Defense Mechanisms in Response to Abuse

Currently, this writer works with and is most interested in victims/survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. Throughout this work, she has learned a variety of things and noticed a set of characteristics and defense methods common to this population. Abuse in any form causes one to experience a trauma, unfortunately, many victims of domestic violence report having endured a variety of repeated traumas throughout their lifetime. Individuals exposed to and victims of domestic violence present with a plethora of psychological problems, to include; depression, self-hatred, dissociation, substance abuse, self-destructive behavior, revicitmization, difficulty with relationships, despair, and persistent anxiety, symptoms that in columniation are often diagnosed as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (Courtois, 2004).

Anxieties often develop as result of an individual’s experiences of being helplessness, powerlessness, and realizing lack of control (Morrow & Smith, 1995). As a method of coping with such traumas and feelings of persistent anxiety, victimized individuals often exhibit defense mechanisms. Pervin, Cervone and Oliver (2005) find that because “anxiety is such a painful state that we are incapable of tolerating for very long,” (p. 93) therefore in an effort to defend our psyche from over-whelming pain, we unconsciously employ defense mechanisms. Recent studies of children have found that during their earlier years, children who experience abuse related traumas employ more cognitively simpler defenses, such as denial (Cramer, 2000). While initially viewed as a bad or non-constructive response, denial can also be viewed as an adaptive defense, when the individual is unable to alter their trauma-inducing situation (Pervin, Cervone and Oliver, 2005). In other words, denial can be viewed as healthy, if the individual uses it to make the best of a bad situation (Vaillant, 2000). When the denial is used, the individual is able to “go on with life,” as if the trauma had never occurred. Many victims of abuse report that this is society’s expectation of them, i.e. that they must not dwell on the abuse, but instead move forward now with their life and healing. Additionally, children often fail to report their abuse; presumably because they fear retribution, punishment, or that they will not be believed. And again, because the events are too mentally and emotionally difficult to process alone, find themselves in denying that the abuse had occurred.

Older adolescent and adult victims of abuse are often found to rationalize the trauma and abuses as being; somehow deserved, self-caused, or even educational in nature (Kluft, 1990). According to Pervin, Cervone and Oliver (2005) rationalization does not require the individual to deny the existence of the trauma, but instead allows them to distort its underlying motive or cause. The individual using rationalization therefore reviews and then internalizes the cause for and the pain inflicted upon him or her (Kluft, 1990). Ochberg (1988), finds that “in an apparent effort to attain cognitive memory over the trauma, they attempt to identify prior events (sometimes erroneously) that if known, would have enabled them to avoid the [trauma],” (p. 204). When analyzing the women and children with whom this writer works with, she sees rationalization more used as a defense mechanism than any other. And while research suggests that rationalization is a more mature defense mechanism, not to be acquired until ages 9-14 (Kluft, 1990), she feels that she must disagree with these findings. In fact, most of her child clients, ages 5 and up, report feelings of ownership and guilt for their abuser’s actions. During discussions and interviews, the children often detail the events prior to the abuse, and purport that “if they had only been good” or “if only I hadn’t spilled my milk” or “if only I would have helped mom clean the house” then the abuse wouldn’t have happened. Unfortunately, the rationalization process very commonly distorts the facts surrounding the traumatic or abusive event. In case studies conducted by Ochberg (1988), it was found that the child’s utilization of rationalization caused numerous distortions regarding the extent of experience as well as it’s sequence of events. And while these findings are important, the writer feels that she must clarify that they should not be implied so as that the one not believe a child’s report of abuse, because rarely does a child lie about experiencing such abuse, in fact, they are more apt to deny the existence of it all together.

As humans, we unconsciously employ the use of defense mechanisms when faced with anxiety. These defense mechanisms allow us to “maintain” composure and continue perform our daily functions. To some extent, all defense mechanisms can be considered healthy and beneficial to the mentally functioning of the individual, when used for a short period of time. Pervin, Cervone and Oliver (2005) find that while defense mechanisms “can be useful in reducing anxiety, they are also maladaptive in turning the person away from reality,” (p.95). Most importantly, they can become dysfunctional if they prevent the individual from taking necessary and constructive actions to reduce themselves from further anxiety and trauma.

Stephanie Lowrance-Henckel

References

Courtois, C.A. (Winter, 2004). Complex trauma, complex reactions: Assessment and treatment. Special issue: The Psychological impact of trauma: Theory, Research, Assessment, and Intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 14(4), 412-425.
Cramer, P. & Williams, C. (2000). Defense mechanisms in psychology today: Further processing adaption. American Psychologist, 55(6), 637-646.
Kluft, R.P. (1990). Incest-related syndromes of adult psychopathology. American Psychiatric Publishing Inc.
Morrow, S.L. & Smith, M.L. (1995). Constructions of survival and coping by women who have survived childhood sexual abuse. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42(1), 24-33.
Ochberg, F.M. (1988). Post-traumatic therapy and victims of violence. Brunner/Mazel. New York, NY.
Pervin, L., Cervone, D. & Oliver, J. (2005). Theories of Personality (9th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. Hoboken, NJ.
Vaillant, G.E. (2000). Adaptive mental mechanisms: Their role in a positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55(1), 89-98.