|
| Cutting ~ The Low Down ~ |
| People who self-injure tend to be dysphoric -- experiencing a depressed mood with a high degree of irritability and sensitivity to rejection and some underlying tension -- even when not actively hurting themselves. The pattern found by Herpertz (1995) indicates that something, usually some sort of interpersonal stressor, increases the level of dysphoria and tension to an unbearable degree. The painful feelings become overwhelming: it's as if the usual underlying uncomfortable affect is escalated to a critical maximum point. "SIB has the function of bringing about a transient relief from these [high levels of irritability and sensitivity to rejection]," Herpertz said. This conclusion is supported by the work of Haines and her colleagues. In a fascinating study, Haines et al. (1995) led groups of self-injuring and non-self-injuring subjects through guided imagery sessions. Each subject experienced the same four scenarios in random order: a scene in which aggression was imagined, a neutral scene, a scene of accidental injury, and one in which self-injury was imagined. The scripts had four stages: scene-setting, approach, incident, and consequence. During the guided imagery sessions, physiological arousal and subjective arousal were measured. The results were striking. Subject reactions across groups didn't differ on the aggression, accident, and neutral scripts. In the self-injury script, though, the control groups went to a high level of arousal and stayed there throughout the script, in spite of relaxation instructions contained in the "consequences" stage. In contrast, self-injurers experienced increased arousal through the scene-setting and approach stages, until the the decision to self-injure was made. Their tension then dropped, dropping even more at the incident stage and remaining low. These results provide strong evidence that self-injury provides a quick, effective release of physiological tension, which would include the physiological arousal brought on by negative or overwhelming psychological states. As Haines et al. say Self-mutilators often are unable to provide explanations for their own self-mutilative behavior. . . . Participants reported continued negative feelings despite reduced psychophysiological arousal. This result suggests that it is the alteration of psychophysiological arousal that may operate to reinforce and maintain the behavior, not the psychological response. In other words, self-injury may be a preferred coping mechanism because it quickly and dramatically calms the body, even though people who self-injure may have very negative feelings after an episode. They feel bad, but the overwhelming psychophysiological pressure and tension is gone. Herpertz et al. (1995) explain this: We may surmise that self-mutilators usually disapprove of aggressive feelings and impulses. If they fail to suppress these, our findings indicate that they direct them inwardly. . . . This is in agreement with patients' reports, where they often regard their self-mutilative acts as ways of relieving intolerable tension resulting from interpersonal stressors. Herman (1992) says that most children who are abused discover that a serious jolt to the body, like that produced by self-injury, can make intolerable feelings go away temporarily. Brain chemistry may play a role in determining who self-injures and who doesn't. Simeon et al. (1992) found that people who self-injure tend to be extremely angry, impulsive, anxious, and aggressive, and presented evidence that some of these traits may be linked to deficits in the brain's serotonin system. Favazza (1993) refers to this study and to work by Coccaro on irritability to posit that perhaps irritable people with relatively normal serotonin function express their irritation outwardly, by screaming or throwing things; people with low serotonin function turn the irritability inward by self-damaging or suicidal acts. Zweig-Frank et al. (1994) also suggest that degree of self-injury is related to serotonin dysfunction. There are many contradictory issues involved in socially sensitive subjects such as self harm. We cannot deny that there are many people in our society today who choose to harm themselves (in various ways) and also that there have always been people like this throughout different histories. Perhaps it is important to consider what the majority's opinion of this behaviour would be. Probably either fear, disgust, empathy or in very rare cases, an understanding of the issues surrounding self harm, without being a self harmer. There are, of course, many medical and psychological/cognitive explanations for all the different categorized types of self harm, which can range from burning or cutting the skin, to deep depressions, or paranoia where the person seems to make life extremely difficult for themselves. Also anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa, are two other examples. Although there are many different theories concerning all types of self harm, and many different variations on the terminology involved, self harm is widely viewed as part of a psychological disorder, or more basically, that there is something WRONG with a person. Something is biologically/medically defective and this manifests itself in various types of self harming behaviour(s). But what if there were nothing wrong with a person, nothing defective or abnormal and this was simply a way of dealing with life's difficulties. We usually disapprove of, but generally accept alcoholism, drug abuse and other such self abusive activities which help people cope. However, more direct abuse such as cutting or burning etc etc, seems to disturb us more. We seem to be living in a society that can accept many faults, such as violence towards others, prejudice and unequal opportunities but cannot accept a person who privately harms themselves as a way of coping. Many psychological theories will try to explain WHY people harm themselves, and indeed it is an intriguing question. Why would anyone want to hurt or scar their bodies? What could drive them to this? The answers vary but commonly mention personal influences, family, friends, state of mind or the way we think. However, there is another issue and that is the view of self harm that is held by society. There is little understanding of the issue compared to, for example anorexia or bulimia, and many misconceptions. Mainly, people are disturbed by this behaviour, disgusted at the actions of people who self harm and frightened by their scars. SO how would this make a self harmer feel.....if they are not aware of the issues surrounding self harm, and do not know of anyone else who does this, and realises the opinion held by most of society this will make dealing with their problems very very difficult. Hopefully we will soon reach a time where there is more of an understanding of self harm and less of a taboo surrounding the subject. Soon we might see organisations that seek to help self harmers, run by those who have self harmed or who understand the issues involved. Self harm is NOT just a psychological issue, it is also, along with many other psychological "difficulties", a sociological issue. Self harm is obviously not an ideal way of behaving. Many people who do abuse themselves would gladly stop their behaviour if they could be happy. But we will never be able to stop people being depressed, or being abused, or being controlled, and so self harm will continue to be used by people who depend on it to survive. Maybe you agree that society should be more understanding and accepting of people who abuse themselves, or maybe you are still disgusted at the behaviour, but it is a basic human RIGHT to treat your body as you wish, dress as you wish etc etc, and everyone should respect this right in other people. Perhaps you hold many stereotypes of people who self harm, but the turth is they are often happy, outgoing people who occasionally feel the need to privately harm themselves in some way, be it cutting or burning or starving, in order to help them cope. They will usually not impose this on anyone and do not ask anyone's approval, and will ask you, if my private behaviour helps me cope and harms no-one else, why shouldn't I do it? No-one could be accused of glamourising the subject, it is not something that CAN be glamourised, it is always a personal choice by a person to harm themselves and they would only do it if it helps them. If people oppose it, they will not do it, even if they are depressed. They may drink, or eat, or not eat instead.....everyone has their own ways of surviving, and hopefully, soon enough society will recognise this and enlighten everyone as to the issues involved. With extracts from Psyke.com and Psych.net |
 |
 |