How Was the Trauma Training Today?
Because we are including so many more foster children and children from broken homes into our fellowship, our church participated in a trauma training session today. Our main purpose was to gain practical insights into how to handle situations where children who have experienced trouble act out their emotions. To that end, we can be thankful for our time together. However, there were many errant teachings included which we must reject.
ERRANT TEACHING ON THE BRAIN
Of course, we were shown a brain scan that demonstrated disparate
areas of activity in the brain which were interpreted as “holes” in the brain. I am not a neuroscientist, but I had many
questions about the scans. What were the
sexes and ages of the individuals scanned; were they comparable individuals
otherwise? What constitutes a “normal
brain” for us to contrast it to the scan of the traumatized brain? What manner of trauma was experienced by the
individual in the scan (physical, emotional, sexual)? What is the background of the traumatized individual,
such as homelife — were there otherwise loving parents present for early
childhood development or not? What is
the education levels of the individuals scanned (did the traumatized child have
access to the same developmental milestones)?
Exactly what areas of the brain are “missing” in the scans, which appear
to be of the upper, frontal quadrant? Perhaps
my questions are more because I lack proper training in viewing such scans, and
because time constraints limited the amount of halo data which could be
presented, but it doesn’t seem like a single side-by-side comparison is
scientifically binding evidence.
Even when the brain becomes injured, though, it is possible
to “rewire” it due to its plasticity. For
instance, those suffering a physical brain injury which robs a person of
certain mobility or cognitive functions can possibly regain some or even all lost
skills over time. Hypothetically
speaking, even if an event is so emotionally scarring in childhood that it
causes the brain to shut down key cognitive centers, it would be possible to
regain that function through proper therapy.
So, this presentation is hardly a case for trauma permanence. Of course, there just isn’t any definitive
evidence that the brain is “injured” in this way through trauma.
Thankfully, that wasn’t the point of the talk. The speaker affirmed that healing is
available through Jesus Christ and that trauma doesn’t redefine the rest of
someone’s life. The thrust of the session
was how to deal with such a child so that he or she may grow into mature
adulthood. This was good.
Later, though, the presentation turned to a subtle presentation
of evolution (I am unaware of whether the speaker believes in evolution). She began speaking about the “lizard brain,” called
this because it’s viewed as the most primitive part of our brain with
structures we share with reptiles. This
would have been the earliest part of our brain to have developed on an
evolutionary timetable, adding higher cognitive functions over the course of
millions of years. It controls the “fight-or-flight”
responses, the concept that those creatures who learned to respond to movement
in the bush survived while those who didn’t died.
As evidence of this, we were told the story of a younger girl
who experienced an emotional breakdown each time she was taken to her
grandmother’s home. Through patient, probing
questions, they were able to ascertain that she was responding to driving by a
particular blue house, one in which she was molested. The explanation was that she was experiencing
a primal fight-or-flight response and was unable to verbalize it on her own. They corrected it by changing the route they
took to grandma’s house.
Yet, is that the best explanation? It’s obviously true that she was remembering
the deep pain of her experience there, and her uncontrolled outbursts welled up
from her anxiety of being anywhere near that home. Yet, how did they discover the cause of her
outbursts and deal with it? Was it
through chemical adjustments to the brain?
Of course not: it was through questioning and then a practical course
change, something that describes the average counseling session, biblical or
otherwise. We don’t need an evolutionary
definition to diagnose the issue.
In fact, consider this: a person can respond to a perceived
threat without having experienced trauma. For instance, children who have never
experienced sexual molestation or volatile home lives can have meltdowns on
Santa’s lap, crying and screaming as though they saw jagged teeth awaiting them
under his beard. It’s up to adults to
understand that children are not always rational, don’t always have the words,
and need extra grace and help, which is what the Bible calls us to present to
them.
ERRANT TEACHING ON SYMPATHY AND EMPATHY
Here's the reality: Empathy, when properly understood, is a lower
or more basic form of relating to others’ emotions than sympathy. Why is that?
Conceptually, it demands that we merely experience or feel the
emotions of others. This can create
difficulties for the one wanting to help to maintain an objective perspective, such
as a foster parent, a pastor, or a biblical counselor, as a person can get
easily drawn into a person’s emotional spiral.
(Of course, this depends on whether one utilizes empathy as a more affective
rather than a cognitive act.) Empathy, as
the cartoon today depicted, involves getting down in the pit with someone — which
may (or may not) offer some comfort — but the help ends there.
Joe Rigney details this in an article he wrote for Desiring God.[2] He accurately defines empathy as meaning to “suffer
in” and sympathy as to “suffer with,” and he directly argues against the notion
that sympathy drives disconnection. He
notes that there is a certain “sin of empathy,” in fact, which may avoid addressing
necessary issues. Instead, he rightly
notes that sometimes, emotional distance is needed to properly help someone. Indeed, empathy is a newer psychological
concept fraught with pitfalls, and so, sympathy and compassion are necessary
tools for ministry.
Consider that we never read of the empathetic Jesus. However, we do read numerous examples of the
compassion of the Lord, and Scripture describes Him as our high priest who can “sympathize
with our weaknesses” (Heb. 4:15). If
sympathy is just painting a silver lining on the dark clouds of sorrow, as this
presentation alleged, then we have an ineffective Savior.
Sympathy is necessary for ministry, especially for the
young, troubled heart. Any parent of an
emotional child understands the need to both recognize the trouble of the child’s
heart while modeling regulation over emotions and assisting the child to think
differently. Sympathy is indeed “suffering
with:” seeing the emotion, getting into the problem, and helping with problems. It is not giving trite aphorisms in response
to other people’s pain, which is a way of dismissing issues rather than helping. Instead, it may start with a hug (which the
video we watched classified only as empathy), and it moves on to standing up
with the helping hand, assisting the suffering up the ladder and out of the
hole. Sympathy is at the heart of all biblical
counseling, not just empathy.
CONCLUSION
There were certainly some helpful elements today. I personally hoped to see more practical
information shared, such as how to handle situations both in the context of
classrooms and in the home. Still, there
was a helpful booklet distributed with some hints that we discussed, and there
were also some stories shared complete with honest failures to encourage us to
continue on with good work, even if we do so imperfectly. And it was extremely important for everyone
to hear that trauma doesn’t define a person’s life, that there is healing available
in Jesus Christ.
However, there were some very troubling elements. The presentation gave dubious evidence of
brain issues, seasoned with evolutionary thought, and completely misrepresents sympathy
(and attribute of our Lord). There also
wasn’t much in the way of biblical encouragement (I mentioned the ones
presented), meaning that secular thought was elevated above biblical thought. While I appreciated what the speaker was
trying to accomplish, this was not the kind of presentation that reflects the
core beliefs of our church.
As such, we will choose to do something different in the
future for this kind of training.
For those wanting a more biblical approach to handling the issues which arise, I recommend the following resources:
- “Shepherding a Child's Heart” by Tedd Tripp (Shepherd Press)
- “Get Outta My Face!” by Rick Horne (Shepherd Press)
- “Instructing a Child’s Heart” by Tedd and Margy Tripp (Shepherd Press)
For those wanting more information on the issues of the brain and general counseling, I recommend:
- “Blame It on the Brain?: Distinguishing Chemical Imbalances, Brain Disorders, and Disobedience” by Edward Welch (P&R Publishing)
- “PsychoBabble: The Failure of Modern Psychology and the Biblical Alternative” by Dr. Richard L. Ganz (Association of Certified Biblical Counselors)
- “Counseling the Hard Cases: True Stories Illustrating the Sufficiency of God's Resources in Scripture” by Stuart Scott and Heath Lambert (B&H Academic)
- “Counseling: How to Counsel Biblically” by John MacArthur (Thomas Nelson)
- “Instruments in the Redeemer's Hands: People in Need of Change Helping People in Need of Change” by Paul David Tripp (P&R Publishing)
I have more recommendations along these lines, so let me know if this whets your appetite for more.
[1] Francine Tan, “A Critical Evaluation of Bessel van der
Kolk’s The Body Keeps the Score,” JBSC, Fall, Vol. 7, (2:2023), 40.
[2] Joe Rigney, “Do You Feel My Pain? Empathy, Sympathy, And Dangerous Virtues,” May
2, 2020, https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/do-you-feel-my-pain.
