Tanielian and Stein (2006) write about the impacts on and needs for addressing the psychological impacts of terrorism. While terrorism is an act which is marked by physical destruction, loss of life, economic collapse, violence, and political aims, it is also intended to provoke fear in the population. It has psychological effects additionally through targeting “the social capital of a nation – cohesion, values, and ability to function. Therefore, successful counterterrorism and national continuity depend on effective interventions to sustain the psychological, behavioral, and social functioning of the nation and its citizens” (Tanielian & Stein, 2006, p.690). However, this aspect is woefully under addressed and not well understood.
Emotional and psychological responses to terrorism, even by those not immediately affected or witness to the event itself, can be present from no reaction at all, to mild symptoms, to development of severe mental illnesses (Ursano, Morganstein, & West, 2020). Distress reactions include changes in sleep, reduced sense of safety, isolation and avoidance, and irritability and distraction. Health risks include increased behaviors of smoking, alcohol, becoming overly involved in work or other tasks, separation anxiety, and fears about traveling nationally, internationally, or even outside one’s neighborhood or home. Psychiatric disorders can include anxiety, PTSD, acute traumatic stress, depression, and complex grief. In others, or in initial stages of a “honeymoon period” following an attack in those who later develop symptoms of mental distress or illness, there may be a sense of resiliency, of bonding, of heroism, and optimism. There can also be a reaction of anger and wanting retaliation. This can lead to pressure to develop harsher policies toward a broad group perceived to be associated with an attack, such as in the case of anti-Muslim policies in the U.S. following 9/11 and leading to the “Muslim ban” implemented by former President Trump (Haner, et al., 2019). This can also lead to a reaction of building of a group identity, framing those with any perceived association with the attack as bad and devaluing their humanity, and leading to the formation of extremist groups, further escalating conflict (Staub, 2012).
Tanielian & Stein (2006) discuss the need for further support and research of psychological reactions and distress from terrorist attacks. They note that “little national or local policy has focused on the importance of addressing psychology or mental health” as a part of the counterterrorism funding, policies, and response in the U.S. Many research articles have studied the frequency, type, and intensity of psychological and mental health consequences of terrorism and natural disasters such as earthquakes. Both indirect and direct victims of a terrorist attack can experience psychological symptoms, but the most heavily affected are those who were directly affected, in the immediate area, or first responders. Vulnerable populations are also heavily impacted, “such as children, racial and ethnic minorities, and those with an existing psychiatric illness” (Tanielian & Stein, 2006, p.693). The article specifically details impacts on children, and how the interactions between parents and children can either increase symptoms in children, or possibly increase parents’ reporting of distress in their children. The article does make a cross-cultural reference to studies in Israel and compares it to studies in the U.S.
The article does also mention that there may be differences in reactions between ethnic and cultural groups, identifying disparities in increases of PTSD and lower utilization of medications and mental health services among Black and Latino people compared to White people (Tanielian & Stein, 2006). This is attributed to “various cultural factors, including valuing self-reliance, expressing emotions in certain ways, and having reservations about sharing emotions with others” (Tanielian & Stein, 2006, p.694). Considering this article was written in 2006, there was a lot less awareness of structural and systemic racism than there is today in 2021 in the U.S. I would argue that what is missing from this analysis of disparities in seeking services is the general distrust of the medical – inclusive of mental health – systems among Black communities due to a history of being abused by such services. This includes experiments done on slaves, and the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis study (Wells & Gowda, 2020). Other factors to consider in this population is the severe lack of Black physicians which are much preferred by the Black community, White physicians lacking cultural competency, history of segregated cities, and socioeconomic barriers.
Additionally, Latinos are the least likely ethnic group in the U.S. to utilize mental health services (Barrera & Longoria, 2018). Reasons for this also include socioeconomics, acculturation issues for immigrants (such as language barriers or not understanding the health care system), cultural stigma towards mental illness, and distrust of the medical and mental health systems due to “past experiences of discriminatory treatment or ineffective care” (Barrera & Longoria, 2018, p.3). The article by Tanielian & Stein (2006), while it touches lightly on the disparities and the need for increased cultural competence in delivering mental health services following a terrorist attack, does not fully account for such deep-rooted issues, which could limit much needed mental health care. Understanding the depth of these systemic factors are incredibly important for not just improving mental and physical health for minority populations in general, but even more so after an acute event such as a terrorist attack.
Tanielian & Stein (2006) note that one of the most important and beneficial strategies for reducing psychological distress after a terrorist attack is to build and strengthen community relationships. They also suggest that response strategies target the needs of specific groups such as victims, vulnerable groups, and first responders. They discuss the use of psychological first aid, and how the Red Cross has recently (as of the time of the article in 2006) begun a Disaster Mental Health program to specialize in and provide these services following disaster incidents, including terrorist events. The authors do note that there may be still problems with this, however, with a lack of cultural-specific training and training specific to terrorist attacks. I am a Disaster Mental Health volunteer with the Red Cross, and I find this absolutely to be the case – I did not receive any training for how to change services or tactics dependent on the type of disaster, nor any training on how to work with people of different cultural groups.
Tanielian & Stein (2006) focus their article on working on the psychological distress with victims following a terrorist attack. However, they fail to include broader implications in preventing the victimized groups developing their own group identity and resorting to retaliatory violence and extremist ideologies, dehumanizing anyone who might be perceived, often incorrectly, of having some association to the terrorists. This potentiality can build into exacerbated group conflict and encourage a cycle of dehumanization and violence towards the ‘other’ (Staub, 2012). While addressing mental health issues both short and long term for victims of a terrorist attack is incredibly important, I think it is also important to incorporate prevention plans to mitigate the growth of retaliatory group identities and future conflict. Finally, any mental health interventions must include comprehensive cultural training for professionals providing aid, including understandings of implicit bias and systemic factors.
References
Barrera, I., & Longoria, D. (2018). Examining cultural mental health care barriers among Latinos. CLEARvoz Journal, 4(1).
Haner, M., Sloan, M. M., Cullen, F. T., Kulig, T. C., & Lero Jonson, C. (2019). Public concern about terrorism: Fear, worry, and support for anti-Muslim policies. Socius, 5, 2378023119856825. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2378023119856825
Staub, E. (2012). The roots and prevention of genocide and related mass violence. Chapter 2 in Anstey, M., Meerts, P. & Zartman, I. W. (eds). The slippery slope to genocide: Reducing identity conflicts and preventing mass murder. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tanielian, T. & Stein, B.D. (2006). Understanding and preparing for the psychological consequences of terrorism. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2006. https://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/RP1217.html.
Ursano, R.J., Morganstein, J.C., & West, J.C. (2020). Essential issues on terrorism: Planning for acute response and intervention. In Vermetten, E., Frankova, I. Carmi, L., Chaban, O., Zohar, J. (eds). (2020). Risk management of terrorism induced stress. IOS Press.
Wells, L., & Gowda, A. (2020). A Legacy of Mistrust: African Americans and the US Healthcare System. Proceedings of UCLA Health, 24.