A common misunderstanding is that the best way to deal with a traumatic experience is to talk about it. The idea is that this gets it ‘out of the system.’ Although this is correct to some extent, it is important to understand that some ways of discussing issues can cause trauma and not heal it. There are two types of conversation which are typical when recalling traumatic experiences; one is regressive, the other progressive.

Regressive conversations focus on the scary elements of the experience, they repeat the worst memories and focus on how bad the experience could have been. Such conversations often become panicky and followed by such repetitions ‘it’s terrible’, ‘it could have been so bad’, ‘I can’t believe how lucky we are, it could have been so much worse…’ Such conversations tend to regress people back into the negative aspects of the experience. The consequences of this can be disturbing with people surviving a traumatic event only to traumatize themselves in the aftermath. An event is not traumatic itself; it is how we think about the event that determines how traumatic we find it.

The way we think about events can be altered and changed by how we talk about them. Talking is a way of trying to work through events and understand what that event means to us. However, if we focus on the event as a very real experience which continues to control and threaten our lives, we will often start to feel the symptoms commonly associated with trauma.

Progressive conversations have a different focus. They emphasize what people did during the experience, how they responded. ‘Good luck’ is often the result of good planning, good training, or presence of mind to make an effective response. Progressive conversations are more positive about the consequences of an event and view the event as a one-off, unusual disturbance to daily life which can then return to normal.

I had a vivid experience which demonstrates these points some years ago when in Finland.  I was caught up in a series of unpleasant events that were quite beyond my control. Following the experience I wrote an account of what had happened and having completed this task felt settled and in control of myself. I had successfully got the experience out of my system. That evening my parents phoned and I described what had happened to me over the previous twenty-four hours. In describing the experience I relived it and this traumatized me. It would have been better if I had not talked with anyone.  I had inadvertently had a regressive conversation which had thrown me back into the horror of what had happened. Talking with friends and family can be helpful but can also do harm.

The whole counseling approach often risks as much as it gains by getting people to relive these experiences which can psychologically lock them into a situation that feels threatening, unsafe and out of control.

Fortunately, there are other techniques which are more useful and safer for people to use. These techniques which are based on Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) approaches avoid focusing on the event itself and deal with how the recollection of the event is remembered.  This technique has been used successfully around the world in trauma cases involving Vietnam veterans, victims of the September 11 attacks in the USA, and genocide and terrorist victims in Bosnia and Russia. The advantage of the NLP approach is that it is a simple method which gets people to mentally rehearse the event in a way that is without the emotional content. By using this technique we can remove the trauma associated with an event, thus making it emotionally neutral and safe.

While talking about events is natural and many ways positive, try to focus on the good stuff and let bygones be bygones.

Peter Campbell is an NLP Master Practitioner. He offers a full range of NLP based services to expatriates. He has personal experience working with trauma, and has worked with victims of violence, sexual abuse and earthquake survivors.

To book a consultation to start recovering from trauma contact Peter.