Post-trauma: Is evidence based practice a fantasy?

Trauma, bereavement, and loss are universal human experiences. Much has been written about the process that the bereaved go through following the loss of a loved one. Recent events such as 9/11, earthquakes in Turkey, genocides in Rwanda, community conflict in Northern Ireland, and the Asian Tsunami Disaster have drawn unprecedented public attention to the subject of traumatic bereavement. Increasingly, it is recognised that while most people are able to cope with loss generally by eventually restructuring their lives, those bereaved in traumatic circumstance often find it extremely difficult. As a consequence, a plethora of interventions have emerged, however, to-date, little is know about their actual effectiveness in helping the bereaved. With the emphasis of health and welfare professions on evidencebased practice (EBP) greater than ever and a raising awareness of accountability as key element of ethical practice, the call for EBP in traumatic bereavement is compelling. Using examples from work carried out in Northern Ireland, we look at the backdrop of the issues involved, describe some of the most commonly used therapeutic interventions, and explore the possibility of evidence-based practice.

Victims or survivors? Debate about victimhood in Northern Ireland.

There is a broad range of definitions of victimhood. The term 'victim' might be seen in a negative sense, because it is often perceived as implying stereotypes of vulnerability, passivity and weakness. But, on the other hand, the term can entail benefits such as recognition, validation, support and compensation. In Northern Ireland, the debate becomes extremely politically loaded and follows well-trodden sectarian lines. The main aims of this paper are to briefly examine the various connotations of the terms victim and survivor, to analyse the debate in Northern Ireland and its political implications, and finally, to present a general overview of the research undertaken to identify who are the victims. co-authored with research assistants

‘Ghosts in the Head and Ghost Towns in the Field: Ethnography and the Experience of Presence and Absence’

This article is about an anthropologist coming to terms with the field and fieldwork. In 1995, I left – was evacuated from – my fieldsite as a volcanic eruption started just as my period of fieldwork drew to a close. These eruptions dramatically and instantaneously altered life on the island of Montserrat, a British colony in the Caribbean. While Montserrat the land, and Montserratians the people, migrated and moved on with their lives, Montserrat and Montserratians were preserved in my mind and in my anthropological writings as from “back home.” Revisiting Montserrat several years into the volcano crisis, I drove through the villages and roads leading to the former capital of the island, where I had worked from. My route to this modern-day Pompeii threw up a stark contrast between absence and presence, the imagined past and the experienced present. This is understood, in part, by examining the literary work of two other travelers through Montserrat, Henry Coleridge and Pete McCarthy, both of whom have a very different experience of the place and the people.