Children’s Peritraumatic Responses During Sexual Abuse Incidents: Exploring the Narratives of Children From Different Ethnoreligious Groups in Israel

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052110163
Author(s):  
Bella Klebanov ◽  
Carmit Katz

The peritraumatic response of children during incidents of child sexual abuse (CSA) is a neglected construct in the literature. Despite the widespread use of the fight-flight-freeze model, recent studies have shown that in the unique context of child abuse, additional peritraumatic responses could be relevant. The current mixed-methods study examined children’s peritraumatic responses to CSA. The sample consisted of 249 forensic interviews with children aged from 4 to 13 years. An initial qualitative analysis resulted in identifying various ways in which the children responded to the abuse, the children’s decision-making around these responses, as well their perceptions of their response. This analysis was followed by quantitative analyses, which explored the frequency of these peritraumatic responses and their correlation with the characteristics of the children and abuse. Six peritraumatic response categories were identified, the most common being fight, flight, and fear. Only ethnoreligious identity was significantly correlated with the fight-or-flight response, with a significantly lower frequency among Muslim and ultra-Orthodox Jewish children. Frequency of abuse and perpetrator familiarity were correlated with the frequency of the fight-or-flight response, indicating that the latter was less relevant in reoccurring incidents of abuse and with perpetrators who were family members. The findings promote the conceptualization of children’s peritraumatic responses during incidents of abuse and the realization of the crucial role of children’s ecological systems in their peritraumatic responses to incidents of abuse.

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 014002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amin Derakhshan ◽  
Mohammad Mikaeili ◽  
Ali Motie Nasrabadi ◽  
Tom Gedeon

2018 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 1404-1411
Author(s):  
Mahsa Rahmani ◽  
Mousa Mohammadnia-Afrouzi ◽  
Hamid Reza Nouri ◽  
Sadegh Fattahi ◽  
Haleh Akhavan-Niaki ◽  
...  

Science ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 270 (5236) ◽  
pp. 644-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. S. P. Jansen ◽  
X. V. Nguyen ◽  
V. Karpitskiy ◽  
T. C. Mettenleiter ◽  
A. D. Loewy

Author(s):  
Angela Duckworth ◽  

For more than a century, scientists have known that acute stress activates the fight-or-flight response. When your life is on the line, your body reacts instantly: your heart races, your breath quickens, and a cascade of hormones sets off physiological changes that collectively improve your odds of survival. More recently, scientists have come to understand that the fight-or-flight response takes a toll on the brain and the body—particularly when stress is chronic rather than acute. Systems designed to handle transient threats also react to stress that occurs again and again, for weeks, months, or years. It turns out that poverty, abuse, and other forms of adversity repeatedly activate the fight-or-flight response, leading to long-term effects on the immune system and brain, which in turn increase the risk for an array of illnesses, including asthma, diabetes, arthritis, depression, and cardiovascular disease. Pioneering neuroscientist Bruce McEwen called this burden of chronic stress “allostatic load.”


Author(s):  
David Anthony Pittaway

The Covid-19 pandemic accelerated the global trend towards spending increasing amounts of time online. I explore some of the potential negative consequences of lockdown-induced increases in time spent online, and I argue that the stressful context of the pandemic and lockdowns is exacerbated by being online beyond that which is required for essential purposes. Time spent online may increase stress levels by perpetuating the sympathetic nervous system's fight-or-flight response, draining a person’s energy and diminishing one’s ability to deal with illness. I frame the situation as one in which the pandemic context, combined with a mandatory need to be online more, forces many people into what Daniel Kahneman calls “System 1 thinking”, or “fast thinking”. I argue that digital hygiene requires the suspension of System 1 thinking, and that “philosophical perception” resonates with potential remedies in this regard.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document