E03: Critical Reading – darnell18

Unlike PTSD, secondary traumatic stress doesn’t have its own entry in the DSM, though the manual does take note of it, as do many peer-reviewed studies and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

-The author claims that secondary stress does not have its own entry in the DSM, but nevertheless, other sources do take note of it. The claim shows that while it may not be a primary medical concern along the lines of first-hand PTSD, it is still an important topic that needs to be discussed.

Symptoms start at depression and alienation, including the “compassion fatigue” suffered by social workers and trauma counselors.

-The claim here is that symptoms of PTSD start at depression and alienation. A slightly different, yet related claim immediately after is that an additional symptom includes “compassion fatigue”. These claims are factual based off of observations and analysis of those who suffer from PTSD. As true as these claims may be, the second one about compassion fatigue is not explained. Given, I can interpret it in a way that makes sense to me, but not every reader may be able to provide a definition for what compassion fatigue is with the context clues provided.

But some spouses and loved ones suffer symptoms that are, as one medical journal puts it, “almost identical to PTSD except that indirect exposure to the traumatic event through close contact with the primary victim of trauma” is the catalyst.

-This complex claim states that the spouses and loved ones of victims that suffer from PTSD go through similar feelings and side effects as the victim simply because of their close contact with the person. This is a well assembled causal claim. PTSD being “passed on” to somebody in this scenario is like a domino effect. Neither person would have it if both of them did not go to war, and if it was a person of lesser significance, it also may not hit that close to home and effect the person since it would not have to be dealt with on a daily basis.

Basically your spouse’s behavior becomes the “T” in your own PTSD.

-This claim is stating that a PTSD victim’s spouse will begin to behave in a way that is traumatic. The quality of this claim is subpar because their behavior could very well also become the “S” in your own PTSD (stressed or stressful). I also just see the claim as reaching to attempt to pull off a play on words of some sort. It could definitely be considered true or accurate, but I just see it as a little bit shallow and too open for interpretation.

If sympathy for Caleb is a little lacking, you can imagine what little understanding exists for Brannan.

-This claim is saying that people lack sympathy for Caleb’s PTSD, who was actually at war, therefore significantly less sympathy or understanding is shown for Brannan, who did not go through what Caleb went through. This is a bit of a trickle-down effect in that fact that if a person does not have sympathy or understanding for a man who was on the battlefield, then they will have a significantly less amount of compassion toward the spouse of that person who was at home.