« Beliefs about feelings | HomePage | Objectophiles »
Wednesday, 09 July 2008
Psychological damage of the law
I attended a workshop a few weeks ago which in essence was a presentation of the latest research on child sexual abuse. One of the things stated was that if an incident of abuse becomes a police matter then it is quite likely that the child will be psychologically worse off at the end of it. The process inevitably retraumatizes the child no matter how careful one is. I find it hard to think of a larger clash between an individual’s needs and society’s needs. It is psychologically better for the child not to get involved in the legal process and of course society (others) may suffer if they do not.
However I think one can expand this to all people and the psychology of the legal process. I saw it again on TV last night. A man had been murdered and the murderer had been found guilty. The press interviewed the victim’s mother and sister outside the court. They were venomous. The hatred and anger that was coming out of them was disarming and you could see the depth of it in their faces. The legal process is usually psychologically damaging to those who get involved in it such as these two women.
You don't want to end up with anger like this, or its "you loose".
When an event happens to you and you have a feeling the goal is to express the feeling as much as is needed and then drop the feeling. Feelings like anything else can become habitual. The more a person does, thinks or feels something the more habitual it will become. This is one way in which the legal process makes people worse of psychologically. The man had been murdered 2 years ago and those two women were still furiously angry. This means that the anger was very habitual to them now. It was by this time deeply ingrained in their personality and thus it would take considerable effort and time for them to drop the anger. Of course the longer they have the anger the more psychological deterioration they will experience.
My counsel would be to distance yourself psychologically from the legal process as it is a retraumatizing process. Those two women on TV are now worse off than before the trial. Their anger is now stimulated yet again and even more ingrained into the personality.
The other thing which is imperative is to not link your emotional state to the outcome of a trial. One has no control over the outcome of a trial and thus one does not want their psychological well being linked to it. Again it seems a distancing process would be most wise. To make the outcome of the trail as psychologically unimportant as one can.
Taking on the legal process.
Why attend the trial? You hear some people say they did it for their son. Well that is not true as the son is dead and knows nothing about it. If you were murdered would you want your loved ones to attend the trial knowing that it is likely that they would be retraumatized by it. I would not want mine to. Some say they attend the trial for final closure. That is not true either as one can do that in the counselling room. Why wait often years for the final closure and thus it becomes more and more ingrained in the personality and one is worse and worse off.
Weather it be a small thing like being cut off in the traffic or a big thing like attending the trial of your son’s murderer the psychological processes are the same. The more you hang onto the feelings the more psychological damage you do to your self. Trials are usually retraumatizing as the entire legal process can be. The more you get involved with it the more likely you will be worse off. Indeed with children there is strong scientific evidence to support this view.
If you have been traumatized once, why stick this in front of your face again when you don't have to?
Vengeance is a normal human emotion and is by and large an angry process. To use the legal process as a means to get your sense of revenge seems most unwise. That can readily be done in the counselling room where the likelihood of dropping the vengeful anger eventually is far greater. That is the best psychological outcome for any emotion one experiences - drop it.
Graffiti
19:15 Permalink | Comments (21) | Email this
Comments
I would go to the trial if my partner was murdered and they got the person.
Why?
Off the top of my head:
To stand witness.
To see justice.
Ability to speak out publicly.
Stop someone else going through what your partner went through.
Empowerment.
Though I can see how it could very well be psychologically damaging.
Posted by: kahless | Wednesday, 09 July 2008
Hi Kahless
What if the person got off, or they got a suspended sentence. Would that be empowering and would it leave you with strong feelings that then they just had to be dealt with in addition to all the other stuff you are coping with.
If you stand witness the goal of the defence is to make you look like a liar, unreliable and basically an all out bad person. How would one feel after that
Tony
Cheers
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Wednesday, 09 July 2008
Hi Tony,
interesting; got to shoot back off to work but I will come back tonight and answer your questions. Though probably hard to know unless you are in that situation.
Maybe if they were guilty and they got off then I would kill them? Yet have I that capability?
And I meant stand witness as to watch and stare at the defendant, rather than get up and testify!
Posted by: kahless | Wednesday, 09 July 2008
I have absolutely no idea what I would do in that situation. I suspect I would stay away so as to not to have to relive the situation and possibly hear all the gory details. I think that would make me feel worse. It would make any pain and suffering more real. And I don't see any point in that for me personally nor for the grief process. Although I do know for some people, those details are very important. so that might be part of their grieving, is to know the whys and wherefores of their mate's death.
Posted by: gezunda | Wednesday, 09 July 2008
That is a good point Gez,
I agree that some people want some of the details and it can assist. There must be some other way of getting them than attending a trial. Also in a trail you have no idea what details are going to be given and thus you can't get the details to stop should that be your wish half way through.
Also in a trial you often have to wait long periods of time to get the details. It is that slowness of the law that I think can contribute greatly to the damage psychologically that the law can do.
Graffiti
Posted by: Tony | Wednesday, 09 July 2008
Yah, point taken, Graffiti. You have no control over what facts you get and when you get them. If you are getting them from a doctor for instance, you can say, enough for now, and then come back later for more if you need them.
Also waiting years for the details - I doubt that would really help psychologically cause I reckon by that stage you would be starting some sort of magical belief about what the trial will give you i.e. closure, information, revenge etc.
Posted by: gezunda | Wednesday, 09 July 2008
What I said earlier was crap.
Justice is a rare commodity.
I think you are right, if you can, stay away.
Posted by: kahless | Thursday, 10 July 2008
I would think it would be so hard to drop that anger against someone who had harmed a person who you were close too. I wonder how many actually ever do. I would think there would always be some level of anger there.
I'm not sure about being at the trial. I'm one of those people who needs to know why but I doubt you'd get any answers at a trial anyway.
Cheers.......Kazza
Posted by: KazzaB | Thursday, 10 July 2008
I think you make a good point Kahless,
To my mind people need to stop thinking about the law and justice. it is a real trap to link the two.
The law is the best long term way we have come up with to clean up a mess created by someone. And that is a good thing. But in your own mind don't let justice (or more correctly vengence) get caught in it or one can suffer psychologically. To try and get your revenge by the law to my mind is a risky and dubious pursuit.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, 10 July 2008
Yes KazzaB,
Maybe sometimes things happen to us that are just so big and impactful that one could never get over it fully in the psychological sense.
One of those we see everyday in counselling is the mother child attachment. How many people ever fully resolve the issues from that?
Cheers
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, 10 July 2008
I have recent experience of how traumatising and scary the legal process can be. It exaggerates, detaches and disempowers.
There are those who get angry, feel out of control and want to punish where they can. Because they can.
When I studied law, we did a course in jurisprudence, the philosophy of law. Intriguing. And if lawyers stopped to ask themselves and their client(s) a few questions before raising an action, much heartache could be spared. Questions such as:
Is this going to promote trust and intimacy?
Who have these people become to each other?
If I/they had a month to live, would I/they still raise this action?
How could forgiveness be symbolised or ritualised before the trial begins?
When you leave the court room after the trial, what wisdom would you be able to give to your present day self?
Have I worked on myself in enough depth, to present this case in a true, even handed and fair manner?
What is the cost to those surrounding the trial?
Letting go of anger in the therapy room is a powerful process with lasting benefits.
Posted by: Hullaballoo | Friday, 11 July 2008
Tony,
I went to go back to an earlier post from May and comments were disabled. Is this a blogspirit thing or would you prefer us not to comment on older stuff?
Kahless.
Posted by: kahless | Friday, 11 July 2008
Hi Kahless,
You are right!
I was unaware that that was the case but it seems the comments are disabled.
I will ask Mr Blogspirit about it.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 11 July 2008
Hello Hullaballoo,
Thanks for your comments and it does seem that you have had a torrid time indeed.
I have had very few "brushes with the law " so to speak the main one being when I got divorced and you have to in this country. You don't have a choice if you want a complete separation.
I often say to my clients who are going through the same it is much cheaper to get angry at your ex in a counsellors office than it is in a lawyers office. I must admit I do wonder how much lawyers feed their clients anger in such circumstances.
Take care
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 11 July 2008
Tony,
please indulge me.
When you say you will ask Mr Blogspirit, I conjure up images of you writing an email starting
Bonjour Mr Blogspirit...
is that the case?
Posted by: kahless | Friday, 11 July 2008
That is right kahless,
How on earth do you spell "quassant"?
I was going to try and be funny but I can't spell it.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 11 July 2008
Yeah Kahless,
So when i go there i comment here. But Ken helped me to realise that i needed to acknowledge that i was commenting on a past post and to perhaps say which one. I was just jumping on and saying what i was thinking about some past thing i just read without giving reference to what i was talking about. I have tried to comment on past posts before. I just assumed everyone knew they were disabled.
And the difference between justice and the law - absolutely! Gosh! Chalk and cheese.
Tony,
I don't love to go to funerals of people i know well or even for friends. If they ask spacifically then i will go to be with them but other wise i just stay away. But to go to a trial? I don't see why i would bother.
Hullaballoo,
What a great comment! Thank you so much for posting that here.
roses
Posted by: roses | Friday, 11 July 2008
Tony?
I just found out that i passed the last subject! I passed it. Like - passed.
roses
Posted by: roses | Friday, 11 July 2008
Hi Roses,
that is wonderful news and I am not surprised at all. Well done to you Roses
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 11 July 2008
Congrats Roses.
Posted by: kahless | Friday, 11 July 2008
Congrats Roses. I had no doubt you would.
Posted by: gezunda | Friday, 11 July 2008