IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cdanxx/v32y2016i1p51-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stolen trauma: why some veterans elaborate their psychological experience of military service

Author

Listed:
  • Edgar Jones
  • Hugh Milroy

Abstract

The embellishment of a warrior biography has a long history but examples of veteran elaboration of traumatic experience have become increasingly apparent. Although legislative change in the UK has removed the penalties for fabrication and a progressive decline in the military footprint may have increased the likelihood of such false trauma narratives, a paradigm shift in explanations for mental illness underpins this phenomenon. The recognition of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 1980, followed by studies to identify risk factors, led to a greater appreciation of psychological vulnerability. As a result, the use of shame to discourage acts formerly labelled as “cowardly” or “lacking in morale fibre” is no longer considered appropriate. Recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan generated popular sympathy for service personnel, whilst media focus on PTSD has led the UK public to believe that most veterans have been traumatised by their tours of duty.

Suggested Citation

  • Edgar Jones & Hugh Milroy, 2016. "Stolen trauma: why some veterans elaborate their psychological experience of military service," Defense & Security Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 51-63, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cdanxx:v:32:y:2016:i:1:p:51-63
    DOI: 10.1080/14751798.2015.1130318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14751798.2015.1130318
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14751798.2015.1130318?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cdanxx:v:32:y:2016:i:1:p:51-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CDAN20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.