Quote from elkpark
That was my first thought when I saw the title of the post -- I'm in psych, and it's my understanding that the entire CISM model had been discredited a number of years ago.
Yep, along with a study, several years ago, published in the AJP that showed "a strong trend" towards the ineffectiveness of long-term PTSD counselling. Suriviors of (and responders to) the OKC bombing were one of the cohorts, as I recall.
Informal is better. If it is mandatory, people with "adequate" coping skills are unlikely to have patience for those who do not. Those who lack the skills will feel threatened by those who do, and will resent the "callousness".
What you are actually trying to discover/nurture is survivors' mindset, which is well addressed in the psychology of economics, athletic performance and "extreme performers" surveys. Essentially, if survivors perpetually recount the traumatic experience, but do not/are not encouraged to find an integrative model in which they are able to assess objectively, and say, "X happened. I did not plan for/observe these indicators. I will
in the future. I can change my day-to-day outlook to be more aware of potential risks. If my preparations are overwhelmed/inadequate, I have an alternate plan and the means to implement it." Without a resolution that incorpoarates the event into a learning model, the trauma is repeated, because the individual recognizes the danger(s), but is unable to formulate a plan for survival. It applies to everything from having a baby to buying/selling stock. Most people just do not look at the process as a decisional framework, with multiple