001]

I just heard someone say that people used to refer to people with PTSD as shell shocked and that this was supposedly changed on grounds o political correctness or sensitivity, is that right?

 

If so, what is the problem with shell shocked, what was the reasoning for why it needed to be changed?

[Delta1212]

"Shell shocked" was called that because it was believed to be caused by physical trauma to the brain from being around exploding shells.

 

As we now know that isn't the case, it's a rather inaccurate term.

 

So less "political correctness" and more just "correctness."

Edited April 24, 2016 by Delta1212

[Alfred001]

You sure there wasn't some PC aspect to the renaming?

[zapatos]

Tell us what evidence you have that it does have some PC aspect. That should help the discussion.

 

And if there was some PC aspect, as you suggesting that is somehow bad?

[rangerx]

"Shell shocked" was called that because it was believed to be caused by physical trauma to the brain from being around exploding shells.

 

As we now know that isn't the case, it's a rather inaccurate term.

 

So less "political correctness" and more just "correctness."

 

Yes. Traumatic brain injury and emotional distress are very different things.

 

"Shell shocked" was borne of WW1 (and perhaps the US Civil War) when high explosives were used in artillery. It's origin was probably considered more of a trench term than a medical condition.

 

I have a career history as a fire officer and air/sea rescue specialist. During my tenure, we referred to it as critical incident stress. However, it was realized different crews reacted differently when being debriefed.

 

For example, the deaths of children seemed to affect rescuers with children differently than those who are single. I have no biological children myself, but have raised a few. Hence, the death of a child is generally the same as the victims of any age. However, I reacted differently to the victims of crimes than my peers did. Negligence is one thing and intentional harm is something yet again. I was often reminded that you can't fix stupid with splints and pressure dressings unless measures are taken toward education or legislation. A task for other professions beyond our scope.

 

We all deal with stress in our lifestyles, but some things are harder to shake than others. This gave rise to the notion of a disorder in individuals as opposed to something that affects everyone equally.

 

Not so much anymore, but in the days gone by, I've heard mixed comments from veterans about PTSD. Some claimed it doesn't exist other than those with issues need to grow a pair and count their blessings. It's was usually followed up with statements like "I was never debriefed and I'm fine". What they didn't realize though, they were actually debriefed in many cases albeit informally. In the early war days when soldiers were discharged, they returned to base for a period, then boarded a ship with numerous others for a long voyage home. During this period they had someone to talk with while sharing common experiences and upholding camaraderie. In modern times this process changed, particularly the war in Viet Nam, when PTSD was not necessarily recognized as a syndrome. Soldiers were discharged and put on the first commercial jet home and within a day or so were plonked into the middle of society with the expectation to do well... and little else. This often compounded issues rather than dispelling them.

 

Black humor is generally shunned in public circles, but in the rescue service it's actually beneficial when used discretely within the circle. It brings levity and can have a calming effect while moving forward. The reactions are observed by each member of the crew. When someone fails to react in a positive way, a PTSD case is observed and noted. Resources can then be suggested and treatment undertaken before it's manifested in other ways.

Edited April 29, 2016 by rangerx

[Alfred001]

Tell us what evidence you have that it does have some PC aspect. That should help the discussion.

 

And if there was some PC aspect, as you suggesting that is somehow bad?

 

Regarding the evidence, read the first post.

 

I'm not suggesting anything.

 

 

 

Yes. Traumatic brain injury and emotional distress are very different things.

 

"Shell shocked" was borne of WW1 (and perhaps the US Civil War) when high explosives were used in artillery. It's origin was probably considered more of a trench term than a medical condition.

 

I have a career history as a fire officer and air/sea rescue specialist. During my tenure, we referred to it as critical incident stress. However, it was realized different crews reacted differently when being debriefed.

 

For example, the deaths of children seemed to affect rescuers with children differently than those who are single. I have no biological children myself, but have raised a few. Hence, the death of a child is generally the same as the victims of any age. However, I reacted differently to the victims of crimes than my peers did. Negligence is one thing and intentional harm is something yet again. I was often reminded that you can't fix stupid with splints and pressure dressings unless measures are taken toward education or legislation. A task for other professions beyond our scope.

 

We all deal with stress in our lifestyles, but some things are harder to shake than others. This gave rise to the notion of a disorder in individuals as opposed to something that affects everyone equally.

 

Not so much anymore, but in the days gone by, I've heard mixed comments from veterans about PTSD. Some claimed it doesn't exist other than those with issues need to grow a pair and count their blessings. It's was usually followed up with statements like "I was never debriefed and I'm fine". What they didn't realize though, they were actually debriefed in many cases albeit informally. In the early war days when soldiers were discharged, they returned to base for a period, then boarded a ship with numerous others for a long voyage home. During this period they had someone to talk with while sharing common experiences and upholding camaraderie. In modern times this process changed, particularly the war in Viet Nam, when PTSD was not necessarily recognized as a syndrome. Soldiers were discharged and put on the first commercial jet home and within a day or so were plonked into the middle of society with the expectation to do well... and little else. This often compounded issues rather than dispelling them.

 

Black humor is generally shunned in public circles, but in the rescue service it's actually beneficial when used discretely within the circle. It brings levity and can have a calming effect while moving forward. The reactions are observed by each member of the crew. When someone fails to react in a positive way, a PTSD case is observed and noted. Resources can then be suggested and treatment undertaken before it's manifested in other ways.

 

So there WAS the attitude of "you're being a pussy?"

 

But that's just general attitude to PTSD, that's not something to do with "shell shocked".

[Delta1212]

"Shell shock" like "crazy" was a bit of a catch-all term for a lot of things, some which were physiological, some psychological and in some cases potentially just personality issues.

 

It didn't have a clear grounding in medical science, which wasn't very good when it came to mental health at the time in any case, and subsequent efforts to classify the problems people deal with have been somewhat more rigorous and specific in their diagnoses.

 

I'm sure to some extent that people who concern themselves with such things see "shell shock" as a problematic term generally, in part because of the incorrect implication about the source of the problem and the negative associated connotations the phrase has that probably don't do anyone who has the label applied to them any favors.

 

But mostly it's just not a medically useful term and the replacement terminology (including PTSD, among other things) refer to conditions that are better described and understood than "shell shock" was.

[zapatos]

 

Regarding the evidence, read the first post.

 

 

 

So, no evidence. Thanks.

[Phi for All]

So there WAS the attitude of "you're being a pussy?"

 

I'd say it seems in line with most normal reactions to a psychological evaluation. Soldiers get wounded and recover, but nobody wants to think they might have something wrong mentally. Wounded physically, you usually get your weapons and your respect back quickly. But a mental problem means you probably get crayons at most, and nobody knows how to deal with you. You may never be allowed to be a soldier again.

 

I have no idea why you feel it's important whether or not what they call it is "PC". Are you trying to minimize how problematic this disorder is? Are you trying to say that people with PTSD are being coddled with this terminology? Why does it surprise you that terms become more detailed as more is known about a certain phenomena? It seems fairly natural to me.

[Velocity_Boy]

Yes. Traumatic brain injury and emotional distress are very different things.

 

"Shell shocked" was borne of WW1 (and perhaps the US Civil War) when high explosives were used in artillery. It's origin was probably considered more of a trench term than a medical condition.

 

I have a career history as a fire officer and air/sea rescue specialist. During my tenure, we referred to it as critical incident stress. However, it was realized different crews reacted differently when being debriefed.

 

For example, the deaths of children seemed to affect rescuers with children differently than those who are single. I have no biological children myself, but have raised a few. Hence, the death of a child is generally the same as the victims of any age. However, I reacted differently to the victims of crimes than my peers did. Negligence is one thing and intentional harm is something yet again. I was often reminded that you can't fix stupid with splints and pressure dressings unless measures are taken toward education or legislation. A task for other professions beyond our scope.

 

We all deal with stress in our lifestyles, but some things are harder to shake than others. This gave rise to the notion of a disorder in individuals as opposed to something that affects everyone equally.

 

Not so much anymore, but in the days gone by, I've heard mixed comments from veterans about PTSD. Some claimed it doesn't exist other than those with issues need to grow a pair and count their blessings. It's was usually followed up with statements like "I was never debriefed and I'm fine". What they didn't realize though, they were actually debriefed in many cases albeit informally. In the early war days when soldiers were discharged, they returned to base for a period, then boarded a ship with numerous others for a long voyage home. During this period they had someone to talk with while sharing common experiences and upholding camaraderie. In modern times this process changed, particularly the war in Viet Nam, when PTSD was not necessarily recognized as a syndrome. Soldiers were discharged and put on the first commercial jet home and within a day or so were plonked into the middle of society with the expectation to do well... and little else. This often compounded issues rather than dispelling them.

 

Black humor is generally shunned in public circles, but in the rescue service it's actually beneficial when used discretely within the circle. It brings levity and can have a calming effect while moving forward. The reactions are observed by each member of the crew. When someone fails to react in a positive way, a PTSD case is observed and noted. Resources can then be suggested and treatment undertaken before it's manifested in other ways.

 

Good post and mostly accurate.

 

I am a combat vet. I did two tours in OIF as an Army 19kilo, which to you guys is a tank driver.

 

I don't know any vets who think ALL PTSD claims are bullshit, but I CAN tell you there is alot of fraud going on out there today. I would reckon that one third, at least, of the kids who have gotten 100% PTSD claims from the VA over the past decade are in fact malingerers gaming the system. The monies btw are substantial. The VA pays $3800 a month for life to a PTSD certified vet.

 

Part of the reason is that it is much much easier to get declared as a PTSD sufferer now than before, as say in the Vietnam era. You wouldn't believe how easy!!

[Alfred001]

 

So, no evidence. Thanks.

 

 

You're not very smart.

 

 

 

I'd say it seems in line with most normal reactions to a psychological evaluation. Soldiers get wounded and recover, but nobody wants to think they might have something wrong mentally. Wounded physically, you usually get your weapons and your respect back quickly. But a mental problem means you probably get crayons at most, and nobody knows how to deal with you. You may never be allowed to be a soldier again.

 

I have no idea why you feel it's important whether or not what they call it is "PC". Are you trying to minimize how problematic this disorder is? Are you trying to say that people with PTSD are being coddled with this terminology? Why does it surprise you that terms become more detailed as more is known about a certain phenomena? It seems fairly natural to me.

 

I'm just curious as to whether that was the motivation for the change. It doesn't surprise me, like I said in the OP, I heard someone say that it was changed for PC reasons and I was curious as to whether that was true.

[Phi for All]

I'm just curious as to whether that was the motivation for the change. It doesn't surprise me, like I said in the OP, I heard someone say that it was changed for PC reasons and I was curious as to whether that was true.

 

I think there's a danger in dismissing anything because it may have been motivated by concern for the way it comes across to people. Too often, a defensive atmosphere created by insensitivity could have been easily avoided by a better turn of phrase. I look at this as the good side of "spin". It's manipulative, but with good intentions.

 

It seems clear in this case that the new term is more accurately descriptive, while also encompassing more types of conditions. A better, more reality-based explanation than we had before, the goal of science.