What is required, therefore, to assist veteran recovery is a comprehensive and holistic treatment program that includes but goes beyond PTSD, that is, beyond traumatic stress, and deals as well with the detrimental effects of war upon one’s moral character and integrity – moral injury.
As a former Marine Corps Officer, a CRPEM injured veteran of the American War in Vietnam, and a philosopher whose life work has focused upon war and morality, I have been writing and speaking about moral injury for many years now, even before it was fashionable to do so. When I first presented my ideas, subsequently published in the International Journal of Applied Philosophy, to a clinicians’ Grand Rounds at the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Brooklyn, NY, I was told rather brusquely that morality is clinically irrelevant to therapeutic practice and veteran healing. Fortunately, over the years, more enlightened clinicians have realized that transgressing a deeply seated sense of self, what I term one’s moral identity, as is commonplace in war, can have serious and lasting detrimental consequences.
Whatever their source and content, whether by nature or convention, and however the process occurs, humankind has identified and internalized a set of values and norms through which we define ourselves as persons, structure our world, and render our relationship to it, and to other human beings, comprehensible. These values and norms provide the parameters of our being – the aforementioned moral identity. Consequently, we now have the need and the means to weigh concrete situations to determine acceptable (right) and unacceptable (wrong) behavior.
Whether an individual chooses to act rightly or wrongly, according to or in violation of her moral identity, will affect whether she perceives herself as true to her personal convictions and to others in the moral community who share her values and ideals. As the moral gravity of one’s actions and experiences on the battlefield becomes apparent, a warrior may suffer profound moral confusion and distress at having transgressed her moral foundations, her moral identity. Guilt is, simply speaking, the awareness of having transgressed one’s moral convictions and the anxiety precipitated by a perceived breakdown of one’s ethical cohesion – her integrity – and an alienation from the moral community. Shame is the loss of self-esteem consequent to a failure to live up to personal and communal expectations.
First Things First: Lessening the Stigma
An important first step in the treatment of all CRPEM injuries is to create an environment in which members of the military and veterans can feel comfortable seeking treatment, assured both that their injuries will be taken seriously and that they will be treated with dignity and respect.
An effective way of lessening the stigma attached to seeking treatment is to reject the pathologizing of CRPEM injuries as mental illness, that is, its clinical designation as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder rather than say as Battle Fatigue, Combat Exhaustion, or Shell Shock, and as such, its disconnect from the combat experience. Further, CRPEM injuries must be acknowledged as a direct consequence of war fighting and as much a combat injury as a battlefield bullet wound or shrapnel-broken tibia. To say otherwise betrays either an effort to disenfranchise the psychologically, emotionally, and morally injured or an ignorance of the nature, prevalence, and severity of these non-physical injuries. Consequently, the CRPEM injured must be recognized as combat-wounded and therefore eligible to be awarded the Purple Heart Medal. To do so would send the message to veterans and members of the military community, many of whom give only lip service to the severity of such injuries, that CRPEM injuries are real and legitimate wounds of war and not the source of shame and embarrassment. Most importantly, it would do much to lessen, perhaps even end, the stigma of mental illness and/or of weakness and encourage members of the military and veterans to recognize, accept, and seek treatment for their injuries.
Dialogue Based Intervention
As trauma certainly remains an important aspect of the war experience, an encompassing and holistic approach to treating the full spectrum of CRPEM injuries may well include traditional and nontraditional clinical intervention for traumatic stress.
These therapies have for the most part, however, proven less than effective in treating CRPEM injuries, particularly moral injuries. As an alternative I offer what I term Dialogue Based Intervention (DBI), a treatment modality utilizing philosophical techniques and insights that are well suited to assist veterans, particularly those suffering from moral injury, to achieve “healing.” I put healing in quotes because, given the pervasiveness and life altering effects of war, the healing we are seeking in DBI, or from any treatment modality, is not recovery, i.e., a return to some unrealistic prewar innocence, as healing in that sense may not be possible, but readjustment, i.e., to restore a level of normalcy to veterans’ lives by rendering CRPEM injuries less toxic and providing a means whereby the afflicted can achieve a moral stasis or equilibrium, i.e., to accommodate and to find a place for the injury in their being, not unlike how an amputee learns to accommodate the loss of a limb, and ultimately, to build a life around it.
Dialogue Based Intervention: Healing Phases
As groups of 5-8 veterans begin the DBI process, the initial focus will be on the critical task of building a group dynamic of trust and mutual respect during which the veterans may become familiar with the theoretical philosophical and psychological ideas and concepts – moral theory, personal responsibility, rules of war, etc. – relevant to providing the parameters of their moral identity, a measure of clarity regarding their military and battlefield experiences, and, ultimately, an answer to the important existential questions, “What have I become?” “Who am I now?”
Foundational to moral injury are issues of meaning, value, and of personal, ideological and moral conflict precipitated by the veteran's experiences in war, all of which are particularly well suited to being addressed philosophically. Specifically, DBI assists the veteran to understand the theoretical nature of war – its moral, social, and political underpinnings – the profound indoctrination process he has endured, the nature of moral values, and the existential reality of war, all of which are essential to addressing the seemingly irreconcilable moral conflicts inherent to the battlefield.
In what follows, for purposes of clarity, I will explain Dialogue Based Intervention as encompassing a series of distinct “healing phases.” In reality, however, these phases may certainly overlap and how the process proceeds and the gains achieved will depend upon a number of variables such as the group’s cohesion, the specific needs of the individuals involved, and perhaps most importantly, their willingness to engage with particular issues and aspects of the experience.
Healing Phase One: Focused Moderated Dialogue
With this awareness, veterans begin to understand that life amid the violence, death, horror, trauma, anxiety and fatigue of the battlefield undoes character, undermines one’s ethical foundations and moral integrity, erodes their moral being, rendering judgments of right and wrong – morality – irrelevant and reduces decent men and women to savages capable of incredible cruelty and atrocity that would never have been possible before being victimized and sacrificed to war.
Healing Phase Two: Guided Introspection
The next phase involves what can best be described philosophically as a moral dialectic. That is, through Guided Introspection, veterans seek to resolve the internal conflict between their now dysfunctional warrior values and principles (the thesis) contradicted by the remnants of their foundational moral values and principles (the antithesis) that survived the indoctrination process – their pre-warrior ego and moral identity – the violation of which now informs the shame and guilt indicative of their moral injury.
Once having done so, veterans can begin the process of synthesis eventually determining a moral identity that embraces values and behaviors appropriate to the non-martial society into which they are to reintegrate. This Hegelian dialectic functions as a reverse boot camp, so to speak, intended to clarify and shore up their moral identities and verify that this period of horror – their time on the battlefield – was a moral aberration, and that their doubts and questions regarding their participation in and behavior during war were well founded.
Healing Phase Three: Remembering, Reasoned Analysis and Reassessment
Having completed the necessary philosophical and psychological groundwork, veterans can now begin the very difficult task of confronting the experience. That is, of remembering, reassessing, and morally reevaluating their responsibility and culpability for their perceived transgressions on the battlefield.
Reassessing their behavior in combat within the parameters of their increased philosophical and psychological awareness, veterans realize that the programming to which they were subjected and the experience of war as a survival situation are causally connected to those specific battlefield incidents and behaviors, theirs and/or others, that weigh heavily on their consciences – their moral injury. As a consequence, they understand these influences as extenuating circumstances. Finally, as they morally reevaluate their actions in war, they see these incidents and behaviors in combat, not as justifiable, but as understandable, perhaps even excusable, and their culpability mitigated by the fact that those who determined policy, sent them to war, issued the orders, and allowed the war to occur and/or to continue unchallenged must share responsibility for the crimes and horror that inevitably characterize war.
Phase Four: Atonement, Absolution, and Activism
Given the moral gravity of the war experience, the journey to healing is often long and difficult. After reassessing and reevaluating their behavior on the battlefield, veterans may in some instances determine their guilt and shame appropriate and impossible to reason away. It is not uncommon, then, for CRPEM injuries to persist, causing veterans to feel that renewal and redemption – atonement and absolution – is necessary for healing and to once again rejoin the moral community of humankind. After all is said and done, in such situations, self-forgiveness and/or absolution for their unresolved transgressions may be necessary, whether through religious ritual (confession, sweat lodge, etc.) or through acts of atonement (community service, speaking to students, civic organizations, and other groups about the nature and reality of war). It is at this crucial juncture in the healing process that veterans realize the importance of activism. By speaking out, educating the public about the truth of war, exposing Warist’s lies and holding them accountable, upholding the moral integrity and national interest of their nation, working for the well-being and dignity of their comrades still in harm’s way, and for the betterment of humankind – that is, by becoming activists, many veterans can, and have, found the penance, absolution, and renewal they so desperately need to forgive themselves and go on with their lives.
Ultimately, what is crucial to healing is that guilt and shame not remain static, veterans’ personal and private burden. While the past can never be undone, nor the dead be made to live again, activism may allow the veteran, if not to assuage his shame and guilt, at least to frame some sort of life around it. The goal is that such acts of atonement restore the veteran's sense of integrity, his moral cohesion, and in so doing, to build his self-esteem and perception of self. Further, re-establishing his moral identity will restore intelligibility to the veterans’ world, their relationship to it and to other human beings, thereby enabling re-integration – ending their alienation and isolation from the remainder of the moral community.
In this essay, I have argued that philosophical insights and techniques offer an effective alternative in treating CRPEM casualties, specifically, moral injury. What I termed Dialogue Based Intervention can help veterans understand moral values and judgments, both the theoretical nature and the existential reality of war – its moral, social, and political underpinnings – and the profound indoctrination process veterans have endured, all of which are essential to addressing the seemingly irreconcilable moral conflicts inherent to the war experience. Further, through philosophical dialogue – dialectic – veterans may (1) therapeutically examine and reassess, rationally and coherently, their perceptions of their behavior on the battlefield, i.e., sort things out; (2) reevaluate their perceived moral culpability and responsibility for their actions or omissions during the war experience, i.e., place things in perspective; and (3) through reasoning and/or activism to come to grips with their personal "legacy of war," i.e., find meaning and achieve personal acceptance or atonement for their past transgressions and build a life around it.
Copyright © Camillo Mac Bica • All Rights Reserved