Making meaning of trauma in psychosis

Open Access
Authors
  • N. van Sambeek
  • G. Franssen ORCID logo
  • S. van Geelen
  • F. Scheepers
Publication date 03-11-2023
Journal Frontiers in Psychiatry
Article number 1272683
Volume | Issue number 14
Number of pages 18
Organisations
  • Faculty of Humanities (FGw) - Amsterdam Institute for Humanities Research (AIHR) - Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis (ASCA)
Abstract
Background: Finding new meaning and identity in the aftermath of trauma has been identified as a key process of mental health recovery. However, research indicates that this meaning-making process is compromised in people with psychosis. Considering the high prevalence, yet under-treatment of trauma in people with psychosis, it is urgent to gain insight into how their meaning-making process can be supported.

Aim: To gain insight into how people with psychosis make meaning of trauma and identify barriers and facilitators in their meaning-making process.

Methods: Qualitative inquiry of N = 21 interviews transcripts from the Dutch Psychiatry Storybank. We included interviews of people who (a) lived through multiple psychotic episodes, and (b) spontaneously addressed traumatic experiences in a low-structured interview. Storyline analysis was performed to gain insight into the meaning-making of trauma within their self-stories. Psychosocial conceptualizations of narrative identity were used to inform the analysis. A data-validation session with four experts-by-experience was organized to check and improve the quality of our analysis.

Results: We identified four different story types: (1) Psychiatry as the wrong setting to find meaning; (2) The ongoing struggle to get trauma-therapy; (3) Exposure to trauma as a threat to a stable life, and (4) Disclosure as the key to resolving alienation. Each story type comprises a different plot, meaning of trauma withing the self-story, (lack of) integration and barriers and facilitators in the meaning-making process. Overall, barriers in the meaning-making process were mostly situated within mental healthcare and stigma-related. People felt particularly hindered by pessimistic ideas on their capacity to develop self-insight and cope with distress, resulting in limited treatment options. Their process of adaptive meaning-making often started with supportive, non-judgmental relationships with individuals or communities that offered them the safety to disclose trauma and motivated them to engage in a process of self-inquiry and growth.

Conclusion: The outcomes illuminate the social context of the meaning-making challenges that people with psychosis face and illustrate the devastating influence of stigma. Our outcomes offer guidance to remove barriers to adaptive meaning-making in people with psychosis, and can help clinicians to attune to differences in the meaning-making of trauma
Document type Article
Note With supplementary file
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1272683
Downloads
fpsyt-14-1272683 (Final published version)
Supplementary materials
Permalink to this page
Back